Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 05-17-2006, 05:30 PM

A simple google search

Version of the Tao Te Ching from 300 BCE

Previously the oldest manuscript was dated to before 195 BCE

EthnAlln · 05-17-2006, 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gamera

Ethn, history is what's recorded, not what is speculated about.

We don't have any early texts of the Jains (which by the way I beleive are a rather late form of Hinduism though I forget). Without a record, you simply cannot claim with any authority that a teaching they have today predated Christianity.

This is all the more true given the influence of Christianity on Indian culture.

It's pointless for us to argue the history of India. I haven't researched its basic documents and don't know any Indian languages. You write as if you were an authority on it. Are you? I'm not saying you aren't, but I would like to know on what authority you proclaim that everything the historians say about Indian history is just "speculation"? For myself, I take what the historians write as a plausible and reasonable basis for drawing conclusions. Even if you happen to be an authority on the subject, I'd have to ask myself how come you make claims that all the other authorities reject.

Your argument resembles the historicism of Hegel. He was ready to assign "categories" to ancient China and India based purely on his own ignorance of both of them. China represented the category of "pure being" and India the category of "nothing". Why? Apparently because all he knew about ancient China was that it existed and all he knew about India was that some of the Indians believed in Nirvana. So, at least, says a modern historian of philosophy. I don't vouch for it, having found Hegel completely impenetrable.

No Robots · 05-17-2006, 09:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loomis

What is decent, good, or honest, about saying my translation of Deut 6:4 is WRONG if you are unwilling to support your claim?

O.K., bad joke... I made a bad joke. You're not a replicant. Go home, o.k? No really, I'm sorry, go home.

Loomis · 05-17-2006, 10:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by No Robots

Love is God.

Does Love kill Sea Monsters?

Does Love crush Rahab with his mighty arm?

Does Love slay the dragon Yamm? :banghead:

Sven · 05-18-2006, 06:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gamera

Suffering that isn't felt is a strange definition. So to call something suffering you must first establish that it's felt, i.e, that the sufferer has self-awareness.

You don't need consciousness to have feelings.

Amaleq13 · 05-18-2006, 07:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sven

You don't need consciousness to have feelings.

You do when you are free to redefine words according to your beliefs.

No Robots · 05-18-2006, 08:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loomis

Does Love kill Sea Monsters?

Does Love crush Rahab with his mighty arm?

Does Love slay the dragon Yamm? :banghead:

Okay, let me spell this out for ya: THERE IS NO GOD!

All there is the nameless, formless Absolute, the One of which we are all part. The love that this nameless One has for any part of itself is the same as its love for its whole self. Do you weep when you lose an eyelash? No? Then why do you expect the One to weep for Yamm? That people continually interpret events in terms of "God's will" is part of there superstitious anthropomorphizing. Good and evil are epithets placed on events by people according to whether they are beneficial or harmful to those people. To a mosquito, it is right and good, even God's will, that people should provide blood. To the mosquito, it is evil that a person should slap her down for seeking nourishment for her eggs.

TomboyMom · 05-18-2006, 09:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gamera

I know for a fact that the Hindu and Bhuddist mss you refered to are post-Christian, by a longshot.

Then you should be able to tell us why you know this for a fact. Your knowledge diverges from that of most scholars in the field.

Quote:

I'm not familiar with the paleography of the Tao. I'm going to bet that the ms at issue is late. I think the burden is on you to show otherwise. You're claming the Tao predates the gospels, whose mss history we know. Look up the mss history of the Tao, and get back with us with support for your claim.

O.K:
Harvard University Gazette February 22, 2001

Quote:

Near a river in Guodian, China, not far from a farmhouse made of earth and thatched with straw, Chinese archaeologists in 1993 discovered a tomb dating back to the fourth century B.C. …Scattered on the floor were bamboo strips…The 800 bamboo strips bear roughly 10,000 Chinese characters; approximately one-tenth of those characters comprise part of the oldest extant version of the Tao Te Ching (also known as Daodejing), a foundational text by the Taoist philosopher Laozi, who lived in the sixth century B.C.

Quote:

It is possible that some of the ideas found in the Daode jing may have begun to take form sometime during the general period in which Confucius lived. But scholars today, in the West and in Asia alike, generally agree that the actual text of the Daode jing is a much later product. In actuality, the Daode jing first appeared sometime during the early 3rd century BCE. In fact, it was certainly later than the writings of Zhuang Zhou (Chuang Chou), the 4th-century author of the earliest sections of the "Taoist" work named for him, the Zhuangzi (Chuang-tzu).

Quote:

Dêodé Jīng 道德經 "The Scripture of the Way and its Efficacy"
The most famous Taoist text, probably dating from some time in the Warring States period (475-221 BC), although some scholars place it earlier, usually in the Spring & Autumn period (770-476) of the Eastern Zhōu 周 dynasty (770-256).

The Taoist Tradition: A Historical Outline
Russell Kirkland, Professor of Religion at the University of Georgia.

Quote:

The key book of Taoism was compiled around the 3rd century BCE. It's called the Tao Te Ching (Dao De Jing or Daode Jing) - The Way and Its Power, and is also known as the Lao-tzu.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religi...ry/books.shtml

EthnAlln · 05-18-2006, 11:52 AM

Unfortunately, the post was a bit jumbled, so I'm not sure who posted what. However, it is definitely clear that the Tao existed in developed form centuries before Christ. Dare we hope that everyone will agree to this?

Gamera · 05-18-2006, 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TomboyMom

Then you should be able to tell us why you know this for a fact. Your knowledge diverges from that of most scholars in the field. O.K:
Harvard University Gazette February 22, 2001

The Taoist Tradition: A Historical Outline
Russell Kirkland, Professor of Religion at the University of Georgia.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religi...ry/books.shtml

You need to distinguish two things:

(1) the date scholars think an idea or teaching or writing arose.

(2) the dates of the earliest mss containing that idea or teaching or writing.

When there is a huge gap between (1) and (2) then our certainty as to what the original state of the writing is diminished. This is the case with Hinduism, whose mss are quite late. The same is true of Bhuddism, whose mss, except for some early fragments, are again quite late.

I don't know the mss history of the Tao. But if you're going to claim it's ideas weren't influence by outside influences, like Christianity, the burden is on you to give us the ms history of the work.

05-18-2006, 11:52 AM	#299
EthnAlln Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Burlington, Vermont Posts: 5,179	I trust the matter of the date of the Tao is now established Unfortunately, the post was a bit jumbled, so I'm not sure who posted what. However, it is definitely clear that the Tao existed in developed form centuries before Christ. Dare we hope that everyone will agree to this?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-17-2006, 05:30 PM	#291
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	A simple google search Version of the Tao Te Ching from 300 BCE Previously the oldest manuscript was dated to before 195 BCE

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.