Lao Tzu - Tao Te Ching

but is this always true?

I dont think so.

 

^​

HTML:

 

but Lao Tsu spoke(wrote).

so according to his own saying, he does not know. which means the statement "he who knows does not speak; he who speaks does not know." is not necessarily true.

 

Yes, I agree, on the surface this does appear to be a statement that refers to it self.

But on examination you can see that Lao Tzu was saying that someone who truly knows "the way" does not speak about "the way", not that they don't speak at all, much like the Beatle song that says; though she thought I knew the answer, well I knew but I could not say.

Still, I would like to hear what Darrell has to say about this.

 

I think my point still applies.

If someone truely knew they way, why would they speak not of it? wouldn't their knowledge be of immense benefit to humanity as a whole?

 

It's beyond words really. So If you explain it with words, you're conceptualising it as something other than itself , which is basically contradicting yourself. It's something that each individual has to experience first hand, rather than try to understand ( understanding is not the same as experiencing)

 

I am me ...

There, I spoke with knowing ... yet ... I realize the futility in claiming self in any of this; these!

I am not Lao Tzu. Nor can I know the mind of any claiming becoming outside the six-base which is condition for my own becoming.

All one can do is speculate(indulge in conjectural thought):

HTML:

 

Thanx Darrell, a nice bit of eastern philosophy.

I kind of thought that your answer would be something like that but I was wondering.

But as for me;
It may only be western philosophy, but I like it!

As for eastern philosophy; I've learn that if your cup of tea is filled to the brim, drink it, don't try to put more tea in it!

 

radareyes: And yet you continue to do so.

* Aye ... so be it!

radareyes: Or perhaps the speculation that myself or Kaminoishiki indulged in speculation?

* It's unfortunate you lack understanding in my statement, yet you understand Lao Tzu. Everyone speculates ... everyone! Don't feel so special in thinking that you were singled out with intent.

HTML:

 

Kamma

HTML:

 

Loosen up ...

HTML:

 

MU

 

I was already!

HTML:

 

Mmmm!

HTML:

 

:smilielol5:

 

Hi

He who knows does not speak; he who speaks does not know. -Tao Te Ching; Lao Tsu.

Conversation be damned, how pathetic, knowledge is always shared and acknowledged, It could not be otherwise.

 

You're silly! ... which doesn't surprise me ...

HTML:

 

Why you being so silly? The keyword here being silly ...

Since when does whether or whatever I choose to believe or not believe, doubt or not doubt become an issue of legitimacy?

When has my ability to doubt what I choose to doubt become a matter of what you dictate or not in terms of legitimacy?

I am not conducting my actoins for existence based on what you think I should or should not think ... feel or should not feel. After all, thinking itself is a feeling.

You're just plain silly ... with a dash of foolishness for flavor.

-- hence the italics.

HTML:

 

um....

why are posts missing?

 

Aye, you're right there.

It was in another thread called Fools, by Scratcho. But since it took a turn to off-topic, I split it off into this thread.

Guess now would be a good time to move it into a more appropriate zone.

HTML: