Lao Tzu: The Way And Law Of Goodness

Buddhist and Chinese scholars defended Buddhism by attempting to prove that Buddhism was as good as other Chinese philosophies. In document 3, an anonymous Chinese scholar utilizes a question and answer organization to drive off the common attacks on the Buddhist belief. The scholar thinks it would be unrealistic to compare Confucianism and Buddhism because the Confucian Classics do not contain everything. He also defended the monks’ celibacy by saying that they had given up their family for “accumulating goodness and wisdom”. As an anonymous scholar, he probably hid his name to escape punishment because most people were Confucians at the time. Likewise, Zong Mi, a Buddhist scholar, was also trying to defend Buddha as an equal to Laozi and Confucius. He said that all three sages lead to an orderly society, and like doc 3, all three philosophies could exist

Tao-te Ching (in English pronounced “dow deh jing”) is believed to be written by Lao-tzu (6th century B.C). However, it is not for certain that he wrote the book. Lao-tzu is translated as “Old Master”. He was born in the state of Ch’u in China. It’s been said that he worked in the court of the Chou dynasty. The day that he was leaving the court to start his own life, the keeper of the gate urged him to write his thoughts as a book. Lao-tzu’s work mostly illustrates Taoism –a religion founded by Chang Tao-ling A.D. 150. His main purpose in this piece is practicing peace, simplicity, naturalness, and humility. Lao-tzu believes that people are overloaded with temporal objects in this world. He recommends his readers to let go of everything

The saint and the sinner both fall down eventually.” This claim of death hints that Lao-tzu sees an ending of life that is tangible, and therefore, he is materialistic in some aspect.

Tzu believed in action through inaction, Hsun Tzu linked "dull and determined effort" with "brilliant achievement" (18). Hsun Tzu also emphasized self-improvement through "conscious activity" (158), but Lao Tzu believed that the ideal human "disregards himself" (Lao Tzu, 7) and "does not want to be anything for

Distinguishing the differences between Lao-Tzu’s Tao-te Ching, written in the early sixth century B.C.E., and Niccolò Machiavelli’s The Qualities of the Prince, composed in 1513, can be shown through major points that both pursue opposing opinions. Whether it is their view of war, their stand on leadership, or even how they believe the ruler should be perceived, Lao-Tzu and Niccolò Machiavelli always seem to be on a different page. Through their pieces of work, one can see how their views differ. Between Lao-Tzu wanting nothing but peace and harmony and Machiavelli seeing a need for power and fear, both are on two very different ends of the spectrum.

    Earlier this week we focused on ancient eastern China during the Han Dynasty and the east asian philosophies that arose during this time period. We reviewed three great asian philosophers, Confucius, Lao Tzu, and Buddha. In class we also picked from a list of quotes from these three philosophers a quote they said that really resonated with us and wrote a descriptive essay on it and shared it in class for extra credit.

(Smith 196-99; Tao Je Ding scripture) Explain the life and characteristics of Lao Tzu. How does the enigmatic character of Lao Tzu’s biography also reflect the enigmatic (in other words: mysterious, paradoxical) character of the Tao Je Ding? Give one or more specific example from this scriptural text citing the specific chapter.

The most obvious difference between Lao-Tzu and Machiavelli are their moral perspectives and beliefs. Lao-Tzu is very mellow and easygoing person. He believes that the best government is one that runs itself, in the sense that the government should have very little control. Lao-Tzu is very passive. In his section titled Thoughts of the Tao-te Ching, Lao-Tzu says, “The world is sacred. It can’t be improved. If you tamper with it, you’ll ruin it. If you treat it like an object, you’ll lose it” (208). This quote strengthens the claim that Lao-Tzu believes in a government with little control. This is most accredited to his religion. He is a person of the Tao, and he is very reliant on the ‘Master’, or the god of Taoism. He believes that the Master controls everything, yet does nothing in the sense that people hardly are aware that the Master exists. Because of his knowledge of the Tao and the expectations of the Master, Lao-Tzu

Refraining from absolute negativity about Lao-Tzu’s work, the Tao does have many redeemable qualities. The emphasis Lao-Tzu places on the attainment of individual happiness is extremely honorable, however this doesn’t detract from the ineffectiveness Lao-Tzu encounters, as he is unable to come to well-grounded conclusion on the means for effective leadership. His advice to politicians is to only interfere when it is an absolute necessity; yet he takes this to a radical extreme advising leaders to pretty much do nothing. His ideas are taken to an extent where if human nature falters, which it

A ruler, in China, is the most honored person in the Chinese society, but the ruler has an obligation to be a moral and upright individual. The Tao addresses these individuals on page

Tao Te Ching of Lao-Tzu is a book with many chapters in it showing the two different sides to basically everything. To break it down, Tao means “path” or “way”, Te means “to get”, and Ching means “great book”. So the Tao was the force that controlled the universe and appreciated the way, to find balance between opposites. The book, Tao Te Ching has been said to been written by a Laozi—an old master—and has been said that the true author (or authors’) name has been lost. In the chapters between the book it tells how to live a life of integrity and of greatness per say. It also has contradictions or paradoxes which allows us to see the both perspectives of each side. It shows us that there are always two sides to everything. Tao Te Ching

Taoism and Confucianism are two primary Chinese ways of thinking. Historically, these two philosophies have been viewed as polar opposites, but upon further research, they have the same mission. The belief system of Taoism viewed in Tao Te Ching, written by Lao Tzu, is the monistic belief that human kind has a connection to the universe, and the “way” controls your life and everything that you do. The “way” has a pre-determined plan for your life, and you must sit back and follow it. On the other hand, Confucianism represented in The Art of War, shows that you have to work and discipline yourself to become complete. The Art of War is essentially a “battle plan”, and “Tao Te Ching “ is a essentially a book of ultimate humility. These two pieces seem quite different with their own different goals. While Confucianism and Taoism have different ways of reaching their respective goals, their goals and their destiny is essentially the same: and that is self-control.

In the world of Chinese philosophy, one cannot find better words than those spoken by Lao Tzu or Confucius. While they seem similar, they are indeed different in many ways.

Who is Lao Tzu? What is the purpose of Tao Te Ching? Why did Lao Tzu write Tao Te Ching? “Lao Tzu was a Chinese philosopher credited with founding the philosophical system of Taoism…He is thought to have lived in the 6th century BEC” (Mark). Lao Tzu’s philosophy of non-action has a great impact on future generations, because it can make the country become peaceful. Tao Te Ching was primarily writing to the rulers and the emperors of that time, he wants all the countries and subsidiary countries in China can coexist together peacefully, hoping that there will be no more wars. The poetic style of Tao Te Ching makes it universal, because it teaches people how to think and to behave well in an manner that can be acceptable and understandable

In an attempt to placate his brother he tries to learn from both old and new traditions and find ways to reconcile them. “He accepted new things quite readily, but without understanding them very thoroughly. It wasn’t that he lacked the desire to understand things, but when he should have used his brain, he used his emotions” (128). Here Black Li also stands in for the May Fourth revolutionaries. Lao She is cautioning them to think through the new ideals they might be accepting and to think rationally and not get caught up in the high and chaotic emotions of rebellion.