/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.11184733]

What books does /lit/ consider their personal bibles other than the bible? Books that had an impact on your life with words to live by.

[Anonymous No.11184783]

>>11184733
ayy. I ordered my local bookstore to have this book shipped to their place for pick up tomorrow.
I think I might find an appeal in Daoism.
Read Dschuang Dsi, and now gonna see I Ging, Konfizius Dialogues and your apparent bible.
I am still too much suffering under the first impressions I got from reading it.
Care to elaborate why you feel this is your personal bible, and how your views on certain aspects changed or remained fast?

[Anonymous No.11184784]

I would love for the Dao De Jing to be real.

[Anonymous No.11184854]

>>11184784
Elaborate

[Anonymous No.11184864]

>>11184733

[Anonymous No.11184870]

>>11184854
He's saying there is no Dao and its just made up poetics.

[Anonymous No.11184952]

>>11184733
Can someone explain the Dao De Jing to me? We're going over it in my eastern philosophy class but it seems so contrived and vague that it doesn't really seem to be genuine in my eyes.

[Anonymous No.11184960]

>>11184870
Sure, if you don't know how to interpret symbols.

[Anonymous No.11184978]

>>11184952
your first impression of things is always correct, you have a high iq and know calculus so you know everything else at first glance. no need to think about it and your teacher is definitely qualified to teach it in a philosophy class. good thinking, "my teacher explained it badly so its wrong" this is the mark of a free spirit
>>11184960
I'm almost positive that the Daodejing isn't intended to be symbolically interpreted

[Anonymous No.11184980]

My diary desu

[Anonymous No.11185639]

>>11184978
Please stop fucking with me and give me some sort of explanation to understand and appreciate Daoism. There has to be a reason for why people subscribe to it to this very day.

[Anonymous No.11185660]

>>11185639
The Tao is the unmanifest, unchanging, unnamable, Absolute Reality.

[Anonymous No.11185712]

>>11184733
The Bible

[Anonymous No.11185718]

Siddhartha's pretty good, some interesting stuff in it

[Anonymous No.11185761]

>>11184733
I can't really pick one. It's a 6-way tie between:
>Tao Te Ching
>The Spiritual Ascent
>The Bhagavad Gita
>The Hermetica
>Ride the Tiger
>Plato: Complete Works

[Anonymous No.11185781]

>>11185660
>>11185639
Tao is God, basically. Some translators put 'God' in the Tao Te Ching.

It's the best Eastern religion, because it is basically monotheistic. Which just goes to show that very similar ways of thought can be developed completely on their own.

[Anonymous No.11185896]

>>11185761
>The Hermetica
>Ride the Tiger
kys

[Anonymous No.11185908]

Tao Te Ching and Meditations.

[Anonymous No.11185912]

I'm not a stupid christfag, so it is The Bhagavad Gita and the Ramayana for me.

[Anonymous No.11185958]

>>11185912
Christfags love the Hindu scriptures. They had a huge influence on people like Simone Weil, and C.S. Lewis even admitted that they make better literature than the Christian scriptures.

[Anonymous No.11186002]

>>11185781
>It's the best Eastern religion, because it is basically monotheistic.
Wrong.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Pure_Ones

[Anonymous No.11186036]

Mein Kampf

[Anonymous No.11186108]

>>11186002
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Pure_Ones
>Tao produced One
So, God.

Nothing I said there is wrong. Taoism is remarkably compatible with monotheism, and God in general. If that's your thing.

[Anonymous No.11186305]

>>11184733
Hippy garbage is your bible?
Damn dude.

[Anonymous No.11186308]

>>11186036
this but unironically

>>11185761
men among the ruins is better than ride the tiger
imo

[Anonymous No.11186331]

>>11185761
great list here. wish we could be friends

[Anonymous No.11186355]

Paradise Lost

I've read it 50-100 times. I've owned about 10 copies and just recently got the Folio Society version. I write short stories based on couplets or individual lines.

[Anonymous No.11186360]

>>11186355
Sup dantebro

[Anonymous No.11186374]

Unironically this.
Not even trying to be edgy, it just I can't seem to get over it.

[Anonymous No.11186378]

>>11186374
sup man i'm hopelessly depressed too
getin drunk as we speak

[Anonymous No.11186380]

>>11186374
am curious
tell me more

[Anonymous No.11186381]

>>11186360
bait? (miltonbro* would of been the correct jest, sir)

[Anonymous No.11186384]

>>11186380
just read it

[Anonymous No.11186398]

>>11186378
It was a very good book. Entertaining and informative, it never gave me the "stop reading and walk around for a bit before sitting down again to read" feelings, but at the end of the day it really felt like the most dreadful thing I have read, which all in all is not that bad, considering I still go on with life like always.
Now everything is coping mechanisms and delusions all the way down, t-thanks mister Ligotti.

Didn't make me suicidally depressed or anything, but now I can't find value in anything at all. If I ever feel depressed you can be sure that this lil' book is probably going to push me deeper into existential despair's tight little asshole.

[Anonymous No.11186408]

>>11186398
yea pretty much man
i think i'm gonna die soon and i don't mind
i also don't mind if i betray everyone's trust around me and live on undeservedly
know what i mean?

[Anonymous No.11186417]

>>11186408
I don't know.
Ever since I had baby's first existential crisis (way before reading the book) I feel like I live on autopilot. I know nothing matters and shit but I still go with the everyday grind, I still get worried about college and jobs and life and people's opinion of me even though it's all a lie.
I know I could betray everyone's trust, but I don't have any reason to. I feel like I'm already living undeservedly and that I have made many terrible choices due to the feelings I had of desperately wanting to cling to something. It's going through the motions I guess.
I don't know man, I feel like I'm alright, but one day I know I wont.

[Anonymous No.11186435]

>>11186417
ah i see
you are much younger than I
keep doing whatever you feel you need to do
do not listen to protocol
do not adhere to the process
think, feel, react
you are still young enough to escape

[Anonymous No.11186466]

>>11186381
You're the one right? The one that's made multiple images on Inferno? The one with the bookshelves full of the copies of them?

There is some anon floating around with that description. Is that you?

[Anonymous No.11186480]

>>11185781
>Some translators put 'God' in the Tao Te Ching
They do that shit with everything. That's what happens when Abrahamism hamfistedly infects everything. It tries to warp other religions and extends 'God' to basically any definition possible, to artificially encapsulate and stomp on other religions/philosophies. Unfortunately, this is has permanently warped other religions to the degree that we will never even find an inkling of their true essences.

[Anonymous No.11186488]

>>11186480
>not wanting to think that an Eastern religion can be monotheistic
Retard.

[Anonymous No.11186490]

>>11186488
I mean could you just say expound on what you're talking about instead of just calling him a retard? We're not in traffic.

[Anonymous No.11186497]

>>11186490
It's just very obvious that Daoism can be monotheistic, yet assholes will begrudgingly fight tooth and nail against the idea of any eastern religion of being monotheistic.

I see evidence of monotheism reflected in the Tao Te Ching constantly, whenever it talks about God and his King. All the fucking time.

Not everything monotheistic is stupid. From a strict, critical examination of the universe you find that monotheism is the logical guiding principle of the motion and behavior of everything. We must come from one and this one is what guides us all.

Now ask yourself how did I even have this thought if not faith? Can you see the level of doubt surrounding this? I unironically believe in God, why don't you?

[Anonymous No.11186593]

>>11186480
God is synonymous, I see the problem with changing the word but at the core it's the same thing.

Monotheism is correct. God is. Level O. What encapsulates everything? How are we truly separate? We exist in the same "thing".

[Anonymous No.11186639]

Have you guys heard of a book called '12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos?' It's by a really amazing guy called Jordan Peterson. He's a Canadian psychologist who once taught at Harvard (so you know he's smart aha).
He does lectures on YouTube all about the Bible and mythology, the power of stories, and what makes up our personality. All stuff that would really interest you guys, I think. He's also a major force in the war against SJW's (if you don't know who they are, then count yourself lucky. Type 'SJW' into YouTube but you best steel yourself XD)

Anyway, I think I think that's my personal bible. It's really helped me sort my life out and become are more active and responsible individual. It's like a self-help book straight from the Logos (or God, shall we say). Check it out guys, and remember to clean your room ;) (that's a little joke, you'll get it if you read the book aha xx)

[Anonymous No.11186648]

>>11186639

[Anonymous No.11186800]

>>11186648
you got baited, son

[Anonymous No.11186920]

>>11184952
Why hte fuck do you morons not read the books BEFORE the class?
It is such a waste when the first time you hear about a topic is when the professor is elaborating on aspects of it.
Read it before hand or the class will be wasted on you.

[Anonymous No.11186935]

>>11186639

[Anonymous No.11188193]

>>11186935
You failed the test.

[Anonymous No.11188278]

>>11184733
"The Dao is like an empty bowl that can never be filled..."

This line is a real (secret) inspiration to me as a mathematician. The concepts of 0 and infinity seem to necessarily imply eachother, as exemplified by this line, which would mean emptiness/nonexistence is inherently unstable and a universe with real numbers must inevitably arise.

With that dogma, it boggles my mind that 0 and infinity are necessarily treated so differently in mathematics, with infinity requiring a much more careful treatment (not being a number), but 0 being perfectly fine treated as a "special number." In complex analysis, infinity can be very appropriately, rigorously, and beautifully treated as a number (the extended complex plane) in many cases, and mathematics is rewarded with elegance and simplicity by doing so. This process also draws a number of parallels between zero and infinity, specifically in theorems which consider the number of zeros and singularities of functions, and in theorems regarding the analysis of the reciprocal space of a function. Still, I can't help but feel that this is fundamental beyond complex analysis, though the topology of rings is not nearly as pleasant as the topology of spheres...

[Anonymous No.11188284]

The foundation for exploration

[Anonymous No.11188286]

The Dao is the source of the myriad reddit ramblings

[Anonymous No.11188303]

Anyone else prefer this?

[Anonymous No.11188438]

>>11188278
Very interesting. Have you discovered this yourself? Having read some Guenon and Evola, it does make sense to think of Zero as the metaphysical origin, Center of the World, or the One, and the Infinite as the All, and the Absolute. Have you read The Metaphysical Principles of the Infinitesimal Calculus by Rene Guenon? I think you will enjoy it very much.

[Anonymous No.11188487]

>>11188438
I did not discover these mathematical theorems. They were developed mostly in the 1800's by Bernhard Riemann and Augustin-Louis Cauchy!

But as for the dogma that Zero and Infinity are intertwined in a way that one can not be said to exist without the other, that I did come up with on my own, though not with any philosophical depth and rigor (just a dogma!).

I will take your advice. They wouldn't happen to be Theosophists would they? I read a book which brushed on Kazimir Malevich and Suprematist art in Russia at the turn of the 20th century and their relation with the work of theosophists and mathematician Georg Cantor...

But Kurt Godel's incompleteness theorems have led me to believe that perhaps theosophists were not as onto something as I once believed. But then again, perhaps the absolute is that which all things arise from, and all axiomatic systems are simply too weak to reach the truth it creates?

[Anonymous No.11188489]

>>11186497
>It's just very obvious that Daoism can be monotheistic, yet assholes will begrudgingly fight tooth and nail against the idea of any eastern religion of being monotheistic.

No, the conversation was about "dao" meaning "God," which it absolutely does not unless you distort the definitions so far as to be utterly meaningless.

[Anonymous No.11188505]

>>11188489
There is a lot of similarity between Dao and God. That's all that is required: similarity.

[Anonymous No.11188543]

The Holy Qūran

[Anonymous No.11188544]

>>11186920
Because it's boring as shit, maybe?

[Anonymous No.11188557]

>>11188543
This and the Tao te Ching are the only acceptable answers tbqhfamalamadingdong

[Anonymous No.11188559]

unironically, my diary.

but only after having read many diaries, and then letting the mind assimilate them and then merge all of it with my own experience.

[Anonymous No.11188600]

>>11188559
That's sweet.

Did you see the news that they recently uncovered pasted over pages in Anne Frank's diary where she talks about sex?

[Anonymous No.11188602]

>>11188487
>They wouldn't happen to be Theosophists would they?
No, they are Traditionalists. They despise Theosophy and New Ageism.

[Anonymous No.11188785]

>>11184864
i like you
Mine would be the Necronomicon

[Anonymous No.11189011]

>>11186639
Same. I was about to say the same thing. Helped me out a lot.

[Anonymous No.11189116]

>>11184952
essentially the Tao Te Ching is a book describing the Tao and Te, or the way and virtue. the books is basiclly describing the best way to live and the right action a ruler should take. the first 37 chapters are more metaphysical dealing with the nature of Taoism while the last 44 chapters dealing more with virtue and how sages rulers and people should act

[Anonymous No.11189250]

>>11188602
>traditionalism
>not new age
Would not a rose by any other name?

[Anonymous No.11189259]

Pythagoras
Parmenides
Heraclitus
Empedocles
Plato
Aristotle
Plotinus
Proclus
Iamblichus
Hermes

[Anonymous No.11189291]

>>11185639
Just read the Daodejing instead of asking for anonymous strangers to teach you (we will be gone in a few hours or days)

The Dao gives life to all things without lording this over them. The Dao is like a bellows its excites and extinguishes the ten thousand forces. The Dao is like a river, it flows always down to the low places, to the site of greatest receptivity. The dao is a cipher it invites mystery but does not abide in formlessness, it contains image and form but it does not yield them through brute force. The Dao has no designs nor does it make moral demands, the man of Dao is like an uncarved block of wood. He is useful because he is profoundly useless and unrefined. The man of Dao is unconcerned with praise or blame and does not shine like Jade or radiate ferocity like a lion or a star. The man of Dao does not take credit nor does he quarrel, he does not shrink from death because he’s passed through the veil of abiding, of identification. The Self is born in darkness, the Dao abides by traceless motion, the World gives birth to its ten thousand things without providing passage back to their origin, no one knows where they come from or where they recede into. The public values kindness, goodness, merit, or power; the man of dao has no use for these, they appear when what is natural, what flows forth from non-action, is absent. In not acting we become stupid and simple, in our stupidity and profound useless simplicity we are like a perfect vessel for every activity. Promises come from not trusting, we should do what must be done and be unconcerned with the other. Violence is a reaction to exertion and invasion, shows of force are followed by exhaustion always, wherever war roots itself death emanates. If you should kill, you should do so as one would conduct themselves at a funeral. Taking great pains to exalt one’s victory is not in line with the Dao, but is an evanescence a turbulence which provokes return force, which dissipates the integrity of the pattern of Self, there is no need to claim anything.

[Anonymous No.11189336]

the philosopher adopts the tone of priest or magician, like them he posits an unreality, in this case the tao, which stands as antithesis to all created things, permanance in impermanance, order in chaos, that which contradicts our experience of both self and other, the result is a comforting delusion, an expansion of the ego to include the egoless, in a select few, it results in complete egolessness, such cases usually end in a jail cell or a psych ward, or a funeral... such is the price true believers must pay to glimpse unreality qua unreality...

[Anonymous No.11189379]

>>11188278
I think that's because there's stuff to both sides of 0 but only stuf to one side of infinity since there is nothing bigger
Feel free to congratulate me on this oberservation

[Anonymous No.11189499]

>>11189379
Not so! The miracle of complex infinity in complex analysis is that you can treat infinity as a single point, corresponding to infinity on the positive real axis, negative infinity on the negative real axis, infinity*i on the positive imaginary axis, etc., and this generalizes to any infinite ray from the origin pointing to the point at complex infinity!

The end result is that you take the clopen set of the complex plane, and make it topologically compact! It's most often visualized as a sphere, known as the Riemann Sphere. You can do all sorts of wonderful, simple things with the most important class of complex functions, Holomorphic functions.

Of course, you can do the same thing on the real line, defining -infty=infty, changing the real number line into the compact real number ring (you can imagine the ring as just being one line drawn around the Riemann Sphere).

This is all well understood. My curiosity is a) using infinity as a number is not nearly as useful on the real line, and b) infinity is not really embedded into the most common fundamental axioms of mathematics (those of set theory). It arises instead only after 0 and 1 are used to define the natural numbers, which may then be used to define negative numbers, real numbers, fractions, complex numbers, what have you. My dogma is that infinity comes hierarchically before 1 - that it is necessarily coupled to the idea of 0!

I should note here that I'm an amateur mathematician, and have no formal training beyond college. It's just some interesting stuff I like to scratch my head about ;)

[Anonymous No.11189526]

>>11189499
in english doc

[Anonymous No.11189530]

>>11184733
the holy Quran

[Anonymous No.11189623]

>>11189526
Fair enough. It can't really be done, that's the difficult part...

Simply put, treating infinity as a number is only really useful in highly developed mathematics - the complex plane. By this point in the development of maths, which typically begins with 0, 1, and then the (0,1,2,3,...), we've developed negative numbers, fractions, the real numbers, "imaginary" constant i, complex numbers, and all the things that come with them.

My dogma is that infinity ought to be earlier in the development on philosophical grounds.

(I could recommend you some textbooks if you're actually interested, but there aren't any popular lectures on the subject of complex analysis that I know of)

[Anonymous No.11189688]

>>11184733
Guru Granth Sahib

[Anonymous No.11189715]

>>11189623
No thank you.
I'm a very superficial person, and there is absolutely nothing aesthetically pleasing in mathematics that I can see
The people who do or enjoy math all look like shit.
They dress like garbage. Not because they are retarded, but because they don't care.
I do not want to be like that, I would rather die.

As an example, someone I knew I high school and maybe you knew someone similar
A kid with absolutely no self-awareness whatsoever, a human who possesed no taste, had no concept of what it would even mean to be attractive and often said things that gave cause to feelings of surrogate shame in everyone in the room besides himself
The type of person you want to shake so they wake up

I'm a STEMfag and regret it
My greatest fear is that this shit will mold my brain until I become like the people I disdain

Maybe you should still post the textbooks, I'm sure someone else would appreciate him
God bless you for seeing something in math I clearly don't, and thank you for sharing a bit of that with me
I just can't appreciate the field, vectors are kind of neat I guess but that's about it

[Anonymous No.11189758]

[Anonymous No.11189763]

>>11189715
Your comment about mathematicians got a belly laugh from me - too accurate!

I’m a physics grad student. I didn’t believe in mathematical beauty until grad school. It’s certainly an acquired taste...

Don’t worry - if you’re anxious about changing, it means you’re aware of any change that could happen to you, and working to resist it. I’m sure you’ll come out fine.

But yes, I too am glad that I don’t lack social awareness like some mathematicians and weirdos in this world. And I’m glad there’s people like you out there who put science and math to good use while appreciating other things in life :)

[Anonymous No.11189789]

>>11189336
sounds like a freudian critique of buddhism and someone who doesn't know what wei-wu-wei is or what de is or any of the concepts of the Dao at all

[Anonymous No.11189820]

[Anonymous No.11189826]

>>11189763
I'm glad you didn't take offence, reading it back to myself the post came off as a little mean
It's nice how this is a place where we two can sort of interact when that in all likelihood wouldn't happen normally

There probably is great beauty in math, I just can't see it yet and maybe I never will
Maybe I'm just not good enough at it, but I'll try

[Anonymous No.11189831]

>>11189758
is this book right wing propaganda all the way through or is there a point where he talks about something important that is not politics?

[Anonymous No.11189835]

>>11189820
excellent, thank you. DL now

[Anonymous No.11189883]

>>11189763
>I’m a physics grad student. I didn’t believe in mathematical beauty until grad school
I'm a math grad student and I personally think the "math is beautiful" sentiment is the worst meme in my field.

[Anonymous No.11189931]

>>11189883
Superficial Anon here, could you elaborate?
I would be very interested to hear the opinion and arguments of someone who sort of agrees with me but has more experience in the field

[Anonymous No.11190046]

>>11189931
The "beauty" has just never made itself apparent to me. Mathematics can have all of those (by now cliche'd) attributes that mathematicians talk about; it can be elegant, slick, etc. By I've never found myself emotionally moved in the way that a beautiful piece of music, or a beautiful scenery has moved me.
Frankly I think we need a better word to describe the transcendent positive qualities of mathematics. I think the mathematician's compulsive need to characterize mathematics as being "beautiful" is just a desperate way of justifying the subject to non-practitioners in a way most readily digestible. Maybe it's not altogether different from a sociologist who insists that he's practicing a science. Everyone wants to be an artist or a scientist. Sure, there are recurring themes/objects/results in mathematics that are definitely pleasing (both for practical reasons relevant to a working mathematician, and for intrinsic reasons), but I don't think that makes mathematics an art.

[Anonymous No.11190142]

>>11190046
Thank you
Reminds me of coding

[Anonymous No.11190288]

[Anonymous No.11190304]

>>11190046
>>11189931
There is something inherently beautiful in mathematics. The more you remove it from indeterminate solutions to arithmetic equations, or the more that you focus on aspects requiring other variables like infinity, or non-real numbers, the further you remove its beauty.

Symmetry and commensurability, then, are beautiful. They are orderly and divine.

[Anonymous No.11190325]

>>11190304
The most beautiful symmetries are best expressed using complex numbers, and you need infinity to define real numbers in the first place

[Anonymous No.11190331]

>>11189831
>Evola
>right wing

[Anonymous No.11190336]

>>11190304
>more that you focus on aspects requiring other variables like infinity, or non-real numbers, the further you remove its beauty
spotted the low spatial IQ moron

[Anonymous No.11190368]

>>11190336
>>11190325
Everything real and commensurable can be measure with lines or a circle. When you enter the realm of solid problems or linear problems, you enter a realm of complexities you will require irrationals to figure out, or that generate infinity.

Which is why hyperbolas are solid problems, because they are generated from the contemplation of three-dimensional figures.

They are lesser, then, and approximate closer to material reality, thus proving their 'lesser'ness.

Indeterminate relations of quadratic equations like those posited by Diophantus, and overall, planar problems, like the problems solved by Euclid prior to book ten, are indicative of higher beauty and symmetry than anything in modern mathematics. The triangle is the essence of unity, then, as Nicomachus and Plato said. And the square, the essence of duality, or magnitude. From there comprise all things in reality.

[Anonymous No.11190463]

>>11190331
>ultrafascism
>hurr durr not rite wing

[Anonymous No.11190489]

>>11190368
oh yeah try describing a quantum superimposition in terms of triangles and squares and see how that goes you fucking autist

[Anonymous No.11190507]

>>11190463
>beyond fascist
>not comparable to a fascist
>above fascist

[Anonymous No.11190516]

>>11190463
>fascism
>right wing
you havent read fucking anything other than a wikipedia page have you

[Anonymous No.11190517]

>>11190507
>ultracommunist
>hurr durr not left wing

[Anonymous No.11190527]

>>11190463
fascism is not right wing

[Anonymous No.11190543]

>>11190517
>taking an italian word out of context in english

[Anonymous No.11190545]

>>11190489
>See line four of my response.

[Anonymous No.11190557]

>>11184733

[Anonymous No.11190565]

>>11190545
>description of quantum realities approximate lesser to material reality
not true at all, now fuck off back to /toy/

[Anonymous No.11190568]

>>11190489
We're communicating right now in zeros and ones...

[Anonymous No.11191010]

>>11189250
It's true that Traditionalists and new agers and Theosophists believe in a transcendent unity of religions, but that is where the similarities end. Theosophists believe in some hodge-podge of religions and occultism, while your typical new agers believe more or less the same thing while being "spiritual but not religious," however. Traditionalists believe you must devote yourself to a spiritual path with an unbroken chain of tradition, like the Abrahamic faiths, Hinduism, Buddhism, Daoism, and so on, which Theosophy and new age aren't, since they are modern pseudo-religions without a lineage of tradition that span hundreds or thousands of years.

[Anonymous No.11191035]

>>11191010
>humans have existed for two hundred thousand years
>the true religions are those from approximately two to three thousand years ago
Ya. I don't get it.

[Anonymous No.11191129]

>>11191035
Yes, esoteric knowledge can only be traced back so far, but their meaning is still preserved in the symbols which have been passed down through the eons, which resurface every now and then in the form of a tradition.For every exoteric religion, their is an inner initiatory esoteric aspect to them. If you can somehow be initiated into one of these traditions, you can uncover the hidden transcendent knowledge held in these symbols and reach a unity or understanding of a sort with the Absolute. This is why Traditionalists keep harping over initiation.

[Anonymous No.11191139]

>>11191010
False
Traditionalism doesnt require devotion to any religion.
It requires faith in the transcendental values of tradition.

[Anonymous No.11191235]

[Anonymous No.11191318]

>>11184978
the dao is quite literally the fundamental essence of everything that exists

[Anonymous No.11191321]

>>11185718
that's buddhism faggot

[Anonymous No.11191464]

The Cambridge Edition of the Works of Immanuel Kant

[Anonymous No.11191504]

>>11185781
Tao is not at all God (not personal, not the maker, not handing out set rules). You might think of it as The Absolute, but even that's a stretch, I think. Western interpreters just put their own spin on it. There's still affinities between the two, but it's reductive to say Tao just is God.

[Anonymous No.11191508]

>>11185958
Mm, speaking of Weil, Gravity and Grace is an important book to me.

[Anonymous No.11191624]

>>11186920
>Why hte fuck do you morons not read the books BEFORE you have any idea of what they mean?

[Anonymous No.11193360]

>The Bodhicaryāvatāra (Śāntideva)
>Ta Hsüeh and Chung Yung
>On the Nature of Things (Lucretius)
>Fragments (Heraclitus)
>The Divine Comedy (Dante Alighieri)

I don't agree with everything in all of them, but they all present some stuff that I think about very often

[Anonymous No.11193402]

>>11191624
You've missed the point of reading.

You don't read something because you already know it, you read it to understand something you /didn't/ already know.

[Anonymous No.11193717]

>>11184952

Some things are one way.
But some things aren't.

This is the gist of it.

[Anonymous No.11193814]

>>11193717
>/everything

[Anonymous No.11193868]

>dat love of truth

[Anonymous No.11193999]

The Pythagorean Sourcebook and Library - Kenneth Guthrie
Art and Thought of Heraclitus - Charles Kahn
Parmenides and Empedocles: The Fragments in Verse Translation - Stanley Lombardo
Reality - Peter Kingsley
Philosophy as a Way of Life: Spiritual Exercises from Socrates to Foucault - Pierre Hadot
Philosophy as a Rite of Rebirth - Algis Uzdavinys
Hermeneutics of the Subject - Michel Foucault
Art of Philosophy - Peter Sloterdijk

[Anonymous No.11194945]

bump

[Anonymous No.11194962]

>>11191129
we don’t even know what the Aryan faith looked like an most Buddhist texts are untranslated you massive fucking pseud
>>11191139
>tradition is transcendental
wow maybe its like genetic or something?
>>11190565
it is true because no scientific model even vaguely approximates reality we know this for a fact because we seek to make them infinitely more accurate implying infinite deficiency

[Anonymous No.11195422]

>>11191508
Indeed. That book unironically saved my life.

[Anonymous No.11195541]

>>11190516
>>11190527
brainlets please at least answer the initial question - how much of it is propaganda and how much is beyond politics?

[Anonymous No.11195575]

>>11195541
Ask stupid questions get stupid answers

[Anonymous No.11196110]

>>11188303
yes

[Anonymous No.11197173]

>>11195422
Worth watching that doc? I've read Need for Roots, G&G, and Waiting for God. Haven't delved much further.

[Anonymous No.11197195]

>>11195575
but you are fucking retards Fascism is right wing it has all the fucking trappings of right wing beliefs:

cult of the leader based in military might and vigor=rw

military expansion, empire, old borders attained, new lands for growth=rw

regulate breeding and sexual behavior, family strong=rw

no privacy, the State owns you, you should do what the military wants=rw

private property is good and so is capitalism just no unregulated finance capital=rw (almost lolbert)

the public needs to be instructed in what to believe, basically we should all be reeducated throughout our lives=rw

rebirth, old glories revived, anti-enlightenment defanging of the race=rw

violence is the supreme law=rw (and de Maistre believed this)

you people are stupid faggot

[Anonymous No.11197969]

>>11197195
Fascism is described by all fascists as "third-positionism". Meaning neither left nor right, it is its own position. It rejects capitalism and communism. Collectivism enhanced by individualism.

>military leader
Has nothing to do with left or right
>cult of personality
Has nothing to do with left or right
>expansion
Fascism is not a doctrine of expansion
Its a doctrine of self sufficiency and nationalism, peace through strength
In Hitlers case he believed Germany needed lebensraum because of the swelling population under his regime, Fitler doesn't speak for all fascists
>eugenics
Again neither left nor right
>no privacy, state owns you, do what military wants
Pathetic ad hominem, not an argument. And even if this were true, still isnt left or right wing.
You need to brush up on definitions because you seem to think authoritarian = right wing
I remind you communism exists.
>private property is good
right wing, although there's a huge caveat to that, there is restrictions on what kind of property you can own and how much of it. There is just as much public property under fascism as there is private.
I also want to point out this whole "private property" thing kind of contradicts your "no privacy" statement earlier.
>so its capitalism
No anon its not capitalism. Fascism is just as anti-capitalist as it is anti-communist. Google the definition of corporatism.
>the public needs to be instructed in what to believe
Again, another pathetic ad hominem.
Nationalised education doesnt equal brainwashing anymore than it does today in modern schools. Will you be given material to learn chosen by the government? Sure. Just as you are today.
The education system under fascism is free for everyone, and it is designed to be tailored to each individual, to train him or her to their best. Because the collective is at its best when its made up of strong individuals. This is the core philosophy of fascism, shown in the symbol of the fasces (multiple individual shafts bound together into a mighty axe).
>romanticism
As i will show you with these screencaps of the Doctrine of Fascism, romanticism is not the goal.
However fascism does honor the tradition and culture of its host nation, as any nation should.
>violence is the supreme law
Meaningless garbage.

[Anonymous No.11197974]

>>11197969
pt 2

[Anonymous No.11197985]

>>11197969
>fitler
wtf
hitler*

[Anonymous No.11198026]

>>11184783
>I Ging
Please don't even bother starting with this unless you are interested in the divination side of things (in which case do what you want). The I Ching is meant to be an immense source of wisdom but you need decades of background knowledge to understand it. Cheng Man-ch'ing (the man who famously brought Tai Chi and Taoist Philosophy to America) said he only felt comfortable studying it in his 80s after he was already master in many disciplines.

I'm sure the /lit/ version of this would be trying to read Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit as your first philosophy book.

[Anonymous No.11198569]

>>11184952
Before we developed language we instinctively lived according to the way (Tao) as do animals. As we started to speak, categorising and describing things we lost the way. We are happiest when we live in accordance to the way (and mastering it could give you special powers depending on what you believe). Although the Tao is in describable and we can't accurately say what it is, we can look at clues in nature and by listening to our bodies. The book is Laozis attempt to suggest some of the potential rules and power of the way.

[Anonymous No.11198589]

>>11198026

´Thanks for your honest answer even if it is a bit of a discouraging one.
I am only starting to confront oriental philosophie/mythologie and therefor have more of a mindset to expose myself to as much of it as I can to then sort myself out and (hopefully) with help from others or other sources adequaetly tackle the various works and reach a point where I truly will be able to understand them.
I am reading this in German by Richard Wilhelm who was the first to translate the msot notable chinese works into German (his translations are still the go to for german sinologie courses I believe), and he does try to elaborate at certain times on what is being said, solely to help the reader understand. I Ging is even more so annotaded all over with an immense introduction and refrence section and part dealing with the signage. Wilhelm also constantly makes refrences in his footnotes to German work of literature, especially Goethe's.
I'll be overwhelmed for sure but hopefully this is jsut the beginning of sinologie for me and I Ging as a work I will revisit over the course and hopefully understand a little more each time.
D-did you personally study it perhaps a little more in detail than most people would?

[Anonymous No.11198661]

>>11184733
ko revolution molting
above tui the joyous lake
below the clinging fire
revolution on your own day you are believed supreme sucess furthering through perserverance remorse disappears
read this in the i ching fortune cookie

[Anonymous No.11198799]

>>11198589
The problem with reading the translation in such a way without knowing the wealth of background information is that you are very subject to his interpretation of the symbolism. Which whilst I know he's a well regarded scholar, when you are trying to describe the indescribable it's impossible to not fill the blanks with your own subjectivity (you can see my defination of Taoism here >>11198569).

I've not read I Ching for the reasons I stated to you. Having read bits of buddhism and started meditaiting for a few years, I eventually moved to Taoism, seeing it as much better interpretation of life in my eyes. I've read several books from older texts to newer ones (Alan Watts's book on Taoism is very good introduction) but nothing is better for learning their philosophy than by practicing one of their arts. This is because for most part they are trying to describe indescribable things but these are things you can feel. So I'd advise you to learn one and read as a complementary to it (you'll be able to see specifics too as the texts relate to the arts and which is easily to grasp and later apply outside of it).

I personally do Tai Chi (which is amazing for so many reasons) but other Taoist arts are caligraphy and flower arranging. You do need someone competent to teach you.

[Anonymous No.11198813]

>>11198026
> le wise chinese old guy meme
looooooooooooooooooool

[Anonymous No.11198837]

>>11198799
>tao is pre-linguistic
Ok. But does that mean all animals are naturally non-neurotic? Animals can become mentally ill through trauma or genetics. They are pre-linguistic. I dunno if I buy it. Besides, doesn't all this "quieting your inner monologue" make you a worse speaker/writer? There are plenty of alan watts listening plebs who say it's like the finger pointing out the moon bro but why believe in a moon at all. Why posit an intelligible order? That said, I do prefer Taoism in some ways to Neoplatonism. Uselessness versus usefulness. Though I think they agree on trying to reach the state where one can act with wu wei, whatever that means... being uselessly useful or usefully useless or something of that nature. Just a minor quibble. But I stll see it as a metaphysical principle akin to a parmenidean one or neoplatonic good (monism is doubtlessly nondualism despite what people say).

[Anonymous No.11198943]

>>11198799
>>11198837
Sorry. Don't mean to be rude. I just honestly think it's not a perfect philosophy. Even if only intelligible post-linguistically, it is still a postulate about a intelligible principle. Is this not the constant lie of sages whether they call it God or Tao? Lao tzu isn't even a real name. It means old boy. A mythical allusion (or illusion). I also have experienced kundalini psychosis during my early twenties after dabbling in yoga and energy work and psychedelic medicine. So I suppose I feel cut off from perceiving intuitivey the intelligible principles of the cosmos, I tried my best to go beyond language and found only chaos. Not a beautiful intelligible yin-yang. Am I just cursed with bad genetics from bad karma in a previous life? Lol. Is that Daoism too?

[Anonymous No.11198958]

>>11189715
Math Major here about to graduate... I came to despise math and the people that like it during my four years in university... Transitioning to film for my career, I'm with u anon.

[Anonymous No.11198975]

>>11198958
:( Sorry you had knowledge ruined for you with drudgery and pretension (just a guess)

[Anonymous No.11199050]

Idk if you mean spiritual texts i read a lot of the bible and am reading the writings of the doctors of the church now. I read all the famous Eastern spiritual texts in high school and sort of feel like it was a waste now but not 100% sure

[Anonymous No.11199068]

>>11198837
It's not that animals live perfect lives, if anything they are a bad example of mine as Taoist tend to look more at natural phenomenon like water. Personally, though whilst mental conditions can effect animals it would be worse if they 'knew' about them. I see this comparison with autistic kids that go to normal schools instead of disabled ones and generally come out better (obviously depending on how serious it is).

>Besides, doesn't all this "quieting your inner monologue" make you a worse speaker/writer?
That depends, I think if you get rid of the subjective layering and stop forcing it so to speak to could come to understand the hidden beauty and learn to follow your instinct in description.

>Alan Watts
A couple of his books are okay as introductions but his followers don't really understand the concepts. He also muddles many philosophies together.

>wu wei
I still don't really grasp this concept particularity in everyday life but I can see it in Tai Chi.


>>11198943
The first couple sentences of the Tao Te Ching say that the Tao they speak of is not the eternal Tao, so by virtue of that it can't be perfect. To this point the Tao is also not intelligible. Wizards (Taoist sages lol) don't claim to comprehend or understand the Tao, they are all still learning to live in accordance to the way, they are simply just further along than us. Laozi actually means Old Master (the symbol for Master and Boy are the same in chinese) and although I also believe it's not one person but the collection of many teachings, why does this matter?

I don't want to assume but I believe your problem with Taoism is grasping this concept that there's no such as perfect or true understanding and actually being okay with that. Unlike in Buddhist/Hindu traditions they aren't trying to escape this life they want to live in accordance to it so you don't need to shut yourself off from everyone to achieve it (even though it's unachievable). You won't find peace until you can accept this principle.

[Anonymous No.11199162]

>>11199068
If there is no perfect understanding then even the daodejing is imperfect and so on so why cling to it more than any other text. And if so, then we might say many of the things alleged of the sage or wizard are false. Furthermore, there may be superior expositions of truth elsewhere. Idk. I prefer Greek and German and French and English stuff. It's not like we don't have fanciful myths too. But its easier to separate the philosophical wheat from the mystical chaff then in another foreign cultural cosmology. Etymology and translation is also easier for me as a occidentaphile.

Anyway, I feel like if there is a "way", it goes its "way" regardless of our actions (if we even have free will)...

You mention
>be more instinctual
But what about instincts to rape murder steal get intoxicated etc? Surely we need a superego...

[Anonymous No.11199164]

>>11186417

>I know nothing matters
Will never understand how this is in any way bad to people.

[Anonymous No.11199231]

>>11199164
Well, I think you're probably just very practical.

For some people, seeking a path in life can be very difficult, because they want to do something that "matters," or that will have a positive effect on the world, but they don't see a way to do it.

For me, there's myriad paths - from the satisfaction of manual labor, to the joys of teaching, to community organization.

But for a lot of people, getting a college degree means taking a job with a good salary and benefits and the cushy lifestyle that comes with it. That's a tough reality, especially if you don't believe in the work the company's doing. That's why you see so many flashy "change the world" startups from young people. Because the idea of doing something that in the long run has little-to-negative impact on the world is scary.

I think that's the real source of "existential" fear. It's not that nothing matters, it's that they can't find meaning for themselves in the society they've inherited.

But then again, I also think we live in a valueless society, so I'm biased.

[Anonymous No.11199285]

>>11199162
> Anyway, I feel like if there is a "way", it goes its "way" regardless of our actions (if we even have free will)...
This is true, and why the Daodejing is focused on steering things in their infancy and seeing things clearly enough to do so. It also recognizes that small actions can have large effects.

>But what about instincts to rape murder steal get intoxicated etc? Surely we need a superego...
For the Daoist, there is an emphasis on deference/respect that serves that function. You steer actions with great attention paid to not being coercive. I don't think instinctual is a particularly good way to describe it.

This is mostly coming from Dao De Jing: A Philosophical Translation, if you want an intro.

[Anonymous No.11199361]

>>11199162
I don’t cling to it anymore than one text. Taking anything as gospel is dangerous because it’s subject to inate human bias. This is why you should look for more sources of knowledge, even simply relying on writing philosophy means that your biased to the ‘intellectual world’ and not the instinctual. This is why I’ve advocated learning through their arts in other posts.

You probably prefer western authors because they are a lot easier to asslimate (assuming your from a western country). Assimilating some of the prinples of eastern philophsy properly (not by rejecting the west) is very powerful.

>you raping others
If you accepted yourself and life wholeheartedly you wouldn’t need to search for external pleasures such as these and advanced Taoist practice believe in not ejaculating.

>if someone rapes you
They’re happy with defending you and even killing in defence. Taoism isn’t Buddhism or other eastern religions.

[Anonymous No.11199510]

>>11199285
>>11199361
>Dao De Jing: A Philosophical Translation
Word up. Shit's pretty based. I read Wilhelm and Mitchell before but that one's my fave. Guess I'm being a little trolly. I am a bit overly intelectualized. But stripped to my instincts I am an unruly beast.

[Anonymous No.11199522]

>>11199361
>They’re happy with defending you and even killing in defence. Taoism isn’t Buddhism or other eastern religions.
You just betrayed your ignorance of Buddhism and Eastern religions as a whole.