Lao-Tzu's Harmony theory!

I hope you might have heard about Lao-Tzu , the wise philosopher from ancient China.

Some scholars believe Lao-Tzu was a slightly older contemporary of Confucius (Kung-Fu Tzu, born Chiu Chung-Ni). Other scholars feel that the Tao Te Ching, is really a compilation of paradoxical poems written by several Taoists using the pen-name, Lao Tzu.

According to legend Lao Tzu was keeper of the archives at the imperial court. When he was eighty years old he set out for the western border of China, toward what is now Tibet, saddened and disillusioned that men were unwilling to follow the path to natural goodness. At the border (Hank Pass), a guard, Yin Xi (Yin Hsi), asked Lao Tzu to record his teachings before he left. He then composed in 5,000 characters the Tao Te Ching (The Way and Its Power).

Here is the piece of writing called Harmony by Lao-tzu:

Harmony
Lao-Tzu

Exterminate the sage [the ruler] and discard the wisdom [of rule],
And the people will benefit a hundredfold.
Without law or compulsion, men would dwell in harmony.

All things carry the yin and embrace the yang.
They achieve harmony through their interaction.

The more prohibitions there are,
The poorer the people will be.

The more laws are promulgated,
The more thieves and bandits there will be.

Therefore a sage has said:
So long as I “do nothing” the people will of themselves be transformed;
So long as I love quietude, the people will of themselves go straight.
So long as I act only by inactivity the people will of themselves become prosperous.

The people starve because those above them eat too much tax-grain. That is the only reason why they starve. The people are difficult to keep in order because those above them interfere. That is the only reason why they are so difficult to keep in order.

What do you think about this writing? Any thoughts?

There will be order only if there is love and nothing else and if you want to love dare to go beyond your comprehension, it may be of many life time but there is no alternative......every man made rule ends in havoc so dont make rule because they are all comprehensible?????got the point

What i find stressed much in chinese philosophy often is the goodness in the "natural".The more you let go, the better it turns out. However one shouldn't misunderstand letting go as to be lazy and give up, but rather, letting go as in "doing your job and not caring about the outcome" as if "doing" itself is the "point of it all".
Now, from that perspective, i believe the text reflects upon the disharmony in lives of people due to over expectation, over zealousness, and too much feeling of control.In fact, if you think about it, there is no such thing as "control" in the absolute sense.We cannot really control our bodies,we donot beat our heart, we cannot control how fast we age, or die , we cannot really help being hurt ,sad or happy.Neither are we passive observers.We do have a role in the grand scheme of things, unfortunately men tend to overestimate their influence upon the natural system and get disturbed in return.

Ironically one could argue that this all, "disharmony" may be in itself a harmony of the highest kind because we by the virtue of our artificiality and errors are perhaps evolving "naturally" towards wiser beings, and perhaps one day the fabled "Utopia" will infact materialise or may be we're just messed up for eternity.

kshitiz wrote:There will be order only if there is love and nothing else and if you want to love dare to go beyond your comprehension, it may be of many life time but there is no alternative......every man made rule ends in havoc so dont make rule because they are all comprehensible?????got the point

couldn't get your point clearly!

VforVendetta wrote:What i find stressed much in chinese philosophy often is the goodness in the "natural".The more you let go, the better it turns out. However one shouldn't misunderstand letting go as to be lazy and give up, but rather, letting go as in "doing your job and not caring about the outcome" as if "doing" itself is the "point of it all".
Now, from that perspective, i believe the text reflects upon the disharmony in lives of people due to over expectation, over zealousness, and too much feeling of control.In fact, if you think about it, there is no such thing as "control" in the absolute sense.We cannot really control our bodies,we donot beat our heart, we cannot control how fast we age, or die , we cannot really help being hurt ,sad or happy.Neither are we passive observers.We do have a role in the grand scheme of things, unfortunately men tend to overestimate their influence upon the natural system and get disturbed in return.

Ironically one could argue that this all, "disharmony" may be in itself a harmony of the highest kind because we by the virtue of our artificiality and errors are perhaps evolving "naturally" towards wiser beings, and perhaps one day the fabled "Utopia" will infact materialise or may be we're just messed up for eternity.

V tell me what do you think ...is it holding on to something that makes one stronger or letting go that makes one stronger....?

And regarding your final point, I don't think anything as utopia will never materalize...we are truly messed up for eternity!!

lao was a mystic, mystic always say same thing but only with different word and all mystics have based their saying on love........at least i believe lao also based his opinion on love thats it .........

you are one hell of a lovy lovy person arent you mr. kshitiz?.I wouldn't really emphasize much on love, for it has the tendency to imply ownership and attachment. I would rather prefer "harmony" or "nature".For me, the flow of the stream or the placidity of lake impresses more than the tiltillations of emotions.

you have to make one thing clear v for vendetta,when there is love there is no ownership, at least this is mystic definition of love if not of our world, so don't get the two words mixed "RAAG,ie desire " is one thing, and "KARUNA OR PREM, ie love" is another thing, and i love the way u have expressed " the flow of stream or the ..........." what does it matters when we dont agree in words but what we want to say is same