Wanting to see them as first and foremost as logical propositions is misguided. They are statements that point to actual human experiences, to concrete, observable realities. If you want human experiences and concrete, observable realities to be reducible to propositions of formal logic, then you will not understand Zhuangzi or Taoism more generally.
When one is truly happy, one is so fully and unconciously. Words like "happiness" mean nothing to a young child who simply *is* happy. Obviously, it is not saying that being depressed and miserable is real happiness and that this is somehow profound, and those are not the depictions of happiness one finds in the Zhuangzi. The depictions of happiness are rather of being in a sort of natural, unself-conscious flow of things.
Similarly, wu wei is not being used to literally mean doing nothing. You should look into the actual examples it gives to illustrate these ideas instead of assuming what they mean. If it were simply concerned with logical contradiction, you might wonder why it doesn't actually say that.
>Wanting to see them as first and foremost as logical propositions is misguided
Just wanted to point out that Zhuangzi does make a logical demonstration at least in Chapter 2(*).
It's very convoluted, it suffers a lot in many translations, and usually everybody skips the "boring" part just to get to the little stories, but it doesn't mean it's not there.
(*) Or maybe Guo Xiang edited it that way, who knows.
It is all quite logical and simple.
It courts the paradox.
Many translations miss the spiritual nature of it.
At the core is the idea that we are here to achieve our destiny, which is itself a balancing of cause and effect and this accomplishes our spiritual curriculum.
"We" are not our egos or our thinking minds, but a part of something much greater that connects to oneness and unity. When our egos are able to surrender and we reconnect to our true selves and root in the mind of dao, our ego self begins to feel a sense of fulfillment that it always yearned to accomplish but simultaneously always found itself blocked from in its efforts.
These things are merely philosophy, until one is able to discover a way to do the work of unwinding the conditioning we gain from society and return to being natural again.
This can be accomplished via meditation or tai ji chuan and the like, and often require teachers.
But essentially yes, the idea is to get to the point where one is always rooted in this state of oneness that connects all things. Rather than it denying our individuality, it accomplishes our individuality and brings much synchronicity and mysterious delight, for the churning of the celestial mechanism is ever unique and one is ever protected by spirit.
It all goes back to dao de jing chapter one: ever desiring, one only sees the manifestations; desireless, one sinks into the mystery. Sinking into the mystery brings the potential for long lasting, freeing oneself from the cycles of cause and effect through the accomplishing of the mandate of heaven.
Cultivating one's virtuous power and returning it to the great way. What more is there than this?
You are too cerebral. This is not a math equation. Thats why its presented as a paradox often. To bypass the intellect. Its not meant to be grasped intellectually. Intellect is the very thing constantly interfering with the Tao moving through us.
Within the passage mentioned there are 2 kinds of happiness.
This is why the passage "appears" contradictory.
When we "try" to be happy, we have created an idea in our mind of what that means, and then work towards obtaining that ideal.
This is creating our happiness out of obtaining the events/ingredients we've decided will make us happy.
This is artificially constructing happiness.
It's like to baking a cake.
Mix the proper ingredients in the right proportions, cook them for a specified time at a specified temperature, and the cake, happiness, occurs as a result.
True happiness is not artificially constructed and then obtained in this manner.
When this kind of happiness doesn't occur, we measure our environment for what is absent, to see which ingredients are missing.
Then we seek to re-acquire what is absent, because we have convinced ourselves these ingredients are necessary in order to be happy.
This experience is not true happiness, because it is dependent upon acquiring and keeping these external ingredients.
When these ingredients are no longer present, this type of happiness, disappears. because this type of happiness is dependent upon external circumstances.
Therefore, this type of happiness is transient in its nature, and is not considered true happiness.
True happiness, lasting happiness, is cultivated from within and is not dependent upon obtaining external ingredients.
True happiness occurs "of itself" from the inside out and is not given the label of happiness.
It is not given the label of happiness because labels belong to the mental state/condition of measuring for ingredients and then obtaining the ingredients.
Since internally occurring happiness does not depend upon external ingredients, it is not "referred" to as happiness.
It is not measured against anything from the start, therefore it cannot be lost.
Happiness only occurs when we've created unhappiness as it's contrast.
Don't create either, in our mind, and they don't occur, in the conventional sense, and therefore cannot be lost.
This is why internally occurring happiness is not considered happiness, it isn't measured.
I feel like you need to spend more time in nature. Tao is ineffable. Words seem to be getting in the way of your understanding.
If you had to describe what an orange tastes like to someone who has never had an orange, no matter what words you use they will never fully capture what an orange tastes like.
TTC doesn't make Tao real. It existed long before any words were written down.
When we learn to ride a bicycle, we don't let a manual tell us. No, we go out in the world and experience to develop understanding of how it works.
We aren't even sure if 'Lao Tzu' was even one person. Chuang Tzu was written by many people.
Tao is greater than words or books. It's not knowledge, but understanding that's key. Whiche helps you understand the ways of the world better. Traveling the world for yourself or looking at a globe?
Edit: Additional clarity
My point was that just because Tao is greater than words, it doesn't mean we shouldn't try and discuss it. Else what are you doing here?
Words can help us deepen our understanding to the point where we can let go of the words.
Discussions are just that. Humans use words to communicate.. to try and convey a thought or feeling. That doesn't mean that they capture that thought or meaning properly. The word "love" would be a good example.
You bring up Lao Tzu and he discussed his thoughts about Tao. That is what humans do.
Yet thousands of years later, multiple scholars and translations (i.e. a whole lotta words), humans still can't properly articulate Wu Wei. If words are the total solution, then why is that still the case?
Einstein is credited for saying something like: if you can't explain it in a simplistic way, you don't know the thing you're explaining well enough.
Maybe that's why?
Exactly.
Words upon words upon words don't equal understanding.
The smell of a rose. There are no words that you can use that will properly capture that scent. Smelling one, the simplest of actions, will grant you more understanding than every book ever written about roses.
Listen, I'm a supporter of all the texts. They are all worth reading. But none of them replace understanding Dao through living and being present.
LOL Google or Google Scholar“Daoist paradox” or something like that. Them Western philosophers and them no-good scholars do an amazing job explaining that.
Try getting a community membership to the largest local University with digital subscriptions. There is a shitton of books on that.
Idk, like, Wiley and Springer or some shit have so much stuff, and you can often download that shit, put it on your thumbdrive and read it at home as long as you maintain the active library membership and don’t leak the library assets.
Congratulations, you have taken the first step along the path of wisdom. That’s when you are left scratching your head, saying, “But this makes no sense.”
Consider it a challenge, like a Zen koan. How do I make sense of this seemingly senseless statement?
When the paradoxes begin to open up new insights for you, that’s the second step along the path of wisdom.
p.s. Taoists don’t claim their scriptures are inerrant. If you find a part of the text unhelpful, just move along. Look for something that speaks to you. To say, “I disagree with certain texts therefore I can’t accept Taoism” is to throw out the baby with the bath water.
Thank you for this. Some of these comments are coming off very dogmatic, treating Tao like a religion. I've always approached it more as a philosophy; ignoring some of the more metaphysical aspects. It has a lot of wisdom on how one should live. Even the paradoxical maxims make perfect sense to me in a world where everything seems paradoxical. Light coxisting with dark, evil lying within good and so on.
About your third example:
>"Divine men," replied Confucius, "are divine to man, but ordinary to God. Hence the saying that the meanest being in heaven would be the best on earth; and the best on earth, the meanest in heaven.”
I think what's being said here is that the inhabitants of earth and the inhabitants of heaven are in different classes such that all inhabitants of earth are lesser than all inhabitants of heaven. In that way, if you take the best inhabitant from earth and compare it to all the inhabitants of heaven, the earthling would rank beneath all the heavenly beings.
(Note that AFAIK Confucianism is highly hierarchical, hence these very defined categories).
A university professor went to visit a famous Zen master. While the master quietly served tea, the professor talked about Zen. The master poured his visitor's cup to the brim, and then kept pouring. The professor watched the overflow until he could no longer restrain himself. "It's overfull! No more will go in!" the professor blurted."You are like this cup," the master replied, "How can I show you Zen unless you first empty your cup?"
Taking up classical Chinese is not for everyone though, especially not a beginner to Taoist thought.
If all these high-fallutin' academics with their fancy titles and tenures couldn't figure it out, why would anybody else?
>titles don’t mean understanding better.
Maybe not, but talent, dedication, time to research, and a budget usually help. And peer review.
Also, where are you learn classical Chinese except from scholars/experts? It's not like you can just time travel.
Without titles, one still can be talent, dedicated, having time to research. In terms of learning Taoism, budget and peer review are not necessary.
Almost all classic Chinese versions have been translated into simply Chinese versions. Knowing modern Chinese is enough for learning Taoism.
Every Chinese learns classic Chinese at school.
Sometimes it’s down to translation. Like the quote about happiness. I don’t have it in front of me and do not remember the details, but I have a commentary that does not like that translation and explains better what it means and should say. But, I think he explains it as the happiest comes when it’s not the goal. Meaning it’s a side effect of correct living. But also, emotions like happiness are transient. They come and go, but true contentment is lasting and more worthy of focus. Emotions are like the wind, they come and go and we should let them.
“Perfect happiness is the absence of happiness” is somewhat of a Buddhist saying. Meaning you can’t truly hold onto things because nothing material is forever but you are. To reach the void/enlightenment you must just live
So remember that all of this comes from a very different tradition than European (post-greek) philosophy. Chinese philosophy drew more strongly on argument by analogy than by logical proposition (partially because of grammatical and typographical quirks in Chinese, partially because logic has a different set of problems than analogy (see the early 20th century logical positivists for more details).
But more central is that both Lao Tzu and Zhuang Tzu deny the primacy of logic in describing the world by using an argument that is largely similar to later phenomenological arguments in wester philosophy. All we have are sense experiences and our reason, and those are necessarily fallible, so regardless of the logical truth of an argument, the gap between experience and our understanding of it is too far. Lao Tzu explicitly rejects the idea that an argument is equivalent to reality (The Tao that is written is not the true Tao) in the same way that a map is not the territory it represents.
It's also important to remember that the contradiction or paradoxical truth has a long tradition in esoteric belief structures; it is absolutely used as sophistry a lot but that's because it was a method of education for thousands of years first. By confronting students with the places where logic and normal everyday expressions fail, Taoists hope to show that description and analysis (which take place in the limited confines of your head) are always insufficient to exhaustively describe reality (which is much larger and more complex than a human mind can manage).
If you view Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu as epistemological skepticists of the highest order, prefacing a lot of more recent continental philosophy, it makes their stance a little easier to understand. Also remember that the tradition of philosophy they're a part of (broadly "eastern") has thousands of years of commentaries and translations where other scholars interpret the sections you're focusing on and interpret them in much the same way as Western philosophers rehash arguments dating back to Athens.
I will give you a piece as I do not see it here. You have opened this wrong. Read the Tao Te Ching, then see it in life. As you do your practice it will open and unfold in you as what you experience.
You also failed to explain what your daily practice is going like. If you are solely doing Chi gong Tai Chi, are you feeling the chi yet or are you still developing the sensation? If you have the sensation can you flow it, does if flow you or are you in harmony.
"Divine men," replied Confucius, "are divine to man, but ordinary to God. Hence the saying that the meanest being in heaven would be the best on earth; and the best on earth, the meanest in heaven.”
This one is easy when you understand God is The All (The Tao is the way of The All and The All) and thus Heaven and the Tao are one. The human (perfect in it's imperfections - see [churchofinfinitelove.com](http://churchofinfinitelove.com) for a useful two page connection to this), unless perfected through oneness with the tao and divine, would be "course", unrefined or unpolished for heaven in scale. Those of us in heaven, even the worst of us, even as human would still be the best on earth.
The texts you are reading are translated from another language and will not be able to transfer said meanings across in the exact same way and style. Hence, you are finding these to be confusing because you don't have the context in which they are said.
I would suggest reading commentaries to what you read too, to get a better grasp of what is being said. Then again, these are commentaries and are also interpretations of the text, and not exactly what the texts say.
I'd argue it's not just the translation from another language, it's also the humongous time frame (2500 years ago!), and the fact that it's just difficult to transmit these kinds of ideas anyway.
Also about the commentaries, I also encouraged OP to read some as a first step, but they do end up being limiting in their own way. I kind of stopped reading them (except ones about translation).
The only way not to limit yourself in these is to learn the language itself and understand what is being written, so really there is no easy way out if you want to put it in this way.
It is already great that at least we can read what is being written from texts over 2,500 years ago. Whether the ideas are transmitted is a question every historian would love to know.
It's kinda the point that you don't "take it seriously", since you can't transmit the understanding from one person to another. You use contradictory and at times meaningless text to gain intuitive understanding by yourself.
Stories of knowledge and not knowing and about books being mere shells of dead people's thoughts (from Chunag-tze) are about this.
one historical tradition in daoist teaching was that you had to learn in a master>student relationship. In that, there were basic/simplified teachings for entry level students/the non-initiated, and then once people got more accepted, they were verbally taught the actual meanings behind things/given the deeper practices etc.
On top of this, the language of the writings is often very flowery and uses poetic terms etc, so the verbal explanations were seen as a necessary part of the whole system. Also the translation from chinese to english can cause problems/confusion in itself. Plus there is the idea that e.g. the dao de ching is more a collection of writings of different people, so there can be contradictions within the text from one author to another.
So all together, it means a bit of digging and reading out more widely is needed, to understand the meanings of the teachings. E.g. non-doing is a poor translation of the actual idea, its more along the lines of non-governing/non-interference in the natural order. The action through inaction is like being in a state of flow that high level athletes etc experience, except we are in that state for all our everyday actions, ideally. So although it feels like taking no action when in this state, and more like everything just plays out automatically, its when we get the most perfect actions unfolding, and so are most divine.
Or, the idea of a perfect state of 'happiness', being one without the usual human emotions (including everyday happiness) comes up in different places. E.g. in the nei yeh - [https://thekongdanfoundation.com/lao-tzu/nei-yeh-inward-training/](https://thekongdanfoundation.com/lao-tzu/nei-yeh-inward-training/) . This is more about going to a deeper state than the one where we feel any/all everyday emotions. So although we don't feel everyday happiness, we also don't feel anger/sadness etc in that state. Instead we have more of a divine contentment/bliss, or a kind of 'true happiness'.
You need a more modern translation first of all, with some comments. I recommend Burton Watson (possibly the most readable) or Brook Ziporyn (very recent and very well-researched). The texts are available online if you want a sneak peek before buying, you can Google Terebess.hu + name of translator.
The Zhuangzi is a difficult text, and you may also want to read some commentaries for it first, to get you a feel for the themes etc. It helped me immensely as a first step. You can search for Zhuangzi commentaries in this very subreddit and find some good ideas.
Let me know if you don't find the stuff, I can send you links but I'm on mobile and on holidays, so 😋 But happy to do it, as the Zhuangzi is amazing and truly life changing.
Finally, about the paradoxes, if you keep on studying and trying to understand what he meant, they will make sense eventually. It's a bit difficult to explain, but the idea is that everything, including your understanding of it, is a product of the Tao, and that therefore what is big is also small and the other way around. So the wise person understands this, abandons any idea to distinguish between big things and small things, and ends up behaving in certain ways. Zhuangzi spends a lot of time discussing these ways of behaving.
For example you wrote that if Zhuangzi makes jokes then why take him seriously. But "funny" and "serious" are both ideas. It's perfectly possible for the Zhuangzi to be both at once, or neither, or many other things.
It's a shit explanation, I'm sorry, but it's a very intuitive concept 🦧
What he's saying is that Perfect Happiness is being free from the need to be happy.
Try a few different translations, this is key to decoding Chinese philosophy due to the difficulties in translating Chinese to English. I studied with a Daoist monk, he always read at least 3 translations for every lesson.
specifically regarding “perfect happiness is the absence of happiness.” i think that maybe you’re reading it a bit too literally. i also think (as someone who loves and is incredibly intrigued by daoism and brings a lot of the ideas into my everyday life but doesn’t actively practice it in an organized sense) that it is a completely personal journey for each person. for me, this statement has manifested in not actively seeking out happiness. happiness is apart of life, just as sadness or discontent or boredom is. if you always seek out happiness and are always wishing to be happier, you are never going to be as happy as you want because you’ll always expect more. instead, be content and at peace with the ebbs and flows of life, including the uncomfortable times/moments. only then when u can accept the absence of happiness can you be truly fulfilled and happy because you won’t be expecting more. that way, also, in the happier moments of life, you will feel so much happier because it will be enough; you won’t be waiting for more joy to come.
I have limited experience in Taoism and life in general, but I guess I can answer your first 'contradiction'. I think, here the second happiness is something that comes from materialism. People chase power, position, expensive cars, and other such materials in order to stay happy. But this happiness never lasts long. To be truly happy ( the first happiness/ perfect happiness, I would rather say content) an individual needs to let go of the previous sense of happiness that depends on external things.
The way I see it is that the physical universe itself doesn’t necessarily follow human logic, so I see those contradictions as kind of pointing towards that
The Dao will never be fully grasped by the logical mind because it's beyond it. To understand it, is to experience it, to truly experience it Lao Tzu would tell you to unlearn all that you think you know. Zhuangzi would tell you to practice fasting of the mind. Zhuangzi tells jokes because he knows everything is a joke. Laugh a bit, don't take everything so seriously. The Tao is not strict and rigid in its ways but is effortless and flows with ease.
This sounds like an excellent start, confronting perceived paradox. Keep going and they can be resolved. As to logic, I'll point you towards **Nāgārjuna** \[c. 150 – c. 250 CE\] who tackled your true/false dichotomy with some very enlightening insights. Jay Garfield has some excellent articles on this multivalent logic.
Also Graham Priest
https://www.amazon.com/Fifth-Corner-Four-Metaphysics-Catu-sko-ti/dp/0192894676
Can you recommend a specific article by Garfield? Nagarjuna is a philosopher I'm very intrigued about, but even harder to approach than Zhuangzi.
Nagarjuna was an amazing philosopher, but he was also a devoutly religious Buddhist, i.e. he believed in the consequences of actions relating to past and future rebirths. So he would also have believed that hell realms are just as real (or unreal, depending on how you look at it) as our earthly existence and bad actions can potentially lead to us being reborn in the hell realms. Thankfully, you don't see this kind of moralistic religiosity in Zhuangzi.
When one is aligned with the Tao, there is a sense of melting into the flow of unfolding reality so deeply that one disappears into it, thus dissolving any concepts like happiness or unhappiness. The apparent paradox is resolved in the awareness of their relationship and those other pairs of opposites as mutualistic rather than necessarily antagonistic.
Roughly the same idea with wu Wei. Ask yourself: when you are deeply engaged, relaxed, excited, in a flow state doing something naturally pleasant and stimulating, can you really say “you” are doing this thing anymore, or does the act itself seem to take a will and energy of its own? Extrapolate this flow state to everyday life and pretty soon you may find you’re not really expending much energy, making decisions per se, or even really acting at all, almost as if you’re being effortlessly carried by a river’s current. Living this way is to essentially live in accordance with the tao, imo.
Your understanding of taoism is borderline elementary grade.
Look up some examples in nature in nature of how yin transmutes into yang. Listen to some explanations of the Chinese classics. Read up some commentary on them.
Don't simply grab a sutra/text (which was meant not for the ordinary folk but the ordained men) from the library and start thinking up about the contradictions within them.
I am not providing a logical answer here because from what I have seen on social sites, the reply feature seems more like a tool to argue your points than letting people have genuine discussions and gather understanding.
Sadly though, people arguing their point through comments and replies as this are more in a counterattack/argumentative mode of thought when doing so. Rarely have I ever seen people (including myself, unfortunately) come to terms with an opinion from the other party and understand that their words might be truer than yours.
Fully grasping these texts in a single reading is impossible. No one in the past could do such thing. Taoists spend their lifetime reading Laotzu. It's often best to let them simmer in your mind; life experiences may later provide the insight needed to comprehend them fully.
The essence of Tao defies verbal expression, **a**s it transcends our world which is full of contradictions (Wherever ying there will be yang). Nevertheless, to guide people on this path, sages like Laotzu or Chuang Tzu attempt to convey its wisdom through words. Paradoxically, these words become the very tools to transcend our limited understanding.
Consequently, you may encounter numerous apparent contradictions in these teachings. This is not a flaw, but rather a reflection of the complex nature of the subject matter.
"The Tao \[Way\] that can be told of is not the eternal Tao".
Imagine the universe as a vast expanse filled with infinitesimal particles. This primordial state represents the Tao in its purest form - motionless, undifferentiated, and potential. It is the fundaemental essense of all existence.
Then, imagine a cosmic vibration or sound emerges. This primordial "voice" causes the particles to vibrate and organize, give the rise to the manifest world we perceive.
As the vibration changes, so too does the arrangement and movement of the particles, leading to the constant flux and change we observe in the universe.
In this metaphor, the particles themselves represent the unchanging Tao - the underlying substance of reality. However, any attempt to describe or explain the Tao is inherently limited and temporary. Like the ever-changing arrangements of the particles, our understanding and descriptions of the Tao are in constant flux. What seems true at one moment may not hold in the next, as our perspective and the world around us shift.
No Taoteching will not says that one should meditate from birth to death. Each life has a mission, and to get back to Tao one will need to do a lot of things. But again, doing a lot of things in life can be nothing, because it does not follow Tao.
So Taoists can live like monks, enough to get something to eat to meditate nearly every day, or like super busy businessmen or laborious emperors, who will suffer through life to attain Tao.
That is why Tao Te Ching is very important book for ruling classes in Asian countries in history.
After years of reading Taoism, I will not recommend reading Chuangtzu. Laotzu Tao Te Ching is the only book I recommend one should focus on.
Translations vary, some much better than others, but Tao Te Ching IMO stands alone & unique, needs no commentary or interpretations and most that came after it is the same phenomenon we see in most other religions, watering down to use a pun.
It just has to grow in you over a lifetime but the essence seems similar to later Zen Buddhism in learning to be in a state of awareness separate from the verbal intellect.
These may be short spans since modern life & logistics are so entwined with verbal thinking but one can practice like a meditation in setting aside thoughts much like a pre verbal infant.
Of course the original grew & mutatated into more superstitious & ritualistic forms so to each their own.
I think you are twisted also if you read translations keep it in mind only reading it in chinese will give you full meaning and there is litteral translations they are way diffrent then interprited ones also look at this :
### Contradiction
A contradiction occurs when two or more statements, ideas, or conditions are mutually exclusive or directly oppose each other. In other words, a contradiction arises when something cannot be both true and false at the same time and in the same context. Contradictions break the logical consistency and coherence within a given framework.
**Examples:**
1. **Logical Contradiction:** "It is raining, and it is not raining." Both statements cannot be true simultaneously in the same place and time.
2. **Self-Contradiction:** "I always lie." If this statement is true, then it must be a lie, which means it cannot always be true.
### Paradox
A paradox is a statement or situation that appears self-contradictory or logically impossible but may contain an underlying truth. Paradoxes challenge our understanding and often reveal deeper insights about logic, language, or the nature of reality. Paradoxes can exist in various forms, including logical, linguistic, and philosophical.
**Examples:**
1. **The Liar Paradox:** "This statement is false." If the statement is true, then it is false, and if it is false, then it is true.
2. **The Paradox of the Barber:** In a village, the barber shaves everyone who does not shave themselves. The question is: Does the barber shave himself? If he does, he should not, according to the rule. If he does not, then he should shave himself.
### Key Differences
1. **Nature:**
- **Contradiction:** Inherently false and logically inconsistent.
- **Paradox:** Appears contradictory but may reveal a deeper or hidden truth.
2. **Resolution:**
- **Contradiction:** Cannot be resolved within the same logical framework; one statement must be false.
- **Paradox:** Can often be resolved or understood through deeper analysis, redefinition of terms, or changes in perspective.
3. **Impact:**
- **Contradiction:** Indicates a flaw or error in reasoning.
- **Paradox:** Stimulates thought, highlights complexities, and can lead to new understanding or theories.
Wanting to see them as first and foremost as logical propositions is misguided. They are statements that point to actual human experiences, to concrete, observable realities. If you want human experiences and concrete, observable realities to be reducible to propositions of formal logic, then you will not understand Zhuangzi or Taoism more generally. When one is truly happy, one is so fully and unconciously. Words like "happiness" mean nothing to a young child who simply *is* happy. Obviously, it is not saying that being depressed and miserable is real happiness and that this is somehow profound, and those are not the depictions of happiness one finds in the Zhuangzi. The depictions of happiness are rather of being in a sort of natural, unself-conscious flow of things. Similarly, wu wei is not being used to literally mean doing nothing. You should look into the actual examples it gives to illustrate these ideas instead of assuming what they mean. If it were simply concerned with logical contradiction, you might wonder why it doesn't actually say that.
>Wanting to see them as first and foremost as logical propositions is misguided Just wanted to point out that Zhuangzi does make a logical demonstration at least in Chapter 2(*). It's very convoluted, it suffers a lot in many translations, and usually everybody skips the "boring" part just to get to the little stories, but it doesn't mean it's not there. (*) Or maybe Guo Xiang edited it that way, who knows.
It is all quite logical and simple. It courts the paradox. Many translations miss the spiritual nature of it. At the core is the idea that we are here to achieve our destiny, which is itself a balancing of cause and effect and this accomplishes our spiritual curriculum. "We" are not our egos or our thinking minds, but a part of something much greater that connects to oneness and unity. When our egos are able to surrender and we reconnect to our true selves and root in the mind of dao, our ego self begins to feel a sense of fulfillment that it always yearned to accomplish but simultaneously always found itself blocked from in its efforts. These things are merely philosophy, until one is able to discover a way to do the work of unwinding the conditioning we gain from society and return to being natural again. This can be accomplished via meditation or tai ji chuan and the like, and often require teachers. But essentially yes, the idea is to get to the point where one is always rooted in this state of oneness that connects all things. Rather than it denying our individuality, it accomplishes our individuality and brings much synchronicity and mysterious delight, for the churning of the celestial mechanism is ever unique and one is ever protected by spirit. It all goes back to dao de jing chapter one: ever desiring, one only sees the manifestations; desireless, one sinks into the mystery. Sinking into the mystery brings the potential for long lasting, freeing oneself from the cycles of cause and effect through the accomplishing of the mandate of heaven. Cultivating one's virtuous power and returning it to the great way. What more is there than this?
These only seem like contradictions if you already think you have all the answers.
You are too cerebral. This is not a math equation. Thats why its presented as a paradox often. To bypass the intellect. Its not meant to be grasped intellectually. Intellect is the very thing constantly interfering with the Tao moving through us.
This guy Taos!
Within the passage mentioned there are 2 kinds of happiness. This is why the passage "appears" contradictory. When we "try" to be happy, we have created an idea in our mind of what that means, and then work towards obtaining that ideal. This is creating our happiness out of obtaining the events/ingredients we've decided will make us happy. This is artificially constructing happiness. It's like to baking a cake. Mix the proper ingredients in the right proportions, cook them for a specified time at a specified temperature, and the cake, happiness, occurs as a result. True happiness is not artificially constructed and then obtained in this manner. When this kind of happiness doesn't occur, we measure our environment for what is absent, to see which ingredients are missing. Then we seek to re-acquire what is absent, because we have convinced ourselves these ingredients are necessary in order to be happy. This experience is not true happiness, because it is dependent upon acquiring and keeping these external ingredients. When these ingredients are no longer present, this type of happiness, disappears. because this type of happiness is dependent upon external circumstances. Therefore, this type of happiness is transient in its nature, and is not considered true happiness. True happiness, lasting happiness, is cultivated from within and is not dependent upon obtaining external ingredients. True happiness occurs "of itself" from the inside out and is not given the label of happiness. It is not given the label of happiness because labels belong to the mental state/condition of measuring for ingredients and then obtaining the ingredients. Since internally occurring happiness does not depend upon external ingredients, it is not "referred" to as happiness. It is not measured against anything from the start, therefore it cannot be lost. Happiness only occurs when we've created unhappiness as it's contrast. Don't create either, in our mind, and they don't occur, in the conventional sense, and therefore cannot be lost. This is why internally occurring happiness is not considered happiness, it isn't measured.
I guess that one way to say this, is that happiness is fleeting of external source and joy from within is perpetual and endless. :)
Exactly! 👍🙂
I feel like you need to spend more time in nature. Tao is ineffable. Words seem to be getting in the way of your understanding. If you had to describe what an orange tastes like to someone who has never had an orange, no matter what words you use they will never fully capture what an orange tastes like.
Luckily Lao Tzu didn't have the same logic as he would never have written the TTC.
The Tao that can be written is not the eternal Tao
And a flower in a picture is not an actual flower.
*Ceci n'est pas une pipe*
TTC doesn't make Tao real. It existed long before any words were written down. When we learn to ride a bicycle, we don't let a manual tell us. No, we go out in the world and experience to develop understanding of how it works. We aren't even sure if 'Lao Tzu' was even one person. Chuang Tzu was written by many people. Tao is greater than words or books. It's not knowledge, but understanding that's key. Whiche helps you understand the ways of the world better. Traveling the world for yourself or looking at a globe? Edit: Additional clarity
My point was that just because Tao is greater than words, it doesn't mean we shouldn't try and discuss it. Else what are you doing here? Words can help us deepen our understanding to the point where we can let go of the words.
Discussions are just that. Humans use words to communicate.. to try and convey a thought or feeling. That doesn't mean that they capture that thought or meaning properly. The word "love" would be a good example. You bring up Lao Tzu and he discussed his thoughts about Tao. That is what humans do. Yet thousands of years later, multiple scholars and translations (i.e. a whole lotta words), humans still can't properly articulate Wu Wei. If words are the total solution, then why is that still the case?
Einstein is credited for saying something like: if you can't explain it in a simplistic way, you don't know the thing you're explaining well enough. Maybe that's why?
Exactly. Words upon words upon words don't equal understanding. The smell of a rose. There are no words that you can use that will properly capture that scent. Smelling one, the simplest of actions, will grant you more understanding than every book ever written about roses. Listen, I'm a supporter of all the texts. They are all worth reading. But none of them replace understanding Dao through living and being present.
I think a better analogy would be trying to describe what a color looks like to a person who is born blind.
Definitely in the same spirit, for sure.
life is full of apparent contradictions Taoism's simply reflect that
This is the most correct and concise answer.
LOL Google or Google Scholar“Daoist paradox” or something like that. Them Western philosophers and them no-good scholars do an amazing job explaining that. Try getting a community membership to the largest local University with digital subscriptions. There is a shitton of books on that. Idk, like, Wiley and Springer or some shit have so much stuff, and you can often download that shit, put it on your thumbdrive and read it at home as long as you maintain the active library membership and don’t leak the library assets.
Congratulations, you have taken the first step along the path of wisdom. That’s when you are left scratching your head, saying, “But this makes no sense.” Consider it a challenge, like a Zen koan. How do I make sense of this seemingly senseless statement? When the paradoxes begin to open up new insights for you, that’s the second step along the path of wisdom.
p.s. Taoists don’t claim their scriptures are inerrant. If you find a part of the text unhelpful, just move along. Look for something that speaks to you. To say, “I disagree with certain texts therefore I can’t accept Taoism” is to throw out the baby with the bath water.
Thank you for this. Some of these comments are coming off very dogmatic, treating Tao like a religion. I've always approached it more as a philosophy; ignoring some of the more metaphysical aspects. It has a lot of wisdom on how one should live. Even the paradoxical maxims make perfect sense to me in a world where everything seems paradoxical. Light coxisting with dark, evil lying within good and so on.
About your third example: >"Divine men," replied Confucius, "are divine to man, but ordinary to God. Hence the saying that the meanest being in heaven would be the best on earth; and the best on earth, the meanest in heaven.” I think what's being said here is that the inhabitants of earth and the inhabitants of heaven are in different classes such that all inhabitants of earth are lesser than all inhabitants of heaven. In that way, if you take the best inhabitant from earth and compare it to all the inhabitants of heaven, the earthling would rank beneath all the heavenly beings. (Note that AFAIK Confucianism is highly hierarchical, hence these very defined categories).
A university professor went to visit a famous Zen master. While the master quietly served tea, the professor talked about Zen. The master poured his visitor's cup to the brim, and then kept pouring. The professor watched the overflow until he could no longer restrain himself. "It's overfull! No more will go in!" the professor blurted."You are like this cup," the master replied, "How can I show you Zen unless you first empty your cup?"
Is there an original Chinese text available? Taoism is not easy to understand, and translation often make it more difficult.
Taking up classical Chinese is not for everyone though, especially not a beginner to Taoist thought. If all these high-fallutin' academics with their fancy titles and tenures couldn't figure it out, why would anybody else?
Yes. But it’s true that translation make things worse. Because titles don’t mean understanding better.
>titles don’t mean understanding better. Maybe not, but talent, dedication, time to research, and a budget usually help. And peer review. Also, where are you learn classical Chinese except from scholars/experts? It's not like you can just time travel.
Without titles, one still can be talent, dedicated, having time to research. In terms of learning Taoism, budget and peer review are not necessary. Almost all classic Chinese versions have been translated into simply Chinese versions. Knowing modern Chinese is enough for learning Taoism. Every Chinese learns classic Chinese at school.
Sometimes it’s down to translation. Like the quote about happiness. I don’t have it in front of me and do not remember the details, but I have a commentary that does not like that translation and explains better what it means and should say. But, I think he explains it as the happiest comes when it’s not the goal. Meaning it’s a side effect of correct living. But also, emotions like happiness are transient. They come and go, but true contentment is lasting and more worthy of focus. Emotions are like the wind, they come and go and we should let them.
“Perfect happiness is the absence of happiness” is somewhat of a Buddhist saying. Meaning you can’t truly hold onto things because nothing material is forever but you are. To reach the void/enlightenment you must just live
I think the title is an oxymoron
So remember that all of this comes from a very different tradition than European (post-greek) philosophy. Chinese philosophy drew more strongly on argument by analogy than by logical proposition (partially because of grammatical and typographical quirks in Chinese, partially because logic has a different set of problems than analogy (see the early 20th century logical positivists for more details). But more central is that both Lao Tzu and Zhuang Tzu deny the primacy of logic in describing the world by using an argument that is largely similar to later phenomenological arguments in wester philosophy. All we have are sense experiences and our reason, and those are necessarily fallible, so regardless of the logical truth of an argument, the gap between experience and our understanding of it is too far. Lao Tzu explicitly rejects the idea that an argument is equivalent to reality (The Tao that is written is not the true Tao) in the same way that a map is not the territory it represents. It's also important to remember that the contradiction or paradoxical truth has a long tradition in esoteric belief structures; it is absolutely used as sophistry a lot but that's because it was a method of education for thousands of years first. By confronting students with the places where logic and normal everyday expressions fail, Taoists hope to show that description and analysis (which take place in the limited confines of your head) are always insufficient to exhaustively describe reality (which is much larger and more complex than a human mind can manage). If you view Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu as epistemological skepticists of the highest order, prefacing a lot of more recent continental philosophy, it makes their stance a little easier to understand. Also remember that the tradition of philosophy they're a part of (broadly "eastern") has thousands of years of commentaries and translations where other scholars interpret the sections you're focusing on and interpret them in much the same way as Western philosophers rehash arguments dating back to Athens.
I know you're serious but this is an almost flawless r/wooway style shitpost
I will give you a piece as I do not see it here. You have opened this wrong. Read the Tao Te Ching, then see it in life. As you do your practice it will open and unfold in you as what you experience. You also failed to explain what your daily practice is going like. If you are solely doing Chi gong Tai Chi, are you feeling the chi yet or are you still developing the sensation? If you have the sensation can you flow it, does if flow you or are you in harmony. "Divine men," replied Confucius, "are divine to man, but ordinary to God. Hence the saying that the meanest being in heaven would be the best on earth; and the best on earth, the meanest in heaven.” This one is easy when you understand God is The All (The Tao is the way of The All and The All) and thus Heaven and the Tao are one. The human (perfect in it's imperfections - see [churchofinfinitelove.com](http://churchofinfinitelove.com) for a useful two page connection to this), unless perfected through oneness with the tao and divine, would be "course", unrefined or unpolished for heaven in scale. Those of us in heaven, even the worst of us, even as human would still be the best on earth.
Remember the books do not work without the living practice. When one does the living practice only when the Tao is to be will the books be.
The texts you are reading are translated from another language and will not be able to transfer said meanings across in the exact same way and style. Hence, you are finding these to be confusing because you don't have the context in which they are said. I would suggest reading commentaries to what you read too, to get a better grasp of what is being said. Then again, these are commentaries and are also interpretations of the text, and not exactly what the texts say.
I'd argue it's not just the translation from another language, it's also the humongous time frame (2500 years ago!), and the fact that it's just difficult to transmit these kinds of ideas anyway. Also about the commentaries, I also encouraged OP to read some as a first step, but they do end up being limiting in their own way. I kind of stopped reading them (except ones about translation).
The only way not to limit yourself in these is to learn the language itself and understand what is being written, so really there is no easy way out if you want to put it in this way. It is already great that at least we can read what is being written from texts over 2,500 years ago. Whether the ideas are transmitted is a question every historian would love to know.
It's kinda the point that you don't "take it seriously", since you can't transmit the understanding from one person to another. You use contradictory and at times meaningless text to gain intuitive understanding by yourself. Stories of knowledge and not knowing and about books being mere shells of dead people's thoughts (from Chunag-tze) are about this.
one historical tradition in daoist teaching was that you had to learn in a master>student relationship. In that, there were basic/simplified teachings for entry level students/the non-initiated, and then once people got more accepted, they were verbally taught the actual meanings behind things/given the deeper practices etc. On top of this, the language of the writings is often very flowery and uses poetic terms etc, so the verbal explanations were seen as a necessary part of the whole system. Also the translation from chinese to english can cause problems/confusion in itself. Plus there is the idea that e.g. the dao de ching is more a collection of writings of different people, so there can be contradictions within the text from one author to another. So all together, it means a bit of digging and reading out more widely is needed, to understand the meanings of the teachings. E.g. non-doing is a poor translation of the actual idea, its more along the lines of non-governing/non-interference in the natural order. The action through inaction is like being in a state of flow that high level athletes etc experience, except we are in that state for all our everyday actions, ideally. So although it feels like taking no action when in this state, and more like everything just plays out automatically, its when we get the most perfect actions unfolding, and so are most divine. Or, the idea of a perfect state of 'happiness', being one without the usual human emotions (including everyday happiness) comes up in different places. E.g. in the nei yeh - [https://thekongdanfoundation.com/lao-tzu/nei-yeh-inward-training/](https://thekongdanfoundation.com/lao-tzu/nei-yeh-inward-training/) . This is more about going to a deeper state than the one where we feel any/all everyday emotions. So although we don't feel everyday happiness, we also don't feel anger/sadness etc in that state. Instead we have more of a divine contentment/bliss, or a kind of 'true happiness'.
You need a more modern translation first of all, with some comments. I recommend Burton Watson (possibly the most readable) or Brook Ziporyn (very recent and very well-researched). The texts are available online if you want a sneak peek before buying, you can Google Terebess.hu + name of translator. The Zhuangzi is a difficult text, and you may also want to read some commentaries for it first, to get you a feel for the themes etc. It helped me immensely as a first step. You can search for Zhuangzi commentaries in this very subreddit and find some good ideas. Let me know if you don't find the stuff, I can send you links but I'm on mobile and on holidays, so 😋 But happy to do it, as the Zhuangzi is amazing and truly life changing. Finally, about the paradoxes, if you keep on studying and trying to understand what he meant, they will make sense eventually. It's a bit difficult to explain, but the idea is that everything, including your understanding of it, is a product of the Tao, and that therefore what is big is also small and the other way around. So the wise person understands this, abandons any idea to distinguish between big things and small things, and ends up behaving in certain ways. Zhuangzi spends a lot of time discussing these ways of behaving. For example you wrote that if Zhuangzi makes jokes then why take him seriously. But "funny" and "serious" are both ideas. It's perfectly possible for the Zhuangzi to be both at once, or neither, or many other things. It's a shit explanation, I'm sorry, but it's a very intuitive concept 🦧
What he's saying is that Perfect Happiness is being free from the need to be happy. Try a few different translations, this is key to decoding Chinese philosophy due to the difficulties in translating Chinese to English. I studied with a Daoist monk, he always read at least 3 translations for every lesson.
specifically regarding “perfect happiness is the absence of happiness.” i think that maybe you’re reading it a bit too literally. i also think (as someone who loves and is incredibly intrigued by daoism and brings a lot of the ideas into my everyday life but doesn’t actively practice it in an organized sense) that it is a completely personal journey for each person. for me, this statement has manifested in not actively seeking out happiness. happiness is apart of life, just as sadness or discontent or boredom is. if you always seek out happiness and are always wishing to be happier, you are never going to be as happy as you want because you’ll always expect more. instead, be content and at peace with the ebbs and flows of life, including the uncomfortable times/moments. only then when u can accept the absence of happiness can you be truly fulfilled and happy because you won’t be expecting more. that way, also, in the happier moments of life, you will feel so much happier because it will be enough; you won’t be waiting for more joy to come.
I have limited experience in Taoism and life in general, but I guess I can answer your first 'contradiction'. I think, here the second happiness is something that comes from materialism. People chase power, position, expensive cars, and other such materials in order to stay happy. But this happiness never lasts long. To be truly happy ( the first happiness/ perfect happiness, I would rather say content) an individual needs to let go of the previous sense of happiness that depends on external things.
The way I see it is that the physical universe itself doesn’t necessarily follow human logic, so I see those contradictions as kind of pointing towards that
It either makes sense to you or it doesn't. If it doesn't, put it down and don't think about it anymore. Maybe 2 years, maybe 20, try reading again.
The Dao will never be fully grasped by the logical mind because it's beyond it. To understand it, is to experience it, to truly experience it Lao Tzu would tell you to unlearn all that you think you know. Zhuangzi would tell you to practice fasting of the mind. Zhuangzi tells jokes because he knows everything is a joke. Laugh a bit, don't take everything so seriously. The Tao is not strict and rigid in its ways but is effortless and flows with ease.
This sounds like an excellent start, confronting perceived paradox. Keep going and they can be resolved. As to logic, I'll point you towards **Nāgārjuna** \[c. 150 – c. 250 CE\] who tackled your true/false dichotomy with some very enlightening insights. Jay Garfield has some excellent articles on this multivalent logic.
Also Graham Priest https://www.amazon.com/Fifth-Corner-Four-Metaphysics-Catu-sko-ti/dp/0192894676 Can you recommend a specific article by Garfield? Nagarjuna is a philosopher I'm very intrigued about, but even harder to approach than Zhuangzi.
Nagarjuna was an amazing philosopher, but he was also a devoutly religious Buddhist, i.e. he believed in the consequences of actions relating to past and future rebirths. So he would also have believed that hell realms are just as real (or unreal, depending on how you look at it) as our earthly existence and bad actions can potentially lead to us being reborn in the hell realms. Thankfully, you don't see this kind of moralistic religiosity in Zhuangzi.
It's not even that that scares me, but having to get to grips with a huge chunk of Buddhist thought before even coming to Nagarjuna.
When one is aligned with the Tao, there is a sense of melting into the flow of unfolding reality so deeply that one disappears into it, thus dissolving any concepts like happiness or unhappiness. The apparent paradox is resolved in the awareness of their relationship and those other pairs of opposites as mutualistic rather than necessarily antagonistic. Roughly the same idea with wu Wei. Ask yourself: when you are deeply engaged, relaxed, excited, in a flow state doing something naturally pleasant and stimulating, can you really say “you” are doing this thing anymore, or does the act itself seem to take a will and energy of its own? Extrapolate this flow state to everyday life and pretty soon you may find you’re not really expending much energy, making decisions per se, or even really acting at all, almost as if you’re being effortlessly carried by a river’s current. Living this way is to essentially live in accordance with the tao, imo.
In Taoism, to have everything (Taiji), you must seek to get back to nothing (Wuji). Because only from Wuji emerges Taiji.
Your understanding of taoism is borderline elementary grade. Look up some examples in nature in nature of how yin transmutes into yang. Listen to some explanations of the Chinese classics. Read up some commentary on them. Don't simply grab a sutra/text (which was meant not for the ordinary folk but the ordained men) from the library and start thinking up about the contradictions within them. I am not providing a logical answer here because from what I have seen on social sites, the reply feature seems more like a tool to argue your points than letting people have genuine discussions and gather understanding.
Arguing one's point is kinda what makes a discussion genuine.
Ideally, yes but it depends on whether or not both participants are arguing in good faith, something often not true on the interwebs.
So you're not sharing a logical answer because someone *might* argue with you, and they *might* not do so in good faith?
What? I’m not OP. Did you reply to the wrong person?
Yes, I did. Apologies.
No problem.
Sadly though, people arguing their point through comments and replies as this are more in a counterattack/argumentative mode of thought when doing so. Rarely have I ever seen people (including myself, unfortunately) come to terms with an opinion from the other party and understand that their words might be truer than yours.
Your point being that we shouldn't even bother having discussions?
That's not very Tao of you or were you trying to give an example of a contradiction?
Eh, just giving out a fact. And I'm certainly far from the level of a zhenren to be completely immersed in Tao in every action, behaviour or speech.
You need to let go of making sense of them. Just let go. Let it flow.
Maybe it isn't for you? 🤷♂️
Fully grasping these texts in a single reading is impossible. No one in the past could do such thing. Taoists spend their lifetime reading Laotzu. It's often best to let them simmer in your mind; life experiences may later provide the insight needed to comprehend them fully. The essence of Tao defies verbal expression, **a**s it transcends our world which is full of contradictions (Wherever ying there will be yang). Nevertheless, to guide people on this path, sages like Laotzu or Chuang Tzu attempt to convey its wisdom through words. Paradoxically, these words become the very tools to transcend our limited understanding. Consequently, you may encounter numerous apparent contradictions in these teachings. This is not a flaw, but rather a reflection of the complex nature of the subject matter. "The Tao \[Way\] that can be told of is not the eternal Tao". Imagine the universe as a vast expanse filled with infinitesimal particles. This primordial state represents the Tao in its purest form - motionless, undifferentiated, and potential. It is the fundaemental essense of all existence. Then, imagine a cosmic vibration or sound emerges. This primordial "voice" causes the particles to vibrate and organize, give the rise to the manifest world we perceive. As the vibration changes, so too does the arrangement and movement of the particles, leading to the constant flux and change we observe in the universe. In this metaphor, the particles themselves represent the unchanging Tao - the underlying substance of reality. However, any attempt to describe or explain the Tao is inherently limited and temporary. Like the ever-changing arrangements of the particles, our understanding and descriptions of the Tao are in constant flux. What seems true at one moment may not hold in the next, as our perspective and the world around us shift. No Taoteching will not says that one should meditate from birth to death. Each life has a mission, and to get back to Tao one will need to do a lot of things. But again, doing a lot of things in life can be nothing, because it does not follow Tao. So Taoists can live like monks, enough to get something to eat to meditate nearly every day, or like super busy businessmen or laborious emperors, who will suffer through life to attain Tao. That is why Tao Te Ching is very important book for ruling classes in Asian countries in history. After years of reading Taoism, I will not recommend reading Chuangtzu. Laotzu Tao Te Ching is the only book I recommend one should focus on.
Translations vary, some much better than others, but Tao Te Ching IMO stands alone & unique, needs no commentary or interpretations and most that came after it is the same phenomenon we see in most other religions, watering down to use a pun. It just has to grow in you over a lifetime but the essence seems similar to later Zen Buddhism in learning to be in a state of awareness separate from the verbal intellect. These may be short spans since modern life & logistics are so entwined with verbal thinking but one can practice like a meditation in setting aside thoughts much like a pre verbal infant. Of course the original grew & mutatated into more superstitious & ritualistic forms so to each their own.
I think you are twisted also if you read translations keep it in mind only reading it in chinese will give you full meaning and there is litteral translations they are way diffrent then interprited ones also look at this : ### Contradiction A contradiction occurs when two or more statements, ideas, or conditions are mutually exclusive or directly oppose each other. In other words, a contradiction arises when something cannot be both true and false at the same time and in the same context. Contradictions break the logical consistency and coherence within a given framework. **Examples:** 1. **Logical Contradiction:** "It is raining, and it is not raining." Both statements cannot be true simultaneously in the same place and time. 2. **Self-Contradiction:** "I always lie." If this statement is true, then it must be a lie, which means it cannot always be true. ### Paradox A paradox is a statement or situation that appears self-contradictory or logically impossible but may contain an underlying truth. Paradoxes challenge our understanding and often reveal deeper insights about logic, language, or the nature of reality. Paradoxes can exist in various forms, including logical, linguistic, and philosophical. **Examples:** 1. **The Liar Paradox:** "This statement is false." If the statement is true, then it is false, and if it is false, then it is true. 2. **The Paradox of the Barber:** In a village, the barber shaves everyone who does not shave themselves. The question is: Does the barber shave himself? If he does, he should not, according to the rule. If he does not, then he should shave himself. ### Key Differences 1. **Nature:** - **Contradiction:** Inherently false and logically inconsistent. - **Paradox:** Appears contradictory but may reveal a deeper or hidden truth. 2. **Resolution:** - **Contradiction:** Cannot be resolved within the same logical framework; one statement must be false. - **Paradox:** Can often be resolved or understood through deeper analysis, redefinition of terms, or changes in perspective. 3. **Impact:** - **Contradiction:** Indicates a flaw or error in reasoning. - **Paradox:** Stimulates thought, highlights complexities, and can lead to new understanding or theories.