Taoist literature, whether it be the text of the Tao Te Ching or commentaries on it, represents a seemingly insurmountable paradox: expressing in language that which is said to be ineffable. But this apparent paradox is a tool that seeks to communicate through the limitations of language, a pervading truth (the Tao) hidden, yet transparent, in the presence of all things.
Confronting the Paradoxes
The famous first lines of the Tao Te Ching are paradigmatic of the linguistic style so prevalent in Taoist philosophy: “The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao.” Although these words have almost become cliché there is still a sense of the mysterious lying within them. But what can they claim to convey if the entity that is designated in the statement is not the one actually meant?
There is a brilliant statement made by Chang Chung-yuan in his book Creativity and Taoism: A Study of Chinese Philosophy, Art, and Poetry, in which he says: “When we do not assert either action or nonaction, this or that, being or nonbeing, we are free from both.” With this thought in mind the first lines of the Tao Te Ching can be understood in a new light.
What appears to be implied in Chung-yuan’s statement is that the act of assertion brings forth the terms used to make sense of an experience. So, one might say “that” in order to distinguish it from “this”. But all that means is asserting involves labeling some object with a name to distinguish it from another object. In actuality, though, we unknowingly limit the object's existence by designating it as some type of thing with a certain quality and quantity, and trying to understand it within the limits we set by the language employed.
But in Taoist philosophy all objects (animals, rocks, humans, etc) are simply manifestations of Tao, and therefore entirely equal to one another. When language is used to call something a “rock” or something an “animal” they have been arbitrarily made distinct, and their existence as entities of and possessing Tao have been lost.
Chapter eighteen of the Tao Te Ching presents the idea very clearly:
“When the great Tao is forgotten,
Kindness and morality arise.
When wisdom and intelligence are born,
The great pretence begins.”
The distinctions “kind” and “moral” are not ontologically eternal terms inherent in the world. Often someone is said to be “kind” and praised for it. But the above passage forces us to confront the notion that “kind” and “moral”, qualities so often strived for, are nothing more than manifestations of a mind that has forgotten a deeper truth and understanding.
Understanding the Paradoxes
The use of paradox and linguistic ambiguity in Taoism is meant to convey one simple fact: words are of the human mind, and to believe that what is communicated in a sentence, a book, a poem, or whatever, communicates exactly and concretely every nuance and subtly of someone’s thought is missing the point. Language is a tool to differentiate, not necessarily unify. So, rather than thinking of paradox as an impassable abyss, think of it as metaphor pointing to that which is entirely ineffable.
The great Taoist philosopher, Chuan Tzu, once said: “Destruction is construction, construction is destruction. There is no destruction or construction. They fuse into one.” They fuse into one experience, or episode, that is part of a larger unity.
References
Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching, translated by Gia-Fu Fend, Jane English. (Vintage Books: NewYork: 1989)
Chung-Yuan, Chang, Creativity and Taoism: A Study of Chinese Philosophy, Art, and Poetry. (Harper & Row: New York: 1963)
