NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #3/NN_1993_3.iso/spool/alt/pagan/15870

Internet Message Format | 1993-01-25 | 3.5 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!olivea!hal.com!decwrl!csus.edu!nextnet!altheimm
From: [e-mail] (Murray Altheim)
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Re: Chinese Religion
Keywords: Lao Tzu, Chuang Tzu, Confucius
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 26 Jan 93 03:14:11 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: California State University Sacramento
Lines: 65

In article <[e-mail]>
    [e-mail] (Richard Man) writes:
[Steve Boylan and I discussing "The Tao of Pooh" and "The Te of Piglet"...]
>> >>
>> >Of course, those interested in an accessible, lucid, and very entertaining
>> >introduction to Taoist thought and philosophy should read the ten-year-old
>> >classic, "The Tao of Pooh", and the new companion volume, "The Te of Piglet",
>> >both by Benjamin Hoff.  I can dig up all those fun details like the
>> >publisher and the ISBN at home tonight.
>> >
>> >                - - Steve
>>
>> Steve, I don't have a real problem with Hoff's "Tao of Pooh", especially for
>> those more interested in skimming the surface, but I didn't care for the
>> second book much at all. Both provide a light-hearted approach, but are not
>> considered scholarly. Of course, the title might clue one in... :-)
>>
>> Murray
>>
>
>With the exception of the section on "Amazons" in the Te of Piglet, I think
>Hoff's two books are the best introduction on Taoism (and I have read some
>in Chinese). Certainly they are readable, perhaps not scholarly, but Taoism is
>a religion / philosophy for the people. Scholarly texts are good if you are
>a scholar, but not if you are just interested to find out what Taoism is.
>
>Also, I think Chuang Tzu tends to concentrate on people - relations and
>too introspective. My biggest gripe is that he tends to forget what Taoism is -
>life and nature. I think the chaotic Warring States really have a bad efefct
>on him ;-).
>
>--
>- Richard F. Man ([e-mail])

Richard,

Please note also my reply to Corun in a previous post. As I stated, my
opinion of Hoff's books is that they are not particularly scholarly, nor do
I think Hoff intends them as such. If they provide a philosophy you like,
then by all means read, enjoy and follow. They are not bad books, full of
problems. I enjoyed The Tao of Pooh. Just didn't care for the preachiness
of The Te of Piglet, nor did I think Hoff understood the concept of Te the
way a Chinese might.

As to scholarly texts, if you are interested in what Taoism IS, I don't
think you'll ever find an answer. But if you are interested in the state-
of-the-art of our knowledge of historical philosophical and religious
Taoist belief and practice, then don't go to a pop book, go to a recognized
scholar. It may not fit into what you believe is Taoism, but then you have
the choice of inventing your own beliefs or following the masters. There is
no judgement or right or wrong about this. It simply means that if you are
interested in accuracy, then read an accurate source, if not, then read
Hoff or Stephen Mitchell. No sixteen ton weight will fall on your head.

Of course, you might get hit with a load of foam rubber bricks... :-)

Blessings,

Murray

--
Murray M. Altheim      "Ils ont l'orteil de Bouc, & d'un Chevreil l'oreille,
Instructional Consultant    La corne d'un Chamois, & la face vermeille
CSU, Sacramento          Comme un rouge Croissant: & dancent toute nuict
[e-mail]       Dedans un carrefour, ou pres d'une eau qui bruict."