In this particular day I shall
interpret a verse from the Tao Te Ching by Lao Tzu, namely verse 7. In A
Source Book In Chinese Philosophy, Wing Tsit Chan presents the verse:
“7. Heaven is eternal and Earth
everlasting.
They can be eternal and
everlasting because they
do not exist for
themselves,
And for this reason can exist forever.
Therefore the sage places himself in the background,
but finds himself in
the foreground.
He puts himself away, and yet he always remains.
Is it not because he has no personal interests?
This is the reason why his personal interests are fulfilled.” 1
Firstly, let us discuss the theme of the verse. The theme of the verse revolves around the
thought of “no knowledge, no desires”.
What Lao Tzu means in here is that if a person has little knowledge
about things, then he will desire less.
Lao Tzu believed that if people have too much knowledge, they will not
find contentment and will never stop seeking for those objects or any other
thing that they desire. Not being
contented of what one has is a manifestation of “going against one’s nature” or
going to the “extremes”, which is said to bring harm to the individual.
Let us observe this theme as we go over the first four lines of the
verse.
“Heaven is eternal and Earth everlasting.
They can be eternal and
everlasting because they
do not exist for
themselves,
And for this reason can exist forever.”
These lines depict the notion of “no knowledge, no desires” in the
sense that it denies the idea of “personal interest”. This
is depicted by the phrase “They can be eternal and everlasting because they do
not exist for themselves”. It is a fact that the objective of a “desire”
is aimed at personal interest and satisfaction.
Personal interest and satisfaction, however, are believed to be
hindrances to an individual to have contentment in life. This can be observed in extravagant
people. They use their money to buy
expensive things which pleases them. The
bad effect comes when they come to a point that they are bankrupt, and would
steal just to get that specific item which they desire. Here, desire becomes a negation of
contentment. It becomes a dangerous drive
within an individual which can enslave him to go beyond the “extremes” just to
satisfy a certain desire for personal gain.
However, if one does not have
too much knowledge, then he can be contented in his life. He can see the things that are only “right”
for him in the sense that it does not make him overdo things that will make him
revert to his “opposite” self. This is
what the line “And for this reason can exist forever.” implies in the verse.
Now we move on to the last lines.
“Therefore the sage places himself in the background,
but finds himself in
the foreground.
He puts himself away, and yet he always remains.
Is it not because he has no personal interests?
This is the reason why his personal interests are fulfilled.”
The first two lines imply that having no personal interests on any
situation or event makes one develop a character of simplicity in his
life. This is because having personal interests makes
one think of “desires”, which most of the time are not “simple” at all. They are filled with grandeur and
extravagance, which then could make the individual “go against the course of
Nature” for he cannot stay put with the “natural” state of his life, which is
devoid of the influence of desire or extravagance. It is in the application of the notion of
simplicity in one’s life that he becomes more fulfilled and effective in a
sense that he does not do harm to himself or to anyone around him. This is what the lines “Therefore the sage
places himself in the background, but finds himself in the foreground.” talk
about.
Now we go to the last three lines in the verse, namely:
“He puts himself away, and yet he always remains.
Is it not because he has no personal interests?
This is the reason why his personal interests are fulfilled.”
These lines give the end
results of an individual who lives his life in a simple manner. These end results are being able to cherish
his life to the fullest because of the contentment and the tranquility that the
individual feels in this contentment.
He cherishes his life for he enjoys himself in what he has. He cherishes his life for he does not harm
himself or others in his simple way of living.
The individual “remains”, for his natural characteristics, capabilities,
and many other things in his life continue to be as what they are. He “remains” even if he “puts himself away”,
for he did not go against his nature. An
individual who is living his life simply “remains” for he did not “lose”
himself in desiring what is “too much” for him.
He “remains” for his character or conduct stands still. It is in this way that a simple-living
individual “fulfills” his personal interests.
This fulfillment is becoming a “sage”.
Lao Tzu gives the notion that
knowing too much can lead to one in thinking about objects of desire, which can
greatly hamper an individual’s capacity to see and realize what was supposed to
be “right” for him. In desiring, one goes to the “extreme”, for
desire has the propensity to make an individual overdo things just to satisfy
the demands of it. And knowing the extremes, it cannot be denied
that it did no good to oneself, may it be in the physical or the metaphysical
aspect. Lao Tzu then, proposes that one
must live life simply in having “no knowledge”.
This implies that one must live a simple life. In living simply, one cannot “desire”
anything, for he only focuses his attention on the things that he has and can
do with his capabilities and means. In
this way one’s mind becomes clearer, for it is rid of any selfish objective. It makes one’s life simple and tranquil. The “extreme” manifestation of desire is
craving. It is in this that obsession becomes
stronger. This causes chaos and unhappiness, justifying
the sense that too much of anything is not good. To live simply means to be free from the
desire that leads to craving for unnecessary things. To be free from desire is to be contented
with what one has.
Source:
1.
Wing Tsit Chan, “The Natural Way of Lao Tzu”, (United States: Princeton
University Press, 1963), In In A
Source Book In Chinese Philosophy, 142.
No comments:
Post a Comment