「道可道,非常道; 名可名,非常名」 ------ 能用言語及名字直接形容的,並不是道。
何解,因為道是自然的,正如花朵不會因為人類對其命名的改變而影響其「花的身份和個性」。同時,道亦是「無」,每刻正改變中,以固定之物當然無法將之定性。
這亦為何佛教襌宗大師達摩說: 「不立文字」。禪師不是否定文字,而是指出文字本身不是「佛性」,或自性。古希臘哲學家亦曾說: 「一個人不可能兩次站於同一河流上」------ 對! 河水從流動中正改變中,河流每刻正在「輪迴」。
從道家角度看,人應順從自然本性而為,不偏不倚,凡事恰到好處,中庸也。
「上善若水,而上善之水向低流」------ 君子亦如流水般謙遜,凡事多份包容,多份彈性。
「道是無限,亦存在空間,而空間和實物的配搭造成其功用」 ------ 房子的空間讓人住在其中,杯子的空間令其容納茶水。「虛無」亦與「實在」無異。
「大道亦是無為,但亦因為其無為,它是無所不為」 ------ 「無為」不是甚麼不做,而是減去不必要的干擾,任由大地自行運動。
如果「市場經濟」是「無為」,那麼「共產」是「有為」。無為勝有為,人們之間的「自利(Self Interest)」亦是推動經濟的無數齒輪。
道不能說,亦不能教,因為宇宙中每一生命和事物皆是道.......
打坐修練的著重點是「吐納」,亦即「吐舊納新」,亦用心經驗其中過程。世間不變的東西是沒有生命,而人生的長短在乎「氣」的流動。
9 則留言:
祝您財源廣進! 身體健康!
又, 呢篇"道", 令我的心靈有所啟發, 仲以為係精工大師或者甚麼大師所悟呢!
二百多年前阿當史密斯在原富論講的無型之手
跟法國人講的laissez faire
和英國人講的 active non-intervention
以及上世紀港英殖民地行的積極不干預
基本上就是抄我國老子的無為之道
中國人的思想早老外二千年成熟
呵呵呵!!!
祝鼠年行好運!
萬事如意! 大吉大利!
祝各位新年快樂,事事如意!!
思人:
不敢同精工大所比。但"道"的智慧確實無限....
ckm:
正是。但不能說西方哲人抄東方的"無為",只能說真理會長存。
回應 albert:
老子的道德經是2千多年前的作品
遠至唐代中國人已經與羅馬經商
印度的佛經在千多年前已經有中文譯本
西方的道德經譯本必有千年歷史
上年在香港展出的道德經古外文譯本就上百種
如果話阿當史的原富論
法國人講的laissez faire
和英國人講的 active non-intervention
如果沒抄襲老子的無為思想
正如日本人話他們的文化不是來自中國
呵呵呵!!!
ckm001
難說,二千多年前,古希臘哲學發展亦十分成熟,與黃老相似看法者亦不乏人在。
另外,市場交易亦很早已存在。
只能說"老子的無為"與"Adam Smith 的市場論"都乎合自然和現實。
修行者忌"過份自我國家肯定",雖然"盲目崇洋排華"亦不是好事。
Dear Albert,
I am only telling you the truth and has nothing to do with patriotism and racism and so on.
The Wealth of Nations was first published in 1776. In the Bantam Classics Edition/March 2003, Alan B. Krueger from Princeton University has the following sentences in the Introduction:
NO BOOK has had more influence on economists' thinking and economic policy-and by extension on the world population's material well-being-than An Inquiry Into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations can be traced to earlier thinkers and that Smith borrowed liberally from his French contemporaries. It has also become popular to find ancient Chinese philosophers who unbeknownst to Smith, advanced related ideas two thousand years previously........
If Adam Smith is still alive today, I will write a letter to the editor to clarify the issue. Adam Smith should cite 道德經 as a reference in his book. The same applies to the French concept of Laissez Faire.
CKM001
Hi CKM001:
Thanks for your information.
From a prudent perspective, we can only assure that both "Lao Tze" and "Adam Smith" shared similar philosophies. We cannot rule out the possibility that Adam Smith and the 18th century philosophiers were influenced by Lao Tze. Unfortunately, we have no concrete evidence to prove that yet.
"Alan B. Krueger" should be a professional, but his syaing may not be solid enough to prove your stance.
To avoid any misappropriate speculation, I tend to stick on what being based on evidence and reaonsable intrepretation.
The idea of "無為" was also raised by an ancient Greek philosophers more than 2,000 years ago.
We cannot rule out the possibility that Adam Smith and others discovered (not invented) the "laissez faire", which is a "law of nature".
Don't forget the fact that the philosophical and scientific development had been severely hindered during the dark ages (from AD 453 to the 13th century). It's not totally-impossible if the 18the century philosophers retrieved the "WAY" by themselves.
Anyway, again thanks for your information and discussion!!
Albert,
咱們中國人真系好幸福,先賢既智慧博大精深,而且歷久不衰,更可以放通四海。大道自顯。越多講則越能體味其中的諱莫如深,能付諸身體力行,又出另一層次。
俺要講明對西方史哲,姑聽其名而多不通義,所以無資格旁引。
【道】性某方面類似西方講既【萬有引力】,佢既獨立於所有物質存在,但必需通過一切物質去體驗彰顯其存在,不生而立,但亦不脫萬有。
最近外國科學界講 darkforce,嘗試去解釋同填補科學家解釋唔到既地方,呢種虛無莫測,正正系當日老字說道果種 feel.
但俺覺得所謂【無形之手】只可以理解為不知之手,因為一切人與人之間的行為一定系有形有為,只系大部份人認知層面的有限,小部份人操控知識流通的屏閉,結果大部份人只見其然而不知其所以然而矣。
道德水平,系今日社會所有人的共識,所以無所謂【應有既】道德水平、【最起碼既】道德操手,最緊要今日大家都受。市場活動亦系今日里面所有人的一種行為的反映,所以讀書果陳講研究過去所有市場行為去推測將來,俺心里早就...
願 順心意暢。
Thanks very much Seiko:
We are proud of living under the Eastern Philosophical environment. As what being said by you, they're quite advanced and sophiscated; and more importantly, they're practical for our daily livings.....
Hail the philosophies from Tao, Buddhism & Confucius, plus the countless eastern philsophical ideas.....
Dark Force ---> I may recall the idea of "Wave-form Nature" of all particles, as stated in the Quantum Mechanics.
Laissez faire --> It is similar to "無為 (Wu Wei)". As said by Lao Tze, he proposed the government not to offer unnecessary intervention. This's very similar to what the pro-market economists propose - Little Government, Big Market - As a result, the government acts little except to maintain a safe and fair environment with sufficient infrastructure; while the people and corporations make their countless "有為" decisions.
For Lao Tze, he did not oppose/deny the "有為" of the people, but just said the great leaders tend not the control the tiny decisions of the people -- i.e. this is "無為".
發佈留言