According to the Taoist tradition, Chuang-Tzu once rejected a job offer in the royal court. The king had offered a sizeable salary plus lodging in the royal palace. Nevertheless, Chuang-Tzu rejected the proposal right away.
Not only did Chuang-Tzu reject the proposal, but he did so rather disdainfully. He answered to the royal messenger that he preferred to remain free of encumbrances even if his freedom implied poverty.
Unfortunately, not everyone can afford the luxury of saying to employment offers nowadays. In the times of Chuang-Tzu, that is, in the 3rd century BC, it may have been possible to stay away from society altogether and still find food and shelter. In our century, those options are few and far between.
Taoism would lose its appeal today if it could not provide a formula for serenity without having to stay away from society. Chuang-Tzu preferred to scrape a living in the countryside, but nowadays, few people regard his choice as a workable option.
Is it possible for Taoists to find harmony amidst the tensions and demands of the modern world? Can we apply Lao-Tzu’s insights to achieve serenity and happiness in our century?
Yes, definitively, but only if we discard Leibniz’ paradigm of a perfect world. I am referring to the doctrine developed by Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646-1716) to explain evil without condemning the world as a whole.
Chuang-Tzu’s metaphor of the cook
Leibniz tried to answer a major philosophical question: how can we live happily in an imperfect world, where evil, iniquity, immorality and cruelty seem pervasive? As a Christian, he had been taught to regard the world as God’s creation, but he found it hard to believe that God had created an imperfect world.
To be fair, I must acknowledge that Leibniz didn’t formulate his question as “how to be happy in an imperfect world,” but I consider this question as the key issue behind his philosophical quest. If God had created an imperfect world, did he expect human beings to suffer and live unhappy, miserable lives?
Taoists face exactly the same question. The philosophy of Lao-Tzu, Yang-Tzu and Chuang-Tzu calls for harmony, but how are we supposed to find it in a hostile environment? Is it workable to seek harmony amidst conflicts and disruptions?
Chuang-Tzu recounts the story of a cook, who had acquired an extraordinary level of skill with his knife. Apparently with little effort, the cook was able to carve an ox from beginning to end. He worked quickly and precisely, without damaging his knife, and achieved an excellent result.
In doing so, the cook was not thinking about the problems of the world. He paid no attention to supply and demand issues in farming, currency inflation, poverty amongst farmers, and a myriad of other problems that might have dampened his mood.
Taoism compared to Leibniz’ philosophy
Chuang-Tzu’s cook had achieved harmony in his daily work without having to solve the world’s problems. I assume that the cook could also be categorized as serene, self-confident, happy and aligned with the Tao.
In contrast, Leibniz had no understanding of how to achieve harmony in the middle of chaos. He viewed it as impossible to lead a happy life in an imperfect world. He could not come up with a formula for remaining effective amidst immorality and iniquity.
Let me underline that Leibniz was remarkably gifted as an intellectual. He gained important insights in linguistics, logic, mathematics and physics, and worked as a diplomat, librarian, and scholar. Nonetheless, he could not figure out how to attain spiritual harmony in hostile environments.
Leibniz’ book “Theodicy,” published in 1710, gives a rather convoluted answer to the question of how to attain serenity in a hostile environment.
The book reassures us that it is possible to live a decent life despite the world’s immorality and iniquity because those exist for good reasons.
According to Leibniz, we perceive iniquity and immorality negatively because of our limited knowledge. God allows them to exist for ulterior reasons that are unfathomable to humans. If we knew as much as God does, we would grasp the underlying plan that will eventually produce a good outcome.
The Taoist path of wisdom
Leibniz’ doctrine is clever, but far-fetched and implausible. I doubt that anyone can achieve serenity and happiness by using Leibniz’ intellectual subterfuge. His arguments cannot help us make decisions in normal circumstances, let alone in situations of clear and present danger.
For Leibniz, it was imperative to wash the world clean of all evil elements. He believed that only a perfect world can enable humans to achieve harmony. Nevertheless, his perfect universe rests on arguments that, in normal circumstances, nobody will take seriously.
Chuang-Tzu’s cook would not have paid any attention to the doctrine put forward by Leibniz. The cook had already aligned his actions with the Tao without need of a convoluted logic. In the Taoist approach, the world’s problems do not disappear, but we do not need to give them exaggerated significance.
According to Taoist tradition, serenity is achieved through wisdom, not by ignoring the universe. Chuang-Tzu’s cook was not ignoring the world’s deficiencies, but simply placed them in context as he focused his attention on what really counts.
I acknowledge the difficulty of acquiring enough wisdom to operate on the same level as Chuang-Tzu’s cook, but Taoism is a path built on enlightened habits. Leibniz missed these aspects completely, but at least made an honest effort to find the truth.
If you are interested in putting effective ideas into practice in all sorts of situations, I recommend my book “Consistency: The key to permanent stress relief.”