Reason is the meeting point of Eastern and Western thought, philosophy and wisdom. That’s why their best ideas resemble each other, and the worst remain cryptic to the uninitiated. The best wisdom from Buddha, Krishna, Lao-Tzu, and Jesus shows commonalities because it is all based on rationality.
What makes Taoism a distinct philosophy, different from all other schools of thought? What’s the key element shaping the Taoist mindset, and making it immediately recognizable when compared to Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity, or Paganism?
I find it hard to resist the temptation to define Taoism in just one sentence, but in my view, this sentence summarizes every crucial aspect of Lao-Tzu’s philosophy: Taoism is the steady, systematic attempt of aligning our actions with the Tao, that is, with natural law, in order to achieve good results.
Lao-Tzu’s work, the Tao Te Ching, is the foundational text of Taoism, but not the only one; the works by Chuang-Tzu and Yang-Tzu must be added to the list of indispensable books for getting acquainted with Taoism. All of them were written long before Christianity took root in the West.
According to tradition, the Tao Te Ching was written in the 6th century BC, and the works of Yang-Tzu and Chuang-Tzu in the ensuing centuries. Historians place Yang-Tzu two centuries after Lao-Tzu, that is, in the 4th century BC. Chuang-Tzu, the third great ancient Taoist, lived one century thereafter.
The core principle of Taoism
I wouldn’t be surprised if my Taoism definition is criticized by people unfamiliar with the Tao Te Ching, especially if they come from a Hindu, Christian, or Pagan background. Am I not contradicting myself when I affirm that Taoists aim at aligning their actions with natural law?
Indeed, at first sight, my statement seems contradictory. The conception of a world governed by natural law seems hard to conciliate with a world in which each person governs himself.
If the Tao is all powerful, what’s the point of aligning our ideas and actions with it? If the world is governed by natural law, what’s the impact of our choosing to do A instead of B? If the outcome is already implicit in each action, why should we attempt to steer events in this or that direction?
Those questions touch the core of Taoism, and the answers bring Lao-Tzu’s uniqueness to the fore. Taoists maintain that the world is governed by natural law, which they call the Tao. I regard the Taoist conception of natural law as equivalent to the concept of causality in Aristotle (384-322 BC).
Both Lao-Tzu and Aristotle theorized that cause-and-effect relationships are objective, not subjective. If we choose to do A, then B will happen. Conversely, if we choose to do C, then D will happen, and so forth.
It is up to us to decide whether to choose this or that action, but once we choose a certain road, we will start to draw closer to our destination. If we keep going, we can objectively predict that we’ll arrive at the end of the road. The Tao or natural law establish a multiplicity of roads, but we remain free to choose which one to walk.
What natural law means
Taoists are conscious of their choices and want to ascertain the consequences in advance, so that they can select the best road. Their knowledge of natural law enables them to forecast rather accurately the consequences of walking road A instead of walking road B.
Like Aristotelian philosophy, Taoism emphasises individual responsibility. The Tao Te Ching can be viewed as a collection of solid observations about causality. If we make this decision, the Tao will generate this consequence, and if we make another decision, then something else will happen.
In contrast to Christianity, Taoism doesn’t view compassion as a cardinal virtue. Taoism endorses benevolence, compassion and generosity, but mostly as lubricants of social interaction. It does not ask people to give away their possessions and devote their lives to serving higher goals.
I find it fair when Taoists get labelled as insensitive, selfish, or indifferent to the world’s suffering because compassion does not primarily drive Taoist motivation.
Taoists are often generous, compassionate and empathetic, but they regard those virtues as secondary. They are the result of effective actions performed upstream, not the primary goal of those actions.
People can afford to be generous, compassionate, kind and empathetic thanks to the harmony arising from good actions. Conversely, if bad actions had been performed, disaster would have ensued and wiped out the chances for empathy, kindness, generosity and compassion.
Taoists equate natural law with cause and effect. As a result, they have little patience with people who behave recklessly or maliciously. Lao-Tzu, Yang-Tzu and Chuang-Tzu knew that bad behaviour will lead to harmful consequences; that explains their reluctance to show compassion towards the culprits.
Harshness as cardinal sin
Chapter 42 of the Tao Te Ching predicts that reckless people will end their days just as they have lived. Maybe they’ll die as a result of some random accident caused by a reckless driver. I must underline that the same principle applies to mean, violent, aggressive, larcenous individuals.
Good actions breed beneficial consequences, and malicious actions do the opposite. Recklessness and thoughtlessness lead to wanton destruction. Lack of consideration leads to irritation, friction and opposition.
After severe harm has been caused, Taoists tend to be less forgiving than the average Christian, Buddhist or Hindu. They expect human beings to think before making decisions, so that harm and suffering are avoided.
What about actions that inadvertently cause damage? If the original intentions were good, shouldn’t we forgive the culprits and attribute the damage to bad luck? Nobody can be an expert in all fields. Should we not forgive innocent mistakes?
Taoists are reluctant to grant absolution for equivocations or accidents that have caused severe damage. Why? Because Lao-Tzu had provided the formula to prevent or minimize mistakes.
In Chapter 76 of the Tao Te Ching, Lao-Tzu calls for a soft approach in all areas of life. Avoid harshness, hastiness, abrupt and disruptive manoeuvres. Avoid the risk of causing accidents and inflicting damage on innocent bystanders.
If we cannot clearly predict the consequences of our actions or reactions, we should proceed cautiously. We should proceed softly, little by little, minimizing disruptions. We should look carefully before we jump, and then look a second time.
If we fail to heed Lao-Tzu’s recommendations, we are liable for any damage that may result from our actions. Taoists won’t easily accept ignorance and haste as excuses for recklessness.
Before setting a chain of events in motion, we should check the road ahead. Before jeopardising other people’s property and health, we should have taken preventive measures. There is no valid excuse for endangering what does not belong to us.
Harshness is the capital sin in Taoism because it brings forth few advantages and lots of disadvantages. Natural law teaches us to avoid harshness in any way, shape or form because, most often than not, it will produce negative consequences.
Christianity and some other religions preach universal love as a matter of principle, but Taoists don’t subscribe to this idea. Their abhorrence for harshness comes from direct observation and purely practical considerations.
Taoists such as Lao-Tzu and Yang-Tzu don’t feel obliged to love everyone, but they certainly feel responsible for their own actions and for ensuring that they will not cause damage to any third party.
When it comes to ethical choices, Taoists abide by a simple rule: think ahead and do not harm anybody. This ideal is much less ambitious than the universal love promoted by Christianity but, in contrast to some Christians, Taoists stick to their simple rule steadily and strictly.
How long does it take for a beginner to grasp the essence of Taoism? I would optimistically say that it only takes a lifetime. If we strive to align our actions with the Tao every single day, that’s more than enough to maximise our chances of happiness.
If you are interested in putting effective insights into practice, I recommend my book “The 10 Principles of Rational Living.”