Martial arts movies love to quote Taoist texts to give the impression of wisdom. The viewer gets the idea that kung-fu and karate fighters are thoughtful souls, who carefully assess the ethics of every situation, and who will not engage in combat unless they are totally sure of being in the right.
I wish that the image of Taoist wisdom portrayed in martial arts movies was true, but I have serious doubts. Some martial arts masters are indeed well acquainted with the Tao Te Ching, but others just use Taoist quotations and rituals to build a halo of mystery, without actually adhering to Lao-Tzu’s philosophy.
Taoist will not hesitate to defend themselves if the situation demands it, but they’ll go to great lengths to avoid those kinds of situations. As a general rule, Taoists will choose peace over war, even if it makes them look weak, withdrawn or cowardly.
Chapter 81 of the Tao Te Ching describes a wise person as someone who does not need to convince others or prove his point. Indeed, the Taoist prefers to steer away from debates and he will let others choose their own ideals, goals and lifestyle.
Lao-Tzu and the water metaphor
In the fourth century BC, one and a half centuries after Lao-Tzu, the words of Chuang-Tzu convey the message even more strongly. Chuang-Tzu describes wise people as those who have no merit (seemingly, I would add) and who have no fame.
Chung-Tzu is simply reminding us that conflict-avoidance, privacy and modesty constitute key Taoist virtues. Those traits shall prevent envy, social friction and confrontation.
The Tao delineates a path of serenity and effectiveness from beginning to end. Chuang-Tzu writings recommend us to stay out of the limelight. By behaving inconspicuously, we can go undetected, remain invisible to criminals, and live peacefully.
Pacifism is an outcome of Taoism, not its primary goal. The Taoists avoid conflicts and confrontations because they want to be left in peace, not because they are afraid. They prefer to stay away from acrimonious debates, even if they have better ideas.
Lao-Tzu formulated this principle in Chapter 37 of the Tao Te Ching. By observing society, he had understood that peace is as much the result of non-action (avoiding conflict, violence, and forced centralisation), as the result of action (benevolence, generosity, and courtesy).
Peaceful social relations constitute the automatic outcome of following the Tao, that is, the Enlightened Path. Lao-Tzu used the metaphor of water in Chapter 8 of the Tao Te Ching, indicating that “water nourishes all things” and does not discriminate.
In the same way, Taoists are called to practise courtesy and benevolence towards everybody without discrimination. That’s a solid method for furthering peace and cooperation. If we stay polite in difficult situations, we may be able to defuse violence, aggression and hostility.
Chuang-Tzu compared to Aristotle
Chapter 49 of the Tao Te Ching strengthens this principle by recommending benevolence and courtesy also toward persons who refuse to reciprocate.
Aristotle (384-322 BC) advised to do exactly the opposite. I must point out that his “Eudemian Ethics” and “Nicomachean Ethics” defined justice as giving each person his due. Aristotle would have been puzzled by the Taoist principle of practising benevolence towards people who manifestly do not deserve it.
Pacifism, as understood by Taoists, may be mistakenly seen as cowardice. I am convinced that Aristotle would have viewed Lao-Tzu as self-effaced and deficient in self-confidence. That’s because the Ancient Greeks, as portrayed by Homer in “The Iliad,” placed a high value on their reputation.
Chuang-Tzu’s metaphor of the crooked, malformed trees is meant to illustrate this point. Tall, large, straight trees will soon attract the attention of men who need beams to build homes, or planks to construct doors. Those trees will be the first to be cut and they will enjoy a short life.
In contrast, small, crooked, malformed trees will be ignored because, at first sight, they seem useless. They will be ignored, underappreciated and underrated; as a result, they will continue to exist inconspicuously and will enjoy a long life.
In modern terminology, I could categorise malformed trees as pacifists. Chuang-Tzu did not employ the word “pacifism” in his metaphor of the trees, but his call for an inconspicuous lifestyle points in this direction.
In his praise of Taoist flexibility and adaptability, Chuang-Tzu employed wood and metal as metaphors. Adaptability is another Taoist strategy for conflict avoidance.
When wood is rubbed against wood, it will ignite, burn, and consume itself. In contrast, explains Chuang-Tzu, when metal is heated, it will melt, take a different shape, and be preserved.
Taoism and Frederick Barbarossa
What about Western civilization? Has Taoist pacifism been intellectually absorbed into the culture? A little bit, I would say optimistically, but we still have a long way to go.
When I look back at history, I still find too many examples of rigid thinking. That’s the equivalent of rubbing wood against wood in Chuang-Tzu’s metaphor. Sooner or later, rigidity will ignite, burn and consume itself, causing widespread mayhem.
In some schools, students are taught, for example, how king Frederick I (1123-1190), known as Barbarossa because of his red beard, attempted to build an empire. Barbarossa represents the opposite of the Taoist ideal of benevolence and courtesy.
Through marriage, war and threats, Barbarossa tried to take over Bavaria, Saxony, Milan, Florence, and even the papacy. In 1159, he went as far as interfering in the election for a new pope in the Catholic Church, trying to impose his pet candidate and forcing the rightful pope Alexander III to flee to France.
Barbarossa had no inkling of Taoism, pacifism, or anything resembling those ideals. He took for granted that, if he made aggressive moves, people would just surrender and submit to his will.
What about his opponent, Pope Alexander III (1105-1181), originally named Rolando Bandinelli? Was he more benevolent and peaceful than Barbarossa? Was he more enlightened about human nature, and the importance of avoiding aggression?
I must report that, philosophically, Alexander III proved to be better than Barbarossa, but ended up supporting some wars. He would not have understood the Tao Te Ching, and probably regarded Taoists as weaklings and good for nothing.
To make things worse, the enmity generated by Barbarossa continued to reverberate for centuries. In Italy, the Guelphs and the Ghibelline parties continued to oppose each other for two hundred years: the Guelphs supported centralisation under the Pope, and Ghibellines under the emperor.
Neither the Guelphs nor the Ghibellines could conceive of a peaceful life under Taoist principles. Their rigidity confirmed the prediction of Chapter 76 of the Tao Te Ching, namely, that inflexibility tends to lead to death. I can only wonder if, still today, this important Taoist lesson has been learned.
If you are interested in putting rational ideas into practice in all sorts of situations, I recommend my book “Against all odds: How to achieve great victories in desperate times.”