""No the idea of the Supreme Ultimate and Ultimate Reality is not just a "western" concept (and Hinduism is in no way "western"). Are you saying there is no concept of the "other shore" in Chinese culture?""
If you bothered to read I wrote this "I want to ask you, where did you find the statement that Dao is the ultimate principle? This seem to be a heavy western(INCLUDING Hindu) centric view of the Way(Dao).
I suggest you broaden your knowledge of Chinese culture, don't just stay fixated on Zhuangzi. Read the Confucian Classics and their orthodox interpretations. You will see the description of Tian Li as the Ultimate Principle.
Funny, I like to say the same for you, stop reading Confucianism alone, there are a hundred schools in China, and Coonfucianism is merely one of them(even in Confucianism, there is hardly a transcending concept. have you read teh doctrine of the means? Thats perhaps the most secret teaching of Confucius, where do you find the transcendal cocnept in it? And don't give me the heaven BS again, you have yet to prove what the Confucian heaven even means. there are different definition for it, and you are doing selective reading, disgustingly. No Zhuang Zi isn't the only source I use, I've alerady read the Confucian sources,(the four books) none of them talk about a transcendent been by a long shot, as for the Wu Jing, Ithere is no prove whether they are even compiled by Confuius himself. Now going beyond teh simple confine of Daoism and Confucianism, have you read legalism? The Logicians? The Ming jia, the Ying Yang Jia, the and even the athiests? Talking about selective reading and a narrow perspective on Chinese culture.
Zhuangzi is the ancient equivalent of a "hippie". If all Chinese people listened to him instead of following Confucianism, our nation would have fallen a long time ago.
What authority do you have to always seem to act as the "spokesman" for Chinese culture? Chinese culture is much much broader and deeper than your understanding.
Having the concept of an Ultimate Reality is a sign of complex civilisation. Only complex civilisations have such a religious concept, primitive tribal cultures don't. Your interpretation of Chinese culture reduces it to that of a primitive tribe.
Prove it, you seem to know so much about ZhuangZi when SimaQian himself is in the fog regarding to his detailed life. Under what authority do you say Confucius represents Chinese culture, the man that needs to consult Lao Zi on his terms.
And no, antagonism and athiesm is what constitues a complex society, where human knows rationalistic thinking instead of superstition, and China has plenty of these people. Warring States has move beyond the Shang superstition of a divine God.
No you don't really understand do you? The premise one needs is to agree with it is possible that God exists.
There is more to Truth than scientific truth. It is irrational to say that just because something can't be observed, then it definitely doesn't exist.
You are right in that one cannot prove the existence of a personal God, only God as the Ground of Being and Ultimate Principle. (Like the Confucian concept of Tian Li)
Of course its possible so is bugs bunny. You can't even prove there is an ultimate, I don't know where you even get that statement from, its unscientific.
No the idea of the Supreme Ultimate and Ultimate Reality is not just a "western" concept (and Hinduism is in no way "western"). Are you saying there is no concept of the "other shore" in Chinese culture?
Read my lips, thats not what I said at all, I said thats not what Dao means. And thats all historical sources points to that.
You're insistence otherwise only show your amateur level in Classical
So go on, prove it using logic. Go on.
I did, using the same prove you used with your God. excpet it isn't really logic at all. Which is my point if you have not understood. I can even use your logic to prove a bugs bunny.
Some religions have better evidence than others.
And unfortunately, Christianity isn't the one with the most evidence.
I am a traditionalist. Tradition matters
The Yi Guan Dao are modernists, and they don't give a dman what you are, so you can keep your criticisim to your self and respect their believe.
You are right, MengTzu. Don't listen to him. His understanding of Chinese culture has been distorted by western atheism.
Please, with your limited knowledge? My reading of classiclal sources is heaven next to your molehole.
This statement already shows your shallow knowledge in Chinese culture and confine it to confucianism.
Athiesm IS NOT A WESTERN INVENTION AT ALL. IT IS A PART OF CHINESE CULTURE IN THE VERY BEGGINING, it also exist in Inidia in the form of Lokayata and some Ajikivas.
It is a human trait, not a cultural element.
Have you read "Sheng Mie Lun" by Fang Zheng? Do you even know it exist? Obviously not, considering your above statement. It is a materialistic argument that there is no heaven that makes choice for people, everything is random just like "the leaves of a tree falling to different directions", there is no after life, the spirit to the body is just like "a flower to a bowl of dirt, when the dirt is gone the flower dies" You need to dig the multi aspect and variety of Chinese culture body, your one pointedness and selective reading is a joke.
The fact is athiesm is Chinese and nothing western about it, in fact China and India probably have these elements way before the west.
Especially before the later supersitious Middle Aged Europeans.
Warhead here is clearly adamant about seeing everything Chinese in the Eastern lens, so it's a bit odd to say that his view is distorted by Western atheism. However, there is some truth to the statement: that his adamantly Eastern view is actually a reaction to some Western views, such as his insistence that Eastern philosophy and religion are rational, and his understanding of rationalism is often, ironically, that of the West.
Rationalism is not a western development at all. In fact I've learned far more about rational thinking when reading the ZhuangZi, it has influenced me in not taking anytnhing for granted, even the most basic cultural influence.