world view differences

[david_dawei]

What I will share here is actually some stuff I wrote at a Dao website I frequent... interestingly enough, most people there are very interested in dao but have little interest or feeling that one should understand chinese thinking; just study the words in certain writings. I would say that many here actually understand the way of chinese much better than those at the other site but obviously they study characters and meaning much more.

 

Feel free to share your experience with the eastern view of such issues shared below.

 

----

 

The topic was about the translation of "shen" (Éñ) in a chapter of the Dao De Jing (The Way and the Virtue), and whether 'god' was really a good translation. There are three words sometimes used to refer to 'god/deity/spirit':

Shangdi (ÉϵÛ), sometimes just the di part... Use started more in the Shang Dynasty

Tian (Ìì), use started to replace shang di in the Zhou dynasty.

Shen (Éñ), usually used more for spirit(s) but deity is permissible since there are so many gods in chinese literature.

 

The hangup is that using the word "god" for a western translation causes people to have alot of connotations that don't really exist for the chinese; that shen is not really the western god, although it may be acceptable in chinese as their apprehension for the use of spirt(s) or god(s). IMO, this is a classic struggle in chinese translations since many chinese words or phrase don't have an exact english match and hidden meaning or indirect references are easily missed.

 

So, at the other site, I tried to delineate what I felt was the differences between the western and eastern worldview and how their view of god might differ..

 

----

 

my first post:

I think that the use of god or gods or spirit or deity or any close form is legitimate for Shen... but I do think it ultimate carries different feeling for eastern and western, particularly the word god... I think the easterner focuses on the process and the westerner the personality....

 

asked to explain, so second post:

I guess my feeling is that the idea of 'god' exists in both western and eastern [chinese] thoughts but it is a different connotation and worldview. And while I do think that both do put some focus on process I had to use a different word for how I think the westerner differs;

 

Meaning, the west tends to look at the god-world as a hierarchial order emanating from one to many and desires to know what's behind each step (which I labeled as personalities--in a sense, a desire to know the personal aspects behind each step, including the one GOD); and the chinese view god-world more as a balanced order (Yin Yang) and do have a unifying aspect [a "one" as the west] but as we know, this is DAO.

 

Instead of focusing on the personal aspects for the sake of knowledge, the chinese tend to want to simply embrace this unfolding process of change and to be partners with it since they understand themselves to be part of the unifying aspect; So being in proper sync is more important; what they "do" is a hallmark of their way and more important than what they "think". I once described this to a chinese person as, "your thinking is usually about what to 'do'". She laughed and said, yes that is our basic nature...

 

asked to explain some more, so third post:

I'll continue to contrast with the western view since I think it's easier at some point to see the opposite; So, in the western view, god is over all things and thus establishes the hierarchial nature of everything. The rest of existence is broken down to various components driven mostly by the desire for knowledge of these distinct items.

 

The chinese concept is that everything (including man) is a part of the one unifying aspect. We are all a part of the unfolding change of the ten thousand things as we are talking about with dao; man as one piece to this is really on the same level as everything else (no hierarchy)... since chinese are generally not as interested in delving into knowledge of the discrete (they've kind of simply accepted that the unfathomable shouldn't be their concern) but understanding their role within the whole.

 

Because of this, everything around man can influence him (pardon the gender use) and by some level of acceptance, the "can" also is accepted as "will". This helps (I think) to understand why chinese are so surrounding by issues that reinforce unity like Feng Shui (environment's influence), astrology (heaven's influence), superstition (spiritual influence), Traditional chinese medicine (food-body organ influence), language (speech's influence), and social concerns ranging from education, art, to face (human's influence). All of these also have a historical influence and lots of it gets wrapped in auspicious/inauspicious meaning (and words like omen, fate, destiny play out).

 

As we read in DDJ about harmony and balance, the chinese tend towards this strongly by seeing the need to harmonize all these aspects; to be in sync with all these aspects. Also, IMO, their society supports this by not having alot of laws and regulations over them. In a sense, they have alot of personal freedom to be in sync with these.

 

The connective tissue for all this is "doing"; unless anything is done, then man is not participating in the unfolding... to idle think about such things may be good philosophy but not good on an existential level. So, I find the historical importance of 'doing over thinking' going back to their original ideas they developed in this dao-world view. If one is part of the ten thousand things, then one participates in ensuring the harmony is maintained; the less you think about it the more natural you can just be a part of it and 'go with the flow'.

 

But there is also a strong Confucian push towards maintaining harmony as well, more on the family and social levels which drive them to place importance on education, music, etc. And Buddhism added a more spiritual level too.. and in typical fashion, they harmonized these three dominate philsophies using what makes sense. When chinese get exposed to christianity, they see no problem with being a buddhist and a christian... again, they harmonize instead of creating discrete parts that are antagonistic (compare how western religions have become towards each other and others through war).

 

There is a very unifying/harmonizing/syncronizing expectation they hold about all things that we just hold as sometimes trivial and certainly discrete/distinct. I'm not sure I gave good enough examples yet since I wanted to try and formulate more of my thought... Because I truly believe that once someone really understands this, what one observes in chinese behavior suddenly makes sense.. even down to the absurb; Like why a couple will not ever try to say the dreaded Ds (death, divorce), since merely saying it 'can' make it happen. Language influences as much as the wind can cause sickness or as much as food sustains the body or as much as anger injuries an organ or as much as the heavenly positions (seasons) makes one wet or dry, etc...

[Corbin]

These are deep thoughts that are hard to grasp and I only understand it a little.

[Don]

In Western thought we have examples of the God - World combination, but it is not the dominate thinking. The example I always use is Spinoza. In simple terms his view was that the world is God and God is the world. From that view we can derive some of the views of Daoism. We are all part of God and the flow of natural events are all part of God.

 

In the western thinking we do mix up or ignore the dualism of the person God and the sprit (Energy) God. Often the person and not the collective spirt of the world take focus. So the Person tells us the rules and sets standards. If we use the World - God combination that it is the collective spirt and the flow of the world that becomes more important.

[ameriken]

Well, I'm not sure what to say, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express.

[IllinoisDave]

Well, I'm not sure what to say, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express.

What he said.

[david_dawei]

In Western thought we have examples of the God - World combination, but it is not the dominate thinking. The example I always use is Spinoza. In simple terms his view was that the world is God and God is the world. From that view we can derive some of the views of Daoism. We are all part of God and the flow of natural events are all part of God.

 

In the western thinking we do mix up or ignore the dualism of the person God and the sprit (Energy) God. Often the person and not the collective spirt of the world take focus. So the Person tells us the rules and sets standards. If we use the World - God combination that it is the collective spirt and the flow of the world that becomes more important.

good comments...

 

Yes, Spinoza does away with the transcendence of God and equates nature with god; thus he really approaches pantheism. And some of his thoughts have been compared to both buddhism and daoism.

 

An earlier form of this is probably stoicism which broke down the god-nature universe into passive [matter] and active [rules]. What I find so interesting is the strong humanistic teaching which also aligns more with chinese philosophies.

 

In both cases, one strips the more typical western attributes of god of transcendence and omnipotence but leaving omniscience--therefore being in everything and equating with nature.

 

Lao Zi said that Dao even preceded the existence of god(s)... in this sense, clearly the chinese model really makes the universal rules/standards as efficacious and everything (god, nature, man, universal) is simply part of [what you call] the collective spirit and unfolding flow. What plays out is a belief in the unity of all things; interrelated and influencing each other. And the goal is balance and harmony.

 

What is most fascinating to me is that this isn't just pure theory but one can see this in practical application as a living philosophy.

[tonado]

If you watch Monkey King story (journey to the West), you will get a feel of gods in Chinese literature. Gods can be good and can be bad. They have emotions just like humans. They have set of rules in heaven. If a god violates the rules, he/she will be punished.

[Jeikun]

"Shen" seems much more suited to "god" and not "GOD". This same character (Éñ) is pronounced "kami" in Japanese. In Japanese, it is used to mean a powerful spirit or god, but not normally to speak of the Christian (monotheistic) god. The Japanese add "sama" (˜”) which is an honorific used to describe someone in a high position of authority whom you are subordinate to (sorry I don't know the Chinese pronunciation) when speaking of the Christian (or other monotheistic) god.

 

So in the case of Japanese usage at least: Éñ = "a god", while Éñ˜” = "GOD".

 

With that in mind, I would agree that the concept of "GOD" as we consider it was largly absent, and not part of the intended meaning of Éñ though it held close enough connotations that for the Japanese at least, modifying it to Éñ˜” became the best way to translate "GOD".

 

I think the Roman, Nordic, or other pantheon's gods could fit better with Éñ. (Which perhaps makes it less of an east vs west issue than a polytheistic or druidic/pagan vs Monotheistic issue)

 

I'm far from well educated on this matter, you just happened to have chosen one of the few characters I actually know something about

Edited April 11, 2008 by Jeikun (see edit history)

[david_dawei]

"Shen" seems much more suited to "god" and not "GOD". This same character (Éñ) is pronounced "kami" in Japanese. In Japanese, it is used to mean a powerful spirit or god, but not normally to speak of the Christian (monotheistic) god. The Japanese add "sama" (˜”) which is an honorific used to describe someone in a high position of authority whom you are subordinate to (sorry I don't know the Chinese pronunciation) when speaking of the Christian (or other monotheistic) god.

 

So in the case of Japanese usage at least: Éñ = "a god", while Éñ˜” = "GOD".

 

With that in mind, I would agree that the concept of "GOD" as we consider it was largly absent, and not part of the intended meaning of Éñ though it held close enough connotations that for the Japanese at least, modifying it to Éñ˜” became the best way to translate "GOD".

 

I think the Roman, Nordic, or other pantheon's gods could fit better with Éñ. (Which perhaps makes it less of an east vs west issue than a polytheistic or druidic/pagan vs Monotheistic issue)

 

I'm far from well educated on this matter, you just happened to have chosen one of the few characters I actually know something about

I do tend to agree with you...

 

In a book I recently bought here in china on Song and Tang Dynasty poetry, the chinese professor (author) translates "shen" as if a particularly God/god but not "the" GOD... examples of shen translated to God/god:

The God of heaven

The God of earth

The God of land

everything has its god

every river had a god

[Don]

I do tend to agree with you...

 

In a book I recently bought here in china on Song and Tang Dynasty poetry, the chinese professor (author) translates "shen" as if a particularly God/god but not "the" GOD... examples of shen translated to God/god:

The God of heaven

The God of earth

The God of land

everything has its god

every river had a god

 

Is it the book by Prof. Ma at Eastern China Normal University? I have met him several times, and has a funny story about a street vendor trying to sell him a pirated version of his book. He has over 20 books on the translation and meaning of the old poetry.

[david_dawei]

I do tend to agree with you...

 

In a book I recently bought here in china on Song and Tang Dynasty poetry, the chinese professor (author) translates "shen" as if a particularly God/god but not "the" GOD... examples of shen translated to God/god:

The God of heaven

The God of earth

The God of land

everything has its god

every river had a god

 

Is it the book by Prof. Ma at Eastern China Normal University? I have met him several times, and has a funny story about a street vendor trying to sell him a pirated version of his book. He has over 20 books on the translation and meaning of the old poetry.

Pearls of Tang and Song Poetry by Zhou Ji

ISBN: 9787807402145

38 RMB

[Don]

I do tend to agree with you...

 

In a book I recently bought here in china on Song and Tang Dynasty poetry, the chinese professor (author) translates "shen" as if a particularly God/god but not "the" GOD... examples of shen translated to God/god:

The God of heaven

The God of earth

The God of land

everything has its god

every river had a god

 

Is it the book by Prof. Ma at Eastern China Normal University? I have met him several times, and has a funny story about a street vendor trying to sell him a pirated version of his book. He has over 20 books on the translation and meaning of the old poetry.

Pearls of Tang and Song Poetry by Zhou Ji

ISBN: 9787807402145

38 RMB

 

Thanks, I often think that if I can understand the old folklore and old stories than I can start to understand a culture.

[Jeikun]

I do tend to agree with you...

 

In a book I recently bought here in china on Song and Tang Dynasty poetry, the chinese professor (author) translates "shen" as if a particularly God/god but not "the" GOD... examples of shen translated to God/god:

The God of heaven

The God of earth

The God of land

everything has its god

every river had a god

 

Is it the book by Prof. Ma at Eastern China Normal University? I have met him several times, and has a funny story about a street vendor trying to sell him a pirated version of his book. He has over 20 books on the translation and meaning of the old poetry.

Pearls of Tang and Song Poetry by Zhou Ji

ISBN: 9787807402145

38 RMB

 

Thanks, I often think that if I can understand the old folklore and old stories than I can start to understand a culture.

 

 

Also if you can become truly fluent in the language, as language shapes thought almost as much as it is shaped by it. Either way, learning to use and understand the language as it was intended gives a blueprint for thought.

 

I think you can consider yourself "there" from a linguistic standpoint when you can hear a joke in the native tongue (not physical humor) and you honestly find it funny. Also when you can make jokes or plays on words and have them laughed at by a native speaker (not the same as YOU being laughed at by same native speaker )

[Randy W]

"Shen" seems much more suited to "god" and not "GOD". This same character (Éñ) is pronounced "kami" in Japanese. In Japanese, it is used to mean a powerful spirit or god, but not normally to speak of the Christian (monotheistic) god.

 

Kami kaze, of couse, is "divine wind" in Japanese

[Don]

 

Also if you can become truly fluent in the language, as language shapes thought almost as much as it is shaped by it. Either way, learning to use and understand the language as it was intended gives a blueprint for thought.

 

I think you can consider yourself "there" from a linguistic standpoint when you can hear a joke in the native tongue (not physical humor) and you honestly find it funny. Also when you can make jokes or plays on words and have them laughed at by a native speaker (not the same as YOU being laughed at by same native speaker )

 

I am not good at languages, even the english languange. I often use the culture and stories to learn. I wonder how much i can really understand, if I only have a very basic understanding of the language? Stories and culture I am good at, so i often focus on my strength and igore my weakness.

Edited April 12, 2008 by Don (see edit history)