The tao that can be told
is not the eternal Tao
The name that can be named
is not the eternal Name.
This is the only book I can think of that starts off by saying that it is impossible to talk about its subject! (‘Must be a short book…’)
A friend commented on my last post that Christianity ‘holds the complete truth’. I think that is misleading. Truth can never be ‘held’: described, contained, captured, or summarised, like some scientific specimen. But it can be lived, embodied, and experienced.
So, what is the Tao? There are only more hints…
The unnameable is the eternally real.
Naming is the origin
of all particular things.
Of course we all see and interact with the ‘particular things’ of the world. This verse encourages us to try to see past our senses towards something that is ‘eternally real’.
The ‘unnamable’ is also part of Jewish belief, of course. When Moses asked God who he was, the answer was simply ‘I am’. Was God just being difficult? Or is that perhaps the best answer? And Christianity creates a further, wonderful paradox by worshiping the unnameable-made-nameable, the unknowable-become-known, whilst remaining as inscrutable as ever.
Free from desire, you realize the mystery.
Caught in desire, you see only the manifestations.
Does this make sense? What is desire, but desire for something? When we desire one thing, we lose sight of other things.
But what happens when we stop desiring for a moment? We can more easily see the big picture. Then (maybe) we can see ‘the mystery’.
Yet mystery and manifestations
arise from the same source.
This source is called darkness.Darkness within darkness.
The gateway to all understanding.
So, what is the Tao? It is indescribable. It is eternal. It is the source of everything. And it’s as inscrutable as darkness.
Is that enough make you want to know more? (No, it’s not a rhetorical question: leave your answer below!)
