Replies

http://www.simplynumbers.com/html/beyond/iching/sn_bey_iching.asp

You're right, Laozi didn't write it word for word, but the I-Ching TODAY certainly contains mostly his and his follower's thoughts. It's not like a book that's written once and then not changed.

And you also claimed Lao tzu didn't found Daoism, when in fact, he's credited to have done so.

"You're right, Laozi didn't write it word for word, but the I-Ching TODAY certainly contains mostly his and his follower's thoughts."

He in fact didn't write a single word of it and your claim that it contains mostly his and his follower's thoughts is either a vast exaggeration or misunderstanding at best. Well known Chinese scholars were writting commentaries on the I Ching hundreds of years before Lao Zi. Even Kong Zi wrote a commentary on it. How much do you think later Taoist authors could have changed the text? You've got it completely mixed up. If some ideas of Taoism seem to resemble those in the I Ching, it is due to the overarching infuence of the I Ching on pretty much every system of Chinese philosophical thought including Taoism - not the other way around.

"And you also claimed Lao tzu didn't found Daoism, when in fact, he's credited to have done so."

Yours is a simplistic view. Most scholars will admit that Lao Zi's role was likely primarily that of putting down ideas that had already been developed and circulating at his time. His position in the library in the court of Zhou would have given him contact with the popular philosohical ideas of the day. On the other hand, Taoist practitioners would say that Taoism is eternal and has no founder. But for the laymen or uninitiated, saying Lao Zi is the founder of Daoism presents a simple, easy to understand story so it is not surprising that you cling to that.

Anyways, I don't have any more time to educate you. You change the topic of conversation to these trivial matters about which you don't have a clue in order to avoid answering difficult questions.