If that’s true, why bother reading further?
If that’s true, why bother reading further?
How do you describe the taste of 'saltiness' to convey the sense of saltiness, if who you're writing to has no understanding of it?
That's the problem with written word. We can write all around, and try to help someone identify the moment the sense happens, but words are incapable of sharing the sense.
The writings about the Dao are so that those looking for it in real life can identify it when they think they find it. Just reading with no doing will never show you the Dao. They describe emotions and senses that writings can never convey.
You don't have taste buds so you'll never understand saltiness, so now let me cover you in salt for you to understand what salt tastes like.
IMO the whole point is about unlearning, not looking for something forcefully, or trying to "get" something. That's just my idea though.
Given that, 81 chapters seems appropriate for an amorphous subject that we can't yet define in language.
Can you describe it by not using 'sugary' or 'sweet' as descriptors? Can you define it using no other sense or emotion words?
You can use language to guide and point. Talking about chocolate is difficult. Pointing to chocolate is not.
Ceasing the consumption of “salt” may be difficult and the “chocolate” in question may be subtle so you may need many intermediate steps.
Nothing we experience can be transcribed into words. Literally nothing. There is not one thing you can experience that’s possible to pin down into script. It’s pointers all the way down.
Almost everything in the world comes with warning labels.
Does that mean you just sit down and don't move?
There are dozens of branches of religions and philosophy and SCIENCE, that questions the ability of language to pass information, its 'fidelity'.
That doesn't mean you just sit at home and stair at the wall. Thought that is one very valid solution. Actually, just staring at a wall is the way some interpret as the best way to deal with the situation.