It seems like a good book. It’s not perfect, and there’s flaws here and there, especially with the part of trying to make “a way” of doing things, because every time we try to covert others to “a way” of doing things, we deprive ourselves of the surprise of something new and maybe even better.
Not surprising, was the time of the writing, which places it around 4th century BC, which makes sense, because after reading it, a little debate came into the mind, seeing there are some similar statements here, as well as in the previous books i’ve reviewed, and i was wondering who copied who, but a logical thought comes in the form of … when parts of a certain philosophy have been taken and made into a less intelligent form, for the purpose of controlling fellow people, it could only have come after, and from little people.
Anyway, i say it’s not perfect, because there are flaws here and there and sometimes i just don’t agree with some of the ideas, like for instance the idea of “stop striving – in the absence of desire, there is peace” … i mean yeah that could work for someone interested in peace, but peace and serenity is not always what is needed.
Overall it seems like a good book, but my perspective shifts a little whenever someone is interested in someone else following because a true leader doesn’t need followers or anyone behind him. A true leader would always be the last one, looking to see if anyone got left behind. With that said, there’s still a bunch of good thoughts in it, and there seems to be more good than bad. i am sure that by now, if you’ve gone through other books, you’ve understood why we read them, and following is most definitely not one of the reasons, so you’ll be able to sift and pick whatever makes you stronger.
i know i keep saying it’s a good book, but another thought came to mind this morning, and i was thinking … alright … let’s go back to the basics – what does the book want? – the book talks about The Tao, which is a way, that wants to be followed, and everything seems fine till now, but let’s pause for a second and think of an endgame. Can you imagine how everything would look like if everyone followed The Tao ? i mean, if the way of being promoted is giving up control, desire, and doing nothing, then if everyone does that, then who is the one that does end up having control over everything? Because the things taught are about laws of attraction and the universe will provide and so on, so basically the followers should be the ones relinquishing control and independence for the hope that they would get what? Peace, serenity, tranquility, everyone singing happily in the meadows?
Let’s test some of this by doing a thought experiment, shall we? Let’s say that we’d be the universe right? And we see things static, doing nothing. Is there any incentive to provide anything to something that already is or do we work with the things in motion, things that want something? Do we fulfill the desires of those who don’t have any? Do we fix things that aren’t broken?
With this in mind, i think that although some of the things in the book are good, it’s still a book that seems like it was created with the intention to create a following, to lead people on a certain path, and to me, it doesn’t look like it’s a path of individual power and fulfillment, but of compliance, acceptance, and pacification. We all know that pacified people will not stand up, because they’ve been taught to accept their fate and that that is the natural way.
As i’ve established that one of the possibilities i see here is that The Tao is there to get everyone on the path relinquishing all their desires, so that it can move things as it wants and be the one in charge, then i guess the existence of the other books makes sense, because they had to be created in various forms, for various levels of intelligence. There had to be some “smarter” variations, while others had to be downright stupid, telling people exactly what they must do, in as simple words as possible.
i guess it’s good to read more