Tao jest milczeniem

by Raymond M. Smullyan

Silencioso Tao es un libro delicioso en el que el conocido matemático Raymond Smullyan autor de obras de gran éxito sobre paradojas lógicas y rompecabezas matemáticos, considerado por muchos como un nuevo Lewis Carroll, y reconocido por sus sesudos trabajos sobre Gödel y otros aspectos de la lógica matemática, nos introduce en el arte del Tao. Smullyan considera el taoísmo como la filosofía más sutil, gozosa y libre que haya existido nunca, y tomando los textos taoístas, así como el zen, como punto de partida, reflexiona, entre otras cosas, acerca de la vida, la moral, los perros, la horticultura, el arte de la siesta, y sobre ordenadores que sueñan que son humanos, además de hacer dialogar a un mortal con Dios, en un texto que alcanza las más altas cotas teleológicas en un estilo digno de Groucho Marx. Esto y muchas cosas más es Silencioso Tao, libro en el que se logra, en un estilo sencillo, que la metafísica más intrincada y las paradojas más insolubles se resuelvan muchas veces en una carcajada cósmica.

Genres: Philosophy, Religion, Nonfiction, Taoism, Spirituality, Buddhism, Logic

196 pages, Paperback

First published June 1, 1977

About the author

Raymond M. Smullyan was a logician, musician, Zen master, puzzle master, and writer.

Reviews

[Chris · Rating 3 out of 5]

About a year ago I read the experimental philosophy of “The Mind’s I” and enjoyed it so much that I decided to follow up with some of its selected authors, and Raymond Smullyan was a first stop. To be honest, at the start of The Tao Is Silent, I wasn’t sure if Smullyan was a joke or not. No doubt, as a mathematician he’s clearly a genius, but the tenor of the book seemed so blithe that I didn’t know how seriously he expected his readers to take him. I’m still not entirely sure he doesn’t think Taoism is completely hilarious as a philosophy of non-philosophy and an absurd parody of religion. The book is full of existential riddles, punchlines, and paradoxes that stretch the mind and loosen our grip on our stubborn biases about what life is, who we are, who god is, and what the ‘answers’ to our problems are. After getting used to his style, I realized that Smullyan is smiling straight through the confused questioning of humanity, and asking his readers to breathe for moment, and think in a purer air before working towards answers. At the end of the book, I was pretty sure he was legit as a thinker and philosopher, even though I never successfully determined which parts were sarcastic and which were completely sober. As far as the latter, probably none were entirely so.

His treatment of Taoism is less like a lesson than a game. Smullyan unasks more questions than he answers, but I think that is EXACTLY his point, and the point of Taoism. It is a perfect demonstration of the unraveling of tangled logic. In the style of Alice In Wonderland, he helps us see what fools we become when dogmatism creeps into ethics, religion, philosophy, politics, education, etc. He uses Taoism to illustrate that we know more than we think [sic], and that the good is often much nearer to us than social reform theories might lead us to believe. He wants us to believe that we do what we do because it’s who we are and we can’t help it. Except when we can. Yeah, it gets tricky, but Smullyan is not interested in resolving contradictions for anyone. He loves it this way, and he makes me think that he loves it this way because he loves life, and life is this way. Matter of fact, he seems completely satisfied with apparent contradictions, believing that there may or may not be an explanation after all. “I wish to accept all religions, even though they contradict each other...pick the finest veins, and synthesize them as well as I can.”

I thought at first that he was an absolute pacifist, and possibly an absurdist, but I think he’s simply interested in breaking down illogic and dispelling presumption before proposing a solution. He quotes George Berkeley’s criticism of philosophers, “They first raise a dust, and then complain they cannot see.” Of course, Smullyan would be the one to play games and antagonize others in the dust storm before helping to clear people’s view, yet even that may be a very strategic move in motivating people to sit still long enough for their confusions to settle so he can help. It’s no jest to say that this is one of the most playful books from a very serious thinker that I have read in a long time, and it almost threw me completely, as it may others. One could very nearly miss the real gold here.

Smullyan is an optimist. It is evident he believes that people will be more effective if they are happy in life, and they will be more happy if they believe in themselves and do what comes natural (and that paradoxically includes what often appears to be ‘going against nature’). It is very Buddhist in that it attempts to go beyond mere right thinking and right action, to reestablishing right view. “When the wrong man does the right thing, it usually turns out wrong.” Taoism, he says, may not always change the practical lifestyle of some, but they may now live “with less fear and anxiety.” There is no coercion in Taoism. “The whole idea of Taoistic politics is that the sage-ruler influences the people to voluntarily do that which is good for them.”

Again, the real gem here is the permission to release our death-grip on sanity and logic, and to simply live with the confidence that the mechanism of our body and the world is rolling in the right direction somehow. This confidence in ourselves, and a simple acceptance of and joy in existence, is what Smullyan thinks will right most wrongs—wrongs which accumulate into the only real ‘evil’: suffering. He willingly accepts that this is a form of mysticism, stating that “metaphysics is the necessary ripening process of the human race to prepare it for mysticism.”

And what mysticism doesn’t cover, a buoyant absurdity does. “Someone asked a Zen-Master, ‘What is the ultimate nature of reality?’ The Master replied, ‘Ask the post over there.’ The man responded: ‘Master, I don’t understand!’ The master said, ‘Neither do I.’”

My favorite chapters, and well worth an isolated read by curious people, are:

Is God a Taoist?
An imaginary Zen story.
The Evening Cool.

**Like this review? Clicking ‘like’ lets me know someone’s reading! For more reviews, visit my blog, www.bookburningservice.blogspot.com

[A.J. McMahon · Rating 4 out of 5]

Raymond Smullyan is quite a character. He started off as a stage magician, then wrote a PhD thesis about Godel's Incompleteness Theorem that became the standard commentary on the subject, and has been ever since a professor of philosophy at an American University and is still going strong at the age of ninety-five! The photos of him online show a veritable Taoist sage, with his beard and long hair. What I liked most about The Tao is Silent is the very obvious fact that he couldn't care less what anyone thinks of him. He speaks his mind with a complete freedom that you have to admire. I didn't always (or even very often!) agree with him, but I enjoyed reading this book and I will at some time in the future re-read it, and to re-read a book is the highest compliment I can pay to the author. For all his light-heartedness, however, if you pay close attention you will see that he is saying very fundamental things of great philosophical importance. This book can be highly recommended to anyone interested in Taoism, or even just in Philosophy.

[Kamakana · Rating 5 out of 5]

if you like this review, i now have website: www.michaelkamakana.com

090819: i have read many philosophy texts of several types but this is probably my favorite daoist work. easy to read, playful, in its writing very much follows concepts of ‘wu-wei’ (effortless action). particularly enlightened to better understanding of precedence of ‘humaneness’ in guidance rather than ‘moralistic’ tendencies to ‘right’/‘duty’ behavior. this is not defense of quietism, but asserting that humans are born humane and only through mistreatments become cruel... i think that i will read this gentle text every once in a while, to alleviate stress of whether i am truly understanding other works of philosophy... and how it matters...

[Moisès · Rating 5 out of 5]

I have laughed a lot with this reading. Not because the text was humorous (though arguably it was). I've laughed mostly about myself when contrasting my reality with, or reacting to, its ideas. This book, as probably the Tao itself, may not be for everyone, at least «not before the time is ripe». However, if you approach it without rational expectations, and let yourself get into its dance, I think you might find out something about yourself. Maybe nothing important, but decidedly essential.

[Andrew Gillsmith · Rating 4 out of 5]

Raymond Smullyan is an imp, in the best possible sense of the term. His energy, his wit, and his authentic love of wry humor jump off the pages of this book.

I have returned to it often as a source of inspiration and intellectual consolation.

[Chris Craddock · Rating 5 out of 5]

I really enjoyed this book. It explained Eastern spiritual thought in a way that was both modern and whimsical. There were short chapters on various topics with lots of quotes from various sources -- Western philosophy and ancient Chinese poetry. I feel like I understand the subject pretty well, though the Tao is incomprehensible and beyond understanding. Nevertheless, that is how it is. A paradox and a conundrum, a riddle wrapped in an enigma. I especially enjoyed the parable of the hippie who 'didn't want to amount to anything.' This is a good example of how the ancient wisdom was updated, and I suppose that hippies are now not-so modern and up-to-date as when the book was written, but relative to some of the thousand year plus stuff, still pretty modern. There was a list of other books for further reading, and I am certainly going to check it out.

[Chant · Rating 4 out of 5]

One must have an understanding of Daoism and Zen/Chan Buddhism before venturing into this book, as it is makes the book much more enjoyable if one knows of the sources more deeply than a surface understanding.

I think it was written not so much to be an introduction but to play around with western philosophy and logic.

[Nick Klagge · Rating 3 out of 5]

My reading of this book falls into the sad category of "picked it up because the author died this year." As happens when your dad is a philosophy professor, I had some books of Smullyan's logic puzzles when I was a kid, so I recognized the name. Reading his obits, though, I learned about this book, which I hadn't heard of before. I am also interested in Daoist thought, so I was eager to read this.

The book is an interesting mish-mash. The only part of it I would recommend unreservedly is the dialog "Is God a Taoist?" But you can read that online without getting the book!

http://www.mit.edu/people/dpolicar/wr...

The content of that dialog doesn't have much to do with Daoism narrowly defined, but I suppose is informed by what Smullyan would describe as a Daoist outlook. The dialog touches on, and interestingly inverts perspectives on, a lot of important ideas regarding free will, moral responsibility, and good and evil.

The rest is more mixed. In a way it felt a lot like reading a blog avant la lettre. Smullyan is clearly a Daoism enthusiast rather than an expert (and I think he might well say that the only way to really learn Daoism is from an amateur enthusiast!). The tone of the book is very conversational, with a surprising frequency of exclamation points. I came to find this pretty endearing, although I can imagine it being offputting. The edition I read, at least, was also very poorly edited, with lots of spelling mistakes.

My biggest annoyance with the book was a sort of cultural essentialism that came across to me. There is already a pretty high risk with a western dabbler writing a book about Daoism. Smullyan very casually uses the terms "eastern" and "western" to characterize entire perspectives or ways of thinking about the world, and often sort of lumps Zen Buddhism and Daoism right together (admittedly they are related, but still). I'm mostly OK chalking this up to it having been written in 1977, but it did very much read like "a western person's idealization of what some eastern religions mean."

Anyway, overall I did find some value in the book. It's certainly interesting to me that someone who cut his teeth on logic puzzles is drawn to the anti-dualist aspects of Daoism--kind of a "late style" type of thing. I like that he tries to take seriously the senses of apparently paradoxical or weird sayings like "the true dao is unnameable," and discuss approaches to thinking about them, rather than just leaving it at "ponder this paradoxical saying!" I think the strongest "philosophical" aspect of the book is the multiple ways that Smullyan demonstrates (and enacts) wu-wei, the Daoist principle of non-action. He doesn't talk about it much explicitly, but as the examples proliferate you start to see them falling under the same umbrella. A more familiar or modern way of putting it might be "not forcing it." One of the more memorable examples is a dialog around the saying from Laotze to the effect that the good man does not argue. One of the dialog participants affirms this principle and continues to argue; when confronted with his (perceived) hypocrisy, he responds, "It just so happens that right now I feel more like arguing than being good!" There is a lot of discussion in the book about dispositions, and it's clear that Smullyan sees changing people's dispositions as much more worthwhile than convincing them rationally or imposing rules. This opens up a much broader field of discourse than the analytical philosophy tradition allows, including things like stories and Zen masters kicking people in the butt!

These ideas resonate a lot with a couple of other books I'm currently reading. In Seneca's letters on ethics, he pooh-poohs the tradition of Stoic philosophers coming up with pithy (and sophistic) syllogisms on why certain things are or are not of value. His view is that basically a syllogism is not going to really convert anyone, and to do that, one needs a much richer approach (as embodied in his letters), reflecting on the issue earnestly, drawing on personal experience and stories, etc. Also, in Parfit's "Reasons and Persons" (which I've just started), a lot of it is pretty dry analytical stuff of the "moral dilemmas" variety, but he does talk (rather obliquely) about how we can change our dispositions, and a moral theory could be "indirectly self-defeating" in the sense that organizing our lives around it could result in us doing worse at achieving the desired outcomes. (For example, it could be that for someone trying to maximize her own happiness, it is more effective to live according to some other disposition rather than consciously trying to maximize her own happiness--the old butterfly thing.) This seems to me like a fairly Daoist perspective.

Ultimately I do think that Smullyan has the courage of his convictions, and sees that his book needs to enact the kind of worldview he is talking about. It wouldn't do to approach it in a traditional expository manner. It makes a lot more sense for him to tell us a bunch of stories that mattered for him, and let us sort it out for ourselves!

[Sandy Maguire · Rating 3 out of 5]

There is some good stuff in here, but it overstayed its welcome. Subsequently, I was bored and still don't know what the hell tao is about.

[Hofstetter Patrick · Rating 5 out of 5]

An introduction to Taoism, written by an American mathematician and logician - how weird is that? Well, the book is as fascinating and enlightening as the author's character. Probably it is exactly this wacky combination that is needed to build a bridge between our Western thinking and Eastern philosophy. The dialogue between God and the Mortal is among the most illuminating and at the same time funny chapters I have ever read in a book.

[Eugene · Rating 5 out of 5]

Raymond Smullyan's beguiling and whimsical guide to the meaning and value of Eastern philosophy to Westerners. More than a book on Chinese philosophy, it is a series of ideas inspired by Taoism that treats a wide variety of subjects about life in general. Readers will be charmed and inspired by this witty, sophisticated tome, whether the subject is gardening, dogs, the art of napping, or computers who dream that they're human.
"To me," writes Smullyan, "Taoism means a state of inner serenity combined with an intense aesthetic awareness. Neither alone is adequate; a purely passive serenity is kind of dull, and an anxiety-ridden awareness is not very appealing."

[Serdar · Rating 4 out of 5]

Infuriating! But in the best ways. Smullyan I knew through his wonderful logic and puzzle books, and I was casually familiar with his interest in Tao and Buddhism. This is not a formal introduction to either one, but more of a celebration of ideas in and around both of those paths, in his playful and conversational style. Favorite part: the dialogue between God and the poor slob who's trying to figure out why he ever ended up with free will.

[Samuel · Rating 4 out of 5]

Best Analytic (Western) exposition on Taoism to date.

[Dimitris Hall · Rating 5 out of 5]

Πολλές φορές δεν είναι ένα βιβλίο αυτό καθ'αυτό, το τι γράφει δηλαδή, που σου μένει στο μυάλο, που το κάνει ιδιαίτερο για σένα. Το πώς έμαθες για την ύπαρξη του, με ποια άτομα το έχεις συνδέσει, ο τρόπος γραφής αντι του περιεχομένου, ακόμα και το αν συμπάθησες ή ακόμα και θαύμασες τον συγγραφέα, παίζουν πολύ σημαντικό ρόλο στην εντύπωση που θα σχηματίσεις για αυτό. Μπορεί ακόμα και να κάνουν τη διαφορά ανάμεσα στο αν θα σου μείνει κατα κάποιον τρόπο, αν θα κουλουριαστεί σε κάποια φρέσκια νευρική σύναψη, ή αν θα το ξεχάσεις για πάντα λες και δεν το διάβασες ποτέ.

Έτσι και «Το Τάο είναι σιωπηλό». Το βρήκα στο αγαπημένο μου πλέον παλαιοβιβλιοπωλείο στο Μοναστηράκι, το μόνο που έχω βρει μέχρι σήμερα που να έχει βιβλία που να με ενδιαφέρουν - είναι αυτό στα αριστερά του James Joyce καθώς βγαίνεις. Λοιπόν, χαζεύοντας τα σκονισμένα ράφια γεμάτα με ως επι το πλείστον αδιάφορους τόμους, έπεσε το μάτι μου στο «Τάο». Είχα ήδη αγοράσει άλλα τρία βιβλία εκείνη τη μέρα οπότε το σκεφτόμουν για τα €4. Ξεφυλλίζοντας το, αυτό που μου τράβηξε στ'αλήθεια την προσοχή ήταν τα κεφάλαια για τους σκύλους και τη κηπουρική. Αυτά τα δύο είναι εξαιρετκά παραδείγματα για το να καταλάβει κανείς περι τείνος πρόκειται το Τάο και το Ζεν (τα οποία είναι μέχρι ενός σημείου εναλλάξιμοι όροι, αν κανείς αφαιρέσει το βουδιστικό στοιχείο του Ζεν), να νιώσει τι ουσιαστικά πρεσβεύουν αυτές οι συχνά παρεξηγημένες και μυστήριες φιλοσοφίες.

Το βιβλίο ήταν απολαυστικό. Υπογράμμιζα σελίδα παρα σελίδα με ρητά τα οποία γέμιζαν την κοιλιά μου με ζεστασιά και τέντωναν το χαμόγελο μου ώστε το χείλια μου να τείνουν να αγγίξουν τα τύμπανα μου. Μερικά χαρακτηριστικά παραδείγματα:

Ας υποθέσουμε ότι με στριμώχνατε στο γραφείο μου και από απόσταση βολής μου λέγατε: "Σμάλλγιαν! Σταμάτα να αοριστολογείς! Πιστεύεις ή όχι ότι το Τάο υπάρχει;" Τι θα απαντούσα; Αυτό θα εξαρτιόταν απ'το κατα πόσο θα ήμουν σε μια περισσότερο Δυτική διάθεση (και υποταγμένος στην δυαδικότητα, ύπαρξης εναντίον μη ύπαρξης), τότε θα απαντούσα, "Ναι, το Τάο υπάρχει". Αλλά αν υποθέσουμε ότι ήμουν σε μια πιο ανατολική διάθεση; Ε, λοιπόν, αν ρωτούσατε κάποιον Ζεν δάσκαλο κατα πόσο το Τάο υπάρχει, πιθανότατα θα σας έδινε ένα δυνατό χτύπημα με το ραβδί του. Εγώ, τώρα, που είμαι κάπως πιο πράος, κατα πάσα πιθανότητα απλά θα σας χαμογελούσα ίσως με έναν συγκαταβατικό τρόπο και θα σας πρόσφερα ένα φλυτζάνι τσάι.

---

Το να αποδώσεις σκοπό στο Τάο είναι κάπως μη Ταοϊστικό. Η εσωτερική αρχή του Τάο είναι μάλλον ο αυθορμητισμός παρα ο σκοπός. Αντίθετα από τον Ιουδαίο-Χριστιανικό Θεό, το Τάο δε δημιουργεί ούτε φτιάχνει πράγματα· μάλλον αναπτύσσεται ή εξατομικεύεται μέσα σε αυτά. Θα μπορούσαμε να πούμε, στο πνεύμα του Λαοτσέ:

Το Τάο δεν έχει σκοπό,
Και για αυτό το λόγο πληρεί
Κάθε σκοπό του αξιοθαύμαστα.

[...]

Έχω επίσης πει ότι το βρίσκω υπερβολικά εχθρικό και καταστρεπτικό να ρωτά κάποιος κάποιον, ποιος είναι ο σκοπός του. Συγκεκριμένα σκέφτομαι την περίπτωση ενός αποτυχημένου μουσικού που είπε κάποτε σε έναν φιλόδοξο μουσικό, "Αληθινά, νομίζω ότι θα έπρεπε να αναρωτηθείς γιατί θέλεις να δίνεις συναυλίες". Αυτό μου έκανε απαίσια εντύπωση! Για ποιο λόγο θα έπρεπε ο ανερχόμενος μουσικός να κάνει μια τόσο γελοία ερώτηση στον εαυτό του όσο αυτή; Δεν είναι αρκετό το ότι θέλει να δίνει συναυλίες; Ίσως θα έπρεπε κάποιος να πει στην Ιωάννα της Λωραίνης: "αληθινά πιστεύω, Ιωάννα, ότι θα έπρεπε να ρωτήσεις τον εαυτό σου, γιατί θέλεις να δώσεις όλες αυτές τις μάχες!"

---

Το Τάο ποτέ δεν διατάζει,
και για αυτό το λόγο,
εθελοντικά υπακούεται.

Αντίθετα, μπορούμε να σχολιάσουμε ότι, ο Ιουδαιο-Χριστιανικός Θεός διατάζει, και γι'αυτό τον λόγο μερικές φορές δεν υπακούεται.

---

Υπάρχει και ένας άλλος λόγος για τη παρανόηση πολλών Ζεν περιστατικών που είναι πράγματι δικό μας λάθος: Υποθέτουμε ότι όταν ο Ζεν Δάσκαλος μιλά, πάντα εννοεί κάτι μ'αυτό που λέει. Και για να χειροτερέψουμε κι άλλο τα πράγματα, υποθέτουμε ότι, εννοεί κάτι βαθυστόχαστο και σημαντικό (και επομένως μας διαφεύγει κάτι βαθυστόχαστο και σημαντικό!) Ώστε ο Ζεν Δάσκαλος πάντα εννοεί κάτι, ε; Πείτε μου, όταν χτυπάτε ένα γκονγκ, και το γκονγκ αντιδρά με έναν ήχο, εννοεί πάντα κάτι το γκονγκ με την αντίδραση του; Αυτή η αναλογία θα ηχήσει στους περισσότερους αναγνώστες απαίσια, αλλά ευτυχώς δεν θα κάνει απαραίτητα το γκονγκ, να ηχήσει έτσι!

[...]

Δεν μπορώ να σκεφτώ πιο ταιριαστό επίλογο, γι'αυτό το κεφάλαιο, από το να αναφέρω την ακόλουθη αρκετά γνωστή ιστορία: Κάποιος ρώτησε έναν Ζεν Δάσκαλο, "Ποια, είναι η έσχατη φύση της πραγματικότητας;" Ο Δάσκαλος απάντηση: "Ρώτησε τον στύλο εκεί πέρα". Ο άνθρωπος αντέδρασε: "Δάσκαλε δεν καταλαβαίνω!" Ο Δάσκαλος είπε, "Ούτε και γω".

---

ZEN ΜΑΘΗΤΗΣ: Λοιπόν Δάσκαλε, είναι αθάνατη η ψυχή ή όχι; Επιζούμε του σωματικού μας θανάτου ή εκμηδενιζόμαστε; Μετενσαρκώνομαστε πράγματι; Χωρίζεται η ψυχή σε επι μέρους κομμάτια τα οποία ανακυκλώνονται, ή είσερχόμαστε στο σώμα ενός βιολογικού οργανισμού σαν μια μονάδα; Και διατηρούμε ή όχι τη μνήμη μας; Ή το δόγμα της μετενσάρκωσης είναι εσφαλμένο; Ειναι μήπως η Χριστιανική έννοια της επιβίωσης ορθότερη; Και αν ναι, ανασταινόμαστε σωματικά, ή μήπως η ψυχή εισέρχεται σε μια καθαρά πλατωνική σφαίρα ύπαρξης;
ΔΑΣΚΑΛΟΣ: Το πρωινό σου κοντεύει να κρυώσει.

---

Ένα γέρικο πεύκο διδάσκει τη σοφία.
Ένα άγριο πουλί φωνάζει την αλήθεια.

Μετά από τον καταιγισμό σοφίας αρκετής για να χωρέσει σε πέντε ζωές και κάτι, πρέπει να παραδεχτώ πως καποια κομμάτια του βιβλίου ήταν λίγο βαρετά, ιδιαίτερα αυτά τα οποία είχαν και καλά διαλόγους μεταξύ δυτικών ορθολογιστών και ανατολικών μυστικιστών - διάλογοι οι οποίοι βέβαια θα μπορούσαν κάλλιστα να είναι αυθεντικά εσωτερικοί, αφού ο Smullyan είναι σημαντικός θεωρητικός μαθηματικών και λογικής, με έμφαση στο παράδοξο και στην αυτοαναφορικότητα. Μάλιστα, επέκτεινε τα θεωρήματα μη-πληρότητας του Gödel -- τι περίεργο που του αρέσει και ο υπέρτατα παράδοξος ταοϊσμός؟

Α, τώρα που το θυμήθηκα: χτες είδα μια πολύ ωραία ισπανική ταινία με θέμα τον δυσκολότερο γρίφο λογικής (ναι, ΚΑΙ αυτός είναι βασισμένος σε κάτι που σκαρφίστηκε ο μπαρμπα-Smullyan) και τις προσπάθειες τεσσάρων κορυφαίων μαθηματικών μυαλών κλεισμένων σε ένα δωμάτιο να τον λύσουν. Αν μυριστήκατε εσάνς θρίλερ, οσμιστήκατε σωστά. La habitación de Fermat, το όνομα της. Αν σας αρέσουν τα παιχνίδια λογικής νομίζω θα σας αρέσει και η ταινία.

Ας γυρίσουμε από άλλον έναν συνειρμικό εκτροχιασμό. Με όλα αυτά, δεν μπορούμε παρα να του το συγχωρέσουμε του κυρ Raymond ότι κάποια κομμάτια του βιβλίου είναι βαρετά· πιο πάνω γράφω ότι η γνώμη μας για ένα βιβλίο μπορεί να μπουσταριστεί από στοιχεία «άσχετα» με το περιεχόμενο. Λοιπόν, διαβάστε τι άλλο είναι ο Raymond M. Smullyan: πιανίστας (στα νεανικά του χρόνια ήταν καθηγητής μουσικής!), ταχυδακτυλουργός, συγγραφέας βιβλιών με αινίγματα λογικής και βέβαια φιλόσοφος του Τάο και του Ζεν. Το κορυφαίο; Ο τύπος είναι 93 χρονών, να τα εκατοστήσει ο άνθρωπος! Αυτό που λένε ότι το μυστικό της μακροζωίας είναι στην αποφυγή του στρες και στην εξάσκηση του μυαλού ίσως να είναι πιο σωστό απ'ότι νομίζουμε! Όχι τίποτα άλλο, ούτε Aλτσχάιμερ φαίνεται να έχει ούτε τίποτα!

Λοιπόν, θα το σκεφτόμουν να έδινα στο βιβλίο τέσσερα αστεράκια υπό κανονικές προϋποθέσεις. Με ένανε όμως να νιώσω τόσο όμορφα διαβάζοντας το και πρόσθεσε στο σύμπαν μου αυτόν τον πυλώνα έμπνευσης που είναι ο συγγραφέας του, που δεν μπορώ να πω όχι στα πέντε. Ίσως είναι και το ότι το βρήκα χωρίς να το ψάχνω, χωρίς να ξέρω τίποτα για αυτό, σε ένα σκονισμένο παλαιοβιβλιοπωλείο στο Μοναστηράκι, και ότι αυτή η κριτική θα είναι η δεύτερη αναφορά στην ύπαρξη αυτού του βιβλίου σε ολόκληρο τον ελληνικό ιστό, σύμφωνα πάντα με το Google. Τι να κάνω, έχω αδυναμία σε κάτι τέτοια.

ΥΓ: **Τα λάθος κόμματα στην παράθεση είναι του μεταφραστή και οι τόνοι δικοί μου -- το βιβλίο δεν έχει ούτε έναν τόνο για δείγμα. Φαντάζομαι το 1990 κάποιοι ριζοσπαστικοί τυπογράφοι θα συνέχιζαν να αντιλαμβάνονται το ακόμα φρέσκο μονοτονικό σαν no-τονικό (το αστέιο αυτό μου πήρε περίπου 3 δευτερόλεπτα να το σκεφτώ· γελάστε τουλάχιστον για το μισό αυτού του χρόνου για να κάνουμε έστω μια υποτυπώδη εξισορρόπηση). Δεν ξέρω γιατί αλλά όλο το βιβλίο σαν γραφή ήταν κακής ποιότητας: μπόλικα ορθογραφικά και συντακτικά λάθη, ενώ η ίδια η μετάφραση είχε ψυχή μεν αλλά κάπου έχανε. Για κάποιον λόγο όμως αυτά τα στοιχεία με κάνουν να το γουστάρω περισσότερο, έχει κάτι από underground με μπόλικο μεράκι.**

[Aidan Smith · Rating 4 out of 5]

Smullyan led the kind of life I'd like to lead — and articulates his guiding principles therein through a bizarre synthesis of extremely analytical logician and wu wei daoist. This book captures a lot of how I feel about moral philosophy... while also still irking the part of me inculcated in the western tradition of finding things wrong with the world and wanting to fix them. Indeed, half my mental schtick is that I want to be better! But better perhaps, in the ways that feel actionless? Was a very fun read, would recommend, especially if you like Smullyan.

[Vivi Peluffo · Rating 5 out of 5]

Good book that effectively describes and explains Taoism

[Bruno · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a book for people who need the Tao to be explained to them (like me). But the Tao is silent, it can’t be explained. The author finds a good way of easing us into that notion, and if I can pretty confidently say I don’t understand the Tao after reading it, I can also confidently say I should stop trying. Funny, varied and with excellent rhythm (especially for a book that’s 40+ years old), I think this is the nudge I needed to venture into Eastern philosophy. Or the blow to the back of my head :)

[Plasma · Rating 2 out of 5]

rating: 2.5/5

[Derek DeMars · Rating 4 out of 5]

"The Taoist strikes me as one who is not so much in search of something he hasn't, but who is enjoying what he has."

My curiosity toward the philosophy of Taoism was piqued after reading its foundational text, the Tao Te Ching. I was struck by its practical and often rather whimsical approach to the various ambiguities and polarities we experience in life. It promotes a serene and holistic perspective, viewing everything as part of a grand process, a melody ever unfolding, in which we each take up our place and contribute our own spontaneous notes.

The series of reflections in The Tao is Silent by logician Raymond Smullyan was a fascinating follow-up. In reading it, I was able to witness a thorough interrogation of Eastern philosophy by a rationalistic but sympathetic Westerner (rather like myself).

Smullyan ranges both deep and wide through a variety of topics and explores them from multiple angles. He contrasts Taoism with other religious/philosophical viewpoints, hypothesizes about the metaphysics of causality, ponders the Gordian knot of determinism and free will, relates Zen parables on the meaning of life, and suggests what we can learn from dogs and gardening and the ringing of bells about the nature of existence and the Tao.

The reflections vary in tone from dry and technical Socratic-style dialogues to lighthearted, almost riddle-like musings and poems. Some of the chapters didn't really do anything for me, but others (especially in the first half of the book) were like nuggets of gold. Smullyan obviously understands the Eastern way of looking at things quite well, as evidenced not only by what he says but even by how he says it, with his writing voice bouncing back and forth between incisively analytical and cheerfully silly, erudite and cheeky.

Overall, The Tao is Silent is a worthwhile read for anyone of a philosophical bent interested in ruminating on different ways of seeing the world, and definitely recommended for anyone interested in learning more about Taoism or Eastern philosophy in general.

[Teo · Rating 5 out of 5]

2014.08.31–2014.09.05

Contents

Smullyan R (1977) Tao Is Silent, The

Preface

Part I: What Is the Tao?

01. Chinese Philosophy in a Nutshell
02. The Tao
03. Does the Tao Exist?
04. Yes, But Does the Tao Exist?
05. The Tao Is Vague!
06. The Tao Is Formless
07. The Tao Is a Mysterious Female
08. The Tao Has No Name
09. The Tao Does Not Talk
10. The Tao and the Sage: They Never Argue
11. I Am Like a Mirror
12. The Tao Is Everywhere
13. The Tao Does Not Command
14. The Tao Is Not Arrogant
15. Worship of the Buddha
16. Abiding in the Tao
17. The Tao Is Ever Spontaneous

Part II: The Tao Is Good but Not Moral

18. Are Men Fundamentally Good?
19. Whichever the Way
20. Why Do You Help Your Fellow Man?
21. Taoism Versus Morality
22. Is God a Taoist?
23. The Tao Is Good but Not Moral

Part III: The Tao Is Leisurely

24. On Gardening
25. On Dogs
26. On the Art of Management
27. On Selfishness
28. Selfishness and Altruism
29. On Egotism
30. Egotism and Cosmic Consciousness
31. On Trusting One's Own Nature
32. On Letting Things Go Their Own Way
33. On Not Wanting to Amount to Anything
34. On Making an Effort

Part IV: The Tao Is a Delightful Paradox

35. Crazy Philosophy and Sensible Philosophy
36. Wouldn't It Be Funny If—
37. A Dream
38. Astrology
39. Two Zen Incidents
40. Two Versions of a Story about Bankei
41. An Imaginary Zen Story
42. Why Do We Sometimes Misunderstand?
43. Mondo on Immortality
44. Do You See the Point?
45. Enlightenment
46. The Evening Cool
47. When the Time Is Ripe—

Notes
Suggested Readings

[Algirdas · Rating 5 out of 5]

Pradėdamas skaityti, tikrai nesitikėjau, kad vakarietis gali taip įtaigiai pasakoti apie Dao. Kažkada jau nudegiau pirštus skaitydamas The Te of Piglet (http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/89...), todėl labai atsargiai imuosi panašių knygų ir vengiu komentarų, skaitydamas Dao De Jing ar Zhuangzi. Bet Smullianas pakeitė mano nuomonę. Jis - matematinės logikos specialistas, parašęs ne vieną šios srities knygą, pianistas. Atrodytų, logika turėtų trukdyti pasiekti tokios sąvokos kaip Dao esmę, bent taip galvojau skaitydamas pirmuosius knygos puslapius, tačiau baigdamas, turiu nusilenkti logikams-profesionalams. Manau, Smullianas nėra eilinis vakarietis, rašantis apie Dao, jis – daosas, užtenka pažvelgti į jo nuotrauką :).
http://www.goodreads.com/photo/author...

[Rachel · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a book on Taoism by an American mathematician. Smullyan alternately delighted and frustrated me. His chapters where imagines conversations between people are full of stupid strawmen. And I just hated some of the very unsatisfying answers he gave to questions he anticipated Westerners would have about Taoism. If the question is so stupid that you won't answer it why bother including it in your book?

But I also really enjoyed learning more about Taoism. One Taoistic ideal is a dog who goes about eating, sunbathing, and barking without any burdensome self-analysis. But obviously we can't just let things happen and be like dogs! Someone has to plan what we're having for dinner!

Here's one poem he quoted that made me laugh, by Basho:

Admirable is he, who when he
sees lightning, does not say
"Life goes by like a flash."

[Dmk · Rating 2 out of 5]

So it's book containing Smullyan's philosophical-fiction (phi-fi how he calls it), it mus be great book! Well, no, it isn't. It begins with very shorts essay about Dao. And you've read this first part, you stil have no idea what is Daoism all about. And then finally the bunch of his phi-fi with some essays on less Dao-interest themes (althrough there are still conneted with Dao very much). And some of them are pure Raymon'd genius, and some of them are totally stupid.

It was so wierd to read this book, I was changing these three phases
1 Well, it's interesting, but quite boring, I'll rather stop reading this
2 This was so amazing, I love you Smullyan
3 What the hell?!? This **** surely isn't written by Smullyan.

It's just too Dao, too Efortless, not enough Western.

[Ege]

From an Amazon Review:

"I was skeptical as I first began to read the short story (or perhaps essay) 'Is God a Taoist'. But it hit me like a ton of bricks with a few simple words 'Where do you end, and the rest of the universe begin?'. And by the time I had finished reading the essay i began to see the world differently then my Catholic School Boy eyes had ever seen it. I immediately rushed out to buy the book, to learn more about this mysterious religion called 'Taoism'. After I read the rest of 'The Tao is Silent' I rushed out to get and to read 'The Tao Te Ching' and other books on the subject.

Now several years later I can not tell you how much differently I see the world. This book taught me the most important lessons that you will ever need to know."

[Jake · Rating 4 out of 5]

"The Tao Is Silent" is a remarkable little book about Taoism, Zen, and Eastern philosophy/religion. Smullyan writes with a very light touch- most of the essays are wry and amusing, and his fundamentally playful approach to his subjects makes the book and easy read. I was first introduced to Smullyan when I read Hofstadter and Dennett's "The Mind's I", which contained one of the essays in this book ("Is God a Taoist?") So it's not surprising that Smullyan frequently speculates about the nature of consciousness and the mind/brain problem.

The short bibliography that Smullyan includes at the end is a nice bonus- it suggests a bunch of avenues for future study.

[Justin · Rating 3 out of 5]

"I hope you don't think I'm so unrealistic as to expect that the whole human race is ready to embark on the way of mysticism! I have absolutely no doubt that one day it will but not before the time is ripe. And don't believe any self-styled "mystic" who argues with you that you "should" - he is really trying to convince himself rather than you. To argue with someone that he should follow the way of the mystics is as silly as to argue with an unripe apple that it is time that it should fall from the tree. When the apple is ready, it will not need to be told that it should fall; it will do so quite of its own accord.

[Stephen · Rating 3 out of 5]

Much like a big cube of tofu, I enjoyed this book only inasmuch as it was properly flavored. And while some of the flavor was quite tasty and intriguing, most was flat and a bit bland, with a faint aftertaste of that fashion of the Seventies, grumbling vocal mistrust of "Western" "materialistic" thinking. Yawn.

Also there were an embarrassing number of typos, misspellings, and other copy errors in my version of the book. Maybe that's a Taoist lesson.

Overall, I'm sure it was mind blowing back in the day but I think there are better, meatier musings now. I'll stick with Smullyan's logic puzzle books.

[Keith Davis · Rating 5 out of 5]

A wonderful book about Taoism by an American mathematician best known for his books of logic puzzles. Unlike any god, the Tao is silent, so it can never contradict itself. The Tao does not get angry or have a plan to judge the world. The Tao is empty, and because it is empty it is useful. One of the few books I regularly reread.

[Steve · Rating 3 out of 5]

Overly clever, repetitive, self absorbed.
A few good points along the way.
Alan Watts much better on these topics imho.

[caroline · Rating 3 out of 5]

The first rule of the tao is not to talk about the tao