Talk:Liezi
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Lie Zi -> Liezi
[edit]For consistency with translation of other Chinese masters like Laozi and Zhuangzi, shall we move Lie Zi to Liezi?Wang ty87916 13:56, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, I'll gladly do it. Keahapana 02:36, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
authentisity and so on
[edit]Aren't authenticity claims and claims of mixing with Taoism with Buddhism and so on all just a waste of space?
If there were an ancient sage and his words were passed on by word-of-mouth or reproduced many times, passed through numerous regimes, rubbed shoulders with other peoples, religions etc then they would surely have been rewritten in more recent times.
Take Alan Watts on Tao quoting from 3 major Taoists, a multitude of translators and some Zen Buddhists plus his own interpretations. Should a quote of his be used as a direct quote of say Lao Tzu then there would be claims that Lao Tzu was Buddhist or wrote his work in 1973. (assuming a few hundred years had passed since the writings numerous arguments could take place)
The point is that no original written work of, as an example, Lao Tzu, exists (he may have only written "The Tao cannot be written about" if that even. (That does, in fact, say it all)). So any writings of his are written since him and therefore mixed with the authors /translators/interests of the Dynasty/fashion of the time.
So in this article we see again that Lieh Tzu is treated in the same way that his words have been mixed with later systems of thought and so we are told that maybe he wasn't so ancient as someone may have claimed before. Instead of the fact that this wisdom and these stories are ancient and have been passed on through many times and many authors so have been mixed with other thought systems over time.
We could put it to rest and say that Lieh Tzu, Chuang Tzu, Lao Tzu and the rest were amoungst ... no hang on it's never going to be put to rest, I'd be better off just keeping quiet..
And as for spelling their names, well, Lazy (Liezi) and Lousy (Lauzi) are just amusing. When I hear Chinese people say the words I just accept that English will never capture the sound of Chinese no matter how we play with spelling as English has no tones and Chinese depends on them).
Wikishaw (talk) 08:28, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
language link missing
[edit]Hi, i am missing the link on the left (under "Languages") to the German Wikipedia article about Liezi http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liezi I don´t know how to make it, but you surely can do this.
Regards, Niko --N1K0W1N (talk) 11:17, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
External links modified
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Liezi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://users.compaqnet.be/cn111132/chuang-tzu/7.htm
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://users.compaqnet.be/cn111132/chuang-tzu/1.htm
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061008154805/http://eng.taoism.org.hk/general-daoism/eminent-philosophers%26accomplished-daoists/pg1-4-5.asp to http://www.eng.taoism.org.hk/general-daoism/eminent-philosophers%26accomplished-daoists/pg1-4-5.asp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:04, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
External links modified
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Liezi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061008154805/http://eng.taoism.org.hk/general-daoism/eminent-philosophers%26accomplished-daoists/pg1-4-5.asp to http://www.eng.taoism.org.hk/general-daoism/eminent-philosophers%26accomplished-daoists/pg1-4-5.asp
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061006222235/http://philtar.ucsm.ac.uk/encyclopedia/taoism/lieh.html to http://philtar.ucsm.ac.uk/encyclopedia/taoism/lieh.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:19, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
- C-Class China-related articles
- Mid-importance China-related articles
- C-Class China-related articles of Mid-importance
- WikiProject China articles
- C-Class Philosophy articles
- Mid-importance Philosophy articles
- C-Class philosophical literature articles
- Mid-importance philosophical literature articles
- Philosophical literature task force articles
- C-Class Eastern philosophy articles
- Mid-importance Eastern philosophy articles
- Eastern philosophy task force articles
- C-Class Ancient philosophy articles
- Mid-importance Ancient philosophy articles
- Ancient philosophy task force articles