“Your Tao is different from mine!” exclaimed the German (?) out of exasperation over the inability by his fellows ‘Zhuangzists’ (a term coined by them) and him in Tao Speaks to effectively counter my substantiated assertions that their icon, Zhuangzi, had indeed defamed the Confucian paragons of virtue – Yao and Shun, King Ji (father of King Wen), King Wu, and Zhougong (the Duke of Zhou) in one of his texts, Tao Kih or The robber Kih.
But I liked his honesty in saying that his Tao is different from mine. Ardent followers of Zhuangzi would probably share his sentiments.
There is nothing really wrong in following a follower of Laozi and Huangdi (the Yellow Emperor) to learn about Tao. Most would be more than impressed by the elaborate oratory skills and the fluent expressions of Zhuangzi, an eminent orator during the Warring States era according to Sima Qian, the noted Han Grand Historian. Only Tsou Yen, his peer, who wrote a very long treatise on Yin Yang, could match his oratory skills, according to Sima.
But no one needs oratory skills to cultivate Tao.
From observations over the past decade, people have had hindered their own progress in the learning of Tao, neidan, and/or the Book of Changes, when they adopt the bias and prejudices of Zhuangzi against all things Confucian. While even rulers of the Warring States found the theories of Zhuangzi difficult to put into practice, we find many of his modern followers on the Web trying to do the impossible.
Over the past few years, more and more Westerners who learn Tao have wizened up to the fact that most Daoists cultivate Tao and Te in line in with the Tao Te Ching (and not that of Zhuangzi).
Therefore, if the German ever visit his Daoist friends in the East, it would be unsurprising if his friends in all honesty tell him that, “Your Tao is different from ours!”
This would probably also explain why the Tao Speaks forum has become defunct in recent years.