Definitely. The philosophy, of "way-making" in the Dao, is not so much different than the metaphysics of "selfless action" dharma, found in Hindu epics like the Bhagavad Gita. The idea there is that actions performed without attachment to the fruits of their labor, are actions that produce no suffering.
Somewhat.
I think there are a couple different ways to look at it.
You can look at the philosophy as one of being "selfless action" - IE - that you perform actions without really having an expectation as to the outcome. I find this outlook helpful when facing an overwhelming decision. Sometimes, you have to stop trying to figure the outcome and just see what happens.
As a life philosophy, though, it doesn't really work. You are a "ship adrift" - and while some can live this way, I don't believe it is how all human beings are intended to live.
There is another way of interpreting the idea.
Taoism is centered around the concept of change. Even the Eight Trigrams are not 'fixed' concepts - "Lightning" is defined as being increasing in Yin or increasing in Yang - the same with any of the other Trigrams. This is to indicate that nothing is ever in a fixed state and is always in flux. Earth will not remain Earth forever and whatever is being 'read' has an inertia one way or the other in the cycle.
The Taoist sage, thus, would not be defined as never acting selflessly, but as always acting within the inertial framework of the situation.
Taking the example of hunger into account - the Sage doesn't eat because he doesn't expect to nourish his body - the Sage eats primarily for that reason. What would be unnatural is if the Sage expects the hunger to go away without eating. Unless it is the conscious choice of the Sage to prolong the state of hunger, he will eat. He can't eat until he has prepared food - so expecting an immediate remedy to the situation is not natural, although conveniences like packaged food and the like certainly reduce the time necessary to prepare food - the Sage must also take into consideration whether the food is appropriate for his/her direction.
If a sage does nothing but eats candy and drinks soda - he can't expect to have a healthy or performing body.
If a sage wishes to travel, it is not simply going to happen - he must choose a direction in which to begin the travel. The Sage doesn't suffer if he chooses to walk and gets blisters on his feet - that is a natural outcome of the choice. If his food supplies run low and he finds himself hungry, he is not suffering unless he is expecting logistics to be irrelevant to his physical condition. If the sage must go without food - the sage considers that a natural physical consequence that is part of the experience of life. Allowing it to manifest as suffering is completely unnecessary regardless of the circumstance.
There are always a range of options available to the Sage to take. He/she is free to evaluate those options and choose freely among them. So long as the expectation is not out of line with nature - there should be no cause for suffering and it should be easier for one to remain at peace with his/her actions.
The sage isn't attempting to -control- the world, but is not simply a leaf adrift in the water, either. He isn't afraid to take action, but is aware of the nature of his surroundings and of his actions.
I hold up Jiraiya as a good example of a classical Taoist Sage.
Or Hinata - but that goes into a much deeper analysis of her interactions with Naruto (
You must be registered for see links
)
Hagoromo, as such, would be a false sage. He isn't -necessarily- evil; but worse, in a way. He hangs around, always has his hands in the pot throwing his power and influence around in an attempt to control the ripples in the water. Despite his best intentions - those types of actions will only ever get chaos and destruction because the ends justify the means.
"Human beings aren't supposed to have the power of the Ten Tails... but what the hell... I want them to get to know each other and use Ninshu!"
Yes, of course - that's the first thing human beings are going to do with power.
"And my sons hated each other because I chose the younger one as the true heir..."
What did he expect?
The man throws power around like it's nothing and expects completely unnatural responses from the world. His solution? More power!
"I had a feeling I'd **** things up this badly. So I sent a portion of myself
through time to keep an eye on things (because that's totally sage-like) and then also gave it the ability to pass on my powers to the reincarnations of my sons who try to kill each other every century."
In the end - nothing was really solved. Kaguya is still sealed and awaiting unsealing. Black Zetsu's fate is unknown (unless that was resolved in the movie). There still isn't much of a platform for world peace...
The only real resolution was the issue between Naruto and Sasuke and Naruto and Hinata. In terms of the things Hagoromo attempted to accomplish - he basically failed on every level, even in keeping his sons from fighting each other.
Jiraiya, on the other hand, succeeded.
Perhaps he didn't bring about world peace - but he didn't expect to do much more than play a part in helping people to better understand each other. He did that through Naruto. Even though he died believing he'd failed in many regards, he was the most successful of the sage-like characters (apart from the Naruto-Hinata combo).
Madara was massively successful but ultimately acting so overtly against the natural order that the backlash destroyed him. He had become so accustomed to controlling things that he forgot there were things outside of his control. He would be an "evil sage" - one who has thrown out the concept of natural order and has decided that the ends justify any means. To them, the order is established by the one who has the power to establish that order.
They are more selfish than the "false sage" - but their danger is far more obvious and thus typically more contained.
The "false sage" is far more dangerous because he expects to be able to use his knowledge/power in to affect an altruistic outcome in unnatural ways. People are quick to latch onto altruistic intent but not as quick to understand when these goals are just not realistic or will result in more harm than good.
Paying to send a bunch of people from the lower economic classes on a luxurious cruise sounds nice - but when they bring their credit cards along and run themselves into debt over once-in-a-lifetime souvenirs or other tourist expenses... has it really helped them in the long run?
A lot of politicians fall into the realm of false sages when they aren't downright evil.
But, I digress.
