nestentrie

What are attachments? What are examples? And, can one be attached to the Dao?

Do the three treasures relate to the three poisons of Buddhism? Also, do they have any bearing in terms of correcting the 8 defects (and 4 evils) of Zhuangzi?

So what's the true nature of things?

I would look at this from a 3 treasures perspective. Like has already been said, WuWei is more about harmony than non-action; it's about taking the appropriate action, not no action at all. 67All the world says that, while my Tao is great, it yet appears to be inferior (to other systems of teaching). Now it is just its greatness that makes it seem to be inferior. If it were like any other (system), for long would its smallness have been known! But I have three precious things which I prize and hold fast. The first is gentleness; the second is economy; and the third is shrinking from taking precedence of others. With that gentleness I can be bold; with that economy I can be liberal; shrinking from taking precedence of others, I can become a vessel of the highest honour. Now-a-days they give up gentleness and are all for being bold; economy, and are all for being liberal; the hindmost place, and seek only to be foremost;--(of all which the end is) death. Gentleness is sure to be victorious even in battle, and firmly to maintain its ground. Heaven will save its possessor, by his (very) gentleness protecting him. In the first instance, the stressing of no desire you're talking about, is the question: can I act (or should I)? If gentleness can be trusted in battle to do the right thing, what could it not be trusted with? Having the desire to be gentle would be ok i think here. In the second instance it's about moderation. Admittedly, this one seems tough to decode if you're thinking WuWei is doing nothing. It's just about measure and not going too far. Discordance is too many beats to a bar, going faster than the set tempo, or just plain playing the wrong note at the wrong time. Being liberal on the other hand is just knowing that these things are true, and that there is a time and place for eagerness and exuberance. Desire here is fine as long as you know the context. Lastly, it's just not trying to be the master of everything and taking control of what's not yours to control. If economy is about time, then coming last is about place. Master your own lot, your own space, your own self. Again, I think there's plenty of room for desire here, it's just about keeping it to the proper locale. It's about keeping it to your own votive and provision. "I will do what's best for me, and no more" I think this is the way Sage's operate. It's the way the God of Futurama works. It's just harmony.

Too many people treat this like a video game.

Good tea. Nice house.

Nothing I haven't already said before, but this is my general take on anyone wishing to partake in these kind of threads: 57 For he who should agree he can speak of belief; yet for he who speaks without agreement might twist the fate of things into what he may not later acknowledge. On the other hand, he who may acknowledge keeps his mouth shut and closes up the portals of his nostrils, making dull the sharp and loosening complications. He shall attemper his brightness also, and by his acknowledgement let any belief he has remain in obscurity. This is the Mystery of an Agree-er’s ability to Accept. Acceptance for such a man will not be treated familiarly or distantly; while yet Agreement for him is beyond all consideration of profit or injury, nobility for such a man depends on his ability to acknowledge. 57 For he who would accept he may speak of acknowledgement; yet for he who speaks without acceptance could twist the fate of things into what he can’t later believe in. On the other hand, he who can believe keeps his mouth shut and closes up the portals of his nostrils, making dull the sharp and loosening complications. He will attemper his brightness also, and by his belief let any acknowledgement he has remain in obscurity. This is the Mystery of an Accepter’s ability to Agree. Agreement for such a man shall not be treated familiarly or distantly; while yet Acceptance for him is beyond all consideration of profit or injury, nobility or meanness for such a man depends on his ability to believe. 57 For he who could believe he shall speak of agreement; yet for he who speaks without belief would twist the fate of things into what he won’t later accept. On the other hand, he who will accept keeps his mouth shut and closes up the portals of his nostrils, making dull the sharp and loosening complications. He can attemper his brightness also, and by his acceptance let any agreement he has remain in obscurity. This is the Mystery of a Believer’s ability to Acknowledge. Acknowledgement for such a man cannot be treated familiarly or distantly; while yet Belief for him is beyond all consideration of profit or injury, nobility or meanness for such a man depends on his ability to accept. 57 For he who might acknowledge he will speak of acceptance; yet for he who speaks without acknowledgement should twist the fate of things into what he shan’t later agree with. On the other hand, he who shall agree keeps his mouth shut and closes up the portals of his nostrils, making dull the sharp and loosening complications. He may attemper his brightness also, and by his agreement let any acceptance he has remain in obscurity. This is the Mystery of an Acknowledger’s ability to believe. Belief for such a man may not be treated familiarly or distantly; while yet Acknowledgement for him is beyond all consideration of profit or injury, nobility or meanness for such a man depends on his ability to agree.

White and blue i found: (for immediate effect). Once, however, i looked at yellow the effect cancelled itself out. I didn't see the 'morphing' of things after i looked at yellow. So the effect lasted a mere 10 seconds. (I have a primary colour thing on my primary and secondary desktop/monitor)

I came across the 8 legged essay on wikipedia some time back and have been wanting to try my hand at it. My topic is Wu Wei. I'm not exactly some expert on Wu Wei, sometimes struggling greatly to understand the context in which it is oftentimes used, but I thought I'd have a go of putting down some of my ideas on it. The essay, like the thread title suggests, is really kind of 'dirty' (and short!). I could have spent more time trying to understand how the essay is supposed to be composed (and lengthening the thing to provide more entertainment and or depth), but I learnt a lot trying to write it. If I find a better description than wikipedia offers, or come across examples of 8 legged essays elsewhere that show the form how it's supposed to be, i'm sure I'll be looking at them with an eye to improve my understanding. With all of it's various problems intact; here it is. ------ WuWei is the maintenance of what is easy with the understanding that once one should have to disagree with a course of action, it could prove difficult afterwards. Maintenance is also the servicing of what one has --and not anything one doesn't have. "(It is the way of the Tao) to act without (thinking of) acting; to conduct affairs without (feeling the) trouble of them; to taste without discerning any flavour; to consider what is small as great, and a few as many; and to recompense injury with kindness." From <http://sacred-texts.com/tao/taote.htm> Agreeing with the course of another's behaviour seems easy to believe in; that another person's business is their own, and on that account to be considered of little trouble, marks the one who makes light of misgiving. Terror, or the great dread that one day one's own business should prove difficult seems of little account also. Honesty is as an honest person does and so earnestness can be forgotten about just as easily as one is distracted by new gossip or interesting tidbits on buzzfeed. To agree that a given course would always be easy is to fail to inspect it on its merits. To agree that a thing has merit, yet no possibility of demerit, is to fail to be in wonder about how it achieves merit. Disagreeing about the merit or demerit oneself may or may not have might be the clue. Disagreeing that one should always find ease in one's own activity is where earnestness and honesty may meet. Accepting that others also may find difficulty or ease depending on their honesty and earnestness is the chief capacity of wonder. Wonder, however, is not on its own merely wanting to believe. Here is a central question: if I were to gift you something of great worth, could you come about another of its kind without any difficulty? If giving is easy, is great worth always difficult? Would the gift I gave you still be worth anything if you could easily take it for yourself from elsewhere? Honesty in light of what one already has is sure to be easy and bring no discomfort; wonder at another's act of giving to you neither should deprive you of anything. If all I had to be was honest, how would I treat a gift of little worth that was still very much given in earnest? WuWei, is about obeying -- while not pandering and without misgiving -- the value of ease and satisfaction. Wu Wei is how things come from being tiny and insignificant, with their roots in the distant past, to how they yet come easily to be in the present. This is the chief wonder of WuWei, and the foundation upon which we come to accept anything that is hard. Having while not valuing is not having at all. Valuing without acceptance is to not believe in value and thus never preserve it. To act outside WuWei is to place oneself into the burdensome position of not being able to accept anything.

Yeah, I could go with that. I'm the last person to know what another truly means when they say something. (I had not read the 'working with destiny' thread until you mentioned it (not that i soberly recall, anyway)).

Thanks, Marblehead.

Yeah I was a little harsh when I didn't need to be. I think the ideas sort of stand up, but perhaps I could have found a better way to put it without being so forward. Sorry if i hurt your feelings.

Well, it wasn't so much that I was saying let it be (to ignore it), but you could be right that the right time may come. What I was more getting at was more along the lines that you've just volunteered with you second post; that there might be a place and nature to it; that it could be more than just a what; it could have a where and when to it. If you want me to shoot from the hip it has something to do with a sentimental attitude. It has something to do with daydreaming (like you said) that's shorted out by an imcompatible instance of boredom and/or mordancy. Your baseline sense of irony and sarcasm fears no situation where it would be disapproved of. What I further suspect is that this daydreaming has no 'what'. There is no object of the fancy and so when a 'who' interrupts there's no scheme in place to react. I could waffle on, but this is the seed of what i'd name this. I might add though that it isn't necessarily your character i'm attacking, just in those far away daydream moments something curious is happening.

Indeed.

See, I didn't think about that at the time, but now I agree. Where's MY mind?

If the people were walking in perfect circles, i don't think the sage would have a problem.

Sping Equinotical point (if you were to ask for my mundane opinion). Can you whistle the Tao Te Ching? hehe. just kidding; i only do with it harmonics on my guitar. Hmm, was that mundane opinion? or mad opinion? That was of course meant to be rhetorical. This post had a lot of personal relevance to me, but if i'm taking your advice i'm just going to continue along. Thanks for some value.

Give me a what. Give me a who. Give me a where. Give me a when. Why would that mean anything? How would it not?

The sage has no invariable mind of his own.

Tool. Nice. (on topic too!)

Is this about greed then? ...rather than pride? Or is it greed first then pride? I would see this situation as more disgusting than lamentable. Foolhardiness - on the other hand of both of these - is about opportunity, not necessarily forbidding competing forces an edge in. 67All the world says that, while my Tao is great, it yet appears to be inferior (to other systems of teaching). Now it is just its greatness that makes it seem to be inferior. If it were like any other (system), for long would its smallness have been known! But I have three precious things which I prize and hold fast. The first is gentleness; the second is economy; and the third is shrinking from taking precedence of others. With that gentleness I can be bold; with that economy I can be liberal; shrinking from taking precedence of others, I can become a vessel of the highest honour. Now-a-days they give up gentleness and are all for being bold; economy, and are all for being liberal; the hindmost place, and seek only to be foremost;--(of all which the end is) death. Gentleness is sure to be victorious even in battle, and firmly to maintain its ground. Heaven will save its possessor, by his (very) gentleness protecting him.

'kill me if you can'.

Lame.

Karma is, yes.

Narf.