Taomeow

Thank you, Rene.

All right, let's speak historically. Buddhism began 2,500 years ago in India and entered China in the first century C.E. via two routes. One went from India through Pakistan, then Afghanistan, then China's Xinjiang, from there into the central China, and from China into Korea and Japan. Another route went from India to Nepal, into Tibet, and again into China's heartland, forming the Tibetan Buddhism tradition. Southern tradition Buddhism went from Sri Lanka to Thailand, Burma, Laos, Vietnam, and the Yunnan region of China. This is the Pali canon. Finally, from the nineteenth century, Buddhism seeped into the Western countries. Taoism, which unlike Buddhism is neither missionary nor messianic and therefore pretty much stayed put where it originated till very recently, was thousands of years old by the time it had its first chance to get influenced by Buddhism. The taoist canon in 5,000 scrolls dedicated to 72 subjects definitely has room for "Buddhist influences," but the subject of this thread -- what principles do all taoists have in common -- precludes the inclusion of "dharma" among these. Many taoist schools were influenced by Buddhism. Not "all." There are, according to (e.g.) Lin Yutang, taoists and taoist schools whose views of Buddhism are anything but accepting. Some of these refer to Buddhism-infused taoist sects as wang ben -- "forgotten their origins." So I submit my remark was not inaccurate. Not "all" taoists embrace Buddhist concepts, and, e.g., a Maoshan traditionalist would ROFL upon hearing the word "dharma." If he does not ROFL, it is not the dharma.

Dharma is a buddhist concept.

Thanks for noticing! Yes, I do think cultivation expands one's perceptions of ganying, and in nonordinary states of consciousness, exponentially so. But even in the ordinary state, once you start noticing, there's more and more to notice. I don't remember if I wrote about it here, so if I'm repeating myself, please forgive me -- I have come to believe that ganying is not mechanical, it is not a "dumb law of nature," it is an intelligent law of nature. Even, perhaps, emotional. Which seems to make some logical sense, since if it's a resonance, a reverberation, a propagation of events in and out of the space-time continuum (a Minkowski space to a special relativity dabbler, and more to a taoist sciences aficionado), a mirror of mirrors -- the "string of pearls in the heaven of Indra," then it can't help resonating, reverberating, mirroring by being what it resonates with, embodying what it mirrors-- so, it would be strange if this phenomenon lacked the abilities and attributes of intelligence, emotionality... even, in my experience, a sense of humor. As for using it -- of course. It's the basis of all empirical applications of the taoist theory rooted in the macrocosm-microcosm interactions, from medicine to taiji to divination to feng shui to talismanic calligraphy to the Peasant Calendar to... frankly, I can't think of an activity a practicing taoist would use that doesn't use it. Of course practice makes perfect, so it's the fruits reaped and savored by the high level cultivators that are particularly juicy... but anyone who's had a taste might appreciate it... I deliberately limited myself in my examples to "coincidences" pointed out by someone else and not personally significant, to avoid (if I can) arguments in favor of "unconscious expectations" and whatever else the "skeptics" like to replace the actual phenomenon with on the street in their mind...

Do you see the difference though between a "culture" and a pile of trash peddled by corporations for mass consumption? All governments are such corporations too, incidentally. You wouldn't mistake maoist ideology and the whole cultural modus operandi created on its basis for "Chinese culture," would you?.. Well, it's the same here. We the people are not them the overlords. Although of course there's people -- everywhere, here and there and everywhere -- who don't know it and identify with whatever they're being brainwashed into identifying with. That's another way to lose face -- to lose YOUR face and substitute the face of a "nation," "race," "religion," "just-like-you-ness" or "not-like-you-ness" and so on... but you're not falling for that, are you?.. That would be a fall a lot harder and a lot less dignified than the one the model took.

Chinese tradition holds that the worst thing that can happen to a person is "loss of face." "Face" in its cultural connotations is a broad concept that includes, but is not limited to, your integrity (a correspondence between what you claim to be and what you prove to be), your idiosyncratic way to connect to other people and the larger world, your essential "worth" as a human being. This is not necessarily put together out of positives -- you can be a monster, but you better not fail to maintain all the attributes of your monstrosity or you'll lose your face as a monster. "Loss of face" includes, but is not limited to, loss of respect, of clout, of being taken seriously, of being taken "for face value." It is a disaster second to none -- "loss of face" is the leading cause of suicide in Asian communities. So the question about what one's face was like before his parents were born is not unrelated. It may have been the face of a peasant or the face of a king. For thousands of years, you were born into a predicament you couldn't change. Your face was shaped by your ancestry, long before your parents were born. But what came before the first peasant ancestors and before the first king ancestors? That, too, shaped your face. But before that? The source, the origin, the what we're patterned on -- that's not faceless. It has "the virtues of tao" -- benevolence, reliability, duration, creativity, simplicity, fertility, and so on. So your original face is like that -- it is the face of virtue, the face of perfection. Whatever happened to change that -- that's "loss of face." Of the original face. The worst disaster of them all...

The fundamentals shared by all taoist schools are tao (as wuji/Xiantian and taiji/Houtian), yin-yang, qi, Hetu, Luoshu, wuxing, bagua, I Ching, ganying. And an infinite assortment of their derivatives. This is eternal because this is not made up by human authors. It's the operational principles of reality. Laozi is a very late addition to taoism. Confucianism and Buddhism, ditto. Shamanism and the universal Goddess religion is the principal source -- one can say original taoism is a natural and smooth extension of the Goddess shamanism into the age of literacy, a refined shamanism of the civilized, of the literati. This transition happened with a mixing-in of Mesopotamian influences (very likely by force), and that's where it gets interesting... Everything that came later -- Confucianism, Buddhism, and arguably "philosophy of taoism" are further dilutions. The original brew, full strength, was not stomached well by hierarchical patriarchies of Mesopotamia and their multiple clones propagating in all directions (not exempting China), so one can say dilutions started then and there. But, mercifully, taoism did not throw the baby (the female baby, mother tao, the original Goddess religion of humankind) out with bathwater even though some serious messing with this water did take place.

Thank you, dear bums. You've been an inspiration. Cat, you think it's like Hotel California -- "you can check out anytime you like, but you can never leave?.." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYEReYb_WtA

Tao fa ziran. Tao patterns itself on itself.

The deer move in groups. Altogether elsewhere, vast herds of reindeer move...* * a quote from a poem by W.H. Auden, The Fall of Rome

I totally have advice! Here's what I witnessed an hour ago: I was shopping for a swimsuit. There were two women around the same rack area, one perhaps in her late 30s, the other one in her early 60s. The 60-year-old was a sight to behold. You could tell right away that she adores herself and no one and nothing can stop her. She was wearing classic jeans -- that's the front -- at the back she turned them into a walking art show with a huge round patch on one pant leg, embroidered and beaded with the Native American Wheel of Life in bright colors, and a top of the same design, leaving her back and shoulders bare -- back and shoulders not pretty, nowhere near young, just her own and unashamed of. Her hair was completely grey and braided on top into an elaborate bun, as professionally executed as something you would see on a Greek statue. The 30-something-year-old was apparently blown away -- she approached the older woman, complimented her lavishly on her "presentation," told her she was "totally hip hop," introduced herself, asked the other woman's name, in other words made every effort to befriend someone who had impressed her right on the spot. I don't know if they wound up going for coffee together or exchanging phone numbers or just parted at that, because a swimsuit that attracted my attention right about then made me end my role as an observer and head for the fitting room. But I thought, well, I thought these two women both had something going for them that probably doesn't leave them friendless: The older one makes sure that what she shows the world when she steps out is creativity, boldness, liking it in her own skin -- these traits are pretty attractive at least to some folks. The other one, un-embarrassed to admit right away that she admires what she admires, instead of keeping it to herself, obviously scanning the world for people to befriend as a habitual way of being in the world, is also likely to hit the jackpot at some point -- maybe not this time, but if she does it every day... if she approaches people with a frank offer of friendship just on the merit of liking them on sight... she definitely has a chance. So, my advice to you would be... well, you've guessed it, right? Don't just wait for someone to be nice to you. Initiate it. Be nice to someone. Be interested. Do you ever see people you like? Just strangers you like -- for whatever reason -- demeanor, posture, smile, even clothes?.. The second you see someone like that -- come up to them and say it! Don't fear rejection -- you don't have to be liked back in order to do it, you do it, for starters, in order to start feeling what it's like to grow up... to call the shots instead of waiting for someone else to call them for you. Practice it. It won't be easy at first. Needs cultivation... but it works. In fact, there's countries in the world where MOST people are like that most of the time -- I know, I've been... Makes life easier there than here, but it's not impossible here if you're the one who decides to make it so. Word!

I remember the first time in my life I saw the sea. I just turned five, we were going on vacation. I had the "idea" of what the sea is explained to me in advance. I knew rivers and lakes, they explained how the sea is different, I expected to see something that is like a lake but way bigger, "so big you can't see the other shore," but what I actually saw did not compute at all. There were no points of correspondence between the idea of the sea I had and what I was actually looking at. Infinity struck me hard. I think it was my first cognitive crisis -- I couldn't conceptualize the absence of limits, boundaries, the "no end to it all," the unbroken immensity that had nothing but itself within itself and no "within" either because "within" means a boundary and there wasn't any such thing, the horizon couldn't fool me, I knew -- felt rather than saw -- that it doesn't end there. I remember getting very upset -- took me a long time to figure out what I was upset about, but I did, it was exactly this, the mismatch between human ideas, concepts, words describing reality and reality itself. They had absolutely nothing in common. Reality was inexplicable, the Black Sea as seen through the eyes of a five-year-old for the first time was mystery of mysteries, and I had no idea what to do with its glaring, shining, flat out presence. To put it in Castaneda's terms, the idea of the sea was on the island of the tonal. The sea itself, however, was the nagual. On the island of the tonal, there's no room for the nagual. In the nagual, the island of the tonal is a little bubble of foam on the surface, and it doesn't matter how many ideas you can stuff into this bubble, the only way it touches the nagual is by floating as a tiny speck on its surface, easily bustable by a chance splash. Later that day, when we settled in, we went to the beach and I went swimming. I loved it, I had fun playing with other kids, explored the pebbles and met a little crab and a sea horse, got the beginning of a suntan going... The sea was becoming seemingly accessible, something I "know what to do with," another "thing" to appropriate and experience and call my own, but deep down I knew it was an illusion, a cop-out. I knew I mustn't look at the horizon so as to maintain this illusion -- if I did, for any stretch of time longer than a brief glance, all my gained territory in domesticating the sea disappeared and I was face to face with mystery as before, as ever. It haunted me in my dreams, formless, tantalizing, dangerous, dangerous to all I knew and could do and was yet to master. As Laozi almost said, When a five-year-old meets the tao, she is stunned. If she wasn't stunned, it wouldn't be the tao.

You should watch wildlife documentaries more often. Just the other day I was watching David Attenborough's Africa -- one episode, dedicated to a very rare and ancient bird (forget what it's called), dealt with a family of these birds who usually raise, with great difficulty due to the adversities of the harsh environment, just one chick, but produce two, the second one being an insurance in case something happens to the bigger, healthier one. When the bigger, healthier one starts pecking at the smaller one, establishing his dominant role, the parents stop giving food and water to the smaller one, aggression in the first-born being seen as a sign of his viability. The smaller one dies. This is abortion in the animal world. The single chick, as many as this particular bird species is equipped to raise healthy and strong, gets the most out of parental care and then out of life, the other one gets nothing. The alternative would be two underfed, thirsty, sickly chicks, perhaps both leading miserable hungry lives and maybe dying too early to have their own shot at reproduction. Eventually the species would be eliminated. It is an ancient one though, 44 million years old. Would that we figured out a way to hang around for this long without making hard choices...

It is unrealistic to view abortion as something "against nature" because nature aborts 9 out of 10 conceived fetuses in the current human species (as well as in unhealthy animal populations -- e.g. a herd of sheep with an accumulation of breeding disorders, or a herd of elephants during a drought) before the woman even knows she was pregnant. (Source: Encyclopedia Britannica). Nature finds 9 out of 10 pregnancies that occur unwanted on the physiological level and terminates them. Who's to say that she doesn't leave a percentage of the remaining ones that make it physiologically to further scrutiny as to their feasibility on the psychological, emotional, social levels, i.e. by leaving room for free will in this matter? Humans are naturally psychological, emotional, social creatures with naturally operational free will, not just abstractly physiological ones. Decisions concerning maintaining or not maintaining a pregnancy are made by nature on all of these levels where our species is concerned, including the level of free will which is part of our nature. We are not pregnancy automatons from nature's POV, unlike some religious doctrines would have you believe. Control of these matters by artificial power structures is what is unnatural. A woman's or a couple's personal control over their social situation vis a vis maintaining or not maintaining a pregnancy is natural. So any society that regulates these matters by the force of law, whether social or religious, is engaged in an unnatural activity. Be it Chinese one-child policy (the unnatural socially induced cause for billions of abortions) or Catholic prohibition (causing healthy women to opt for hysterectomy -- a surgeon once told me of all the made-up diagnoses they concoct in order to sterilize a socially controlled Catholic woman so as to put an end to a conflict between her physiological fertility and psychological infertility), it is an abomination.

I have the Barefoot Doctor's manual -- this was created some fifty years ago in order to train medical practitioners for remote areas of China that had a shortage of doctors and/or no easy way for local folks to get to the hospital. It is a mind-blowing resource of a monumental scale. They pretty much collected everything -- TCM, folk/traditional from all over the country, Western -- to prepare a "barefoot doctor" to deal with anything and everything that elsewhere (e.g. here) would require a hospital with dozens of specialized departments. It is a super pragmatic no-nonsense medical text, with no room for wishful thinking or anecdotal or theoretical fairy tales -- only what works was included. So, this book has a few herbal formulas that are used for prevention of pregnancy, and some of them have to be taken only once (sic) and confer sterility for a year (sic!). There's other contraceptive formulas there too, ones that are to be taken on a regular basis -- accordingly, fertility returns as soon as the woman stops taking them, or shortly thereafter. Interesting about Hinduism asserting that the soul enters the fetus at 3 months. It is exactly the same as in taoism if I remember correctly. Accordingly, no moral qualms whatsoever are involved in terminating a pregnancy before this deadline. It can be terminated after this too, in which case a special ritual to appease and placate the offended soul is prescribed. It is the same in traditional Japanese (both shinto and zen) handling of these things. This is not viewed as "murder" or even "sin" -- rather, it is thought of as a potential source of disharmony which needs to be addressed. If a soul that was going to inhabit a body and already started making a home for itself is prevented from doing so, you owe it, so to speak. Offerings are made, explanations are followed by apologies, in other words you communicate with that soul and do your best to make peace with it.

Draped lightly in blue, Goddess Yemaya sails forth around submarines

"I am the real teacher" in response to the question about one's teacher must be the application of the high level taiji skill of hiding one's root.

Follow your own heart away from cheap abstractions. Where's my bowl of milk?

What was I doing wrong for CT to ignore my link in the chain? (#5150 at 2:20, followed by #5151 at 2:22 )

Those you'd like to love in a circle by the fire. Strong backs. Soft laughter.

Not obesity, but a slender cow is still a cow, not a doe.

Actually, Rāja yoga is a discipline of the mind. Traditionally, because the mind-body is seen as a unity, the practice starts with honing and "taming" the body by the outer, preliminary five limbs of this eightfold yoga, primarily by hatha yoga. The understanding being that a good level of overall physical and psychological health must be attained before pursuing yoga's deeper, inner aspects. So Westerners who start out with asanas are not doing anything wrong or non-traditional. It's just that most don't take it farther than that. I practice some yoga without any other goal than to keep flexible. Minding one's flexibility is a good start for anything you might want to undertake, and what I want to undertake has nothing to do with a deep immersion in yoga. But for someone whose goal is indeed deep immersion, external practices are still the right place to start.

I think you should watch Kumare, a documentary recently discussed here. It starts out with an Indian guy who grew up in a family of authentic Hindu practitioners in the US going to India to look for the real masters...

One of my favorite chapters. I like to play with words to uproot their unexpected layers of meaning -- often resonating across linguistic borders, involving seemingly unrelated languages... a ganying approach reveals that nothing is unrelated though. It has always been widely used by the Chinese, by the way, who, e.g., serve foods for the New Year whose names are word-play homophones for things like "long life," "great fortune," "abundance," or hang the character for "good luck" upside down over the door which turns it into the character for "arrived" -- so you can read it up to down or down to up and get "good luck arrived" out of it. Or they will skip number 4 when numbering houses in the street and go straight from number 2 to number 6, because "4" is a homophone for "death" and no one might want to ganying with that. But if you know a few languages, resonances of this kind get even more interesting. So, I was thrilled when I found an English concept that contains 德virtue/De(Te) and reflects it accurately: inTEgrity. What a great word. "德/Te" right in the middle. "In" points to where to look for it. "Grit" is unyielding courage of mind and spirit. "Grity" is the urban slang for "a horrible place, full of crime and vice." Layers of stuff to in-TE-grate... Don't let it be said that English is powerless to render a complex Laozism!

Wingtips, shined to spec, right words, right thoughts, right actions, black hat, Cadillac!