OldDog

Sure. If you think of your emotions as just another senseory input and you become attuned to reading your own emotional content ... there you have it. You may not entirely understand what triggers your emotions. Clearly they are a response alternative to rationale. There must be some value to them. Why not listen to what they have to say.

I have always considered emotional knowledge as important ar rational knowledge. That the two equally inform our perception, understanding and actions in reality. Unavoidable.

Wow! Supernatural doo-dah aside, you don't think that having dodged a bullet would change your outlook or thinking? I certainly don't have that degree of certainty.

I don't disagree ... but the point I was trying to make is that we are not static beings cast with an immutable perception of the world. We are continually evolving in our ability to perceive and interpret. At any one instance of time, our reaction to what we encounter will be what it is ... but not forever. At that level, I think, we are in agreement. But who is to say that you won't view things differently later ... that after, say a near death experience, that short of believing in an afterlife, your view of the world, how you perceive things won't be changed ... the value and significance of things would be different, in light of the experience.

True enough. We are not always ready to accept a teaching. When I was young I was what you might call a science bigot. I rejected any larning that was not science. My view was pretty narrow. In college I resented having to take any course that was not in line with traditional Biology, Chemistry, Physics and Mathematics curriculum. Just didn't see the point. Took a long time to get over that. There is an old saying ... When the student is ready the teacher will appear.

Yes, that is the most revealing statement. It is at the very heart of the paradox of the Dao. Somehow after having arrived at the paradox, you can be accepting of the ambiguity and lack of certainty. At least that's how I receive it. And just because it is ambiguous and uncertain does not mean one cannot make use of it. At one point we could not understand electricity but we sure made use of it. And then there is gravity ... we are still working on that.

Interesting you should mention this. The gradual enlightenment ... think attainment is a better word .. path is the one where various traditions have layed out a prescribed approach based on the relative success of adherents. They establish schools of thought and practice. Where many get into trouble is that by building such rigid approaches and boundaries they impeded exploration and expansion. They can stagnate. On the other hand ... and you don't hear it often ... if you read enough of the ancient texts, you will find a reference that says essentially that complex methods are not necessary ... that one can have a direct experience/attainment. Where I have encounterd this it is often in a discussion of reducing or putting aside knowledge to open one up to experience. Now that's interesting.

Hmmm. If what you mean by that is spirituality has been dumbed down to the masses ... I don't think I can argue with that. Seems like it is sort of a bait and switch sort of thing. Something takes on the appearance of spirituality ... usually by appropriating some language or ideas ... and then begins to manipulate those attracted in the name of spirituality. Enter mass marketing, political influence, etc. On the other hand, we are kind of the blame for that. We don't do much to prepare people to deal with spiritual issues. Unless one takes the initiative and engages philosophy, spirituality and religion or social psychology ... or some such ... at an academic level. The only recourse is individual interest to read, explore and learn on thier own.

Boy howdy, wandelaar. You said a mouthful. It seems to lead to an absurdity. But, I .. as philosophical dabbler ... just can't bring myself to throw in the towel on this one. Nihilism and fatalism sure leave a bad taste. In a sense, I think this is exactly the kind of thing that set me off on the search lo these many years ago. The reason I have been involved with Daoist thought is that it seems to offer the best chance of breaking out of the vicious cycle you so aptly describe. I may never find all the answers ... or any answers ...but I have to try. So, don't really see it as a waste of time ... back to nihilism and fatalism. In the back of my head is the notion that as individual instances of life, this seeking activity is part of what it is about ... becoming an expression of the diversity within the unity. As for the practical side of just living in the world of things, I think the understanding and practice of Dao offers guidance in how to do just that.

I don't know. Perhaps these things ... perceived as positive practice ... are the natural consequence of a changed sense of self. In that sense, where would a backlash come from? Hard to believe the universe would begrudge a little more selflessness in existence. Just thinking out loud.

A thought crossed my mind as I read your post. You speak almost as if the elevation to the bigger self is a quantum leap ... all or nothing ... sort of thing. Is it not possible that a person, through cultivative practice, move/improve gradually toward the bigger self? I like to think that I am a better more attuned person than I was twenty, thirty or fourty years ago. Albeit far from perfected. Btw ... not sure I will be accepting if the answer is delusion.

One more quality vocalist ...

Great post. Julie was very big at our house growing up. My dad was a big fan. Good jazz vocalists are few these days. Here's one ...

I don't think it is a question of dominance. In trying to understand what is represented by the female and male principles, I go back to the I Ching discussions on Qian and Kun. (Any I Ching will do but I found Alfred Huang's the most illuminating) In discussing these principles in terms of Heaven/Earth or yang/yin I found that it was easier to avoid much of the inherent gender bias in the terms male/female and allows the discussion to get closer to the core principles ... by thinking about the principles as the creative and nurturing principles. I think the important thing here is the parity and interdependence of the two principles. It makes no sense to talk about creation if there is no nurturing/fulfillment, and ... no sense to talk about nurturing if no creation/initiation. In this sense the Dao is that which has the potential to provide for both creation and nurturing in that which it manifests.

Hmmm. Perhaps the operative word is true.

Perhaps. It is something I have wrestled with ... a proper understanding. If ... as I have ... taken the DDJ as a starting point and move forward in time I see that daoist thought and practice seems to become more complex and adorned with ornamentation and ritual. I feel like it ends up at the same level as Christianity, Buddhism ... very prescribed, very dogmatic, very orthadox. I sense this is the case in dao jiao and neidan. Perhaps I am just not ready for neidan. But I do feel that there is a value in practice as described in Neiye. I see Neiye as the precursor to neidan ... foundational ... without a lot of ornamentation. I don't want to be wrapped up in the orthadoxy in such a way that a distraction to the fundamental goal. Do you think this view misses the point? If so, why?

No argument there but it is the door that I came thru. On the other hand I am not all that interested in dao jiao or neidan. I think these are over embellished with a lot of ritual. Not sure that is entirely possible. I think whatever traditions one is raised with are deeply embedded. One probably is not conscious of all the ways those traditions affect one. All you can do is be aware they exist and question your assumptions and understandings as you go along.

Hi everyone, Saw this thread awhile back and thought it was pretty much dead ... extict ... bereft of activity. Noticed it active again ... and having interest in the topics, read through the thread. This would appear to be the third revival. So far, I have heard ... Discussion of self. While I understand there is little use of the term "self" in the received DDJ, I think its fair to say that the self is the target of many of the points in DDJ ... most especially if we are talking about practice. (Lately, my interests have been captured by Daaoist meditative practices and how they take one from thinking about Dao to doing something that informs one's understanding of the world.) Discussion of the feminine. I have to say I have a lot of trouble with this. In a Marbley sort of way I feel like having "feminine" as line of analysis and discussion is sort of unbalance. I feel like we are walking a fine line here. Probably just my own modern western male point of view feeling a bit disenfranchised but I'll get over it as best I can. Buried in the detail of discussion of the feminine context I see a lot thst rings true. But I do have to reject the bold assertion that the Dao is feminine. I have struggled to long to dispell male/female, light/dark, right/wrong images and arrive at an understanding of Dao as undifferentiated potential to want to yeild to the notion of Dao as Feminine. I rather like Dawei's ... I think ... charaterization of Dao as process of potentiation enough to want to stick with that for the time being. So, where does thay leave us. ... or find us ... in this thread. Have we worked these two concepts enough to move on? Is there enough of an ember of interest for this thread to flame up again?

I actually meant the opposite ... translation being more true to the tradition than interpretation. I guess the clarification is in what is meant by translation vs interpretation. Translators are attempting to render the work from the original source Chinese into some other language. That would require knowledge of Chinese and its ancient usage, understanding of the cultural and historical context and the philosophical and religious traditions of the times. I think the likelihood of loss is lesser under this sort academic rigor. Interpretation does not necessarily require the above. Interpretation can be done based on other sources and levels of academic effort. Interpretations are often influenced by poetic license and other belief systems. This is not necessarily a bad thing, as long as it is clear that the rendering is of this type. It can be quite useful depending upon what the reader is looking for.

Read thru it a littleand did not really appeal to me. I think language and manner of expression is a generational thing. Words and idioms move in and out of our speech by ages. Being an old dog, the language does not appeal to me. It will probably be appealing to a younger set. Language and idiom aside, I would be concerned that some of the original meaning is being lost. I have this concern about most modern versions of Laozi. The problem is where we cross the line from being a translation to being an interpretation. Original meaning, intent and practice may be getting lost in the interpretation. Still, it can be personally instructive as an individual exercise for someone to go thru Laozi chapter by chapter and write down what they understand the passages to mean. That would be a perfectly valid way to approach Laozi. Many of us on TDB have done that mentally if not literally. We then often bring our understanding back to the forum to share and discuss. That way our understanding grows. Good effort on your part. Especially in that the effort spanned such a long period of time.

I am no more a Taoist by virtue of reading the Lao Tzu than I am a physicist from reading Einstein's The Meaning of Relativity. - Harold D Roth, Original Tao

That would be death .... either in a literal sense or a figurtive one. One can always learn something new. Even within a so called complete system there are alwys dimensions to be explored. And ... if you have the good forture to have learned from multiple teachers ... you do, as ZP suggests begin to synthesize. This is true whether we are talking about martial arts, philosophy or how to tie your shoes. I have yet to run across a teacher that does not understand this. Like my teacher once told me ... a good form always has room fora little improvement.

I have often considered that if one absorbs the lessons of Dao then one is in a better position to navigate the issues of living. One is less likely to make a hasty impatient ill-advised decission, less likely to act in unnecessary opposition and more likely to be in accord with the times. A good ally, indeed! Nice thought.

Perhaps the metaphor is misunderstood. Empty cup meaning ... without preconceived notion ... without distracting attitude such as egocentric, argumentative, etc. Empty cup does not mean without desire or some background ... or without virtue. When a student approaches teacher in an open manner, is attentive, is sincere and works hard ... this is said to be virtue ... and will result in gongfu. He who neither values his teacher Nor loves the lesson Is one gone far astray, Though he be learned. -Such is the subtle secret.

While it is true that we all must ultimately make decisions according to our own criteria, the seeking of a teacher implies that there is knowledge that we do not posses of which we wish to avail. So, while caution is always advisable, one is better off suspending ones current criteria for the opportunity to acquire new knowledge. Approach the teacher and teaching with an empty cup.