OldDog

Absolutely. As I was commenting above I realized how close I was getting to the Confucian notion of virtue. I have not studied Confucius much ... probably something I should do ... but I don't feel ready for it. I feel like I should have a better sense for virtue in a Daoist sense before taking on Confucius. Daoism and Confucianism are often seen as at odds with each other. I don't think that is true. I tend to see Daoism as applicable to individual personal development ... where Confucianism deals with applied conduct in social structure. I tend to think ... would hope ... that they both issue from the same source. Sure would be elegant if that were the case.

The notion that energy can not be created or distroyed is a very powerful one. When I first heard that phrase ... probably is an elementary Physics class somewhere ... it stopped me in my tracks. The absoluteness and seeming irrefutability of that statement leaves no place to go. I committed it to memory as a guiding eternal truth. Consideration of Virtue as a seed of energy that can be misplaced, forgotten or ignored by us as individual instances of being is a very powerful image for failure to cultivate. Perhaps this is what is involved in destiny and fate.

That statement made me stop and think. I am not sure you meant it as harshly as it sounded ... or probably more like as I heard it. I think Dao does not not care for us. If we are to accept the notions put forward by the ancients, all things issue forth from the Dao and are nurtured impartially. We (us) come forth into a world that has what we need to thrive ... but also has dangers and risks to individual survival. Dao as a (living?) eternal process seems to be well within the notions set forth by the ancients. In this sense there is no anthropomorphic entity to "care". Such a view would seem highly pragmatic as a way to reckon with Dao. From this point of view, where does Virtue come into play? @Wu Ming Jen (above) has something to say about Virtue that rings true. We started out this thread with some focus on Something planted so deep it's never rooted up. Perhaps Virtue is the seed planted within us when we come forth into the world that gives us the potential to reckon with the impartial world. Whether as individuals we are successful or not may be an issue of cultivation, as suggested by WMJ.

Part of what mkes Laozi poetic. Words like those have a visceral, deep seated meaning ... they say more than whole sentences or paragraphs. Yes I think so. All things have Dao as thier origin. Not too far a leap to say there is a bit of Dao within everything ... the deep root. Neidan seeks to return to Dao. Perhaps the root deep within is the way to know the Dao.

Speaking of Augie Meyers ... and in keeping with Tex-Mex sound.

Marbleheads objection caused me to re-read ... several times ... Hinton's opening line. I have to admit I did not ponder it much. I was preconditioned by my reading of Ch53. I simply accepted the metaphor in lite of the question, "What makes me know ...". I still like the pairing ... of opening lines ... but it does seem like an odd way to refer to Dao. The "rooted up" seems to be the part difficult to reconcile ... as if anyone would have cause to want to root it up. Even a non-daoist or anti-daoist would not entertain the notion of rooting it up. To do so would mean acknowledging its very rootedness to begin with. Deep rootedness of Dao could speak to its persistence within regardless of whther acknowledged or not. But perhaps better meaning might be that to know the root you must go deep ... possibly suggested in line nine ... So look through self into self Refernces to the root are fairly common in Zhuangzi ... here's one that seems appropriate ... The things of the creation are nourished by it, without knowing it. This is the root, from which one may survey the universe. Hinton draws this passage to a close ... How can I know all beneath heaven as it is? Through this. ... but you gotta go deep to find it.

Yes! No doubt it is. But what struck me was how applicable those words are to the current political climate ... world in general, America in particular. Sometimes my attempts at humor only amuse me.

Just as I was struck by the cold reality of Lok Sang Ho's question at the beginning of Ch 53 What makes me know what I know, And adhere to the Dao I am equally struck by the answers in David Hinton's rendering of Ch 54. Something planted so deep it's never rooted up, Something held so tight it's never stolen away: And just as Lok Sang Ho so eloquently describes the corruption in society ... When the court is busy with granting honors to its dignitaries. And not caring for the fields ... overgrown by weeds, While the granaries are empty; While the officers of the nation dress themselves ... And carry sharp swords with air of superiority and power; While excessive dining and drinking Go hand in hand with excessive consumption and waste, You know this is arrogance at the Dao. David Hinton points to the virtue of keeping to that which is fundamental ... so deeply rooted. Cultivated in yourself it makes integrity real. Cultivated in your family it makes integrity plentiful. Cultivated in your village it makes integrity enduring. Cultivated in your nation it makes integrity abundant. It's almost ... political!

Lok Sang Ho's rendering hit me like a splash of cold water. How many times have I asked myself the question ... How do I know what I know? There is no rationale to it. Its simply experiential. I can sit and think ... compare and contrast ... distinguish and discriminate ... and yet struggle to explain. After all ruminations, I find myself back at the same place. There is something there ... what is it. It is what keeps me moving on.

I have been working through these sequentially. 51 speaks of the Mystic(al), the Profound ... the coming into being and the virtue of nurturing. 52 speaks of the mind understanding vs knowing ... and how to remain close to Dao. 53 speaks of what happens when the understanding mind has free rein and consumes all attention ... people are distracted from reality by a contentious mind and are thus corrupted.

Flowing Hands rendering is the most poetic ... perhaps the most meaningful. It eloquently points to Dao as being beyond understanding but not unknowable. Understanding is a process of a mind that is conditioned by contending with the myriad of things ... acting in respose to them. Dao cannot be approached through such contention and action. This would seem to be where ideas from Neidan come into play. To know ... not understand but to experience Dao ... one takes up a practice of abiding in silence ... closing the apertures that feed the minds struggle to understand ... reconciling body, mind and spirit. Having that expeience and staying close to it allows one to experience the unity of being. From that point of view, what is there to be concerned about.

Mystic(al) vs Profound. Mystic(al) suggests impenetrable, while Profound suggests great depth but not unattainable. Optimistically, I would prefer Profound. This. The last line gramatically refers to some antecedent, presumably ... again grammar ... contained within the body of the verse/stanza/paragraph. What is contained there? Seems to be talking about birth, development and fulfillment. It would seem profound that something is issued forth from Dao into an environment that provides for its development and fulfillment. That nurturing being the profound virtue. All of this being spontaneous and selfso. The relationship ... interaction ... of Dao and Virtue being mystical. That's about as far as my understanding carries me.

Amen!

Thanks, Wandelaar. You seem to have a real knack for ferreting out these pdfs. I am looking forward to this ine. I started out this year with intent to accomplish some things I have long had interest in. Zhuangzi was not one of them. But thanks to this site, in particular Marblehead's posts, I diverted to a more in depth reading of Zhuangzi. It's been quite enjoyable. Thanks again.

I too have looked for such a reference. Too no avail. I think what I am going to do is obtain Burton Watson's Complete Works of Zhuangzi as an ebook, probably from Amazon. Then I can use the reader search function to quickly locate key words, phases, names. Not a scholarly concordance but would suffice. Only thing is I balked when Marblehead started posting from Mair's translation, which I have come to like.

... and something with a little more international fkavor.

I was doing the tejano thing a couple of weeks ago but I'll go there with you. Really kike the Texas Tornados.

So, it seems here that the answer to OPs original inquiry has to do with transcendence through forms. Its not that the form is special and must be adhered to ... more at, use the form to develop and expand your ability ... approaching transcendence of form. I've heard many a martial arts master talk of transcending the forms ... the form of no form. The Liuhebafa example possibly being a case in point. How would qigong be any different? Energy (qi) wants to move. But energy/qi can stagnate. Physical forms assist in energy/qi movement ... help develop awareness. Overcoming physical limitations opens up for intent and spirit to be involved. Transcendence would seem reachable.

It seems to be characterized by a lack of civility, accountability and return to tribal instincts. Agree with that ... relearn fundamental principles of free society. I think we coulf also learn a lot from social psychology ... why we behave the way we do.

Here again is the prickly notion of proof. As you might surmise, I am fairly skeptical ... to the point of being cynical ... of "scientific" proof. Now understand, my formal education was very scientific ... chemistry, physics, mathematics ... but that was many years ago ... and for practical reasons left that behind. So, I am not unfamiliar with the rigors of the scientific methods. My issues with science are several. For one, in the west we have placed science (western notion of science) on a pedestal. It is sacrosanct in the western mind. We tend to think that anything that does not follow the scientic method is not worthy of respect or further investigation. The problem is that there are subjects and questions that western style science may not be able to address ... or at least not be able to adapt to. This is the basis of my skepticism/cynicism regarding science. A similar problem exists with western ideas of religion. Not only will ideas of religion that do not conform to western notions be deemed unworthy of respect ... they can be grounds for accusations of blasphemy and heresy. The Inquisition comes to mind. This brings me to my second main issue with science ... and it relates more directly to "proof" ... but is none the less cynical. Science tends to study only what it finds worthy of the effort ... and worthiness all to often equates to value. Value ... potential for gain ... is often the motivating factor for applying science. This can happen in two ways. One is to demonstrate the usefulness of an idea, product or process. The other is to use science to discredit a competing idea, product or process. Now, I will grant you that to varying degrees, these represent a misuse of science. But to the extent that we (in the west) hold scientific methods sacrosanct, we are unwilling to accept alternative methods of inquiry as valid. So what does proof actually mean? If judged from the perspective of western science ... or at least the common application of science ... if scientific methods are used ... or misused ... then that would constitute proof. However, lack of proof regarding a subject does not negate the subject. Now there is an argument to be made for pure science. But that might only exist in an ideal world ... a world free from being value driven. That's not the world we live in. I sense this is getting dangerously close to another rant. But at least at this point I have offered a rational for a skeptical view of science. Hope this helps further our understanding of viewpoints. Kind regards.

Fair enough. I have just taken to not purchasing a book unless it really has some strong appeal.

... except to apologize to you and the other Bums for the rant response. I do that every once in a while and always end up wishing I hadn't. You were asking a fair question about the nature of proof and rather than give you a considered response, I cut loose. The handle OldDog is not as much an indication of my age as it is my disposition. The image associated with the handle OldDog is actually a picture of my old dog. Easy enough to get along with most of the time but if something didn't rub him just right he was up on all fours telling you about it. I do value our exchanges and you insights have been helpful. Kind regards.

You know, being old school, I have thought of doing that a few times. It's hard to break the habit of wanting to own it so you can hold it in your hands as you read and annotate freely. But then at some point you end up with a lotta books that you don't have a lot of room for. Then the dilemma of what to do with them. Lately, I have come to value pdfs and ebooks. With the right reader you can annotate to you hearts content, highlight, underline, post sticky notes. Really handy when you are on a site like this and want to make a point ... copy/paste. What is ownership anyway? Once you have really absorbed the material ... don't you own it? I had a professor once tell me that its not how much you know but knowing where to find it when you need it.

I took your recommendation and downloaded this pdf ... and read it. It contains everything and more that was in his translation of the Cantong qi. This pdf is valuable in that, in its brevity, he distills the Cantong qi and other sources down to their essence and relates the multiple sources into a consistent narrative of waidan and neidan practices. If on approaches from the perspective of philosophical Daoism, as was my case, then the reading has some really great insights. So, I would recommend this pdf to you as a way to gain the insights/understandings and economize on the time to read the Cantong qi translations and other works. It's almost the Cliff's Notes version. Thanks for recommending. I will hang on to this and no doubt refer to it often.

When the distinctions of true and false appeared, then Tao lost its wholeness. And when Tao lost its wholeness, individual bias began. - Chuangtse