OldDog

I have no doubt that what you say is true ... I just don't see it. Wish I could ... But I don't. I love music but I have never been able to grasp music theory very well. That you speak about it so passionately is inspiring.

Oddly, I had not directly thought of it the way you describe it but subconsciously must have implied it since "systems thinking" was such a big part of my IT career. But i absolutely agree with the notion that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. It happens around us all the time in various activites ... e.g., sports, music.

Perhaps it was too much to hope for that we could have an unpolarized discussion on polarization.

I went to sleep last night with this on my mind. The title is particularly intriguing for me as I have a modest interest in cognitive science. My own sense of cognition is still in development but i have long felt that there is something missing.The notion of a "Chinese model" ... as distinct from a generalized human model ... sounds promising. The generalized human model is a western one that is heavily influenced by science. The thing that gives the Chinese model of cognition some promise for me is potential for similarity to the way TCM looks at the organs of the body ... not as objects in specific locations but as systems whose functions are distributed. This was alluded to in the few pages I read. Fairly excited. I begin a full reading today.

Yes, I downloaded and read pp 52-56. Seems entirely consistent with other sources I have encountered that have informed my understanding. This is a great find and I look forward to reading it in its entirety. This thread is taking me in a direction of study different from what I was intending. But I find the subject compelling and will happily follow. I think I should look into the writings of Roth and Pregadio on these subject. When the student is ready, the teacher appears. Thanks for the link!

I agree polarization is a great threat ... probably one of the greatest threats we have to face. The problem is not that we have differing views but that we fail to realize that any view has a little bit of truth ... a basis that has some value that is worth considering ... regardless of the subject. To move forward ... make progress on any subject ... we have to be willing to leave our position and see the truth in other positions. Only then can a balance be found that permits us find a way forward that all can find value in. But this skill is not taught anywhere. Social media often exacerbates the polarized positions because people do not really interact very effectively on social media sites. Its like the wild west where anything goes. People are able say anything without consequence ... and often do. There are no rules for engagement and civility. So it's a pretty ugly environment.

Pretty good advice. Skepticism is healthy. Always testing your beliefs in the real world. Trust but verify.

You present a very valid modern world analogy. I came from and industry where ITIL was seen as the way to successful IT management. So, I am able to quickly grasp what you are trying to say wrt ISO 14000. The elegance of your analogy was clear to me. However, I would point out that with ITIL it is not a template for compliance but more like a play book, where you select practice standards that fit your business model to enhance your organization's performance. Enough about that. In this discussion is universal consciousness not like the Dao? It's like talking about Daoism without the doctrinal language. Again a very insightful notion. Thanks for the post!

The two are intricately tied together in my view. I think what the Neiye is suggesting is that by calming and emptying (cleansing, sweeping clean?) the heart-mind one can set conditions for the Dao to be experienced. The presence of Dao is innate in all things. But is only apparent when the agitation in the heart-mind, caused by desires and general busy-ness of the mind contending, is stilled and emptied. I find the image of still water becoming clear to be especially compelling. This takes some practice but from the Neiye point of view is not outside the ability of most people to accomplish, at least to some degree. This sort of activity is not the same thing as some of the esoteric energy and alchemy practices that evolved in later times. Not to deny the validity of those practices, since i have little experience with them, but they have always seemed to me to be a little too contrived. Out of the Neiye kind of experience of the Dao, true wu wei is born. From the experience of the Dao, one is able to see more clearly how the world works, how Dao is present and expressed in all existence. From this realization one can act intuitively and spontaneously in a manner that is in accord with the times and conditions. Metaphorically, this is action without action ... effort-less-ness ... accomplishment without doing. This is what I think is the real wu wei. So, in this sense, the practices suggested by the Neiye are foundational to developing wu wei. That's it in a nutshell.

That struck me as a remarkable statement. I don't see anything antithetical to the concept of wu wei in the Neiye, quite the opposite. Granted I have not read other translations of Neiye ... maybe, I should. The quote from Kirkland did not resonate with my understanding, as its devloped thus far. Perhaps the issue is with how one understands wu wei. It would seem that if one takes wu wei as no action literally, as some would have it, then any effort towards cultivation, be it Neiye or later Neidan approaches, might seem antithetical. So, I'm inclined to disagree with Kirkland ... But will not dismiss him out of hand. I should probably look into his work.

I am not sure why there is concern over the idea of cleansing the heart. It was stated that cleansing the heart is not in the Nei Ye. I went back and checked on the Nei Ye that I have access to (Reid's Thread of Dao) and, indeed in his translation cleansing of the heart is not mentioned. But Reid's analysis includes two other Guanzi texts ... Bai Xin and Xin Shu ... and a detailed comparison to the DDJ with a strong reliance on Heshang Gong's commentary. The Xin Shu text makes strong reference to cleansing and sweeping away, per Reid, as preparatory practices for the heart-mind. All three texts ... Bai Xin, Xin Shu and Nei Ye ... have strong parallel and overlap. So, may not be unreasonable for cleansing to be considered part of the overall tradition that they represent individually. But again, Reid's analysis is heavily influenced by Heshang Gong which did not occur until some time later than the Guanzi texts. Perhaps later more evolved interpretation of the practice has crept into these early described practice. I don't think so ... but there it is. The real question is what is meant by cleansing. Is it any thing more than just a metaphorical reference to calming and making still the heart-mind or, as it is said, emptying the heart-mind? Is there some other esoteric practice to be considered?

Another thought crossed my mind this morning ... In looking at beliefs, I think we over-emphasize our rational content and under-estimate our emotional content. We like to think that we can arrive at a rational position based on logic ... and "believe" in it. But much of what we experience in life ... and how we react to various situations ... is recorded in and driven by our emotional content, if you will. So, that we often behave in ways contrary to what our rational self might suggest. There is probably a better explanation of this that has been elucidated in the various psychological disciplines. I think this is why a real understanding of Daoism ... or any other ism or practice ... requires a physical component. So that experience informs rational understanding producing stronger combined position for belief. Just a thought.

Perhaps not in cosmology models per se. But I did a quick search through several texts I have in electronic form, including Laozi, Zhuangzi, Liezi and the Wilhelm/Baynes I Ching. I found many examples of the use of three as adjective and as a proper noun. It has just always struck me that such use of three seems disproportionally frequent. Maybe there is nothing to it.

We often think of truth as independent and unassailable ... but I'm not so sure. Truth is always relative. People see the world through the lens of their own experience and since experience is varied there are as many lenses as there are people. Even the highly skilled and educated are not immune to this. Another thing is to remember that what we often call truth is conditionrd by the times and conditions. So that what is called for at one point in time or under some circumstances may not be called for when ... not if ... things change. Now if that isn't grist for the Daoist leaning mind, I don't know what is.

Sunday morning jazz ....

All things in moderation. And btw ... let's not forget the role sugar plays.

A word about Dao and One. I think you have to keep in mind the Daoist cosmological model. In that model, the Dao is the originating unknowable from which issues the One, that state where Yin and Yang exist but are undifferentiated. At this point, it is still pre-celestial. The post-celestial ... and generative ... state comes about when Yin and Yang move and distinguish themselves and their interaction produces Three ... or the 10,000 things. So, Dao and One are not exactly the same thing but the One is close to the Dao and is endowed (have to resist a pun here ) with some of the nature of the Dao. The nature of Dao thus carries forth to all existence. Now, exactly how people attain to this state of One ... or Oneness ... becomes a matter of methods which have evolved over time. What is clear ... at least to me ... is that in the Nieye the foundations are laid for the various (myriad?) ways of development. For this mortal ... simple meditative practices may be all I can hope to attain. But perhaps this is suffcient for understanding.

When it comes to trying to define terms commonly encountered in alchemical texts, I often refer to Pregadio. In his translation of Awakening the Tao, he involves a discussion of the cosmological model in his explanation of the origins. In his explication he talks about the distinction between pre-celestial and post-celestial. There he says: In this view, the cosmos as we know it is the self-manifestation of the Dao, which first determines itself as Oneness. Primal Oneness contains Yin and Yang in their pristine state; the joining of Yin and Yang generates the world. To appreciate the details of this view, it is convenient to follow the example of the alchemical texts and describe it through the emblems of the Book of Changes. Qian (pristine Yang) and Kun (pristine Yin) are constantly joined to one another in the state of Unity. Being joined Qian unceasingly bestows its essence to Kun, and Kun bri ngs it to achievement; thus the world with its countless events and phenomena is generated. However, due to the very fact of being continuously joined to one another, Qian becomes Li (Yang} , and Kun becomes Kan (Yin). Therefore the essence of the Yang principle in its pure state is now found within Kan. That principle, which is the One Breath of the Dao (the state of Unity represented by the undivided line), is what an alchemist seeks to recover. But this is an understanding from a much later Daoist text. The question was asked what was the meaning in the Neiye. To look for the answer, I referred to Dan G Reid's Thread of Dao, a discussion of what he calls proto-Daoist texts, including the Nieye. However, I could not quickly find a concise definition. But from what I have read and understood, the nature of Oneness is a recurring theme whose meaning is not far from what Pregadio describes, but without the use of the Yijing cosmological model. Perhaps this from Ried will help. The Guigu Zi is useful for the study of the Guan Zi’s “art of the heart-mind,” as it expands on these teachings and offers some confirmation as to the meaning of “oneness” in the Guan Zi, and elsewhere, where it refers to uniting facets of consciousness and energy. Later, in a comparison of the Guanzi texts to DDJ Ch10 , He Shangong's commetary is cited. Referring to Oneness, it is said: “In a unified consciousness, there is no division.” This sounds a lot like the undivided pre-celestial combination of Yin-Yang. A fuller reading of the Thread of Dao will no doubt shed more light. Hope this is helpful.

Kinda glad we came back to this discussion of one to two to three. In The Way of the Golden Elixir, Pregadio gives a pretty decent explanation. According to one of the ways in which this passage has been understood, the Dao first generates Unity, which comprises the two complementary principles of Yin and Yang. After Yin and Yang differentiate from one another, they again conjoin and generate the “three,” which is the product of their conjunction. The “ten thousand things” are the totality of entities produced by the continuous reiteration of this process. This seems entirely consistent with early Daoist cosmology. As I understand this, the Three is not a specific thing ... it's a metaphorical launch point for the 10,000 things. As an aside ... but not entirely unrelated . .. ever notice how often "three" occurs in the ancient texts? The three Emperor's ... the three August Ones ... three days, three months, three years, etc. It's like "three" is an expression representing multiple occurrences, not literally three. It's almost Confucian in its sufficiency and correctness. Just saying.

This is one of the things that causes me to lean in the direction of Daoism. Many/most Christians have, at on time or another, wrestled with questions of good and evil. If I am to think of God was being good and positive, how do I account for the presence of misfortune and suffering in the world. This leads one down the long road of Chistian theology and doctrine ... which for me never quite disposed of the original question. So, the impartiality of the Dao and it's workings (Heaven and Earth?) has appeal. As we have talked about this, it has occurred to me that the notion of anthropomorphizing is probably playing a part here. It is an innate tendency in humans to confer human qualities upon complex concepts. It's just how we are wired. We want to put things into contexts of human experience and understanding, which has a large social aspect. It just makes it easier to deal with them. For example, it's much easier to deal with the notion of a hurricane if we call it by name. It is somehow more responsible and accountable for its distruction ... gives us something to vent our emotions toward. I think this human tendency shows up when we talk about Heaven conferring favor or disfavor as if there were judgement and intent.

I have to admit that at this point the notion of Heaven gives me pause. I am not sure that one can look to the DDJ for an ... adequate, appropriate, well balanced? ... understanding. That is, relying solely on the DDJ does not seem to provide an understanding that accomodates most discussions. The point about Heaven not being the same as Dao is certainly a fair point ... But, on the other hand, it does not seem apart from Dao either ... that it shares some qualities. In some texts Heaven is said to operate in the same self-so impartial manner as the Dao. In the various texts, the term Heaven seems to be used in a number of different ways and frequently without reference to Earth, as if Heaven has some sort of natural preeminence ... another thing that I find troubling. I take a lot of my understanding of Heaven from the Yijing and from Leizi. In Leizi, it is almost the exception to find Heaven mentioned apart from Earth. So, in my understanding, I tend to see Heaven and Earth as being inextricably tied together but with distinct influences on the world, each with its own constancy and impartiality. There being, a dynamic tension between the two that accounts for time and change in the manifest world. Hence, expanding and contracting, growth and decay and reversion in unending cycle. Just elaborating on what I have been given to understand from the texts.

Have to admit that I have had some confusion over searches as well. Recently I inquired about how to quickly locate discussion threads and I specifically had in mind getting quickly to What are you listening to. Was really hoping for ability to save a personal link to a thread. Anyway, there seem to be a lot of peculiarities in how the site functions. Maybe its just me. I'm not unhappy with the site ... just a little perplexed. Perhaps what is needed is a tutorial on how the forum is organized and functions. If one exists, I am in aware of it.

Please do. These are the kinds of discussion that I find most helpful on the forum. How else are we to fine tune our understanding. Btw ... did I understand correctly that FH was leaving? I hope not. FH has a way with words that I have found very helpful, often pointing out ways of understanding the ancient texts that are being overlooked.

Much of what has been said by flowing hands and by rene resonates with me but perhaps for different reasons. When i hear remaining empty of desires and emotions, it calls to mind passages from Neiye that speak of emptying the heart-mind in order to reach experience of the Dao within us. I have understood that such experiences allow insight to the way of Dao as it works in the manifest world. It is through such insights that one can be in accord with the Dao in one's actions. As for material possessions, it is easy enough to see how material possessions ... or concerns about them ... Would be significant distractions from the work of emptying the heart-mind. I don't know what the practical implications are for remaining more or less permanently empty of desires and emotions. It would seem reasonable that at least maintaining frequent contact with the Dao within on a regular basis might be considered a cultivating practice. So, I don't see it as an either/or proposition, nor necessarily as at the same time as in the sense of simultaneous. I do think that the practical implication of us as manifestations in the world is that without understanding of Dao we struggle with being often times out of accord with the natural unfolding of events. It would seem that the practical application would be for us to move between the two positions allowing the experience gained through the practice of emptying the heart-mind to inform our actions in the world of the manifest; that is, be in accord with time and change. The part about the way of Heaven singling out people I find troubling because it suggests Heaven having a preference based on special qualities we might not have any control over. Sounds particularly un-Daoist to me. Maybe its just my western religious sensibilities getting in the way. What makes more sense to me is constancy in the way of Heaven and people by their efforts in cultivating gaining Heaven's favor only by aligning with the Way. Certainly, there will be those more adept than others but I can only speak from the point of view of the common person. Just thought I would put this impression out there.