Aaron

Hello Kate, My point really, is that there being here and now is real, just there is more to it. You drop away your perception of reality and you can understand that there's more to it then that, but that doesn't mean that reality isn't real, nor that it is. In fact it's both. That's why the Zen laymen train so that they can be a part of society again. You chop wood and carry water before you understand and after you do the same thing, only you are aware of what you are doing. The first step to awareness is understanding the underlying nature of the experience and what lies beyond experience. Before you can do that you have to understand experience. Which is not to say that you don't understand now, just that many people are not aware that they understand. Aaron

Who were you before you entered your mother's womb? I hate questions like that. I think it's much easier to ask, if you have never known someone or heard their name, how can you know they exist? If they have not known you, then how can they know you exist? It is not a requirement that someone knows who you are for you to be here, but rather that you are here, but then if you are not really here, where are you? Aaron

The problem bluefront, is that it exists and doesn't exist. Yes it is an illusion, but it is also real. So it is pointing at something false, but it is also point at something true. It is only when you can see how it is both false and true, that you can truly identify it for what it is and isn't. Aaron

Hello Stig, I am whatever you want me to be. I still stand by my last statement. Aaron edit- My personal recommendation, let it go. It's not that important. Perhaps, the only thing I've effected really is your pride.

Every now and again the question comes up, what is Tao? Recently I've been a bit perplexed with this question, because with my current experiential understanding of existence, Tao, as I was led to believe it to be, didn't make complete sense, but the other day I had an epiphany of sorts that I thought helped to explain exactly what it was and why it cannot be completely understood. The general idea amongst most philosophical Taoists is that Tao cannot be explained or understood, that he who knows does not speak and he who speaks does not know, and that may be true in the sense that he who knows understands that explaining it in logical terms will never give it justice, because in a sense only the experiential understanding of Tao will allow one to understand what it actually is. The important thing to remember is that one can know Tao, even if one cannot adequately explain it. I will try to explain Tao in a way that can be supported scientifically as well as spiritually, because in fact the understanding of Tao requires both in order to truly support it's existence as an actual "thing". In order to truly understand what Tao is one must also understand how one has been taught to think and believe in existence. In the West especially, we have been taught to believe that our existence is dualistic in nature, that we exist, not only as physical beings, but also as consciousness or spiritual beings, and that these two types of existence are separate from one another. The main crux of this belief stems from the idea that consciousness cannot directly effect the material world, an example being one cannot simply wish an apple to exist. This idea is grounded on the idea that consciousness, while it exists, does not consist of any type of physical matter, but rather exists as a type of energy or reaction to a biological function. In order to understand Tao one must first understand that along these lines of thinking Tao cannot be explained. The first thing we must do is understand consciousness for what it really is an actual material physical state that exists in reality as much as our bodies exist. Our thoughts are every bit as real as we are. When we understand this we can start to understand Tao as it actually exists and as it is understood by many mystics and enlightened souls around the world. Sufi's say, "God is everything." Christian Mystics believe the same thing, as do Hindus and various other religions. Quantum Physicists are beginning to understand this as well, at least in the sense that there is a consciousness that exists that connects all things together. You can call it the collective unconscious if you want, but it is also quite certainly Tao. What we experience as individuals is localized or ego consciousness. We have a limited ability to experience the world based on our own individual understanding of how the world works or to be more specific, how we are taught to believe the world works. Now the important thing to remember is that our perception of the world does not effect the actual being of the world, the world exists in the state it exists regardless of how we believe it exists. Our consciousness allows us to interact with the world, but it no way allows us to change the world. This actuality, as I stated before is also the biggest hindrance to our understanding of Tao and the world. Tao, you see, is not simply a collection of every conscious thing in the universe, but in fact it is the consciousness that creates everything. As localized conscious beings we can tap into this consciousness, but rarely for any extended period of time, if for no other reason than if we do tap into for any extended period of time we tend to forget the reason why we tapped into it in the first place. The Tao or collective conscious doesn't work the same way that our localized conscious does, because it serves a different purpose, it's purpose being, most simply put, the running of the universe. To ask if it's intelligent is not really important, because when we ask this question we are basing our understanding of intelligence on what we consider intelligence to be. This is the reason why so many people tend to fall into the idea that this ultimate being is like us, the noble old man with long white hair sitting on a golden throne in the sky. It's not like that. Tao is essentially the way things work, just as we are the way our body works. If we are not conscious, our bodies may still breathe and live in the physical sense, but they cannot survive long without something else to support them. In the same way the universe cannot survive long without Tao being there to work it. Now one may ask, where is the proof that there is an underlying consciousness? Well the proof can be found in various experiments, the most notable one consisted of pairs of individuals who are asked to meditate together for twenty minutes, with the focus of that meditation being that they will be able to communicate together without using words or signs of any kinds. After the twenty minutes are up the people are set aside in separate rooms. One of the two is exposed to various images and stimuli. The scientists conducting the experiments monitored the brain waves of both people and it was found that in almost every case the person in the other room who was not exposed to the stimuli, had brainwave patterns that matched the person exposed to the stimuli. The only explanation for why this could happen is that there is some underlying force that connects both of those people together, a collective unconscious that allows both consciousnesses to communicate and share information without the need for verbal or physical cues. For me this is also an explanation of Tao. Tao in a greater sense is not a separate consciousness, but rather a collective conscious that encompasses everything in existence. In reality we are all Tao and in being Tao we are all everything that exists. Now the problem is that explaining this can never do it justice. It is only that spark of knowledge that comes with not only understanding it, but also experiencing it that allows a true understanding of Tao. Cultivating Tao for instance is not simply strengthening chi, but tapping into the greater consciousness and working in harmony with it, wu wei. When one is able to work in accordance with Tao they find that they working in harmony with the world around them. They no long find themselves struggling to figure our what to do each day, but rather they intuitively understand how to act in each situation because they are tapped into this consciousness. Certain Buddhists by the way will call this Zen. This is the crux of understanding Tao, that Tao within the confines of Taoism may not be enough, that what it takes to truly understand this greater consciousness, this collective consciousness, or God consciousness, requires more, an understanding of the world that transcends dogma and cumulative knowledge and instead relies on an innate experience of consciousness. Anyways, this was a long explanation and by no means the only explanation. If anyone has more to add or chooses to disagree, feel free, but I would ask that you conduct your responses with respect. If you disagree, I would much rather hear the reason why, rather than your feelings about this explanation. Aaron

I like what you said, but these days I stop at the "to name it is presumption." Aaron

Just a heads up. In order to make it easier to find chapter threads, I'm asking that people post their translations under the TTC Chapter headings. I would also ask that conversations regarding chapters be restricted to those headings as well, unless it is sufficiently esoteric or off the wall to warrant it's own topic. The reason is to keep things organized and easy to find, so that if someone does have questions about a chapter, they can refer to that chapter in order to ask their question, without having to start a new thread or look through several threads on the same topic. Before anyone gets too upset, remember that we have already done this, it just wasn't in the official FAQ. If you disagree, then this is the place to talk about it. This is a community, so please tell me what you're thinking, I'm not a mind reader. Aaron

You could also say that even if one has come to a conclusion, that doesn't mean that the question isn't still alive, after all they are tied together. I think the problem many people have is that they believe that they forget that there can be more than one answer to a question, and that answering a question, doesn't necessarily mean that the question has been answered. Aaron

Hello Mith, Thanks for the response. I'm sorry to hear about all the troubles you've had. Family can be a big downer when it comes to discovering "truth". I'm glad you've come to an understanding of what you believe. I guess I'm an atheist too, in the sense that I don't believe in an intelligent higher being, i.e. God in the Christian sense, but I do have faith that there is more out there than I can understand. Vedanta, without the trappings of mythology and religion really seems to be more in line with my own experience. But this thread is about you, so I want to say, thank you again. You wrote exceptionally well and I enjoyed reading about your experience. Good luck with school. Also, I worked for AT&T's customer support division in the receivables management department, too long there will kill your soul. No one can survive in that kind of stress and perpetual abuse. I would not recommend you stay there long if you can help it. Aaron

Hello Stig, I think you missed my argument though, I haven't changed my stance, I still believe that the Tao that Lao Tzu is talking about is a different Tao, rather I am agreeing with you that there is one undefinable Tao, the Eternal Tao so to speak. I did start a thread in the Tao Te Ching section to discuss this further, since this discussion seems to be following me to other threads. So we can respect those threads, I recommend we continue the discussion there. Aaron

And this is my point as well, the Tao being talked about isn't the Eternal Tao, but is the Tao. In other words anything that Lao Tzu says about the Tao in the Tao Te Ching is not about the Eternal Tao, but rather the Tao that can be talked about. Aaron Edit- I'm going to actually start a topic about this in the Tao Te Ching section, to give people a chance to discuss this as it actually relates to the Tao Te Ching.

This topic was moved to the Taoist Discussion forum because it seemed more appropriate for the Taoist Discussion section. The discussion seems to be more about personal interpretation, rather than how it relates to the Tao Teh Ching and other Easter texts. This isn't a knock against the thread or topic, rather an observation. Aaron

Well I'm glad you're willing to admit you couldn't let it go. Aaron edit- To clarify, I do think that when Lao Tzu talks about tao, he's not talking about the undefinable original Tao mentioned in chapter 1 (since the Tao that can be talked about is not the eternal Tao). But I do agree that there is really only one undefinable Tao.

I used to think happiness was the normal state of being, but I'm not so sure anymore. I think you can't have happiness without suffering (otherwise how do you appreciate it for what it is?) Today I think life is about suffering and joy, that the two are as much a part of our natural state of being as breathing is. The problem lies when one suffers too much or has too much joy, then they can begin to go off kilter. Too much joy can lead to apathy for instance, as can too much suffering, one begins to retreat into their own experience and as a result is unable to see their connection to others in a healthy way. Aaron

Hello Steve, I agree, but I think that it is a misinterpretation, not an illusion. As you said the experience exists, it's our interpretation that's off. Now if one wants to see illusion as a misinterpretation, that's fine, I just think it's better to describe it as simply as possible, so that there isn't so much confusion about it. Aaron

This is very sad. I do hope that things get better for him and that he's not just forgotten once the season ends. The problem for me comes from this idea that this one good thing that has happened to him, somehow makes up for him being sold as property as a child. It doesn't, but perhaps it's easier to believe it does. He seems to me very sad, even when he should be happy. Aaron edit- But then one has to ask, if he was living on the street, sold from person to person, then why should he be happy? What experience has he had to make him believe that happiness can be sustainable in his life? Perhaps that's the saddest thing to me.

Hello Steve, I loved your original post too. I think what I've come to understand is that there really is no such thing as enlightenment. When you look at the experience of enlightenment, it's intricately linked to no-enlightenment, all you are doing is moving from one end of that experience to the other. The perception of enlightenment doesn't change the experience, it just changes what we believe it is. Ignorance and knowledge are the same thing. It is better in my opinion to not worry about such things as enlightenment (I know this may sound hypocritical, but it's a recent insight, after examining it more closely). I am beginning to understand more each day that the true trick to actually living life, is to give up our preconceptions about life, these things we've been told are true and lies, and just realize that there is no truth or lie, that everything that exists simply exists and as deci belle says, changes and transforms. We are not the same person we were ten years ago, but we are as well. The trick to understanding who we are is to see the entirety of the experience of being I as it really is. When we can see that, then we can see that all these experiences are really just one experience, the state of being. Aaron

Hello Otis, I think people overuse the word illusion. Experience isn't an illusion, it is real, it's just not everything that is, it is impermanent. There is something that lies beyond experience and by understanding the nature of experience, that there is no black and white, or on and off, but rather a thousand myriad different degrees of the same experience, then one can also understand the full experience. Life to death, love to hate, happiness to sadness, and compassion to cruelty are not opposites as well, but the same experience. Joy is suffering and hate is love, because they are the same experience, the only thing that changes is our perception and understanding of that experience. Aaron edit- I do think you make some very valid points, especially in regards to people equating experience with truth. I think it's better to understand that truth and lies are the same experience as well, so you cannot have a truth that is not also a lie. Perhaps nothing is true or a lie, rather it just is. Aaron

Hello Stig, My point is that when you hear the phrase "the Tao that can be talked about" it infers that there is more than one type of tao, but just one Tao. That's my point, there is the WAY and other ways. I'm not stating there is more than one undefinable original Tao. As far as telling what is and isn't Tao, I've begun to understand how completely ludicrous this is. You can never pin down what Tao is or isn't, you can only assume to know. It's best not to even try. Aaron

Hello Stig, Thanks for the kind words regarding my OP. In regards to the Dao within Dao thread, the first thing I think needs to be pointed out is that my assertions weren't really emphatic... okay, perhaps they were, it was awhile ago. The reason I brought up the idea that I believed that gardening wasn't natural, was simply because I could see how it wasn't. I know that sounds strange, but I can see it, that even though it has to do with planting and cultivating, that in fact planting and cultivating, controlling those processes, rather than allowing them to occur as they naturally do, makes the act unnatural. That's all I was saying in regards to that. Now if you want to examine it along the lines of experience, then gardening and foraging are an excellent example. When you examine this experience, you see that natural doesn't really matter, that at its root it isn't about nature at all, but rather about gathering food. When you look at it in that light you understand that people do not do one thing or another with the intention of doing harm, rather they do it to meet a very basic need, which is to eat. There is no good or bad attached to either act, it is what it is. In regards to this is and isn't Tao, well that's a little easier to define because it's simply an abstract construct within our minds. It really doesn't matter if it is or isn't Tao, rather it is about the experience of understanding Tao and what that understanding essentially is. Anyways, I hope that helps to answer your questions. Aaron edit- I also wanted to add that we shouldn't be focusing on the pristine grey either (imo), rather we need to be aware the entirety of the experience, black to grey to white. It is only when we can examine the breadth of the experience that we can understand what it is and then transcend it. I was just using grey as an example of what lies at the middle.

Hello Deci and Vaj, Thanks for the responses. I'm not sure what else to say. I was kind of expecting to have someone add a comment correcting the idea, this may be a first for me. Aaron

lol It could be true.. I am not sure about those scientists definition of 'useful' and benefit of the planet. Don't ranchers grow meat too? I'm getting confused here. Aaron

I would recommend that we expand on the argument. Which to me seems to be, "Can one be a part of society and still be able to attain the qualities of high virtues such as compassion, serenity, and wisdom? Or does the attainment of these qualities only come from seclusion and separation from society?" I think this is a great topic by the way. I'm on the fence about it, so I will have to hear a few more arguments before I'm willing to throw my weight one way or the other. Again, if you want to join in, think of which side you agree with and then take the opposite side and defend that position as best as you can. Aaron

You nearly have me convinced. Aaron