dawei

or even a ZZ or LZ section

Here you go http://www.thedaobums.com/forum/511-no-one/

So your argument is then also an illusion, yes ? And thus where such do coarse, value judgments come from ? Maybe you would also argue that the true nature of men is ugly... and animals? Where would it stop? (Rhetorical) As soon as the world regards something as beautiful, ugliness simultaneously becomes apparent. As soon as the world regards something as good, evil simultaneously becomes apparent. In exactly the same manner, existence and nonexistence give birth to each other. Difficult and easy define each other. Long and short form each other. High and low make each other distinguishable. Silence and sound make each other conspicuous. Front and back connect each other. Realizing this, one does not separate one's being from the subtle essence of the universe. One holds no preconceptions, and does things without insisting on personal conditions. One guides people by living in accord with the essence of life. One brings good things about, but has no intention of possessing them. One performs work, but has no intention to acquire personal power. When one's task is accomplished, one lets go of it and seeks no reward or recognition. Because one does not claim credit for oneself, one does not do any damage to oneself. - Tr. Ni

Michael said it in a way I think needs to be truly understood. But this is my comment and I'm not trying to speak for others. If you're asking the question then you don't know the answer in a primordial way. It is also likely you're going to understand it in this lifetime, in a realized way. In my case, it did not change except there is always an ebb and flow but there is not a right vs wrong, not a left vs right, etc. Meaning, distinctions didn't mean 'two'. I just saw everything as 'one'. When you naturally see it that way, there is only one next step to go...

Which is made to look stupid in the end, Yen Hui or Confucius?

Or maybe trying to say how to truly use this tool (?)

That is an interesting point... but isn't our mind already free? In the sense of a Zen idea: What binds the mind? Maybe you mean like free to expand or surf the wave of thinking, etc.

I think I might accept the final comment but not sure I would say that Confucius was a disciple of LZ... As mentioned above, he is a bit of a foil and convenient mouth piece. I will admit to not deeply breathing all of ZZ to state such stuff with certainty but more a gut reaction. So I agree there is no conflict but there is a great gulf that resolves as one body of water that brings together two sides.

He is a mouth piece foil of daoism...

Exactly where was the reference to Yin nature as deceitful, or you took it that way? And why was it bs... this is a discussion forum

I did kind of like re-reading each chapter discussion about 10 times to create a summary but I think I will not do that going forward. I should not appear to have a last word and should instead let the discussions be read and each come to their own summary and understanding.

In an expression, Ziran; self-so-doing. "There is no purpose" could be linguistically correct but the "directive" behind what occurs is Ziran. And then someone will bring up "De" as the "power". And we get tangled in their mixed contributions but I think you know better than most this... so I think that's enough

Not sure I follow as you seem to explain Confucianism more than Daoism and the latter is like a correct of the former. I didn't see this as Dao[ism] aims to abide in the scene that men disdain but is simply a comparison of the Way vs the Way of man. Man likes to excel but water just follows its nature even if that means it goes 'downhill' which is a concept man would normally avoid or disdain. Water doesn't care about such things.

Ok, as SFH was mentioned, I'll add a few more: FH: A transmission The greatest good is like water. Water gives life to the Ten Thousand Things, but does not strive. Because it does not strive, it flows in places without preference, depending on the flow and so is like the Dao. In dwelling, be close to the land. In meditation, go deep into the heart. n dealing with others, be gentle and kind. In speech, be straight and truthful. In ruling, be just and honest. In business, be honest and competent. In action, be careful of the timing. Be forever these things and life will never burden you with troubles. Ni: An elucidation One of universal nature is like water; he benefits all things but does not contend with them. He unprotestingly takes the lowest position; thus, he is close to the universal truth. One of universal virtue chooses to live in a suitable environment. He attunes his mind to become profound. He deals with others with kindness. In his speech, he is sincere. His rule brings about order. His work is efficient. His actions are opportune. One of deep virtue does not contend with people; thus, he is above reproach.

Imagine dreaming you're a butterfly. When is it no longer a dream ? It reveals that our conscious and subconscious create a dichotomy but once you are awake and can dream or asleep and yet be awake shows these two sides are really closer than we realize. If I plant a flower in universal consciousness can you see or find or feel or experience its growth?

How do you know that your current knowing/awareness isn't due to a previous life and death? As you neither prove nor disprove it, it remains at least a part of potential awareness. If someone never dreamed in their life, and you tried to explain what dreaming was... they would just say, I have no idea what your talking about but it sounds like your dreaming to me. That double meaning would be exactly correct; a complete denial of a truth. Our issue is that our mental boundaries and borders define what we tend to think and believe to a large degree. If we could get outside of that, or let go of that...

The branding and nose thing was a form of punish in ancient china. I think it was referenced as a metaphorical mutilation to suggest that such 'punishments' are irreversible if taken from their rigid [physical] point of view; you can't physically grow a new nose but you can re-grow or re-shape your understanding of the Way. Master Yierh talks of wandering or roaming the border... like walking along the shoreline and touching a toe to the water to claim to have experienced the water. Hsŭ Yu suggests to reside with the waves and be one with the ebb and flow of the water.

For some, it might be universal presence or one mind among the ten thousand or residing in infinity. This became much more apparent to me after I realized I was not transmitting to the universe of time/space but it was being received by me. Once one experiences the latter, one can realize the mind may be interpreting something but it did not cause the communication. I watched the TV series Iron Fist as a recommendation of my son... later I told him the story of what it is truly like to be in the presence of Kunlun... the one that reaches out to you via the deities. Interacting with deities clearly seems to be outside of body-mind. It is more like a gateway to the universal aspect they also reside within.

A curious question, indeed. What would be my 3 steps? 1. Forget all distinctions 2. Specifically, forget meaning of self 3. Form a thought of all inclusiveness: Oneness Here is my caveat. If you're trying to cultivate this, then it won't be realized in this life time.

can't the mind-body have non-local associations? Karma may be a mind meaning idea... but can it exist outside of mind, or at least outside of what we can know? To me, Mind-Body is a troublesome phrase. There is much outside of mind-body going on. My query may be going outside of karma proper but curious as to your thought

I helped a friend move the last few days and was asked in the midst of the exhaustive chore whether we should stop to eat. I said, Stopping to eat is stopping the chore; who can work after eating ! FWIW, I don't meditate nor see the need to. But focus can cause energy to follow and if your body is trying to do its natural thing, then I might think that meditating focused energy to the same area is combative, as Brain said: Sink or swim reaction. Here is the issue. If you sometimes meditate and sometimes don't, then there is a 'on' and 'off' state. If you are always in a meditative state, then the entire thread is moot. So, from my vantage point, should we stop what you are doing to then go into another state? Shouldn't our goal be a continuous state of [Fill in the blank]. Maybe I can call it the continuous state but are we saying folks are not trying to get to that point of continuous meditation or residing of presence? Is this a question about how to be 'off' or 'on' a meditative state ? When you're not meditating, what is that state? I guess I could ask, when meditating, what is that state? And then, why are there two different states?

A few more view points: Ni: Heaven is everlasting and Earth is perpetual. Why so? Because they live without holding onto any consciousness of self. Therefore, they can endure forever. One who does not separate his being from the nature of universal wholeness lives with the universal virtue of wholeness. He, too, dissolves all consciousness of self and lives as the universe. By putting himself behind others, he finds himself foremost. By not considering his own personal ends, his personal life is accomplished. He finds himself safe, secure and preserved. Because he does not hold a narrow concept of self, his true nature can fully merge with the one universal life. FH: Heaven and Earth are still. Why are Heaven and Earth still? Because they are detached. The Sage is detached, so he is like Heaven and Earth; thus he is at one with all. Being at one, he performs selfless actions and so he is fulfilled. Master Liao: The universe is everlasting. why does the Universe last forever? Because it does not bear itself, therefore it is ever-existing. Therefore, the saint stays behind his body as if his body goes ahead of himself. And since he stays out of his body, his body last forever. It is because he is rid of his consciousness of self that he gains his true self.

a desperate title of, now 35 replies which the OP has only the first post ... Stop meditating and report back after a few weeks.

I agree in regards to the chapter but it may be of interest to simply understand the term, even if vastly earlier than the chapter. I agree what what you said but why not just explain Straw Dog in the Shaman point of view ?

Good stuff... so let's discuss it more. 天之道，利而不害 "The heavenly Dao is always beneficial and never harmful." I think there are times like in the chapter of discussion (5) and this quote (81) that LZ is citing, clarifying, and countering Confucian ideas... or even his hallmark virtues. Li (利) is yet another like from this chapter (Ren). Yet, Confucius seems to talk of Li as if it should benefit people. Mengzi has warned it should not compromise Ren. I see LZ as setting the record straight that the Way of Heaven is based on benefit in the sense that it is not about profiting a man but steering him in the Way. Just as "De" means one thing to Confucius and another to LZ... so would Li and Ren. Without partiality to the human outcome but more as a guiding hand. Heaven, Earth, Sage, and LZ point to the path. Confucianism was tied to the necessary outcome OR ELSE. There is no "or else" for heaven, earth, sage, LZ. It is all arising and returning. Inbetween is 50 shades of gray that the human condition will encounter.