stan herman

Whew, deci belle, didn't expect that deluge. I was tempted to respond to it paragraph by paragraph, but that wouldn't accomplish much, I don't think. Just a few points: First, I believe I understand what you are saying--Trust your inner guide, it will take you where you need to go. In the function of leadership, the true spiritual leader trusts her inner guide to provide direction and impetus as she gently guides others. " Understanding not-understanding is true understanding. That is the method of getting lost in the hearts and minds of the people." That is all the true leader knows and all she needs to know. Worldly leadership does not exist, it is only a guise for selfishness and ignorance. In my view, this is a very narrow view. There are fundamental 'truths' within it, but like other forms of fundamentalism, it disregards, denigrates and discards those aspects of wisdom that do not conform to its gospel. You do not know me, or my background. Nor do I know you. I've read a few of your earlier comments and liked them

I'd agree with that, and add: "Enlightenment is no more nor less than getting to know nothing, and then how it's filled by everything you can think of." But then, there's more to enlightenment than enlightenment--because unless you die immediately, you have to come back here and live in the world. What that entails is reacquainting yourself with your ego and other people's egos and ...

My view is similar to this, said in a contemporary context: 47. It is not necessary to possess all the data to know your best course. Without exhaustive inspection of each and every factor, what feels right and good your spirit will announce. There are times when data are no use, when information distances, and learnedness obscures the heart of certainty. The keen-minded, without hurrying to meetings knows the crucial issues, without analysis recognizes the choices, without programs does what needs doing. The best of all action stems from the fact of being.

That seems a reasonable interpretation to me. As an old boss of mine used to say, "You got to take them from where they're at (non from where you're at)". But of course, if go along and get along too well, you won't be moving them anywhere. They'll have moved you.

An excellent statement, Jetsun. In my experience personal power is based upon a clear idea of your own personal boundaries--physical and psychological--and recognition of your inherent ability to control them. This begins with a process called 'grounding' in which you first become fully aware of your body, and then recognize (and say aloud) "Here I Am'. And at the same time recognize You are NOT in someone else's mind picture of what you are. From this distinct base you can then learn to manage how much or little you allow vulnerability. There is an exercise for this, and if you're interested let me know and I'll send it to you.

23. In every life things are bound to go up and down. In nature the weather changes from fair to stormy and then to fair again. In the stock market and in the fortunes of sports teams there are wins and losses. One year, a person who is capable, works hard and is promoted. A second person who is capable and works hard is not. And a third person who is not capable and avoids work, but plays political games cleverly, is also promoted. How unfair, one might say. But the tide turns, the season changes and the pendulum swings only according to their own schedules, and the world is fair only in its own terms. It is not obliged to conform to yours. If you identify yourself with winning then winning will identify with you. If you identify yourself with losing then losing will identify with you. A sound leader chooses her course and follows its varied turns without regrets. She performs her work as well as she can, dispenses kindness when she can and justice when it is required. When she finds herself badly used by others she changes what she can, protects what she can, and endures what she must. Until the tide turns, the season changes, and the pendulum swings.

Marblehead, you are serving a purpose for at least two others. I admire that. At the same time I hope that as you serve, you serve yourself as well as others.

Whew, this is not the place for me. Many words, much presumptive analysis. Little felt or applicable meaning. As a parting comment though, my estimate is that what makes the most sense is the verse is speaking about the ordinary man's perception of Tao, and contrasting that with an enlightened understanding. Good luck to you both in your competition.

Re Level of Enlightenment Hadn't looked at this item for a while, so I had to review several pages. What struck me overall, it was like the old allegory of the blind-men describing the elephant--the participants here were standing in so many different places while describing their beliefs and experiences. All were relevant, but most were unconnected. That's not meant to be a criticism, but it was a lesson to me. Here's what I took from the overall ➢ If you want enlightenment, you need to practice ➢ If you just want relief from suffering, that's another matter ➢ (So you ought to start by finding out what you do want) ➢ Learning to manage your ego is important in any case ➢ Learning how to allow action, in the Taoist sense, is important ➢ Learning how to take action, in the ordinary sense, is also important ➢ Knowledge of when and how to do each is key ➢ (Fundamentally, every problem is a matter of You, Other(s) and the Situation) ➢ By all means, keep your sense of humor

I find this verse difficult to swallow. The English/Fen seems closest to digestible, but my impression is it is speaking about the ordinary man's perception of Tao, and contrasting that with an enlightened understanding e.g. in line 6, the ordinary man would think Taoist wisdom to be stupid. English/Feng Great accomplishment seems imperfect, Yet it does not outlive its usefulness. Great fullness seems empty, Yet cannot be exhausted. Great straightness seems twisted. Great intelligence seems stupid. Great eloquence seems awkward. Movement overcomes cold. Stillness overcomes heat. Stillness and tranquillity set things in order in the universe. My interpretation may be something of a stretch, but I don't think it's inconsistent with Lao Tzu's message 45. Great performances invariably decline. Great monuments eventually decay. Great accomplishments are always surpassed. All that is achieved invites its own eclipse. As long as life continues there is more to be or do. Thus, the perfect being unattainable, why rush to reach it? When tired, rest. When rested, act. These are the guidelines of a suitable life.

Artfully drawn.

Now that is an interesting question. I suppose it depends on what one means by 'nature'. Most commonly it's defined as phenomena of the physical world. But some people have a definition that also includes the non-physical as well. I would say physical nature depends on matter of all kinds, and a perceiver who separates the matter and gives the pieces names.

Well, so when you get right down to it, all you can say is 'om'. But then what would we have to talk about? So, after you get to know your ego well enough to make him behave, enjoy his company.

PS It seems incongruous and self-contradictory if we here become rigid and righteous about our pronouncements and dignity. This seems to me a place for learning and growth. Or as Lao Tzu today might say: 76. In life a body is soft and vulnerable, in death a body stiffens. it is the same for plants, the delicate and fragile grow, the rigid and brittle break or decay. When people are permeable and flexible they thrive. When they stiffen they lose their vigor and resilience. When the planks of party platforms dry out they crack. What is stiff and brittle fails. What is pliable and sensitive rises.

YES to this. Here we sit among the wisdoms, ambiguities, and omens of the Tao. And there is an issue--obviously more than what is said in the exchange of words so far. What do you suppose Lao Tzu would advise, that we bury dissension beneath sight? I don't think so. This would seem to me an opportunity for the Tao in action.

Since I don't know you and your learning style I can only guess. If you are inclined toward making total commitments to a cause, stick with the Tao only for a while, but bear in mind it is not an only truth, but only an aspect. If you are an independent thinker and can handle ambiguity look also at "Be Here Now" by Ram Das, and the Carlos Castaneda series, starting with the first book. Allow both the similarities AND the differences of the approaches to tumble around your mind, without need to decide which is true and which isn't. Whichever, have fun and enjoy the magical accidents.

8. Whatever his hierarchal level, the sound leader stands as high within it as he can in what he does, and as low within it as he is able in terms of personal pride in his position and achievements. Large egos tend to high ambition and showy claims. They sort other people and conditions only as items favorable or unfavorable to themselves and their interests. Great prides trumpet great accomplishments and obscure great failures, rise on great euphorias and sink in great despondences. In all this tide of drama the pleasures of the ordinary are often lost. The sound leader refines his ego to more moderate proportions. While he may lead through equally momentous events he travels his road more evenly. He pauses to engage his friendliness, spends attention on maintaining his straightforwardness and remembers to value the substance of both his own and others work. Insisting on no sorting of those for or against him, he himself is not so sorted.

15. Alert to problems and opportunities, addressing them with prudence and calm. Solid in principle and fluid in execution. Open to ever changing possibilities. Generous and considerate. These are the qualities. Flowing with ones natural stream, accepting ones rapids and whirlpools, becalmings and stagnant pools. Stroking hard without compulsion, resting patiently, awaiting clarity that is sure to come. These are their applications.

THE LEGEND -- Part 2 Gary became an executive vice president and he continued, smart, demanding and lucky. His reputation made him seem tough to some and terrifying to others. Yet people from all parts of the company seemed to be standing in line to transfer into his organization. It was fun and exciting and successful. There were opportunities and generous budgets. For a lot of mid-level managers a meeting with Gary was an event--like meeting an NFL quarterback. Even when he skinned you with that whip-like mind of his, you could go back to your peers and show the scars proudly. When Gary was appointed president and chief operating officer of the company his mind seemed to grow even sharper. He had a vision of the company's future and the business sense and instincts for determining what was crucial and what was irrelevant in getting to it. He had about zero tolerance for irrelevance or people who brought irrelevancies to him, no matter who they were, and that included some pretty powerful people in the financial community Gary engineered several acquisitions that were instrumental in moving the company into the front ranks of its industry, but in the process he bruised the egos of several major investment bankers. When the company CEO retired a few years later most of us expected Gary would succeed him, but it didn't happen. A more conservative person was picked. Gary took it in stride, and still tried to mobilize support among the board of directors for his plans, though he wasn't desperate about it. But he had too many opponents. The board of directors decided against his proposals. Gary was appointed vice-chairman of the board, a job that had more title than authority, and he no longer held operating responsibility. About a year later, I remember, a major business magazine commented on 'the seeming decline of company energy', and for more than two years the company did indeed seem to get pretty lethargic. Gary, sensed a new chance, and like Napoleon, attempted to come back from exile by trying again to win the board to his vision. For a while it looked as though he might succeed, but the forces against him were still too strong. Soon afterward, at sixty-two, Gary retired and made plans to sail around the world in a small boat. Just before his scheduled departure a prominent business columnist interviewed him. In the course of the interview, sensing the possibility for developing a hot story of corporate controversy at high levels, he asked Gary if, in light of his long career with the company he felt any bitterness about the way he had been treated. Gary seemed surprised by the question, then he said, "No bitterness at all. It was a hell of a trip." He smiled and pointed at a model of his sailboat, resting at a corner of his desk. "And now," he said, "I'm getting ready to start another one." Bill seemed to have ended the story just in time with the the waiter arriving with our wine, but nobody moved. Bill folded his big hand around his glass and said, about a year after Gary retired the company was awarded two large contracts and started to hire again.

For me when I first encountered the Tao, one of its more intriguing elements was in the verses dealing with 'leadership'. Of course, few conventional translations refer to leadership as such, they speak of rulers--emperors, lords and princes. Their times and locale were starkly different--ancient China. This was an era of absolute despotism at the top and totally submissive populations at the bottom, so it isn't easy to find practical relevance in interpreting the Tao's lessons on leadership for our times. But with a bit of poetic extension it is possible. What I'm going to try to do in the following entries of 'Tao Now' is to set the stage for a few short stories that I think reflect what Lao Tzu might have written if he had found himself transported into our times (and had to work for a living These will be followed by related verses and maybe an illustration or two. Hope you like them, and feel free to let me know whether you do or don't.

The John Wu translation speaks most eloquently to me. Non-Ado (without fuss) is not saying without action. Also Chi Dragon's terse version says what is so.