Distinguishing natural and forced desire

[glooper23]

We are to let go of the ego and follow the Tao.

 

Isn't the motive for this to improve ourselves? Hence, are we not attempting to improve the ego by letting it go?

 

Many articles regarding Tao discuss people who paint and create art. Isn't the idea of creating art based on a desire for the pleasure these pieces bring about? And if you say the painters paint naturally without an egoistic desire, then what pleasure can be obtained? I get these feeling that much of the effort put into following the Tao is based on quenching an egoistic thirst.

 

I am a guitarist who struggles to see the point in playing anymore. Am I not merely attempting to please myself by plucking the strings? Isn't this going against the Tao? And let's say I decide that I am providing a service by going out and playing the guitar for other people. Aren't I simply pleasing them? This seems very egotistical to me.

 

What's the logic in working out? When I lift weights, it hurts my body.. isn't this going against the Tao? Shouldn't I go with the flow and do what feels good? It would seem that exercising is an effort to improve the body so that I can feel better about myself, which I feel is contradictory to the Tao.

 

Can anyone shed some light on these dilemmas? Thank you.

[Marblehead]

Hi Glooper23,

 

Where in Taoist Philosophy does it say that we are supposed to let go of ego?

 

Where in Taoist Philosophy does it say that we are supposed to avoid pleasure?

 

Where in Taoist Philosophy does it say that we are not supposed to give pleasure to others?

 

Where in Taoist Philosophy does it say that we are not supposed to take care of our body?

 

Peace & Love!

[glooper23]

Perhaps I've been reading articles at sites such as www.taoism.net incorrectly. I will try to find the texts that caused me to presume those ideas.

[3bob]

[Marblehead]

[glooper23]

[idquest]

Shouldn't I go with the flow and do what feels good?

The point is not doing what feels good but what is right. Distinguishing between those is the art.

[glooper23]

The point is not doing what feels good but what is right. Distinguishing between those is the art.

 

So how do I decide if it's right to spend my time writing songs?

[Iyoiyo]

The resolution to these issues lies, I think, in the way that things are done without desire. Now, that sounds pretty vague so I'll try to expound some more.

 

You wrote, "Isn't the idea of creating art based on a desire for the pleasure these things bring about?" I can see why one would think that, although it is not fully true. It's more accurate to say that most people who do what everyone thinks is art are doing it for those reasons. However, there are genuine people who create simply because it's in them to create, and not for any desire greater than just feeling like they want to do it. All the best art is created in this way because its foundation is unshakeable. Imagine two students attending college, both in the same course of study. One is genuinely interested in the subject and loves it, the other is bright, but desires only to impress others. Eventually the effortless interest will surpass the other, because it is impossible to fuel sustained progress on struggle. It's the difference between floating in a current and thrashing against one. I strayed off topic, but that was supposed to explain the dilemma with art: you will only be an artist if you are truly pursuing art itself, but never if you're after fame or acclaim.

 

My thinking is much the same on music, and in this case I have personal experience. I played the violin for many years when I was younger, and many considered me quite skilled. I never really liked it though, because I didn't understand the music. Only moments of success and praise made me continue. Once I realized this my interest vanished completely, and I stopped playing. Since that time, though, I have occasionally picked it up again and played sheerly for music-- it's very fulfilling. I would be a very profound person if I was capable of explaining what music is, but I can't, and so this is the limit of my explanation on that point.

 

As you might expect by now, my thoughts on exercise are very much the same. What is the logic in working out? In the past I could not understand this at all. I viewed gym goers as shallow, foolish beings consumed entirely in vanity. Sadly this is true to a great extent. However, I was not complete in my observation and did not realize the other viable reasons for exercise. In recent years my physical fitness has improved greatly, and to an outside mind it might appear that I am working for the same motivations of those I previously despised. But that is not the case. My current fitness is merely a byproduct of other interests. In order to improve my martial arts, because I love them, my body has gradually become stronger and stronger. This result was not attained through greed or shallow reasoning though. It's as if I owned a car. I have not buffed up the car to impress people, but because I am becoming a person who goes faster. A crude metaphor, but maybe it's serviceable.

 

In summary, if you can identify a true "logic" behind the things you do, it may mean that you are forcing yourself to do them. If your activities are things which require no real explanation beyond "I love it" or "I'm drawn to it" then those are effortless paths (which does not mean they won't require practice or physical effort)

 

Hopefully this will be of use, but there's a good chance it's off topic since I started to forget what I was supposed to be responding to.

Edited December 26, 2009 by Iyoiyo

[glooper23]

Thank you, Iyoiyo.

 

The underlying theme I get from your post is that it is ok to do things you love. On the contrary, it's foolish to do things that you think will make others love you. I suppose it's up to the entertainer to decide if they are playing the violin to impress or playing because it gives them joy regardless of the impression.

 

Would you agree with this?

[3bob]

is the quote translatable to you in some way that could be adapted to use in music?

 

(as related to on that level)

[voidisyinyang]

Actually I wrote a masters thesis on music theory, philosophy of science and energy healing.

 

http://www.hiddenmysteries.org/themagazine...-justice1.shtml

 

I discovered that yang is the Perfect 5th music ratio 2:3 and yin is the Perfect 4th music ratio 3:4 and the octave is the "emptiness."

 

So Taoism is music -- but it's actually NONWESTERN music harmonics.

 

Western tuning relies on the concept of containing infinity into geometry using irrational magnitude but in nonwestern music tuning there is an INFINITE SPIRAL OF FIFTHS/FOURTHS (yang/yin) as Taoist alchemy.

 

This tuning in nonwestern music healing is for the creation of LIGHT that bends spacetime -- consciousness is the process of LISTENING to this infinite natural resonance.

 

I call this the "natural resonance revolution" and I have a blog on it http://naturalresonancerevolution.blogspot.com

 

I trained in classical piano and orchestration and did ear training and then was accepted into a music composition program at the university level. But my research went into this interdisciplinary secret meaning of music lost in the West.

 

I have several articles about this online as well.

 

http://www.mind-energy.net/archives/151-Th...ic-Healing.html

 

http://www.mind-energy.net/archives/264-Ag...-Harmonics.html

 

http://www.mind-energy.net/archives/259-Ho...-Gurdjieff.html

 

http://www.viewzone.com/rainbow.html

 

Thank you, Iyoiyo.

 

The underlying theme I get from your post is that it is ok to do things you love. On the contrary, it's foolish to do things that you think will make others love you. I suppose it's up to the entertainer to decide if they are playing the violin to impress or playing because it gives them joy regardless of the impression.

 

Would you agree with this?

Edited December 26, 2009 by drewhempel

[glooper23]

drewhempel, that sounds fascinating. I will read through it soon.

 

3bob, I'm not sure I understand. I'm still interpreting it to say, "write the music if you want, for either way, you will be fine."

[Marblehead]

However, there are genuine people who create simply because it's in them to create, and not for any desire greater than just feeling like they want to do it.

 

I think this is a good statement because it speaks to both the concept of doing those things that are natural for us as well as to the concpet of knowing our capabilities and capacities and doing those things that we are naturally capable of doing (without effort).

 

Peace & Love!

[Lucky7Strikes]

A monk to his teacher: I neither want the rice cake or do not want it. If it is in front of me I will not hesitate or desire.

 

Teacher (correcting the student): If I want cake, I will go make one.

 

Or something like that....

 

When you no longer have obstacles, you escape both life and death. So what's the worry?

 

Desire without a source is no longer desire. When your intent is pure, it is ok to want cake. I think. .

Edited December 28, 2009 by Lucky7Strikes

[Marblehead]

When your intent is pure, it is ok to want cake. I think. .

 

I agree. (Unless you are on a diet.) (Yeah, I know, this could be validly argued. Hehehe.)

 

Peace & Love!

[Iyoiyo]

Sorry for the slow response-- Glooper, that is basically what I meant. My only quibble is that I don't think it's possible to simply decide one's motives (with regard to the musician example). But that's just semantics in a way, possibly just a misunderstanding, you got the message.

Edited December 30, 2009 by Iyoiyo