Why the Taobums Can't Get Along

[Tao99]

I never heard of the diamond mind in any Taoist books.

[forestofclarity]

I would not say that this is wrong. Rather, like all truths, it is incomplete. Looking from outside to in, tuna and cows looks very different. But if you were to look from the inside out, then you would see how they are the same.

 

However, people who never tended cows or fished for tuna will easily mistake one for the other. Works on sushi. Doesn't work if you try to impose the cow's values on the tuna's lifestyle, or vice versa. Doesn't work if you insist on milking the tuna, and proclaim that a tuna fish that gives no milk is on the wrong path. Doesn't work if you insist the cow lives deep in the ocean, and proclaim that a cow that drowned when dropped there did so because she didn't understand the teachings of the buddha. Doesn't work if you can't tell the difference between two organically incompatible paradigms -- they can only be made compatible on some sushi platter or other when they are dead. Alive, they live different lives, taoism swims in the ocean, buddhism chews cud in the barn, both are fine and neither one needs to insist on taking the other's place. Otherwise you wind up with a bloated cow and a bloated tuna that will stink up the world.

[Marblehead]

So who is right? The tuna or the cow?

 

Peace & Love!

[C T]

So who is right? The tuna or the cow?

 

Peace & Love!

The Cow of course! Beyond the shadow of a doubt!!

[Marblehead]

The Cow of course! Beyond the shadow of a doubt!!

 

Boy did I set myself up for that or what?

 

Peace & Love!

[Tao99]

So who is right? The tuna or the cow?

 

Peace & Love!

What if both, in a binary mix? Yikes!

Edited January 15, 2010 by Tao99

[Marblehead]

I try my best to stay away from those binary mixes. I had enough problems during my two tours in Korea.

 

 

Peace & Love!

[Encephalon]

I think all college grads should commend one another for the fortitude involved. I would have to bring myself up to speed to even respond to your opening points, but the following points,highlighted in red, throw up a few flags for me.

 

You are not in some indistinct "now" -- you are in a precise, ever-changing, ever-valid (not illusory anymore than any other) texture that spells, to one living it, e.g., something like "warm, soft, moist, timely, fragrant, cherished, in need of protection, funny to look at from the top, flowing from the kidneys, redirected by dong quai, modulated by licorice, in the Seventh Palace under a Money Star, ancient, reliable," whatever -- on and on you notice reality and its energies and swim in that and know and feel and think and live instead of resenting and seeking to "transcend" so as to be "one with everything." A taoist is one with everything not "later" and not "if she deserves it by thinking the Right Thougts and doing the Right Actions" and not "if she escapes rebirth" -- humbug!-- she is one with everything by virtue of being and becoming -- simultaneously and at all times and in all states.

 

"Resenting" is key term here, and it appears as if there is some resentment toward Buddhist tools of the Four Noble Truths, and the Eightfold Path in particular. There has been a lot of criticism of these Buddhist tools, as if they are moralistic orders laid down from above.

The small but robust Buddhist camp I identify with - contemporary Buddhist agnosticism (Loy, Batchelor, Macy, and others) - regards these teachings as challenges to act in reponse to the enormity of being born. The dharma is not something to believe in but something to do. Jack Kornfield ("The Wise Heart") digs deeply into this element of Buddhist psychology, which has very little to do with moralizing or merit-based spiritual progress. Batchelor's "Buddhism Without Beliefs" has completely divorced itself from traditional orthodoxy, and speaks beautifully of the raw experience of interdependency, of "swimming in energy" if you will. Joanna Macy in "'The Dharma of Natural Systems" takes it even farther.

 

There needn't be resentment here. But as you must know, Buddhism is no more monolithic than Christianity or Islam. It appears as if this is a case of misdirected resentment fuleing an argument that Taoism and Buddhism have 'nothing' in common. I could be entirely wrong, of course.

 

Cheers.

[~jK~]

I never heard of the diamond mind in any Taoist books.

 

Try lookng from a different perspective as: "A rose by any other name smells as sweet."

Hint:

Removing the label helps.

Edited January 16, 2010 by ~jK~

[Taomeow]

I think all college grads should commend one another for the fortitude involved. I would have to bring myself up to speed to even respond to your opening points, but the following points,highlighted in red, throw up a few flags for me.

 

You are not in some indistinct "now" -- you are in a precise, ever-changing, ever-valid (not illusory anymore than any other) texture that spells, to one living it, e.g., something like "warm, soft, moist, timely, fragrant, cherished, in need of protection, funny to look at from the top, flowing from the kidneys, redirected by dong quai, modulated by licorice, in the Seventh Palace under a Money Star, ancient, reliable," whatever -- on and on you notice reality and its energies and swim in that and know and feel and think and live instead of resenting and seeking to "transcend" so as to be "one with everything." A taoist is one with everything not "later" and not "if she deserves it by thinking the Right Thougts and doing the Right Actions" and not "if she escapes rebirth" -- humbug!-- she is one with everything by virtue of being and becoming -- simultaneously and at all times and in all states.

 

"Resenting" is key term here, and it appears as if there is some resentment toward Buddhist tools of the Four Noble Truths, and the Eightfold Path in particular. There has been a lot of criticism of these Buddhist tools, as if they are moralistic orders laid down from above.

The small but robust Buddhist camp I identify with - contemporary Buddhist agnosticism (Loy, Batchelor, Macy, and others) - regards these teachings as challenges to act in reponse to the enormity of being born. The dharma is not something to believe in but something to do. Jack Kornfield ("The Wise Heart") digs deeply into this element of Buddhist psychology, which has very little to do with moralizing or merit-based spiritual progress. Batchelor's "Buddhism Without Beliefs" has completely divorced itself from traditional orthodoxy, and speaks beautifully of the raw experience of interdependency, of "swimming in energy" if you will. Joanna Macy in "'The Dharma of Natural Systems" takes it even farther.

 

There needn't be resentment here. But as you must know, Buddhism is no more monolithic than Christianity or Islam. It appears as if this is a case of misdirected resentment fuleing an argument that Taoism and Buddhism have 'nothing' in common. I could be entirely wrong, of course.

 

Cheers.

Thanks for a thoughtful response, Blasto.

 

I have to confess very mixed feelings about buddhism, not "resentment" (this I reserve for more worthy targets like genocide, environmental crimes, cruelty, lies, or governments engaged in same) but a state of mind resulting from "understanding without embracing." (Taoist stuff I recognize subjectively by its being easy for me to embrace, no effort of any moral or ethical faculties required. I was at the Asian part of the Philadelphia art museum recently, and my companion had to pull me away by force from each and every item of taoist origins, whereas I walked past buddhist ones rather unperturbed, except when buddhist statues were shown holding their hands in taoist mudras! ) Of course buddhism doesn't need my approval. And of course, just like you said, there's many shapes and forms it takes and some are closer to my heart than others (in particular tibetan buddhism -- my first training was in Dzogchen, before taoism.) And to add embarrassment to mystery, a shamanic ritual that keeps gaining significance in my mind as time goes by (almost a year ago, and its aftermath keeps growing more rather than less important) culminated (at one of its many climax points) with an otherworldly entity giving me a personal buddhist mantra! YIKES!

 

What I do want to stress -- not easy to find words in a quickie online entry -- is that I see much of buddhism as very close ideologically to much of "western" stuff, and since many a western taoist is a refugee from exactly the western paradigm we've been overfed in the past few thousand years, I sort of try to point out that running from that and into the arms of buddhism is actually running in circles more often than not... whereas running from that to taoism is indeed being headed somewhere new. Better or worse -- who's to judge? -- but different for sure. So when Soaring Crane said they have "nothing in common," well it may have been a bit of an exaggeration but mostly I had to agree. They lead in different directions -- one, toward another circle back to some kind of "father in heaven" or other, under whatever name; the other, toward a circle dance where "father in heaven" may be a dancer but not the main honcho. I see it as crucial, because the western paradigm has no built-in safety against being used for enslavement and has chiefly served this purpose better than any other for ages. Whereas the eastern paradigm does offer a measure of healthy resistance against this kind of applications.

[voidisyinyang]

[Sloppy Zhang]

Taomeow, I love your posts

[Taomeow]

Taomeow, I love your posts

(a humble bow) thank you!

[Smile]

So when Soaring Crane said they have "nothing in common," well it may have been a bit of an exaggeration but mostly I had to agree. They lead in different directions -- one, toward another circle back to some kind of "father in heaven" or other, under whatever name; the other, toward a circle dance where "father in heaven" may be a dancer but not the main honcho.

Soaring Crane didn't say they have nothing in common. He said they have nothing in common. See the difference?

The reason Taobums can't get along is simple... we don't cultivate our mind properly. The result - spiritualized mental diarrhea. Without it, there would be no Taobums, so it's great to be us.

[Encephalon]

Thanks for a thoughtful response, Blasto.

 

I have to confess very mixed feelings about buddhism, not "resentment" (this I reserve for more worthy targets like genocide, environmental crimes, cruelty, lies, or governments engaged in same) but a state of mind resulting from "understanding without embracing." (Taoist stuff I recognize subjectively by its being easy for me to embrace, no effort of any moral or ethical faculties required. I was at the Asian part of the Philadelphia art museum recently, and my companion had to pull me away by force from each and every item of taoist origins, whereas I walked past buddhist ones rather unperturbed, except when buddhist statues were shown holding their hands in taoist mudras! ) Of course buddhism doesn't need my approval. And of course, just like you said, there's many shapes and forms it takes and some are closer to my heart than others (in particular tibetan buddhism -- my first training was in Dzogchen, before taoism.) And to add embarrassment to mystery, a shamanic ritual that keeps gaining significance in my mind as time goes by (almost a year ago, and its aftermath keeps growing more rather than less important) culminated (at one of its many climax points) with an otherworldly entity giving me a personal buddhist mantra! YIKES!

 

What I do want to stress -- not easy to find words in a quickie online entry -- is that I see much of buddhism as very close ideologically to much of "western" stuff, and since many a western taoist is a refugee from exactly the western paradigm we've been overfed in the past few thousand years, I sort of try to point out that running from that and into the arms of buddhism is actually running in circles more often than not... whereas running from that to taoism is indeed being headed somewhere new. Better or worse -- who's to judge? -- but different for sure. So when Soaring Crane said they have "nothing in common," well it may have been a bit of an exaggeration but mostly I had to agree. They lead in different directions -- one, toward another circle back to some kind of "father in heaven" or other, under whatever name; the other, toward a circle dance where "father in heaven" may be a dancer but not the main honcho. I see it as crucial, because the western paradigm has no built-in safety against being used for enslavement and has chiefly served this purpose better than any other for ages. Whereas the eastern paradigm does offer a measure of healthy resistance against this kind of applications.

 

The above runs so counter to my own experience that I'm having a difficult time practicing what they call in the critical thinking movement "intellectual empathy." Not that I am ready to dismiss your sentiments out of hand. It's just that my own 35 years of Buddhist study has been informed not by traditional orthodoxies but by the western writers, beginning with the original Dharma Bums out here on the west coast, like Suzuki and Watts, and up through the contemporary generation of Buddhist scholars, those who have participated and contributed to academic east/west dialogue (the aforementioned scholars as an example, who were almost exclusively politically progressive.) So, my introduction to Buddhism came from those who were truly looking for the emancipatory elements of Buddhism, but also from the scientists like Capra and Macy, who were busy connecting ecology and general systems theory to Buddhist doctrines of mutual causality and and interdependence (the Paticca Samuppada specifically). That's my Left Coast, California Buddhism story for ya!

 

Have a good weekend.

 

PS - Suzuki wasn't a westerner, of course. My mischaracterization. He was just one of the first zen masters who made it across the Pacific.

Edited January 16, 2010 by Blasto

[Ninpo-me-this-ninjutsu-me-that]

How do they reconcile indestructible diamond body spirit with selfless emptiness? This is the tunacow fork in the road.

 

Tao99

 

They don't..... unless they want to.

 

Yes, it sounds dumb.... to a western mind, it still does to me sometimes. The problem is in the question and particularly the word 'reconcile'. They don't have a need to reconcile, unless they choose to. I know that is illogical and you don't need to tell me that, and any argument that involves logic as we understand it is simply an attempt to overlay one kind of thought process over another that basically doesn't fit.

 

Here's an example using a different subject, political ideology, a conversation I've had on many an occasion goes something like this:

 

Chinese: China is communist!

 

Westerner: No it's not.

 

C: What makes you say so? Everyone knows it.

 

W: Well, China is more or less capitalist now.

 

c: Oh, you mean two systems in one one country

 

w: Those two systems are diametrically opposed, you cannot have one without it going against the ideology of the other.

 

c: Yes you can.

 

w: You can't, exactly how can you? it's not communism anymore!

 

c: We do.

 

w: !? But your missing the point, you have essentially one system with the odd communist bit thrown in for ideological/political good measure.

 

c: So, it is two systems then.

 

w: You CAN'T have that! It's illogical, it's either one or the other!

 

c: But we do, see for yourself.

 

w: It's not communism!

 

c: Your right, it's Chinese communism, thanks for clearing up that point for me.

 

w: I hate you.

 

c : Me too, lets be friends.

 

 

When foreigners first live in China they generally for the first year or so come to the conclusion that Chinese people must be stupid, totally illogical, then they either retain that opinion and keep going or leave, or they get to the next stage which is 'I'm stupid', after a while they then say to themselves 'It's so freeing not needing to quantify everything with western logic(unless it suits me to), it's true freedom'.

 

Logic is a foundation western countries are based on, that's not to say the Chinese don't have logic....but it's a flexible logic...yes, I know, there is no such thing as flexible logic, but you try having a conversation with someone Chinese who hasn't really been exposed to western thinking to a great degree and make the point what they are saying is illogical and what you will get is this 'It's Chinese logic', Chinese logic has one very simple foundation/precept: 'I want it to be so, and so it is, until which time I decide otherwise if it is convenient or beneficial to me'(yes I know that's not logic, but once you've translated it into your own language and used it countless times with your own interpretation in place it becomes so, for them at least).

 

Taomeow I should say having re-read my own post it comes off as a bit sarcastic, I didn't mean it to be so, I was actually laughing at the problems between the two ways of thinking and how they can never fit, one must be given up in order to accept the other. I was also reminded of your 'homer simpsons' thread, I have those conversations everyday...it used to drive me crazy, doctors, lawyers and civil 'self' servants all alike. No difference. Trying to argue with a western mind to an Asian mind can be totally fruitless, and exceptionally frustrating unless they have learnt how to adapt to a western way of thinking and/or you have just given up the western need to quantify and use logic.

 

There's no way to really experience that thought process except to be within it and just give in to it. I honestly hope one day you will live in China, I know with commitments and such that may not be possible at this point, but age is not a factor were China is concerned, they would love you, anyone who loves Chinese culture and has as much knowledge of the intricacies of Daoism as you do they would love. But they would drive you nuts 1.3 billion Homer Simpsons Taomeow, 1.3 billion!

 

To all, here's a conversation with my ex which more reflects the subjective/objective angle....and also some rather strange logic:

 

Me: So what time should I meet you?

 

Her: I'm doing the laundry.

 

M: Ok, so what time will you leave?

 

H: Its not done yet.

 

M: I get it, what time will you be there?

 

H: Where are you now?

 

M: Huh? At home.

 

H: What time are you leaving?

 

M: !!? How can I know?! I don't know when your gonna be there.

 

H: It's quite a lot.

 

M: What is?!

 

H: The laundry.

 

M: How much exactly is quite a lot?

 

H: I should have said it's the average amount actually.

 

M: Average compared to what! I don't know how much you usually do, so how on earth can I judge the average to then guess the time you will leave!!!???

 

H: Why are you getting angry, that's not nice.

 

M: I wanna know when you are leaving so I can arrive on time but you keep talking about the laundry!

 

H: That's because I'm doing the laundry, and that effects the time I will leave.

 

M: Ok, now we're getting somewhere! So what time do you think, 'roughly', you will be likely to finish the laundry?

 

H: I wouldn't like to exactly say.

 

M: Why!!!!!!???

 

H: Well, I have to get ready afterwards and that takes some time.

 

M: So why didn't you say that in the first place! Why!?

 

H: I don't know, I was doing the laundry when you phoned.

 

M: *&^)*(*()_)(_)((**(&*))__$#......OK, SEE YOU THERE!

 

H: OK, what time?

 

 

You may imagine my ex to be a complete spanner, but I assure you, she's not, she's more intelligent(in my western opinion of intelligence)than most, and her language skills far exceed most others I have known here. It may also seem she was deliberately being annoying, but she wasn't. After that time I had to explain western logical thinking.....it was a mistake as then she deliberately started using it to mess with me Oh well. My bad.

 

 

ps. sorry for my rather long post all.

[Stigweard]

I need to add to the above that the success of this website is largely because of the really hardworking and insightful moderators that keep a firm but flexable grasp on the reality of a successful website.

The amount of programming that has gone into The Tao Bums really is fantastic both in the volume of work and the outcome application.

Its so nice to be appreciated. I do have to say though that all the real work was done by Sean and co long before we were "annointed", our efforts are minisclue in comparison. But cheers all the same.

 

[Marblehead]

To all, here's a conversation with my ex which more reflects the subjective/objective angle....and also some rather strange logic:

 

 

Well, at least I can understand why she is your ex.

 

Peace & Love!

[soaring crane]

Soaring Crane didn't say they have nothing in common. He said they have nothing in common. See the difference?

The reason Taobums can't get along is simple... we don't cultivate our mind properly. The result - spiritualized mental diarrhea. Without it, there would be no Taobums, so it's great to be us.

 

He said "virtually", and has absolutely no time available at the moment to expand on it. He wasn't trying to start a snowball fight, he was referring to goals and methodologies - practice. Dantians vs Charkras, that's all... gotta fly...

 

The little snowball I threw has resulted in a pretty fantastic dialog, though! Kudos to the Bums!

 

Xi Xi

 

and, uh,

 

Peace

[effilang]

Well my 2 cents...

 

I honestly couldn't care any less about Buddhism / Taoism / Christianity etc.

 

They are all just a means to the same goal.. Union with the origin.

They are just information systems to help voluntarily awaken evolution and development from within.

 

I will never understand why two people will have a heated argument about whether Buddhism or Taoism is better.

 

What does it matter? lol - HONESTLY? - I feel like i am missing something... like who cares?

 

I can understand someone dutifully correcting ie: a historical fact about their Religion on a board or forum or during a discussion, just to make it clear so someone who reads it gets the right info, but to butt heads and claim one is better than the other, i mean? Seriously?

 

How can such an attitude exist within the mind of someone practicing any of these religions?

Shouldn't you just feel satisfied? - Even if something is demonstrably better, shouldn't u just be happy?

 

Does the need arise from jealousy? anger? irritation? dissatisfaction? uncertainty? curiosity?

Isn't it more sensible to have an internal debate with yourself about why you feel those rather than defend their external manifestations like a selfish doofus?

 

I don't get it, really. No matter how much pride i have regarding these matters. We are striving for nothing. Nothing is our goal. How can u argue about nothing... Nothing is neither right nor wrong. It just is, u cant debate that, u just let it be.

 

U can say, i feel this way and you feel this way, but why try to convince someone otherwise, when our goals are the same; union with the Tao.

 

It perplexes me to no end O_O

Edited January 16, 2010 by effilang

[Marblehead]

 

It perplexes me to no end O_O

 

Yeah. But just think how boring a place this would be if we didn't have our petty little challenges.

 

There are a lot of young guys here who have to exercise their ego. What better way than to convince someone that they are wrong and you are right?

 

Peace & Love!

[三江源]

.

Edited June 8, 2015 by 三江源

[goldisheavy]

I don't know if anyone else has noticed this, but we are all getting along. Getting along doesn't mean loving each other. It just means not trying to kill each other or ban each other or get each other banned.

 

"Getting along" is a really low and unambitious standard to strive for. People who don't give a crap about each other can get along. Two self-absorbed and unkind people can get along. Etc.

[soaring crane]

I don't know if anyone else has noticed this, but we are all getting along.

 

I think this is absolutely true, too. When I wrote my little comment, I was thinking of misunderstandings, cross-communications, basic confusion. But I also think that this website functions remarkably well, especially considering the mixed-bag of non-conformist people who gravitate toward it.

 

So, in the two minutes I have available before heading out to the swimming pool with my daughter, I want to expand my comment again by saying, in areas where we may have a simlar goal, our methods for getting there will be different, and where our methods are similar, we apply them toward different ends.

 

Off to the pool, and the steam room...

[三江源]

.

Edited June 8, 2015 by 三江源