Compassion and Taoism

[Aaron]

In the recent discussion of De and the Tao, I think many of us have come to the conclusion that De is not morality or ethics, but rather something that come from Tao, and that's all and good, but even after figuring that out it still leaves me with a question, if Te is not morality or ethics, then how do we rectify the need for compassion towards others? Isn't compassion supposed to be fueled by a desire to ease others suffering, because it's the right thing to do? If so, does that mean we need to be compassionate because it's the ethical way to behave? Perhaps, but perhaps not.

 

I remember when I was married and having problems with my job and family (I was feeling overwhelmed trying to please everyone). I was holding my stepson at the time, he was around a year and half old. He reached out and put his hand on my cheek and looked at me with this quite serious look, then sighed and leaned his head on my shoulder. He stayed there for the longest time, sucking away at his pacifier, content. Everything everyone had told me up until then, to try and ease my mind did very little, but in that moment, a moment where this small innocent child set about trying to comfort me, not because it was the right thing to do, but because for him it was the natural thing to do, did more to ease my troubles than anything else.

 

In the grand scheme of things, there are far too many questions and often times, not enough answers. I get caught up sometimes in the big picture, forgetting that there are little things I can do, that can be done, not because they're the right thing to do, but because they're the natural thing to do.

 

I believe that I am connected to everything in this universe, as James Broughton put it,

 

This is It

and I am It

and You are It

and so is That

and He is It

and She is It

and It is It

and That is That.

 

If I am truly It, if my connection to you is more evident than what I see it as, if I can drop the idea that I am separate from you and you from me, then is there nothing left to do but feel compassion for those suffering?

 

When one practices compassion they gain great insight into themselves. The Tao Teh Ching says that the Sage puts others before himself, and by putting others before himself, he put himself first. This seems to be a contradiction, but I don't believe it is. In my mind what I see is that when one puts others before themselves, shows compassion to another, what they get out of it, isn't just a deep insight into the nature of suffering, but also deep insight into their own nature.

 

Compassion is one of the three jewels, because it is one of the fundamental emotions one feels for others, when they are acting in a natural way. The practice of compassion helps to strengthen our relationship with others, it helps to deepen our connection to the world at large. It's something that seems to be a sign of weakness, but in fact is a sign of strength.

 

It is with compassion, true compassion, not done out of a sense of right and wrong, but done because one sees another suffering or has caused another to suffer, and feels an innate need to show compassion, that one is truly connected to the world on a spiritual level, a level that allows us to transcend the "I" and become the "It".

 

Even animals show compassion. I remember watching a program about meerkats where for one reason or another a female meerkat decided to stand up to a hyena and ended up mortally wounded. As she lay dying, one by one every meerkat in the pack came over to her and spent time with her. Although we can never be sure what their intent was, I have no problems recognizing compassion and love in that act.

 

If even animals show compassion for others when they suffer, how can we deny that need within ourselves? What happens to us that causes us to be able to tune out the plight of those that suffer all around us? Is the fact that there is so much suffering in the world justification for denying compassion to those who suffer?

 

Anyways, these are just my thoughts. I'm very interested in how other people view compassion, especially as it relates to the Tao. In that light, I would ask others to be respectful and not address their comments towards others and what they need to do, but rather express their views on what compassion truly means and it's virtues as it relates to our own paths in this life.

 

Aaron

[strawdog65]

Twinner/ Aaron,

 

 

Thanks for bringing this up. I am very curious to see what everyone has to say about

compassion and what it means within the Taoist framework.

I agree that if the nature of a person is towards being compassionate, then it is

flowing with Tao. But so too if a person is hard and lacks compassion and treats

all with a harshness that is natural to them, that would also be considered flowing

with their true nature and being with Tao.

 

I agree that in our most natural undisturbed and unprejudiced state, as children, we are

apt to be compassionate purely because it is a natural empathetic state that needs no

learning. Learning and the influence of people and our society can be both good and bad

in respect to compassion. The stereo typical roles we are "assigned" by our society can

create selfish and destructive habits that reinforce a compassionless life. I like to think about

it in terms of reverence, respect for life and thereby the respecting of our own selves.

 

Flowing from moment to moment, being how we are most naturally meant to be, I like to think

includes the ability to make "wise" decisions that do the least harm in any given situation.

 

Again... I am a little in the air over this, and look forward to hearing and taking in other

poster's viewpoints to better understand this dynamic in regards to Taoism.

 

 

Peace!

[RiverSnake]

I just finished Esoteric Warriors by Alex Kozma and he made some enjoyable comments about compassion and martial arts. This passage in particular resonated with me. Enjoy

 

"A big question i had when i was doing Lung Ta is how compassion relates to martial arts, because the art is based on opening the heart. After studying with Bruce i now understand that the heart/mind practices are the highest level of Ba Gua.

 

Heart/mind practice is about doing what is needed. On a karmic level you could be creating future suffering for yourself by inflicting pain on someone. The Shambhala model is that compassion is a great thing, idiot compassion is not.

 

You can be compassionate to another human being, but when someone is bent on destruction and it is coming for you then you have a choice to survive or not.

 

We are born with an innate survival system in our bodies, we want to live, we don't want to die. That instinct is very pure and is connected to higher consciousness, Tao, or God." Esoteric Warriors by Alex Kozma

Edited December 12, 2010 by Tao Apprentice

[Marblehead]

Hi Aaron,

 

You went pretty deep with this one. Basically, what are the roots of compassion?

 

I think we will feel compassion for anyone/anything that we feel is a part of us.

 

This thought is contradictory to what is said by Loa Tzu regarding the Sage putting himself in the background and as a result being elevated to the foreground.

 

I know that my words may seem untrue but let's consider ...

 

I will use the word 'attached' with a special meaning here.

 

I think that if we feel attached (through love or respect or appreciation) to others we will always feel compassion for that whatever. On the other hand, if we feel we are complete in and of ourself, and unattached from those others, there will be no compassion felt for those people or things.

 

So, in my mind, it depends on how we view our existence as part of much more than just ourself.

 

An example to help me out here: Native Americans felt that they were a part of the land they lived on. The respected the land and all that lived on it. Sure, they killed to eat and clothe themselves but they always gave respect to what they used.

 

And, as I stated in that other thread, I do feel that if we take care of those people and things that are a part of our life those people and things will take care of us. So compassion toward else is unintentionally self-serving.

 

Strawdog used a term I really like better than the word 'compassion', that is, "natural empathetic state".

 

That says so much more to me than does the word compassion.

 

And then we have from Tao Apprentice:

 

The Shambhala model is that compassion is a great thing, idiot compassion is not.

 

There is a great difference between the two.

[manitou]

In the recent discussion of De and the Tao, I think many of us have come to the conclusion that De is not morality or ethics, but rather something that come from Tao, and that's all and good, but even after figuring that out it still leaves me with a question, if Te is not morality or ethics, then how do we rectify the need for compassion towards others? Aaron

 

What a nice topic. I agree that De is not morality or ethics. It is something else. It is that place that is BEFORE the need for morality or ethics. When you have love or compassion for all things in your heart, there is no need for morality or ethics. The compassion is already in the heart, it already knows the answer; not some man-made idea of what is moral or ethical. When the need for 'good' or 'bad' arises the Tao has already been lost.

 

This place of Good Heart is found by doing the inner work, by going in. It is an ongoing process of treating Self with love, which is the hardest thing for me to do, because my entire young life was anything but. I track my own actions every day, some days better than others. My Intent is to be impeccable, to have a good heart, to look at all with compassion. My reality falls short of this, but as long as my Intent is engaged upon each waking day, the actions get better and better over the years. This process in me started by working the AA steps about 30 years ago; the 'going in' process has never stopped. It just keeps on keepin' on.

[rene]

What a nice topic. I agree that De is not morality or ethics. It is something else. It is that place that is BEFORE the need for morality or ethics. When you have love or compassion for all things in your heart, there is no need for morality or ethics. The compassion is already in the heart, it already knows the answer; not some man-made idea of what is moral or ethical. When the need for 'good' or 'bad' arises the Tao has already been lost.

 

This place of Good Heart is found by doing the inner work, by going in. It is an ongoing process of treating Self with love, which is the hardest thing for me to do, because my entire young life was anything but. I track my own actions every day, some days better than others. My Intent is to be impeccable, to have a good heart, to look at all with compassion. My reality falls short of this, but as long as my Intent is engaged upon each waking day, the actions get better and better over the years. This process in me started by working the AA steps about 30 years ago; the 'going in' process has never stopped. It just keeps on keepin' on.

 

Manitou, I agree and well said. We each begin from a different place but the end result is the same: trusting the inner heart that understands the connection, embraces and resides in it naturally. (-:

 

warm regards

[The Way Is Virtue]

When people read the Tao Te Ching (Dao De Jing), it may seem that it makes things very impersonal, almost uncaring from a certain perspective. But many people might also agree that what is written in the Tao Te Ching is not at all easy to understand, and it seems that there are possibly many ways to interpret it, and it also seems that it is multilayered and addresses things at various levels all at the same time. By changing one's perspective it can seem to speak about how to conduct oneself in every day normal life and how to interact with others, and at the same time from a different perspective it seems to be giving guidance on inner cultivation and proper conduct and attitude for inner cultivation, and it also seems to hint at the inner workings of tao as the 'great mystery' as well as the inner workings of tao in its many 'outward' expressions, etc. Depending on which translation one reads it may seem that some aspects are emphasized more than other aspects but I suspect that is more than a little due to the biases of the translators. I think when one examines the original Chinese characters it is easier see how it could easily be interpreted in many different ways, and how it seems to be speaking at many different levels.

 

Anyway, my point is that I think one should be very careful about drawing definite conclusions about what is really being said in the Tao Te Ching just based on one's own particular point of view and current way of thinking.

It seems to me that even amongst different traditions in Taoism there can be various different perspectives and interpretations of 'tao' with different emphasis placed on different things. When viewed from this perspective it should give one pause to think that even within practicing Taoists there are various different perspectives with different emphasis, presumably based on different points of view and different understanding, and different cultural biases at the time. It seems to me they are all outward expressions of 'tao'. Some perspectives and practices may be good, some may be fairly neutral, some may be bad. All exist in the outward expression of tao, or so it is said.

 

Also, from what I have seen, most if not all actual practicing Taoists did/do follow certain rules of conduct and many seem to place emphasis on being of service to others and helping others and society as a whole. Also some Taoist writings go into detail about various types of de and that the 'accumulation' of de (te) is the main deciding factor in how one truly progresses in their cultivation.

I have seen de broken down into 4 levels, starting at the lowest level of de to the highest:

pin de - morality and virtues.

gong de - helping others through one's actions.

yin de - helping others anonymously without selfish motive, with no desire or intent for personal recognition or gratitude, etc.

dao de - helping others in their progress to realize dao

 

Note added later: I should also probably point out that although these are expressed as levels, all are important and the higer levels build on the foundation of the lower levels. One can't embody a higher level without first having embodied the lower levels as a foundation. This is my understanding of it anyway.

 

Here is a passage from the 'Yellow Emperor's Hidden Talisman scripture", thought to orginate in the 6th century CE:

"Heaven is without kindness

but from this great kindness is born"

 

 

.

[Aaron]

What a nice topic. I agree that De is not morality or ethics. It is something else. It is that place that is BEFORE the need for morality or ethics. When you have love or compassion for all things in your heart, there is no need for morality or ethics. The compassion is already in the heart, it already knows the answer; not some man-made idea of what is moral or ethical. When the need for 'good' or 'bad' arises the Tao has already been lost.

 

This place of Good Heart is found by doing the inner work, by going in. It is an ongoing process of treating Self with love, which is the hardest thing for me to do, because my entire young life was anything but. I track my own actions every day, some days better than others. My Intent is to be impeccable, to have a good heart, to look at all with compassion. My reality falls short of this, but as long as my Intent is engaged upon each waking day, the actions get better and better over the years. This process in me started by working the AA steps about 30 years ago; the 'going in' process has never stopped. It just keeps on keepin' on.

 

 

Hello Manitou,

 

I think you've repeated much of what I was saying from a different slant. I think our viewpoints on the nature of compassion are founded on similar principles.

 

I wouldn't say that the AA steps started me working on the process, in fact I think I ended up taking a few steps back from understanding the process. For me the 12 steps are saturated with morality, guilt, and ethics. I am currently trying to develop a program of recovery that isn't based on those precepts, but rather spirituality and self awareness. Of course that's a different topic.

 

Thanks for your input.

 

Aaron

[Aaron]

When people read the Tao Te Ching (Dao De Jing), it may seem that it makes things very impersonal, almost uncaring from a certain perspective. But many people might also agree that what is written in the Tao Te Ching is not at all easy to understand, and it seems that there are possibly many ways to interpret it, and it also seems that it is multilayered and addresses things at various levels all at the same time. By changing one's perspective it can seem to speak about how to conduct oneself in every day normal life and how to interact with others, and at the same time from a different perspective it seems to be giving guidance on inner cultivation and proper conduct and attitude for inner cultivation, and it also seems to hint at the inner workings of tao as the 'great mystery' as well as the inner workings of tao in its many 'outward' expressions, etc. Depending on which translation one reads it may seem that some aspects are emphasized more than other aspects but I suspect that is more than a little due to the biases of the translators. I think when one examines the original Chinese characters it is easier see how it could easily be interpreted in many different ways, and how it seems to be speaking at many different levels.

 

Anyway, my point is that I think one should be very careful about drawing definite conclusions about what is really being said in the Tao Te Ching just based on one's own particular point of view and current way of thinking.

It seems to me that even amongst different traditions in Taoism there can be various different perspectives and interpretations of 'tao' with different emphasis placed on different things. When viewed from this perspective it should give one pause to think that even within practicing Taoists there are various different perspectives with different emphasis, presumably based on different points of view and different understanding, and different cultural biases at the time. It seems to me they are all outward expressions of 'tao'. Some perspectives and practices may be good, some may be fairly neutral, some may be bad. All exist in the outward expression of tao, or so it is said.

 

Also, from what I have seen, most if not all actual practicing Taoists did/do follow certain rules of conduct and many seem to place emphasis on being of service to others and helping others and society as a whole. Also some Taoist writings go into detail about various types of de and that the 'accumulation' of de (te) is the main deciding factor in how one truly progresses in their cultivation.

I have seen de broken down into 4 levels, starting at the lowest level of de to the highest:

pin de - morality and virtues.

gong de - helping others through one's actions.

yin de - helping others anonymously without selfish motive, with no desire or intent for personal recognition or gratitude, etc.

dao de - helping others in their progress to realize dao

 

Note added later: I should also probably point out that although these are expressed as levels, all are important and the higer levels build on the foundation of the lower levels. One can't embody a higher level without first having embodied the lower levels as a foundation. This is my understanding of it anyway.

 

Here is a passage from the 'Yellow Emperor's Hidden Talisman scripture", thought to orginate in the 6th century CE:

"Heaven is without kindness

but from this great kindness is born"

 

 

.

 

Hello Thewayisvirtue,

 

I understand what you're saying. I'm not a religious Taoist, but rather follow the ideas set down in Neo-Taoism (20th century western Neo-Taoism that is). I think in light of your nick and what you've stated I would assume that you consider High Te to be Virtue. I think that might be part of the confusion, I am addressing this question from the perspective that virtue isn't Te, but rather (High) Te is the innate action that springs from Tao. We don't have to debate this, if you feel differently that's fine.

 

Also in the spirit of drawing conclusions, I would ask if perhaps what you're warning against, is drawing conclusions that are different from the ones being taught in Traditional Taoism? This is just what I see on the surface, perhaps you could clarify this a bit more? In regards to the topic at hand, I'm much more interested in what your own personal views of compassion are.

 

Aaron

[Vajrahridaya]

I am currently trying to develop a program of recovery that isn't based on those precepts, but rather spirituality and self awareness. Of course that's a different topic.

 

Thanks for your input.

 

Aaron

 

Aaron,

 

What an awesome endeavor! I would be interested in hearing about it's progression.

[hyok]

Perhaps the grand scheme of developing compassion is the sole purpose of carnation in forms, so that we may experience things that reveal to us why and how we are all connected, otherwise how would one know that compassion is the way if he/she has not experienced the right situations through which compassion can be developed.

 

IMO, compassion develops through compassion but the impetus in perceiving human affairs through compassionate eyes is the crux. People need a reason and usually that reason is born through their own personal experiences which are then projected onto others who are experiencing the same thing which in turn splinters into the hearts and minds of everyone else.

[The Way Is Virtue]

I understand what you're saying. I'm not a religious Taoist, but rather follow the ideas set down in Neo-Taoism (20th century western Neo-Taoism that is). I think in light of your nick and what you've stated I would assume that you consider High Te to be Virtue. I think that might be part of the confusion, I am addressing this question from the perspective that virtue isn't Te, but rather (High) Te is the innate action that springs from Tao. We don't have to debate this, if you feel differently that's fine.

 

Hi Twinner. I think you may be misunderstanding me actually. I was not attempting to promote any particular point of vew within taoism over any other, but was actually just trying to point out that there are many perspectives, and while some may view certain things such as how de is interpreted in different ways within taoism as being seemingly contradictory, I am suggesting that it may be because of our limited understanding that there appears to be contradictions, and if we consider that the Tao Te Ching and other taoist teachings and writings may be speaking from different perspectives and different levels, sometimes all at the same time, then the apparent contradictions seem less of an issue.

 

BTW, the concept of distinct divisions of 'religious taoism' and 'philosophical taoism' and other types or periods of taoism is I believe mainly a modern academic view that seems to have been formed as an attempt by some to classify and define Taoism in different ways, and also to try to make taoism fit into certain preconceptions which appear to be in part culturally based, and to try to make more 'sense' out of all the different practices and traditions and views and approaches that are contained within Taoism as a whole. In my view these are just terms of convenience only and, from what I have seen, actual practicing taoists seem to make less distinction between religious concepts, philosophoical concepts, and the various other practices and views contained within taoism as a whole. The Tao Te Ching was and still is seen as an important book by all taoists as far as I am aware. The view of its value is not limited to any particular group within taoism or period of taoism. This might be hard for many Westerners to grasp as in Western culture philosophy and religion developed fairly separately and often seem to be at odds with 'each other'.

 

I am not partial to any particular classification or view within taoism as I see all as different outward epressions of the tao, if you will. What I was trying to do was merely point out that there are different perspectives and views within taoism as a whole and what might seem as division and contradiction from one perspective may appear less contradictory and divided from other perspectives. For example, when viewed from a 'multi-layered' perspective certain concepts take on different meanings depending on the 'layer' one is focusing on.

 

Also in the spirit of drawing conclusions, I would ask if perhaps what you're warning against, is drawing conclusions that are different from the ones being taught in Traditional Taoism? This is just what I see on the surface, perhaps you could clarify this a bit more? In regards to the topic at hand, I'm much more interested in what your own personal views of compassion are.

 

I believe I understand what you are saying here and that is not what I am saying or where I am coming from. My view is that our perspective leads us to see things in a certain way, and what we think we understand may only be a tiny piece of the 'greater whole', a greater whole that may actually be multi-layered or multi-faceted or multi-dimensional, or however you want to think of it. To be clear, I personally do not see any contradiction between viewing de as something that naturally springs from tao and which is an 'expression' or 'vehicle' of tao, and the view of de as a way of cultivation and embracing tao, and also as an embodiment or expression of one's level of cultivation. These to me are just different perspectives. Different perspectives of a 'greater whole' which we are told actually extends far 'outside the boundaries' of rational thought and analysis, and which also at the same time has no substance or dimension to it as well. It seems to me that the Tao Te Ching speaks of tao from the perspective of the great mystery as well as from the perspective of its outward expression, if not from various other perspectives as well.

 

In regards to the topic at hand, I'm much more interested in what your own personal views of compassion are.

Hmmm, well the topic is "Compassion and Taoism - A discussion about Compassion as it relates to Taoism", is it not?

 

P.S. - I think the passage I quoted in my previous reply sums up what I am trying to say quite well in regards to virtue and compassion:

"Heaven is without kindness

but from this great kindness is born."

The great mystery is beyond the duality of kindness and unkind, but great kindness (one side of a duality) arises from the great mystery. The outward expression of tao follows paths and patterns and even laws, so within that context there are definite ways that can be understood and followed, but from the context of the great mystery there are no such concepts or ways or identifiable patterns. My view then is there are many views, depending on the context and perspective.

 

I am not overly interested in debate in regards to such things as I believe it is not too helpful in general. I have no problems with people expressing different perspectives however, as we all have our own perspectives and it is only natural for us to express things from our own perspective. All the different perspectives are valuable in my 'perspective'.

 

 

(I really do need to start using a spell checker).

[Aaron]

Hi Twinner. I think you may be misunderstanding me actually. I was not attempting to promote any particular point of vew within taoism over any other, but was actually just trying to point out that there are many perspectives, and while some may view certain things such as how de is interpreted in different ways within taoism as being seemingly contradictory, I am suggesting that it may be because of our limited understanding that there appears to be contradictions, and if we consider that the Tao Te Ching and other taoist teachings and writings may be speaking from different perspectives and different levels, sometimes all at the same time, then the apparent contradictions seem less of an issue.

 

BTW, the concept of distinct divisions of 'religious taoism' and 'philosophical taoism' and other types or periods of taoism is I believe mainly a modern academic view that seems to have been formed as an attempt by some to classify and define Taoism in different ways, and also to try to make taoism fit into certain preconceptions which appear to be in part culturally based, and to try to make more 'sense' out of all the different practices and traditions and views and approaches that are contained within Taoism as a whole. In my view these are just terms of convenience only and, from what I have seen, actual practicing taoists seem to make less distinction between religious concepts, philosophoical concepts, and the various other practices and views contained within taoism as a whole. The Tao Te Ching was and still is seen as an important book by all taoists as far as I am aware. The view of its value is not limited to any particular group within taoism or period of taoism. This might be hard for many Westerners to grasp as in Western culture philosophy and religion developed fairly separately and often seem to be at odds with 'each other'.

 

I am not partial to any particular classification or view within taoism as I see all as different outward epressions of the tao, if you will. What I was trying to do was merely point out that there are different perspectives and views within taoism as a whole and what might seem as division and contradiction from one perspective may appear less contradictory and divided from other perspectives. For example, when viewed from a 'multi-layered' perspective certain concepts take on different meanings depending on the 'layer' one is focusing on.

 

 

 

I believe I understand what you are saying here and that is not what I am saying or where I am coming from. My view is that our perspective leads us to see things in a certain way, and what we think we understand may only be a tiny piece of the 'greater whole', a greater whole that may actually be multi-layered or multi-faceted or multi-dimensional, or however you want to think of it. To be clear, I personally do not see any contradiction between viewing de as something that naturally springs from tao and which is an 'expression' or 'vehicle' of tao, and the view of de as a way of cultivation and embracing tao. These to me are just different perspectives. Different perspectives of a 'greater whole' which we are told actually extends far 'outside the boundaries' of rational thought and analysis, and which also at the same time has no substance or dimension to it as well. It seems to me that the Tao Te Ching speaks of tao from the perspective of the great mystery as well as from the perspective of its outward expression, if not from various other perspectives as well.

 

I am not overly interested in debate in regards to such things as I beleive it is not too helpful in general. I have no problems with people expressing different perspectives however, as we all have our own perspectives and it is only natural for us to express things from our own perspective. All the different perspectives are valuable in my 'perspective'.

 

 

(I really do need to start using a spell checker).

 

 

No problem TWIV I understand what you're saying and I agree to a degree. I think that it's fine to talk about these things. Understanding how others view things is important, because it allows us to view our own understanding objectively, what better way to do that than discuss it in a general forum? Nix that, I can think of better ways, but this is still a fine way to do it.

 

Thanks again for your clarifications.

 

Aaron

[manitou]

Please don't write me off as a whack job... As I was just sitting here with my finger down on the mouse reading this exchange between you two, kundalini energy just came up through my mouse hand and down into my heart chakra. This only happens in the presence of Truth of some sort, I've observed in the past. My husband's foot turns inward electrically, the same phenomena; it acts as a sort of Truth compass.

 

I'll bet the Truth that resides in my soul responded to the Truth that was speaking from your souls. You two are having a most intelligent and deep conversation. I'm just going to stay out of the way and listen to you and hope you post a bit more.

[Aaron]

Please don't write me off as a whack job... As I was just sitting here with my finger down on the mouse reading this exchange between you two, kundalini energy just came up through my mouse hand and down into my heart chakra. This only happens in the presence of Truth of some sort, I've observed in the past. My husband's foot turns inward electrically, the same phenomena; it acts as a sort of Truth compass.

 

I'll bet the Truth that resides in my soul responded to the Truth that was speaking from your souls. You two are having a most intelligent and deep conversation. I'm just going to stay out of the way and listen to you and hope you post a bit more.

 

 

Who am I to question your beliefs or experiences? I am glad that you see truth in what's being said, but I think to an extant there is no truth or untruth, there is just the way things are. Also I think you have a great deal to add to the conversation and I hope you continue to share. You have a very fresh perspective that I think is not only valid, but helps our understanding to grow.

 

Thanks,

 

Aaron

[Marblehead]

Yeah, we all have our personal truths.

 

But we all have our 'reality'.

 

If our truth is not consistent with our reality we need to do some adjustments.

[manitou]

 

If our truth is not consistent with our reality we need to do some adjustments.

 

 

And there....is the crux of it.

[Aaron]

Yeah, we all have our personal truths.

 

But we all have our 'reality'.

 

If our truth is not consistent with our reality we need to do some adjustments.

 

 

I believe reality is an illusion. When we become aware, it falls away like a house of mirrors, revealing it's true appearance. How's that for a bit of wackiness?

 

Aaron

[Marblehead]

I believe reality is an illusion. When we become aware, it falls away like a house of mirrors, revealing it's true appearance. How's that for a bit of wackiness?

 

Aaron

 

Yeah, that's wacky. Sounds like some of my wacky Buddhist friends.

 

So tell me please. What is the true appearance of the illusion of reality?

 

Please be compassionate with your response. (Hehehe. Just trying to stay a little bit on topic here.)

[Aaron]

Yeah, that's wacky. Sounds like some of my wacky Buddhist friends.

 

So tell me please. What is the true appearance of the illusion of reality?

 

Please be compassionate with your response. (Hehehe. Just trying to stay a little bit on topic here.)

 

It's not so much the appearance of reality but your awareness of reality. An apple is still an apple, a bird is still a bird, but the way you view yourself in connection with that bird is completely different. You are as much a part of that bird as it is you. You understand that just because you're not touching something, doesn't mean you're not touching it. You see the person in front of you, not as a stranger, but as yourself. You treat people, not as strangers anymore, because no one is a stranger.

 

We all spring from Tao, everything in creation, so we all come from one source and that source is within everything and connects everything. I am the man that lived 200,000 years ago, just as I am the man I am today. Death is not the end, but the beginning. My existence is not tied to the small lot of time that I am existing right now, but the entirety of existence. You are Tao and I am Tao. I am It and you are It. We are no longer I, but It.

 

Knowing that and becoming aware of it are two different things. I know this is the way things are, but have I truly become aware of it, have I learned that the simplest of actions, just opening my eyes and seeing what is before me in the mirror, is not everything, but is everything?

 

Anyways, more wackiness.

 

Aaron

[xenolith]

We all drink from the same same stream. We contribute to it through our interactions with others...therefore give the finest water that you can.

 

Knowledge of the sweetness of the stream...herein resides the wisdom of compassion.

 

Exercising the heart's desire to Love...therein resides the meaning of compassion.

Edited December 14, 2010 by xenolith

[Marblehead]

You are Tao and I am Tao. I am It and you are It.

 

Anyways, more wackiness.

 

Aaron

 

Yes, we all are stardust. However, all manifest thing have formed in their own individual ways.

 

And because of this there are many things that are acceptable to me but there are some things that are unacceptable to me (the behavior of certain individuals, for example).

 

Yes, I am aware that we all are of the same source. But some of the manifestations of the source are beyond my ability to accept.

 

This thought has to do with compassion as well. Is there any requirement for me to feel compassion for someone who has ruined there life through intentional wrong-doing? I think not. Should I feel compassion for the rapist/killer of an eleven year old girl who is on death row? I think not.

 

Yes, there is the Way of Tao and there is the way of man. All to often the two ways are at opposites. It is my opinion that when the way of man is counter to the Way of Tao compassion is null and void.

[Marblehead]

We all drink from the same same stream. We contribute to it through our interactions with others...therefore give the finest water that you can.

 

Knowledge of the sweetness of the stream...herein resides the wisdom of compassion.

 

Exercising the heart's desire to Love...therein resides the meaning of compassion.

 

Hi Xeno,

 

Thanks for joining in.

 

Yes, we all drink from the same water. However, there are some who live upstream who will piss in the water to make it undrinkable to all others. That is the way of some men.

 

Should I still love this man who has pissed in the drinking water? Sorry. I just can't go there.

[The Way Is Virtue]

Please don't write me off as a whack job... As I was just sitting here with my finger down on the mouse reading this exchange between you two, kundalini energy just came up through my mouse hand and down into my heart chakra. This only happens in the presence of Truth of some sort, I've observed in the past. My husband's foot turns inward electrically, the same phenomena; it acts as a sort of Truth compass.

Hi manitou. It doesn't sound wacky to me. I think the boundary between wackiness and reality depends on what a person has personally experienced, consensual experience, and also what falls within the limits of the sphere of one's personal belief system and one's societal or cultural consensual belief system one is involved with as well. There is a constant interplay between personal exerience, consensual experience, and the limiting sphere and influences of one's belief system. What people may view as some sort of clear cut reality with clear cut boundaries actually is a constanly changing and evolving interplay between all the factors I mentioned above. Anyway, just thought. In the end, all we have is the sum total of our experience to judge by. What other's think and believe does not change our experience. Our experience is our experience.

[xenolith]

Should I still love this man who has pissed in the drinking water?

Yes. That action of yours may cause him to become a non-stream pisser, to act not will surely not. And you will have exercised your heart's desire...never choose not to...hard sometimes to so choose...but the heart grows cold and hard when one chooses not