The Nature of Virtue

[Ya Mu]

Hi Twinner. I think I have mentioned this before, but anyway, I am not aware of any actual practicing Taoists that have said that Taoism is not at all concerned with morality or virtue. However, one should also keep in mind that what is referred to as 'Taoism' has never been one single unified coherent institution. Many widely diverging groups with different roots and goals and approaches and focuses, and with a rather loosely based somewhat nebulous underlying theme have been grouped together and are collectively referred to as Taoism, so it is quite possible that there is some divergence in views in regards to this matter.

 

Of the two surviving Taoist branches in China today, I believe both put emphasis on being of service to others and the community and society as a whole, and both have various rules and guidelines of conduct for followers as well. I don't believe these rules and guidelnes are in place just to make follower's lives more difficult, but are seen as practical and necessary requirements. Practices and guidelines that help one cultivate virtue

are very muc a part of these traditions, just as they are in many other religious/spiritual cultication traditions around the world. I personally believe this is for very practical reasons. I think those who downplay or ignore this are missing an important aspect of these traditions.

 

Where I see the problem being is some people may read a few texts such as the Tao Te Ching and perhaps a few other Taoist texts and then attempt to draw very definite conclusions about what they believe is being expressed in those texts, and also about specific concepts within the texts, and some may also try to then make wide sweeping conclusions about Taoism in general as well. Many Taoist (and Buddhist, etc.) writings are expressions of practitioner's very deep inner experiences, and I have seem more than one Taoist point out that one shouldn't reasonably expect to begin to truly understand the full depth of what is being said in such texts without having reached such states oneself. That is not to say there isn't value for one to read and try to absorb what they can from such writings, but one's understanding will likely be fairly superficial and one's true understanding can only grow through applying oneself to their own personal cultivation over a long period of time, such that one can then relate these things to actual experience. I understand that some people in the West view texts such as the Tao Te Ching just as 'philosophy', and from that point of view one might expect to be able to analyze and think their way through to a decent understanding of what is being said, but I personally think that this view is more than a little off the mark when it comes to texts like the Tao Te Ching anyway. In many if not most Taoist traditions, one cultivates and studies under the direct guidance of an experienced teacher or teachers, as it is believed that such guidance is essential for making real progress, for all but the most rare and exceptional anyway. That's my two cent's worth on the subject and I do realize that others may and likely do see it differently. Keep smiling.

Some very good points here.

[rex]

Now there's a coincidence, I've just been reading about the neoplatonic philosophy of Plotinus where the four cardinal virtues of prudence, courage, temperance and justice have distinct applications in four classes of virtue - civil, purificatory, contemplative and exemplary. The civil virtues centre on social cohesion while the purificatory virtues centre on purging the soul; the contemplative virtues centre on allowing the intrinsic qualties of the purified soul to function while the exemplary virtues centre on abiding in the One.

 

Here's what is said about the the four cardinal virtues when operating on the contemplative level:

 

"Here prudence and wisdom consists in contemplating the beings or essences contained by intelligence; justice consists in the soul's fulfilling of her characteristic function - that is, in attaching herself to intelligence and in directing her activity there. Temperance is the intimate conversion of the soul towards Intelligence, while courage is the impassibility by which the soul becomes assimilated to what she contemplates, since the soul's nature is to be impassible."

[Taken from Porphyry's Launching-Points to the Realm of Mind p.30]

 

In this scheme I see many parallels with other traditions, both Eastern and Western.

[manitou]

"Hi Twinner. I think I have mentioned this before, but anyway, I am not aware of any actual practicing Taoists that have said that Taoism is not at all concerned with morality or virtue. However, one should also keep in mind that what is referred to as 'Taoism' has never been one single unified coherent institution. Many widely diverging groups with different roots and goals and approaches and focuses, and with a rather loosely based somewhat nebulous underlying theme have been grouped together and are collectively referred to as Taoism, so it is quite possible that there is some divergence in views in regards to this matter. "

 

 

How odd that we keep gettting stuck on this very thing, regardless of what thread we're participating in.

 

I've been on my path for so very many years and my understanding on this has evolved as well. My personal take is that at some point we realize that Virtue has nothing to do with good or bad when speaking of the Tao; it is almost more of a cleanliness thing; I just visualize my insides as being clear tubes; when some personality trait is in the way within one of the tubes, the light cannot shine through without casting shadow.

 

I just don't think we can take the Te out of the Tao Te Ching. Virtue must certainly mean something.

[2netis]

My personal take is that at some point we realize that Virtue has nothing to do with good or bad when speaking of the Tao; it is almost more of a cleanliness thing; I just visualize my insides as being clear tubes; when some personality trait is in the way within one of the tubes, the light cannot shine through without casting shadow.

 

I just don't think we can take the Te out of the Tao Te Ching. Virtue must certainly mean something.

 

Very nice metaphor, thank you.

[Marblehead]

Is this to mean that virtue is synonymous with authenticity? Turds are nothing if not authentic.

 

 

Yes, that is the way I understand it.

[manitou]

I think Virtue has to do with Intent, as well. It's just intending to live within the understanding of the logos, the Nature of What Is. There's no need to put a good or bad label on it, it's not pertinent.

[Aaron]

Hi Twinner. I think I have mentioned this before, but anyway, I am not aware of any actual practicing Taoists that have said that Taoism is not at all concerned with morality or virtue. However, one should also keep in mind that what is referred to as 'Taoism' has never been one single unified coherent institution. Many widely diverging groups with different roots and goals and approaches and focuses, and with a rather loosely based somewhat nebulous underlying theme have been grouped together and are collectively referred to as Taoism, so it is quite possible that there is some divergence in views in regards to this matter.

 

Of the two main surviving Taoist branches in China today, I believe both put emphasis on being of service to others and the community and society as a whole, and both have various rules and guidelines of conduct for followers as well. I don't believe these rules and guidelnes are in place just to make follower's lives more difficult, but are seen as practical and necessary requirements. Practices and guidelines that help one cultivate virtue are very much a part of these traditions, just as they are in many other religious/spiritual cultivation traditions around the world. I personally believe this is for very practical and specific reasons. I think those who downplay or ignore this part of the traditions are missing an important aspect. Perhaps it is because in the Modern world, and especially in the West, Religion and its associated views and practices are considered by many to be superstitious and such, and many people thus naturally tend to want to discard any such 'superstitious' aspects.

 

Where I see the problem being is some people may read a few texts such as the Tao Te Ching and perhaps a few other Taoist texts and then attempt to draw very definite conclusions about what they believe is being expressed in those texts, and also about specific concepts within the texts, and some may also try to then make wide sweeping conclusions about Taoism in general as well. Many Taoist (and Buddhist, etc.) writings are expressions of practitioner's very deep inner experiences, and I have seem more than one Taoist point out that one shouldn't reasonably expect to begin to truly understand the full depth of what is being said in such texts without having reached such states oneself. That is not to say there isn't value for one to read and try to absorb what they can from such writings, but one's understanding will likely be fairly superficial and one's true understanding can only grow through applying oneself to their own personal cultivation over a long period of time, such that one can then relate these things to actual experience. I understand that some people in the West view texts such as the Tao Te Ching just as 'philosophy', and from that point of view one might expect to be able to analyze and think their way through to a decent understanding of what is being said, but I personally think that this view is more than a little off the mark when it comes to texts like the Tao Te Ching anyway. In many if not most Taoist traditions, one cultivates and studies under the direct guidance of an experienced teacher or teachers, as it is believed that such guidance is essential for making real progress, for all but the most rare and exceptional anyway. That's my two cent's worth on the subject and I do realize that others may and likely do see it differently. Keep smiling.

 

[Edit: added a few more thoughts...}

 

Hello The Way is Virtue,

 

You are absolutely right, but what you're talking about is the view of Te as it's understood by Religious Taoists. I tend to be a 21st Century Neo-Taoist, in the sense that I don't necessarily believe that there is a Celestial Court, or that numerology is a valid science, or that you can use the I-Ching to foretell the future, or that Te is necessarily something that can be explained very well, but rather is experienced. For me the Tao Teh Ching and Chuang Tzu are enough. With that said, thank you for adding the religious Taoist view, because it does clearly show the similarities of religions.

 

In particular that religions tend to proscribe right and wrong to actions. This isn't bad, in fact it prevents societies from being chaotic (towards themselves for the most part). I also tend to believe that what is practiced as Taoism today has little to do with the Tao Teh Ching and more to do with the cultural evolution of China, including Buddhism and Confucianism, but also the folk traditions that have been passed down. But again, we've discussed this a few times before, so you know my view, and there's no need to elaborate any further here. Thank you for joining the discussion.

 

Aaron

Edited February 23, 2011 by Twinner

[The Way Is Virtue]

Hi Twinner. Best to you....

Edited February 23, 2011 by The Way Is Virtue

[Marblehead]

Those last two posts look like thread-killing posts.

 

I really hope the thread doesn't die because I think that the Taoist concept of "virtue" is an important concept for all of us, not just Taoists.

 

And I do agree that we need keep in mind that there is a difference between man-made virtue and the Virtue of Tao.

[Ya Mu]

Disappointed that you removed your post. It made several valid points.

But I will give my viewpoint on these things.

 

Oral traditions and teachings, IMO, are far more valid than the written ones. For in the written ones, only a part is revealed.

 

When I first started on this path I read the TTC and many many other books on Taoism. And I actually thought I understood quite a bit of it and considered myself a fairly "informed modern Taoist". Then I found my first Taoist Teacher, the one I spent a 12 year apprenticeship with. I attempted to impress him with my "book learning" and he laughed at me, over and over. After several years of practicing the Taoist internal cultivation techniques I laughed with him; it was truly hilarious that I thought I understood these things by reading about them. IMO and IME no one can possibly truly understand these things without first putting about 20 years into internal cultivation. And even then we only understand SOME things. I know that after putting in this cultivation the TTC makes more sense, however there is a "gotcha". One finds that the translations are inadequate without the context, and furthermore unless one intensely learns Chinese and figures out the particular cultural context of any particular writing then the meaning is still not clear, as it could mean any number of things.

 

So as to the subject of "virtue", without the internal cultivation it truly is difficult to actually experience the path of virtue and apply it in each and every moment. Otherwise, we are only experiencing or applying our individual concept of what Virtue actually is.

[Marblehead]

So as to the subject of "virtue", without the internal cultivation it truly is difficult to actually experience the path of virtue and apply it in each and every moment. Otherwise, we are only experiencing or applying our individual concept of what Virtue actually is.

 

This is a valid statement, IMO, and worthy of much consideration.

 

And thanks for your time and effort in making this thread something of much value as well as thanks to TheWayIsVirtue and others as well.

[The Way Is Virtue]

Disappointed that you removed your post. It made several valid points.

But I will give my viewpoint on these things.

 

Oral traditions and teachings, IMO, are far more valid than the written ones. For in the written ones, only a part is revealed.

 

When I first started on this path I read the TTC and many many other books on Taoism. And I actually thought I understood quite a bit of it and considered myself a fairly "informed modern Taoist". Then I found my first Taoist Teacher, the one I spent a 12 year apprenticeship with. I attempted to impress him with my "book learning" and he laughed at me, over and over. After several years of practicing the Taoist internal cultivation techniques I laughed with him; it was truly hilarious that I thought I understood these things by reading about them. IMO and IME no one can possibly truly understand these things without first putting about 20 years into internal cultivation. And even then we only understand SOME things. I know that after putting in this cultivation the TTC makes more sense, however there is a "gotcha". One finds that the translations are inadequate without the context, and furthermore unless one intensely learns Chinese and figures out the particular cultural context of any particular writing then the meaning is still not clear, as it could mean any number of things.

 

So as to the subject of "virtue", without the internal cultivation it truly is difficult to actually experience the path of virtue and apply it in each and every moment. Otherwise, we are only experiencing or applying our individual concept of what Virtue actually is.

 

Hi Ya Mu. I agree with what you are saying. One can get an overview of the types of practices and an idea of some of the different views and theories and the like by reading taoist texts, but if one wants to seriously undertake the more advanced practices one really needs an experienced and accomplished teacher. I think this would equally apply to most 'cultivation' systems. One may be able to make some real progress at the lower level practices on their own, but in my view the higher level stuff really does require the guidance and assistance of an accomplished teacher.

 

Regarding virtue, there is no doubt that different traditions and different people will see things somewhat differently. My personal views on virtue are more than a litle shaped by one of my former teachers who empahsized that one can't really expect to make any real progress in higher level self cultivation practices without first really working on cultivating virtue in one's self. Regarding 'Te' as used in writings such as the Tao Te Ching, I agree with others that this seems to be referring to something that is different than worldly virtue, and which seems to be more directly related to the cultivation of 'tao'. I don't claim to understand it beyond that very basic general idea though.

 

On a somewhat related topic, I personally do think that a practical judge of a person's level of spiritual/self cultivation is the degree of virtue they show in all their actions under all circumstances. In my experience how much mastery a person has over qi or whether a person can display any extraordinary abilities doesn't seem to be as much of a true indication of a person's 'spiritual' cultivation level as their ability to act virtuously no matter the situation and circumstances. For example, I have encountered some teachers who could display quite a bit of mastery over qi, but I wouldn't consider studying with them for the purposes of spiritual/self cultivation due to the way they acted from day to day. So in my view, worldly virtue is important not only for self cultivation but also as an indicator of a person's level of cultivation.

 

Of course people can try to fake being virtuous to try to impress others, and there is no doubt that some teachers do this, but over time their true self will show itself, especially under more trying circumstances. Of course there is a definte subjective elecment in trying to make such an evaluation, and each person will have to work from their own value system and faculties of perception, more or less, but if I were to go to the store to purchase a spiritual yardstick, this is the type of spiritual yardstick that I personally would buy. Speaking of cultivation of virtue, I have not the slightest doubt that I personally have a long way to go in this regard. My experience is that the cultivation of virtue is no easy undertaking by any means, and in my view this is where much of the real cultivation work is done. No doubt many will see it differently.

Edited February 23, 2011 by The Way Is Virtue

[Ya Mu]

 

....one of my former teachers who empahsized that one can't really expect to make any real progress in higher level self cultivation practices without first really working on cultivating virtue in one's self...

Oh I agree. But it becomes a two way street. Without tapping into the higher vibrations and tuning into one's true inner core it is very difficult to actually know what some term "high virtue" is. But without practicing this "high virtue" then it is very difficult to progress in the cultivation. Almost a catch 22 except if one works at both at the same time then the other becomes more viable.

[The Way Is Virtue]

Oh I agree. But it becomes a two way street. Without tapping into the higher vibrations and tuning into one's true inner core it is very difficult to actually know what some term "high virtue" is. But without practicing this "high virtue" then it is very difficult to progress in the cultivation. Almost a catch 22 except if one works at both at the same time then the other becomes more viable.

 

Ok, I am not speaking of high virtue however, and I wouldn't say I even know what that is. I am speaking of everyday worldy virtue that we all can recognize in others who truly embody it, for the most part. From my own perspective this is where much of the cultivation work starts and where it is done. So we may have a bit of a divergence in views in that respect. I do have little doubt that different traditions may approach this from different sides, so to speak, as you mentioned there is an interplay between the two. Perhaps at least in part that is where the difference lies. A difference in approach. In regards to high virtue, as I mentioned I don't think I am at all in a position to comment on that.

Edited February 23, 2011 by The Way Is Virtue

[3bob]

The very pinacle of virtue is also directly tied to and related to the practice of the most simple and most basic elementary beginning elements such as non-violence, for without such humble connections the "high" falls very fast and hard into the abyss.

Edited February 23, 2011 by 3bob

[Ya Mu]

Ok, I am not speaking of high virtue however, and I wouldn't say I even know what that is. I am speaking of everyday worldy virtue that we all can recognize in others who truly embody it, for the most part. From my own perspective this is where much of the cultivation work starts and where it is done. So we may have a bit of a divergence in views in that respect. I do have little doubt that different traditions may approach this from different sides, so to speak, as you mentioned there is an interplay between the two. Perhaps at least in part that is where the difference lies. A difference in approach. In regards to high virtue, as I mentioned I don't think I am at all in a position to comment on that.

Oh, I don't know that we are that far apart in our views. I was attempting to keep the other part out of it as I was trying to stay on subject from a "Taoist" viewpoint. IMO quite a bit of what is called "morality" is only the present and everyday expression of our trueselves. We do the things which some religions call "moral" because of who we are. The lesser emotions of expression, such as guilt, hate, and fear, are not an aspect of our trueselves. Whereas expressions of kindness, compassion, and love are natural expressions of our trueselves. So I agree that observation of folks and how they interact with others does point to their level of comprehension and cultivation.

[Aaron]

Hello folks,

 

My original point was that High Virtue, what some might call Te, is something that is accepted in many different religions. With that said, it also seems to be commonly agreed upon that if one is incapable of behaving virtuously (as in low or worldly virtue) then the chances they'll ever become aware of high virtue are slim. The fact is many of the actions that are found in low virtue are also products of High Virtue. If one is incapable of performing those actions out of low virtue, then the chances they'll be able to achieve High Virtue are again, very slim indeed. This is my own opinion as well.

 

Aaron

Edited February 23, 2011 by Twinner

[The Way Is Virtue]

Hello folks,

My original point was that High Virtue, what some might call Te, is something that is accepted in many different religions. With that said, it also seems to be commonly agreed upon that if one is incapable of behaving virtuously (as in low or worldly virtue) then the chances they'll ever become aware of high virtue are slim. The fact is many of the actions that are found in low virtue are also products of High Virtue. If one is incapable of performing those actions out of low virtue, then the chances they'll be able to achieve High Virtue are again, very slim indeed. This is my own opinion as well.

 

Hi Twinner. It all sounds reasonable to me. For me, virtue is virtue, so I agree that it won't make any difference what one's tradition or religion is or whatever. The only difference that I could see for what some people seem to be referring to as 'high virtue' would be how it is enacted. A very virtuous person embodies virtue, so virtue is automatic for them. It is not something that they have to think about. They are highly virtuous because it is who they are. They have no ulterior motives for acting virtuously. They are just acting completely naturally and spontaneously. I personally don't think it needs to be any more complicated than that. For the most part we can all recognize a highly virtuous person due to their selfless behaviour, so it seems to me it doesn't have to be anything too esoteric. Well, I don't think I have anything much further to say on the matter. That about sums it up for me.

Edited February 24, 2011 by The Way Is Virtue