So What does Tao say about attachment/desire

[Marblehead]

Hi Wuji,

 

Another great post.

 

Thanks for sharing.

[taowanderer]

.

Edited October 2, 2011 by taowanderer

[Wuji108]

Hi Wuji,

 

Nice to see you on Taobums

 

I don't know if you remember me we met in Georgia a few years ago. Right before you were moving to Wudang Shan. I also briefly met your teacher there. Very bright and positive energy he had.

 

Are you still in China? I just moved here a month ago.

 

Best,

 

Cameron

 

Hi Cameron,

 

I am in Wudang Shan for just three more weeks and then I head back to the US. Have been a "Wandering Taoist" for the past three years and not sure where I'll land next... Where in China are you?

 

Best,

Corinne

[Cameron]

I live in Beijing. Prior to that I was in Korea for 2 1/2 years. I will be in China for atleast 1 year. Perhaps longer if I really like it.

 

How did you find living on Wudang Shan?

Edited September 29, 2011 by Cameron

[Enishi]

Learning detachment is good for being able to let go of things that no longer help you. For a brief period when I was experiencing intense internal bliss I started wondering if I really was becoming completely "free". Then I got attached to other things and realized I "nope, I'm still a lustful, spiteful ding dong human". The difference is that inner alchemy makes the process of shifting attachments and detachment smoother and more natural.

[Birch]

I figure learning detachment is useful for whatever you deem it useful for. Even those buddhists suggest not to get attached to detachment either. It's sort of like learning to drive, rather than being driven IME/IMO. I still maintain the 'self' to be gotten rid of is the conditional construct created to protect oneself (true-self) in situations that require it. But I should add, 'remembering' is just as important. It's important post-circumstances/event in which you 'constructed' because you want full faculty of consciousness for all the other moments.You don't want the new moments getting understood through the previous (now not appropriate) construct(s).

Oh yeah, it's like being a Transformer then getting 'stuck' in airplane-mode when you need to have wheels. Or something like that.

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

Attachment and desire should be balanced with detatchment and acceptance.

 

The Tao says to balance. If desire is too great, learn to accept what you have. If attachments are binding, learn to let [them] go.

 

Find balance in all things, and you hear to the Tao; Listen to the Tao and you will find balance in all things.

[Simple_Jack]

The perspective of reconciliation of opposing forces comes into play here - recognizing when enough is enough - I have enough to feed myself today, so that is enough...I don't have to store so much food in my pantry that much of it sits there for years. I don't have to have ten outfits for each season, I don't have to compete with the Jones. At the same time, yes, I do live so I need food, shelter, clothing, etc, and it is okay to live above subsistence level. The universe will provide.

 

Emotion is natural, and a gift - when is it responded to and acknowledged at its point of origin and then released. The moment we attach to emotion and create drama we are attaching. The moment drama enters the picture, a "need" or attachment has been activated. We attach also to different roles - for example - I may put myself into the role of hero - rushing in to help/heal people. Or I may habitually put myself into the role of victim - attach to the role of victim. This form of attachment is the subject of Taoist Xing (essential nature) training. If we attach to a role, who are we really?

 

And then that brings in the whole question of dialectics - how do we move beyond the yin/yang of the universe? What is the dynamic that lets us bring indulgence and abstention into balance? How do we get to the point of knowing when enough is enough and moving past a particular attachment? How do we shift our perspective to be present in the contentment of the moment and acceptance of what is now?

 

This is such a huge subject - attachment takes so many forms, beyond attachment to things and people...

My god woman! This and your last posts sound a lot like something I've read before....I don't know, it starts with a "B" and ends with an "M"......

[Simple_Jack]

Fixed my post and added some things....

 

Hmmm, interesting subject though.....

 

The commonality between Taoism, Buddhism, and Confucianism is that at some point there is a move from first disciplining yourself towards developing detachment to sense data, to being able to "detach" or not be carried away by the constant stream of sensory input; and then being able to fully experience everything without contrivance.

 

Buddhism has a laid out approach starting from the causal vehicle of the Sravakas (Hinayana,) where it tends to be more strict, as a means for "purifying the mind-stream" of someone first starting out on the path. This is done by cultivating "virtue" and training the neophyte to develop "mindfulness" and to utilize vipashyana ("insight" meditation) to analyze into their current state of mind in order to "detach" from the incoming sensory input and afflictive states. This in turn "trains" the neophyte towards developing mundane meditative absorption and "transcendental wisdom." Then in Mahayana, it moves towards developing insight towards experiencing everything as it is, without accepting or rejecting anything....

 

Of course we have the stories of the 8 immortals and Zen masters getting drunk and hanging out at brothels; the 84 mahasiddhas sleeping with prostitutes, drinking alcohol, etc...

 

Confucius laid out his experience of the path towards Tao like this: "At fifteen I had my mind set on learning. At thirty I stood firm. at forty, I had no doubts. At fifty, I knew the decrees of Heaven. At sixty my ear was obedient [the mind was detached.] At seventy, I could follow what my heart desired, without transgressing what was right [always in samadhi.]"

 

In Buddhism they would say being in samadhi while walking, reclining, sitting, and standing (meaning in each and every moment of your life.)

 

So like I said above: Eventually, there is a point when everything can be experienced without any "impressions," without leaving any traces in the mind, or without "sticking"....In other words, Mind is "unmoved" so to speak.

 

So for example, I'm sitting here at work and everything being experienced in each moment...The sound of traffic outside, the sight of fine looking women in their tight business attire, this arising thought, the aroma of cookies on the desk, and taste of chocolate chip cookie in my mouth...These are all Tao.

 

Bleh, sorry for the rambling lol....

 

EDIT: Fixed and added to a sentence as this post is talking about the levels of how the Chinese refer to as "seeing the Tao" and not just mundane meditative absorption, which doesn't develop "insight" in order to "detach" from habitual habit-energies. The example of Confucius's progress has to do with this.

Edited October 18, 2011 by Simple_Jack

[Patrick Brown]

Ever desireless, one can see the mystery.

Ever desiring, one sees the manifestations.

These two spring from the same source but differ in name; this appears as darkness.

Darkness within darkness.

The gate to all mystery.

[Marblehead]

I so much don't like the use of "darkness" in that quote.

 

This is because "darkness" has negative connotations of being something to be feared.

 

Understanding that both have the same source is something to be overjoyed about.

[EagleShen]

 

Taoism proper is about unification of consciousness, which results in a firm belief that some cake for everyone is good, too much cake for some and too little or none for others is bad, too much cake for you personally will give you indigestion, no cake at all for you personally will give you hunger pangs... A unified, whole, unmolested consciousness (referred to as the state of a "real human," "man/woman of tao," "holy sage," "realized human" and, occasionally, jun zi ) has no problem coping with these situations as they arise. None of them is elevated to the status of an absolute, an ideal. If you are told that no one should want any cake ever for any purposes under any circumstances in order to accomplish whatever, that's not taoism. Taoism is situationally flexible. If I want cake, it will look into why, and how much, and where and how I intend to get it, and when I plan to stop, and what it's made of, and how much I need it and how much I deserve it and so on... rather than invalidate my desire automatically. Cake, of course, stands for "any and all situations of the process of living" here.

This

 

This discussion reminds me of a famous painting with Confucius, Buddha and Lao Tzu in it that attempts to demonstrate the difference between the approaches. The 3 sages are all sampling out of a large cauldron labelled 'life' (or something). Confucius looks like he's just tasted the most sour thing you could imagine, and Buddha the most bitter thing ever. Lao Tzu, however, looks like he's just tasted the sweetest nectar.

 

Additionally, i'm not entirely convinced the detachment is a particularly good translation, most people tend to think this means you don't feel desire, where as I understand the whole concept more as 'it doesn't rule you', ie you can still feel it, and in fact you could argue that only one who is detached from desire can actually fully experience desire.

 

This is part of the reason i enjoy Daoism so much, as there is nothing which is not the Dao - and at the same time at the heart of mastering the mind is not being ruled by the 'ten thousand things' (including the 5 senses).

[Harmonious Emptiness]

This

 

edit

 

Being ruled by the senses pulls us out of "the moment" or "suchness" I think. I mean, we can smell nice things, and see beautiful things, or conversely, smell bad things and see nasty things, but if they don't pirate our focus, then we are still detached.

 

If I think, "oh, I want this, it will do this for me, I won't have to be like I was without it" then I'm in the future, the past, and all up in my mind, but no longer "there." I feel like this is a big slice o' the Dharma pie. Mmmmm.. Dharma pie..

 

ha ha.. never said I was perfect...

Edited November 8, 2011 by Harmonious Emptiness

[deci belle]

Desire is a wonderful thing. Attachment to desire is something else altogether. Attachment to anything is conditioned and dependent. I would have to say either you are or you aren't. But mostly it is a matter of gravity and degree. In terms of the most basic necessity, observing the disease of the mind means it entails suffering. This is an habitual relationship not with the world, but with oneself. It is neurosis. This neurosis is a mental crutch. This is the dependency one must acknowledge and cut away from one's life.

 

Don't be sidetracked by externals in this regard. One follows the heart's desire without stepping over the line. The most subtle veils are of your own making and must be swept away until there is nothing left of you. When you don't want, then self and other turn into mutual response because the situation becomes the context. Sure, no one else knows that— but when you do, you are not at issue with conditions. So when others are, you detach from their issue, not the situation. The situation may very well go on, but you don't.

 

Who can start and end here without further deliberations?

 

Patrick said:

Ever desireless, one can see the mystery.

Ever desiring, one sees the manifestations.

These two spring from the same source but differ in name; this appears as darkness.

Darkness within darkness.

The gate to all mystery.

 

An enlightening being sees both— as delusion and absolute are both empty.

Also, seeing oneself in terms of delusion, along with conditions that are themselves delusional,

whereas the deluded do not see themselves nor conditions as delusional.

Seeing both is the path of the Great Vehicle, entering where there is no entry.

 

Seeing is seeing through phenomena without denying characteristics.

Knowing the mystery is knowing creation as causeless phantom scenarios.

So following the heart's desire is going along with creation's cycles

While not stepping over the line is not following conditions.

 

What is there to want from desires knowing the images are complete illusion?

What is there to attach to situations with the knowledge that creation is entirely unsubstantial?

(ed note: added Patrick's quote and the comment)

Edited November 8, 2011 by deci belle

[Marblehead]

 

Who can start and end here without further deliberations?

 

 

That sounds like, "The sage stops without know why she has stopped."

[deci belle]

[Marblehead]

So one follows the heart's desire within unknowing (innocence, not ignorance or cunning).

 

I like the way you said that. I also like the word "innocence".

 

Part of your post caused me to think:

 

"First there is a mountain, then there is no mountain, then there is."

 

Yes, I am sure you could have gone on and on. Hehehe.

[deci belle]

Marblehead said:

"First there is a mountain, then there is no mountain, then there is."

 

Yes. It is in the interval between "is" and "is" that transformation occurs. One does not "cut" insofar as LaoTzu's dictum that the master carpenter does no cutting. The interval is pure alchemy, effortless response within unknowing. By managing the interval selflessly, one meets conditioned potential with causelessness. One yin and one yang equal one change. Those who do not see change are compelled to go along with creation. Those who see change somehow stand outside the conditional evolutionary cycle and are not subject to the killing energy of its yin convergence.

 

Invariably, changelings are blessed with amnesia because they reflect on phenomena and disregard potential. It is a matter of perspective. Without the perspective of selfless causelessness, one submerged in the flux of phenomena has nothing to effect objectivity outside the blur of time. Whereas knowing "no mountain" will inevitably return to its alternate, an enlightening being just waits. Just waiting is the crux of self-refinement it seems. That's why it is not a matter of doing.

 

In following the heart's desire unknowingly, it's what you don't do that counts.

[Marblehead]

You got heavy on me that time. I actually had to read each word individually to make sure I was grasping what you were saying.

 

But yeah,

 

"In following the heart's desire unknowingly, it's what you don't do that counts."

 

If it doesn't need be done then don't do it.

 

(Be careful now Folks, while reading this; it is not an excuse to be lazy!)

[deci belle]

Ya, the hard part is always forgetting the confusion whipped up by the compulsion to keep up with the flow, the speed of a given situation.

 

My estimation is that only about 2% of the time or less, something actually needs to be acted on. Sometimes you really need to act. But one waits until the time arrives. One responds on ones own terms. One makes the universe wait— it is something the universe needs; you do not need anything. The interval one is awaiting is according to celestial timing, not human timing. If you can be dedicated to now, it is as if you are in the eye of the situation as creation acts in concert. The mountain is going to pop up, but since you know that you can decide when. Taoism calls this taking over creation, because you do …and no one knows. Only you know.

 

The alchemical classics all tell us to refine the self and await the time. They also say neither rushing ahead nor lagging behind, like a cat watching a mouse-hole, ever vigilant, careful not to miss the timing. When the celestial time arrives, human energy is responsive.

 

The whole point of this kind of subtle intensity is to follow the breath of creation, waxing and waning. It is really a curious affair in that one does not have to go along with creation at all. One leaves the matrix and enters the mystery. It is so for no reason. It just is and no one knows why. But the ancients have left this teaching for those who have the affinity to follow in their footsteps.

 

In the final analysis, the benefit is this: taoism calls it stealing potential. It is as if the spiritually aware potential energy that makes manifestation possible is gathered by the individual not going along with the particular situation one is a part of. This gathering of potential is real, yet one doesn't actually gather anything. It goes back to following the heart's desire within unknowing.

 

One last thing… it is like the story of the monkeys who do not want 3 nuts in the morning and 4 nuts at night. So the monkey feeder says, "Ok, I'll give you 4 in the morning and 3 at night"— at this the monkeys are very pleased. First of all, you adapt to the situation selflessly and respond impersonally to give the universe its arbitrary causeless requirement in each situation as it arises. Secondly, one uses this situation to master the 3rd and 4th hexagrams. Imagine that!

 

You see, the world gets it all backwards! Those of you who know the I Ching, know that the 3rd hexagram is Difficulty. This should be done before i.e., in the morning. This is advancing the yang fire. This is effort. This is following desires. This is entering the tiger's lair. The 4th hexagram is Innocence. This should be done last. This is withdrawing the fire when the killing energy of the yin convergence first arises in order to gather potential and seal it within innocence void of intellectualism. This is non-doing. This is not stepping over the line. This is stealing potential.

 

I am directly divulging the secret. Who can put it to use?

 

(ed note: delete word "for" in second paragraph and add "in order" in last big paragraph)

Edited November 11, 2011 by deci belle

[Guest munky]

thanks deci belle i love how you put it so profound yet so simple when its done. Especially the part "it is something the universe needs."

Ive seen marblehead post about how he is a philosphical taoists and some others here are alchemical taoists but really, in deeply understanding and being able to do what is said in the philosophical texts IS alchemical.

Other things you do maybe aim to help u get to the stage where you can always do this continuously?

 

Liu-i-ming in his commentaries talks about human mind and mind of tao coming together. It's like normal people are controlled by their logical and rational human mind. At every situation if it is used, it is no longer spontaneous action but more like considering alternatives and consequences of them and it is how attachment to desires will happen. If one sublimates the human mind and has faith in the mind of tao in doing what is necessary, dropping the fear of the unknown and having to rely on rational definitions of phenomena then one can wu wei.

It's what i believe is fulfilling destiny, which means if you can always wu wei as you are going through what needs to gone through, karma and all in a smoothly and in the best way possible, and without suffering (not feeling like you are suffering). So when rational human mind not in control and in trusting the spontaneous action according to the situation, then even if you get rich or poor, something good happens, something bad happens, it's destiny and what Heaven and Earth has given you so how can you say like or dislike it? But if we had a purpose in life when we were spirit, before we were born and wanted to set out to do something in this life, then i suppose this is a good way to end up achieving this yes?

 

I recently read in lieh tzu about endeavour vs destiny and how it is all too easy to see the concept of destiny as like fatalism, a sort of lazy attitude to things, which too many outsiders think what non-doing is.

Endeavour says "If it is as you say, certainly i have no efffecton things. But is it you who directs that things should be so?"

Destiny answers "When we say that a thing is destined, how can there be anyone who directs it? I push it when it is going straight, let it take charge when it is going crooked. Long life and short, failure and success, hing rank and low, wealth and poverty, come about of themselves. What can I know about it?"

 

So though destined it doesn't mean somethings gonna happen that way no matter what. I interpret this as fulfilling destiny, when destiny "pushes" it when you are doing what needs to be done ad nothing more all the time. And being crooked is the resistance to what is happening, as you less smoothly overcome destined karmic situations.

 

 

It also talked about being completely in every situation and just spontaneously do what needs to be done, like how deci belle said to follow the heart's desire without stepping over the line, as it is desire but spontaneously being done. Reacting to the situation without using your human mind to conceive of any alternative paths of action and what's gonna happen afterwards for either of them, which is the attachment to things. And the attachment causes the desire that steps over the line. And as deci belle said you do not need anything but in this case you suddenly need something for yourself? How can you fulfill your destiny with mind like that? Wouldnt new karma then be constantly created and also it will make you suffer (resistance) when going through your old karma?

Edited November 10, 2011 by munky

[Marblehead]

In the final analysis, the benefit is this: taoism calls it stealing potential. It is as if the spiritually aware potential energy that makes manifestation possible is gathered by the individual not going along with the particular situation one is a part of. This gathering of potential is real, yet one doesn't actually gather anything. It goes back to following the heart's desire within unknowing.

 

You said this very well. I call it building reserve energy but it really doesn't matter what words we use to describe it. Potential (Mystery) is ever-present. This is part of what wu wei is about.

[Marblehead]

Ive seen marblehead post about how he is a philosphical taoists and some others here are alchemical taoists but really, in deeply understanding and being able to do what is said in the philosophical texts IS alchemical.

Other things you do maybe aim to help u get to the stage where you can always do this continuously?

 

Oh shit! I've just had another label slapped on me. Hehehe. (But I understand what you are saying.)

 

But yes, Deci started a discussion that I felt was worth engaging in, not only for myself but for others as well.

[EagleShen]

I've been wondering if a person's attitude to desire comes down to basic assumptions in their outlook on life.

 

If you believe you were born here to learn to escape, then all attachment and desires are necessarily to be transcended through moving away from them.

 

If you believe you were born here to bring bridge/fuse heaven and earth, then all attachment and desires are necessarily to be transformed through moving towards them.

 

A thought

[Marblehead]

I've been wondering if a person's attitude to desire comes down to basic assumptions in their outlook on life.

 

If you believe you were born here to learn to escape, then all attachment and desires are necessarily to be transcended through moving away from them.

 

If you believe you were born here to bring bridge/fuse heaven and earth, then all attachment and desires are necessarily to be transformed through moving towards them.

 

A thought

 

A good thought, I will suggest.

 

I agree that our image of ourself is going to be the driving force of how we conduct our life while we are here. If we feel we "deserve" certain things in life we will always have desires we will be chasing after and we will rarely have the time to just "be" and enjoy the life we have been offered.