What is Wu Wei?

[doc benway]

It is oftentimes difficult for me to feel comfortable with Buddhist-oriented thoughts.

 

I had no problem with this one.

 

Thanks for sharing.

Funny - this one doesn't do it for me at all!

No slight to you Mark, I'm just a bit dense and concrete...

[Marblehead]

Funny - this one doesn't do it for me at all!

No slight to you Mark, I'm just a bit dense and concrete...

 

Hehehe. How does that saying go? Different strokes for different folks.

[ChiDragon]

The wu wei difference between LaoTze and ZhuangTze

 

LaoTze: Don't interfere with Nature; and let Nature take its own course.

 

ZhuangTze: Don't let Nature interfere with the course of my life; and let me live freely.

Edited January 14, 2012 by ChiDragon

[Harmonious Emptiness]

doesn't wu also mean empty in a way? like wuji and wuxi?

 

so wu wei would be like empty action, or meditation in action, or just doing things without predetermined objectives and a "when the only tool you have is a hammer" type approach...? Maybe just empty of thoughts like when you're really into what you're doing and you move with it like water down a stream.. That's what it means to me anyway.. though of course just because that might be what the two words mean doesn't mean that's the only possible answer.

[Marblehead]

doesn't wu also mean empty in a way?

 

I don't do the language stuff but my direct answer would be "yes".

 

But I rarely speak to this as it reduces my power of disagreeing with Buddhists about emptiness. Hehehe.

 

And actually, I have suggested that in my opinion the state of wu wei can be attained through empty-minded meditation.

[Vmarco]

I am so glad that others have seen the mountain. I would be in distress if I were the only person who has seen the mountain. But the valley between the two mountains is real too. That is my place of rest - in the Valley Spirit.

 

 

The neurosis of delusion is quite entertaining,...nevertheless, in the Present, there is neither mountain nor valley.

 

V

[Mark Foote]

It's brushed on the slips 10-12 in this link: http://www.tao-te-king.org/taiyi_shengshui.htm

 

That translator prefers 'task' to 'duty' and 'suffers no harm' to 'not boned'.

 

What's expressed in these lines is very early 'pre-Laozi' taoism!

 

That's very interesting, then. The Zen teacher Dogen went to China wondering why, if everyone has Buddha nature, must one practice zazen (essentially). So the 'pre-Laozi" logic points to the word and the task. Lately I am drawn to just being where I am moment after moment, the experience of a location in consciousness in three dimensions as it were, and how that acts and opens feeling. I recall many things, then I realize all I have to do is be where I am, and there's no way I can't be where I am if you get right down to it. Sort of the same question Dogen had, sort of the notion of the word and the task and yet easy peasy.

 

Steve, I just like the part about floating on clouds and following the wind. I frequently lose Dogen as he justifies the Buddhism of his teaching- that's the way it reads to me.

 

There were are again, the word and the task as it were- words up in the air on clouds, following the wind a task (seemingly), something like that. Hard to believe it could be easy peasy, have to keep open to that experience where I am, or it's all too much!

[ChiDragon]

I find this an interesting area to consider, these are the words that are often used to describe Wu Wei but I'm not sure that they tell me much. I don't intend to be critical CD, I think it's worth looking at these things and how they apply to us personally.

 

Not critical at all, my friend. I am glad that I have something captures your interest in....

 

1. How is it that Nature can not take it's course?

2. How can I let or not let Nature take its course?

3. How is it that I can do something to "cause Nature to go off its course"?

4. Am I something other than Nature?

5. If so, where is the line?

6. How do I know when Nature/I are on and off course?

7. If I attempt to "right" that course, am I not interfering?

Rhetorical questions that help me feel it, I don't have answers...

 

I am glad to answer all these questions in a "Wu Wei" attitude, in a natural way without bias.

 

1. By observation, a river flows from the west to the east without interruption was considered "let Nature take its course".

 

2. If a dam was built on a river interfering the water to flow was considered that Nature is off course.

 

3. Item number 2 is one of your answers. All animals and plants are part of nature. If one kills animals and chopped the trees down or set fires to burn down the forest, these are the tings that will cause Nature to go off course. E.g., if a rattle snake was killed will effect the infestation of rodents in that region.

 

4. According to the point of view of LaoTze, you are something other than Nature. It is because you have to deal with Nature. You have to deal with the cold weather of Nature by wearing more clothes; and you have to wear less clothes in the summer. Human is a dependent on Nature to survive. However, Nature can survive without humans. Human has no contribution to Nature but destroying it.

 

5. The line is "Wu Wei" as LaoTze had defined.

 

6. All of the above.

 

7. Yes, as soon you took some kind of action toward Nature, you are interfering with Nature in some way, regardless of the outcome.

 

Some characteristics of Nature:

Wild - Nature cannot be tamed, categorized, or restrained

Spontaneous - Nature is "of itself so" / ZiRan / Alan Watts quotes Suzuki Sensei as comparing Zen to "dropping a fart" - one doesn't plan it, it happens as it happens

Unpredictable - Nature is full of asymmetry and irregularity

Relentless - Nature always continues on, moving forward while standing still, life comes and goes and is always there

Aware - There is a luminosity, a spark, life, something that completely defies description

 

I don't really get it yet but Wu Wei is definitely one of my favorite topics to work with.

 

I don't know does this help any or not....

[Marblehead]

The neurosis of delusion is quite entertaining,...nevertheless, in the Present, there is neither mountain nor valley.

 

V

 

I was beginning to think that you had died and gone to Happy Mountain.

[doc benway]

I don't know does this help any or not....

I do appreciate you taking the time to reply so thoroughly.

I don't quite have the patience to address each point.

Suffice it to say that I disagree with your interpretation.

 

The Empty Boat parable of Zhuang Zi (among others) clearly says to me that human beings are a manifestation and agent of natural action just as a thunderstorm or flood. So if a boulder rolls off a mountaintop and blocks a stream due to an earthquake, or that same boulder is pushed off accidentally by someone who stumbles, or if a person pushes it intentionally, what is the difference? Does the stream or boulder care or discriminate? I do not see myself as separate from nature in the same way that you do. I'm not stating this in an authoritative way. I'm not judging who is right or wrong. Just sharing my perspective to (presumptuously, perhaps) stimulate some deeper consideration of the topic.

[Marblehead]

So if a boulder rolls off a mountaintop and blocks a stream due to an earthquake, or that same boulder is pushed off accidentally by someone who stumbles, or if a person pushes it intentionally, what is the difference? Does the stream or boulder care or discriminate?

 

But suppose that someone intentionally rolled the boulder into the stream for the purpose of diverting the water so that You would have no water to water your crops but that other person now would get all the water for their crops. True, the boulder and the stream would still not care.

 

But I am pretty sure you would care and I am pretty sure you would take action against such an event.

[ChiDragon]

I do appreciate you taking the time to reply so thoroughly.

I don't quite have the patience to address each point.

Suffice it to say that I disagree with your interpretation.

 

The Empty Boat parable of Zhuang Zi (among others) clearly says to me that human beings are a manifestation and agent of natural action just as a thunderstorm or flood.

 

1. So if a boulder rolls off a mountaintop and blocks a stream due to an earthquake, or

 

2. that same boulder is pushed off accidentally by someone who stumbles, or

 

3. if a person pushes it intentionally, what is the difference? Does the stream or boulder care or discriminate?

 

I do not see myself as separate from nature in the same way that you do. I'm not stating this in an authoritative way. I'm not judging who is right or wrong. Just sharing my perspective to (presumptuously, perhaps) stimulate some deeper consideration of the topic.

 

Just from a pure philosophical point of view:

First we must have to consider what was being natural(Wu Wei). By LaoTze's definition, Wu Wei has no intent of any kind for being natural(let Nature take its course).

 

In items 1 and 2, were there any intent....??? No, there was no intent. Therefore, Nature took its course which was natural.

 

3. It was not a matter of "Does the stream or boulder care or discriminate?" However, it was the intent of someone to push the boulder interrupting the stream flow which caused Nature to go off course. Thus it was not Wu Wei.

Edited January 15, 2012 by ChiDragon

[Mark Foote]

Just from a pure philosophical point of view:

First we must have to consider what was being natural(Wu Wei). By LaoTze's definition, Wu Wei has no intent of any kind for being natural(let Nature take its course).

 

In items 1 and 2, were there any intent....??? No, there was no intent. Therefore, Nature took its course which was natural.

 

3. It was not a matter of "Does the stream or boulder care or discriminate?" However, it was the intent of someone to push the boulder interrupting the stream flow which caused Nature to go off course. Thus it was not Wu Wei.

Exactly so, I would say! Intent is in fact a consequence of ignorance and the "station of consciousness", a term I found in the Pali Canon (I think the term "Buddhism" was only coined after the Pali Canon had already been composed, although it was not in Pali at that time). The habitual activities that the Gautamid spoke of are the coupling of intent to action, and the cessation of the habitual activities that he taught depended on the induction of meditative states; he taught that this cessation was gradual, first in speech, then in body, and then in mind. He seemingly did not teach that the habitual activities ceased and never came back, only that they ceased as the meditative states occurred, and at some point the desire for again-becoming was cut off, even though the habitual activities resumed as the trance states were exited.

 

He also taught that for one who saw as it really is sense organ, sense object, consciousness, impact, and feeling, all the parts of the eight-fold path and all the prerequisites of enlightenment develop and come to fruition. That's why I say:

 

'Lately I've been writing for friends about waking up and falling asleep, about the role of the sense of place in waking up and falling asleep. If I can bring forward my sense of location and relax, then I can wake up or fall asleep; the trick is, the sense of location tends to move as I wake up or fall asleep.

 

These days I'm happiest when I can feel my action being generated from the place I find myself in, from the place and the things that enter into the place even before I know it. I can say that my sense of place is freed to move when I have an attraction or aversion to something I feel, and the witness of that attraction or aversion enters into my sense of place; that's how I find myself waking up or falling asleep, in the midst of my activity.'

 

The place I find myself in, the place and the things that enter into the place even before I know it, that is sense organ, sense object, consciousness, impact, and feeling. As it really is, is as much about the actual experience as it occurs, to me, as to the nature of the experience being empty of self, of mine, of any "my".

[konchog uma]

The neurosis of delusion is quite entertaining,...nevertheless, in the Present, there is neither mountain nor valley.

 

V

 

then there is no neurosis and no delusion. There is probably no rudeness either, or i would be compelled to ask why you are so rude. Good thing i don't care.

[konchog uma]

I have a question about wu wei.. My qigong teacher is often saying that wu wei embodies the concept of "always reacting in an appropriate way to the situation". He acknowledges that it is a doing without doing or an action without awareness of an actor.. but i don't get the link between that and appropriate reaction. His senior student said it is a martial understanding of wu wei, while the other is a philosophical understanding. Can anyone comment on that?

[ChiDragon]

I have a question about wu wei.. My qigong teacher is often saying that wu wei embodies the concept of "always reacting in an appropriate way to the situation". He acknowledges that it is a doing without doing or an action without awareness of an actor.. but i don't get the link between that and appropriate reaction. His senior student said it is a martial understanding of wu wei, while the other is a philosophical understanding. Can anyone comment on that?

 

The whole confusion of Wu Wei was started with the direct translation of the two characters as "non-doing" or "no action". The original translator did not know the philosophy behind the term Wu Wei(無為). So, one translated the meanings of the characters instead of interpreting it as a philosophy. Its translation as "non doing" or "no action" has been spread like a disease in the West and started to spread the "no action" philosophy on its own and multiplied out of control. Now, the "no action" philosophy is everybody's mind. When ever people have a chance to use it, they tend to build a story to tailor for their needs.

 

To be honest, I did not know what Wu Wei(無為) at first. In modern Chinese definition, it means doing nothing or accomplished nothing. It makes no sense to me. So, I had bought few native books written by native scholars in interpreting the Tao Te Ching. I finally realized what it means: Take no abusive action to interfere with Nature. That was my last and best understanding of Wu Wei.

 

Wu Wei is a patented term by LaoTze was being a neutralist, so the speak. Having the meaning as: Let Nature take it course.

Edited January 15, 2012 by ChiDragon

[Harmonious Emptiness]

I have a question about wu wei.. My qigong teacher is often saying that wu wei embodies the concept of "always reacting in an appropriate way to the situation". He acknowledges that it is a doing without doing or an action without awareness of an actor.. but i don't get the link between that and appropriate reaction. His senior student said it is a martial understanding of wu wei, while the other is a philosophical understanding. Can anyone comment on that?

 

I think the differences can be seen when applying the understanding of "empty" for wu. Empty just in the Taoist sense of an empty heart for example doesn't mean someone is lifeless, but rather clear in their heart. So emptiness in action, from a martial application, would be emptying your mind of training exercises "he's gonna move left so I'm gonna do move a, b, and c" and moving with the opponent to redirect his energy rather than pushing against it. The body might be trained to do this and this and that, but action which is empty will respond like water running over rocks and so forth.

 

The more philosophical or moral understanding would be not acting out of ego, not doing everything out of self-concern.

[Marblehead]

I have a question about wu wei.

 

I was going to respond but ChiDragon did a good enough job so I will just remain silent.

[doc benway]

But suppose that someone intentionally rolled the boulder into the stream for the purpose of diverting the water so that You would have no water to water your crops but that other person now would get all the water for their crops. True, the boulder and the stream would still not care.

 

But I am pretty sure you would care and I am pretty sure you would take action against such an event.

I might but Zhuang Zi would not...

 

 

THE EMPTY BOAT

 

He who rules men lives in confusion;

He who is ruled by men lives in sorrow.

Yao therefore desired

Neither to influence others

Nor to be influenced by them.

The way to get clear of confusion

And free of sorrow

Is to live with Tao

In the land of the great Void.

 

If a man is crossing a river

And an empty boat collides with his own skiff,

Even though he be a bad-tempered man

He will not become very angry.

But if he sees a man in the boat,

He will shout at him to steer clear.

If the shout is not heard, he will shout again,

And yet again, and begin cursing.

And all because there is somebody in the boat.

Yet if the boat were empty.

He would not be shouting, and not angry.

 

If you can empty your own boat

Crossing the river of the world,

No one will oppose you,

No one will seek to harm you.

 

The straight tree is the first to be cut down,

The spring of clear water is the first to be drained dry.

If you wish to improve your wisdom

And shame the ignorant,

To cultivate your character

And outshine others;

A light will shine around you

As if you had swallowed the sun and the moon:

You will not avoid calamity.

 

A wise man has said:

"He who is content with himself

Has done a worthless work.

Achievement is the beginning of failure.

Fame is beginning of disgrace."

 

Who can free himself from achievement

And from fame, descend and be lost

Amid the masses of men?

He will flow like Tao, unseen,

He will go about like Life itself

With no name and no home.

Simple is he, without distinction.

To all appearances he is a fool.

His steps leave no trace. He has no power.

He achieves nothing, has no reputation.

Since he judges no one

No one judges him.

Such is the perfect man:

His boat is empty.

 

- Zhuang Zi -

[doc benway]

Just from a pure philosophical point of view:

First we must have to consider what was being natural(Wu Wei). By LaoTze's definition, Wu Wei has no intent of any kind for being natural(let Nature take its course).

 

In items 1 and 2, were there any intent....??? No, there was no intent. Therefore, Nature took its course which was natural.

 

3. It was not a matter of "Does the stream or boulder care or discriminate?" However, it was the intent of someone to push the boulder interrupting the stream flow which caused Nature to go off course. Thus it was not Wu Wei.

 

I still disagree - I don't think it's that simple.

Humans have intent, animals have intent.

Intent is a natural manifestation of Dao.

 

I do not see Wu Wei as figuring out a way to do away with intent - suppressing or ignoring it.

It is our nature to have and use intention.

In fact, Daoist methods develop intent to a very high level.

 

Rather, it is about skillful application of intent.

Having a deep awareness of who and what we are and allowing this to be the flowering of intent.

Finding how and where our intention aligns with our nature rather than struggles against it.

As opposed to the misguided intent that results from confusion and blindness when we live our lives asleep.

It is very confusing to try and figure out what we are because we are so far removed from nature and our connection to her.

 

This is why I liked Wayfarer's post so much - he seems to be working skillfully with intent, not against it.

Trying to suppress or ignore it is as much opposed to Dao as misusing it.

We must find our connection with Dao through opening fully to our nature and potential, not fighting against or denying it.

Just my opinion.

[doc benway]

I have a question about wu wei.. My qigong teacher is often saying that wu wei embodies the concept of "always reacting in an appropriate way to the situation". He acknowledges that it is a doing without doing or an action without awareness of an actor.. but i don't get the link between that and appropriate reaction. His senior student said it is a martial understanding of wu wei, while the other is a philosophical understanding. Can anyone comment on that?

I agree with what I hear your teacher saying.

There is no difference between the "martial" and "philosophical" understanding as described by his senior student.

 

"always reacting in an appropriate way to the situation" means skillful application of intent.

"action without awareness of an actor" means to open oneself to one's true nature, to be fully aware.

That is the link.

To react skillfully requires that awareness and awareness requires skill.

The two are interdependent.

 

The actor is confusion, the conditioning, the sleeper.

Awareness is the clarity, the light that dissipates the confusion, illuminates the conditioning, and wakes the sleeper.

[Mark Foote]

so beautiful, thanks Steve!

[dawei]

To be honest, I did not know what Wu Wei(無為) at first. In modern Chinese definition, it means doing nothing or accomplished nothing. It makes no sense to me. So, I had bought few native books written by native scholars in interpreting the Tao Te Ching. I finally realized what it means: Take no abusive action to interfere with Nature. That was my last and best understanding of Wu Wei.

 

Wu Wei is a patented term by LaoTze was being a neutralist, so the speak. Having the meaning as: Let Nature take it course.

This does not deal or explain it in relation to man, since I believe you hold that man is separate from nature. In your understanding, do you just plug in 'man' for 'nature' to understanding in relation to man?

[konchog uma]

Thanks!

 

Steve that really helped me put it together. Its so weird how when the mind creates a division of two concepts, it can have a hard time bridging the gap (that it created) but the way you explained it made me go "a-ha!"

 

thanks everyone who responded, it was all helpful in fact.

[ChiDragon]

This does not deal or explain it in relation to man, since I believe you hold that man is separate from nature. In your understanding, do you just plug in 'man' for 'nature' to understanding in relation to man?

 

This does deal or explain it in relation to man. The whole idea about Wu Wei was written for man to be natural. Wu Wei for being "let Nature take its course" is a principle for man to follow. It was LaoTze's way of saying to the rulers not to interfere with the people's life. He was suggesting rule with Wu Wei which means do not use excessive force or high taxation to burden the people. That was the hidden code in the Tao Te Ching.

Edited January 16, 2012 by ChiDragon