Wu Wei: Real or Myth?

[Marblehead]

So I'm guessing no one can actually find any evidence relating Wu Wei to Lao Tzu? I'm sure it will be much more interesting to avoid the topic by creating a new thread, but I think it's important to address why we can't actually prove it's from the Tao Teh Ching or Chuang Tzu and then whether or not it's actually a real phenomena to begin with.

 

Aaron

Wrong.

 

But I will do you the honor of double posting in the new thread as well as this thread when I begin presenting my support for the fact that Lao Tzu did, in fact, speak to the concept of "wu" (Tzujan) action as well as "wu desires".

[Everything]

Ahh... what an easy way to get out of proving something, just say that the person who asks you to prove it doesn't know what he's talking about. You still haven't given any evidence regarding Wu Wei being mentioned in the Tao Te Ching. If you can prove it do so by providing text from the Tao Te Ching, preferably by a translator who has been recognized by the academic community.

 

Aaron

Preferably an academic who has been recognized by the academic community? If faith alone is not enough to you, and you want proof, then why is it that you have placed your utmost trust and faith in the idea that Lao Tzu is an academic?

 

I strongly suggest you reconsider what real and not real really means to you. How you perceive the relationship between seen and unseen. What lie and truth really means to you and most importantly, how they relate to eachother in your minds eye. Just a suggestion.

Edited August 4, 2012 by Everything

[Aaron]

Preferably an academic who has been recognized by the academic community? If faith alone is not enough to you, and you want proof, then why is it that you have placed your utmost trust and faith in the idea that Lao Tzu is an academic?

 

I strongly suggest you reconsider what real and not real really means to you. How you perceive the relationship between seen and unseen. What lie and truth really means to you and most importantly, how they relate to eachother in your minds eye. Just a suggestion.

 

Umm... I never said Lao Tzu was an academic. Read more carefully, I said that I didn't want someone's opinion without having evidence to support it, preferably by someone who is recognized as an expert (in other words understands the subject) rather than your neighbor John Doe or a friend you do yoga with.

 

 

Aaron

[Marblehead]

[Aaron]

[Marblehead]

[Marblehead]

Can you tell me exactly why my reply to Chidragon's comments regarding translation didn't actually belong in that thread? I think you might mean you didn't want the response in your thread?

 

Aaron

 

You are right. I didn't want you two argueing in that thread.

[Aaron]

So, regarding using John Wu as support that Wu Wei is not a Taoist concept:

 

John Wu did not write any preface, introduction, or footnotes to his translation so we have no idea what he thought about the concept of "wu wei".

 

John Wu did not use a single "Wade-Giles" or "Pinyin" (Romanized Chinese) in his translation so it should be considered a given that he would not have used the term "Wu Wei".

 

Furthermore, Chapter 3 is the first place the concept of "wu wei" is mentioned in the Tao Te Ching.

 

Line numbers will vary depending on individual translations but here are quotes from a number of different translations:

 

John Wu - Line six (last line) "Practice Non-Ado, ..."

 

Wayne Wang - Line 8 "... and act only with Wu."

 

Derek Lin - Line 14 "Act without contrivance."

 

James Legge - Section 3 (no line numbers) "When there is this abstinence from action, ..."

 

Stephen Mitchell - Line 14 "Practice not-doing,"

 

Okay, of these five, and yes, I could have presented many more, not one used the words "wu wei".

 

I have previously translated (based on my understanding of the concept) "wu wei" to "non action".

 

Not very different from any of the above.

 

Now, do I really mean "do nothing"? Of course not. Recently I stated that it means "take no unnatural action".

 

I have many times made the statement "Do what needs be done, nothing more, nothing less". That too, IMO is "wu wei".

 

So let's go back to John Wu. He used the compound word "Non-Ado". Note the capitalized N and A signifying that this is something important.

 

So what does non-ado mean? Let's see ...

 

a·do, [uh-doo], noun, busy activity; bustle; fuss.

 

http://dictionary.re.../browse/ado?s=t

 

My dictionary defines it as: bustling excitement : FUSS 2 : TROUBLE

 

So we could say non-busy activity, or non-bustle, or non-fuss based on John Wu's translation.

 

Are there any synonyms? Sure there are. From Microsoft Word Thesaurus:

 

commotion, hubbub, bustle, flurry, confusion, hurry, excitement, bother

 

Anyhow, this might be a good read for some folks here:

 

http://www.sacred-te.../tgl/tgl008.htm

 

Okay, I'm done for now.

 

I just sat down to eat, so I'll make this brief. The actual definition of ado according to websters is the following:

 

 

 

1: heightened fuss or concern : to-do

2: time-wasting bother over trivial details <wrote the paper without further ado>

3: trouble, difficulty

 

I think you might've chosen the definition that you felt most closely aligned with your ideas of Wu-wei, but it isn't necessarily what Wu or Lao Tzu meant to talk about in this chapter. In other words this is not "wu" in the sense of wu-wei, but rather wu as it is repeatedly talked about throughout the tao te ching, which is that we should avoid conflict and the way to avoid conflict is through not pursuing or teaching knowledge.

 

Aaron

Edited August 4, 2012 by Aaron

[Marblehead]

I just sat down to eat, so I'll make this brief. The actual definition of ado according to websters is the following:

 

1: heightened fuss or concern : to-do

2: time-wasting bother over trivial details <wrote the paper without further ado>

3: trouble, difficulty

 

I think you might've chosen the definition that you felt most closely aligned with your ideas of Wu-wei, but it isn't necessarily what Wu or Lao Tzu meant to talk about in this chapter. In other words this is not "wu" in the sense of wu-wei, but rather wu as it is repeatedly talked about throughout the tao te ching, which is that we should avoid conflict and the way to avoid conflict is through not pursuing or teaching knowledge.

 

Aaron

 

That's good Aaron. You are close enough for me to leave you alone about this for a while.

[Everything]

I have many times made the statement "Do what needs be done, nothing more, nothing less". That too, IMO is "wu wei"..

no... No no no no NO NO NO!!!

 

AN ACT OF NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ACTION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

0

 

Nothing

 

Without...

 

A letting go

 

Utter and COMPLETE SURRENDER!!!! This is literally the EASIEST the most EFFORTLESS action to take in AAAAALLLL OF EXISTANCE! It is the very act of EFFORTLESSNESS ITSELF! Its so easy you do it all the time without even knowing you are doing it!! -----YOU DO IT BILLION OF TIMES PER SECOND-------

 

You are the only one in all of existance that is even capable of standing in your own way. Stop standing in your own way! Let go of standing in your own way. Let go and allow that which you prefer. If you think you need more then that, you're on your own. I SHALL NEVER SURRENDER TO THE IDEA THAT YOU NEED MORE THEN THAT! You see where I'm getting at with this?

Edited August 5, 2012 by Everything

[Marblehead]

no... No no no no NO NO NO!!!

 

AN ACT OF NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ACTION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

0

 

Nothing

 

Without...

 

A letting go

 

Utter and COMPLETE SURRENDER!!!! This is literally the EASIEST the most EFFORTLESS action to take in AAAAALLLL OF EXISTANCE! It is the very act of EFFORTLESSNESS ITSELF! Its so easy you do it all the time without even knowing you are doing it!! -----YOU DO IT BILLION OF TIMES PER SECOND-------

 

You are the only one in all of existance that is even capable of standing in your own way. Stop standing in your own way! Let go of standing in your own way. Let go and allow that which you prefer. If you think you need more then that, you're on your own. I SHALL NEVER SURRENDER TO THE IDEA THAT YOU NEED MORE THEN THAT! You see where I'm getting at with this?

And you know I never surrender, period.

 

Surrender is a Buddhist and others' concept, not a Taoist Philosophical concept. Acceptance, non contention, and going with the flow are concepts of a different color.

[thetaoiseasy]

.

Edited August 5, 2012 by thetaoiseasy

[Everything]

And you know I never surrender, period.

 

Surrender is a Buddhist and others' concept, not a Taoist Philosophical concept. Acceptance, non contention, and going with the flow are concepts of a different color.

Taoism is philosophy? The dao that can be named is not the unchanging dao.

 

Isn't the default state of being of water a constant state of surrender and yielding?

[Marblehead]

Taoism is philosophy? The dao that can be named is not the unchanging dao.

 

So you want to speak of only the "Wu" condition (Mystery) and ignore the "Yo" condition (Manifest)? That would not be speaking of Tao but only an aspect of Tao.

 

Isn't the default state of being of water a constant state of surrender and yielding?

Have you ever stood at the bottom of Niagara Falls? Of course you haven't because it is impossible to get even close to where the water falls because it is so violent and active. Sure, you put water in a tea cup and place the cup on a firm, stable surface and the water will remain at rest. But if you add some vinegar to that water then add some baking soda you will not see water at rest but you will see it doing some pretty nasty things.

 

The Yangtze River has taken millions of Chinese lives over the centuries. You call that surrendering and yielding? I call it taking it own path through violence. And it has yet to surrender to anything except the ocean. And let's not talk about the ocean waters as they can be pretty darned violent as well.

[Everything]

So you want to speak of only the "Wu" condition (Mystery) and ignore the "Yo" condition (Manifest)? That would not be speaking of Tao but only an aspect of Tao.

 

 

Have you ever stood at the bottom of Niagara Falls? Of course you haven't because it is impossible to get even close to where the water falls because it is so violent and active. Sure, you put water in a tea cup and place the cup on a firm, stable surface and the water will remain at rest. But if you add some vinegar to that water then add some baking soda you will not see water at rest but you will see it doing some pretty nasty things.

 

The Yangtze River has taken millions of Chinese lives over the centuries. You call that surrendering and yielding? I call it taking it own path through violence. And it has yet to surrender to anything except the ocean. And let's not talk about the ocean waters as they can be pretty darned violent as well.

I don't know lets talk about whatever

 

So have you ever thought you might be projectig violence unto water?

 

If water washes me away, does that mean that water is violent? Water does not even have a personality structure to even express violence... It is in utter and complete constant surrender to its environment.

[Marblehead]

I don't know lets talk about whatever

 

So have you ever thought you might be projectig violence unto water?

 

If water washes me away, does that mean that water is violent? Water does not even have a personality structure to even express violence... It is in utter and complete constant surrender to its environment.

Okay, first let me say that I understand your wanting to talk about surrender as it is a recent inspired realization you experienced. That's fine. This thread was already dead so it is a good place to do that.

 

No, I think I can honestly say that I have recently, last couple years, projected anything on anyone or any thing.

 

If water washes you away all I can say is that you were in the wrong place at the wrong time. I place no blame on the water.

 

And I agree, water has no intent. In that way it is in a state of pure wu wei.

 

However, I still will not agree with your last sentence. Water seeks its lowest possible place. There are dome mountain lakes where water accumulates and there is no escape so it just calmly sits there. (Those are beautiful sights to se BTW.)

 

However, if there were the slightest breach in the blockage of the water it would then become very active and cut a passage so that it could attain its lowest possible place, maybe another lake, maybe the ocean.

 

True, water is subject to the heat of the sun and evaporization. But that same water will again seek its lowest possible place; it will fall as rain and continue its journey, sometimes very peacefully and othertimes perhaps very violently.

 

BTW Rain has been falling here the past hour and it is likewise seeking its lowest possible place. My catchment barrels are full so the water is going out the overflow to wherever it might end up, perhaps the river that is not too far from where I live and then to the ocean.

[Everything]

Okay, first let me say that I understand your wanting to talk about surrender as it is a recent inspired realization you experienced. That's fine. This thread was already dead so it is a good place to do that.

 

No, I think I can honestly say that I have recently, last couple years, projected anything on anyone or any thing.

 

If water washes you away all I can say is that you were in the wrong place at the wrong time. I place no blame on the water.

 

And I agree, water has no intent. In that way it is in a state of pure wu wei.

 

However, I still will not agree with your last sentence. Water seeks its lowest possible place. There are dome mountain lakes where water accumulates and there is no escape so it just calmly sits there. (Those are beautiful sights to se BTW.)

 

However, if there were the slightest breach in the blockage of the water it would then become very active and cut a passage so that it could attain its lowest possible place, maybe another lake, maybe the ocean.

 

True, water is subject to the heat of the sun and evaporization. But that same water will again seek its lowest possible place; it will fall as rain and continue its journey, sometimes very peacefully and othertimes perhaps very violently.

 

BTW Rain has been falling here the past hour and it is likewise seeking its lowest possible place. My catchment barrels are full so the water is going out the overflow to wherever it might end up, perhaps the river that is not too far from where I live and then to the ocean.

I love how you speak about water, lovely!

 

I don't see boiling water as violent, rather yielding to the heat. The person who is surrendered, in my experience, is as powerful as all of existance combined. No one can utterly surrender to such a degree though. We surrender bit by bit. Let go in every moment what we feel like we're ready to let go of. At the same time, a surrender is also a surrender of resistance. Which has got all to do with allowance. You allow more good to flow to and trough you. For allowance is also nothing but a surrender of resistance. A releasing of it. A yielding of it.

 

How about forgiveness? Do you think forgiveness requires an action or rather a stopping of the action (like blame, hate, judgement). Isn't forgiveness an action of non-action?

Edited August 6, 2012 by Everything

[Everything]

Edited August 6, 2012 by Everything

[Marblehead]

I wanted to reply specificly to that, it means allot to me.

Hi Everything,

 

I do understand what you are saying. However, the word and the concept "surrender" has too many negative connotations for me. What you described I would call Awareness Realization.

 

When we become one with our surroundings we have no enemies.

 

When water becomes one with its surroundings (water always is) it has no enemies.

 

Water will rest when it has found a place to rest. We too should be like water in this regard.

 

Please remember that I consider myself to have an ego. Even if I tried to surrender I could never completely surrender because my ego would prevent me from doing so.

 

To move with the flow is fine if the flow causes us no conflict. However, if the flow is taking us toward a two hundred foot water fall I suggest it is time to get out of the water by whatever means possible.

 

I am not trying to alter your thinking and understanding, I am only trying to explain my understandings regarding your concepts.

 

The more you think, talk, and are challenged about them the better you will be able to establish what you truely believe. But that doesn't mean that anyone else will believe the way you do. But even that does not imply that you are wrong.

[Everything]

...

Please remember that I consider myself to have an ego. Even if I tried to surrender I could never completely surrender because my ego would prevent me from doing so.

...

But then you are completely surrendered to the ego, are you not?

Edited August 6, 2012 by Everything

[Marblehead]

But then you are completely surrendered to the ego, are you not?

Oh, by no means. I often deny ego in order to benefit others.

 

To say that anything, aspect of us, etc, is an absolute would be to place limits on that whatever. That would be against Tao because Tao is without limits.

 

Sure, we each have our set of capabilities and capacities but even these change ofer time.

 

Absolutes suck!!!

[Everything]

To move with the flow is fine if the flow causes us no conflict. However, if the flow is taking us toward a two hundred foot water fall I suggest it is time to get out of the water by whatever means possible.

you do not get out of the water. You let go of being in the water. You do not avoid death. You let go of death and surrender to living. Surrender to your eternal existance. For you try to avoid death, you just get more of it. That is how existance works. As I said, surrender is the only action you CAN take and the only action you HAVE ever taken. When you step out of that water, you surrender to your survival. When you step out of that water because you simply prefer to be over there now, and you are not afraid of death, then you surrender to being over there. As you lift your hand, you surrender to your hand being in a state of lifted. All action is non-action. Wei wu wei is all that we have in existance.

[Everything]

I often deny ego in order to benefit others.

there is no denial in existance. There is no non existance. All the things that do not exist do not exist. All the things that do exist, EXIST.

 

your ego exists. If you denie it, you reinforce the ego! You can only let go of it and let be! For it shall always exist to eternity

 

Denie the ego and you surrender the ego. You create the same paradoxical trap here for yourself.

Edited August 6, 2012 by Everything

[doc benway]

I'm not a Dao De Jing scholar and I haven't read much of it lately.

I practice Daoist methods (Taijiquan, Baguazhang, Daoist meditation, Qigong) much more than I read the philosophy.

That said, I do feel that many of the chapters of DDJ reflect the approach of Wu Wei, particularly with respect to governance and interacting with others.

Explicitly, governance relates to overseeing a group of people.

Implicitly, as everyone knows I'm sure, it can be extended to oneself and personal relationship.

Similarly, the concept is widely addressed in the Zhuangzi as well.

Whether the Wu Wei concept is purely Daoist, purely Buddhist, Non-dual, or an amalgam of influences over time is not terribly relevant to me.

Investigating it deeply in my practice and daily life has been extremely useful in terms of approaching who I am and what I do.

Daoist and Buddhist (and by extension, Hindu) concepts have been thoroughly blended over the centuries.

I'm not sure it's realistic to try and tease them out as isolated entities.

Too much of an abstraction, IMO.

[Basher]

I know that I'm a relative Novice, in a room full of Academics & Sages but it seems to me that this thread has become "a lot of Fuss about Nothing".

 

Unless the actual Author has discussed it fully and comprehensively with you in THEIR own native language (Which must be the same as yours, to get all of the nuances). How can anybody possibly state for certain, what was originally meant or intended ?

 

The Author (s) lived in a bygone age, with a different life and perspective from 99% of us.

 

Even our perceptions tend to change over the course of our own lifetime(s) due to any number of different experiences, both 1st & 3rd hand.

 

Each of us must travel our own path & come to our own conclusions....

 

(All of the above = IMO obviously)

 

Basher