The Purpose of Taoist Cultivation

[Marblehead]

So I would make a difference between a functional subjectivity and a dysfunctional subjectivity.

You did great!!!

 

Yes. Dysfunctional subjectivity with all its illusions, delusions, biases and prejudices.

[doc benway]

To attain the condition where the objective and the subjective are exactly the same.

 

(I stole that and am proud of it.)

 

A question - how does one attain what one already is?

 

And a second question - once you attain that condition, what happens next?

[rene]

Hiya marblehead. (-:

 

 

But in this simple example the subject and object are already the same. We see the tail side as it is and we see the head side as what it is. Subject and object are the same. ... And no, I don't want to change the objective. I will never tell you that the coin landed with tail up if in fact it landed with head up. That would be trying to alter the objective to meet my subjective needs.

 

You just said that heads and tails are the same, and that heads is different than tails. Starting to sound like "both" to me.

 

 

And no again, I don't want everything to be the same. That saying "All is One" is tricky. All is not "One". All are different aspects of objective reality. It is true that all things are of the same source but here we have already gone beyond duality, beyond objectivity and subjectivity.

 

My chair is a chair. I should not use it as a ladder. I would likely fall down and break something.

 

Maybe what would be less tricky, is saying "All is not only One".

 

That way, the wholeness of the non-dual is present, and the usefulness of the dual parts (chair for chair, ladder for ladder, etc) can still be part of your reality!

[rene]

Wayfarer, hi, nice to see you (-:

 

It is the purpose of Taoism, Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism etc etc. We think there is a difference between the object and ourselves and we go through life overlooking what is right before our eyes. The few that do 'see' realise they are not a 'they', that their body is the same as what is not the body, their mind is the same as what is not the mind. This is the purpose of Taoism for sure.

 

Even the endless energy exercises found in Taoism are a poor second to Realising. Such a person comes to know that there are no individual aspects of this and that, there are no differences to bring into harmony - if there is no object or subject how can anything be brought into harmony? It has nothing to be in balance with. So yes, our Nature is to see there are no heads or tails, not even a coin. We leave this 'perspective' when we learn of a 'self' - and we find ourselves in the world we live in, in the sickness of humanity that is constantly trying to achieve unaware there is nothing to achieve, or never being at peace by overlooking that which is always at peace.

 

That's the reason we cultivate, is it not? Because even though we may not 'know', we trust there is a way that is different than the way we live, we believe there is something more profound - it aches in our heart for expression and knowing. So those who practice wish to return to that pure state of knowing but not-knowing, of being carefree, of knowing they are that which can never die and in being completely at peace no matter how the world around them tries to disturb that peace.

 

 

Thanks for such a great reply as to what and why Taoists do what they do!

 

My 'self' has no aches or longings or worries about death, nor do I think humanity is a 'sickness' (though truly there are some sickos out there...) so I guess not being Taoist is a good choice for me. I'm glad you've found something that works for you.

 

warm regards

 

[ChiDragon]

 

The tree happens to be of crooked wood therefore it is useless to the carpenter. The tree provides shade for the passing traveller therefore it is useful.

 

You stole this one from Zhuang Tze, didn't you.......???

[rene]

 

It is my opinion that you are a Taoist and a Philosophical one at that.

 

Well, if "Philosophical Taoist" means that every method, practice or text written after The Laozi is excess baggage - then you would be right!

 

Which would mean, if you wanted to also be a "Philosophical Taoist", you'd have to toss out your beloved ChuangTzu, and all your other ideas about this and that. Is that really what you want?

 

Is there a reason you need me to fit into a category you've chosen for yourself?

[Marblehead]

A question - how does one attain what one already is?

What you already is got lost so you have to find it. It got lost as soon as you started understanding what you mom and dad were saying when they spoke and it continued to worsen over the years.

 

And a second question - once you attain that condition, what happens next?

You chop more wood and you carry more water. But now you know why you are doing it.

 

 

So many questions. Where are your answers? Hehehe.

[Marblehead]

Hiya marblehead. (-:

 

 

You just said that heads and tails are the same, and that heads is different than tails. Starting to sound like "both" to me.

No, I'm still misunderstanding myself. Heads is heads and tails is tails. Let me check one of my quarters just to make sure. ... ... Yep. One side is heads and the other side is tails. No doubt about it.

 

And the quarter is a quarter except when it is twenty-five cents.

 

Maybe what would be less tricky, is saying "All is not only One".

I wouldn't dare say something like that.

 

That way, the wholeness of the non-dual is present, and the usefulness of the dual parts (chair for chair, ladder for ladder, etc) can still be part of your reality!

Well, all I know for sure right now is that were it not for my chair my ass would be on the floor.

 

The object (its physicality) of the chair and the subject (my perception) of the chair are the same. This is where I think we should be going with everything else in our world as well.

 

Am I still confused?

[Marblehead]

You stole this one from Zhuang Tze, didn't you.......???

Of course I did. I'm trying to prime Y'all for when I eventually get the study started.

[Marblehead]

Which would mean, if you wanted to also be a "Philosophical Taoist", you'd have to toss out your beloved ChuangTzu, and all your other ideas about this and that. Is that really what you want?

Now you know there ain't no freakin' way that is going to happen. Hehehe.

 

Is there a reason you need me to fit into a category you've chosen for yourself?

No, I just like to label myself. It's a fun game but really means nothing except when I am talking with someone I might mention one of my labels so that they can possibly understand from where I am coming.

[Marblehead]

We started to follow our false thinking.

Yes, and that is one of the key concepts that is in the background of this discussion. But it includes more than false thinking, it includes all the false teachings we have been subjected to as well as the false information we are being confronted with every day from many, many sources.

 

Question Everything.

 

(I got that from The Science Channel. Hehehe.)

[Marblehead]

Yes, Lao Tzu warned us against knowledge overload.

[doc benway]

So many questions. Where are your answers? Hehehe.

 

I don't have any...

I find the questions more helpful than the answers.

_/\_

[Marblehead]

I don't have any...

I find the questions more helpful than the answers.

_/\_

Hehehe. Cheater!!!

[zerostao]

You stole this one from Zhuang Tze, didn't you.......???

he acquired it with noble intentions only

[zerostao]

Yes, Lao Tzu warned us against knowledge overload.

didnt chuang tzu basically give the same warning?

[ChiDragon]

didnt chuang tzu basically give the same warning?

 

I didn't think so. I think he gave the complement. Chuang Tzu was suggesting that one should obtain as much knowledge as possible. Then, one will see all the reasons not to argue because one knows who knows what and who doesn't.

[Bubbles]

Chuang Tzu was suggesting that one should obtain as much knowledge as possible. Then, one will see all the reasons not to argue because one knows who knows what and who doesn't.

 

That's a strange statement. Would you mind quoting Zhuangzi on this? Thanks

[Marblehead]

didnt chuang tzu basically give the same warning?

Yep.

[Marblehead]

 

I didn't think so. I think he gave the complement. Chuang Tzu was suggesting that one should obtain as much knowledge as possible. Then, one will see all the reasons not to argue because one knows who knows what and who doesn't.

Be careful with this. Chuang Tzu made a great distinction between "knowledge" and "wisdon". The butcher story is a perfect example of this.

[Marblehead]

That's a strange statement. Would you mind quoting Zhuangzi on this? Thanks

Hehehe. Now you have put him on the spot.

 

I think we are getting pretty ready to start our Chuang Tzu study.

[zerostao]

Hehehe. Now you have put him on the spot.

 

I think we are getting pretty ready to start our Chuang Tzu study.

i get an assist! yipee

[rene]

i get an assist! yipee

 

An assist for putting CD on the spot?

 

(I just want to understand what it is you're celebrating...)

 

thanks!

[zerostao]

An assist for putting CD on the spot?

 

(I just want to understand what it is you're celebrating...)

 

thanks!

noooooooooo

an assist for helping restart the chuang tzu threads!

CD reminds me of that one chuang tzu character that was never afraid to stand alone

even if others did not share his view

the rest of ya'll get a bigger share of the assist, i just wanted a tiny portion

[rene]

ohhhhhh okay!!

 

YAYYYYY ZEROSTAO !!!