kicking the dog?

[3bob]

In Chapter 5 of the T.T.C. we have the "straw dog" saying... I've heard that saying bandied about by various people in a context sounding like a description of those who are lesser than and 'oh well its just tough shit for the straw dogs'?

 

Anyway if we then take the saying of "as above so below" which alludes to the meaning of the laws and nature in the macrocosm as also being in the microcosm and cross reference/compare it with chapter 5 of the T.T.C. then I think one could also reasonably arrive at an interpretation that "the One", "the Two" and "the Three" are also straw dogs because by their description they can be named.

 

(then again this foray does not really compute since one never hears of the Jade emperor or of the Three of divine beings or deeply important Three in being-ness called "straw dogs" in Taoism)

 

What do you think?

[dawei]

The Straw Dogs has a history of use and served a temporal function. Here are the historical references to Straw Dogs:

 

1. Huang Di: He put them over the door as a symbol of evil doers, or maybe as a reminder to 'be good'. This could derive from the idea that despite they are the first domesticated animal, they were buried with the dead and that might of been to ward off evil spirits (or a watch dog in the afterlife). The Zhou mention them as warding off disease.

 

2. Zhuangzi: He talks of their ceremonial use but shows they need to be burned after the ritual to prevent the accumulated evil Qi from spreading anywhere. They are trampled on afterwards. This is the most common story known. 軷 - A chariot riding over an animal. Seems an original tale for trampling on them after the ceremony.

 

3. Laozi: He juxtaposes them with a bellows between Heaven and Earth... If we tie in the ritual funeral meaning: every sacrifice is an act of renewal, a cycle of life; cyclic and empty... and why does Heaven and Earth endure? (DDJ7)

 

4. Huainanzi: Says dogs are a symbol of the king...

[thelerner]

Thus we are all straw dogs.

 

and that's neither bad or an insult.

Edited November 18, 2013 by thelerner

[soaring crane]

Thus we are all straw dogs.

 

and that's neither bad or an insult.

 

I am so going to kick you!

[3bob]

Thanks for the historical info Dawei.

 

"Thus we are all straw dogs" thus does that include "the One, the Two and the Three" along with all beings whether in heaven or on earth... since there is also a "bellows" or transition zone between the Tao and heaven(s)...

[Stosh]

In Chapter 5 of the T.T.C. we have the "straw dog" saying... I've heard that saying bandied about by various people in a context sounding like a description of those who are lesser than and 'oh well its just tough shit for the straw dogs'? Anyway if we then take the saying of "as above so below" which alludes to the meaning of the laws and nature in the macrocosm as also being in the microcosm and cross reference/compare it with chapter 5 of the T.T.C. then I think one could also reasonably arrive at an interpretation that "the One", "the Two" and "the Three" are also straw dogs because by their description they can be named. (then again this foray does not really compute since one never hears of the Jade emperor or of the Three of divine beings or deeply important Three in being-ness called "straw dogs" in Taoism) What do you think?

Once you slap a name on something you HAVE already begun to make decisions which are arbitrary . The straw dog metaphor , could have different meanings ,though the one two three stuff aren't men,, the significance of a straw dog is in its spiritual vs physical existance, as I see it , so the point in question resolves into a question on how one should approach one another as physical vs spiritual beings. The metaphor in and of itself doesn't push you towards special reverence toward either... nor does it say to attatch undue significance toward either. I think this is the message, so I'm just suggesting it to resolve the Op a bit.

Oh , and Yes, once one has slapped a verbal description on something , like I just did it is also an arbitrary straw dog.

Edited November 19, 2013 by Stosh

[3bob]

Hello Stosh,

 

We could call "the One" (etc..) spiritual but then again the One is "born" (T.T.C. 42) although and granted as a different order of Being or being-ness but still born -- along with the fact that mankind or men and women are also born, thus can one really draw a difference here as you have between the so called spiritual and physical? (in using a definition that anything or anyone born is still physical whether in a gross or refined sense... for example as dense matter or heavenly light)

 

As far as approaching different order of Beings I see giving them all their due and earned respect whether in dense or refined form. Further, if nothing is gained and nothing is lost to the "Tao" then of what purpose is countless sacrifice of countless "straw dogs"?

[Marblehead]

You guys don't want me to start talking about "straw dogs" here in this thread.

[Harmonious Emptiness]

The way I see the "straw dogs" description is meaning that all people, including emperors and great lords and so forth, are all perishable beings. They may seem all nice and well put together, putting all the care into their appearance that is put into the sacrificial effigies, but they are really just shells, soon to be discarded, and to hold some higher than others or lower than others is only looking at the momentary, which is like a grain of sand on the beach of time.

 

As I mentioned in other threads, the "humanity," referred to in chapter 5, appears to be referring to the Confucian/court idea of "ren/jen" which structures how much respect or love is given to a person based on a particular hierarchy of association. Lao Tzu advocated "ci/love/humanity" as part of his 3 treasures. "Ci" can also be translated as humanity, but it doesn't have the limitations associated with "ren/jen/humanity."

 

So, I don't think the 1, 2, and 3 would fit into the same observation. They are more like a beach of time, while a life time is the grain of sand.

 

The following blues tune explains the straw dogs sentiment very well:

 

Edited November 19, 2013 by Harmonious Emptiness

[3bob]

Hello Harmonious Emptiness,

 

To me the perishable also includes the One, the Two and the Three... but I like your image of a grain of sand and a beach of time.

 

Who stopping you MH? Go for it.

[Marblehead]

Who stopping you MH? Go for it.

Because I am currently running on about this in this thread:

 

http://thetaobums.com/topic/32522-questions-for-the-scientists-in-our-midst/

[Stosh]

Hello Stosh,

 

We could call "the One" (etc..) spiritual but then again the One is "born" (T.T.C. 42) although and granted as a different order of Being or being-ness but still born -- along with the fact that mankind or men and women are also born, thus can one really draw a difference here as you have between the so called spiritual and physical? (in using a definition that anything or anyone born is still physical whether in a gross or refined sense... for example as dense matter or heavenly light)

 

As far as approaching different order of Beings I see giving them all their due and earned respect whether in dense or refined form. Further, if nothing is gained and nothing is lost to the "Tao" then of what purpose is countless sacrifice of countless "straw dogs"?

Yeah , some folks consider the universe to have had some beginning , others contend it could not , because the beginning would have to have had an origin and so forth,, thats a bit moot to me since it neither changes anything, nor could I do anything about it.

 

The sacrifice or destruction of straw dogs , apart from what Ive heard the historical literal aspect of the metaphor, is a recognition of the true situation , ,, generally, one has to burst some bubbles ,, admit some things as confused ,, give up some cherished illusions ,, if one is going to come to new realizations about the same subject matter,

but ! it can be recognized that the spiritual and the physical both have legitimacy.

Hence one should not think their ideas and emotions have no fungibility nor should they consider themselves slaves to them .... at the same one should not dismiss their ideas feelings bodies as bullshit with no significance even though they can rise above the material at times.

The sacrifice is to a pursuit of an enlightenment , and that which is given up is favored illusions.

For example,, the thought that bodies are ONLY perishable SHELLs with no significance

 

(Purpose is defined by the involved party thats a different line of thought.)

Edited November 19, 2013 by Stosh

[3bob]

I see MH, that is a long thread...

[Harmonious Emptiness]

 

For example,, the thought that bodies are ONLY perishable SHELLs with no significance

 

Seems you were referring to my post, but what I said:

 

"The way I see the "straw dogs" description is meaning that all people, including emperors and great lords and so forth, are all perishable beings. They may seem all nice and well put together, putting all the care into their appearance that is put into the sacrificial effigies, but they are really just shells, soon to be discarded,"

 

It's the appearance of superiority, due to being "above" the commoners that I'm talking about. The superficiality of their superiority is meaningless, and this superiority is largely part the "shell" of appearance.

 

The song I posted there (I know, I rarely ever check people's song references either lol) would have made that clearer.

[Stosh]

Seems you were referring to my post, but what I said:

 

"The way I see the "straw dogs" description is meaning that all people, including emperors and great lords and so forth, are all perishable beings. They may seem all nice and well put together, putting all the care into their appearance that is put into the sacrificial effigies, but they are really just shells, soon to be discarded,"

 

It's the appearance of superiority, due to being "above" the commoners that I'm talking about. The superficiality of their superiority is meaningless, and this superiority is largely part the "shell" of appearance.

 

The song I posted there (I know, I rarely ever check people's song references either lol) would have made that clearer.

Yes I was referring to it , ( I didnt want to bypass your input and it fit what I wanted to express)

and contending that such a view isnt exactly off-base, just that its incomplete,

with the Lords really having responsibilities and effect and powers due to this "shell" as well.

A social mandate ,,, or unspoken collusion has effects though they consist of nothing but ideas.

One can defy the reality of a cop being anything other than just another individual by going ahead and "shedding " that idea.. but he may actually still issue you ,or me, the ticket anyway. His copness exists in both material and immaterial ways and having one part be the shell and the other be valid is what I am not considering as entirely accurate.

Edited November 20, 2013 by Stosh

[3bob]

"It's the appearance of superiority, due to being "above" the commoners that I'm talking about. The superficiality of their superiority is meaningless, and this superiority is largely part the "shell" of appearance." by HE

 

Appearance only is one thing but that doesn't mean I'd lump all beings together as being superficial because of appearance only...

 

For instance in chapter 25:

 

"...Man follows the ways of the Earth.

The Earth follows the ways of Heaven,

Heaven follows the ways of Tao..."

 

(with the realms above all having their share of various and multitudes of Beings)

Edited November 20, 2013 by 3bob

[Harmonious Emptiness]

Yes I was referring to it , ( I didnt want to bypass your input and it fit what I wanted to express)

and contending that such a view isnt exactly off-base, just that its incomplete,

with the Lords really having responsibilities and effect and powers due to this "shell" as well.

A social mandate ,,, or unspoken collusion has effects though they consist of nothing but ideas.

One can defy the reality of a cop being anything other than just another individual by going ahead and "shedding " that idea.. but he may actually still issue you ,or me, the ticket anyway. His copness exists in both material and immaterial ways and having one part be the shell and the other be valid is what I am not considering as entirely accurate.

Sure, but you can also see through the "cop-ness" that's giving you a ticket and look at the regular individual who has a tough job of giving tickets to people who might not be able to afford it. This is not always easy, and so the pretense of him being an authority is really just a shell that he can take off when he, say, goes to dinner at his mom's house. It's the same with emperors and such. Sure, there are roles and functions in the material world which might even have effects in the immaterial/spiritual world, but each person has the same basic principle underneath. The sage knows this.

 

It's like meeting a famous person. Most people will be like "oh, mister whatever, what an honour to meet you" while other people will just see the person as just another person, who happens to be surrounded by an exterior of fame, glamour etc.., but you can also see them as the person that they are underneath, which is not above anyone, etc.., it's just another personality/person just like any of your other friends.

[Stosh]

"It's the appearance of superiority, due to being "above" the commoners that I'm talking about. The superficiality of their superiority is meaningless, and this superiority is largely part the "shell" of appearance." by HE

Well if you figure-- his position is real enough at top , but that does not mean he is spiritually better nor materially better -- yes thats true ,,because 'Better" is a Subjective situation which depends on circumstance.

 

Appearance only is one thing but that doesn't mean I'd lump all beings together as being superficial because of appearance only...

Sorry I dont know what youre getting at..

 

For instance in chapter 25:

 

"...Man follows the ways of the Earth.

The Earth follows the ways of Heaven,

Heaven follows the ways of Tao..."

 

(with the realms above all having their share of various and multitudes of Beings)

That just appears to suggest that there are levels or orders of magnitude ,,

and can also be taken to indicate that the macrocosm recapitulates the microcosm or vice versa.

 

But its basically just an assertion

which could be considered inexact ,, in light of man operating on an often irrational level,,

otherwise evereryone would be acting according to Wei Wu Wei already.

and so its not quite enough to describe whats going on to say that one of these things follows the other.

(with the realms above all having their share of various and multitudes of Beings)

Well if that was true , then the universe is filled with angels that make the flowers grow ,

and furthermore the universe would not abide by rational and consistent sequences which are predictable.

it means the universe is chaotic and willful and makes mistakes since humans surely do.

Edited November 20, 2013 by Stosh

[Stosh]

Sure, but you can also see through the "cop-ness" that's giving you a ticket and look at the regular individual who has a tough job of giving tickets to people who might not be able to afford it. This is not always easy, and so the pretense of him being an authority is really just a shell that he can take off when he, say, goes to dinner at his mom's house. It's the same with emperors and such. Sure, there are roles and functions in the material world which might even have effects in the immaterial/spiritual world, but each person has the same basic principle underneath. The sage knows this.

 

It's like meeting a famous person. Most people will be like "oh, mister whatever, what an honour to meet you" while other people will just see the person as just another person, who happens to be surrounded by an exterior of fame, glamour etc.., but you can also see them as the person that they are underneath, which is not above anyone, etc.., it's just another personality/person just like any of your other friends.

Nicely said. but as you can see as well when he goes off to work he can shed his poor workingman persona and fulfil the job like the impartial hard ass that the TTC suggests he should be at work.

Edited November 20, 2013 by Stosh

[Harmonious Emptiness]

Nicely said. but as you can see as well when he goes off to work he can shed his poor workingman persona and fulfil the job like the impartial hard ass that the TTC suggests he should be at work.

But a persona is a persona. There is a more real nature underneath the accumulated dust of persona, hierarchy, etc.

[Stosh]

But a persona is a persona. There is a more real nature underneath the accumulated dust of persona, hierarchy, etc.

Ok , What is "real" , "more real', and what is the 'real human nature' that you believe folks have , in your opinion.

 

Now mind you though , if a person doesnt share in that nature you describe as human nature ,

then that would not be a human by your own description.

Edited November 20, 2013 by Stosh

[Harmonious Emptiness]

Yes, sorry to confuse again -- I don't mean to refer, necessarily, to sort of Buddhist sense of "real nature."

 

Basically, the emperor, the lord, even the priest, and of course the "peasants," they all have human weaknesses, struggles, are subject to the whims of nature, experience sadness, happiness, anger, desire. None have transcended these things, so in a way we are all like children, still subject to the schedules and whims of mother Earth and father Sky, and still crying when we can't get our proverbial bottle. Even if one has conquered the self, they are still at the same level. They are still in the stroller, they're just more comfortable and content, and don't cry all the time.

[Stosh]

Yes, sorry to confuse again -- I don't mean to refer, necessarily, to sort of Buddhist sense of "real nature."

 

Basically, the emperor, the lord, even the priest, and of course the "peasants," they all have human weaknesses, struggles, are subject to the whims of nature, experience sadness, happiness, anger, desire. None have transcended these things, so in a way we are all like children, still subject to the schedules and whims of mother Earth and father Sky, and still crying when we can't get our proverbial bottle. Even if one has conquered the self, they are still at the same level. They are still in the stroller, they're just more comfortable and content, and don't cry all the time.

Ahh , very nice

And is this true man, the one with vulnerability ,a thing of the physical or the spiritual?

[Harmonious Emptiness]

Ahh , very nice

And is this true man, the one with vulnerability ,a thing of the physical or the spiritual?

Well, it's not that he's true because he's vulnerable, it's just the way people are.

[Stosh]

Well, it's not that he's true because he's vulnerable, it's just the way people are.

Maybe so , but then you could say ,my characterization, based on your assessment of him, as being vulnerable, is accurate,, which only leaves the more salient question, which is, if the man as described, is just a spiritual thing or a physical thing.