What has TaoBums taught you?

[Tibetan_Ice]

 

*

 

"Plato said that the unexamined life is not worth living. But what if the examined life turns out to be a clunker as well?"

 

Kurt Vonnegut

 

 

 

*

I thought it was Socrates who said that about the unexamined life... .?

[Aetherous]

I thought it was Socrates who said that about the unexamined life... .?

 

If I remember correctly, Plato attributed it to his teacher Socrates, who never had writings of his own.

[liminal_luke]

*

 

"Plato said that the unexamined life is not worth living. But what if the examined life turns out to be a clunker as well?"

 

Kurt Vonnegut

 

*

 

 

Examination, if it goes very deep, leads to acceptance. And when we accept gracefully the clunky parts of our lives--and we´ve all got ´em--we grow. Life takes on a sweetness and a depth it wouldn´t have if everything always happened the way we think we want it to.

 

Liminal

[beyonder]

If I remember correctly, Plato attributed it to his teacher Socrates, who never had writings of his own.

 

You are correct. What we know of the historical Socrates is through secondary sources.

Next to the platonic dialogues dealing with the execution of Socrates (in other dialogues it becomes much more likely that Plato used his teacher as a mouthpiece for his own ideas, or "Ideas".), we also have several essays on Socrates by Xenophon, who was a close friend. Next to that is the play "Clouds" by Aristophanes, though that's more satire than fact. As for texts, Diogenes Laertius might be another source, though he wrote his "Lives and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers" several centuries later. Aristotle, when talking about Plato in his "Metaphysics", also mentions Socrates, elaborating on the difference between Plato and Soc. Finally, one has to mention Antisthenes, a close friend and follower of Socrates, who was a philosopher in his own right, and has several surviving fragments.

 

So, yeah. The issue regarding the historical Socrates and what he said isn't exactly clear cut.

[manitou]

Well,on this thread Manitou said it

[manitou]

*

My intuition tells me that you're confusing the tail with the dog here. I feel that life is 'doing us',... I don't think it's a question of 'us doing life', (though it certainly appears that way.)

 

But as you know, appearances are very often deceptive. To every person in the world, it clearly appears that the sun rises in the east, travels across the sky, and sets in the west. That 'sensory perception' is universal.

 

Perhaps, so too with this idea of me, or you, or Kurt, living our life 'rightly', or 'wrongly',... as you put it.

 

*

 

My understanding is that we're doing life in the sense that we manifest that which is in front of us, that which happens to us. If We are part of the Whole, who is doing the manifesting? Us.

[silent thunder]

I get the sense more and more in life that there is a river.

The current of which is determined by the conditions of our environment, over which we exert almost no force.

We can swim against the current all we want.

But the shape of the river remains shaped by the conditions.

 

I find life most pleasant when I can sense the current and flow in accord.

 

But then, who says life is about things being pleasant...

[ThisLife]

My understanding is that we're doing life in the sense that we manifest that which is in front of us, that which happens to us. If We are part of the Whole, who is doing the manifesting? Us.

 

It's purely semantics whatever we choose to call the 'thing',... 'Life', the 'Tao', 'Buddha Mind', 'God', 'Universal Consciousness', etc. But if we are the type of person who is drawn to this kind of model in our attempts to make sense of this experience of "consciousness", or, of "living-our-life",.... then it seems to me that we are also inescapably and unwillingly drawn towards a logical position which our mind's nature always automatically rejects. That is,... if the Tao is EVERYTHING, (or, the Whole, as you chose to call it),.... then how would it ever be possible for us to do anything which is NOT ALSO simply part of the Tao ? And therefore 'right' ?

 

The limited perceptions that you and I and every other living being has within our tiny corners of the Tao, (i.e. whether we like or dislike what's happening, accept or rebel against it, etc),.... are they not also simply part of this same Tao ? And therefore of no more, or no less, importance than the colour of shirt that we each happen to be wearing at this moment, or the type of car our next-door neighbour drives ?

 

Isn't everything equally, the same unfolding of Tao ?

Edited May 22, 2014 by ThisLife

[GrandmasterP]

I get the sense more and more in life that there is a river.

The current of which is determined by the conditions of our environment, over which we exert almost no force.

We can swim against the current all we want.

But the shape of the river remains shaped by the conditions.

 

I find life most pleasant when I can sense the current and flow in accord.

 

But then, who says life is about things being pleasant...

A Taoist story tells of an old man who accidentally fell into the river rapids leading to a high and dangerous waterfall. Onlookers feared for his life. Miraculously, he came out alive and unharmed downstream at the bottom of the falls. People asked him how he managed to survive. "I accommodated myself to the water, not the water to me. Without thinking, I allowed myself to be shaped by it. Plunging into the twirl, I came out with the swirl. This is how I survived."

Edited May 22, 2014 by GrandmasterP

[Marblehead]

My understanding is that we're doing life in the sense that we manifest that which is in front of us, that which happens to us. If We are part of the Whole, who is doing the manifesting? Us.

I like that. It is worthy of deeper thought.

[Marblehead]

Everything is equally, the same unfolding of Tao.

My philosophy isn't changing, it's just that I like this post.

[doc benway]

My understanding is that we're doing life in the sense that we manifest that which is in front of us, that which happens to us. If We are part of the Whole, who is doing the manifesting? Us.

 

If I beat my heart, I also shine the sun…

- paraphrased from Allan Watts

[ThisLife]

If I beat my heart, I also shine the sun…

- paraphrased from Allan Watts

 

Only you're NOT 'beating your heart.' Surely, your heart is 'beating you ?'

[manitou]

It's purely semantics whatever we choose to call the 'thing',... 'Life', the 'Tao', 'Buddha Mind', 'God', 'Universal Consciousness', etc. But if we are the type of person who is drawn to this kind of model in our attempts to make sense of this experience of "consciousness", or, of "living-our-life",.... then it seems to me that we are also inescapably and unwillingly drawn towards a logical position which our mind's nature always automatically rejects. That is,... if the Tao is EVERYTHING, (or, the Whole, as you chose to call it),.... then how would it ever be possible for us to do anything which is NOT ALSO simply part of the Tao ? And therefore 'right' ?

 

The limited perceptions that you and I and every other living being has within our tiny corners of the Tao, (i.e. whether we like or dislike what's happening, accept or rebel against it, etc),.... are they not also simply part of this same Tao ? And therefore of no more, or no less, importance than the colour of shirt that we each happen to be wearing at this moment, or the type of car our next-door neighbour drives ?

 

Isn't everything equally, the same unfolding of Tao ?

 

 

I think you're spot on. As it says in the DDJ, "between "ugh" and "ah", how much difference is there? This is why looking at things as Good or Bad is not helpful to clarity. They just Are, no judgment. It amazes me how many times in my life I felt that something 'happening to me' was Bad, and yet later when I looked at it, I realize that it was probably the best thing that could have happened at that moment. it's all so very relative.

Edited May 22, 2014 by manitou

[doc benway]

Only you're NOT 'beating your heart.' Surely, your heart is 'beating you ?'

Excellent question-

If my heart is beating me, who is the me that is other than the heart?

Can that me exist absent a heart?

I don't mean to ask for an answer to the "who am I?" question, rather call attention to the duality inherent in both of our replies.

 

It's purely semantics whatever we choose to call the 'thing',... 'Life', the 'Tao', 'Buddha Mind', 'God', 'Universal Consciousness', etc. But if we are the type of person who is drawn to this kind of model in our attempts to make sense of this experience of "consciousness", or, of "living-our-life",.... then it seems to me that we are also inescapably and unwillingly drawn towards a logical position which our mind's nature always automatically rejects. That is,... if the Tao is EVERYTHING, (or, the Whole, as you chose to call it),.... then how would it ever be possible for us to do anything which is NOT ALSO simply part of the Tao ? And therefore 'right' ?

 

The limited perceptions that you and I and every other living being has within our tiny corners of the Tao, (i.e. whether we like or dislike what's happening, accept or rebel against it, etc),.... are they not also simply part of this same Tao ? And therefore of no more, or no less, importance than the colour of shirt that we each happen to be wearing at this moment, or the type of car our next-door neighbour drives ?

 

Isn't everything equally, the same unfolding of Tao ?

 

Nice post and I thought I'd offer the following random ramblings it evoked in me as I sit as work on my lunch break:

 

The "limited perceptions" we all exist with are all we ever have. We tend to make the assumption that there is "something" common, whatever you call it or however you attempt to describe it. And I'm not saying that there is not. On the other hand, on what does our certainty rest that there is? I will only ever know what is known through the unique and constantly changing set of aggregates that define "me." Each and every one of us will have that experience, or maybe just me, I can only guess. And when it ends, we can then grasp onto any of the various gratuitous assertions that governs what comes after. But the after is a conceptualization, a projection. And the "thing" is, itself, a conceptualization and is not as solid as one might like. Empty, one might say, or ineffable, un-nameable, etc... I think this is why the DDJ starts with the caution - from here on out, everything that is written is not "it" because you can't ever capture "it" in words and concepts. No credible tradition defines the undefinable, only beginners, institutions, and fundamentalists do that because they don't (want to) know better.

 

So maybe there is a big "it" and maybe not. Maybe there is something that is aware at a different level than us little ants, and maybe not. Maybe Dao encompasses everything, and then again, maybe it is absolutely nothing, or both, or neither...

 

One thing I do think is important is that, whether or not there is a big it, or right and wrong, and whether or not everything is part of Dao and manifests as the Great Perfection, we have choices to make in our lives and our lives, and the lives of others, are much more pleasant if we are kind to each other and to ourselves.

[liminal_luke]

Only you're NOT 'beating your heart.' Surely, your heart is 'beating you ?'

 

When I took a chi nei tsang massage workshop with Gilles Marin he told us that we "are our organs." We don´t "have" a liver, heart, lungs, etc. There´s no divide between our body and ourselves. It´s not our heart beating, it´s us beating.

 

Liminal

[ThisLife]

One thing I do think is important is that, whether or not there is a big it, or right and wrong, and whether or not everything is part of Dao and manifests as the Great Perfection, we have choices to make in our lives and our lives, and the lives of others, are much more pleasant if we are kind to each other and to ourselves.

 

*

 

Nice thought. As always in life, there's us 'mini-thinkers' who, in our spare time find ourselves drawn to wonder about the nature of our existence. And then there's the A-Team members who know, live, and breath the answers to the questions we're still trying to formulate. So it goes. Could your well-expressed thoughts be put any more perfectly than this :

 

*

 

Whether one believes in a religion or not, and whether one believes in rebirth or not, there isn't anyone who doesn't appreciate kindness and compassion.

The Dalai Lama

Edited May 22, 2014 by ThisLife

[silent thunder]

When I took a chi nei tsang massage workshop with Gilles Marin he told us that we "are our organs." We don´t "have" a liver, heart, lungs, etc. There´s no divide between our body and ourselves. It´s not our heart beating, it´s us beating.

 

Liminal

 

echo this...

[manitou]

Steve said:

 

Empty, one might say, or ineffable, un-nameable, etc... I think this is why the DDJ starts with the caution - from here on out, everything that is written is not "it" because you can't ever capture "it" in words and concepts. No credible tradition defines the undefinable, only beginners, institutions, and fundamentalists do that because they don't (want to) know better.

 

 

It occurred to me the other day that the Dao is much like the hole in the life saver. it defines the genre of candy by its non-existence. Otherwise, you'd just have a stinkin' mint.

Edited May 23, 2014 by manitou

[ThisLife]

It occurred to me the other day that the Dao is much like the hole in the life saver. it defines the genre of candy by its non-existence. Otherwise, you'd just have a stinkin' mint.

 

Nice analogy. It reminded me of a similar kind of idea that came to me several years ago when I found myself wondering how it is that , (and here I assume this is a common experience for all of us),.... that if there's some question that my mind keeps returning to, over and over, like a dog worrying a bone trying to find a way into the marrow at its centre,.... how is it that the answer one day will suddenly just pop out at me ? From a book I may happen to pick up, a fragment of overheard conversation, an advert on a billboard glimpsed as I drive past. It can come from anywhere. But it inevitably comes, and it's arrival is most often sudden and unexpected.

 

One day an analogy arrived in my thoughts, that perhaps the process was very like what a potter experiences every time he makes a vessel on his wheel. As soon as he's finished the form of the pot,... he has simultaneously formed the space inside it. Perhaps similarly,.... if we spend a great deal of time and effort trying to formulate precisely some question that means a great deal to us,.... perhaps once we have formed the question perfectly, unknowingly we have also formed the answer, which is the space inside precisely filling the outer form that our question has made.

 

Maybe then, we should focus our attention on understanding as perfectly as we can, the nature and form of the questions that plague us. Having done so, perhaps we can then relax. Because the answers will, soon enough, appear without effort.

Edited May 23, 2014 by ThisLife

[Marblehead]

Maybe then, we should focus our attention on understanding as perfectly as we can, the nature and form of the questions that plague us. Having done so, perhaps we can then relax. Because the answers will, soon enough, appear without effort.

I have found that, for me, the questions are always much more important than are the answers, if we ever find them.

[manitou]

Nice analogy. It reminded me of a similar kind of idea that came to me several years ago when I found myself wondering how it is that , (and here I assume this is a common experience for all of us),.... that if there's some question that my mind keeps returning to, over and over, like a dog worrying a bone trying to find a way into the marrow at its centre,.... how is it that the answer one day will suddenly just pop out at me ? From a book I may happen to pick up, a fragment of overheard conversation, an advert on a billboard glimpsed as I drive past. It can come from anywhere. But it inevitably comes, and it's arrival is most often sudden and unexpected.

 

One day an analogy arrived in my thoughts, that perhaps the process was very like what a potter experiences every time he makes a vessel on his wheel. As soon as he's finished the form of the pot,... he has simultaneously formed the space inside it. Perhaps similarly,.... if we spend a great deal of time and effort trying to formulate precisely some question that means a great deal to us,.... perhaps once we have formed the question perfectly, unknowingly we have also formed the answer, which is the space inside precisely filling the outer form that our question has made.

 

Maybe then, we should focus our attention on understanding as perfectly as we can, the nature and form of the questions that plague us. Having done so, perhaps we can then relax. Because the answers will, soon enough, appear without effort.

 

You've done a very good job of expressing that which is 'experiential knowledge' as opposed to book-learning. I think that's how we teach ourselves, how we uncover the truth. Through the analogy that our minds conclude when the situation aligns in a particular way. It's an inside job, a result of our own experiences. The internal 'Aha!' results.

 

Your pot analogy reminds me of the DDJ, wherein it is ascertained that the functional part of the cup is its vacancy.

Edited May 23, 2014 by manitou

[manitou]

The "limited perceptions" we all exist with are all we ever have. We tend to make the assumption that there is "something" common, whatever you call it or however you attempt to describe it. And I'm not saying that there is not. On the other hand, on what does our certainty rest that there is?

 

Damn you're good.

 

I base my certainty on the meditative experience of losing the personality and finding myself part of the greater whole. Yes, I do think there is something common within all of us, that we are attached one to the other. that we are all actually the same entity in a zillion different forms. But what I always come back to is the black spots in our eyes. We all seem to share that, even animals and insects. This is the manifestation of awareness, the black void in our eyes. This is a remnant of the manifestation of the One, as I see it. When this is remembered, 'God' (or It) can be seen in everything. It's an awareness device.

[Mystique Enigma]

Heck, who is here to learn ??? am here to air my ignorance

[Mystique Enigma]

On another note thought a wise one once said ......

 

Teaching takes place when learning does and Learning takes place when one teaches ones self something.

 

i truely doubt there is any one who can teach you anything

 

 

Bows