The Sage not acting for reward

[manitou]

 

In your scenario, A can make suggestions for B to change. If it didn't work out, then A can just continue with the daily routine to avoid conflict altogether or just walk away which is his choice.

 

 

Avoiding conflict altogether without getting to the root of the problem within will only cause A to 'stuff it' down. Then A will start overeating or overdrinking, lol, to keep from rocking the boat.

 

As a Blackbelt Alanon, please know that this is referred to as 'walking on eggshells'. Not a comfortable place.

[manitou]

2

All in the world know the beauty of the beautiful, and in doing

this they have (the idea of) what ugliness is; they all know the skill

of the skilful, and in doing this they have (the idea of) what the

want of skill is.

 

So it is that existence and non-existence give birth the one to

(the idea of) the other; that difficulty and ease produce the one (the

idea of) the other; that length and shortness fashion out the one the

figure of the other; that (the ideas of) height and lowness arise from

the contrast of the one with the other; that the musical notes and

tones become harmonious through the relation of one with another; and

that being before and behind give the idea of one following another.

 

Therefore the sage manages affairs without doing anything, and

conveys his instructions without the use of speech.

 

All things spring up, and there is not one which declines to show

itself; they grow, and there is no claim made for their ownership;

they go through their processes, and there is no expectation (of a

reward for the results). The work is accomplished, and there is no

resting in it (as an achievement).

 

The work is done, but how no one can see;

'Tis this that makes the power not cease to be.

 

---------

 

The want of reward is the want to have our skill acknowledged. The recognition of that skill is the heirarchy you wanted to impose. If the sage feels no pull for acknowledgement why should he expect that for the other that pull (and the acknoweldgement) is good? To make no personal claim for the rewards in the game of skill is to place no value on reward for anyone. If I don't rest when I feel I could be rewarded why would I rest when another feels they should be rewarded?

 

Therefore the sage manages affairs without doing anything, and

conveys his instructions without the use of speech.

 

Like dawei said, the sage treats people like heaven and earth do: like straw dogs. Sincere words are not fine. Fine words are not sincere. One shouldn't really confuse one's own ego with another's.

 

What an excellent post, Nestentrie! A beautiful merging of the Dao with the situation, IMO.

[ChiDragon]

Avoiding conflict altogether without getting to the root of the problem within will only cause A to 'stuff it' down. Then A will start overeating or overdrinking, lol, to keep from rocking the boat.

 

As a Blackbelt Alanon, please know that this is referred to as 'walking on eggshells'. Not a comfortable place.

 

That is if, only if, A is not a sage.

Edited June 23, 2014 by ChiDragon

[manitou]

 

That is if, only if, A is not a sage.

 

The intent to change another may have already answered that question----

[Kajenx]

I think this is a misunderstanding of acceptance and what it brings. The sage has used acceptance and simplicity to return their mind to a place where these kinds of problems simply don't arise. Person A - being a sage like you said - would never feel exploited in the first place. The mind of the sage is indifferent to the content of the moment they're living in. If person B began abusing person A physically, person A would likely wander away out of pragmatic interest for their physical wellbeing, but other than that I can't imagine there being any real conflict. The sage is like an idiot. Their mind is empty, so doing houswork all day wouldn't be any different from reading or watching TV or doing some kind of leisure activity, or even doing nothing at all.

 

This is the main problem with trying to use mystical philosophy as a guide for everyday living. You can't really do it halfway. It might work if you don't overthink it too much - but this question you posed is a very detailed situation looking for a specific morality based kind of answer. That's not really the point of the TTC and other mystical texts IMHO. You need to believe in the concept of the sage, or buddha, or saint, etc, and give yourself up completely for the teachings and poetry to make any sense. Someone training to become a sage would welcome this kind of conflict because these situations are the forge of life. These challenges, when faced with equanimity, do a great deal of damage to the ego. It's the perfect opportunity.

 

In my experience, acceptance is referring to emotional states, as well. So a sage doesn't have to accept living in an unhealthy environment when it's easy enough to move away - but doing so wouldn't cause them any mental distress if they were forced against their will (like if put in a prison or enslaved). This may be why mystical religions thrive in unstable places.

Edited June 24, 2014 by Kajenx

[PGawley]

Kajenx - you've only gone and hit the nail on the head.

 

P

[manitou]

I think this is a misunderstanding of acceptance and what it brings. The sage has used acceptance and simplicity to return their mind to a place where these kinds of problems simply don't arise. Person A - being a sage like you said - would never feel exploited in the first place. The mind of the sage is indifferent to the content of the moment they're living in. If person B began abusing person A physically, person A would likely wander away out of pragmatic interest for their physical wellbeing, but other than that I can't imagine there being any real conflict. The sage is like an idiot. Their mind is empty, so doing houswork all day wouldn't be any different from reading or watching TV or doing some kind of leisure activity, or even doing nothing at all.

 

This is the main problem with trying to use mystical philosophy as a guide for everyday living. You can't really do it halfway. It might work if you don't overthink it too much - but this question you posed is a very detailed situation looking for a specific morality based kind of answer. That's not really the point of the TTC and other mystical texts IMHO. You need to believe in the concept of the sage, or buddha, or saint, etc, and give yourself up completely for the teachings and poetry to make any sense. Someone training to become a sage would welcome this kind of conflict because these situations are the forge of life. These challenges, when faced with equanimity, do a great deal of damage to the ego. It's the perfect opportunity.

 

In my experience, acceptance is referring to emotional states, as well. So a sage doesn't have to accept living in an unhealthy environment when it's easy enough to move away - but doing so wouldn't cause them any mental distress if they were forced against their will (like if put in a prison or enslaved). This may be why mystical religions thrive in unstable places.

 

There's another phenomena that can occur, rather than just move away. Joe and I started out on a very unhealthy footing 30 years ago, both of us totally messed up human beings. We've been married and divorced from each other twice - but we've never been able to get away from each other. We're still together.

 

But what has happened is that by the mere fact of us hanging in there, our relationship has turned into a beautiful and glowing thing - accented by the fact that we've both had to work on our inner selves for other reasons. The way I see it, is that if I had been able to leave Joe say, 25 years ago - I would have found another with the exact same inner dynamics that Joe had - because my inner configuration required another with an equally sick inner configuration; our configurations fit together like the pieces of a puzzle.

 

But now? You can't find a couple that gets along better. It's been a long hard road - but well worth it.

 

I think that what I'm trying to say is that sometimes it's beneficial to just stand there and let it happen; the most interesting part is admitting that 'we' are playing a part in the negative situation - and that looking at ourselves honestly and finding exactly what the offending dynamic is within us. It is never all on the shoulders of one person. Takes two.

[ChiDragon]

The sage is like an idiot. Their mind is empty, so doing houswork all day wouldn't be any different from reading or watching TV or doing some kind of leisure activity, or even doing nothing at all.

 

 

IMHO.....

I wouldn't say that a sage is like an idiot. Their minds are not empty but full of philosophical principles to be cultivated.

 

Doing house work is to keep a living quarter in a sanitary condition. Watching TV will became a couch potato. What do you think...???

Edited June 24, 2014 by ChiDragon

[PGawley]

ChiDragon,

 

You've articulated yourself very well. Basically you and Kajenx have a very different understanding of what a sage is.

 

I think that difference is at a very fundamental level.

 

You can bat this back and forward a bit but I don't think there's any more to be said really.

 

P

Edited June 25, 2014 by PGawley

[Kajenx]

IMHO.....

I wouldn't say that a sage is like an idiot. Their minds are not empty but full of philosophical principles to be cultivated.

 

Doing house work is to keep a living quarter in a sanitary condition. Watching TV will became a couch potato. What do you think...???

 

Maybe the difference between our viewpoints is that I'm seeing the sage as a perfected or ideal person. Someone who has reached the end of their philosophy doesn't need to cultivate anything. Just like a gardener, once the flowers are grown, no longer needs to plant or water anything. Nature does the rest of the work, and they can just kick back in the garden and enjoy the colors and sents. The way I see cultivation is that it is a process of elimination. Eventually, once everything is dumped, there is nothing left to eliminate. Since you see the sage as having a mind full of philosophical principals, I'm assuming you see cultivation as an additive process? In that case, something can always be added, and the sage is a continuously developing creature.

[YawningMind]

I want to ask a question that has been grinding on me for some time.

 

Let me put to you this every day scenario.

 

A lives with B. A is a sage, goes about his way and acts out of goodness. He does a lot of work around the house, cooks meals for both and ensures that B is well looked after, regardless of the amount of time and effort he puts in. It is often tiring, but A looks past this and carries on day to day. He doesn't seek acknowledgement and praise for what he does, he just continues out of sheer kindness.

 

B is a busy person, but no more busy than A. B is not a sage but prioritises himself before the home environment. B still helps A out, but nowhere near as regularly and when he does clean the place, or cook a meal, he boasts and seeks praise and acknowledgement.

 

Regardless of A's efforts, A cannot help but feel frustrated by the fact that despite all his day-to-day work, it is B that wants to make themselves feel good. A begins to get sad because it is as if he doesn't do much!

 

--------

 

Now, A being a sage, well, if he IS a sage, should he be paying attention to B's ego? Should he be letting it affect him and speak up and put them back in their place? Or should he be calm, breathe and just let them carry on in this same way for the rest of their lives?

 

Why is A focusing so much effort on helping B when children are starving elsewhere in the world? Seems oddly myopic of him.

 

Also, it seems like A is much happier than B in your scenario. A is content enough with his life that he has energy to spare for helping others, while B is so miserable that he craves attention for the smallest deeds. As myopic as A is, B is even more emotionally stunted; if anything, A should be feeling pity for B's lack of development. If A is feeling jealous of B, then A and B are simply two fools of different kinds.

[Harmonious Emptiness]

Person A might want to double check why they're doing what they're doing. If they're "practicing" selflessness, well then they're getting lots of practice, because person B doesn't seem to give a *^&% too much.

 

If they're being selfless, and have some despair with B's lack of progress, the best they could do may be to just not respond to B's ego elevation. If B asks why, A could jibe him or her by quoting from DDJ3 "By not elevating the worthy, you bring it about that people will not compete."

[Rara]

I think this is a misunderstanding of acceptance and what it brings. The sage has used acceptance and simplicity to return their mind to a place where these kinds of problems simply don't arise. Person A - being a sage like you said - would never feel exploited in the first place. The mind of the sage is indifferent to the content of the moment they're living in. If person B began abusing person A physically, person A would likely wander away out of pragmatic interest for their physical wellbeing, but other than that I can't imagine there being any real conflict. The sage is like an idiot. Their mind is empty, so doing houswork all day wouldn't be any different from reading or watching TV or doing some kind of leisure activity, or even doing nothing at all.

 

This is the main problem with trying to use mystical philosophy as a guide for everyday living. You can't really do it halfway. It might work if you don't overthink it too much - but this question you posed is a very detailed situation looking for a specific morality based kind of answer. That's not really the point of the TTC and other mystical texts IMHO. You need to believe in the concept of the sage, or buddha, or saint, etc, and give yourself up completely for the teachings and poetry to make any sense. Someone training to become a sage would welcome this kind of conflict because these situations are the forge of life. These challenges, when faced with equanimity, do a great deal of damage to the ego. It's the perfect opportunity.

 

In my experience, acceptance is referring to emotional states, as well. So a sage doesn't have to accept living in an unhealthy environment when it's easy enough to move away - but doing so wouldn't cause them any mental distress if they were forced against their will (like if put in a prison or enslaved). This may be why mystical religions thrive in unstable places.

Nice answer, and yes, the scenario is very detailed and specific. I understand with what you are saying RE trying to pigeon hole a few lines from TTC, so thanks for your elaboration.

 

So your stand is that it is all within person A and their cultivation. My question to you, is if the emotional state would not change regardless of what was going on (doing dishes, watching TV, playing football) does this mean that a sage doesn't make any decisions? A life fully lacking in purpose? Surely anyone without any purpose or preference in this current world lacks interaction with fellow humans? I mean, if the sage doesn't have a hobby, then they will have nothing in common with anyone and thus, no friends...

Edited June 29, 2014 by Rara

[GrandmasterP]

Sage as 'idiot' is fine but maybe 'fool' is a less contentious word.

As in " Holy Fool"....

 

 

Be a fool in the Taoist sense, in the Zen sense. Don't try to create a wall of knowledge around you. Whatsoever experience comes to you, let it happen, and then go on dropping it. Go on cleaning your mind continuously; go on dying to the past so you remain in the present, here-now, as if just born, just a babe.

(Osho).

 

More about Holy Fools here ( they are pretty 'clever')....

http://cometogetherarticles.yolasite.com/holy-fools.php

Edited June 29, 2014 by GrandmasterP

[Rara]

 

There's another phenomena that can occur, rather than just move away. Joe and I started out on a very unhealthy footing 30 years ago, both of us totally messed up human beings. We've been married and divorced from each other twice - but we've never been able to get away from each other. We're still together.

 

But what has happened is that by the mere fact of us hanging in there, our relationship has turned into a beautiful and glowing thing - accented by the fact that we've both had to work on our inner selves for other reasons. The way I see it, is that if I had been able to leave Joe say, 25 years ago - I would have found another with the exact same inner dynamics that Joe had - because my inner configuration required another with an equally sick inner configuration; our configurations fit together like the pieces of a puzzle.

 

But now? You can't find a couple that gets along better. It's been a long hard road - but well worth it.

 

I think that what I'm trying to say is that sometimes it's beneficial to just stand there and let it happen; the most interesting part is admitting that 'we' are playing a part in the negative situation - and that looking at ourselves honestly and finding exactly what the offending dynamic is within us. It is never all on the shoulders of one person. Takes two.

This is true. I have found that I always attract the same types/have the exact same fallouts.

 

What changed? My thought process and practice. I figured that I should settle and work with my current one as otherwise, I would be back at square one again with another.

 

At least two can learn from each other!

[Rara]

ChiDragon,

 

You've articulated yourself very well. Basically you and Kajenx have a very different understanding of what a sage is.

 

I think that difference is at a very fundamental level.

 

You can bat this back and forward a bit but I don't think there's any more to be said really.

 

P

I disagree. Goes back to my question a few posts up on decision making.

 

If the sage could clean up OR watch TV, do they make a choice? If so, what prompts this choice?

[Rara]

 

Why is A focusing so much effort on helping B when children are starving elsewhere in the world? Seems oddly myopic of him.

 

Also, it seems like A is much happier than B in your scenario. A is content enough with his life that he has energy to spare for helping others, while B is so miserable that he craves attention for the smallest deeds. As myopic as A is, B is even more emotionally stunted; if anything, A should be feeling pity for B's lack of development. If A is feeling jealous of B, then A and B are simply two fools of different kinds.

Good question...I will answer bit by bit.

 

1. A helps B because they co-exist in a household. In fact A is equally helping themselves out too. Just feels it would be nice to have a little help around the place. When B does help, B makes a big point of it, not even acknowledging that A is always putting the work in.

 

So...

 

2. It's a big kettle of fish helping everybody else in the world that is not as fortunate. Surely A can co-habit AND do their bit for the world?

 

3. Correct tha A is happier overall anyway. And maybe they do pity B's attitude. But isn't it normal for someone else to pull their weight? Why shouldn't they get frustrated? I wouldn't say A is jealous of B...just observational of B's shortcomings.

[Rara]

If they're being selfless, and have some despair with B's lack of progress, the best they could do may be to just not respond to B's ego elevation. If B asks why, A could jibe him or her by quoting from DDJ3 "By not elevating the worthy, you bring it about that people will not compete."

Hehe, A certainly does this. B's ego still isn't diminishing much. Maybe a little at a time though.

 

Progress is progress.

[PGawley]

Hi Rara,

 

What I was trying to say is that Kajenx and ChiDragon have a fundamentally different understanding of what a sage is. I read this recently which kind of nailed it for me (from Taoism The Enduring Tradition - Russell Kirkland, p191 - The Cultivated Life).

 

"Hence, the starting point for making our lives into what they should be is learning to discriminate between a fruitless existence - mere survival, then pointless death - on the one hand, and a form of true living on the other hand - living in accord with what really is, and engaging in a fruitful process of spiritual development. That learning process was never simply a matter of thinking certain thoughts about life and trying to put them into action [ChiDragon's and I think your position]. That approach would be as fruitless as living without regard for life's realities. Rather, the Taoist life consists in a process that is focused on a change in experiential awareness. [Kajenx's position]"

 

It took me a long time to get this because it is so, so far away from the Western Judeo-Christian mindset that it may as well be from Jupiter. Kajenx has made another very good post about getting into this mode of experiential awareness and he is much further down this path I am. I believe that it is about interrupting consciousness; its our conscious mind that produces unhelpful illusions. In the past I've always tried to use my conscious mind and rationality to resolve a lot of live's problems - which is madness because ultimately the conscious mind is the source of most of these problems in the first place :-)

 

P

Edited June 29, 2014 by PGawley

[Silent Answers]

I disagree. Goes back to my question a few posts up on decision making.

 

If the sage could clean up OR watch TV, do they make a choice? If so, what prompts this choice?

 

Why would a sage waste time on TV

 

But okay.. choice? Does the house need to be cleaned? If not, the sage is probably cultivating.

Edited June 29, 2014 by Silent Answers

[thelerner]

Yet.. we may want to be sages or saints, but we're not. Every now and then you've got to express your true inner feelings, lest they manifest internally or externally in other negative ways.

 

Thus imo there is a time and place to shake the other person up, and state your truth loudly and emotionally. Living together is a 2 way street, martyrdom is for saints who are on their way out.

[Rara]

Hi Rara,

 

What I was trying to say is that Kajenx and ChiDragon have a fundamentally different understanding of what a sage is. I read this recently which kind of nailed it for me (from Taoism The Enduring Tradition - Russell Kirkland, p191 - The Cultivated Life).

 

"Hence, the starting point for making our lives into what they should be is learning to discriminate between a fruitless existence - mere survival, then pointless death - on the one hand, and a form of true living on the other hand - living in accord with what really is, and engaging in a fruitful process of spiritual development. That learning process was never simply a matter of thinking certain thoughts about life and trying to put them into action [ChiDragon's and I think your position]. That approach would be as fruitless as living without regard for life's realities. Rather, the Taoist life consists in a process that is focused on a change in experiential awareness. [Kajenx's position]"

 

It took me a long time to get this because it is so, so far away from the Western Judeo-Christian mindset that it may as well be from Jupiter. Kajenx has made another very good post about getting into this mode of experiential awareness and he is much further down this path I am. I believe that it is about interrupting consciousness; its our conscious mind that produces unhelpful illusions. In the past I've always tried to use my conscious mind and rationality to resolve a lot of live's problems - which is madness because ultimately the conscious mind is the source of most of these problems in the first place :-)

 

P

Thanks for your response. Yes, I kjow what you (both) are saying but my query in the OP arises merely from a flaw that I see in this overall description of what the sage is like.

 

I have asked Kajenx another question in response to their post so perhaps that might make things clearer Having an answer to that will most probably bring us one step closer to rounding this up!

Edited June 29, 2014 by Rara

[Rara]

 

Why would a sage waste time on TV

 

But okay.. choice? Does the house need to be cleaned? If not, the sage is probably cultivating.

Hehe, well, he/she wouldn't waste time with TV. But if he/she was sat with B watching it because, I dunno, maybe spending time with each other is healthy? B is the one that wants to watch it, of course. Lol, I dunno, better stop with the TV talk before I completely lose the plot.

 

Interesting simplicity to your answer. A cleans, cooks and cultivates. B goes out, works, socialises and stresses etc. At least B comes back to a clean home and food and A is happy either way.

 

There is a similar account in Zhuangzi, talking about Leih Tzu. I forget which chapter, but he threw all his books away and dedicated the rest of his days doing the housework for his wife.

[Rara]

Yet.. we may want to be sages or saints, but we're not. Every now and then you've got to express your true inner feelings, lest they manifest internally or externally in other negative ways.

 

Thus imo there is a time and place to shake the other person up, and state your truth loudly and emotionally. Living together is a 2 way street, martyrdom is for saints who are on their way out.

Echoes of manitou...there is practicality in the words you speak

[Harmonious Emptiness]

In The Yellow Emperor's Four Canons, he speaks of wen and wu, which could be translated and love and sternness, and notes that there is a time for both, though generally spring and summer for the former, and fall and winter for the latter when it comes to governance.

 

Timing is of the utmost importance in such matters, both not doing so at the wrong time, and not letting the right time pass un-acted upon.