Earthly sage and mystical Immortal

[Harmonious Emptiness]

The two are not the same, but the two exist in Taoist lore. Let's not forget that.

 

That is all....

[Taoist Texts]

The two are not the same,

How we know that they are not the same?

[GrandmasterP]

Cos the earthly sage dies eventually.

IMO the clue's in that word 'immortal'.

 

Edited September 12, 2014 by GrandmasterP

[Marblehead]

BTW I'm not really immortal.

[Taoist Texts]

Cos the earthly sage dies eventually.

IMO the clue's in that word 'immortal'.

 

 

 

thats not bad for a top of the head explanation but stil could use more detail. You see xian 仙人 (which is translated as immortal) means a special kind of spiritual beings, who may or may not have been mortal at some point in time. Same with the sages 圣人 or 聖人, they might have been mortal or not, regardless of what happened to their physical bodies. Also TTC does not contain 仙人, only 聖人. On the other hand, Zhuangzi contains several appellations: an utter man至人a spiritual man 神人，a sage man 聖人; but no 仙人. In my translations i translate 仙人 as a saint, not an immortal, the latter being misleading.

[Harmonious Emptiness]

I meant to post this in Taoist discussion, if a mod wants to move it there..

 

 

Also, meant that so much focus on the forum seems to be on trying to become a mystical Immortal, as though there's nothing to being an earthly sage, or seemingly to say that the Dao De Jing didn't even speak about wisdom, but that it's all just a metaphor for something else.

 

I feel like people talk too much about all the mystical trappings and miss the opportunity to learn the earthly wisdom. This seems almost like a slight (insult), as though the wisdom of these teachers is of no value unless you become an immortal; as though people have it all down pat simply because they have a meditation path.

 

Don't people care about living well with other people? About setting one's self right in balance with the world? Is it all just about becoming spirit fairies? If you don't develop virtue, character, and wisdom in the world, what good are you going to do with your power?

 

 

 

first remarks starting

fire dance of forum debate

incendiary....

[Marblehead]

Yeah, I can tell you have been eating your Cheerios. Pretty spunky post there.

 

"I feel like people ..."

 

Oh, Oh! Another generalization. Hehehe. How about, "I feel like some people ..."?

 

But I do hear what you are saying.

 

 

 

[beyonder]

Oh, I don't know about becoming an immortal. But to live an entire lifetime like an immortal, isn't that the next best thing?

[dust]

I feel like people talk too much about all the mystical trappings and miss the opportunity to learn the earthly wisdom. This seems almost like a slight (insult), as though the wisdom of these teachers is of no value unless you become an immortal; as though people have it all down pat simply because they have a meditation path.

 

My own understanding of Laozi and Zhuangzi is that trying to achieve immortality is utterly futile. As front is to back and light is to dark, so to be born is to die. Someone who doesn't die is only half a thing. Immortality opposes the Way.

 

It may be that in another time, or an infinite number of other times throughout time, we will each live again. But recognizing and accepting the fact that we are all basically on the verge of death at any moment during this time is a liberation.

 

夫唯弗居也 是以弗去也

[Marblehead]

Oh, I don't know about becoming an immortal. But to live an entire lifetime like an immortal, isn't that the next best thing?

You could have gone on and on with that thought. But what you did say was significant.

[dawei]

In my translations i translate 仙人 as a saint, not an immortal, the latter being misleading.

 

I am not sure the english word Saint will come close to meanings of 'immortal' as used in various ancient text.

 

I will just add that it probably has a connection to shamanism and Wu (毉-reduced into 巫) and True man (眞-reduced into 真)

 

 

 

 

BTW: I think it should stay here as it will get better attention and maybe more talk about ancient texts or characters.

[Daeluin]

There is a fish in the Northern Oblivion named Kun, and this Kun is quite huge, spanning who knows how many thousands of miles. He transforms into a bird named Peng, and this Peng has quite a back on him, stretching who knows how many thousands of miles. When he rouses himself and sours into the air, his wings are like clouds draped across the heavens. The oceans start to churn, the this bird begins his journey toward the Southern Oblivion. The Southern Oblivion - that is the Pool of Heaven.

 

The Equalizing Jokebook, a record of many wonders, reports: "When Peng journeys to the Southern Oblivion, the waters ripple for three thousand miles. Spiraling aloft, he ascends ninety thousand milds and continues his journey without rest for half a year."

 

- It's a galloping heat haze! - It's a swirl of dust! - It's some living creature blown aloft on a breath of the air! And the blue on blue of the sky - is that the sky's true color? Or is it just the vast distance, going on and on without end, that looks that way? When Peng looks down, he too sees only this and nothing more.

 

Now, if water is not piled up thickly enough, it has no power to support a large vessel. Overturn a cupful of water in a whole in the road and you can float a mustard seed in it like a boat, but if you put the cup itself in there it will just get stuck. The water is too shallow for so large a vessel. And if the wind is not piled up thickly enough, it has no power to support Peng's enormous wings. That is why he needs to put ninety thousand miles of air beneath him. Only then can he ride the wind, bearing the blue of heaven on his back and unobstructed on all sides, and bake his way south.

 

The cicada and the fledgling dove laugh at him, saying, "We scurry up into the air, leaping from the elm to the sandalwood tree, and when we don't quite make it we just plummet to the ground. What's all this about ascending ninety thousand miles and heading south?"

 

If you go out on a day trip, you can return with your belly still full. If you're traveling a hundred miles, you'll need to bring a day's meal. And if you're traveling a thousand miles, you'll need to save up provisions for three months before you go. What do these two little creatures know? A small consciousness cannot keep up with a vast consciousness; short duration cannot keep up with long duration. How do we know? The morning mushroom knows nothing of the noontide; the winter cicada knows nothing of the spiring and autumn. This is what is means by short duration. In southern Chu there is a tree called Mingling, for which five hundred years is as a single spring, and another five hundred years is a single autumn. In ancient times, there was even one massive tree whose spring and autumn were each eight thousand years long. And yet nowadays, Pengzu alone has a special reputation for longevity, and everyone tries to match him. Pathetic, isn't it?

 

Tang's questions to Ji also have something about this:

 

In the barren northland there is a dark ocean, called the Pool of Heaven. There is a fish there several thousand miles across with a length that is as yet unknown named Kun. There's a bird there named Peng with a back like Mt. Tai and wings like clouds draped across the heavens. Whorling upward, he ascends ninety thousand miles, breaking through the clouds and bearing the blue of the sky on his back, and then heads south, finally arriving at the Southern Oblivion. The quail laughs at him, saying, "Where does he thing he's Going? I leap into the air with all my might, but before I get farther than a few yards I drop to the ground. My twittering and fluttering between the bushes and branches is the utmost form of flying! So where does he thing he's going?" Such is the difference between the large and the small.

 

And he whose understanding is sufficient to fill some one post, whose deeds meet the needs of some one village, or whose Virtuosity pleases some one ruler, thus winning him a country to preside over, sees himself in just the same way. Even Song Rongzi would burst out laughing at such a man. If the whole world happened to praise Song Rongzi, he would not be goaded onward; if the whole world condemned him, he would not be deterred. He simply made a sharp and fixed division between the inner and the outer and clearly discerned where true honor and disgrace are to be found. He did not involve himself in anxious calculations in his dealings with the world. But nonetheless, there was still a sense in which he was not yet really firmly planted.

 

Now, Liezi rode forth upon the wind, weightlessly graceful, not heading back until fifteen days had passed. He did not involve himself in anxious calculations about bringing good fortune to himself. Although this allowed him to avoid the exertions of walking, there was still something he needed to depend on.

 

But suppose you were to chariot upon what is true both to Heaven and to earth, riding atop the back-and-forth of the six atmospheric breaths, so that your wandering could nowhere be brought to a halt. You would then be depending on - what? Thus I say, the Consummate Person has no fixed identity, the Spirit Man has no particular merit, the Sage has no one name.

 

Zhuangzi, Chapter one, translation by Brook Ziporyn.

 

This is the concept of "Walking Two Roads," found in chapter two as well:

 

 

So no thing is not right, no thing is not acceptable. For whatever we may define as a beam as opposed to a pillar, as a leper as opposed the great beauty Xishi, or whatever might be [from some perspective] strange, grotesque, uncanny, or deceptive, there is some course that opens them into one another, connecting them to form a oneness. Whenever fragmentation is going on, formation, completion, is also going on. Whenever formation is going on, destruction is also going on.

 

Hence, all things are neither formed nor destroyed, for these two also open into each other, connecting to form a oneness. It is only someone who really gets all the way through them that can see how the two sides open into each other to form a oneness. Such a person would not define rightness in any one particular way but would instead entrust it to the everyday function [of each being]. Their everyday function is what works for them, and "working" just means this opening up into each other, their way of connecting. Opening to form a connection just means getting what you get: go as far as whatever you happen to get to, and leave it at that. It is all just a matter of going by the rightness of the present "this." To be doing this without knowing it, and not because you have defined it as right, is called "the Course."

 

But to labor your spirit trying to make all things one, without realizing that it is all the same [whether you do so or not], is called "Three in the Morning."

 

What is this Three in the Morning? A monkey trainer was distributing chestnuts. He said, "I'll give you three in the morning and four in the evening." The monkeys were furious. "Well then," he said, "I'll give you four in the morning and three in the evening." The monkeys were delighted. This change of description and arrangement caused no loss, but in one case it brought anger and in another delight. He just went by the rightness of their present "this." Thus the Sage uses various rights and wrongs to harmonize with others and yet remains at rest in the middle of Heaven the Potter's Wheel. This is called "Walking Two Roads."

 

This concept allows one to flow harmoniously with what is external, even while maintaining a vastly separate scope of operation on the inside. The principles found in the Dao De Jing describe how to just just that.

 

In my opinion, the tao is right there in front of us, waiting for us to listen to what it is teaching. When we flow like water, following the paths of least resistance, the tao leads us into circumstances which will challenge our egos and help us to empty. By learning to synchronize with this path of least resistance, we become harmonious within the operation of the external realm.

 

Then as we cultivate our inner realm, we are able to maintain our connection to the external realm, even as our inner scope changes and we put miles and miles of air beneath us, we remain dependent upon what is low to keep us up high. Our foundation is upon what is low, and if we do not take care to maintain it how will we not avoid damage? Many try to hide in absolute isolation, but the changing external world has many ways of catching up. Simpler to cultivate a flowing invisibility that ever merges and slips past, yielding to remain whole.

 

Thus we are able to chariot upon what is true to both Heaven and Earth, merging with the ebbs and flows of the ten thousand things, dependent only upon the operation of the dance itself, until mysteriously slipping through to what is beyond both Heaven and Earth.

 

Those who focus on the infinite are well to be reminded it ever includes and depends upon the mundane.

[Taoist Texts]

I will just add that it probably has a connection to shamanism and Wu (毉-reduced into 巫) and True man (眞-reduced into 真)

 

i like these goings-on for xian.

[Taoist Texts]

I am not sure the english word Saint will come close to meanings of 'immortal' as used in various ancient text.

 

A saint is one who has been recognized for having an exceptional degree of holiness. While the English term "saint" originated in Christianity, historians of religion now use the term "in a more general way to refer to the state of special holiness that many religions attribute to certain people,"^[1] with the Jewish Tzadik, the Islamic Mu'min, the Hindu rishi or guru, and the Buddhist arhat orbodhisattva also referred to as saints.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint

[Marblehead]

I ain't no saint.

[GrandmasterP]

Saint Marblehead.

Patron saint of Realists.

Feast Day... Today.

 

Edited September 14, 2014 by GrandmasterP

[Marblehead]

That's kinda' like accepting the label of "Master" (of anything). I don't do that. I don't accept expert either.

 

But here in real life if someone pisses me off the label they must use when referring to me is "Mister".

[GrandmasterP]

In the army officers called NCOs above the rank of sergeant " Mister - Surname".

Sergeant and below it was surname only or number then surname if you were in trouble.

I'd feel a right prong is anyone called me ' Grand Master' in real life.

Plus I'd wonder what they were after.

 

 

Edited September 14, 2014 by GrandmasterP

[silent thunder]

I ain't no saint.

and I ain't no senators son....

 

though I do consider myself a fortunate one.

[Marblehead]

and I ain't no senators son....

 

though I do consider myself a fortunate one.

I was wondering if anyone would catch that.

[dawei]

 

i like these goings-on for xian.

 

And this for Wu:

 

[Marblehead]

And this for Wu:

 

WoW! There's a lot going on in Wu.

[Taoist Texts]

 

Those who focus on the infinite are well to be reminded it ever includes and depends upon the mundane.

 

 

In this yogi-ridden age, it is too readily assumed that ‘non-attachment’ is not only better than a full acceptance of earthly life, but that the ordinary man rejects it because it is too difficult; in other words, that the average human being is a failed saint. It is doubtful whether this is true. Many people genuinely do not wish to be saints, and it is probable that some who achieve or aspire to sainthood have never felt much temptation to be human beings. If one could follow it to its psychological roots, one would, I believe, find that the main motive for ”non-attachment” is a desire to escape from the pain of living, and above all from love, which, sexual or non-sexual, is hard work. But it is not necessary here to argue whether the other-worldly or the humanistic ideal is ‘higher’.’ The point is that they are incompatible.

 

— George Orwell, Reflections on Gandhi

[Daeluin]

Are they truly incompatible, or are we simply blind to the overlap, and think what we do not see must be separate from what we do see?

 

Zhuangzi says when the understanding consciousness comes to rest in what it does not know, it has reached its utmost. When we are always declaring what is known, how can we avoid separating it from what is not?