The nature of Tao and its '-ism'

[Marblehead]

 

The beings that do come to accept this responsibility will ever be dominated by conquerors who decide there is something of value to exploit - hence the use of yielding, humility, and non-contention as mechanisms of invisibility. The connection the conquered beings made to tao is covered by layers of trauma and perversion, but it remains and lives on within, and there will always be those who are able to uncover it again.

This last paragraph came off a little too pessimistic for me this morning. I don't know why it felt that way.

 

Maybe the thought of someone trying to conquer me? Would there be any we would call the Mission Impossible #48.

[Daeluin]

I hear that. To me it is a way of looking at reality that allows me to understand just how much beauty there is abounding us, and that despite how many threats there are to its survival, there is an awe inspiring courage present with the undying potential to overcome any and all forms of exploitation.

 

Perhaps less pessimistic than thinking we are doomed to be wiped out by the seemingly undying greed of mankind, and not as blindly optimistic as justifying to ourselves that despite the greed of man nature always seems to grow back and look at all the flowers.

[Marblehead]

Okay. That's better. Hehehe.

 

But nature (the Way of Tao) will win every time. We think we are accomplishing something on this planet but one day this planet will be dead. And it will happen with or without man's help.

[Daeluin]

Maybe the thought of someone trying to conquer me? Would there be any we would call the Mission Impossible #48.

 

Looks like the discussion on 61 could use more context. Hu Xuezhi:

 

A great country should be like an ocean located in the lower reaches of rivers,

Thus accomplishing the converging place of all rivers under Heaven.

The feminine of the world

Always overcomes the masculine by the nature of stillness.

Because stillness lies lower,

Therefore, if a large country lowers itself to greet a small country,

It will gain the small country.

If a small country lowers itself to serve a large country,

It will gain the large country.

Therefore, some lower to greet in order to gain,

And some lower to serve.

The large country wants nothing more

Than to let the small country rely upon itself,

The small country wants nothing more,

Than to rely upon the large country.

Thus, both get what they want.

Yet it is proper for the great one to lower itself.

 

So if someone tries to conquer you, Marblehead, if they are smaller than you it might be best to simply receive them. And if they are larger than you, they really have no business conquering you, so best to yield to their own momentum and not giving them reason to stick around by engaging them. This can be accomplished by both letting them think they have conquered you, and not giving them much reason to care.

 

When the Malazan Empire's reputation for unfailingly conquering many countries spread to one little island kingdom, they sent an emissary to the Malazan Emperor with their terms for surrender. No Malazan ever ended up visiting the kingdom.

 

I know a teacher who has a reputation. When his name comes up people will laughingly dismiss him. He never once did anything to correct such reputation, simply letting it be. In the end his students know the truth, and the rumors merely keep him invisible from those who might otherwise look deeper.

Edited January 31, 2015 by Daeluin

[Daeluin]

But nature (the Way of Tao) will win every time. We think we are accomplishing something on this planet but one day this planet will be dead. And it will happen with or without man's help.

 

Does tao win or lose?

 

Certainly the planet has a limited time frame, but the resources we exploit may be used up long before that happens. Just as humans use up their own inner primordial energy and undergo ageing, the potential exists for human-kind to use up the resources we rely upon. We also have the potential to learn finer balance, as is present in the many ecosystems we topple.

 

Should we kill ourselves off and strip the earth bare, certainly the earth could reclaim itself over time. No doubt it has happened before and could happen again.

[dust]

"All this has happened before, and will happen again.. again... again........"

 

(Battlestar Galactica)

[Marblehead]

 

So if someone tries to conquer you, Marblehead,

No, no, no.

 

Merging with me is fine. Trying to conquer me is a no-go.

[Marblehead]

Does tao win or lose?

 

Certainly the planet has a limited time frame, but the resources we exploit may be used up long before that happens. Just as humans use up their own inner primordial energy and undergo ageing, the potential exists for human-kind to use up the resources we rely upon. We also have the potential to learn finer balance, as is present in the many ecosystems we topple.

 

Should we kill ourselves off and strip the earth bare, certainly the earth could reclaim itself over time. No doubt it has happened before and could happen again.

Yep. I think all too often men speak of the great powers of man. Ego stroking is all that is. Put man on an island with a couple palm trees and the trees will last a lot longer than the man will.

 

And true, we humans may kill ourselves off before the Earth starts her death dance.

[FmAm]

Does tao win or lose?

 

Certainly the planet has a limited time frame, but the resources we exploit may be used up long before that happens. Just as humans use up their own inner primordial energy and undergo ageing, the potential exists for human-kind to use up the resources we rely upon. We also have the potential to learn finer balance, as is present in the many ecosystems we topple.

 

Should we kill ourselves off and strip the earth bare, certainly the earth could reclaim itself over time. No doubt it has happened before and could happen again.

Tao can't win or lose. Tao just happens. Eventually sun will run out of fuel and all life on earth will end. That's tao. If humankind learns finer balance, that's tao. If humankind destroys life on earth, that's tao. There's no balance in the ecosystems. They're changing all the time. Species die out, new species are born. Same thing happens to ecosystems and to entire galaxies. That's tao. And a mother nursing and loving her baby is tao.

[TheDustAutumn]

...

Edited February 3, 2015 by coZma

[dust]

No, of course, everyone's got it wrong... only a handful of living people throughout history have been blessed with Laozi's wonderful secrets, and now only a handful of people can possibly open us to 'enlightenment'. But this long-lost ancient knowledge can now be yours for only $49.99!

 

[Daeluin]

Chop wood, carry water.

[C T]

Chop wood, carry water.

I know the above is often associated with the encouragement to keep things simple, to stay lowly and make little demands of oneself, but some Zen masters actually use that phrase to teach about putting the 'self' aside, as in the removal of all subtle traces of a self that is chopping wood or carrying water so as to honour/sanctify even the humblest of actions. If one were to be preoccupied with one's thoughts while performing (especially) menial tasks, upon completion, its as if nothing was accomplished, because it will feel as if one did not chop any wood or carried any water at all...

 

In fact, its the menial tasks that more often than not shape character and discipline, ensuring that the basics are pounded deep into the foundation so that even the subtlest aversions are removed and all bases are covered. People think of big obstacles getting in the way, but sometimes what actually floors a person could be the tiniest, subtlest thing, much like how a mice can frighten an elephant, or a professor who takes a boat everyday to cross a river to get to work, where one day, the boat sprang a leak in the middle of the river, and him realising too late he never bothered to learn how to swim even though he supposedly knew the theory/logic of everything like the back of his hand.

 

(sorry, its late, and I'm rambling once more, annoyed that i could be sleeping and I'm not...)

 

 

edit to add: Goodnite folks

Edited February 3, 2015 by C T

[Daeluin]

In simplicity and deep sincerity one connects to tao. This is ones payment.

 

Today people take money as sincerity. It is worthless, but for those insist otherwise, and yet difficult to not participate.

 

Waysun Liao's Laozi embodies such unbroken sincerity and simple connection to tao that even though he does not raise a finger to protect himself from harm, no harm is able to come to him. In the midst of all he simply maintains sincerity and all is done.

 

What is simple is powerful.

[TheDustAutumn]

...

Edited February 3, 2015 by coZma

[dust]

I get what you're saying. And take my last comment with a pinch of salt.

 

We do need to look past what we think we know -- this in my opinion is absolutely necessary, and this honest searching is the main problem the majority of people face. It's something I'm facing all the time. But I have an innate distrust of anyone claiming to have some special kind of knowledge, especially when they're claiming that it's hidden in a book like the Laozi -- something that's been dissected continuously for centuries, and something which, in my opinion, does not reflect the ideas in that quote you posted very much at all.

[Marblehead]

No, of course, everyone's got it wrong... only a handful of living people throughout history have been blessed with Laozi's wonderful secrets, and now only a handful of people can possibly open us to 'enlightenment'. But this long-lost ancient knowledge can now be yours for only $49.99!

 

But wait! You can get a second copy free. Just pay additional shipping and handling.

[Marblehead]

In simplicity and deep sincerity one connects to tao. This is ones payment.

 

Today people take money as sincerity. It is worthless, but for those insist otherwise, and yet difficult to not participate.

 

Waysun Liao's Laozi embodies such unbroken sincerity and simple connection to tao that even though he does not raise a finger to protect himself from harm, no harm is able to come to him. In the midst of all he simply maintains sincerity and all is done.

 

What is simple is powerful.

I sometimes have a problem with this concept. No harm comes to him because he is worthless to others. Nothing mare than a grain of sand on a beach.

 

I'm not knocking the concept of something being useless and thereby preserving its life. But I actually find value in being useful. (I just don't like being misused.)

 

Most things in life are easy if you already know how to do them. But it takes a lot of trial and error to find simplicity (easy).

[FmAm]

A: 'There's a secret to be found.'

Q: 'Have you found it yourself?'

A: 'Yes.'

Q: 'Can you show it to me?'

A : 'No, you have to find it yourself.'

Q: 'Can you tell me where it is?'

A: 'No. It's not that simple.'

 

A conversation like that tells me instantly that there's no secret found. A person who has found the secret can show it immediately, no matter where he is. There's no such spiritual secret that someone could make use of.

 

(Of course, the above conversation is fair if it's about someones saxophone playing skills, and he can't show his skills until he has picked up his saxophone.)

Edited February 3, 2015 by FmAm

[Marblehead]

The flowering plants I grow in my gardens have no secrets. But they do require certain conditions and resources in order to live to their full capacity.

 

I think we humans are about the same. Living to our full capacity requires certain conditions and resources. No secrets; we just have to find out what the conditions and resources are best for us. (Yes, different plants require different conditions and resources. Likely humans do too.)

[FmAm]

The flowering plants I grow in my gardens have no secrets. But they do require certain conditions and resources in order to live to their full capacity.

 

I think we humans are about the same. Living to our full capacity requires certain conditions and resources. No secrets; we just have to find out what the conditions and resources are best for us. (Yes, different plants require different conditions and resources. Likely humans do too.)

I know we've been there before, but: are the plants actively searching suitable conditions and resources? No. They are expressions of those conditions and resources they are part of. Following those conditions and resources far enough eventually exposes the whole universe. There's no way separating a flower from its conditions. Before the flower was 'born', it was air, water, sun, earth etc.

 

It's the same with us human beings. We are our actions and our thoughts. Our actions, consciousness, thoughts, body and feelings are impersonal and non-volitional events in the whole. Which leads logically to non-conditional and non-logical. We are just like flowers. How to separate us from the flowers?

Edited February 3, 2015 by FmAm

[Marblehead]

I know we've been there before, but: are the plants actively searching suitable conditions and resources? No. They are expressions of those conditions and resources they are part of. Following those conditions and resources far enough eventually exposes the whole universe. There's no way separating a flower from its conditions. Before the flower was 'born', it was air, water, sun, earth etc.

 

It's the same with us human beings. We are our actions and our thoughts. Our actions, thoughts, body and feelings are impersonal and non-volitional expressions of the whole. Which leads logically to non-conditional. We are just like flowers. How to separate us from the flowers?

Damn! You cause me to think. Shame on you. Hehehe.

 

Actually, to your first question, I think I have to disagree with you. Plants do seek preferred conditions and resources. They seek more or less light, more or less water, different kinds of nutrients, etc. The root systems vary from plant to plant depending on their needs.

 

If they don't get what they need they die an early death without fulfilling their natural capacity.

 

Same with people, I think. Seekers are searching for what they (think) don't have yet. Many of our members are still seeking for what they (think) they don't yet have.

 

So yeah, life is life, and the processes are the same for all. But the needs vary.

[FmAm]

Damn! You cause me to think. Shame on you. Hehehe.

 

Actually, to your first question, I think I have to disagree with you. Plants do seek preferred conditions and resources. They seek more or less light, more or less water, different kinds of nutrients, etc. The root systems vary from plant to plant depending on their needs.

 

If they don't get what they need they die an early death without fulfilling their natural capacity.

 

Same with people, I think. Seekers are searching for what they (think) don't have yet. Many of our members are still seeking for what they (think) they don't yet have.

 

So yeah, life is life, and the processes are the same for all. But the needs vary.

Every plant is an expression of full natural capacity. There is nothing but the full, inexhaustible whole with it's conditioned expressions which we call by names. In certain conditions there is the potential for a certain plant to live. And those conditions need their conditions, etc. ad infinitum. A plant doesn't have natural capacity. It's just an non-volitional and impersonal event. A phenomenon. So are the valuations and fears we have, which cause us to judge things. A dying plant is just a phenomenon among others. It isn't good or bad. Full bloom and a stunting plant are what they are. If I give water to a dying plant and save it, it's just an event, including all 'my' motives, feelings, and movements. It's like rain or a dust devil. They can't be anything else but what they are at a certain moment. I use to observe this: I sit and observe plants, rocks, wind and my thoughts and ask myself, can they be something else but what they are right now? The answer is always 'no'. Everything is what it is right now.

Edited February 3, 2015 by FmAm

[Marblehead]

Every plant is an expression of full natural capacity. There is nothing but the full, inexhaustible whole with it's conditioned expressions which we call by names. In certain conditions there is the potential for a certain plant to live. And those conditions need their conditions, etc. ad infinitum.

Okay. I was with you up to this point.

 

A plant doesn't have natural capacity. It's just an non-volitional and impersonal event. A phenomenon. So are the valuations and fears we have, which cause us to judge things. A dying plant is just a phenomenon among others. It isn't good or bad. Full bloom and a stunting plant are what they are. If I give water to a dying plant and save it, it's just an event, including all 'my' motives, feelings, and movements. It's like rain or a dust devil. They can't be anything else but what they are at a certain moment. I use to observe this: I sit and observe plants, rocks, wind and my thoughts and ask myself, can they be something else but what they are right now? The answer is always 'no'. Everything is what it is right now.

But the same can be said for the human animal, the eagle and the skunk.

[FmAm]

But the same can be said for the human animal, the eagle and the skunk.

What do you mean by that?

Edited February 3, 2015 by FmAm