Oneironaut Posted September 24, 2015 (edited) This came to me as quite a revelation in the Tao Te Ching. "Chase after money and security and your heart will never unclench" I have also read similar things from Koichi Tohei in his works of ki and aikido and ran across similar concepts in completely unrelated works. I would like to have some input on here from veteran practitioners as well. Is the idea of security realistically achievable? Edited September 24, 2015 by Oneironaut 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Karl Posted September 24, 2015 (edited) Don't know about Tao, but Benjamin Franklin said: Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. Edited September 24, 2015 by Karl 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thelerner Posted September 24, 2015 Security is an illusion, but an important one. All things can be taken away, hurt or destroyed at any time. Yet, its best to live in appreciation and assuming things will remain, cause mostly they will, but not forever. Koichi Tohei was an incredible optimist. Going to war, when Japanese were saying I'll die for my country, he said I will survive. As a commander he is reputed to wave to enemy troops and communicate, we're going this way, you go that way, so no fight. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
liminal_luke Posted September 24, 2015 You can´t have security in the sense people usually mean. For most people security means never losing their money, never losing their health, never having the people they love die or leave them. Sometimes people feel this kind of security, but it´s built on a shaky foundation because none of these things are sure. But here´s what you can do: Build a kind of unshakable inner peace so that you can lose your money, your health, even the people you love...and you know you´ll still be OK. Liminal 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marblehead Posted September 25, 2015 Yes, security is an illusion. There will always be someone who has a bigger gun than you have. But even with a small gun you can fend off those who have no gun. As Liminal stated, inner peace is our best security. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Karl Posted September 25, 2015 Freedom from the self imposed prison of ignorance is the antithesis of the need for security. If you have no prison, then there is neither need of walls or locks :-) 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rara Posted September 25, 2015 I was always a bit hardcore with the whole "I don't want a mortgage" "I don't need marriage" "I don't need a pension" These days, I'm the opposite. While the above statements are correct, it's certainly nice to have these things. After all, if a house does get paid off, any furure kids will be in a better spot regardless than if I never tried... 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thelerner Posted September 25, 2015 At some point possessions end up owning you. Sometimes its worth the trade off, but you need to realize it exists. Spend enough money, time or heart on something and you're tied to it. By some belief systems we are beings tied by 1,000 strings. Every lover, every friend, every emotional attachment is still there weighing on us, pulling us, connecting us karmically to others. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bud Jetsun Posted September 26, 2015 Spend enough money, time or heart on something and you're tied to it. This appears true until the moment of realization all attachment is a choice, and it's always been equally possible to make the choice of non-attachment. Security and the illusion of a need for it is a human construct alone. Nothing remains the same, but nothing is lost. Unlimited Love, -Bud 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shanlung Posted September 26, 2015 If you want certainty, you will have the certainty that changes will always be inevitable and the only constant that you will live with. Idiotic Taoist full of certainty and happy to throw those pearls left and right 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marblehead Posted September 26, 2015 At some point possessions end up owning you. Sometimes its worth the trade off, but you need to realize it exists. Spend enough money, time or heart on something and you're tied to it. By some belief systems we are beings tied by 1,000 strings. Every lover, every friend, every emotional attachment is still there weighing on us, pulling us, connecting us karmically to others. Point well made. The only true attachment I have is my music collection. There is a lot of time and money devoted to it. But I have the entire collection of a 1.3 TB hard drive so it would be easy to pull the two plugs, grab it and run if anything were ever to happen to my life and I remained alive. Everything else can be replaced. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Karl Posted September 26, 2015 I was always a bit hardcore with the whole "I don't want a mortgage" "I don't need marriage" "I don't need a pension" These days, I'm the opposite. While the above statements are correct, it's certainly nice to have these things. After all, if a house does get paid off, any furure kids will be in a better spot regardless than if I never tried... Yet, originally you were tied to the negative element of attachment. You wished not to have attachment in the way an addict does not want to take the drug by locking the drug beyond reach. There are plenty here that are equally attached to the Dao and Buddhism. Attachment is to thoughts and not to existent things. Trying to have no thoughts, or refusing to get possessions is equally attachment. Can't win with that line of thinking. It is a dead end. Attachment can only be broken when the truth is realised. That you cannot avoid the pain of loss and should never, ever seek to avoid it. It is the exquisite pain of life, of having loved, to know that deeply is to feel what it is to be human. One who has not loved will never feel loss and I pity them. Those that fear to love are already grieving they just haven't realised it. It is better to have loved and lost than to never have loved at all. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marblehead Posted September 26, 2015 'Tis better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all.(Lord) Alfred Tennyson 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rara Posted September 27, 2015 This appears true until the moment of realization all attachment is a choice, and it's always been equally possible to make the choice of non-attachment. Security and the illusion of a need for it is a human construct alone. Nothing remains the same, but nothing is lost. Unlimited Love, -Bud Human construction is a wonderful thing Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rara Posted September 27, 2015 Yet, originally you were tied to the negative element of attachment. You wished not to have attachment in the way an addict does not want to take the drug by locking the drug beyond reach. There are plenty here that are equally attached to the Dao and Buddhism. Attachment is to thoughts and not to existent things. Trying to have no thoughts, or refusing to get possessions is equally attachment. Can't win with that line of thinking. It is a dead end. Attachment can only be broken when the truth is realised. That you cannot avoid the pain of loss and should never, ever seek to avoid it. It is the exquisite pain of life, of having loved, to know that deeply is to feel what it is to be human. One who has not loved will never feel loss and I pity them. Those that fear to love are already grieving they just haven't realised it. It is better to have loved and lost than to never have loved at all. Indeed. And I too was attached to Daoism and Buddhism. I realise now that it was my own lack of accountability in life...the need to be mothered by something. I see this as important though, and inevitable in the early stages of cultivation. We all have to start somewhere and these extremes are probably neccessary at first if somebody needs to turn their life around. But then there comes a point when you gotta say "I don't think I need to be so hard on myself anymore" I know what it's been like to going from a sheltered family to being away with very little money and no job. You learn all about yourself and how little materialism means in such situations. Now I'm in a much better place so I think "sure, I guess it's ok now to strive towards a few things". The old "me" would take it all for granted, and certainly wasn't ready! But yes, I was attached to "not having" In hindsight, I too was ignorant and mocked those that "had". Now I feel that a lot of those that "have", probably deserve it. Not all, but a lot I'm currently attached to my fiancee. I'm sure she would be upset if I wasn't haha. Life is good. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rara Posted September 27, 2015 (edited) Point well made. The only true attachment I have is my music collection. There is a lot of time and money devoted to it. But I have the entire collection of a 1.3 TB hard drive so it would be easy to pull the two plugs, grab it and run if anything were ever to happen to my life and I remained alive. Everything else can be replaced. Wow, a true music fan right there. I'm a supposed musician and I don't think my collection is even 10% of that. Then again, you've been around a lot longer And I don't think I'm all that into music any more. That too. Edited September 27, 2015 by Rara Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marblehead Posted September 27, 2015 Wow, a true music fan right there. I'm a supposed musician and I don't think my collection is even 10% of that. Then again, you've been around a lot longer And I don't think I'm all that into music any more. That too. Yeah, my music collecting started in the early 1950s. And my collection always traveled with me wherever I went in the Army. And it did take a lot of time digitizing and remastering all the records. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Karl Posted September 27, 2015 Wow, a true music fan right there. I'm a supposed musician and I don't think my collection is even 10% of that. Then again, you've been around a lot longer And I don't think I'm all that into music any more. That too. I found the same thing. I've got several hundred or maybe more than a couple of thousand records and CDs but I listen to a tiny fraction and hardly listen to anything new. Last time that happened I had a 5 year hiatus before hearing Nirvana, RATM and Metallica which got me going. I seem to be sliding slowly towards classical music and have been listening to a lot of Bach for organ. I hear a lot more than I once did. Old age eh. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marblehead Posted September 27, 2015 I seem to be sliding slowly towards classical music and have been listening to a lot of Bach for organ. I hear a lot more than I once did. Old age eh. Yep. That's old age. Physically and mentally. We've gotta let the child out to play if we want him to stay young and healthy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Karl Posted September 27, 2015 Yep. That's old age. Physically and mentally. We've gotta let the child out to play if we want him to stay young and healthy. I find pop music ever more mundane. If you really wanted to go back to the inner child I would be embracing teething rings, pacifiers and goo goo eyes. Move on is my motto. Leave all that stuff behind like manure on a garden. I appreciate age as the price of wisdom and the decline of endless desire. Funnily enough, when I think back, I was never enamoured with my childhood playmates. I preferred to seek adult company and learning to sand pits and toy cars. I don't wish to revisit it :-) 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
doc benway Posted September 27, 2015 I found the same thing. I've got several hundred or maybe more than a couple of thousand records and CDs but I listen to a tiny fraction and hardly listen to anything new. Last time that happened I had a 5 year hiatus before hearing Nirvana, RATM and Metallica which got me going. I seem to be sliding slowly towards classical music and have been listening to a lot of Bach for organ. I hear a lot more than I once did. Old age eh. Yep. That's old age. Physically and mentally. We've gotta let the child out to play if we want him to stay young and healthy. I listened almost exclusively to classical music for decades in my 20's and 30's mostly. Now that I'm older (50's), I prefer more rhythmic music - Brazilian, West African, Cuban hip hop, Andean, along with Tibetan music. I've maintained a bit of interest in current (not necessarily pop) music through my kids. It's always been a way for us to communicate and share something. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites