Mair 11:6

[Marblehead]

The common people of the world are all happy when others are like themselves, but are displeased when others are different from themselves.  Both the desire for others to be like themselves and the desire that others not be different from themselves stem from their minds being set on distinguishing themselves from the crowd.  But have those whose minds are set on distinguishing themselves from the crowd really done so?  Better to go along with the crowd by being content with what one has learned, for it could never match the ingenuity of the crowd as a whole.  Yet those who desire to administer the state of another only have their gaze set on the profits of the rulers of the three dynasties without seeing all of the troubles involved.  This is to try one's luck with another's state.  But how often can one try one's luck without bringing ruin to his state?  The chances for the preservation of his state will not be one in ten thousand, while the chances that it will be ruined are more than ten thousand to one.  How sad it is that those who possess the land are unaware of this!

The possessors of the land possess the greatest of all things.  Possessing the greatest of all things, they should not be influenced by things.  Having a thing but not being influenced by things, therefore they can treat things as things.  He who perceives dearly how to treat things as things is himself not a thing.  As such, he will not merely govern the hundred clans of all under heaven.  He will pass in and out of the six reaches {{North, south, east, west, up (heaven), down (earth).}} of the universe, he will wander through the nine regions.  {{The ancient Chinese divided the whole world into nine regions (like a tick-tack-toe diagram).}}  Alone he will come, alone he will go.  This may be termed "possessing all alone."  The man who possesses this all alone may be termed the noblest of all.

The teaching of the great man is like the shadow from a form, like the echo from a sound.  When questioned, he replies, sharing his thoughts fully and serving as the companion of all under heaven.  He dwells in Neverland and travels in Utopia.  He leads all of you teeming masses back to where you belong, to wander in limitlessness.  He passes in and out of nonattachment, beginningless as the sun.  His discourse and corporeal form join in the great commonality.  Having joined in the great commonality, he has no self.  Having no self, how could he have being?  If you look at those who had being, they were the superior men of old.  If you look at those who had nonbeing, they were the friends of heaven and earth.

{{That which is lowly, yet must be employed things.  That which is humble yet must be depended upon - the people.  That which is minor, yet must be done - affairs.  That which is coarse, yet must be set forth - laws.  That which is distant, yet must be indwelling - righteousness.  That which is intimate, yet must be broad - humaneness.  That which is restrained, yet must be amassed - rites.  That which is central, yet must be elevated - virtue.  That which is unitary, yet must undergo change - the Way.  That which is divine, yet must be exercised - heaven.

Therefore the sages contemplated heaven but did not assist it.  They found their completion in virtue but were not encumbered by it.  They proceeded according to the Way, but made no schemes.  They formed their associations in humaneness, but did not rely on it.  They clove to righteousness but did not amass it.  They responded to the rites and did not conceal them.  They engaged in affairs and did not reject them.  They applied the laws equally and did not cause disorder.  They relied on the people and did not despise them.  They depended upon things and did not discard them.  Among things, none are adequate for use, yet they must be used.

Those who do not understand heaven are not pure in virtue.  Those who do not comprehend the Way will have no point of departure from which they can proceed.  How sad are those who do not understand the Way!

What do we mean by the Way?  There is the Way of heaven, and there are the ways of men.  To remain in nonaction and yet be honored, that is the Way of heaven.  To be involved in action and thereby encumbered, such are the ways of men.  The ruler is the Way of heaven; his subjects are the ways of men.  The Way of heaven and the ways of men are far apart.  This is something that must be critically examined.}}

 

[Taoist Texts]

1 hour ago, Marblehead said:

He who perceives dearly how to treat things as things is himself not a thing. 

sounds cryptic

[Marblehead]

2 hours ago, Taoist Texts said:

sounds cryptic

Yes.  One of Chuang Tzu's mystic moments, I guess.

 

We can probably associate this with the concept of being a spiritual immortal.

 

 

[Stosh]

A man who clearly perceives that objects are mere objects,  is no mere object. ( Because he knows that he is different, the 'end user' so to speak, or has sentience. ) 

Edited September 5, 2017 by Stosh

[Taoist Texts]

On 9/6/2017 at 1:42 AM, Stosh said:

A man who clearly perceives that objects are mere objects,   

As opposed to what?

[oak]

4 hours ago, Taoist Texts said:

As opposed to what?

 

As opposed to giving objects a piece of his soul which would be idolatry. People can be objects/idols too, at least that is my interpretation of the term "straw dog" in the DDJ.

[Taoist Texts]

2 hours ago, oak said:

 

As opposed to giving objects a piece of his soul which would be idolatry

And by that you mean consumerism? Not literal idolatry?

Edited September 7, 2017 by Taoist Texts

[Marblehead]

Yeah, that would be included within limits.

 

After all, if you cannot carry water and chop wood then you have to buy it.  That's not a bad thing.

 

[Stosh]

6 hours ago, Taoist Texts said:

As opposed to what?

As opposed to being a thinking spiritual being. I think the passage suggests a man recognizes that he is not , just the material body. He doesn't react predictably in the manner of objects, he has a greater potential ,like ,  for instance land being the most important 'thing' as opposed to objects within its border, because the land provides the most potentials.

He plays a choice-ful creative role in his own destiny. He appreciates and gives relative meaning and value. Gold is not the thing of value, the thing of value is not the merit one attributes to the gold , or that which one procures with the gold , but the end benefit to the ephemeral man , , his life. 

old quote, 'Man is the measure of all things.'

So even if I do not amass gold, if I live a long happy productive life as I see it, I did not live a life of poverty. 

Edited September 7, 2017 by Stosh

[oak]

1 hour ago, Taoist Texts said:

And by that you mean consumerism? Not literal idolatry?

 

Don't know what your interpretation of idolatry is, mine is putting your hope, your energy, your "soul" in objects, those objects being something that lead you away from the source. Of course one needs people, wood, water, books etc, but psychologically if one hopes to find salvation or an ultimate answer in those one is very far from the right path. So let's say, I know how some books are very important to us but... that something that put those books in our path should be regarded as more important, right?

[Stosh]

Or what he said

 

[oak]

1 hour ago, Stosh said:

As opposed to being a thinking spiritual being. I think the passage suggests a man recognizes that he is not , just the material body. He doesn't react predictably in the manner of objects, he has a greater potential ,like ,  for instance land being the most important 'thing' as opposed to objects within its border, because the land provides the most potentials.

He plays a choice-ful creative role in his own destiny. He appreciates and gives relative meaning and value. Gold is not the thing of value, the thing of value is not the merit one attributes to the gold , or that which one procures with the gold , but the end benefit to the ephemeral man , , his life. 

old quote, 'Man is the measure of all things.'

So even if I do not amass gold, if I live a long happy productive life as I see it, I did not live a life of poverty. 

 

Your post made my day Stosh. Thank you.

[Taoist Texts]

Some examples of this expression in ZZ

 

夫有土者，有大物也。有大物者，不可以物物；而不物，故能物物。明乎物物者之非物也，岂独治天下百姓而已哉！出入六合，游乎九州，独往独来，是谓独有。独有之人，是谓至贵。

Now the possessors of territory possess the greatest of (all) things. Possessing the greatest of all things (possessing, that is, men) they should not try to deal with them as (simply) things. And it is he who is not a thing (himself) that is therefore able to deal with (all) things as they severally require. When (a ruler) clearly understands that he who should so deal with all things is not a thing himself, will he only rule the kingdom? He will go out and in throughout the universe (at his pleasure); he will roam over the nine regions, alone in going, alone in coming. Him we call the sole possessor (of this ability); and the sole possessor (of this ability) is what is called the noblest of all.

 

无誉无訾，一龙一蛇，与时俱化，而无肯专为；一上一下，以和为量，浮游乎万物之祖；物物而不物于物，则胡可得而累邪！此黄帝、神农之法则也。

He is above the reach both of praise and of detraction; now he (mounts aloft) like a dragon, now he (keeps beneath) like a snake; he is transformed with the (changing) character of the time, and is not willing to addict himself to any one thing; now in a high position and now in a low, he is in harmony with all his surroundings; he enjoys himself at ease with the Author of all things; he treats things as things, and is not a thing to them: where is his liability to be involved in trouble? This was the method of Shen Nong and Huang-Di. 

 

物物者与物无际，而物有际者，所谓物际者也；不际之际，际之不际者也。

That which makes things what they are has not the limit which belongs to things, and when we speak of things being limited, we mean that they are so in themselves. (The Dao) is the limit of the unlimited, and the boundlessness of the unbounded.

 

物物者非物。物出不得先物也，犹其有物也。犹其有物也，无已。圣人之爱人也终无已者，亦乃取于是者也。

Was that which was produced before Heaven and Earth a thing? That which made things and gave to each its character was not itself a thing. Things came forth and could not be before things, as if there had (previously) been things - as if there had been things (producing one another) without end. The love of the sages for others, and never coming to an end, is an idea taken from this.'

[dawei]

On 9/7/2017 at 2:24 AM, Taoist Texts said:

As opposed to what?

 

I take it in the sense of Zen formula:

 

A = A = not A

 

Non-dual being presented.