Form of meditation of Lao tse and Chuang tse

[vonkrankenhaus]

On 5/18/2018 at 12:14 PM, wandelaar said:

I'm on the road of philosophical Taoism and just want to know what meditation practices are most probably referred to in the Chuang tse and the Tao Te Ching, and the investigation has to be based on the texts themselves

 

These are not strictly Internal Cultivation or even purely philosophical texts.

People seem to hear bamboo flutes when they are brought up in conversation, as if this is mystical religious writing, or something.

They represent applications of some principles of these to governing a municipality.

 

This is, to me, like looking for "esoteric" meditation techniques in manuals of a philosophy of conduct and government.

 

 

 

 

-VonKrankenhaus

[wandelaar]

I don't like to endlessly repeat this discussion. I am currently reading this book on the subject:

 

https://www.amazon.com/Original-Tao-Foundations-Mysticism-Translations/dp/0231115652/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1534091683&sr=8-1&keywords=original+tao

 

When you are interested in this topic you can read there that there are very good reasons to think that already Lao tzu and Chuang tzu promoted a simple form of breathing meditation and that such techniques were known at the time and spoken of in the same terms as used by Lao tzu and Chuang tzu. Some other Bums posted links to some other books on the same subject. Of course there are those who don't like that idea and will hold on till the end of time that it ain't true. But I am happy to consider as probably true whatever seems most likely so, and I am no longer putting any energy in trying to convince those who don't want to see it that way.

Edited August 12, 2018 by wandelaar

[Miffymog]

1 hour ago, OldDog said:

 

Was reading thru this thread because I was interested in topic suggested by the title. I am about to return to meditative practice and thought there might be some fresh insights here. 

 

Then I ran across @Daemon comment quoted above. Sort of stopped me in my tracks because I do not particularly think that the scientific method is a good approach for evaluation of wisdom traditions and practices. Not that it can't be done but that it probably not an approach that will yield useful results.

 

Science's approach to any problem/phenomena is to deal with it through the material. The approach seeks to identify physical/material events that can measured. Then it will constrain the system in which the events appear in various ways so that the behaviour can be observed under different conditions. All with the purpose of being able to demonstrate through the methods used that the results can be reproduced. If the results can not be reproduced, the phenomena being examined is discounted and the scientific community will turn its attention toward what can be measured. Any further reference to the problem or phenomena is met with skepticism and deemed not worthy of scientific investigation. Now, not all scientists behave in this manner. Scientists investigating in the realm of quantum mechanics, for example, have learned that because they are not able to reach a conclusion through scientific means just simply means that they have not yet figured out how to do it and place the phenomena in a box labled "Needing Further Evaluation".

 

I submit that wisdom traditions and practices deal with phenomena and events that are highly subjective, variable and do not present themselves consistently, at least to methods of observation preferred in science. Reproducibility is elusive. Research into wisdom traditions and practices is most often done on an individual and personal basis and typically finds its meaning in that realm. 

 

So, we should be cautious when someone approaches armed with the scientific method ... particulary those not mature in their discipline. There are science dogmatists out there just as there are religious dogmatists that are not accepting of other approaches. In listening to mature scientists talk, you will find the same reserved quiet demeanor that you find in the Dalai Llama, zen monks, daoist sages. 

 

Now, none of this contradicts @Daemon statement that there is no reason that science cannot be used ... but whether it should be used might give us pause.

 

Sorry for the late respose to this thread. But as I read through it I had what felt like a moment of clarity that was worth sharing.  

 

 

 

I happen to now be taking a more meditative approach to my standing and I was looking around for some inspiration. The Chan text's I used to use no longer seemed to hit the mark that well, so I've moved on to the Neiye. I've printed myself out a copy of the pdf in the link bellow and its sitting next to my bed to read before I go to sleep. It describes the state and qualities I'm looking for in my meditation really well and I'm looking forwards to researching this text more in the future.

 

 

 

[wandelaar]

@ Miffymog

 

The same text is translated and discussed in the book I mentioned in my previous post.

 

Where is the free pdf you mention?

[OldDog]

@wandelaar

 

I checked out the book you are currently reading on the Kwan Tzu. It appears to be an analysis of the material (Guanzi) that is the subject of the book I read a little earlier this year ... Dan G Reid's, The Thread of Dao.

 

When you are finished, I would be interested in your overall impression and what you think the key take-away is.

[Miffymog]

27 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

@ Miffymog

 

The same text is translated and discussed in the book I mentioned in my previous post.

 

Where is the free pdf you mention?

 

Hmmm - just tried the link and it didn't work for me either so I've attached my copy of the file to this post. Don't think the original poster will mind as it was his intention for people to have free access to it.

 

 

 

Neiye Booklet.pdf

[vonkrankenhaus]

1 hour ago, wandelaar said:

I am currently reading this book on the subject:

 

https://www.amazon.com/Original-Tao-Foundations-Mysticism-Translations/dp/0231115652/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1534091683&sr=8-1&keywords=original+tao

 

Yes, this book details what I am writing.

 

This is the application of some principles of Internal Cultivation to the socio-political endeavor of running a municipality.

 

The older text is more Cultivation-oriented, the newer text is more Governance-oriented.

 

Neither is strictly a "meditation manual" at all, and are not meant as sources of meditation "techniques".

 

 

 

-VonKrankenhaus

[wandelaar]

@ OldDog

 

I'm about halfway now, and I can tell you that the book concentrates on the Nei-yeh which is only a small part of the Kuan Tzu. The book gives a translation and analysis of the Nei-yeh and argues that the meditation promoted in the Nei-yeh gives us a good impression of the kind of meditation what was used and/or promoted by the early Taoists who also wrote and/or composed the Tao Te Ching and the Chuang tzu. Now who exactly wrote what and when is an extremely difficult matter. But the important point as far as I am concerned is that the descriptions in the Nei-yeh and the terms used make it highly probable that the Tao Te Ching and the Chuang tzu in certain passages also talk about (roughly) the same type of breathing meditation as the Nei-yeh. The relevant passages in the Tao Te Ching and the Chuang tzu are also discussed in the book.

 

The book is a scholarly work, but when you want to read a reasoned approach to the issue of meditation within the circles of the early Taoists I think it is a good choice.

Edited August 13, 2018 by wandelaar

[OldDog]

@wandelaar

 

I think studying the Guanzi ... through which ever analyst is a good idea. It demonstrates that daoist ideas ... whether they be philosophical, cosmological or nei gong/nei dan cultivation methods ... were all in common circulation at the time Laozi and Chuangzi emerged and that there was likely less distinction among them than we tend to place on them today. Paints a broader backdrop for understanding daoism.

[vonkrankenhaus]

26 minutes ago, OldDog said:

It demonstrates that daoist ideas ... whether they be philosophical, cosmological or nei gong/nei dan cultivation methods ... were all in common circulation at the time Laozi and Chuangzi emerged

 

Exactly.

 

And that's about it.

 

And these are not Internal Cultivation manuals or collections of meditation techniques.

 

They are something else, something that merely "uses" these, the concepts from them, in a general way.

 

 

 

 

-VonKrankenhaus

[wandelaar]

I have just now finished reading the book by Harold Roth: Original Tao, and I can now say that my "halfway description" of yesterday is also correct for the whole book.

 

A free article by Roth can be found here:  https://www.sunypress.edu/pdf/60818.pdf

 

Edited August 13, 2018 by wandelaar

[flowing hands]

On 7/23/2018 at 6:17 AM, Harmonious Emptiness said:

 

Quite an exercise, but here you go:

Indications of an earlier tradition in Lao Zi

Aside from the more overt mentions of “old sayings,” describing the Sage, in general, seems to suggest an existing traditional community of “the sages” that he is lecturing on for an inquiring audience. Also, many of the times he says “this is called…” he may be referring to existing terminology. Speaking of Guanzi (see my previous comment) he may have been asked about the traditions that helped Guanzi bring Qi such success.

 

Using Lin Yutang's translations

Ch. 15

The wise ones of old had subtle wisdom and depth of understanding,
So profound that they could not be understood.
And because they could not be understood,
Perforce must they be so described:

 

 

 

Ch. 22

Is it not indeed true, as the ancients say,
   "To yield is to be preserved whole?"
Thus he is preserved and the world does him homage.

 

 

39:

That is why the princes and dukes call themselves
   "the orphaned," "the lonely one," "the unworthy."
Is it not true then that they depend upon the common man for support?

 

 

 

41:

Therefore there is the established saying:
   "Who understands Tao seems dull of comprehension;
   Who is advance in Tao seems to slip backwards;
   Who moves on the even Tao (Path) seems to go up and down."

 

 

 

49

The Sage dwells in the world peacefully, harmoniously.
The people of the world are brought into a community of heart,
And the Sage regards them all as his own children.

 

 

 

50

It has been said that he who is a good preserver of hi life
   Meets no tigers or wild buffaloes on land,
   Is not vulnerable to weapons in the field of battle.
The horns of the wild buffalo are powerless against him.

 

 

 

57

 

Therefore the sage says:
   I do nothing and the people are reformed of themselves.
   I love quietude and the people are righteous of themselves.
   I deal in no business and the people grow rich by themselves.
   I have no desires and the people are simple
      and honest by themselves.

 

 

 

62

Wherein did the ancients prize this Tao?
Did they not say, "to search for the guilty ones and pardon them"?
   Therefore is (tao) the treasure of the world.

 

 

 

68

The brave soldier is not violent;
The good fighter does not lose his temper;
The great conqueror does not fight (on small issues);
The good user of men places himself below others.
- This is the virtue of not-contending,
   Is called the capacity to use men,
   Is reaching to the height of being
      Mated to Heaven, to what was of old.

 

 

 

77

Who can have enough and to spare to give to the entire world?
Only the man of Tao.
Therefore the Sage acts, but does not possess,
   Accomplishes but lays claim to no credit,
   Because he has no wish to seem superior.

 

 

 

78

 

Therefore the Sage says:
   "Who receives unto himself the calumny of the world
   Is the preserver of the state.
   Who bears himself the sins of the world
   Is king of the world."
Straight words seem crooked.

 

 

Hi HE

When I look at the translations you have quoted  I hardly recognise the verses; they seem very strange and unlike Li Erh's thoughts. One must remember that Li Erh was a great Immortal before reincarnated 2600 years ago. Already the Dao was in his heart when he was born and then he sought teachers as a young man and lived many years among the sages, shamans and hermits of Mao Shan. He then left the mountain and returned to normal life. Living his life gave him even more insight to the Dao and the way of humans. Translators who are not themselves Daoist masters interpret the text and slant it with misunderstanding.

 

So the verse 15 Li Erh taught me is;

The ancient masters (probably alluring to many of the lineage masters of the teachers he met and experienced at Mao Shan) were subtle, mysterious, profound and alert.

The depth of their knowledge was unfathomable.

Likened to the Dao, they were at one.

Being at one all we can do is observe their appearance. 

 

He then goes on to try and describe what these masters were like in appearance. What is it like to be nourished by the great mother of all things and only that. This is a supreme state of being, a state rarely realised by many in the world. This is why it is most important that his words are written down as he wrote them and the meaning then not lost by translators who have their own take and are using a text that is corrupt.

Edited August 13, 2018 by flowing hands
typo

[CityHermit!]

On ‎8‎/‎12‎/‎2018 at 11:23 AM, vonkrankenhaus said:

 

These are not strictly Internal Cultivation or even purely philosophical texts.

People seem to hear bamboo flutes when they are brought up in conversation, as if this is mystical religious writing, or something.

They represent applications of some principles of these to governing a municipality.

 

This is, to me, like looking for "esoteric" meditation techniques in manuals of a philosophy of conduct and government.

 

 

 

 

-VonKrankenhaus

They're definitely not strictly those if anything because of the political climate they lived in during those times. Chinese philosophy developed much along the lines of questions related to sociopolitical concerns. However, in searching for solutions internal cultivation discoveries could be an unintended result. The manner to govern a state or govern oneself is not sometimes so far off from one another.

[Daemon]

On 12/08/2018 at 4:34 PM, OldDog said:

 

Was reading thru this thread because I was interested in topic suggested by the title. I am about to return to meditative practice and thought there might be some fresh insights here. 

 

Then I ran across @Daemon comment quoted above. Sort of stopped me in my tracks because I do not particularly think that the scientific method is a good approach for evaluation of wisdom traditions and practices. Not that it can't be done but that it probably not an approach that will yield useful results.

 

Science's approach to any problem/phenomena is to deal with it through the material. The approach seeks to identify physical/material events that can measured. Then it will constrain the system in which the events appear in various ways so that the behaviour can be observed under different conditions. All with the purpose of being able to demonstrate through the methods used that the results can be reproduced. If the results can not be reproduced, the phenomena being examined is discounted and the scientific community will turn its attention toward what can be measured. Any further reference to the problem or phenomena is met with skepticism and deemed not worthy of scientific investigation. Now, not all scientists behave in this manner. Scientists investigating in the realm of quantum mechanics, for example, have learned that because they are not able to reach a conclusion through scientific means just simply means that they have not yet figured out how to do it and place the phenomena in a box labled "Needing Further Evaluation".

 

I submit that wisdom traditions and practices deal with phenomena and events that are highly subjective, variable and do not present themselves consistently, at least to methods of observation preferred in science. Reproducibility is elusive. Research into wisdom traditions and practices is most often done on an individual and personal basis and typically finds its meaning in that realm. 

 

So, we should be cautious when someone approaches armed with the scientific method ... particulary those not mature in their discipline. There are science dogmatists out there just as there are religious dogmatists that are not accepting of other approaches. In listening to mature scientists talk, you will find the same reserved quiet demeanor that you find in the Dalai Llama, zen monks, daoist sages. 

 

Now, none of this contradicts @Daemon statement that there is no reason that science cannot be used ... but whether it should be used might give us pause.

 

Sorry for the late respose to this thread. But as I read through it I had what felt like a moment of clarity that was worth sharing.  

 

 

Thanks for the detailed feedback.

I was attempting to indicate that I consider that no valid wisdom tradition is incompatible with science.

To clarify, I have nothing against harnessing religious paradigms (i.e. myths) but I'm certainly not a believer. In fact, attempting to fit experiential gnosis into a religious paradigm is usually a grave error. For example, George Fox attempted to align his own experience of gnosis with the Christian paradigm, thereby sowing the seeds of Quakerism's ultimate failure.

In terms of the scientific method, I'm able to offer the possibility of gnosis to anyone open to carrying out an experiment with some simple practices for themselves because the results are reproducible. The only problems occur when someone attempts to fit this experience into a linear (i.e intellectual or dualistic) narrative.

Perhaps that makes more sense to you?

 

☮️