Wrong?

[Stosh]

Lao conclusively , cannot be shown to be factually wrong , about the mandate of heaven ( if its meant in a way that supposes a deity adjudicates men , and who then alters events from what they would have been on their own , to satisfy some sort of justice.) Since it doesn't appear he says that anywhere. 

Even if one supposes tao to be a secret word for a god, its men who must act in accord with tao , and its not an adjudication which waits upon the impact of a judgement from the Tao personality, about what men have done. 

 

In Moby Dick , Ahab deems himself greater than God , if by his actions , he can stir the hand of God to act , even if that act is one of punishment. ( he misses the ironic part, which would be that he himself is acting out of revenge, for a transgression against himself, by God) and the very neutrality of Tao is what then makes it have the greater virtue , Tao would be downgraded if it were to act with partiality. Similarly, the great show they are greater ,,according to some, , by sitting on their behind, staring south. 

Edited August 8, 2018 by Stosh

[Stosh]

4 minutes ago, rene said:

 

Hmmm...I don't know if LZ is being too optimistic; my take is he was pretty aware of the feebleness of human nature (Ref: Ch. 70: My words are easy to understand and easy to perform, Yet no man under heaven knows them or practices them).

 

Optimism is there though; so perhaps it's based on what could be - if his ideas were implemented?

 

But who knows for sure; both your and my opinion on this is conjecture.

Have you considered that men cannot 'practice' that which is spontaneous ?

Read thusly , it isn't that all men fail to act in accord with tao , its that you cannot do it with the intention of abiding by a rule. 

[rene]

6 minutes ago, Stosh said:

Have you considered that men cannot 'practice' that which is spontaneous ?

Read thusly , it isn't that all men fail to act in accord with tao , its that you cannot do it with the intention of abiding by a rule. 

Of course. But that's waaay beyond this discussion. Feel free to jump in it.

 

Also: "Acting in accord with tao" - is another discussion even beyond that.

Edited August 8, 2018 by rene
Add the Also:

[rene]

17 minutes ago, Stosh said:

.... and the very neutrality of Tao is what then makes it have the greater virtue , Tao would be downgraded if it were to act with partiality. Similarly, the great show they are greater ,,according to some, , by sitting on their behind, staring south. 

 

Are you not downgrading Tao by saying being 'in accordance with Tao' parallels with what is favorable to you?

[OldDog]

2 hours ago, Lost in Translation said:

"Mandate of Heaven" could easily to expressed as "In accordance with Tao".

 

I don't think I would argue with that, per se. In the other thread the discussion about the Mandate of Heaven never go that far. The question of the realatiinship of the Dao to the Mandate of Heaven. It (the Mandate) is certainly spoken of as if it were accordance with Dao. But your point of the inverting of the relationship is a good one ... assuming to begin with that there is a distinction between the Mandate and accord with Dao. It can certainly be read that way. 

 

3 hours ago, wandelaar said:

And that assumption is also highly problematic.

 

I do not think that Ch 32  makes any assumption about man finding his own way naturally. Seems like the entire chapter is predicated on the ruler and the people being in accord with Dao. That is the only assumption; not that people will naturally gravitate to accord with Dao. 

[Marblehead]

10 hours ago, Wu Ming Jen said:

Men should avoid giving things too many names, and look more closely at the whole.

Yep.  My chair is called "Chair".  I never call it by its component parts.  

 

[Marblehead]

10 hours ago, wandelaar said:

 

And that assumption is also highly problematic. I think Lao tzu is too optimistic about what even an ideal ruler can accomplish, and about what ordinary people will choose to do when allowed to do whatever they want.

In that original post I forgot to specify "Chapter 80".  I have edited it.

 

I do agree with you though.  Lao Tzu was an optimist.  He thought that the common man would always do the right thing given the freedom to do so.

 

In reality we know that's not true.  Some people do the wrong thing just because they can.  And bottom line, that's why there needs be some form of government within any society.

 

 

 

 

[Marblehead]

And the sweet rain falls.

 

[Stosh]

14 hours ago, rene said:

 

Are you not downgrading Tao by saying being 'in accordance with Tao' parallels with what is favorable to you?

No, its just favorable to me because it's the fact of what has been related to me. When I first looked at daoism , I was very open to whatever was going to be described. I wanted something to tell ME about things , I wasn't looking to fit my expectations. 

As it turned out I was  surprised !  at what , mostly Lao , was saying. Eventually I came here , essentially, to find out if my conclusions were correct. I have never seen anything which contradicts my original conclusions, nor have I had anyone present a better basic understanding of the texts, in a way in which undermines ,what I believe they relate. 

What I have come to understand , is that there are schools of thought, a Shamanic or religious angle , casual modern 'Neodaoism', legalist readings, and a scholarly view centered on linguistics or history. 

While those are wrong , I have to let people decide for themselves the poison they wish to partake of  

 

 

Edited August 9, 2018 by Stosh

[wandelaar]

5 hours ago, Marblehead said:

And the sweet rain falls.

 

Thank heavens, yes!

Edited August 9, 2018 by wandelaar

[rideforever]

Hmm ... nope, that's not right.    For life to exist, it has to be non-deterministic.   There must be room to manoeuvre, room to take action.  

 

There is "duality", but frankly human apes have such slimey reasoning that this word is immediately becomes an argument orgasm !!!

 

If there was only a nondual whole, then it would be a nonmoving dot.   The fact that I open my eyes and see the sky and the birds, means something is happening, hence it is "dual" .... in fact these words dual/ non-dual are just the slimey human mind looking for an argument orgasm.

 

Fortune favours the brave.

 

Existence opens lees in the ice, will you accept or reject.   It is a constant adventure / test / challenge.   That is life, life is hazard.

 

Low creatures would perish in this environment so they are given support, hence all the programming animals and humans have, but humans, some of them, are emerging from that programming to come into their own being.

 

It is just like at primary school : you are helped, and helped a lot, but .... so that you one day spread your wings.

 

Do you have free will ?   ... the question is can you acquire free will, and how.    Would you actually like to use the free will you have now, and take a risk.   Many human apes refuse to use any of the resources and possibilities they have.    

 

Laozi talks about "The Ruler" ... it helps us to understand things to talk like this.   But in reality there is never one ruler, things are never black and white, it is a vast connected system of beings and forces.    But; when an observation is made, we make it through identifying something specific ... "The Ruler" does this or that.    Then our intelligence takes one step forward.

 

Jesus would says "Love the Lord your God with all your heart, body, soul, mind".   And people around him start shaking their Rosaries and getting on their knees raising hands to the sky, praying, and hitting Bibles on their heads.   Jesus, rolls his eyes again.

 

Laozi, writes poetry of the world he knows.   People read and repeat like parrots, they want to follow the "instructions".
Laozi rolls his eyes again, and walks out of the city, leaving his writings with the guard at the gatepost.

 

 

 

[rene]

55 minutes ago, Stosh said:

No, its just favorable to me because it's the fact of what has been related to me. When I first looked at daoism , I was very open to whatever was going to be described. I wanted something to tell ME about things , I wasn't looking to fit my expectations. 

 

Right, even though that isn't what I was meaning...

 

55 minutes ago, Stosh said:

As it turned out I was  surprised !  at what , mostly Lao , was saying. Eventually I came here , essentially, to find out if my conclusions were correct. I have never seen anything which contradicts my original conclusions, nor have I had anyone present a better basic understanding of the texts, in a way in which undermines ,what I believe they relate. 

 

Also agree that this place rocks, and I'm glad you're here; you always seem to put a finer point on things - and I like that.

 

55 minutes ago, Stosh said:

What I have come to understand , is that there are schools of thought, a Shamanic or religious angle , casual modern 'Neodaoism', legalist readings, and a scholarly view centered on linguistics or history. 

While those are wrong , I have to let people decide for themselves the poison they wish to partake of

 

LOL yep.

 

Lemme try my question/thought again re "in accordance with Tao".

 

My starting premise is that Tao moves in ALL directions (at the same time) - so it's not possible to be NOT in "accordance with Tao". If I choose to do something really horrid - I'll suffer the consequences, yes. But that is not going 'against Tao' - unless one holds that Tao only moves in the direction of the non-horrid.

 

Once that ^^^  idea is held, it becomes very easy to create various 'schools of thought' - and in all cases the idea of Tao is downgraded (reduced in scope) to only those things deemed favorable, i.e., what one would want to 'be in accord with'.

 

For clarity: I'm all in favor of favorable things. And, I'm not using my (all directions, same time) premise as justification for horrid behavior (though that accusation is usually the first one to appear). My point is - once folks start assigning Tao to specific choices, results or actions - they've limited Tao not only to their own needs/preferences, but also to their own understanding of it.

 

What say you?

 

 

 

 

[rene]

49 minutes ago, rideforever said:

Hmm ... nope, that's not right.    For life to exist, it has to be non-deterministic.   There must be room to manoeuvre, room to take action.  

 

There is "duality", but frankly human apes have such slimey reasoning that this word is immediately becomes an argument orgasm !!!

 

If there was only a nondual whole, then it would be a nonmoving dot.   The fact that I open my eyes and see the sky and the birds, means something is happening, hence it is "dual" .... in fact these words dual/ non-dual are just the slimey human mind looking for an argument orgasm.

 

Fortune favours the brave.

 

Existence opens lees in the ice, will you accept or reject.   It is a constant adventure / test / challenge.   That is life, life is hazard.

 

Low creatures would perish in this environment so they are given support, hence all the programming animals and humans have, but humans, some of them, are emerging from that programming to come into their own being.

 

It is just like at primary school : you are helped, and helped a lot, but .... so that you one day spread your wings.

 

Do you have free will ?   ... the question is can you acquire free will, and how.    Would you actually like to use the free will you have now, and take a risk.   Many human apes refuse to use any of the resources and possibilities they have.    

 

Laozi talks about "The Ruler" ... it helps us to understand things to talk like this.   But in reality there is never one ruler, things are never black and white, it is a vast connected system of beings and forces.    But; when an observation is made, we make it through identifying something specific ... "The Ruler" does this or that.    Then our intelligence takes one step forward.

 

Jesus would says "Love the Lord your God with all your heart, body, soul, mind".   And people around him start shaking their Rosaries and getting on their knees raising hands to the sky, praying, and hitting Bibles on their heads.   Jesus, rolls his eyes again.

 

Laozi, writes poetry of the world he knows.   People read and repeat like parrots, they want to follow the "instructions".
Laozi rolls his eyes again, and walks out of the city, leaving his writings with the guard at the gatepost.

 

 

 

 

Nice post! You give good argument for there not being only non-dual.

 

Do you hold there is only dual?

 

Do you see how there could be both duality and non-duality in play at the same time?

 

Thanks!

***************

 

Edit to add:

 

Jesus would says "Love the Lord your God with all your heart, body, soul, mind".   And people around him start shaking their Rosaries and getting on their knees raising hands to the sky, praying, and hitting Bibles on their heads.   Jesus, rolls his eyes again.

 

Laozi, writes poetry of the world he knows.   People read and repeat like parrots, they want to follow the "instructions". Laozi rolls his eyes again, and walks out of the city, leaving his writings with the guard at the gatepost.

 

Love it!!

Edited August 9, 2018 by rene

[rene]

6 hours ago, Marblehead said:

I do agree with you though.  Lao Tzu was an optimist.  He thought that the common man would always do the right thing given the freedom to do so.

 

In reality we know that's not true.  Some people do the wrong thing just because they can.  And bottom line, that's why there needs be some form of government within any society.

 

But doesn't that make LaoTzu a Realist, like you?

 

You know it's always possible for the weather to do the 'right thing' and be perfect for tending your garden...but you always have a Plan B, knowing it will probably be sweltering.  Laozi's Plan B - was writing this cool little book... knowing the common man as well as he did. If he was an optimist - his Plan B would have been redundant.

[rideforever]

27 minutes ago, rene said:

 

Yes a funny picture speaks a thousands words.

 

In a Primary School, of course the goal is to teach the children, but the school is a real life place.   Accidents happen, sometimes there are bad teachers or bad currriculum, sometimes there is external pressure from the PTA or the Government.   But the course is steered through all this.   Real life is like this.   Everyone in the picture is learning growing, struggling to live. 

Life gets round to its justice when it can.
And there are many actors at many levels of consciousness, who knows who will come to help you if you are of interest.   Why would somebody help you ?   If a hundred people ask you for help, who will you help ?    There are no permanent rules but there are directions.   For instance "help only those who are not idle".   But on a given day you might help anyone.

 

What is meant by "Duality" ?   It's probably good to consider the what you really feel or mean here ?

 

Well, in you have a wonderful night of making love with your woman, you become one, you really lose track of who is doing the pushing and who the pulling, right.   And in the morning you are separate again .... but you have a sort of closer connection.   Then in the morning you choose again what you will do.    Expanding and contracting, it yields knowledge, learning, growing.

But if you step back you can say we are One and always One.
Great, but still today is the field that is open to us .... what shall we do ?
If you lose connection to the One, then you start to lose energy degenerate and fall into the slime, it hurts > that's where mankind seems to be.

So reconnect with the One, through the many traditions > but how many people actually do what is asked of them by the traditions ?

In meditation and out, you can experience Oneness or awakening or embody pure consciousness .... you are united with the source/god/whole in some way.   But are you God ?   No.   Does it feel good, Yes.  Are you home, Yes.    Are you grateful, Yes.

Life exists through countless beings, they explore, they .... try to understand themselves, and the whole.   They ... invent what they are doing - they can do anything to express their lives, sing dance meditate war.

 

But for humans the problems seem to be :
- they have lost all contact with the source
- they are fragmented inside, more like 25 shards are in one person, all fighting each other
- they have proto-consciousness which needs to mature or will cause big trouble
- they live in a society of similar nutballs

- the weather can be very bad in England

 

But on the other hand consider being born as a cockroach.   Now complain.   And were would we be without Beyonce's ass ?

So there is opportunity.

Small concrete steps with serious teachers.

[rene]

3 minutes ago, rideforever said:

Yes a funny picture speaks a thousands words.

...

 

rideforever - thanks for your reply.

Though you didn't state it specifically - it reflected your idea of the existence of both the dual and the non-dual but, for you, not yet simultaneously.

Also, if you would, when you quote me (or anyone) please leave a little in the quote box so we know which post you're replying to. This time it was an easy guess.

Thanks again!

[Lost in Translation]

1 hour ago, rene said:

Lemme try my question/thought again re "in accordance with Tao".

 

My starting premise is that Tao moves in ALL directions (at the same time) - so it's not possible to be NOT in "accordance with Tao". If I choose to do something really horrid - I'll suffer the consequences, yes. But that is not going 'against Tao' - unless one holds that Tao only moves in the direction of the non-horrid.

 

I think we're getting somewhere! As I see it, Tao "moves in all directions" as you say. People however, aren't inanimate objects. We don't want to simple blow whichever direction the wind goes. We want a specific direction. We have goals! Within that context, acting "in accordance with Tao" means to act in such a way that you actually can achieve your goals with a minimum amount of effort and exhaustion. Now, what does it look like if a ruler is able to do this? Well, it will appear as if he is blessed by the gods. He will have received, for lack a better word, the mandate of heaven!

[wandelaar]

Yes - this discussion about "following Tao" comes up time and again, but we already had it solved some time ago. Actually it is quite simple:

 

1. In a metaphysical sense everything follows Tao, because Tao is the way the world works.

2. In a metaphorical sense "following Tao" means acting in a way that minimises egocentric considerations and makes a maximal use of situations and developments that are already given.

 

It is perfectly possible to not follow Tao in the second sense, and in fact most people do so because they want to shine as the one who got the job done. A Taoist would prefer to stay in the background. Same thing as LiT wrote.

Edited August 9, 2018 by wandelaar

[OldDog]

Acting in accordance with Dao ... 

 

Choose what you want to do. Do it with full understanding of how existence ebbs and flows. Use that understanding to achieve your goals. Be sincere in your intent. Seek in accordance with the times. Don't just follow blindly. Move with the current of existence. Be open to new experiences. 

[Lost in Translation]

On 8/7/2018 at 9:38 AM, wandelaar said:

If I remember well it is said that natural disasters will happen as a result of immoral acts by a ruler. Such a claim seems highly suspect to me.

 

Might I simply add this: Oftentimes it is not the natural disaster that ruins a people but the humanitarian disaster that follows. For example, a monsoon floods a city and afterwards the people die from disease, starvation and crime.

 

In the sense of a ruler acting in accordance with Tao, and thus receiving the mandate of heaven, this could mean that the ruler takes precautionary actions. He stores grain safely in weatherproof silos; he sets aside wealth for emergency use; he develops disaster relief plans: he trains his guards in domestic policing operations; etc. When the natural disaster strikes, the prince deploys his resources and mitigates the humanitarian disaster. The people are hurt but minimally and are able to rebuild. History records the prince as a wise ruler.

[wandelaar]

Yes - within Taoism the still older doctrine of the Mandate of Heaven was gradually given a more natural interpretation.

Edited August 9, 2018 by wandelaar

[rene]

16 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

Yes - this discussion about "following Tao" comes up time and again, but we already had it solved some time ago. Actually it is quite simple:

 

1. In a metaphysical sense everything follows Tao, because Tao is the way the world works.

2. In a metaphorical sense "following Tao" means acting in a way that minimises egocentric considerations and makes a maximal use of situations and developments that are already given.

 

What a simple and elegant solution you found!

Sadly, the clarity of your metaphysical sense is usually lost buried in the mundane world of justifying one's actions, creating systems, and selling products... using 'aligned with tao/following tao' for marketing purposes.

 

16 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

 

It is perfectly possible to not follow Tao in the second sense, and in fact most people do so because they want to shine as the one who got the job done. A Taoist would prefer to stay in the background. Same thing as LiT wrote.

 

[Stosh]

2 hours ago, rene said:

 

Right, even though that isn't what I was meaning...

 

 

Also agree that this place rocks, and I'm glad you're here; you always seem to put a finer point on things - and I like that.

 

 

LOL yep.

 

Lemme try my question/thought again re "in accordance with Tao".

 

My starting premise is that Tao moves in ALL directions (at the same time) - so it's not possible to be NOT in "accordance with Tao". If I choose to do something really horrid - I'll suffer the consequences, yes. But that is not going 'against Tao' - unless one holds that Tao only moves in the direction of the non-horrid.

 

Once that ^^^  idea is held, it becomes very easy to create various 'schools of thought' - and in all cases the idea of Tao is downgraded (reduced in scope) to only those things deemed favorable, i.e., what one would want to 'be in accord with'.

 

For clarity: I'm all in favor of favorable things. And, I'm not using my (all directions, same time) premise as justification for horrid behavior (though that accusation is usually the first one to appear). My point is - once folks start assigning Tao to specific choices, results or actions - they've limited Tao not only to their own needs/preferences, but also to their own understanding of it.

 

What say you?

 

 

 

 

I agree basically that , the physical world always conforms to the constant principles of the tao, that being said, yes one must always be physically acting in a manner predictable as regards physical laws.. however,, a sentient creature with free will , can make decisions , make errors , have preferences , and so, has some leeway, ( which provides an opportunity to hold a standard by which individuals and society , may be regarded, by other people , sharing that standard.) beyond that , of the proverbial billiard ball. 

The Great Tao , is factual non-dualist , holding no opinions, no sentiment, no judgement etc  , it is true and inviolable ,, 

 tao Lower case !  is the behavioral construct humans think conforms to the great tao , but in fact includes human sentiments.

  The majority of taoists appear to be of this ... either higher... or lower, .. type of Tao ethic. 

 

 

Edited August 9, 2018 by Stosh

[wandelaar]

1 minute ago, rene said:

What a simple and elegant solution you found!

Sadly, the clarity of your metaphysical sense is usually lost buried in the mundane world of justifying one's actions, creating systems, and selling products... using 'aligned with tao/following tao' for marketing purposes.

 

Do we have to come up with a solution that cannot possibly be misused? Don't think that is possible, surely not from a Taoist perspective where good and bad are inextricably mixed up.

[rideforever]

(A)  A creature who is sub-conscious does not have much freewill, and so flows easily with the Tao.

 

(B)  A creature who is attempting moving into consciousness faces a very painful and difficult journey, like trying to pull himself out of the primordial slime, he pushes this way and that, experiments with this or that, makes a hell of a mess, often he pulls directly against the natural flow of the Tao to create some elbow room to pull himself out.    

 

From a higher vantage point, we might conjecture that creature (B) is also part of a flow of the Tao, 1/3 of creatures following life, 1/3 dead, 1/3 just moving from life to death.   However it is just a conjecture.

 

But from his own perspective he must fight and push and struggle upwards, otherwise he will sink back into  (A) and the opportunity to become conscious is lost permanently.

 

(C)  A conscious creature has a stable identity beyond the Earth realm, and might choose any direction of activity on Earth.   He might flow with the Tao and drift easily, or he might try to save the world and disturb a lot of people.   The disturbance, the waves propagated into a stable society, creates opportunities for people to become conscious.   

 

Such a creature might be said to be following Tao at a level beyond the Earth realm.

 

Another thing is that people (sheep) often say "calm down, don't disturb things, don't disturb the Tao".
But it is fake. 

It is not the peace of Tao all.