Wu-Wei: What is it? How does it feel? Share examples?

[Daniel]

@Taoist Texts,

 

Please?  Is your reaction mocking?

[Daniel]

9 hours ago, Indiken said:

I guess wu wei is when you retreat to move forward. yin produces yang and vice versa.

 

Thank you.  Sorry it took me an extra hour-or-so to read and reply to this.

[Daniel]

9 hours ago, Indiken said:

I guess wu wei is when you retreat to move forward. yin produces yang and vice versa.

 

The model I'm working from, idenifies wu-wei as a general category of actions or attitudes ( dispostions, if you will ) which I'm calling sympatheic paradoxes.

 

A few that I mentioned in the other thread are:

 

1. enforcing-freedom
2. a helpful-demon
3. a negative-role-model
4. syncopation
5. willful-submission ( assuming that submission is to something known to be benevolent )

 

But there's others which are antagonistic paradoxes, which would be wu-wei applied in a harmful way.

 

1. true-lies ( illusions, deceptions, arguably pranks-and-trolling )
2. vain-glory
3. fat-free-vinegarette ( kidding, kinda )
4. partial-circumcision ( more kidding  )

Edited July 24, 2023 by Daniel

[stirling]

19 minutes ago, Daniel said:

Thank you very kindly.  I haven't read the Zhuangzi, but I understand, in general, it is a politcal treatise?  Included there are some, powerful and important passages regarding self-cultivation?

 

I haven't read the entirety of his work, but am specifically interested in the non-dual pointing in this particular section, and more specifically its bearing on the Wu Wei subject. It is direct, clear, and clean, and points specifically 

 

19 minutes ago, Daniel said:

I would like to spend some time on chapter 11, perhaps the chapters which bracket it as well.  What's interesting to me, just on the initial reading is, these are the words of the "dark concealment" which is advocating "undifferenitated chaos".

 

The cloud chief considers this a "heavenly master", but I am not sure if this "master" is the "only master", and "master" of what?  What are the motives of the cloud chief?  Why would it consider the "dark concealment" its master?  Do my principles and values align with the cloud chief?  Maybe-maybe not.  

 

And then zooming out, big-big picture:  how can a text which is a political treatise advocate consistently for a "dark concealment which is a master of undifferentiated chaos"?  That does not add-up for me.  I would expect that the source of a political treatise to favor order not chaos.

 

Can you offer some insight on this?

 

If your interest is Wu Wei, my insight would be that all of these meta-questions are just going to get you lost in the woods.

 

A tip: Your conceptual ideas about what will make "sense" or "add up" will not get you any closer to understanding the Dao. Your thinking  mind is not the way in to understanding here. This is not intellectual knowledge, it is EXPERIENTIAL. 

 

Zuangzi tells you this:

 

Quote

Undo the mind, slough off spirit, be blank and soulless, and the ten thousand things one by one will return to the root -

 

[silent thunder]

Wu Wei seems intimately woven with Tzujan.

What is, as it is, arising and falling of its nature.

 

Instinct, insight, intuitive promptings... innate responsiveness.

This can include preparedness if that is one's essential nature.

 

or how about this... Wu Wei seems the path that flowers use when they unfurl. 

There is no study, no teacher, no curriculum, no aim other than to be as one is, where one is amongst the co-arising conditions of which one is an amalgam of... 

 

wu wei is as water flows downhill without effort, strain, design or assumption, judgement, worry or care.  Where it comes to rest of its nature is where it settles in clarity eventually.

[Daniel]

44 minutes ago, stirling said:

 

I haven't read the entirety of his work, but am specifically interested in the non-dual pointing in this particular section, and more specifically its bearing on the Wu Wei subject. It is direct, clear, and clean, and points specifically 

 

Most people agree that "proof-texting" only reinforces the individual's preconceived notions.  The proof-text ignores context and detail, reducing precision for the purpose of forcing the desired conclusion. 

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prooftext

 

"Such quotes may not accurately reflect the original intent of the author, and a document quoted in such a manner, when read as a whole, may not support the proposition for which it was cited. The term has currency primarily in theological and exegetical circles"

 

It's a technique used by preachers and charlatans.  

 

AND

 

The individual is pretending ( knowingly or unknowingly ) that the intention of the author is aligned with their own ideals.  By quoting a tiny portion, but ignoring all others, an illusion is produced.   The proof-texter says:  "This author is credible, and this is what they say, I agree with them and so should you."

 

But the truth is, the proof texter is saying:  "**I** am credible, and this is what **I** say, and here is a quote **I** found which agrees with **me**."

 

Essentially the proof-texter is casting a net far-and-wide which gaurantees they will find a fish that satisfies their desire.  Then they throw-out all the other fish, and proudly declare "This pond is the only pond, and it contains only one type of fish, and I know how to catch them."  When anyone else produces a fish, the proof-texter objects "that's not the fish you're looking for."

 

Quote

If your interest is Wu Wei, my insight would be that all of these meta-questions are just going to get you lost in the woods.

 

Or, maybe, you are choosing to ignore the woods.  It sounds to me like you are bound, literally, to the WU and this is what is denying the WEI.

 

Quote

A tip: Your conceptual ideas about what will make "sense" or "add up" will not get you any closer to understanding the Dao. Your thinking  mind is not the way in to understanding here. This is not intellectual knowledge, it is EXPERIENTIAL. 

 

Not true.  I propose that the non-dual philosophy is doing precisely the same thing.  Trying to "make sense", and "add it up".  When someone is a rigid-adherent ( literally ) to this philosophy, it seems that they went through a process to arrive at the conclusion.  And, because of the simplicity of the philosophy they are able to reproduce that "making sense" and the equation that produces "non-duality" extremely rapidly.  It is the rapid onset that produces the denial.

 

There's nothing wrong with this process.  I think it's true and useful.  But, not always.  What perhaps is being experienced is pleasant.  But the attributes that produce this pleasant feeling may be helpful or harmful, skillful or clumsy, depending on the situation.

 

Let me ask you a simple question?  Super-duper simple? 

 

Are you asking me to accept that non-dual philosophy does NOT make sense and does NOT add up?

 

Quote

 

Zuangzi tells you this:  "Undo the mind, slough off spirit, be blank and soulless, and the ten thousand things one by one will return to the root "

 

Now that you've told me that the Zhaungzi is easily accesible online, ( and thank you for that ) I can apply that to locate the actual quote in context.

 

When YOU are quoting it the way you are, Zhuanzi is not telling me anything.  These are your words culled from a library.  Did you know that the bible says "There is no God!"

 

Amazing!  Do you actually think that's what the author intended?  Think about it, that is, if you value using your brain.  Do you?

 

Edited July 24, 2023 by Daniel

[Taoist Texts]

1 hour ago, Daniel said:

@Taoist Texts,

 

Please?  Is your reaction mocking?

oh no no it is a happy laugh because i posted something on the subject recently

 

[Daniel]

30 minutes ago, silent thunder said:

Wu Wei seems intimately woven with Tzujan.

What is, as it is, arising and falling of its nature.

 

Instinct, insight, intuitive promptings... innate responsiveness.

This can include preparedness if that is one's essential nature.

 

or how about this... Wu Wei seems the path that flowers use when they unfurl. 

There is no study, no teacher, no curriculum, no aim other than to be as one is, where one is amongst the co-arising conditions of which one is an amalgam of... 

 

wu wei is as water flows downhill without effort, strain, design or assumption, judgement, worry or care.  Where it comes to rest of its nature is where it settles in clarity eventually.

 

Thank you silent-thunder.  I love-love the screen-name.

 

Can you help me understand "Tzujan"?  What is it?  I'm specifically curious what is produced if wu-wei is divided from it, both the implication on wu-wei and on Tzujan itself.

 

Edited July 24, 2023 by Daniel

[stirling]

6 minutes ago, Daniel said:

Let me ask you a simple question?  Super-duper simple? 

 

Are you asking me to accept that non-dual philosophy does NOT make sense and does NOT add up?

 

I am suggesting that you EXPERIENCE that non-duality does not make sense in subject/object language. 

 

6 minutes ago, Daniel said:

When YOU are quoting it the way you are, Zhuanzi is not telling me anything.  These are your words culled from a library.  Did you know that the bible says "There is no God!"

 

You are welcome to your opinion. 

 

6 minutes ago, Daniel said:

Amazing!  Do you actually think that's what the author intended?  Think about it, that is, if you value using your brain.  Do you?

 

What I think is that there are "pith" instructions in all non-dual teachings. 

 

I'm not sure what I said that upset you, but I apologize if I have. You seemed sincerely interested - my comments were intended to be helpful. 

[Daniel]

11 minutes ago, Taoist Texts said:

oh no no it is a happy laugh because i posted something on the subject recently

 

 

Thank you I look forward to reading that thread and following the link(s) you brought.

[silent thunder]

15 minutes ago, Daniel said:

 

Thank you silent-thunder.  I love-love the screen-name.

 

Can you help me understand "Tzujan"?  What is it?  I'm specifically curious what is produced if wu-wei is divided from it, both the implication on wu-wei and on Tzujan itself.

 

i appreciate the phrasing of your question...  it's a whopper.  Great minds have spoken volumes and my local mind struggles with words and concepts often.

 

What is produced and if wu wei is divided regarding tzujan is causing unanticipated and welcome ripples, but they're all under the surface and no other words are coming to local mind to share in the moment.  Tzujan is such a potent, subtle and far reaching concept and words are such tiny, rigid things to me, it's always a challenge to find words that convey the sense i have of certain concepts.  But i know my nature enough to appreciate the ripples your question has raised and that eventually some words will rise in response.  i'll let the process unfold and return if and when words that may suit the question arise for me.

[Daniel]

1 hour ago, stirling said:

 

I am suggesting that you EXPERIENCE that non-duality does not make sense in subject/object language. 

 

I respectfully disagree.  I think it's supremely logical, rational, makes sense and adds up.  But a person can also experience its truth, they can also feel it.  I have no doubt.

The limit of x/infinity as x approaches infinity is 1. 

IF x are the differences between all objects and "things" that exist, including events that bracket all moments

THEN x is what defines significance in existence.  

As a person realizes that there is infinite diversity in existence, all of the significance of those differences, goes 'poof'.  This produces a peaceful feeling and a singularity which is a commonly universal descriptor for a spiritual experience.

Further, there is an opportunity for the conscious mind to become unbound, while this is occuring.  There is a lot of wisdom collected by the subconscious mind which is accessible in this state, and, for those who are willing and able, even a higher divine consciousness becomes reachable.  ( technically it is drawn down, like in a vaccuum ).

Sadly, the indidivual who acheives these things even in a small way is susceptible to arrogance which sabatoges any future attempts to receive from anything outside of themself.  And this "feeling of being wiser than others" is combined with the pleasant feeling coming from non-duality.  But it is no longer non-dual, because non-duality is being lifted up as an ideal.  This automatically produces a dualist mindset.  And the entire philosophy collapses.

Makes sense, adds-up, n'est-ce-pas?
 

 

Quote

You are welcome to your opinion. 

 

Are you or are you not ignoring context, and valid questions?  Did you, or did you not again "proof-text" the Zhuangzi eventhough it seems clear that my path is different than yours?

 

This is not an attack.  I am stating facts.  That's the point.  This is not an opinion.

 

Quote

What I think is that there are "pith" instructions in all non-dual teachings. 

 

Maybe-maybe not.  It seems rather clear to me that non-duality is being brought as a part-of-the-whole.  The challenge is to determine what is "pithy" and when is it "pithy".  And that is the wisdom that is being expressed.  Could-be.  I haven't read it.  All I know is what you quoted in the micro scale does not match what you brought in the macro.  And this is what produces an illusion/delusion.

 

My friend, this is what produces stereotyping and bigotry.  Not that you're doing that, but, I think it's good to be aware of the root causes and avoid them.

That said: whether or not dualism in the daoist cannon is "pithy" can be evaluated, rationally or supra-rationally based on the quantity and quality of dualist language, symbolism, and themes compared to the non-dualist language, symbolism, and themes.  The rational mind can observe that non-duality is important in the proper context, just like almost anything.  The supra-rational "heart" can feel it.  But both rationally and supra-rationally if the entire book is read, how much do you want to bet that dualism far outweighs and brackets the non-dualism.  This puts non-dualism in a box, in its place, in its context.

 

If non-dualism is applied out of context, and in the extreme, then you have a "China" invading any and all "Tibets", over and over and over and over... until....  sure, it's non-dual.  There is only 1, a dictatorship.

It seems to me, that what is true and consistent is below:

"I really like what the Zhunagzi says here, but you really can't trust anything else which is non-dual in the text even though the majority of it is dualist.  And since this is a daoist forum, maybe you'll appreciate this little tidibit of what I find to be wholesome true and useful.  If this resonates with you and you have any further questions I'm happy to help, but not as a master, just as a friend."
 

Quote

 

I'm not sure what I said that upset you, but I apologize if I have. You seemed sincerely interested - my comments were intended to be helpful. 

I know, I know, please see above.  Helpful, friendly, yes, yes.  I'm not *actually* upset, just a tiny bit miffed. The only apology I think is appropriate, for me, would be for:

 

disregarding my valid questions.  And discouraging ANY future questions.

 

And there is probably an apology warranted to the Zhuangzi for devaluing its words.

I am interested in wu-wei, but not non-duality.  I think non-duality, actually, is in opposition to what daoism is all about.  It is choosing WU and denying WEI, basically.

Edited July 24, 2023 by Daniel

[Cobie]

46 minutes ago, Daniel said:

… non-duality, actually, is in opposition to what daoism is all about. …

Daoism as Laozi stuff, then yes.  
But in China ‘daoism’ can also refer to Buddhism, and then what ’stirling’ says probably applies.

It can also refer to Confucianism, ‘Zongyongdaoist’ would probably know what it means there.

 

Edited July 24, 2023 by Cobie

[Daniel]

46 minutes ago, silent thunder said:

i appreciate the phrasing of your question...  it's a whopper.  Great minds have spoken volumes and my local mind struggles with words and concepts often.

 

What is produced and if wu wei is divided regarding tzujan is causing unanticipated and welcome ripples, but they're all under the surface and no other words are coming to local mind to share in the moment.  Tzujan is such a potent, subtle and far reaching concept and words are such tiny, rigid things to me, it's always a challenge to find words that convey the sense i have of certain concepts.  But i know my nature enough to appreciate the ripples your question has raised and that eventually some words will rise in response.  i'll let the process unfold and return if and when words that may suit the question arise for me.

 

Thank you,  I have the Encyclopedia of Daoism editted by Fabrizio Pregadio on my bookshelf.  I've found it to be a good resource.  But, hee-hee, I might not know if it is leading me astray.  It seems to be complete.  And I can do some keyword analysis, follow those leads, and maybe come up with something useful?

 

Would posting my findings be helpful?  Or would they interfere with your possible answer?  I can see it both ways.

[Daniel]

@ everyone,

 

Something happened with the font on my post to @stirling, that was completely unintended.  The editor here in the forum was giving me all sorts of problems.  I ended up copying and pasting to another app, then copying it back.  Then posting, but, it exploded the font-size. 

 

I adjusted it back.  It was NOT intended to be as empahtic as it appeared originally.

 

Edited July 24, 2023 by Daniel

[stirling]

24 minutes ago, Daniel said:

Helpful, friendly, yes, yes.  I'm not *actually* upset, just a tiny bit miffed. The only apology I think is appropriate, for me, would be for:

 

disregarding my valid questions.  And discouraging ANY future questions.

 

And there is probably an apology warranted to the Zhuangzi for devaluing its words.

 

I'm sorry if you feel I have disregarded your questions. I will admit to reframing the answers in a way that I experientially know makes sense in order to answer them.

 

I'm sorry if you feel I have discouraged any future questions. I am definitely doing that now, at least for questions directed at me. I don't think I am the right source to help you. 

 

Quote

I am interested in wu-wei, but not non-duality.  I think non-duality, actually, is in opposition to what daoism is all about.  It is choosing WU and denying WEI, basically.

 

I can't see them as separate. Still, I truly wish you best of luck in your pursuits.

[Cobie]

25 minutes ago, Cobie said:

Daoism as Laozi stuff, …
But in China ‘daoism’ can also refer to Buddhism, …

It can also refer to Confucianism, …

 

In China ‘Dao’ is not exclusively used for the Laozi Dao.

 

Kroll dictionary listings for 道 dao:

2. … conceptual term used by all schools of thought, with same root metaphor but varying connotations:

 

Confucian 

‘Way’ incl. norms of social responsibility and personal conduct 
exemplified by ideal worthies such as King Wen of the Zhou, the Duke of Zhou, etc.;

 

Dao.

‘Way’ points to absolute and ineffable reality behind flux and modalities of the world,

and advisability of taking it as model;

 

Budd.

‘Way’ incl. possibility of release from the round-of-birth-and-death (samsara)

and recognition of contingent and impermanent nature of human existence.

 

 

Edited July 24, 2023 by Cobie

[Cobie]

19 minutes ago, Cobie said:

In China ‘Dao’ is not exclusively used for the Laozi Dao. …

The same goes for the concept 無為  wu2 wei2 - wuwei. This too is also used by Chinese Buddhist. So again ‘stirling’ (within his tradition) probably is right in what he says . 

無為 originated (around Laozi time) in Legalism. 

 

 

Edited July 24, 2023 by Cobie

[Daniel]

4 minutes ago, stirling said:

I can't see them as separate.

 

They're not seperate.  They are a team!

[Cobie]

7 minutes ago, Daniel said:

They're not seperate.  They are a team!

 That depends on which team you’re on (Daoist or Buddhist). 

 

 

Edited July 24, 2023 by Cobie

[Daniel]

21 minutes ago, Cobie said:

Daoism as Laozi stuff, then yes.  
But in China ‘daoism’ can also refer to Buddhism, and then what ’stirling’ says probably applies.

It can also refer to Confucianism, ‘Zongyongdaoist’ would probably know what it means there.

 

Um.  I am aware of some crossover and there are later schools which included some aspects of Buddhism.  But, non-duality is, as far as I know is a specific philosophy in Hinduism.   I am very happy to be corrected.

 

If I were to guess, I would expect that it is the adoption of koans, or koan style teachings, which were included. 

 

Anything you can bring to this thread in support of what you're saying would be greatly-greatly appreciated.

 

I'll also see what I can find.  I recall reading about the specific schools which incorporated Buddhism into their practice.  Maybe I can find some details on what aspects were adopted.

[Daniel]

1 minute ago, Cobie said:

That depends on which team you’re on (Daoist or Buddhist).

 

 

And... if we really want to start having fun... even the opposing side is on my team if I consider them a negative-role-model.

[Daniel]

20 minutes ago, Cobie said:

 

In China ‘Dao’ is not exclusively used for the Laozi Dao.

 

Kroll dictionary listings for 道 dao:

2. … conceptual term used by all schools of thought, with same root metaphor but varying connotations:

 

Confucian 

‘Way’ incl. norms of social responsibility and personal conduct 
exemplified by ideal worthies such as King Wen of the Zhou, the Duke of Zhou, etc.;

 

Dao.

‘Way’ points to absolute and ineffable reality behind flux and modalities of the world,

and advisability of taking it as model;

 

Budd.

‘Way’ incl. possibility of release from the round-of-birth-and-death (samsara)

and recognition of contingent and impermanent nature of human existence.

 

 

 

And I propose that all of those are dualist.  Especially Buddhism:  "the only constant is change".  Non-dualism = "nothing changes everything is the same"

[Cobie]

 

@Daniel You failed to get my point:

You are arguing with ‘stirling’ while actually there is no argument, you are talking about different things.

 

 

Edited July 24, 2023 by Cobie

[Daniel]

18 minutes ago, Cobie said:

The same goes for the concept 無為  wu2 wei2 - wuwei. This too is also used by Chinese Buddhist. So again ‘stirling’ (within his tradition) probably is right in what he says . 

無為 originated (around Laozi time) in Legalism. 

 

 

Maybe, but without dualism there are no patterns, there are no trends, there is no dao.  There is no spontaneity.  There is no naturalism, there is nothing.

 

The problem is, bringing a text, ignoring what it says, creates a credibility problem.  That problem can be remedied in several ways.  Either by bringing known good daoist texts that explain non-duality as  th ideal ( eventhough lifting it us as an ideal is dualism ), or bringing good thoughtful examples, and concepts just like any other daoist seems to be able to do.