Weekly TTC, Ch. 54
bookburn
Fifty-four
What is firmly established cannot be uprooted.
What is firmly grasped cannot slip away.
It will be honored from generation to generation.
Cultivate Virtue in your self,
And Virtue will be real.
Cultivate it in the family,
And Virtue will abound.
Cultivate it in the village,
And Virtue will grow.
Cultivate it in the nation,
And Virtue will be abundant.
Cultivate it in the universe,
And Virtue will be everywhere.
Therefore look at the body as body;
Look at the family as family;
Look at the village as village;
Look at the nation as nation;
Look at the universe as universe.
How do I know the universe is like this?
By looking!
BraveNewWhirl
> Feng-English translation.
>
> Fifty-four
> What is firmly established cannot be uprooted.
> What is firmly grasped cannot slip away.
> It will be honored from generation to generation.
>
The ignorant see opinion. The novice sees perspective and value. The
adept knows only belief matters.
Jaybuzin0000
>The ignorant see opinion. The novice sees perspective and value. The
>adept knows only belief matters.
w'hat is
beyond adept
musician
> How do I know the universe is like this?
> By looking!
a question for the chines speaking scholars here...
can this last line be translated as;
how do I know that?
by virtue of this.
--
musician
musician
wu chi?
--
musician
Nadine Kwong
in one's:
opinion,
perspective,
and
belief . . .
that(this) is!
Nadine ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~>
gone beyond De see and
a-s'wimmin' wi' Te ha-p'i fishes
Miller Jew
mus...@planet.nl (musician) wrote:
bookburn <book...@yahoo.com> ((tx again!..(and again..)) wrote:
(re Feng/English edition)..
>
>How do I know the universe is like this?
>By looking!
M
>a question for the chines speaking scholars here...
>
>can this last line be translated as;
>
>how do I know that?
>by virtue of this.
Yes :)
"how do I know that?" has this TTC/54 line simply one ideogram, "tsai" or
literally "?" (but in context, is pro-question(?)ing' the previous remarks,
hence "how do I know that" is fine.
"by virtue of this." has this TTC/54 (last) line, two ideograms: "yi tz'u":
"yi" means 'by' or 'through' or 'by means of' & "tz'u" means 'this' or
cultivation of virtue* or 'what is within me'., hence "by virtue of this" is
correct also.
Rgds,
--Zhou
*fwiw, plz :::flash::: note-note:) there is no "De" ideogram in these lines.
(Or oft said De/Te as 'moral virtue').
References: From the internet: http://zhongwen.com/dao.htm (for it's PRC
'pinyin' conversion to English words) and "Tao Te Ching: A Definitive Edition"
by Jonathan Star (for it's pre-PRC, or classical, 'Wade-Gile' conversion to
English words! %-)
Snorky The Inept
Inept!
--
-Snorky the Inept
DEAD FREAKS UNITE
Who are you? Where are you?
How are you?
BraveNewWhirl
Ask the Dali Lama or (though a medium) Picasso.
Jaybuzin0000
>jb wrote:
>>bw wrote:
[...]
>> >adept knows only belief matters.
>>
>> w'hat is
>> beyond adept
>
>wu chi?
nothing matters?
a while
-passinging bottomless
bottles of beer off teh
w'alls-
Jaybuzin0000
>jay'd wondered:
>> w'hat is
>> beyond adept
>
>Inept!
eye be Unept
t'hen, speaking
as a staple, of course
-honkless
{:-])))
Jaybuzin0000
>a question for the chines speaking scholars here...
that ain't me.
but lack of an hat never s'topped me befur.
>can this last line be translated as;
>
>how do I know that?
>by virtue of this.
rings a bell.
When I saw NK's ming eye'd hopped
a comment wood p'u be made, too th'is.
anywho. "yi ci"
Gu Zhengkun translates:
"How do I know about the whole world?
By employing the above."
Red Pine has:
how do we know what the world is like
through this
yi ci also appears at the end of 21
In 21, Gu translates the final lines as:
"How do I know the intial state of all things?
By means of the Tao."
In googling, I see Zhoubu has responded
and that such a quest'ion has also been on yer
mind for sum time!
How do we know any 'this'?
Well, by virtue of 'that', it
wood p'u seams.
Nadine Kwong
> joel wondered:
>
> >a question for the chines speaking scholars here...
>
> that ain't me.
> but lack of an hat never s'topped me befur.
>
> >can this last line be translated as;
> >
> >how do I know that?
> >by virtue of this.
no; it can not be so read, not exactly; someThing gets lost when ya do
this like that. see infra, read:
> rings a bell.
>
> When I saw NK's ming eye'd hopped
sum One
(w)ring mah
ming
?
hops will getcha
ever a where.
wu2
i
he2 yi3
how take / by means of (what)
zhi1
know
tian1 xia4
heaven-under (i.e., "all under heaven"; the empire / realm / entirety
of "civilized" world in which true "humans" (as opposed to barbarians)
live)
ran2
thus / that way / like that
zai1
[exclamative/emphatic particle] !
yi3
take / by means of (what)
ci3
this
~~~~~~~via english~~~~~~~>
leads to:
"how do i know that the entire world is thus?!?!?!
by *this*..."
ran2 is "that way," i.e., the way things are observed/said to be,
externally / "over there";
ci3 refers to 'this," i.e., that which is there immediately, in
*direct* experience, internally / at hand...
musician, your para(-)phrase explicitly edits out the concept of /
link to "the world, and implicitly edits out the "way" in "that way,"
which is to say, replaces "thus" with "this," but they are different;
"thus" / "this way" refers to / signifies /points to a pro-cess in
process/progress, not a static Thing-y "this"... so i'd say: let the
Old Master(s) be, as (t)he(y) be.... no need to edit or paraphrase
what is already fine, just as it is, and can be said quite nicely
thank you in english as well....
> a comment wood p'u be made, too th'is.
>
> anywho. "yi ci"
>
> Gu Zhengkun translates:
> "How do I know about the whole world?
> By employing the above."
>
> Red Pine has:
> how do we know what the world is like
> through this
>
> yi ci also appears at the end of 21
>
> In 21, Gu translates the final lines as:
> "How do I know the intial state of all things?
> By means of the Tao."
>
> In googling, I see Zhoubu has responded
> and that such a quest'ion has also been on yer
> mind for sum time!
>
> How do we know any 'this'?
> Well, by virtue of 'that', it
> wood p'u seams.
and thus is the entire w(h)orld,
made (w)hole....
wu2 he2 yi3 zhi1 ran2 zai1?!?!?!
YI3 CI3!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
exclamatively/emphatically,
Nadine, who gets a-round
Jaybuzin0000
>Jay was hop-full:
[...]
>who gets a-round
many tanks, an ards
o varks
{:-])))
musician
> ref: Subject: Re: Weekly TTC, Ch. 54
>
> mus...@planet.nl (musician) wrote:
> bookburn <book...@yahoo.com> ((tx again!..(and again..)) wrote:
> (re Feng/English edition)..
> >
> >How do I know the universe is like this?
> >By looking!
>
> M
> >a question for the chines speaking scholars here...
> >
> >can this last line be translated as;
> >
> >how do I know that?
> >by virtue of this.
>
> Yes :)
> "how do I know that?" has this TTC/54 line simply one ideogram, "tsai" or
> literally "?" (but in context, is pro-question(?)ing' the previous remarks,
> hence "how do I know that" is fine.
>
> "by virtue of this." has this TTC/54 (last) line, two ideograms: "yi tz'u":
> "yi" means 'by' or 'through' or 'by means of' & "tz'u" means 'this' or
> cultivation of virtue* or 'what is within me'., hence "by virtue of this" is
> correct also.
>
> Rgds,
> --Zhou
thanks Z. I checked the four translations I have here and none of them
has it like that and it makes me wonder why not 'cause it seems to me to
be a good way of putting it in english. I suppose they were looking more
for poetic clarity and I'm certainly not qualified to secong guess any
of those respected translator/scholars.
>
> *fwiw, plz :::flash::: note-note:) there is no "De" ideogram in these lines.
> (Or oft said De/Te as 'moral virtue').
ah - okay. Then even though it works, the original isn't quite like
that. Well... it was fun to think about.
>
> References: From the internet: http://zhongwen.com/dao.htm (for it's PRC
> 'pinyin' conversion to English words) and "Tao Te Ching: A Definitive Edition"
> by Jonathan Star (for it's pre-PRC, or classical, 'Wade-Gile' conversion to
> English words! %-)
thanks again Z - I've added it to my links.
--
musician
musician
> jaybuz...@cs.comm (Jaybuzin0000) wrote in message
> news:<20020406165308...@mb-cr.news.cs.com>... > joel wondered:
> > > >a question for the chines speaking scholars here... > > that ain't
> me. > but lack of an hat never s'topped me befur. > > >can this last line
> be translated as; > > > >how do I know that? > >by virtue of this.
>
> no; it can not be so read, not exactly; someThing gets lost when ya do
> this like that. see infra, read:
gotcha (see Z-post reply)
I hear ya Nadine - the above paraphrase is (as J has historied out) a
posit that expresses my idea of the meaning of the chinese word "te". I
was curious to know if it really fit in there, but since the word "te"
isn't in that line at all, well... it just don't work - aaarrrggghhhh.
I'll just keep thelittle word smithy for myself then. Thanks for your
reply.
> > a comment wood p'u be made, too th'is.
> >
> > anywho. "yi ci"
> >
> > Gu Zhengkun translates: "How do I know about the whole world? By
> > employing the above."
> >
> > Red Pine has: how do we know what the world is like through this
> >
> > yi ci also appears at the end of 21
> >
> > In 21, Gu translates the final lines as: "How do I know the intial state
> > of all things? By means of the Tao."
> >
> > In googling, I see Zhoubu has responded and that such a quest'ion has
> > also been on yer mind for sum time!
> >
> > How do we know any 'this'? Well, by virtue of 'that', it wood p'u seams.
>
> and thus is the entire w(h)orld, made (w)hole....
>
> wu2 he2 yi3 zhi1 ran2 zai1?!?!?!
>
> YI3 CI3!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> exclamatively/emphatically, Nadine, who gets a-round
-- musician
lisa
>ref: Subject: Re: Weekly TTC, Ch. 54
>
>mus...@planet.nl (musician) wrote:
>bookburn <book...@yahoo.com> ((tx again!..(and again..)) wrote:
>(re Feng/English edition)..
>>
>>How do I know the universe is like this?
>>By looking!
>
>M
>>a question for the chines speaking scholars here...
>>
>>can this last line be translated as;
>>
>>how do I know that?
>>by virtue of this.
>
>Yes :)
>"how do I know that?" has this TTC/54 line simply one ideogram, "tsai" or
>literally "?" (but in context, is pro-question(?)ing' the previous remarks,
>hence "how do I know that" is fine.
>
>"by virtue of this." has this TTC/54 (last) line, two ideograms: "yi tz'u":
>"yi" means 'by' or 'through' or 'by means of' & "tz'u" means 'this' or
>cultivation of virtue* or 'what is within me'., hence "by virtue of this" is
>correct also.
>
>Rgds,
>--Zhou
>
>*fwiw, plz :::flash::: note-note:) there is no "De" ideogram in these lines.
>(Or oft said De/Te as 'moral virtue').
I hear you, I think. This brings up exactly the point that Wilhelm was
bringing up in his definition of De/Te. By virtue of is generic rather than
cultivated. Is this what you're getting at, Z?
rgds,
--li
Miller Jew
oneo...@aol.com (lisa) wrote:
Zhou writes:
mus...@planet.nl (musician) wrote:
bookburn <book...@yahoo.com> ((tx again!..(and again..)) wrote:
(re Feng/English edition)..
>>
>>How do I know the universe is like this?
>>By looking!
>
>M
>>a question for the chines speaking scholars here...
>>
>>can this last line be translated as;
>>
>>how do I know that?
>>by virtue of this.
>
>Z
>Yes :)
>"how do I know that?" has this TTC/54 line simply one ideogram, "tsai" or
>literally "?" (but in context, is pro-question(?)ing' the previous remarks,
>hence "how do I know that" is fine.
>
>"by virtue of this." has this TTC/54 (last) line, two ideograms: "yi tz'u":
>"yi" means 'by' or 'through' or 'by means of' & "tz'u" means 'this' or
>cultivation of virtue* or 'what is within me'., hence "by virtue of this" is
>correct also.
>
>Rgds,
>--Zhou
>
>*fwiw, plz :::flash::: note-note:) there is no "De" ideogram in these lines.
>(Or oft said De/Te as 'moral virtue').
Li
>I hear you, I think. This brings up exactly the point that Wilhelm was
>bringing up in his definition of De/Te. By virtue of is generic rather than
>cultivated. Is this what you're getting at, Z?
Yes, in the sense your former point is correct, although what is De cultivated
is not denied by the "generic", because this Oneness is inclusionary to all
fields of endeavors (including our attaching to de as moral virtues in order to
get moral). We note how the Tao ideogram has a person walking --is telling
about the holism of life living). Where cultivation enters, (moral de or any
such cultivating) is so, for *developing* the phenomenal medium to fully
express (a Dao) in.
As far as your 'exacting' 'thru Wilhelm's pov, that is, of his De-defining as
life, is succinct. (In bring up that post) with his saying De is "Life, in its
highest manifestation, appears in the form of an individual personality; but
the personality is, in a manner of speaking, only the vessel whose content is
DAO" -- articulates our Earth (Services) embodiment, or this kind of embodied
nature; it's this Earth-encased "vessel" that we move and breath and have our
being in. Said non- planetary-wise:), it's our outer sheath, or manifest
form-ative state OF y/our spiritual being, or De (Virtuousity) of our
Dao-emanating. (Or this kind of "Life" De which is defined by Wilhelm as it's
'highest MANIFESTation'). And so, by 'virtue of this generic' comes from our
spiritual being's outward state, not by (de) moral-cultivation, which is
normatively derived from our human thought-formed and emotionally
well-intentioned social con-form-ations.
Best to U (and your kids.. 'rounding U-p' to become young men:)
(& "say" Li!" *hi!* to (p)De/z for me? Tx! :)
--Zhou
>Going on, Wilhelm, translating te as Life..
>It wants nothing for itself, it does not even know
>itself. <-- yet "walks", thru Dao's (feety:) *De* :)
>
>
>
lisa
>
"De cultivated is not denied by the generic [de.]" An important
distinction--and a ponderable point of discussion. Any takers??
Where cultivation enters, (moral de or any
>such cultivating) is so, for *developing* the phenomenal medium to fully
>express (a Dao) in.
>
>As far as your 'exacting' 'thru Wilhelm's pov, that is, of his De-defining
>as
>life, is succinct. (In bring up that post) with his saying De is "Life, in
>its
>highest manifestation, appears in the form of an individual personality; but
>the personality is, in a manner of speaking, only the vessel whose content is
>DAO" -- articulates our Earth (Services) embodiment, or this kind of embodied
>nature; it's this Earth-encased "vessel" that we move and breath and have our
>being in. Said non- planetary-wise:), it's our outer sheath, or manifest
>form-ative state OF y/our spiritual being, or De (Virtuousity) of our
>Dao-emanating. (Or this kind of "Life" De which is defined by Wilhelm as it's
>'highest MANIFESTation'). And so, by 'virtue of this generic' comes from our
>spiritual being's outward state, not by (de) moral-cultivation, which is
>normatively derived from our human thought-formed and emotionally
>well-intentioned social con-form-ations.
Are you saying that the spirit forms the shell?
What about a tag team? You've seen me type excerpts from Clarissa
Pinkola-Estes before, and maybe even this very bit:
"[The body's] purpose is to protect, contain, support, and fire the spirit and
soul within it, to be a repository for memory, to fill us with feeling--that is
the supreme psychic nourishment. It is to lift us and propel us, to fill us
with feeling to prove that we exist, that we are here, to give us grounding,
heft, weight. It is wrong to think of it as a place we leave in order to soar
to the spirit. The body is the launcher of those experiences."
--from, _Women Who Run with the Wolves_
This seems to be saying that the shell likewise nourishes the spirit.
>
>Best to U (and your kids.. 'rounding U-p' to become young men:)
Thank you, Z. And to you and your'n. I'm thinking your oldest must be over
halfway through university by now?
>(& "say" Li!" *hi!* to (p)De/z for me? Tx! :)
Just sent the E, Z :)
Li
Jaybuzin0000
>zhoubu wrote:
>>lisa gleaned:
[...s]
>>>exactly the point that Wilhelm was
>>>bringing up in his definition of De/Te. By virtue of is generic rather
>>>than cultivated.
>>Yes, in the sense your former point is correct, although what is De
>>cultivated
>>is not denied by the "generic",
>"De cultivated is not denied by the generic [de.]" An important
>distinction--and a ponderable point of discussion. Any takers??
The generic, "by virtue of"
is an intrinsic property. Rocks are hard
by virtue of their density. Water is soft
in a generic de-way. But usually, 'de'
does not refer to such things.
De cultivated is not denied by propensic de.
It wood, p'u, appear to be advantageous to
feel one's de in order to cultivate it.
The wheel-write could not teach his son.
>> Where cultivation enters, (moral de or any
>>such cultivating) is so, for *developing* the phenomenal medium to fully
>>express (a Dao) in.
If a li (pattern\way) is not present
de will never eek. But I'm not sure that daoism
concentrates on any apriori dao. Kinda st'range,
at home in on de.
>>As far as your 'exacting' 'thru Wilhelm's pov, that is, of his De-defining
>>as
>>life, is succinct. (In bring up that post) with his saying De is "Life, in
>>its
>>highest manifestation, appears in the form of an individual personality; but
>>the personality is, in a manner of speaking, only the vessel whose content
>is
>>DAO" -- articulates our Earth (Services) embodiment, or this kind of
>embodied
>>nature; it's this Earth-encased "vessel" that we move and breath and have
>our
>>being in. Said non- planetary-wise:), it's our outer sheath, or manifest
>>form-ative state OF y/our spiritual being, or De (Virtuousity) of our
>>Dao-emanating. (Or this kind of "Life" De which is defined by Wilhelm as
>it's
>>'highest MANIFESTation'). And so, by 'virtue of this generic' comes from our
>>spiritual being's outward state, not by (de) moral-cultivation, which is
>>normatively derived from our human thought-formed and emotionally
>>well-intentioned social con-form-ations.
>
>Are you saying that the spirit forms the shell?
Cook Ting loved Tao bestest.
His ch'i motive-force developed his te.
>What about a tag team? You've seen me type excerpts from Clarissa
>Pinkola-Estes before, and maybe even this very bit:
>
>"[The body's] purpose is to protect, contain, support, and fire the spirit
>and
>soul within it, to be a repository for memory, to fill us with feeling--that
>is
>the supreme psychic nourishment.
I'm not convinced that Chuang Tzu
was particularly an esotericist.
>It is to lift us and propel us, to fill us
>with feeling to prove that we exist, that we are here, to give us grounding,
>heft, weight. It is wrong to think of it as a place we leave in order to
>soar
>to the spirit. The body is the launcher of those experiences."
>--from, _Women Who Run with the Wolves_
First p'o, then hun, aye.
First dirt, then flower, eye.
But yin and yang appear(ed) simultaneously.
>This seems to be saying that the shell likewise nourishes the spirit.
Why do problems beset me?
Because I am a body. Is there a spirit
without a shell? Recalling the hun is a phrase
used to suggest th'air may be two-ness.
W'hen te shell is shed,
did Zz's wife go someplace?
>>>Going on, Wilhelm, translating te as Life..
>>>It wants nothing for itself, it does not even know
>>>itself. <-- yet "walks", thru Dao's (feety:) *De* :)
water nourishes all things
yet has no mind to do so
space makes room for all things
while not intending
two give way
Sister Kate
Imo, there are useful approaches & useless ones. Suppose we are all
fruit trees, but I am an apple and you are an orange tree. We both
require certain things -- water, sun, appropriate soil, to develop
beautifully. I need a period of winter to make fruit; freezing can be
fatal for you. And apples & oranges are 2 different fruits, both very
fine. But neither of us needs drought, or sand instead of soil, or
dioxin poured on our roots. In fact there are hundreds of substances
that can destroy us, only a smaller number that can do us good. Taoist
moral cultivation is like that -- nourishing hatred, contempt,
arrogance, greed, . . Being good to the good but bad to the bad,
believing the honest but not believing liars, assuming malice or
stupidity in others, these all are poison to our roots! It's contrary
to sanity to expect to attain the Tao while feeding on poison. Jay!
This just can't be right. A religion or philosophy which does not help
one build character & become organically wholesome is no place to put
your roots.
Doctornine
if you understand why daoists are sometimes
referred to as 'vinegar drinkers'...
Perhaps you would like to give your perspective
on that particular point.
tia..
D9
Miller Jew
oneo...@aol.com (lisa) wrote:
Zhou writes:
mus...@planet.nl (musician) wrote:
bookburn <book...@yahoo.com> ((tx again!..(and again..)) wrote:
>(re Feng/English edition)..
>>
>>*fwiw, plz :::flash::: note-note:) there is no "De" ideogram in these lines.
>>(Or oft said De/Te as 'moral virtue').
>
>Li
>>I hear you, I think. This brings up exactly the point that Wilhelm was
>>bringing up in his definition of De/Te. By virtue of is generic rather than
>>cultivated. Is this what you're getting at, Z?
>
>Z
>Yes, in the sense your former point is correct, although what is De
>cultivated is not denied by the "generic", because this Oneness is
inclusionary to all
>fields of endeavors (including our attaching to de as moral virtues in order
>to get moral). We note how the Tao ideogram has a person walking --is telling
>about the holism of life living).
Li
>"De cultivated is not denied by the generic [de.]" An important
>distinction--and a ponderable point of discussion. Any takers??
>Z
>Where cultivation enters, (moral de or any
>such cultivating) is so, for *developing* the phenomenal medium to fully
>express (a Dao) in.
>
>As far as your 'exacting' 'thru Wilhelm's pov, that is, of his De-defining
>as life, is succinct. (In bring up that post) with his saying De is "Life, in
>its highest manifestation, appears in the form of an individual personality;
but
>the personality is, in a manner of speaking, only the vessel whose content is
>DAO" -- articulates our Earth (Services) embodiment, or this kind of embodied
>nature; it's this Earth-encased "vessel" that we move and breath and have our
>being in. Said non-planetary-wise:), it's our outer sheath, or manifest
>form-ative state OF y/our spiritual being, or De (Virtuousity) of our
>Dao-emanating. (Or this kind of "Life" De which is defined by Wilhelm as it's
>'highest MANIFESTation'). And so, by 'virtue of this generic' comes from our
>spiritual being's outward state, not by (de) moral-cultivation, which is
>normatively derived from our human thought-formed and emotionally
>well-intentioned social con-form-ations.
Li
>Are you saying that the spirit forms the shell? <<-- Yes :)
>
>What about a tag team? You've seen me type excerpts from Clarissa
>Pinkola-Estes before, and maybe even this very bit:
>
>"[The body's] purpose is to protect, contain, support, and fire the spirit and
>soul within it, to be a repository for memory, to fill us with feeling--that
is
>the supreme psychic nourishment. It is to lift us and propel us, to fill us
>with feeling to prove that we exist, that we are here, to give us grounding,
>heft, weight. It is wrong to think of it as a place we leave in order to soar
>to the spirit. The body is the launcher of those experiences."
>--from, _Women Who Run with the Wolves_
>
>This seems to be saying that the shell likewise nourishes the spirit.
"Likewise" yes Li:) (notwithstanding your well-picked reference :) Saying the
shell nourishes the spirit -simultaneously- the spirit nourishes the shell. The
shell nourishes the spirit for the reason spirit expands from this (particular
"place") Earth (School-ground:) experiencing. Especially for the capacity in
each De in it to create new forms, new thought-forms, i.e. fecundate that which
is yet-formless. --& None is denied. Note how (in the TTC) 'Tao does nothing,
yet everything is done' --> through De ( this "embodiment of the Way'" -Mair's
De-finition). And this is the expansion (astrono-cosmologically) of nothing to
everything. And obviously, (our) spirit nourishes (our) shell 'thingy':) --via
ch'i/qi vitality, to enable "purpose.. protect, contain.."
Rgds,
--Zhou
Jaybuzin0000
>re the aversion so many scholars see in Taoism to moral cultivation.
Yes. A thread of Taoism contrasts
with an over-emphasis of Confucianism,
cf. CT 29. A great thief has Tao. But there is
a balance within the text also. Robber Chih
lost his Teh, as did others who sought forms
of morality or other gains. Confucius, in his
effort to 'do good' got himself persecuted
rather regularly. Daoism opts other-wise.
>Imo, there are useful approaches & useless ones.
The CT speaks of the utility of uselessness.
To live long, and prosper, beware. But, again,
the text balances its'elf out with an honkless
goose getting cooked.
>Suppose we are all
>fruit trees, but I am an apple and you are an orange tree. We both
>require certain things -- water, sun, appropriate soil, to develop
>beautifully. I need a period of winter to make fruit; freezing can be
>fatal for you. And apples & oranges are 2 different fruits, both very
>fine. But neither of us needs drought, or sand instead of soil, or
>dioxin poured on our roots. In fact there are hundreds of substances
>that can destroy us, only a smaller number that can do us good.
Yes. Similarly, the pine and redwood trees,
being of great use, are cut down in their prime.
To go about doing good is a sure way to incur
the wrath of others who are not-so-good.
Martin Luther King Jr was, "not-a-daoist"
in this sense of the tradition.
>Taoist
>moral cultivation is like that -
various denominations exist.
some forms are very sexual.
some practice external alchemy.
>- nourishing hatred, contempt,
>arrogance, greed,
such a dao is the "not-Tao" of the TTC.
virility is also, "not-Tao" as it declines.
waxing and waning is a given,
knowing the yang but holding to the yin
is proscribed, imo.
While love\hate, contempt\respect, arrogance\humility,
selfish\selfless, could be said to go hand-in-hand,
I don't find a dao of daoism stressing one over the other.
Quite the obverse, a dao of daoism employs and
plays both sides off the other to show yet
another way.
transcending duality, unism, no-mind,
middle way, such are adjectival reflect'ions, imo.
>. . Being good to the good but bad to the bad,
I think that reads, good to the good
and good to the bad, iirc.
>believing the honest but not believing liars, assuming malice or
>stupidity in others, these all are poison to our roots!
All of us are honest, all of us are liars,
all of us have malice, all of us are stupid;
the differences are of degree not of genre.
> It's contrary
>to sanity to expect to attain the Tao while feeding on poison.
From my pov, a form of daoism is to see
that if anyone is stupid, then everyone is
when compared to someone smarter. If any
body is malicious, then every body is, when
compared to another body who is less-so.
This is a dao of the Zz, imo.
>Jay!
>This just can't be right. A religion or philosophy which does not help
>one build character & become organically wholesome is no place to put
>your roots.
Here's a rule:
Rules simply don't cut it.
Rules bind one to a dao. A dao may dao
but such is not a constant\eternal\immortal dao.
To strive to attain an impossible goal, is futile.
To accept what is, releases teh st'rain of futility
and allows for liberty to naturally find w'hat
suits one and all.
While swimming, there is no place to put roots.
Water flows, seeking out the lowest places.
If a rick is bad, am I not good to the bad.
If a tim, or a george, is good, is it not good
to sharpen a wit here before leaving.
Usually a tim tree, or a george tree,
leaves in its season.
I love to argue. With associates at work
we would often go round and round with
fundamental christianity. One friend claimed
that, since I believed as I did, I was not a _real_
christian. And such a claim is most interesting.
We wood p'u sharpen our wits on each other.
Did Zz not mourn when Hui Shih passed on?
-rootinging
a round looking
for bottomless b'owls
of Juan Chi and Juan Hsien-
{:-])))
DoctorNine
This is from there.
---------------
Vinegar Tasters
An excerpt from The Tao of Pooh
by Benjamin Hoff
"You see, Pooh," I said, "a lot of people don't
seem to know what Taoism is..."
"Yes?" said Pooh, blinking his eyes."
So that's what this chapter is for - to explain
things a bit."
"Oh, I see," said Pooh.
"And the easiest way to do that would be for us to go to China for a
moment."
"What?" said Pooh, his eyes wide open in amazement. "Right now?'
"Of course. All we need to do is, lean back, relax, and there we are."
"Oh, I see," said Pooh.
Let's imagine that we have walked down a narrow street in a large Chinese
city and have found a small shop that sells scrolls painted in the classic
manner. We go inside and ask to be shown something allegorical - something
humorous, perhaps, but with some sort of Timeless Meaning. The shopkeeper
smiles. "I have just the thing,", he tells us. "A copy of The Vinegar Tasters!"
He leads us to a large table and unrolls the scroll, placing it down for us to
examine. "Excuse me - I must attend to something for a moment," he says,
and goes into the back of the shop, leaving us alone with the painting.
Although we can see that this is a fairly recent version, we know that the
original was painted long ago; just when is uncertain. But by now, the theme
of the painting is well known.
We see three men standing around a vat of vinegar. Each has dipped his
finger into the vinegar and has tasted it. The expression on each man's face
shows his individual reaction. Since the painting is allegorical, we are to
understand that these are no ordinary vinegar tasters, but are instead
representatives of the "Three Teachings" of China, and that the vinegar they
are sampling represents the Essence of Life. The three masters are K'ung
Fu-tse (Confucius), Buddha, and Lao-tse, author of the oldest existing book of
Taoism. The first has a sour look on his face, the second wears a bitter
expression, but the third man is smiling.
To Kung Fu-tse (kung FOOdsuh), life seemed rather sour. He believed that the
present was out step with the past, and that the government of man on
earth was out of harmony with the Way of Heaven, the government of, the
universe. Therefore, he emphasized reverence for the Ancestors, as well as
for the ancient rituals and ceremonies in which the emperor, as the Son of
Heaven, acted as intermediary between limitless heaven and limited earth.
Under Confucianism, the use of precisely measured court music, prescribed
steps, actions, and phrases all added up to an extremely complex system of
rituals, each used for a particular purpose at a particular time. A saying was
recorded about K'ung Fu-tse: "If the mat was not straight, the Master would
not sit." This ought to give an indication of the extent to which things were
carried out under Confucianism.
To Buddha, the second figure in the painting, life on earth was bitter, filled
with attachments and desires that led to suffering. The world was seen as a
setter of traps, a generator of illusions, a revolving wheel of pain for all
creatures. In order to find peace, the Buddhist considered it necessary to
transcend "the world of dust" and reach Nirvana, literally a state of "no wind."
Although the essentially optimistic attitude of the Chinese altered Buddhism
considerably after it was brought in from its native India, the devout Buddhist
often saw the way to Nirvana interrupted all the same by the bitter wind of
everyday existence.
To Lao-tse (LAOdsuh), the harmony that naturally existed between heaven
and earth from the very beginning could be found by anyone at any time, but
not by following the rules of the Confucianists. As he stated in his Tao To
Ching (DAO DEH JEENG), the "Tao Virtue Book," earth was in essence a
reflection of heaven, run by the same laws - not by the laws of men. These
laws affected not only the spinning of distant planets, but the activities of the
birds in the forest and the fish in the sea. According to Lao-tse, the more man
interfered with the natural balance produced and governed by the universal
laws, the further away the harmony retreated into the distance. The more
forcing, the more trouble. Whether heavy or fight, wet or dry, fast or slow,
everything had its own nature already within it, which could not be violated
without causing difficulties. When abstract and arbitrary rules were imposed
from the outside, struggle was inevitable. Only then did life become sour.
To Lao-tse, the world was not a setter of traps but a teacher of valuable
lessons. Its lessons needed to be learned, just as its laws needed to be
followed; then all would go well. Rather than turn away from "the world of
dust," Lao-tse advised others to "join the dust of the world." What he saw
operating behind everything in heaven and earth he called Tao (DAO), "the
Way."
A basic principle of Lao-tse's teaching was that this Way of the Universe could
not be adequately described in words, and that it would be insulting both to
its unlimited power and to the intelligent human mind to attempt to do so.
Still, its nature could be understood, and those who cared the most about it,
and the life from which it was inseparable, understood it best.
Over the centuries Lao-tse's classic teachings were developed and divided
into philosophical, monastic, and folk religious forms. All of these could be
included under the general heading of Taoism. But the basic Taoism that we
are concerned with here is simply a particular way of appreciating, learning
from, and working with whatever happens in everyday life. From the Taoist
point of view, the natural result of this harmonious way of living is happiness.
You might say that happy serenity is the most noticeable characteristic of the
Taoist personality, and a subtle sense of humor is apparent even in the most
profound Taoist writings, such as the twenty-five-hundred-year-old Tao Te
Ching. In the writings of Taoism's second major writer, Chuang-tse
(JUANGdsuh), quiet laughter seems to bubble up like water from a fountain.
"But what does that have to do with vinegar?' asked Pooh.
"I thought I had explained that," I said.
"I don't think so," said Pooh.
"Well, then, I'll explain it now."
"That's good." said Pooh.
In the painting, why is Lao-tse smiling? After all, that vinegar that represents
life must certainly have an unpleasant taste, as the expressions on the faces
of the other two men indicate. But, through working in harmony with life's
circumstances, Taoist understanding changes what others may perceive as
negative into something positive. From the Taoist point of view, sourness and
bitterness come from the interfering and unappreciative mind. Life itself, when
understood and utilized for what it is, is sweet. That is the message of The
Vinegar Tasters.
"Sweet? You mean like honey?" asked Pooh.
"Well, maybe not that sweet," I said. "That would be overdoing it a bit."
"Are we still supposed to be in China?" Pooh asked cautiously.
"No, we're through explaining and now we're back at the writing table."
"Oh."
"Well, we're just in time for something to eat," he added, wandering over to
the kitchen cupboard.
-------------------
You still sure you know what is poison for all things?
Sure you are wise enough to prescribe a universal tonic?
Certain that what works for you, is good enough for everyone else?
(Maybe the story of the songbirds.. hrmm..)
D9
Jaybuzin0000
[...dao of pooh...]
>(Maybe the story of the songbirds.. hrmm..)
I was thinking this morning
of how I felt when attending Narcotics
Anonymous meetings. The language was
gruff and the people in the rooms were not
particularly folks that looked 'acceptable'.
Perhaps not-so-strangely, my immediate feeling
was one of joy; these are my people, this is
my family, were thoughts that went thru my
hsin as I sang and I sat and waited
by the billabong.
-waltzing
and wondering
what if the other ken
is getting a round two-it
{:-])))
DoctorNine
JB
> Doc wrote, and quoted:
> [...dao of pooh...]
Jest a bit to bite.
D9
> >(Maybe the story of the songbirds.. hrmm..)
JB
> I was thinking this morning
> of how I felt when attending Narcotics
> Anonymous meetings. The language was
> gruff and the people in the rooms were not
> particularly folks that looked 'acceptable'.
> Perhaps not-so-strangely, my immediate feeling
> was one of joy; these are my people, this is
> my family, were thoughts that went thru my
> hsin as I sang and I sat and waited
> by the billabong.
On the Road,
Sometimes you meet yourself,
Coming or going.
I like to shake hands,
And ask for a few particulars.
When the cycle circles,
That is completion; return: fu
Always a singular moment...
JB
> -waltzing
> and wondering
> what if the other ken
> is getting a round two-it
> {:-])))
Lemme put another coin in the juke box.
And listen...
;)
D9
Jaybuzin0000
[...]
>Lemme put another coin in the juke box.
54 is interesting, two-me.
Tim has posited a curious go-round.
In reading my Idiot's Guide, a term waved.
Matsu is said to be the Taiwan folk deity
Goddess of the Sea. Taoism may number
3,000,000 followers on the island.
In Sanskrit, Matsya means, literally, '"fish";
Vishnu's avatara incarnation as a fish, first
mentioned in the Shatapatha-Brahmana, part
of the White Yajurveda, in connection with
the Hindu saga of the Great Flood ... .'
Vishnu, a Taoist.
wu he yi zhi tian xia ran zai?
yi ci.
Who knew!
-happy sails, too yu.
{:-])))
Sister Kate
1981. Like my earlier efforts to be a good Catholic, this also failed
to help me, personally, become a good person. I was earnest as a
Catholic, then earnestlly threw off the traces to follow what appeared
to be natural. Looking back, I am convinced that the natural mind was
not natural at all but was a landfill of received values, old tapes, and
personal karma. Only when I learned to watch my mind, prefer & promote
good thoughts & good impulses, reject anger & greed, did I begin to be
free both of the childish outer-directed mores of Christianity as I
experienced it, & the poisons I had imbibed following what I thought was
natural. . . Jay, you prove too many points with metaphors. And when I
said "good to the good & bad to the bad" etc. I was describing a person
without character. I supppose you realized that after you posted it.
Yes, you do like to argue. I didn't think I did. . .
Sister Kate
Who refer to us this way & why? I am sincerely curious.
Jaybuzin0000
>Well, I followed what I thought Chuang Tze was teaching, from 1967 to
>1981.
How did you do this?
> Like my earlier efforts to be a good Catholic, this also failed
>to help me, personally, become a good person.
If you are not already good,
at what point will you consider yourself
to have arrived at a state of goodness?
>I was earnest as a
>Catholic, then earnestlly threw off the traces to follow what appeared
>to be natural. Looking back, I am convinced that the natural mind was
>not natural at all but was a landfill of received values, old tapes, and
>personal karma.
Forgetting about all those things,
throwing the landfill into the landfill,
w'hat remains?
> Only when I learned to watch my mind, prefer & promote
>good thoughts & good impulses, reject anger & greed, did I begin to be
>free both of the childish outer-directed mores of Christianity as I
>experienced it,
I think a balance exists.
By being overly altruisitic, one can easily
be taken advantage of. That might be nice
except the wolves will consume prey without
giving much thought, without compassion. By
being overly selfish one can also self-destruct.
Both extremes may not lead to long-life.
>& the poisons I had imbibed following what I thought was
>natural. . .
By poisons\natural do you mean carnal?
>Jay, you prove too many points with metaphors.
mixing t'hemsup is fun
food for thought.
>And when I
>said "good to the good & bad to the bad" etc. I was describing a person
>without character.
I did wonder a bit. But the person who is
without character is bad to the good and bad
to the bad also, no?
> I supppose you realized that after you posted it.
I read it a couple times and thought that you
did a kind of switch-over in mid-stream.
>Yes, you do like to argue. I didn't think I did. . .
Zz did, two.
{:-])))
lisa
>lisa challenged:
>>zhoubu wrote:
>>>lisa gleaned:
>[...s]
>
>>>>exactly the point that Wilhelm was
>>>>bringing up in his definition of De/Te. By virtue of is generic rather
>>>>than cultivated.
>
>>>Yes, in the sense your former point is correct, although what is De
>>>cultivated
>>>is not denied by the "generic",
>
>>"De cultivated is not denied by the generic [de.]" An important
>>distinction--and a ponderable point of discussion. Any takers??
>
>The generic, "by virtue of"
>is an intrinsic property. Rocks are hard
>by virtue of their density. Water is soft
>in a generic de-way. But usually, 'de'
>does not refer to such things.
de is for only animated things then? How is it that our bodies are made up
partially of rock (calcium in bones,) metal (iron in blood) and water (70%)?
Is it that their states cannot change? Rock may be pulverized, iron may be
molten, and water may be steam.
Or is it an intangible, untouchable sentience that makes us special? Do
thoughts matter? Or is it something other than thoughts which give us a de of
potential?
Your choice whether or not to take the above as rhetorical is your choice :)
J:
>De cultivated is not denied by propensic de.
>It wood, p'u, appear to be advantageous to
>feel one's de in order to cultivate it.
How do you feel your de? Do you mean discern that some-thing is there that
flows? Is it like synchronicity, where you know the events converging are
meaningful?
J:
>The wheel-write could not teach his son.
>
Z:
>>> Where cultivation enters, (moral de or any
>>>such cultivating) is so, for *developing* the phenomenal medium to fully
>>>express (a Dao) in.
What if I have long, lean legs, built for swimming, but I do not have the de of
a swimmer? What if my legs are short and pudgy but my de is to swim? Do I
cultivate what my body can do or what my nature needs for fulfillment? Is
there a third way?
J:
>If a li (pattern\way) is not present
>de will never eek.
Really? What about a father who wants his son to play baseball, and the son
reaches the little league championships? The pattern to be a baseball star is
present, even if the child's heart is not in it. Again, it seems as if heart
is an essential characteristic of de.
J:
But I'm not sure that daoism
>concentrates on any apriori dao. Kinda st'range,
>at home in on de.
Not sure what you mean here.
Z:
>>>As far as your 'exacting' 'thru Wilhelm's pov, that is, of his De-defining
>>>as
>>>life, is succinct. (In bring up that post) with his saying De is "Life, in
>>>its
>>>highest manifestation, appears in the form of an individual personality;
>but
>>>the personality is, in a manner of speaking, only the vessel whose content
>>is
>>>DAO" -- articulates our Earth (Services) embodiment, or this kind of
>>embodied
>>>nature; it's this Earth-encased "vessel" that we move and breath and have
>>our
>>>being in. Said non- planetary-wise:), it's our outer sheath, or manifest
>>>form-ative state OF y/our spiritual being, or De (Virtuousity) of our
>>>Dao-emanating. (Or this kind of "Life" De which is defined by Wilhelm as
>>it's
>>>'highest MANIFESTation'). And so, by 'virtue of this generic' comes from
>our
>>>spiritual being's outward state, not by (de) moral-cultivation, which is
>>>normatively derived from our human thought-formed and emotionally
>>>well-intentioned social con-form-ations.
de, then, is the long legs? the heart of a champion is found where? beyond
thoughts, emotions, and intentions?
>>
Li:
>>Are you saying that the spirit forms the shell?
>
J:
>Cook Ting loved Tao bestest.
>His ch'i motive-force developed his te.
I see Cook Ting as having practiced carving the ox so many times that, after
awhile, he did it seamlessly (or is that seamfully?) Was it his te that kept
him carving until he reached his level of expertise?
Li:
>>What about a tag team? You've seen me type excerpts from Clarissa
>>Pinkola-Estes before, and maybe even this very bit:
>>
>>"[The body's] purpose is to protect, contain, support, and fire the spirit
>>and
>>soul within it, to be a repository for memory, to fill us with feeling--that
>>is
>>the supreme psychic nourishment.
>
J:
>I'm not convinced that Chuang Tzu
>was particularly an esotericist.
Me neither. What are you getting at? From CPE's quote, basically anyone with
a mind and a body experiences both. Or are you looking beyond sentient
creatures?
CPE:
>>It is to lift us and propel us, to fill us
>>with feeling to prove that we exist, that we are here, to give us grounding,
>>heft, weight. It is wrong to think of it as a place we leave in order to
>>soar
>>to the spirit. The body is the launcher of those experiences."
>>--from, _Women Who Run with the Wolves_
>
J:
>First p'o, then hun, aye.
>First dirt, then flower, eye.
>But yin and yang appear(ed) simultaneously.
Visually, when tai chi is at rest, yin and yang are distinct. When they begin
to spin, they become one. A flower is made of dirt, so to speak.
rgds,
lisa
Sister Kate
My personal definition of a person without any character at all is one
who says, "If you are nice to me mine, I'm a nice person. But if you
aren't, watch out. Don't cross me." . . . As to degeneracy as I
experienced it to an extreme degree, the above goes far toward
describing it. "I don' t get mad, I get even," sounded like wisdom, I
also liked the Turkish saying, "My friends' friends are my friends, my
friends' enemies are my enemies." I am so grateful to have stayed alive
past that condition.
DoctorNine
SK
> My personal definition of a person without any character at all is one
> who says, "If you are nice to me mine, I'm a nice person. But if you
> aren't, watch out. Don't cross me." . . .
Guess we have to disagree Kate.. :)
I don't think that's what it means in the TTC at all.
I think my definition of a person without character, is someone who
swallows any dogma whole, btw...
But that isn't really what the -equalization of things- is about imo.
That would be a nice thread all on its own.
Glad you have found a Way that fits your feet.
Doc
bookburn
"Sister Kate" <taoistnuni...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:2172-3CB...@storefull-2317.public.lawson.webtv.net...
I have some radical notions about how people fit into the
good-evil syndrome:
1. Evil tends to cancel itself out, like when gangsters kill
each other off; rotten characters fall in with each other; etc.
For all I know, Taoism manages evil in this way.
2. Innocent people are snared into evil through their egos, like
the Brar Rabbit kicks into the Tarbaby and gets stuck because he
was not pleased by the Tarbaby's silence. I see this as a
syndrome, too, where people entrain each other in 10K stuff.
3. There is a theraputic function involved with projecting one's
conflicts, etc., in a psycho-drama, such as where you are brought
to understanding of it because it happens outside you and you can
see it. For instance, if you have suffered at the hands of
others, you may be inclined to cause similar suffering to others,
literally or figuratively. We act out problems, it seems;
sometimes on a daily basis, sometimes generationally. Just
knowing that this is happing can allow you the insight necessary
to step aside or climb over the wall.
4. One wonders if there is sacrifice at play, like when people
are in relationships and the dynamics of good-evil are present,
and someone takes hits. This can be very bad if rationalized as
a scape-goat th ing. But some people seem capable of absorbing
bad vibes by asserting a different phase field and making a big
difference in ripple effect. As Taoists, maybe we all can do
that?
bookburn
>
kamerm
news:ubfe8f9...@corp.supernews.com...
...
> 3. There is a theraputic function involved with projecting one's
> conflicts, etc., in a psycho-drama, such as where you are brought
> to understanding of it because it happens outside you and you can
> see it. For instance, if you have suffered at the hands of
> others, you may be inclined to cause similar suffering to others,
> literally or figuratively. We act out problems, it seems;
> sometimes on a daily basis, sometimes generationally. Just
> knowing that this is happing can allow you the insight necessary
> to step aside or climb over the wall.
expectations create a selective filter
amplifying by responding
to what's anticipated/feared
this acts like a lashed "rudder"
heading one from anywhere
toward where one's been before
seeing other possibilities
cuts the shackles on your rudder
and lets you drift
(though the predominant current may or may not
be carrying you somewhere you'd like)
at the least you're no longer going to the same old
in due course you may begin sailing again
closer to the heart (as informed by what you now sea)
...
> bookburn
-k
musician
> I see Cook Ting as having practiced carving the ox so many times that, after
> awhile, he did it seamlessly (or is that seamfully?) Was it his te that kept
> him carving until he reached his level of expertise?
my take:
cook Ting fell
------
this whole te thing is getting fractured!? I'm curious to see the
syncretic part come along.
--
musician
Jaybuzin0000
>jay wrote:
[...s]
>>The generic, "by virtue of"
>>is an intrinsic property. Rocks are hard
>>by virtue of their density. Water is soft
>>in a generic de-way. But usually, 'de'
>>does not refer to such things.
>
>de is for only animated things then?
I took this to my blue-collar associates
and, being indigenous speakers of the lingo,
they told me that not only is de restricted
to animals, it is really almost exclusively
used in speaking of the human realm.
>How is it that our bodies are made up
>partially of rock (calcium in bones,) metal (iron in blood) and water (70%)?
Guess it just works out that way.
Silicon-based life may form, and be smart.
Carbon is our primary elemental, in a way.
>Is it that their states cannot change? Rock may be pulverized, iron may be
>molten, and water may be steam.
Yes.
Water may be steam, by virtue of
a generic aspect of water. Water may not
be pulverized by virtue of its constituency.
I hear what you're saying and agree. My
understanding of how Chinese speakers use
the term tho reflects a different aspect.
>Or is it an intangible, untouchable sentience that makes us special?
I'm not so sure that we're special. I think it
may be that while a term has many connotations,
by virtue of its denotation the applications are
somewhat restricted.
>Do
>thoughts matter? Or is it something other than thoughts which give us a de
>of potential?
It may have to do with heart, hsin.
All animals may have a heart, and some
may have 'heart' in that they are akin to
rocky. A sly stone gathers no moss.
The flying squirrel also had teh.
>Your choice whether or not to take the above as rhetorical is your choice :)
I prefer the connotation (if it is one) of te
that suggests a point on a graph, simply a
location; and the aspect of the entire universe
being manifest thru a given point. In this sense
a river is a point, a rock is a point, and each
delineation differentiable has te. But this view
may not be a particularly Chinese, classical
traditional, Taoistic view.
>J:
>>De cultivated is not denied by propensic de.
>>It wood, p'u, appear to be advantageous to
>>feel one's de in order to cultivate it.
>
>How do you feel your de?
Using intuition. Gut feeling. Heart feeling.
Balancinging two-meyes'elf in thought
in order to melt into te, cruzin.
>Do you mean discern that some-thing is there that
>flows? Is it like synchronicity, where you know the events converging are
>meaningful?
Certainly a synch is a signal to me.
If I find myself banging my head against a wall
then it could be that I'm swimming upstream.
If it feels right none-the-less, then I press on.
Sometimes things just don't seem right. It may
not be easy to say exactly why.
>What if I have long, lean legs, built for swimming, but I do not have the de
>of a swimmer?
Then you will probably not swim with ease.
>What if my legs are short and pudgy but my de is to swim?
I saw a documentary about a big guy,
this guy was way overweight and a probable
cardiovascular tragedy waiting to happen,
according to the medical community. But,
he was\is an Iron Man Tri-athelete. His de
is to be who he is.
>Do I
>cultivate what my body can do or what my nature needs for fulfillment? Is
>there a third way?
Probably there is a fourth, fifth, and sixth way.
You may have the potential to be a criminal justice
expert par excellant, but if it doesn't feed your
spirit then another way may be in order for you
to find yourself at home in your heart.
>J:
>>If a li (pattern\way) is not present
>>de will never eek.
>
>Really? What about a father who wants his son to play baseball, and the son
>reaches the little league championships? The pattern to be a baseball star
>is present, even if the child's heart is not in it. Again, it seems as if
heart
>is an essential characteristic of de.
Yes, I agree. It takes an environment
conducive to an organism, plus genetics,
plus what is in the kids essential nature.
>J:
>> But I'm not sure that daoism
>>concentrates on any apriori dao. Kinda st'range,
>>at home in on de.
>
>Not sure what you mean here.
To say that a pattern of a river exists
before any water runs down a mountain
is a strange way to think. To say that a pattern
of a cloud exists before any water evaporates
and meets up with dust in the atmosphere
is a strange way to go about saying. A pattern,
li, is inseperable from the wood, p'u, or jade
or any physical manifestation; not-two.
It's in the wu-wei, mebbe.
Probably beyond all things. It's found
just this side of dao.
>Li:
>>>Are you saying that the spirit forms the shell?
>>
>J:
>>Cook Ting loved Tao bestest.
>>His ch'i motive-force developed his te.
>
>I see Cook Ting as having practiced carving the ox so many times that, after
>awhile, he did it seamlessly (or is that seamfully?) Was it his te that kept
>him carving until he reached his level of expertise?
It was his love of tao.
>Li:
>>>What about a tag team? You've seen me type excerpts from Clarissa
>>>Pinkola-Estes before, and maybe even this very bit:
>>>
>>>"[The body's] purpose is to protect, contain, support, and fire the spirit
>>>and
>>>soul within it, to be a repository for memory, to fill us with
>feeling--that
>>>is
>>>the supreme psychic nourishment.
>>
>J:
>>I'm not convinced that Chuang Tzu
>>was particularly an esotericist.
>
>Me neither. What are you getting at? From CPE's quote, basically anyone
>with
>a mind and a body experiences both. Or are you looking beyond sentient
>creatures?
I'm not familiar with CPE,
but am familiar with zhoubu a bit.
>CPE:
>>>It is to lift us and propel us, to fill us
>>>with feeling to prove that we exist, that we are here, to give us
>grounding,
>>>heft, weight. It is wrong to think of it as a place we leave in order to
>>>soar
>>>to the spirit. The body is the launcher of those experiences."
>>>--from, _Women Who Run with the Wolves_
>>
>
>J:
>>First p'o, then hun, aye.
>>First dirt, then flower, eye.
>>But yin and yang appear(ed) simultaneously.
>
>Visually, when tai chi is at rest, yin and yang are distinct. When they
>begin
>to spin, they become one. A flower is made of dirt, so to speak.
seed,
and sun,
a lite tingling.
add water and
-voila
{:-])))
>rgds,
>lisa
Jaybuzin0000
[...]
>4. One wonders if there is sacrifice at play, like when people
>are in relationships and the dynamics of good-evil are present,
>and someone takes hits. This can be very bad if rationalized as
>a scape-goat th ing. But some people seem capable of absorbing
>bad vibes by asserting a different phase field and making a big
>difference in ripple effect.
'Wu Ch'eng says, "Those who plant right,
plant without planting. Thus it is never uprooted.
Those who hold it right, hold without holding.
Thus it is never ripped away."'
The absorption of bad vibes is a dao.
The turning and deflecting of bad vibes is too.
In one instance self-sacrifice might be good.
It's been said that people will instinctively
rush into oncoming traffic to save a child.
In another instance self-sacrifice might be
less than good; enabling dysfunction.
> As Taoists, maybe we all can do that?
Momentarily
as each momentous present
greets us with new gifts
two-be unwrapping.
try'nah:wer'kit
"lisa" <wrote in message .
>
> Visually, when tai chi is at rest, yin and yang are distinct. When they
begin
> to spin, they become one. A flower is made of dirt, so to speak.
>
>
"Where there is dynamism there is interpenetration; where there is
interpenetration there is universal love, so all mutually sympathetic things
cannot remain apart"
Liang Qichao
become one or become 10K * 10 M * 10 G different blends of 2?
Anders Honore
DoctorNine <docto...@aol.com> skrev i en
nyhedsmeddelelse:3CB4AAB1...@aol.com...
> ---------------
>
> Vinegar Tasters
<snip>
> -------------------
>
> You still sure you know what is poison for all things?
> Sure you are wise enough to prescribe a universal tonic?
> Certain that what works for you, is good enough for everyone else?
>
> (Maybe the story of the songbirds.. hrmm..)
An old Christian mystic once said that there are two ways to enter the
Essence: The negation of all things or the affirmation/acceptance of all
things. Food for thought in relation to these vinegar tasters....
Anders Honore
> Hi again Kate. You say:
>
> SK
> > My personal definition of a person without any character at all is one
> > who says, "If you are nice to me mine, I'm a nice person. But if you
> > aren't, watch out. Don't cross me." . . .
>
> Guess we have to disagree Kate.. :)
> I don't think that's what it means in the TTC at all.
Does it matter what the TTC means at all? The words are just pointers and
open for interpretation for and against all kinds of views.
If you want to know what Lao Tzu really meant with those words, you're gonna
have to disregard interpretation and opinion, and walk the path with a
humility for one's own shortcomings on the path, and once you get there, the
TTC becomes worthless anyway...
lisa
>lisa <oneo...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> I see Cook Ting as having practiced carving the ox so many times that,
>after
>> awhile, he did it seamlessly (or is that seamfully?) Was it his te that
>kept
>> him carving until he reached his level of expertise?
>
>my take:
>
>cook Ting fell
reaching a level doesn't imply higher or lower, just another state of being...
i'm with jay on this, cook ting did what he did because his nature was such
that reaching a level where he could carve the ox effortlessly was what was
exactly right for him.
>
>------
>
>this whole te thing is getting fractured!? I'm curious to see the
>syncretic part come along.
>
let us wait for k and z to cook up entrees; and mama nadine can prepare a
concluding and stellar dessert.
lisa
>
>--
>musician
>
>
>
>
>
>
DoctorNine
SK
>>>My personal definition of a person without any character at all is one
>>>who says, "If you are nice to me mine, I'm a nice person. But if you
>>>aren't, watch out. Don't cross me." . . .
D9
>>Guess we have to disagree Kate.. :)
>>I don't think that's what it means in the TTC at all.
AH
>Does it matter what the TTC means at all? The words are just pointers
>and open for interpretation for and against all kinds of views.
Just trying to bring a personal view (Kate's) to bear on the texts which
are most commonly associated with daoist thought.
Personal views may be informed by the classics of daoism, or other
things. They are of value to whomever holds them, or they wouldn't
be espoused publicly. However, arguing that a certain position is
derived from daoist thought requires some purported connection.
AH
> If you want to know what Lao Tzu really meant with those words,
> you're gonna have to disregard interpretation and opinion, and
> walk the path with a humility for one's own shortcomings on the
> path, and once you get there, the TTC becomes worthless anyway...
Once the rabbit is caught... yes.
However, dao ke dao, fei chang dao.
So we all talk about how our feet fit our individual paths.
In this way, a community derives.
Humans are communal critters.
We may have enough commonality to walk together for a while.
We may not.
When I meet myself on the road (coming or going)
I usually exchange greetings, and ask for particulars.
;)
D9
musician
> musician wrote:
> >lisa <oneo...@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I see Cook Ting as having practiced carving the ox so many times that,
> >after
> >> awhile, he did it seamlessly (or is that seamfully?) Was it his te that
> >kept
> >> him carving until he reached his level of expertise?
> >
> >my take:
> >
> >cook Ting fell
>
> reaching a level doesn't imply higher or lower, just another state of being...
> i'm with jay on this, cook ting did what he did because his nature was such
> that reaching a level where he could carve the ox effortlessly was what was
> exactly right for him.
that's what I mean by "falling". There is no effort in falling ;-)
>
> >
> >------
> >
> >this whole te thing is getting fractured!? I'm curious to see the
> >syncretic part come along.
> >
>
> let us wait for k and z to cook up entrees; and mama nadine can prepare a
> concluding and stellar dessert.
>
> lisa
>
> >
> >--
> >musician
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
--
musician
musician
> When I meet myself on the road (coming or going)
> I usually exchange greetings, and ask for particulars.
>
> ;)
> D9
a most amenable wei!
--
musician
Sister Kate
disrespected anybody, that I know of. Anyway, my definition of a person
without character was not taken from the TTC as you know, but from
personal experience. (I have no idea what "btw" stands for!) As for
swallowing any dogma whole, gosh. That's the exact impression I've had
of many of you & Chuang Tzu -- a magnificent poet, to be sure, and I
love many of his musings and wonderful metaphors. But using him as
one's sole source of spiritual nourishment reminds me of the folk tale
about the critter -- you'll rememer which -- that was persuaded to carry
the scorpion across the river. When halfway across our hero is fatally
bitten, he cries, "But you promised not to bite me!" And scorpion
replies "You knew what I was when you promised to take me." Chuang Tzu
doesn't promise not to bite, but neither will he take you all the way
across. (Maybe he likes you better than me, of course. That's very
possible.)
Sister Kate
evil. And provoked some. I will be interested to see what others think
about this. My own moment of horror came when I realized that all the
people I was with at the time were truly bad people -- and they made no
effort to conceal their doings from me. I realized that they assumed I
was one of them. This is when I learned what fear is. That was 1981, &
I have never forgotten it. .. I think when we are made innocent
victims, we can often find compassion for the perpetraor. That's the
only solution I have found.
DoctorNine
SK
> ..I guess it's just my day to offend everybody, without
> having disrespected anybody, that I know of...
Well you certainly didn't offend me, if you are worried...
Be at peace.
SK
> .. Anyway, my definition of a person without character
> was not taken from the TTC as you know, but from
> personal experience...
Whatever you find that works for you. :)
SK
> ..(I have no idea what "btw" stands for!)...
By The Way... btw
SK
> .. As for swallowing any dogma whole, gosh. That's the
> exact impression I've had, of many of you & Chuang Tzu...
Actually, one of the things that impresses me about daojia
is the dearth of things one might possibly label as dogma.
It seems to me to be one of the most, if not the most, sparing
of philosophies available, with regards to proscriptions and
prescriptions...
Most of the folks I know around here wander too freely to
be enamoured of lists and beatitudes...
Dogma's really not in them.
SK
> -- a magnificent poet, to be sure, and I love many of his
> musings and wonderful metaphors. But using him as
> one's sole source of spiritual nourishment...
That assumption may be a bit mistaken there, Kate. :)
The philosophy doesn't necessarily imply spirituality.
Although it may, for some individuals, unlock an inner
wellspring of the spirit...
These things are very particular to the individual in question.
SK
> ..reminds me of the folk tale about the critter -- you'll remember
> which -- that was persuaded to carry the scorpion across the river.
> When halfway across our hero is fatally bitten, he cries, "But you
> promised not to bite me!" And scorpion replies "You knew what
> I was when you promised to take me."...
In my case, quite to the contrary, daojia has enabled me to
defang, and remove the venom, from things that stung me before
studying the Way. I guess my experience is different than yours.
SK
> ..Chuang Tzu doesn't promise not to bite, but neither will he take
> you all the way across...
The Zhuangzi (Chuang Tzu) is only one of the classics of daoist
thought. As I mentioned earlier, some people have larger and
smaller lists of what they consider seminal texts. In any event,
Some folks say 'Your mileage may vary...' Which means that,
what use you get from anything, jing included, is unique to you.
Some find the Zhuangzi to be the one that does it for them.
Others think the DDJ is the jing that says it best for them. A few
think the canon is a more complete unfolding.
The reason I asked about your familiarity with daojiao, is that
I am interested in your understanding of the canon, if you intend
to recommend that Way as is elucudated by contemporary daojiao
writers.
SK
> ..(Maybe he likes you better than me, of course. That's very
> possible.)
It always did seem to click for me... Maybe so...
cheers,
D9
Nadine Kwong
in Dao
(*and* in dao-Ism)
there is neither "victim" nor "victimizer"...;
nor is there
"perp(etrator)" or "perpetratee"...
these...
make no sense;
are worth *no* cents;
and yet...
in all "innocence"...
*compassion*,
what arises...
does so
thru de
workings of
de/Dao
ain't it so
?
so forGET fear...
an' fear no mo'.
it easy here,
in De floooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooow~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~>
try'nah:wer'kit
"Sister Kate" wrote in message ...
> (s)
. My own moment of horror came when I realized that all the
> people I was with at the time were truly bad people -- and they made no
> effort to conceal their doings from me. I realized that they assumed I
> was one of them. This is when I learned what fear is. That was 1981, &
> I have never forgotten it. ..
My own moment of horror came when I realized that most of the people I was
at the time were truly bad people -- and I made no effort to conceal my
doings from me. I realized that I assumed I was one of them. This is when
I learned what fear is. That was for three years until 6 months ago, and I
have never forgotten it but there is no emotion attached to the memory.
Dropped away.
>I think when we are made innocent
> victims, we can often find compassion for the perpetraor. That's the
> only solution I have found.
>
Amen, the only solution I found too. I found compassion for myself and
didn't even need to forgive myself or anything, just learning (mis)steps
along the way.
So be it
Not reborn but revitalized
Jon
lisa
>lisa <oneo...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> musician wrote:
>> >lisa <oneo...@aol.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> I see Cook Ting as having practiced carving the ox so many times that,
>> >after
>> >> awhile, he did it seamlessly (or is that seamfully?) Was it his te that
>> >kept
>> >> him carving until he reached his level of expertise?
>> >
>> >my take:
>> >
>> >cook Ting fell
>>
>> reaching a level doesn't imply higher or lower, just another state of
>being...
>> i'm with jay on this, cook ting did what he did because his nature was such
>> that reaching a level where he could carve the ox effortlessly was what was
>> exactly right for him.
>
>that's what I mean by "falling". There is no effort in falling ;-)
>
ok, i'm with you, if the falling meant that the person had first climbed to the
top of a mountain :)
rgds,
lisa
musician
> "Sister Kate" wrote in message ...
> > (s)
>
> . My own moment of horror came when I realized that all the
> > people I was with at the time were truly bad people -- and they made no
> > effort to conceal their doings from me. I realized that they assumed I
> > was one of them. This is when I learned what fear is. That was 1981, &
> > I have never forgotten it. ..
>
>
> My own moment of horror came when I realized that most of the people I was
> at the time were truly bad people -- and I made no effort to conceal my
> doings from me. I realized that I assumed I was one of them. This is when
> I learned what fear is. That was for three years until 6 months ago, and I
> have never forgotten it but there is no emotion attached to the memory.
> Dropped away.
roses are red
violets are blue
I'm a schizophrenic
and so amI
>
>
> >I think when we are made innocent
> > victims, we can often find compassion for the perpetraor. That's the
> > only solution I have found.
> >
>
> Amen, the only solution I found too. I found compassion for myself and
> didn't even need to forgive myself or anything, just learning (mis)steps
> along the way.
>
> So be it
>
> Not reborn but revitalized
>
> Jon
--
musician
Nadine Kwong
act-you-a-li,
u sound
re-Cycled
'n
re-Turned
ta
me's...
well come Home.
big wheel keep on turnin',
Proud Mary-Nadine
(who hangs out under the big top
as often as she can)
> Jon
nice to meetcha, Jon...
don'tcha know
yer
ming
?
Anders Honore
> Hi AH. You ask:
>
>
> SK
> >>>My personal definition of a person without any character at all is one
> >>>who says, "If you are nice to me mine, I'm a nice person. But if you
> >>>aren't, watch out. Don't cross me." . . .
>
> D9
> >>Guess we have to disagree Kate.. :)
> >>I don't think that's what it means in the TTC at all.
>
> AH
> >Does it matter what the TTC means at all? The words are just pointers
> >and open for interpretation for and against all kinds of views.
>
> Just trying to bring a personal view (Kate's) to bear on the texts which
> are most commonly associated with daoist thought.
>
> Personal views may be informed by the classics of daoism, or other
> things. They are of value to whomever holds them, or they wouldn't
> be espoused publicly. However, arguing that a certain position is
> derived from daoist thought requires some purported connection.
>
> AH
> > If you want to know what Lao Tzu really meant with those words,
> > you're gonna have to disregard interpretation and opinion, and
> > walk the path with a humility for one's own shortcomings on the
> > path, and once you get there, the TTC becomes worthless anyway...
>
> Once the rabbit is caught... yes.
In the meantime, we should settle for separationist tendencies in the
mind...?
> However, dao ke dao, fei chang dao.
> So we all talk about how our feet fit our individual paths.
> In this way, a community derives.
>
> Humans are communal critters.
> We may have enough commonality to walk together for a while.
> We may not.
>
> When I meet myself on the road (coming or going)
> I usually exchange greetings, and ask for particulars.
;-)
A very nice maxim.
Anders
DoctorNine
SK
>>>>>My personal definition of a person without any character
>>>>>at all is one who says, "If you are nice to me mine, I'm a
>>>>>nice person. But if you aren't, watch out. Don't cross me."
D9
>>>>Guess we have to disagree Kate.. :)
>>>>I don't think that's what it means in the TTC at all.
AH
>>>Does it matter what the TTC means at all? The words are
>>>just pointers and open for interpretation for and against all
>>>kinds of views.
D9
>>Just trying to bring a personal view (Kate's) to bear on the texts
>>which are most commonly associated with daoist thought.
>>
>>Personal views may be informed by the classics of daoism, or other
>>things. They are of value to whomever holds them, or they wouldn't
>>be espoused publicly. However, arguing that a certain position is
>>derived from daoist thought requires some purported connection.
AH
>>> If you want to know what Lao Tzu really meant with those words,
>>> you're gonna have to disregard interpretation and opinion, and
>>> walk the path with a humility for one's own shortcomings on the
>>> path, and once you get there, the TTC becomes worthless anyway...
D9
>> Once the rabbit is caught... yes.
AH
>In the meantime, we should settle for separationist tendencies in the
>mind...?
In the meantime, each path that is walked has a Way of teaching us
the Way. Little clues may be had.. they tend to arrive when one is
ready to see them. But the integrity of each path as it is walked is
unique... dao ke dao... so being true to one's own path is vital. No
amount of food from the table of a duke or an emperor will feed the
songbird its required sustenance. So, a songbird looking for its type
of food, might want to know from whence it came.
I am interested in the origin of Kate's generously offered meal.. ;)
D9
>>However, dao ke dao, fei chang dao.
>>So we all talk about how our feet fit our individual paths.
>>In this way, a community derives.
>>
>>Humans are communal critters.
>>We may have enough commonality to walk together for a while.
>>We may not.
>>
>>When I meet myself on the road (coming or going)
>>I usually exchange greetings, and ask for particulars.
AH
> ;-)
> A very nice maxim.
Just another clown in floppy shoes..
<honks a horn and flaps his feet>
D9
try'nah:wer'kit
"Nadine Kwong" <nadin...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:d405e5fe.02041...@posting.google.com...
pleased te meet u 2 Mary-Nadine, nice 2 c u on te dance floor
think I got it sussed enuff to start co'ming along nicely, thanks.
a place to hang me (w)hat.
jon
t:w
Anders Honore
> AH
> >In the meantime, we should settle for separationist tendencies in the
> >mind...?
>
> In the meantime, each path that is walked has a Way of teaching us
> the Way. Little clues may be had.. they tend to arrive when one is
> ready to see them.
Yeah, definitely agree with that. There was a Zen master who once said that
enlightenment is an accident. Practise makes us accident prone ;-)
> But the integrity of each path as it is walked is
> unique... dao ke dao... so being true to one's own path is vital.
Agreed, though I would add that one must always make room for developing the
path. But each person has to figure out what works for oneself.
> No
> amount of food from the table of a duke or an emperor will feed the
> songbird its required sustenance. So, a songbird looking for its type
> of food, might want to know from whence it came.
>
> I am interested in the origin of Kate's generously offered meal.. ;)
So you're the emperor or what? ;-)
DoctorNine
D9
>> ..No amount of food from the table of a duke or an
>> emperor will feed the songbird its required sustenance.
>> So, a songbird looking for its type of food, might want
>> to know from whence it came.
>>
>> I am interested in the origin of Kate's generously
>> offered meal.. ;)
AH
> So you're the emperor or what? ;-)
No way! You're the one with the sceptre... heh!
In this case though, I think I would be analagous to the
songbird. Kate's sustenance may not be the same as
mine. That's why I'm asking questions.. to find out.
D9
Anders Honore
> Anders, you ask:
> > So you're the emperor or what? ;-)
>
> No way! You're the one with the sceptre... heh!
>
> In this case though, I think I would be analagous to the
> songbird. Kate's sustenance may not be the same as
> mine. That's why I'm asking questions.. to find out.
Well, not many can be sustained by the same amount of food as a songbird, ya
know ;-)
DoctorNine
AH
> Well, not many can be sustained by the same amount of food
> as a songbird, ya know ;-)
From the Chuang tzu:
---------------
There was a Sun Hsiū who went to the door of Tsze-pien
Khing-tsze, and said to him in a strange perturbed way, 'When I lived
in my village, no one took notice of me, but all said that I did not
cultivate (my fields); in a time of trouble and attack, no one took notice
of me, but all said that I had no courage. But that I did not cultivate my
fields, was really because I never met with a good year; and that I did
not do service for our ruler, was because I did not meet with the
suitable opportunity to do so. I have been sent about my business by
the villagers, and am driven away by the registrars of the district;--
what is my crime? 0 Heaven! how is it that I have met with such a
fate?'
Pien-tsze said to him, 'Have you not heard how the perfect man deals
with himself? He forgets that he has a liver and gall. He takes no
thought of his ears and eyes. He seems lost and aimless beyond the
dust and dirt of the world, and enjoys himself at ease in occupations
untroubled by the affairs of business. He may be described as acting
and yet not relying on what he does, as being superior and yet not
using his superiority to exercise any control. But now you would make
a display of your wisdom to astonish the ignorant; you would cultivate
your person to make the inferiority of others more apparent; you seek
to shine as if you were carrying the sun and moon in your hands. That
you are complete in your bodily frame, and possess all its nine
openings; that you have not met with any calamity in the middle of
your course, such as deafness, blindness, or lameness, and can still
take your place as a man among other men;-- in all this you are
fortunate. What leisure have you to murmur against Heaven? Go
away, Sir.'
Sun Hsiū on this went out, and Pien-tsze went inside. Having sitten
down, after a little time he looked up to heaven, and sighed. His
disciples asked him why he sighed, and he said to them, 'Hsiū came to
me a little while ago, and I told him the characteristics of the perfect
man. I am afraid he will be frightened, and get into a state of
perplexity.' His disciples said, 'Not so. If what he said was right, and
what you said was wrong, the wrong will certainly not be able to
perplex the right. If what he said was wrong, and what you said was
right, it was just because he was perplexed that he came to you. What
was your fault in dealing with him as you did?' Pien-tsze said, 'Not so.
Formerly a bird came, and took up its seat in the suburbs of Lū. The
ruler of Lū was pleased with it, and provided an ox, a sheep, and a pig
to feast it, causing also the Kiū-shāo to be performed to delight it. But
the bird began to be sad, looked dazed, and did not venture to eat or
drink. This was what is called "Nourishing a bird, as you would nourish
yourself." He who would nourish a bird as a bird should be nourished
should let it perch in a deep forest, or let it float on a river or lake, or
let it find its food naturally and undisturbed on the level dry ground.
Now Hsiū (came to me), a man of slender intelligence, and slight
information, and I told him of the characteristics of the perfect man, it
was like using a carriage and horses to convey a mouse, or trying to
delight a quail with the music of bells and drums;-- could the creatures
help being frightened?'
--------------------------
Not all things require the same sustenance.
Not all paths are the same path.
Dao ke dao, fei chang dao.
D9
Joel Scannell
> musician wrote:
> >lisa <oneo...@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> >> musician wrote:
> >> >lisa <oneo...@aol.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> I see Cook Ting as having practiced carving the ox so many times that,
> >> >after
> >> >> awhile, he did it seamlessly (or is that seamfully?) Was it his te that
> >> >kept
> >> >> him carving until he reached his level of expertise?
> >> >
> >> >my take:
> >> >
> >> >cook Ting fell
> >>
> >> reaching a level doesn't imply higher or lower, just another state of
> >being...
> >> i'm with jay on this, cook ting did what he did because his nature was such
> >> that reaching a level where he could carve the ox effortlessly was what was
> >> exactly right for him.
> >
> >that's what I mean by "falling". There is no effort in falling ;-)
> >
>
> ok, i'm with you, if the falling meant that the person had first climbed
> to the top of a mountain :)
>
> rgds, lisa
>
what I mean is that "experiencing" through means of sticks is all well
and good, but you can also wu your wei ;-) to such experientials. This
is like falling falling. You have to let go, not focus. Unclear your
clarity and let what flows flow.
--
musician
Anders Honore
I have read the Chuang Tzu several times, but do not recall the story.
But I'll be damned if it's not one of the best stories I've heard in a long
long time.
I am definitely gonna upload that one to my website.
Thanks, doc.
Anders
try'nah:wer'kit
"kamerm" wrote in message
> "bookburn" wrote in message
> ...
> > 3. There is a theraputic function involved with projecting one's
> > conflicts, etc., in a psycho-drama, such as where you are brought
> > to understanding of it because it happens outside you and you can
> > see it. For instance, if you have suffered at the hands of
> > others, you may be inclined to cause similar suffering to others,
> > literally or figuratively. We act out problems, it seems;
> > sometimes on a daily basis, sometimes generationally. Just
> > knowing that this is happing can allow you the insight necessary
> > to step aside or climb over the wall.
>
> expectations create a selective filter
> amplifying by responding
> to what's anticipated/feared
> this acts like a lashed "rudder"
> heading one from anywhere
> toward where one's been before
>
perhaps because for many the automatic response, however miserable, is less
feared than a non-deterministic unknown.
the devil you know is better than the devil you don't.
afraid of the dark.
>
> seeing other possibilities
> cuts the shackles on your rudder
> and lets you drift
>
Hey, I can hook up my light air sailing experience too (damned Lake Ontario
summer ghosting, gotta be still and concentrate for hours in the sun burn
:-}
If there was no motive force, if you were a drifter, there would never be
steerage-way. No point in having a rudder at all.
>
> (though the predominant current may or may not
> be carrying you somewhere you'd like)
If I'd just managed to un-jam my rudder, and was drifting into danger, my
immediate priority would be to get up some boatspeed, steerage-way. So she
would start to respond to the helm.
Depending on the wind and current, sometimes that means that you just gotta
head straight at the rocks, and turn aside at the last minute. If that's
how it plays -- just gotta go with it, committed.
Whatever, steerage-way is critical. Movement.
> at the least you're no longer going to the same old
>
> in due course you may begin sailing again
>
>
If yer timings right that is, Phew, that was close.
>
> closer to the heart (as informed by what you now sea)
>
>
Damn the rudder getting stuck like that again.
Thought I'd fixed it last time
First priority when I get home.
And the work that's gone into it already!
Can't afford to replace it yet,
More work still.
Shook up a nice little sailing trip.
danger:crisis:opportunity.
Ha, ha but ain't life grand.
jon
t:w
>
> ...
> > bookburn
>
> -k
>
>
>
lisa
Much clarity in this CT translation. Thanks for posting the whole story. Some
things coming to mind are that yes, you can see that the way of the bird is not
the way of a man, but how could Pien-tsze know that Sun Hsiu was a man of,
"slender intelligence, and slight information"? Is it not the way of man to
wonder? The specifics are unimportant ;)
rgds,
li
>
>
>
>
>
Jaybuzin0000
>doc quoted:
[...s]
>how could Pien-tsze know that Sun Hsiu was a man of,
>"slender intelligence, and slight information"?
in the same way that Zz's bud knew
that Zz knew that the fish were happy.
>Is it not the way of man to wonder?
teh sage chang wanders in wonder
>The specifics are unimportant ;)
here here!
{:-])))