Taoism enlightenment: Absolute Happiness.

Discussion in 'Eastern Philosophy' started by taoist11, Jan 11, 2011.

  1. keith1 Guest

    The dao that can be told
    is not the eternal Dao.

    ~Lao-tzu

    I interpret this to mean that one must not discuss what the dao is, or risk getting lost, like taoist11 is lost. I interpret taoist11 to have over-shot the basic concept.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. taoist11 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    49
    Buddha, when he was going to die, said that he had taught nothing. That's everythingness, i.e, what he had said, what postures, what he had written, ect, could not express nothingness. & Lao Tzu, leaving the 5000 words Tao Te Ching, just to suggest, not give Dao (which has two sides nonbeing & being) to others. & Chuang Tzu, to, left book. Similarly, I write Taoism here to suggest only. He who meditates, reach enlightenment himself. Dao that could be taught, the world would blossom.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. keith1 Guest

    Rest assured that the "Eternal Dao" that CAN be taught, is being taught already, without your's, or anybody else's, wordy lips flapping. It is important to understand that, then throw the thought away.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. keith1 Guest

    The Master leads
    by emptying people's minds
    and filling their cores,
    by weakening their ambition
    and toughening their resolve.
    He helps people lose everything
    they know, everything they desire,
    and creates confusion
    in those who think that they know.

    ~ Lao-tzu

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQq_XmhBTgg
     
  8. taoist11 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    49
    Tao, Te, Everythingness & nothingness.

    Dao has no beginning, no end and always exists, i.e, Dao is everywhere, Dao is everything, Dao is everytime. Dao is oneness, just one. Although one, but it is also the most because things and phenomenons, although abounding, can’t not go out of Dao. Dao is a reluctant name since Dao has no form. Speaking and writing must have some forms, i.e, some sound, some words. Existing in a form, speaking and writing are limited, cannot express the thing having no beginning, no end, no form, limitless, the most precise but also the greatest. Consequently, even trying the best to say, to write or any way, we cannot express Dao.

    Below is Daoism in modern astrophysics:

    In a similar experiment by the Swiss physicist Nicolas Caisin and his colleagues in Geneve in 1998, they started by producing a pair of photon. Then they transmited them in a optical cable a photon to North of Geneve and other to South of Geneve. Length of two detectors were 10 km. When going to the ends of the optical cable, each photon had to choose at random two ways, one was short and the other was long. They observed that, in every case, photons had the same choice. On average, half of all times they picked the long way, and the other half, they pick the short way, but they always had the same choice. Swiss physicists believed that two photons could not transmit information to each other by light, because the difference of time they “answered” to each other were less than 3/10.000.000.000 of a second. In this extremely short time, light could only go 9 cm, while the length of the two photons were 10 km.

    In classical physics we know that the choice of A and B must be independent to each other because they can not inform each other. But in reality, it doesn’t. Their interrelation was always perfect. How do we explain that B always knows what A does immediately ? The paradox appears here if we assume like Einstein that reality is not connected. This paradox is solved if we accept that A and B are a part of a general reality, even if the space between them is the largest. A doesn’t need to send a signal to B because two photons always have a relationship via a mysterious interaction. Wherever the first particle is, it is a part of reality like the second particle, even if the two particles are in the beginning and the end of the universe. Quantum mechanics gives space the general property. Concepts “here” and “there” become meaningless as “here” is identical with “there”. Physicists call it undetachment.

    Some physicists don’t accept the concept that reality is general and undivided and they have tried to find weak points in those experiments and the theorem Bell, but up to now, they have been failed. Quantum mechanics has not had any wrongness and so the phenomenon EPR suggests that reality is general.

    In my opinion (HNN), modern physicists repeat the conclusion of Chuang Tzu. Chuang Tzu said here is there and there is here. A great unification.
     
  9. taoist11 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    49
    Taoism in astrophysics (cont)

    Trinh Xuan Thuan wrote more: if inside atoms, phenomena seem to be dependent on one another, in the experiment the Pendulum Foucault, it is shown that dependence is not limited in particle world, but it happens in the whole universe. French physicist Leon Foucault wanted to prove that the Earth moves around itself. In 1851, in an experiment which is now still famous and is repeated in many scientific museum around the world, he attached a pendulum in the top of the arch of palace Pantheon in Paris. Letting the pendulum to swing, the pendulum had a special action: its swing plane rotated a circle in many hours. If letting it to swing in the plane North-South, after some hours, it swung in the plane of East – West. If we are in North Pole or South Pole, swing plane will rotate a circle after right 24 hours. In Paris, because of the latitude, after one day, the swing plane of the pendulum only rotated a part of a circle.

    Why does the swing plane rotate? Foucault answered that this movement was apparent: actually, the swing plane did not change, only the Earth moved. He was very pleased as he proved that the Earth turned. But his answer was not complete because a movement can be described only when comparing with a fixed landmark, because no movement is absolute. Movement doesn’t exist itself, but it moves to another thing. The Earth “rotates” in compare with another thing which doesn’t move. But how do we find this thing? To check a motionless thing, a star, for example, we only need to let the pendulum swings to that star. If this star is motionless, it will be in the swing plane of the pendulum, and by that way, we know that the star is fixed. If the star moves, it is gradually askew to the swing plane of the pendulum.

    We will try with heavenly bodies we know, from closest one to the furthest. If we drive the pendulum plane to the Sun, after several weeks, the Sun will move out of the swing plane pretty clearly. To closest stars, far away from us several light-years, will move our of the swing plane after some years. The galaxy Andromede, far away from us two milion light-years, will move out more slowly, but lastly, it will leave the swing plane. Time passes in the swing plane will lenthen and declination out of this plane has the tendency to 0 when things go further to us. Only furthest galaxies, away from us billions of light-years, in the end of the universe which we can observe, don’t have declination out of the swing plane of the pendulum. But why does it has such a priority plane ? No plane is priority. All directions are equivalent. The pendulum swings in any direction and its plane is fixed not to close heavenly bodies, but fixed to furthest galaxies they may discover in that direction. The conclusion we have from this experiment is very special: the pendulum Foucault controls itself not to its local environment, but to furthest galaxies, i.e, to the whole universe, as most of mass seen in the universe are not in close stars but in far galaxies. Say it another words, what happens in the Earth are determined in limitless universe, or things happening in the Earth depend on the general of the universe.

    Thus, in my opinion (HNN), a little pendulum on the Earth, seems an independent phenomenon, actually, it is united with the whole universe as one. We and the universe are one.

    Physical knowledge of mankind is going to Oneness. The more physics develops, the more phenomena people thought there were seperated may unify with one another. In the century XVII, Newton unified rotation of the Moon around the Earth, rotations of stars and the falling of an apple in a garden were one, because of gravitational force. In XIX century, Maxwell proved that electricity and magnetism were two sides of one phenomenon. Then he understood that light waves were electromagnetic waves. In the beginning of XX century, Einstein unified time and space. Time and space are one. Time lengthens makes space shrinks. He also unified energy and mass: energy and mass are one in the formula E = mc2. All physical phenomena can be explained by four basic forces: weak and strong nuclear forces, electromagnetic force and gravitational force. Physicists are trying to unify these four forces into one super force. In the future, when this will be done, that will be a repetition of Daoism: all are One. (cont)
     
  10. Rav Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,422
    That statement is an oversimplification. We are a part of the universe, yes. Consciousness and self-awareness are features of reality. But they are the end result of a very particular configuration of energy, different from that of a rock for example. Made up of the same stuff, yes, but also distinctly different. Am I one with the rock? In some ways, sure. But in a lot of ways, not at all.

    It's impossible to embrace this statement as an ultimate truth because it's nothing more than a simple and narrow perspective on things. I can say that I am one with my hand for example, because it is a part of my body. It's my hand. But it is functionally different from my foot. And even if I can say that I am one with my hand and one with my foot it does not mean that my hand and my foot are one with each other. They are both a part of one body of course so in that way you could say that they are one, but they are also independent of each other.

    It's more correct to say that I am connected to the universe, that I am a manifestation of the same energy that everything else in the universe is made up of, or even that the universe is kind of like a mother in that sense. It's a lot more accurate than an ancient one liner that was born of a time when people weren't scientifically advanced enough to understand reality for what it physically is. But then again, maybe that's a bit too harsh. I think it has to be said however that it is at least weak because it's an incomplete perspective.
     
  11. taoist11 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    49
    Taoism in astrophysics (cont)

    Thank for your post, Rav. I'm talking more about oneness (or Dao) in modern astrophysics for you & our readers see more about Tao, not boring philosophy. Later, I'll talk about meditation (zen) or taoism practice. In my opinion, that's the techniques to reach enlightenment, to have complete freedom privately. Wait for me then.

    Tao (or Oneness) in astrophysics (cont)

    All things are one. This theory was from Ancient China. Modern physics proves this. Life on the Earth and limitless vast university are one. Trinh Xuan Thuan wrote:

    Mankind are so tiny that they seem to be meaningless. This makes Pascal in the XVII century uttered worriedly:” Silence forever of limitless space makes me anxious”, and to answer this, three centuries later, the French biologist Jacques Monod said:”Mankind disappears in indifferent vastness of the universe, where it appears incidentally,” and the American physicist Steven Weinberg:”The more we understand the universe, the more we feel we are meaningless.”

    It seems that the universe is controlled perfectly for living beings to appear… We need to know that the evolution of our universe, or every physical system, all are because of “initial conditions” and 15 numbers called “physical constants” assign.

    A curve made by a ball flying in the air before landing onto land can be described very exactly. To do this, a physicist uses the laws of gravity and his knowledge of initial conditions, i.e position and speed of the ball at the time they throw the ball. The laws of gravity, in turn, depends on “gravity constant” assigning intensity of gravitational force. Similarly, in the universe, there are 3 other numbers assigning intensities of weak and strong nuclear forces and electromagnetic force. Then speed of light and constant Plank assign sizes of atoms. Next are specific numbers for mass of fundamental particles: mass of protons, electrons, etc… These constants don’t change in time and space. We may check this by observing galaxies from very far. Up to now, we haven’t had any physical theory to explain why these constants have those values, not other values. Those values are given to us and we have to live with them.

    In the limited knowledge of physics nowaday, we don’t see any reason to ban these constants to change in other universes. They have the key role in the evolution of the universe, as they determine mass and sizes of galaxies, stars and the Earth; they determine height of trees, forms of flowers, mass and sizes of ants, of a giraffe and man. Things would be different if these constants were different. And initial conditions of the universe are related to many things which have number of matter of the universe, and initial speed to stretch. Astronomical physicists see that if it changed, even very little, physical constants and initial conditions, the universe would not have life. For example, we talk about initial density of matter in the universe. Matter has a force, gravitational force in opposite with impulse of the initial bang, and makes the universe stretches slowly. If initial density had been too high, the universe would have shrinked after one billion years, a century, or even one year. This period would have been too short, not enough for nuclear piles in stars to produce heavy elements such as carbon, which is necessary for life. In the opposite way, if initial density had not been enough, the gravitational force would have been weak, making stars would not have been formed. No stars, there would have been no heavy elements, no life. Thus, all are based on an extremely sophisticated balance.

    Another noticeable example, that is density when it was formed (in Plank time): this density must have been controlled with exactness 10-60. Say it another words, if we had changed one number in sixty number 0, the universe now would be barren, would have no life and awareness. This amazing exactness of initial density can be compared with exactness of a bow shooter who shoots a target which is 1 square cm put in the end of the universe far away from him 15 billion light year! We have a conclusion that: constants and initial conditions must have been controlled extremely exactly for life and awareness to appear.

    Mankind don’t have to worry before the endless vastness of the universe, but this very vastness helps people to exist. Age of the universe is necessary for stars to live long enough to produce heavy elements in nuclear piles for life. (cont)
     
  12. Rav Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,422
    In a multiverse of an infinite number of universes it is inevitable that a universe would form with conditions that were favourable for life. In fact there would be an infinite number of such universes.
     
  13. taoist11 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    49
    Taoism in astrophysics (cont)

    Oneness in modern astrophysics (cont)

    About unification of time and space, and relativity of time, Trinh Xuan Thuan wrote:

    Time in classical physics were unique, absolute, universal. Time passed by all alike to everybody, and every observer in the universe shared the same past, the same present and the same future. Space and time were seperated completely: time passed by which had no interaction with space.

    In 1905, this concept of absolute time was overthrew by Einstein by his Special Relativity. Time is not indifferent to the universe, but become elastic when it turns to depends on motion of observers. The more rapid observers move, the more slowly time passes by. If a man in a spaceship move with the speed of 87% the speed of light, he will see time passes by as slowly as a half. He will be as old as half of his twin in the Earth. Difference about age is real. His twin in the Earth will have more wrinkles and will have more white hair. His heart will beat faster, and he will eat more meals, drink more wine, read more books. That is the twin paradox Langevin ( the French physicist stated this paradox). But this is a paradox only to our common sense which is easily cheated. Relativity explains slowness of time: the faster speed, the slower time. This is not seen in everyday life, but this is seen more easily with speeds near light speed (300,000 km/s). At 99% light speed, time is slow 7 times. At 99.9% light speed, time is slow 22,4 times.

    Another important change: time and space don’t exist seperatedly. Einstein said time and space are a unified pair. Space is also elastic. Time and space are always supplementary. When time stretches and be slow, space shrinks. If one of a pair of twins in a spaceship moving with 87% of light speed, he will not only be as old as half , but his space will also shrink: to people on the Earth, his spaceship will shrink a half. Deformation related to time and space can be seen as time changes into space and conversely. Space shrinks makes time stretches. From this, the universe has four dimension. To determine an object in the universe, we need not only 3 co-ordinates, but also time when measuring this position.

    Time is slow not only because of speed but also because of gravitational force. Einstein stated this in General Grativity in 1915. Near a black hole, there is extremely great gravitational force, watches of spacemen will run slowly in compare with watches on the Earth. This slowness is not imaginary. It can be seen clearly when fundamental particles move with great speed in accelerators: those particles live longer (before being disintegrated) in compare with when they stay still, and this always correct to the rate Einstein foretold.

    Elastic time leads to a basic consequence: time loses its universal characteristic, not the same to all observers. My present can be your past and can be the future of somebody else, if the two people move in compare with me. As the concept “at the same time” become meaningless, “present” become ambiguous, indefinite. There is no time is prior. According to Einstein, time passes by is only an illusion. As to lessen his sadness, he revealed this view point in a letter written in 1959 after death of a friend Michele Besso:”To us, truthful physicists, difference of the past, the present and the future are only an illusion, even when this difference is hard to shake.” To modern physicists, time doesn’t pass by: it simply exists there, motionless, as a line stretching endlessly to 2 dimensions.

    Not only that, in fundamental particle world, time can pass by two dimensions. Two electron meet, hit against each other, then fly far apart from each other. If we reverse order of events in time, we still have two electrons meet, hit against each other, then fly far apart from each other. The two series of events are the same. Physical laws describing these events don’t have signs of any specific dimension of time. The film of particle world can be seen in two dimensions.

    Thus time and space are oneness, are the chaotic combination of yin and yang, or oneness. (cont)
     
  14. taoist11 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    49
    De (te) & Wu wei of Taoism.

    Thus time and space are oneness, are the chaotic combination of yin and yang, or oneness.

    As we know, Dao, the chaos of yin and yang is the essence of the world. But why are things so multiform ? That is because of De (Te). In Daoism, De is what nature or Dao give to things, people. For example, fire is Dao, its De is hot and bright. Water is Dao, its De is flexible and is good solvent for many substances. A magnet is Dao, its De is attracting iron. Each individual has his own De, i.e, his own things innate, his own talent, his own natual endowments, his own tastes. It is impossible that things don’t do so is what we call De. For example, fire is bright naturally; it must do so; things which are not bright are not fire. A magnet must attracts iron; if it doesn’t, it is not a magnet. De is what things get from Dao, what man gets from Dao, or nature. Say it another words, De is Dao manifests in each man, each thing. Dao and De, although different names, are oneness in a thing, in an individual. Thus, the world is one, not many. Things, phenomenons, humankind, although numerous, multiform, but all are Dao. In change, there is unchange, there is oneness lasting forever, and constant. But remember this: De does not make things, phenomenons, people become good or bad, or not become yin or yang. For instance, a magnet attracts iron , but this is not good nor bad. Magnets rotates and produce electricity. Electricity is used to run radio, TV, computer, telephone, cell phone, etc… sounds good. But without electricity, Hitler could not produce a great deal of weapons using to kill millions of people in the world war II, or say it another words, electrictiy, or magnets are not good nor bad, or they are nothingness.

    Based on Dao and De, how does a Daoist act ? As we disscussed above, we can’t do the bad: the society punish us, but if we do the good, this means we do the bad. As a result, Daoism suggests wu wei. In Vietnamese, it is called “vo vi” which means “doing nothing” literally. Actually, wu wei doesn’t mean so. It has four meanings:

    1. Each thing, each person has De, has his own nature, so we don’t need to interfere him to help. The nature of humankind is to interfere others noisily. Sages who rule a country, they would let people follow their natures, would not need to teach, to correct people.
    2. Follow the nature of us. That is to do but not do, not reluctant. Be coldheaded, not to let things affecting our minds. Live the life of us fully without wanting things outside. If doing it well, then follow nature for things to be as calm as us, i.e, let things live their natures, not to force them to follow our wills. That is “to rule by wu wei”, “do nothing but nothing is not done”, follow the nature of things to change, so although we do but we follow the nature, thus we are like we don’t do anything. Doing that way, we can’t say we do anthing.
    3. Ruling people the way above, people do not know we do as the Sun shines naturally helping everything to live but the sun doesn’t know its service because it is impossible that the Sun doesn’t do so.
    4. Three meanings above are wu wei passively. Wu wei actively is to destroy all blocking freedom and equality for mankind.

    However, wu wei is hard to practise to ordinary people. Ordinary people love the good, hate the bad or love the bad, hate the good. Persons enlightened in Daoism wu wei naturally, never reluctantly as they see goodness and badness are nothingness, so they don’t interfere others. He is not the good, therefore he doesn’t killl the bad. He is also not the bad, therefore, he does not do badness. Wu wei is not doing nothing, but is to follow Dao, follow the nature, follow world’s laws, follow the law all are nothingness.
     
  15. taoist11 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    49
    Wu Wei (cont)

    Wu wei (cont)

    This chapter is the most abstract of the book. I don’t want so, but I have to. And Dao is the practical life, therefore I would like to be realistic by telling you readers an example of Wu Wei, for you to see how a Daoist act in real life like you see … bread. For instance, if in a couple, the wife, as she misunderstands the husband, wants to divorce him, what does he do to practise Wu Wei ? When getting married, the husband thought that because of happiness, they married. Now, also because of her happiness, she leaves. OK, leave me. But he is not unhappy, because if he is an Taoist, his mind is nothingness. Though he tries the best, he still does not feel unhappy, like the Zen master Hakuin in the preface above. Since he is not unhappy, he doesn’t hate the wife. Then he waits for several months, several years and observes the wife. During that time, as he is balanced, he doesn’t make any scandal and he works well to make sure he may supply money for the family. He prepares well for the family, then asks the wife:”Hey, darling, come back?” If the wife says “yes”, they live together again. In both cases, leaving him and come back to him, all are ok, peaceful,since all are for happiness.He never feels reluctant. Leaving or coming back all are ok.That is Wu Wei.

    Wu Wei sounds “new” and very different from normal persons’ solutions. A couple of my folks have been divorced for decades but they are now still reproaching with each other. I often hear the first wife curses the second wife “the mare” and I smile, thinking to myself “Oh, God! Being stuck with dualisms, she can’t go beyond the misery. But I give you this book, discussing the truth, leaving all misery far from you, but you think that I am young and inexperienced (she is 17 years older than me), you don’t need to read mine. All life you hurt but I can not help you although I have the best solution here.”

    After discussing the truth, we go to the section how a Daoist is like in real life; how he applies Dao in everyday like, and how is his inner world like. The key point is how Dao affects a man in real life.
    (cont)
     
  16. taoist11 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    49
    The True Men: Enlightened daoists.

    People who are enlightened in Taoism:

    Chuang Tzu called a Daoist is aTrue Man. Let’s see he wrote about True Men in his book.

    “But what is a true man? The true men of old did not override the weak, did not attain their ends by brute strength, and did not gather around them counsellors. Thus, failing they had no cause for regret; succeeding, no cause for self-satisfaction. And thus they could scale heights without trembling, enter water without becoming wet, and go through fire without feeling hot. That is the kind of knowledge which reaches to the depths of Tao.
    The true men of old slept without dreams and waked up without worries. They ate with indifference to flavour, and drew deep breaths. For true men draw breath from their heels, the vulgar only from their throats. Out of the crooked, words are retched up like vomit. When man's attachments are deep, their divine endowments are shallow.
    The true men of old did not know what it was to love life or to hate death. They did not rejoice in birth, nor strive to put off dissolution. Unconcerned they came and unconcerned they went. That was all. They did not forget whence it was they had sprung, neither did they seek to inquire their return thither. Cheerfully they accepted life, waiting patiently for their restoration (the end). This is what is called not to lead the heart astray from Tao, and not to supplement the natural by human means. Such a one may be called a true man. Such men are free in mind and calm in demeanor, with high fore heads. Sometimes disconsolate like autumn, and sometimes warm like spring, their joys and sorrows are in direct touch with the four seasons in harmony with all creation, and none know the limit thereof. And so it is that when the Sage wages war, he can destroy a kingdom and yet not lose the affection of the people; he spreads blessing upon all things, but it is not due to his (conscious) love of fellow men. Therefore he who delights in understanding the material world is not a Sage. He who has personal attachments is not humane. He who calculates the time of his actions is not wise. He who does not know the interaction of benefit and harm is not a superior man. He who pursues fame at the risk of losing his self is not a scholar. He who loses his life and is not true to himself can never be a master of man. Thus Hu Puhsieh, Wu Kuang, Po Yi, Shu Chi, Chi Tse, Hsu Yu, Chi T'o, and Shent'u Ti, were the servants of rulers, and did the behests of others, not their own.
    The true men of old appeared of towering stature and yet could not topple down. They behaved as though wanting in themselves, but without looking up to others. Naturally independent of mind, they were not severe. Living in unconstrained freedom, yet they did not try to show off. They appeared to smile as if pleased, and to move only in natural response to surroundings. Their serenity flowed from the store of goodness within. In social relationships, they kept to their inner character. Broad-minded, they appeared great; towering, they seemed beyond control. Continuously abiding, they seemed like doors kept shut; absent-minded, they seemed to forget speech. They saw in penal laws an outward form; in social ceremonies, certain means; in knowledge, tools of expediency; in morality, a guide. It was for this reason that for them penal laws meant a merciful administration; social ceremonies, a means to get along with the world; knowledge a help for doing what they could not avoid; and morality, a guide that they might walk along with others to reach a hill. And all men really thought that they were at pains to make their lives correct.
    For what they cared for was ONE, and what they did not care for was ONE also. That which they regarded as ONE was ONE, and that which they did not regard as ONE was ONE likewise. In that which was ONE, they were of God; in that which was not ONE, they were of man. And so between the human and the divine no conflict ensued. This was to be a true man. “(Quoted Chuang Tzu by Lin Yutang)
     
  17. taoist11 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    49
    The true men: Enlightened Daoists

    The difference between a Daoist and an ordinary person is that Daoist sees he is Dao, the chaos of yin and yang, not distinguished, no nature. This having-no-nature thing, of course, has one side is nonbeing and this nonbeing is the left side which the right side is being, therefore a Daoist sees he is nothingness. This is the key point to infer all his inner world and his actions. To know one leading to know all is here. In compare with an ordinary person, an ordinary person considers, hopes that he is good, or he feels inferiority complex that he is bad. This makes a Daoist different to all. As a Daoist feels he is nothingness, he doesn’t love himself nor hates himself. Since he sees everybody is Dao, is the chaos of goodness and badness, he doesn’t hate anybody, even the minority.Because doing goodness is doing badness, Daoists don’t need to find goodness or fame. In general, a Daoist works to earn money for life, but to do things noisily to be famous, he doesn’t. Corruption, stealing, wasting, v.v… those sins, Daoists feel unknown. Daoists are not goodness, so they feel strange when others serve them in a corrupt way. As a Daoist sees money is Dao, the chaos of goodness and badness, he doesn’t love nor hates money. Not loving money, he never steal things, money. As a consequence, he is frank. Since he sees money is not good and he doesn’t love it, he acts the way “ failing they had no cause for regret; succeeding, no cause for self-satisfaction.” In any situation, they are composed, free, and calm. If they are on a boat in the vast sea, the boat is pierced, Daoists will not fear death. There is birth, there is dead; birth and dead are oneness. Dao is the chaos of living and dead; everybody has the cause of death inside, or germs, Daoists foresee, so they are always calm. Consequently, Chuang Tzu wrote:” enter water without becoming wet, and go through fire without feeling hot. “ A Daoist enters water, still he is wet, and goes throught the fire, he is burnt like everybody. Daoists are like ordinary people, also obeying physical laws, but if threatening them by putting them into water until they die, or to burn them, they don’t fear. The evidence of this is Chuang Tzu was so poor that he had to borrow rice; he was still hungry like everybody, not a god that fire could not burn. Chuang Tzu was an ordinary person, not a god as Daoist religion makes him.

    I eat, breathe like an ordinary person, nothing strange. I’m different from my folks that in my mind, I see the chaos of the good and the bad, advantages and disadvantages, honour and shame, failing and succeeding, the right and the wrong, …, nothing distinguishing, no nature, so it is called to see nothingness. Because my mind is nothingness, very true, so when I see people around me who are eager with something, love something, love somebody and so hate somebody, and hating leads to misery, I see that they don’t understand the truth throughly. For example, can Vietnamese love Viet Nam ? Wrong. It is impossible to love Viet Nam. Viet Nam is chaotic; heroes jumble up with monsters in it. VietNam has not had an golden era, not the good. It is not good, how do they love it ? Therefore, nation and people, Daoists abolished long time ago. There is love, there is hatred. The person hating somebody, how do we call him a True Man ? As a result, Daoists treat every people equally; they don’t hate any people nor love any people. Because they are not close to any people, they are not strange to any people and they treat everybody the way they treat themselves. Treating everybody like themselves, that is “to wage war, they can destroy a kingdom and yet not lose the affection of the people.” For instance, to confront with an invasion, although the Daoist has the relatives killed by the enemy, still he wont hurt because his mind is empty, so he won’t feel hatred for the enemy. Not feeling hatred, he uses grace to influence the enemies, like the story Watering the melons for others:

    “Tong Tuu was an official in a district near the border of Luong state and So state.
    The two heads of communal house in the village of Luong state and So state plan melons. The one in Luong was hardworking and water the melons well so the melons were good. The one in So was lazy and water badly so the melons were bad.
    The official in So, seeing goodness in Luong and badness in So, felt angry. The head of communal house in the village in So saw Luong’s melons were better, he envied, therefore, at nights he went to Luong secrecly and destroyed Luong’s melons and some Luong’s melons were faded and died.
    Then the head of the communal house in the village in Luong knew that, telling the official, intending to destroyed So’s melons. The official said it to Tong Tuu. Tong Tuu said:
    - Oh! Why is it so ! Doing like that only make hatred, get misfortune. Now I tell you, don’t go there to destroy their melons. At night, go there secrectly and water their melons but don’t let they know.
    The head of the communal house in the village followed him.
    Then the melons in So became better and better. The head of communal house in the village in So was surprised; he investigated many times and found out that the one in Luong came to help.
    The official in So knew the affair well, and he was pleased. He reported to the So’s king.
    The So’s king knew that; he felt sad and ashamed, thinking:”Not only destroying their melons, they must also did many other things sinful.”
    The king then brought treasures to confess their faults and made peace. Luong’s king also believe in them. As a consequence, the two countries stayed in peace for a long time.
     
  18. EmptyForceOfChi Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,848
    Lao Tzu's Dao De Jing was a fine attempt for a human to understand the workings of the most high, but he himself lacked the ability to shine with the eternal light on this earth. You see Lao Tzu himself was a depressed and dull individual who did not have complete inner happiness, he lacked this happiness because he was stuck in the paradox of cycles and his mind did not truly have faith in the creator.

    The chicken and the egg can be unhealthy to the philosopher if he does not understand how to break the cycle ^_^.



    Peace
     
  19. Lady Historica Banned Banned

    Messages:
    85
    The dao that can be told is the dao that one can hold. The fact as it is that someone can tell but chooses not to would only suggest something came unsheathed and must have its mark such as a Sikh carries his knife. He uses the simple statement to show a dislike for the "need" of war against the cycles for birth and rebirth of man.

    I say put down that knife and grab a Lady.
     
  20. Emil Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,789
    First was the egg. :itold:
     
  21. Lady Historica Banned Banned

    Messages:
    85
    Maybe the shell/border itself, but not the whole chicken.(=
     
  22. taoist11 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    49
    The True Men: Enlightened daoists.

    Old saying says:”Change failing into succeed; on the occasion of unluck, make luck”. Lao Tzu said:”Require evil with good”. The two sayings are this story.
    Oh! They are not right; why do we repeat them!”

    But Daoists practise charity not because they love others, different from Confucianists, always “humanity, rites, righteousness, wisdom, faithfulness”. Daoists’ minds are empty. Chuang Tzu, highest founder of Daoism described that mind mightily in the story The boat hitting the ferry:

    “A ferry is crosses the river. There is a boat, noone in, from elsewhere drifts to, hits the ferry. The man driving the ferry, although he is very narrow hearted, still he doesn’t get angry. If there was somebody in the boat, the man in the ferry would swell his cheeks,would glower, would yell, once, twice, three times then would curse badly.
    Two cases are the same, but the first, he was not angry then the second, he was angry. Why ? Because in the first case, there is nobody in the boad; in the second case, there is somebody in it..

    If they are just calm, having no personal opinions, who can harm them in this life?”

    But not only always do goodness, always require evil with good, but also do badness to be balanced. Taoists are not goodness. After requiring evil with good, enemies still don’t understand, then Taoists return like for like, no fixed direction, as Dao has no direction. In Viet Nam war, there were not two battles alike. But Daoists are different from unenlightened persons as they have the ability of requiring evil with good all the time since they don’t feel hatred to anyone, even to enemies.

    Another speciality of Daoists are that they are not humble. Being humble is good and being arrogant is bad. Daoists don’t follow the good, therefore they are not modest. Being modest is a yang attitude, is being, existing in a form, while Daoists are formless, nothingness. Daoists speak what they see, not to do goodness, do great work but speak less. When they are humble, they practise politeness, to avoid conflicts with life, to avoid misunderstanding that they are arrogant, have high opinion of themselves. Actually, being humble is very bad. The art of war says being a general must be modest, never be arrogant. Being arrogant when leading army is very bad because in that case the general sees all services of the army is his, from his, then he doesn’t praise soldiers and officers. His inferiors won’t sacrifice for the general any more. Good generals are modest. But if talented generals always be glorious ? No. Sometimes I see they were spoken evil, they were killed brutally in history. Remember Roman famous Aetius and Confucius. In ancient China, I always see other talented generals like that. Ngo Khoi, as greatly talented as saint founder Sun Tzu, at the end of his life, he was arrow-shot until he died. Ton Tan, highly talented, was envied by classmate Bang Quyen as Bang Quyen feared that Ton Tan would work better, leading army of some king to be the dominator, so Bang Quyen cut Ton Tan’s legs. Tin Lang Quan leading army of several states to fight against Tan state, the most powerful state in ancient China. He provoked Tan but Tan did not dare to fight with him. Tin Lang Quan was famous greatly through China that time as the strongest general but after that Tan use treasures to bribe some official in his state to speak evil of him to the king, making the king fear that Tin Lang Quan would be the greatest, the king, then of course the king did not appoint him as a general any more. Lastly, feeling boring, he just spent all his time to drink and have sex with many beautiful women until he died uselessly. Confucius was as modest as he had no ego, but he couldn’t take part in politics as other states always fear him. He was so dangerous to others. In general, modesty is evil, like the law yin is yang and yang is yin. Because Daoists see that clearly, they are not modest. When being modest, they follow politeness, the outside, not the inside, the main thing, i.e, Dao, to avoid conflicts with others. The main part is they we wei naturally. To practise modesty is to wanting other to follow, i.e, to interfere life, not wu wei; that is still put a strong will on life. But life is a chaotic mixture of yin and yang, not follow any strong will, therefore any will, although good or bad, will disappear, will fade, will be destroy. The universe doesn’t follow any will, how does a person can force others to follow his will? Any strong will will be broken. Modest will will be broken.

    Not modest nor arrogant, but to confess themselves that they are enlightened, is it having high opinion of themselves ? No. To be enlightened is to see nothingness only, not goodness. I have seen some Buddiest monks. They said that I confess that I am enlightened, that is I am arrogant. To speak like that is unenlightened. I see I am nothingness, I confess I am nothingness, not goodness. Since I don’t confess that I am good, how can others say I am arrogant ? Daoists speak as they see, speak what they see, how can they confess that they still exist in a form, i.e, still be existence ? Existence is modesty and arrogance while Daoists are not modest or arrogant.
     

Share This Page