Baroness Radon
Although this isn't the post that Trey is expecting -- I have promised a couple of things on Chinese history and the difficulties of cross-cultural transmission of ideas especially in the context of Daoism -- it is something I feel must be addressed at the moment.
Someone pointed out in reply to a comment I made earlier, "Funny that the Baroness is the first to criticize a post, but rarely writes any of her own." I won't deny that's true, and I won't deny that I am frequently critical of and frustrated by some of the interpretations and notions expressed about Dao and other things here. (And I should know better than to get into political discussions.) But I will assert that some of those comments are posts, they are just hidden in the shady valley of the comment field.
Being the yin/female voice of the group, it is my nature to respond, and usually quickly, to the stimulus of the yang/male posts. I call it dialogue and I am sometimes disappointed, (unfulfilled?) when the response goes unacknowledged. I do not regard Daoism as being any kind of static position (it is a celebration of change, really) and unless someone is actually "enlightened" (unlikely here), back and forth, round and round dialogue (with others as well as within our own hearts) is one way we come to a greater understanding. If you don't want to hear other opinions, you are stuck. Occasionally, though not as often as on some forums I participate in, we get a good sustained debate going here. Does anyone really want to hear only one side? Eventually we may all agree, but I think that is a long way off; we are still in the post-heaven world of red dust.
I have said it all before: I am a sinophile; I do not subscribe to the western philosophical/religious Dao distinction; I find no serious worth in popular western Daoism (e.g., Wayne Dyer, the Tao of Pooh, hippie new age surfer self-help Dao); I am interested in neidan and practice qigong; I read the literature of Daoism (the canon) which goes far beyond the Dao De Jing and Zhuangzi; I study Chinese arts and language...and yet I am still "attached" to a liberal Christian/Catholic background. I am not afraid of temples, whether they house Guan Yin or the BVM. (Although I have to say I don't much care for the stripped-down style of very fundamentalist meeting hall sanctuaries...give me my bells and smells!) For the most part, I eschew politics and social activism. (When confronted by a leftist liberal, I lean to the right; when challenged by a ranting conservative, I lean to the left. I am like an old tree with deep roots, but flexible sprouting branches. But I recycle and try to live an economical, fiscally responsible life.)
Through the study of mystics, of the east and west, I find some hope of reconciling Dao and God as ways to live and die. Perhaps these particular questions are part of Lenten fasting and discipline; must go find my Thomas Merton books. (Easter, of course, is the movable lunar/yin bookend to the fixed solar/yang of Christmas.)
While I'm listed here as a "scribe," I do not seem to fit the profile of a "Rambling Taoist."
Having reiterated all that, the question I have for myself, and for anyone who might respond is, do I have anything to offer to you?
You can check out other musings from the Baroness here.
Yes, you definitely have something crucial to offer: your own perspective!!
ReplyDeleteI think it should be apparent to readers that Scott, Ta-Wan (who is on holiday right now) and I share much of the same perspective on many things philosophical. So, our posts often end up echoing each other.
This presents a real danger. Readers who are not that familiar with Taoism may come to the conclusion that our general perspective is THE perspective (even though we continually caution readers NOT to make that mistake).
Your involvement in this joint endeavor goes a long way toward illustrating that there are different perspectives as well. At times, the four of us agree on certain points and, at other times, your point of view diverges from the three-headed male monster! :-D
I often wish we had another regular female contributor to balance better all the testosterone that sometimes gets thrown around here.
I should also note that I am one of the two guilty parties in terms of lack of acknowledgment or response to comments.
ReplyDeleteOften, it simply is a case that I don't have anything cogent to say! For another, I see it that I had my say in the post itself and the comments section is for others to agree or disagree.
Finally, because of my OCD nature, I often don't respond because I don't want to get into a back-and-forth argument or debate. I have trouble letting go and one of the best strategies I've found is not to "get into it" in the first place.
Thanks Trey. I will avoid making any kind of tasteless, and obvious, jokes about "three-headed male monsters."
ReplyDeleteAlthough, I do observe that on the other forums I participate in, the comments and posts probably are about 75 percent of male origin. It is of the yin nature, I suppose, to keep quiet and stay in the shadows. What that says about me, I don't know.
Perhaps baroness, yang experiences a hotter/brighter/more active challenge to balance with yin.
DeleteFor example the Taoist trinity (Child, Mysterious Female & Spirit of the Valley) are all aspects that Yang does not naturally share; being raised as it were with the proverbial Stone Age Club (be it now a weapon/fist, a word or an attitude) as the preferred method of communication/dialogue.
In human terms Yang often seeks to dominate Yin (rather than balance/co-habit), eg.sun over moon, day over night, summer over winter or life over death. Perhaps Yang responds to Yin (in any being) as an owner rather than a partner based as it is at the bio-chemical level in testosterone. Interestingly to maintain a pregnancy in humans progesterone increases & oestrogen (the female hormone) decreases, esentially rendering the individual less Yin & more Yang.
... afterthought. . .
Deletesurvival (YANG) <-----> nurture (YIN)
& yet there are times in our lives, as men or women, that we respond ito survival not nurture or nurture not survival.
'Rambling Taoist' ... Not unlike Plato's Peripatetic Philosophers - I wonder who made the 'padkos'? [pad = path/road, kos = food; aka 'packed lunch']
ReplyDeleteHm it looks like I was misquoted.
ReplyDeleteIt's contradictory that you don't "subscribe" to the distinction of philosophical/religious Daoism, however you clearly draw the line between eastern and western perspectives.
Hmm, that seemed a contradiction to me too, but we humans are contrary creatures at times. Life is paradoxical, and so are we.
ReplyDeleteHaving found that making distinctions between this and that, right and wrong, truth and untruth, has limited me tremendously in the past, I'm more apt these days to ignore them, and take what I will from anything that presents itself, that makes some sense to me. I don't care where it comes from, or what sort of pastiche I end up with. In fact I find it exciting to mix and blend from all over.
But I do know what you mean about the frustration at not getting any sort of a response. And yes, I have often wondered what that says about me too, as it is usually the female element that stays quiet. What can I say, I was brought up by an argumentative Dutchman who expected us to have an opinion, though that meant we often clashed! :)
Ah...dialogue!
ReplyDeleteThank you Jennie, your points are well taken and add much to the discussion. Perhaps, as a femme du certain age, my yang side is struggling to dominate. Women certainly know that hormones fluctuate over time, and with declining estrogen in age, I suppose it is no surprise that I might be coming from yang. I actually hadn't thought of it that way so precisely recently, but you are right.
As to the apparent contradiction, I refer to the idea (expressed by Komjathy and Kohn) that the distinction between philosophical/religious Daoism is an artificial one, created by western (usually Christian) thinkers who didn't understand the place of Daoism in Chinese culture. Daoism is philosophy AND religion; to divide and separate them in an either/or context is a western thing to do. The Chinese don't really make that distinction (although there is the jia and the jiao, but it is more about who is doing certain things, not about the ideas.) There is a continuity in the Chinese view that is not always grasped or appreciated by the western mindset.
In China & specifically Japan, itz the plant oestrogens in ?tofu & seaweed, plus the iodine in seaweed, that contribute to naturally balancing hormone levels. Indicative of why these women have fewer imbalances & live longer, more harmonious lives (Longevity & Harmony are important principles of Taoist philosophy/religion). Naturally balancing & medicinal additives are again a dichomtomy of east/west thinking/philosophy. These cultural stances are part of daily life & nutrition physically but inform thinking & philosophy. I understand that much of "inland" China in uninhabitable & indeed the Emperor Zhu Di redirected the "Yellow River" to relocate his capital to Beijing - not an insignificant engineering & population relocation project for the times. The route was a trade & transport one ensuring access to the Yellow Sea.
DeleteThey were Japanese scholars who made the distinction of philosophical/religious Daoism. It was only popularised in the west by a visiting Protestant. Technically it's not western. Are you western yourself Baroness? That's probably why you assumed it was the west.
DeleteCan you point me to those Japanese scholars and the timeline and context? I suspect that from their position (as Shinto and Buddhist?), they were doing the same thing the western scholars were presumed to. I am influenced by Komjathy's and Kohn's critiques; they make no mention of this that I know of. I welcome additional information as this is a vital topic to me.
DeleteYes, I am an American of Swiss heritage. That's pretty western. And you?
In all fairness, I had to search for luckyponcho's statement which was :
ReplyDelete"...i like how baroness is always the first to criticise a post, yet she never writes one herself.."
Sorry for the misquote, but not sure it makes any difference.
"Being the yin/female voice of the group, it is my nature to respond, and usually quickly, to the stimulus of the yang/male posts. I call it dialogue and I am sometimes disappointed, (unfulfilled?) when the response goes unacknowledged."
ReplyDeleteI guess that's what I think a forum is for, not the comment section of a blog post. On blogs, I might just make one or two comments and that is it. When I come back in a few days, there are several new posts to review and I just don't flip back to the pages containing posts with my comments. A forum is designed better for constant dialog...at least I've found it that way.
"I have said it all before: I am a sinophile; I do not subscribe to the western philosophical/religious Dao distinction; I find no serious worth in popular western Daoism (e.g., Wayne Dyer, the Tao of Pooh, hippie new age surfer self-help Dao..."
Actually, I was introduced to Taoism by these sources when I was seeking new spiritual ideas after pulling out of the American Evangelical Christian mindset. I was first drawn to systems like the Unity Church, Science of Mind, etc., forms of positive and practical Christianity/Religion. Read a lot of Wayne Dyer. I felt so free after reading The Tao of Pooh (I was still attending an Evangelical church at that time, and almost felt like I was sinning, or at least being tempted). Some of this information helped me, but I also realized a lot of it was entirely focused on getting things for one's self (a la The Secret) similar in a way to the Prosperity Gospel of Charismatic Christianity. But within all of the New Agey books I was reading, there was that kernel of truth, The Tao, that was often referenced. I bought my own copy of the Tao Te Chang, and began seeking out books and blogs like this to expand my understanding of what the Tao really is. So I have to at least give thanks that these feel-good, self-help authors I originally read pointed me in the right direction...and that I had sense enough to head that way, instead of jumping on the "name it and claim it" bandwagon.
I've always referred to my interest as being in philosophical rather than religious Taoism simply because I have little understanding of the religious aspects of Taoism. Admittedly, I might be stand offish to religious Taoism because I think of rituals as being empty symbols, just outward actions performed for show and not necessarily evidence of inward change/desire/belief (this is probably left over debris from my Protestant Christian past, you know, those stripped-down fundamentalist meeting hall sanctuaries you mentioned). Plus other than finding reliable books/CD's/websites (and how do I know they are reliable?), I don't have an easy way of learning the religious aspects of Taoism. There is a Taoist group meeting in my state, but they are a two hour drive away. I've sometimes thought of checking them out, and if they are a good source, trying to attend a couple of times a month in good weather.
Overall, when you ask "Do I have anything to offer to you?" I would give a resounding "Yes!" I find your posts and comments on the posts of others very helpful.
Two things. First off, for some odd reason, this comment ended up in the spam folder. Of course, since it's here now, I rectified that!
DeleteSecond, if you subscribe to the comments on particular posts, you'll be notified each time somebody comments. Yes, it's not the same as a massage board, but it's closer. ;-)
Trey, you found 'Joy' in an unexpected place.
DeleteI was pondering the blog/webpage/website distinction & I wholeheartedly agree that blog is more personal, more tangible somehow. Thank you for sharing this space. J
"...this comment ended up in the spam folder."
DeleteMaybe I didn't read those squiggly passwords correctly when I tried to post. Blogspot can make things rough for the "squiggly challenged."
"Yes, it's not the same as a massage board..."
Hmm, a Taoist massage sounds like something I might be interested in. :)
I just left a very long answer in response to your post, but for some strange reason it isn't showing up. Perhaps it isn't totally lost in webland, but may reappear when I next check in; in case it doesn't, here is a very short version of what I said originally.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the new agey teachings by Wayne Dyer and such have much to be desired, but I must add that it was through books such as his and some teachings of churches with a positive, practical spin on Christianity/Religion (Unity, Religious Science, etc.) that I was first introduced to the concept of the Tao. After realizing the shallowness of some of the feel-good, self-help teachings, I delved deeper into learning what the Tao was really about by getting my own copy of the Tao Te Chang, and reading books, blogs, etc. about it. Thus how I ended up here.
I've usually expressed my interest as being in philosophical Taoism because I don't know much about religious Taoism. I also have that Protestant "stripped-down style" still in me causing suspicion of the "bells and smells", as you call it. There is a Taoist group meeting in my state, but it is two hours away. Perhaps sometime I should visit a few times a month to see if they can expand my understanding.
As for your question, "Do I have anything to offer to you?", I would give a resounding answer of "Yes!" When you, Trey and the others share your thoughts, present your differences, and your stories of how you live in the Tao; this is how I learn about it. I find your posts very enriching.