Thursday, December 29, 2011

Line by Line - Verse 55, Line 3

fierce beasts will not seize him;
~ James Legge translation, from The Sacred Books of the East, 1891 ~

Wild beasts will not pounce upon him;
~ Gia-fu Feng and Jane English translation, published by Vintage Books, 1989 ~

Wild beasts do not claw them
~ Derek Lin translation, from Tao Te Ching: Annotated & Explained, published by SkyLight Paths, 2006 ~

wild beasts can't attack him.
~ Ron Hogan rendition, from Beatrice.com, 2004 ~
Derek Lin explains that "wild beasts represent fear and anger." Newborns know neither. They don't view the world as separate; it is seen as a mere extension of themselves!

As we grow beyond infancy, we learn the art of expectation. When we expect something to go this way or that and it doesn't, this is the point where fear, to a lesser extent, and anger, to a greater extent, kicks in. In most cases, when we temper our expectations, there is no place for anger.

To view the Index page for this series to see what you may have missed or would like to read again, go here.

Who's winning?

Ta-Wan


A company email addressed to the team and from the boss came titled:

A good slogan I just read

"Winners must have two things; definite goals and burning desire to achieve them."

I was tempted to reply with:

The contented person

"sees that to aspire to be a winner is to define yourself as a loser"

You can check out Ta-Wan's other musings here.

Chapter 9, Part 14 - Confucius

The Master said, "I returned from Wei to Lu, and then the music was reformed, and the pieces in the Royal songs and Praise songs all found their proper places."
~ James Legge translation via The Internet Classics Archive ~
Go here to read the introductory post to this serialized version of the Analects of Confucius.

Daily Tao - Knowing or Wisdom

Feeling like you don't know, you seek knowledge.

Knowledge from others is not complete and not your own.

So you feel even more like you don't know.

The wise at this point say “I can't know” and shift their attentions to perfecting this wisdom.

Daily Tao is a reprint from Ta-Wan's blog, Daily Cup of Tao, which offers one post per day for an entire year. You also can read these posts in an ebook.

Is There Death Before Life? I

Scott Bradley


A monk asked a Master: "Before my parents gave birth to me, where is my nose?"
The Master replied: "When you are already born of your parents, where are you?"
(Transmission of the Lamp; Studies in Zen; D.T. Suzuki)

This mondo addresses a common theme in both Taoism and Zen, but adds a novel twist. In the Zhuangzi it is suggested that one return to that which one was before his parents were born. This is echoed in the Zen literature in the question, "What was your original face before your parents were born?" Here, the implications of that answer are brought to bear on the present experience of life. The apparent lack of a 'you' before birth suggests the lack of a 'you' after birth, just as death suggests a lack of 'you' after death.

If we consider life and death as a single thread, that thread stretches into the past as well as the future. Death precedes life, just as it follows it. But this would make death something other than simply the end of life since it already precedes life. The implication is that death is no longer defined in terms of the extinction of the individual, but also as the source of the individual. In this sense, death is a return. Reality after death is a return to Reality before birth.

A you-less past and a you-less future in some sense suggests a you-less present. I qualify this statement because there is some sense of a you-fullness in the present. Yet it is now a qualified you-fullness. You are and you are not. And being this, being what you were (and were not) before you were born and what you will be (and will not be) after you are dead, is to realize the point of Zhuangzi's single thread here now in the present. This unites the life experience "into a Totality", as he has it. All is securely hidden in the One.

This is a strategy for understanding and being reconciled to death. Is it a valid one? I do not think so, if it is understood as somehow explaining Reality. Yet as a metaphor, as an upaya, it has practical validity; it works.

Chen Jen wrote, "Ready to die you are ready to live / Free from fear and grasping / is free to live indeed." When life and death have become a single string, life is free to follow its natural course; there is nothing to fear, nothing to grasp. This is life in its fullness.

When the you-lessness of the past and the you-lessness of the future are realized in a you-lessness of the present, this is freedom. This was the experience of Yan Hui when he exclaimed, "I have not yet begun to exist!" This is the meaning of Zhuangzi's summation of his philosophy: "It's just being empty; nothing more."

You can check out Scott's other miscellaneous writings here.

3W 40

TAO

The Doctrine is the doctrine of non-doctrine,
The Practice is the practice of non-practice,
The Method is meditation by non-meditation,
And Cultivation which is cultivation by non-cultivation.

This is the Mind of non-mind, which is wu hsin,
The Thought of non-thought, which is wu nien,
The Action of non-action, which is wu wei,
The Presence of the absence of volition,
Which is Tao.
~ A selection from All Else is Bondage; Non-Volitional Living by Wei Wu Wei. Click here for more from this book. ~

Wednesday, December 28, 2011

A Response to Yang Rising and Other Stuff

Scott Bradley


After reading the comments on the recent post, I Feel My Yang Arisin', I think it might be worthwhile to share what it was about for me. It was, first of all, a spoof, albeit a serious one. I often attempt to convey what I believe to be interesting or provocative ideas in a less than a serious tone. It is serious, but one shouldn't take it too seriously; the medium is intended to convey this message. Reference to 'Bruce Lee (fl. 645)' was intended to make clear that this post was a bit spoofier than usual.

I have been thinking and writing a lot lately about the Yin/Yang concept, and this post was in some sense a culmination of some of that thought. Unfortunately, those posts have yet to be posted and thus this post appeared without that context.

In my Christmas Day post, Where Are The Prophets? Lo Ami, I expressed a lot of Yang; the Yang rising post was my attempt to express the understanding that following the Way of the Valley, the Way of Yin, does not negate the expression of Yang, but rather makes it possible without its being only and always an expression of the assertiveness of ego.

On another note, this seems like a good time to explain once again that I am online only once a week on average and must do so out-of-doors. Thus, I am unable to answer 6 of 7 comments before they are archived.

With regard to some recent comments, it seems I need to again re-iterate that, yes, these posts are all about me and my issues. I would otherwise have nothing to say. Every exhortation, every lecture, every point made is addressed to myself. I write these things out of my own self-awareness. I recognize these issues, ponder them, and share their possible resolution out of this awareness; they are issues only because they are recognized. There is an element of vulnerability in doing so, but that is also part of the Way of the Valley and this is the path of self-cultivation that I have chosen to follow.

Sometimes what I share may also speak to someone else's issues. But in any event, there is a message in the exercise of discovering and working through personal issues however irrelevant they may be to any one individual. If one is not likewise working through personal issues, he or she is either a sage, unaware of his or her own issues, or is simply not truly committed to self-cultivation in this way. Self-cultivation through self-awareness is not necessarily a blissful endeavor; in making it a point to discover one's bondage, one also increases the burden of that bondage. It is for this reason that I frequently emphasize the larger context of total affirmation and acceptance. All is well despite the bondage.

The object of self-cultivation is, of course, one's self. Dwelling on the issues of others is simply a way of avoiding that work.

You can check out Scott's other miscellaneous writings here.

Chapter 9, Part 13 - Confucius

The Master was wishing to go and live among the nine wild tribes of the east.

Someone said, "They are rude. How can you do such a thing?"

The Master said, "If a superior man dwelt among them, what rudeness would there be?"
~ James Legge translation via The Internet Classics Archive ~
Go here to read the introductory post to this serialized version of the Analects of Confucius.

Tao Essence and the Zen Rot

Ta-Wan


It can't be touched, seen, tasted, smelled or heard. Not sensed one bit. It must be nonsense, make no sense, not sensible, or you're not sensitive to it.

It was what was when you were being a new born baby, when you were making no sense of the world. You were taught separation, gradually, taught to differentiate, name and categorize things, you were acted towards as if you were a thing with a name and in time you adopted the name and accepted your separation. By your adolescence, your sense of self was so concrete that you'd spend nine hours in ten dedicated to your sense of self, comparing it to others, adapting it, dressing it, wishing for it to get naked with and sense some carnal essence. The true self that was being the baby, was being the adolescent, had been ignored like the glass of a TV screen is missed when characters enthrall.

In later life, you saw the world in a new way, the seemingly concrete sense of self was seen to be just a sense and perhaps even nonsense. A wisdom was born that all was one and that this sense of separation was constructed, acts of this constructed self were more often seen as play acting, puppets on the stage, puppets who'd forgotten the same puppeteer had a hand in both.

In time, a seeking was undertaken to discover the lost self, but the methods and even the doer of the seeking were rooted in a world, that of concept, so traps lay at every turn. A simple truth emerged though, so clear, so obvious, so simple, this, is it. Sitting or walking one day, or in some other simple act, painting, gardening, washing potatoes, you were struck. Behind the watcher was an infinite oneness that did not judge, name, sense, rejoice or complain, it enveloped the totality. The being you were when you were a new born child.

In this complete emptiness you were present and whole, yet soon, natural habits began to whirl up from a lifetime of beliefs that only the learned program of 'me in the world' was real. A change had occurred though, the programmed self had met and been struck by a timeless self and the programmed self had a natural attitude to this, it wanted to be, have or use this new discovery to draw it from suffering.

It seemed now perhaps that these two selves were incompatible or living them was unhealthy, the new books you were drawn to spoke of the constructed self as negative and the true self to be something to be sought with all you could muster, in fact the wise on these subjects said there was nothing more important than the discovery of the true self. You thought it through, hadn't you rediscovered it by doing nothing though? Hadn't it just made itself apparent one day through no effort? Wasn't it already the case at birth? You saw this to be the case, oneness was the case, the problem then? Was the constructed self!

Now Zen sickness had set in its rot. You tried to remove you. This terrible joke had you in its grip. Stories of great blissful ones who had achieved this mighty feat of ridding themselves of the constructed self leaving them in everlasting bliss, fueled the very egoic self onwards in the task equivalent to a knife trying to cut itself out of existence. You'd been better off when you were unaware of the true self, you had the act well played, you were the best there'd ever been at playing you. You could not go back though, a window had opened and you could not live this side of it without its presence drawing you to the other side.

So far this story is, in a general case, the story of the common spiritual seeker. What follows is perhaps and hopefully what it takes to end the journey.

You can see both selves as you are the glass in the window, not a third self, but the non-self. You can look out into the projected and constructed world of the conceptual self in the world and you can look inward at the essence. No need to affirm or deny either, the magic is that you are infinite Tao and by way of infinity you can act a role where you are separate. To act the role convincingly and to provide infinity with a show of ceaseless wonder, you forget your true nature and you live out a role where you are not in control. Feel privileged that you can see both ways, enjoy what the show brings and live free of fear as you're, as you came to realize by peeling potatoes, infinite oneness. Tao.

You can check out Ta-Wan's other musings here.

Afternoon Matinee: A People's History, Part 29

The GOP Sideshow

Trey Smith


Much has been written about the sorry state of the current field of individuals vying for the Republican nomination for President in 2012. In many ways, it resembles a sideshow replete with freaks, wonders and human curiosities. Each time one of the main characters ascends to the top of the ladder, the Republican faithful see the candidate's exposed fanny and, almost instantaneously, knock the pole sitter off the ladder!

In their numerous debates, these candidates try to outdo one another in the most ludicrous ways. They enthusiastically reject science, statistics and commonsense. They make up "facts" that almost any third grader could disprove without breaking a sweat. They mangle names and almost all of them seem to have failed in geography class.

Why is it that only the clowns from the GOP circus have thrown their hats into the proverbial center ring?

Writing in The Guardian, Glenn Greenwald my have discovered the answer!
In fairness to the much-maligned GOP field, they face a formidable hurdle: how to credibly attack Obama when he has adopted so many of their party's defining beliefs. Depicting the other party's president as a radical menace is one of the chief requirements for a candidate seeking to convince his party to crown him as the chosen challenger. Because Obama has governed as a centrist Republican, these GOP candidates are able to attack him as a leftist radical only by moving so far to the right in their rhetoric and policy prescriptions that they fall over the cliff of mainstream acceptability, or even basic sanity.
In other words, Democrats like President Obama are the real culprits. As Greenwald points out, on issue after issue, Obama has moved in to claim the traditional Republican turf. Since everyone knows that the Republicans are the right-leaning political party, they have been forced by the Democratic Party to move to the outer right fringe.

So, what does this leave the American voter? If you chose to participate in this rigged electoral system, you get to choose between a Republican (Obama) or a fringe nutcase (the Republican nominee). What kind of choice is that?!

If you identify with left-of-center politics, you're shit out of luck. Even worse, if you define yourself as a moderate -- someone in the middle -- you're in the same boat. The only voters these days who are granted the possibility of a choice are the conservatives and even some of them are turned off by the choices as well.

Line by Line - Verse 55, Line 2

Poisonous insects will not sting him;
~ James Legge translation, from The Sacred Books of the East, 1891 ~

Wasps and serpents will not sting him;
~ Gia-fu Feng and Jane English translation, published by Vintage Books, 1989 ~

Poisonous insects do not sting them
~ Derek Lin translation, from Tao Te Ching: Annotated & Explained, published by SkyLight Paths, 2006 ~

bees can't sting him,
~ Ron Hogan rendition, from Beatrice.com, 2004 ~
Needless to say, this line (and the next two) is not to be taken literally. If you set your child on a yellowjacket's nest, chances are very good that the poor child would be stung left and right! Derek Lin tells us that "poisonous insects represent the sting of malicious gossip."

To view the Index page for this series to see what you may have missed or would like to read again, go here.

Looking Back to 2009: Spare the Rod, Spoil the Wife

Trey Smith
Original Post Date: 2/2/09


A very interesting article, "Biblical Battered Wife Syndrome: Christian Women and Domestic Violence" was posted on Alternet this morning. It explores the issue of spousal abuse within the confines of fundamentalist Christianity and this exploration isn't very pretty.
What is a good enough reason for divorce? Well, according to Rick Warren’s Saddleback church, divorce is only permitted in cases of adultery or abandonment -- as these are the only cases permitted in the Bible -- and never for abuse.

As teaching pastor Tom Holladay explains, spousal abuse should be dealt with by temporary separation and church marriage counseling designed to bring about reconciliation between the couple. But to qualify for that separation, your spouse must be in the “habit of beating you regularly,” and not be simply someone who “grabbed you once.”

“How many beatings would have to take place in order to qualify as regularly?” asks Jocelyn Andersen, a Christian domestic violence survivor and advocate, author of the 2007 book Woman Submit! Christians and Domestic Violence, an indictment of church teachings of wifely submission and male headship. As she sees it, by convincing women that leaving their relationships is not an option, these teachings have laid the ground for a domestic violence epidemic within the church.

Andersen writes from personal experience, describing an episode of being held hostage by her husband -- an associate pastor in their Kansas Baptist church -- for close to twenty hours after he’d nearly fractured her skull. Andersen was raised in the Southern Baptist Convention, where she heard an unremitting message of “submission, submission, submission.” She saw this continual focus reflected in her ex-husband’s denunciations, while he detained her, of women who wanted to “rule over men.” Though Andersen was rescued by her church’s pastor, who had his assistant pastor arrested himself, she says other churchwomen aren’t so lucky, particularly when churches tell couples to attend joint marriage counseling under lay ministry leaders with no specific training for abuse survivors, who instead offer an unswerving prescription of submission and headship, often telling women to learn to submit “better.”
As a former licensed social worker, I realize that the plague of domestic violence isn't confined to any one religious tradition. It occurs across economic, religious, ethnic and geographic lines. However, while some atheist (or even Taoist) husbands most likely beat their wives, the victims of this violence don't have to fight through religious mores and laws to find safety!

In essence, this kind of violence almost is institutionalized in fundamentalist religions. This should surprise no one because these religions were created by men, not women. In fact, if we look at the Judeo-Christian tradition, women are not treated as feeling and sentient beings at all, but as property! Fundamentalists tend to favor the idea that a man (not a woman, of course) can do whatever he damn well pleases with HIS property.

If a person had no other issues with Christian thought, this particular issue should give one pause. Why should women be treated as property or second-class citizens? For that matter, why is God conceived of as a he? It would make far more sense if God was not gender specific. The very fact that a specific gender is indicated should inform anyone that the concept of God was conjured up by members of the gender that is forever glorified...at least in THEIR eyes.

Chapter 9, Part 12 - Confucius

Tsze-kung said, "There is a beautiful gem here. Should I lay it up in a case and keep it? Or should I seek for a good price and sell it?"

The Master said, "Sell it! Sell it! But I would wait for one to offer the price."
~ James Legge translation via The Internet Classics Archive ~
Go here to read the introductory post to this serialized version of the Analects of Confucius.

Daily Tao - Gain Gain Gain

You want to be given wealth and material reward? Go to work.

You want to be fed by the infinite stream and have bliss in every moment? Give up doing.

Daily Tao is a reprint from Ta-Wan's blog, Daily Cup of Tao, which offers one post per day for an entire year. You also can read these posts in an ebook.

Two Moons

Scott Bradley


Yun-yen T'an-sheng (d. 841) was sweeping the ground when Reiyu (d. 853) came up and commented, "You are busily employed, are you not?" Yun-yen replied, "There is one who is not at all busily employed." To this Reiyu responded, "In that case you mean to say there is a second moon?" Yun-men then presented his broom and asked, "What number moon is this?"

Reiyu nodded and walked off. But when Hsuan-sha Shih-pei (834-908) heard the story, he said, "This is no other than a second moon!" (Transmission of the Lamp; Studies in Zen; Suzuki)

Before considering what all this bantering might specifically mean, it might be instructive to consider what this kind of bantering in general might mean. It reveals three Zen masters having fun with words. They are playfully probing one another's insight while irreverently bouncing a Zen metaphor back and forth to see how it might hold together. No one won; no one ever intended to do so. No truth was established; none was ever in the offing. The matters at stake might be as serious as death, but what's so serious about death? We do the mondo itself an injustice when we see it as other than they saw it themselves.

"Two moons" is Zen-speak for dualistic perception. There is only this one moon. The pursuit of another 'self' other than the one in pursuit would be to introduce a second moon. Another metaphor often used is that of adding a head, one upon the other. The experience to which Zen aspires is the integration of the totality of experience in this moment. It is being here now. It is not to be of two, or many, minds, but of single mind. When sitting, sit; when sweeping sweep. And yet, paradoxically, this is not a monadic, but an all-encompassing experience.

Thus, Yun-yen, had he given the 'correct' answer, would have agreed that he was busy. Instead, he threw a spanner in the works and apparently suggested that, though he was busy, there was another 'he' that was not. I could speculate on what he might have really meant (perhaps that nothing is really ever done), but the important thing is to realize he knew he was kicking the metaphor on down the road. This seems clear in his second response where he challenged Reiyu to give a number to the broom. He was declaring the metaphor intact, though he had only just carelessly broken it.

Suzuki, in his reply to the criticism of the historian Hu Shih, declared that both he and Hu were "descending into hell" by way of all their verbal sparring, yet he continued on because when transcendent you are free to participate in the mundane. When you know that words are not reality, you can use them to your heart's content. And turn them on their head when it suits you, too. The freedom to play is true freedom.

Then comes Hsuan-sha with his two cents: This is certainly two moons! Yes, indeed. And you make three! Ha, ha, ha. What do you say to a cup of tea?

You can check out Scott's other miscellaneous writings here.

3W 39

Go to the Awakened Masters - and leave all your baggage behind.
~ A selection from Ask The Awakened by Wei Wu Wei. Click here for more from this book. ~

Tuesday, December 27, 2011

Tao Bible - Jeremiah 18:8

If that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them.
~ King James version ~

Tao is beyond good and evil.
~ possible Taoist alternative ~
This is the second instance in the Book of Jeremiah in which we are told that God will/may repent of something. In order to repent, an entity must accept the definitions of good and evil because the act of repenting is to acknowledge wrongdoing or sin.

Tao has no need to repent because Tao is beyond good and evil. Tao represents -- for lack of a better description -- the laws and principles of nature. Good and evil are human concepts that merely try to understand the Way...that is beyond complete human comprehension.

If you're interested in reading more from this experimental series, go to the Tao Bible Index page.

Chapter 9, Part 11 - Confucius

The Master being very ill, Tsze-lu wished the disciples to act as ministers to him.

During a remission of his illness, he said, "Long has the conduct of Yu been deceitful! By pretending to have ministers when I have them not, whom should I impose upon? Should I impose upon Heaven?

"Moreover, than that I should die in the hands of ministers, is it not better that I should die in the hands of you, my disciples? And though I may not get a great burial, shall I die upon the road?"
~ James Legge translation via The Internet Classics Archive ~
Go here to read the introductory post to this serialized version of the Analects of Confucius.

Circling the Wagons

Trey Smith

We're not on the edge of a slippery slope here. We're sliding down a precipice faster than you can say “Facebook killed privacy and I don't care”. We're all becoming viewed as potential terrorist suspects.

Is this because we are all potential terrorists? No, it’s because those in power understand that they have lost their legitimacy and recognize that the only way that they will be able to hold onto power it is through intimidation and fear. The 1% have never been able to earn power through just governance. The 99% always rebel eventually when the injustices and inequalities grow too great for their society to bear. And even though the elite always lose in the long run, they first resort to ratcheting up their police and military power and start treating their citizens like potential enemies.
~ from Vying for Detention: Two liberal Democratic Senators Give Us a Police State for Christmas by Dan DeWalt ~
The vast majority of Americans believe that our government genuinely wants to protect us from viable outside threats. If those threats turn into reality, the belief is that we will circle the wagons to afford the greatest protection of the citizenry as well as those sworn to protect us.

The imagery of "circling the wagons" comes to us via movies (and later, TV) from the 30s through the mid 60s. Civilians and/or the military would be moving across the Plains and vile savages -- the indigenous people on whose territory was being encroached upon -- would descend upon the wagon train with evil intent. To protect the most vulnerable (women, children and the sick or aged), the train would be halted and the wagons would be placed in a circle.

Those civilians with guns and/or soldiers would take up positions in or underneath the wagons. As wave upon wave of savages made forays toward the circle, our brave champions would pick them off one-by-one. The savages would become so demoralized by the uncanny accuracy of the protectors -- with guns that, historically, were anything but accurate -- that they would break off the attack and our champions would be feted as heroes.

This image has stuck with far too many Americans. What they don't realize is, that in the eyes of the elites, we aren't viewed as the vulnerable to be protected inside the circle. No, they view each of us as the savages to be shot at on the outside of the circle!

As the caption of a photo that accompanies the cited article states: "The new military authorization bill makes the US a "war zone" in the "war" on terror, and makes us all potential terrorists with no constitutional rights, while further blurring any distinction between cops and soldiers."

In other words, you and I have become the savages that the "champions" are preparing to pick off one-by-one and those that survive will be so demoralized that they will allow the elites to have anything they want without uttering as much as a whimper.