the latest freed

Hello to those who are interested. The tao of pooh is one of my favorite books because it was how i found Taoism. I know i have yet to learn alot about taoism, but i hope to change that. So far i've learned that taoist believe in the natural beauty and use of everything. If i am mistaking, please do not hesitate to correct me. I look forward to conversating with anyone who wishes to.

I made the phrase that I'm going to address bold, just for the sake of clarity. Anyway, it's been a while since I've read the Tao of Pooh, but I do love it for all the reasons already mentioned in the thread. But I think the "use of everything" phrase is inaccurate and should be modified, maybe, to "value of everything." There is a passage in the Chuang Tzu/Zhuangzi that mentions a tree that had grown to be very large and old. This was because the tree was "useless"--that is, it was so twisted and knotted that it couldn't be cut down to be used for anything. It couldn't be made into furniture, or arrows, or anything else that trees are used for. It is because of its uselessness that it was able to survive and grow so large. This, according to Chuang Chou, was a very good thing; according to his classic, one should strive to be useless, rather than useful, for the sake of self-preservation. Then again, the "useless" tree was used for shade, so in some ways, it was still useful. Just in an unconventional way that permitted self-preservation. But there is a general suspicion about "usefulness" in the Chuang Tzu, so I thought I would note it, again for clarity's sake. I can't remember if this is mentioned in any way in the Tao of Pooh, as I can't seem to find my copy at the moment, so maybe someone can help me out. But anyway, thought I'd add that thought to the discussion.

Hi Steve F!

 

I'm digging around in physics books as well. I think it's great to read. There's something that keeps bothering me in all of them, however, it's that there is nothing in there that someone (and generally in physics after all the experiments "someone" becomes a "we") hasn't been the observer of.

 

I guess this might be an old argument, but if all we're ever doing is observing then the "whatever" we are observing can only ever be a product of our consciousness. Whatever it is. A supernova, a black hole, a planet, an earth, a mouse, a fruitfly, a cat, a myself.

 

I think this is not a very well drawn argument but I am not practiced enough in them and I'd rather just say it.I hope that someone will point out exactly where my argument is bad so I can learn to do it better. Maybe it doesn't matter whether my argument is bad but whether I am in fact right...? Or maybe I do need the best argument to be considered right for a while?

 

But isn't observing the universe through our consciousness and then concluding that the universe is consciousness kind of, well, weird?

Hi Kate!

I think your argument is valid. I haven't read the book that is the subject of the topic (so I probably shouldn't even make a comment here...), but from what little I do know about this subject--the universe and consciousness and the power of observation and quantum mechanics--mostly drawn from the film What the Bleep Do We Know? and the preview I just saw for Quantum Activist, they're not so much arguing that consciousness creates reality as much as consciousness influences reality to narrow the possibilities of what could happen, what could exist. I remember from What the Bleep... that there was a scientific study done with electrons fired at a screen of some sort and filmed on a camera; when no conscious observer was present, the electrons were scattered and disordered (which they observed later with the camera, I believe). However, when an observer was present, the electrons fired onto the screen were well-organized and formed straight lines. The observer didn't manifest the electrons or the screen or the camera, but s/he did change the way that the electrons were fired onto the screen. So I guess what I'm suggesting is that the observer (us) doesn't create reality, but shapes it. As Steve F said, quantum mechanics is about all of the possiblities that could take place. The consciousness, according to some studies, narrows those possibilities to a single action, a single path. But as for the formations of black holes and other unobservable creations, I wouldn't be able to comment. I know this isn't an entirely satisfactory--or even complete--response, but it's something I considered in response to your questions and thought I'd share.

Cheers!

Hi there! I hope I'm not coming into this too late. I agree with Marblehead about just recommending the Tao Te Ching and the Chuang Tzu for people who are new to Taoism, as those are the most foundational texts of the Taoist canon (and the oldest, I believe--correct me if I'm wrong). But after you've read those, I'd also recommend the I Ching, which, while often used as a divination text, can also be considered a Taoist work of poetry because of its emphasis on the changing of opposites. I've also read The Tao of Pooh, which is adorable and easy to read and covers the basics of Taoist philosophy in a contemporary format. Those are the ones that I know best.

As for translations, I prefer Arthur Waley's translation of the Tao Te Ching, mostly because my Chinese Lit professor in college preferred it and said that it was the most accurate translation in his opinion, but also because of the beauty of the translation. It blends, IMO, the clarity and the mystical aspects of the text, so that it's mysterious and thought-provoking, but not inscrutable, and the writing is elegant. However, I have five other copies of the Tao Te Ching by four different translators. I like the variety and being able to compare them. My translations are by D.C. Lau (my first), Thomas Cleary, John C. H. Wu, and Stephen Mitchell (whose Tao Te Ching I don't recommend for a first-time reader because it's not a translation, but an inspiration-driven text, where he read various translations and derived his text from those rather than going to the source).

As for the Chuang Tzu, I have two copies by two different translators--Thomas Cleary (came in the same book as his translation of the Tao Te Ching) and Burton Watson, both of which I enjoy. But I haven't read other translations to compare them to.

Hope this helps!

This is just this boys perspective. One thing at a time. You mentioned the I-ching, Yijing. For me it would not matter if it were any other system, cards, beans, coins, computer based, coffe grinds, tea leaves, etc... Here goes, You think of your question in meditation, you manifest it in writing, while connected as an awareness/observer of the infinate void/wuji/dao, cast with whatever system you want, stalks, coins, dice. Read the answer, refer to the hexagram and note any changing lines. Read what ever volume of i-ching/yijing you have. Meditate on the answer, do not question or reject it, in your own words write down the answer next to the question, ensure the date and location are listed. maintain this journal and ask only real pertinent questions several times a week. As you refer back to it, you will find it will reveal more than first thought. How you ask your self, it is just dumb luck, well, let us take a look at the energetics and spiritual component. here you are in space and time, connecting with it and open to the knowledge of the void, with intention (YI) backed up by your will (ZHI) supported by your spirit (SHEN) with balanced aggressive desired focus (PO), with a benevolent wiseness (HUN) you cast the di, for a milisecond all of the components are connected to deliver a very specific reply. Through patience and awareness these simple tools become great aids in life. Feel your way and just be content with your path. Disclaimer: for all the bums that have a different approach or who use it to keep your rice bowls full, sorry, do not shoot the messenger, this is just one boys approach. DQC

Thanks for the advice! What you describe sounds similar in approach to a writing journal that writers keep to study the world, get ideas for stories, and reflect in general. I think your idea to keep a journal of Yijing questions and answers, as well as dates and locations, is very useful for lots of reasons. Thanks again for the tip!

Hi the latest freed.

 

Welcome to the forum.

 

Thanks for taking the time to share your heart with us. It is always a pleasure to make the acquaintance of a fellow Wayfarer (read: fellow freak )

 

What are your thoughts about cultivation practice beyond Taiji? I understand not wanting to jump head first into all the new-agey stuff out there. OTOH I don't know how focused on the Tao your Taiji school is (many really aren't at all).

Thanks for the warm welcome! I haven't really checked out the Taiji school yet, so I wouldn't be able to say just yet. From their website, they seem to be somewhat/fairly focused on the Tao (i.e. they mention it specifically and stress that students will learn about "Asian culture and philosophies" as well as the martial art). But I'm not sure of the extent. I'll let you know after I take the time to attend a class. Anyway, thanks again for the welcome!

Hi everyone. I've been following the Way for about three or four years, since I took a World Humanities course in undergrad and was assigned to read portions of the Chuang Tzu. Since then, I've read all of the interior chapters of the Chuang Tzu (and some of the other chapters) and all of the Tao Te Ching, and also some of the Wen Tzu. Needless to say, my experience with and practice of Taoism has been chiefly literary and internal, and in occasional discussions with my husband. I joined this forum mostly to meet other people who follow the Way. I live in the American South, where Taoists are hard to come by, though I've recently discovered a small Tai Chi center in town (I've recently relocated) and may go there, in order to unite the intellectual with the physical to spur on further growth.

I'm very much into Tao-chia--keeping it simple, reading the oldest classics of the canon, questioning everything I know, making it more of a life philosophy than a religion. I do know how to consult the I Ching at a basic level and I do feel energy. I've read in some of these forum posts that others "feel" the trees, and that really resonates with me. I'm fairly skittish about getting too New Age-y (part of me is very pragmatic and skeptical), but I am open to (and have some experience with) the less-recognized aspects of reality. I've been sensing trees for a while, since I was a little girl. I don't really "talk" to them, as such, because speaking is superfluous. Still, their "voices"--for lack of a better word--seem to come to me in barely inaudible whispers, like the sound is just out of my hearing frequency.

Probably the largest factor in my life experience that led me to Taoism has been my sense of self, or lack thereof. As a child, of course, I didn't have existential concerns; I didn't worry about who I was, what made me singular among everyone else. But once I hit 10 or 12, all of those questions became my biggest concerns. I struggled to find something that was unique to me, and of course I couldn't pinpoint it. A childhood friend of mine told me that what "made" me was the combination of things I liked, i.e. my favorite color, my favorite sport, my favorite animal, etc. But I never felt that any of that defined me--it was more so "window dressing" than anything else, or like the clothing I put on and could take off at any time. This caused a lot of problems for me during my teenage years because I felt like I was the only one who felt that way, who didn't "know" who I was. And then, of course, in college I read parts of the Chuang Tzu--the butterfly allegory in particular--and felt absolutely ecstatic because I realized that I wasn't a freak, or abnormally hollow. My recognition that the "me"--the essential part of myself--is indefinable is a positive step along the Way. I finally accepted that no words can encompass my true self, but it can be felt in the silences; that my true self is not just the body and mind that I inhabit, but everything in reality. I love Tao-chia's lack of dogma, its resistance to defining what cannot be defined and the creation of rules and traditions and formulas out of thin air.

Well, I feel that I've said too much for an introduction. I tend to wax verbose because I never feel that what I say about myself, or Taoism, or my general feelings and beliefs and sense of the world, is ever sufficient. I am always transforming, moving from caterpillar to butterfly only to find that I'm still, comparatively, a caterpillar (if a modified one), so, like Prufrock, I can never say what it is I really mean. Other basics about me can be found on my profile.

Anyway, all this has been to say: I'm happy to be here, looking forward to getting to know all of you, and am making my Way along the path as best I can. Cheers!