stan herman

As long as one is going to be hanging around this (apparent) world, seems to me, that I/ego is a pretty handy thing. The trick is to keep the I/ego and exercise it regularly and vigorously, while keeping in mind it's only a paper shell over an empty bucket After your transfer comes through is plenty of time to join up with what replaces it.

I appreciated your description Otis. I too have experienced similar abrupt and strong changes in overall outlook, sometimes even when nothing substantive has changed in my 'situation'. Allowing the variations to play themselves out, rather than cutting off the ones I don't approve has worked well for me over time. The more familiar I become with the habitual patterns ( in their emotional, mental and physical manifestations) the less they control me.

It strikes me how many times in conversations here and elsewhere online and off, I've read or heard people complain about other people being closed-minded, not listening to what 'others' (usually meaning the speaker) were saying. I've voiced that same complaint many times. Just a matter of minutes ago, going through the posts of a number of discussions, I saw it again--3 times in a row. It put me in mind of the following version of verse 2 of Tao. 2. Many people are reflexive partisans. They instantly compare, contrast, and have opinions for or against everything that comes over their horizon. They join causes, take positions and wave their arms about politics, social issues, economics, ethics and other people. Once a reflexive partisan takes a position or chooses a side, it becomes the flag of his ego, so that his own personal sense of victory or defeat, worthiness or worthlessness, becomes dependent on his cause. It is better not to set your stance too soon or champion it too adamantly. As time winds forward there will be more to see than can be seen at present, but only if your eyes remain open. For a wiser course, before you choose a position take a moment to recognize the foundation for other opinions along the continuum. If you are able, consider the continuum itself. Comprehending all opinions will enable you to better govern the arena of debate.

I'm in general agreement with what's been said before. One other thing I've found useful in circumstances of difficulty that seems to be habitual like this. Suggest to your friend that when he first starts to think about meditating, he notes carefully what happens in both his mind/thinking and his body/feeling. Don't try to change anything, or analyze causes, just observe them. It was mentioned that he becomes angry when he prepares, ask him to identify where in his body he feels the anger--chest, bely, hands, arms, wherever. He should then focus on the physical feeling exclusively (not the mental) and sense what that physical feeling wants his body to do--e.g. to tense his shoulders, clench his fists, pull his torso forward or sideways, bend his head or whatever. Then slowly allow that movement to take place--tensing, stretching etc. until it has completed itself. Repeat as required until the body business is done. After some number of trials, he will find a change in his experience.

I like that

Verse 1 Interdependence or Independence Following is a contemporary version of the first verse of the Tao. It seems to me one of the most important because it identifies a crucial issue for each individual--whether to 'join-up' to the prevailing spiritual community culture, ingesting its mores, customs and philosophy or to hold one's core self apart. To choose independence over interdependence. There are prices to pay in either case--lacking community deprives one of comfort and support, holding to community requires conformity. As an old friend of mine said, 'There's no free lunch'. Personally, I have chosen independence--not in a flamboyant way, but in a fundamental one. I have been involved in a spiritual quest for more than half my life. I've studied with gurus and teachers, and explored most of the better-known (and a few lesser-known) 'philosophies' with groups of other seekers. I found all of them helpful, and eventually all of them lacking. Gradually, I came to realize there was no system that was adequate for everyone. I came to recognize too that the founders of religions--Jesus, Moses, Muhammad--all followed a curiously similar pattern. None were enlightened in a group situation. Each needed to go off by himself to realize his truth. ### 1. You can choose how you think and what you act upon. You may center your attention on what is real and valid, according to your own observations and experiences, or you can become a contributor to the latest and most fashionable tower of Babel. If you choose to be a tower builder, you put on the uniform of a particular profession or trade or political movement or social or economic group. You go along and get along. You pledge allegiance to your group's slogans and interpret events according to its generalizations. If you choose to be a reality hunter you place your self somewhat apart from the popular view and concentrate on discovering what is going on beneath the slogans. Both courses have their advantages and disadvantages. If you choose to help build the tower, sooner or later, you will be disappointed because what is supposed to happen (according to the slogans) doesn't happen, and you are thrown on your own devices. If you choose to be a reality hunter you find the hunt is not an easy one, and it can get lonesome. Some choose one course and some the other to travel their lives. A few recognize their equal validity. To respect popular generalizations but not to depend upon them is healthy. To increase your capacity to cope with their crucial exceptions is skill. When you depart from your usual pattern, whether by necessity or choice, the crucial moves of your life are made.

Hmm, can't resist questioning that bit about the same water under the bridge... Considering the process of evaporation, cloud formation, and so on, maybe the same water can. Also a basic question to be asked, can there be an "event" unless it is interpreted by man, otherwise ain't it just undifferentiated action? Just to add a little more confusion.

Yep, I believe in free will--that we can make a choice. And every choice we make is absolutely inevitable. How can it be otherwise? Even if there's an homunculus inside called Willhemena

The responses are Interesting. There seems to be a unanimity of interpretation that 'Oneness' is the meeting of loving hearts and its product is quietude and contentment. And absent (that version) of Oneness there is calamity, which is what we have in the world now. While i appreciate this view and understand its appeal to many, I find it incomplete and misleading. For me oneness (like the yin-yang symbol) does not reject, but contains duality within itself. It includes the rich diversity of peace and conflict, contentment and ambition and all the 10,000 foibles our humanity has been and continues to be heir to. I hope this comment will be considered in the context within which it is offered, I do not mean it as advocacy for violence, but for an expansion of viewpoint. If you disagree with it, I will consider your disagreements carefully. Btw I will post an alternate version of 39 in Tao Now for your comments.

In reading the preceding I was struck by the inherent difficulties in trying to explain the 'spiritual' in words--especially when one is attempting to evaluate the great variety of prescriptions for spiritual growth--moving toward God. So many words, so many interpreters of those words, so many different places on the road (Tao). Perhaps most problematic is trying to fit the ineffable essence within the framework of conventional logic. Are religion, spiritual beliefs and faith aids to realization or obstacles? Which comes first, seeing the connection of all things (as Steve notes), or recognizing that all things are illusory. Are these contradictions of each other, or do they synthesize somewhere outside the framework of logic? At this point in time my own view is that logic and faith(s)--including in the Tao--need to be set aside as soon as practicable in one's developmental process. Rather than believing of disbelieving particular principles or teachings, one needs to learn to suspend both belief and disbelief (at east temporarily) in favor of just becoming available.

Forgot to mention much of the previous text was lifted selectively from Wikipedia. And that I welcome comments both in agreement and disagreement. Particularly those that might help me to expand and extend my own perspectives. Thanks.

40. Each person lives, then dies, acts and then is still. Wherever action leads and whatever it achieves, stillness comes. Action and stillness are part of a whole, each requiring the other in order to know itself, as large requires small, as night requires day.

Yeah, I can see it that way too, mostly, though I don't hear "just do nothing". Perhaps it's because I have an action-bias , but I do believe there is a tendency among most Tao translators emphasizing passivity to the neglect of action. I'm by no means an authority on the Tao, but from what 'research' I've done, that seems to me a somewhat prejudiced view. Consider the Yin-Yang symbol--it portrays constant action. Such action, seems to me, to be perceptible to mankind must involve human volition. Later today or tomorrow I'd like to share some of my interpretations of the Tao history, and hopefully others will join in. For now following this are a couple illustrative 'other' verses.

The thing I most remember about Jung is that he had at least a glimpse of the spiritual, and he countered Freud who believed everything had its source in sex and guilt. That last line of yours triggers a bunch of thouughts in me, but too complicated to deal with here.

38. The person who is sound and confident meets others without hidden intention. The person dedicated to courtesy meets others with practiced warmth and solicitude. The person dedicated to obeying the rules meets others ethically. The one concerned to avoid punishment meets them legally. The person who is anxious for acceptance meets others according to the fashion of the day. To meet others courteously To meet others ethically To meet others legally To meet others according to the fashion of the day. Each of these, in our time, is expertly promoted and elaborated by renouned authorities. And so declines the quality of our lives. The person of stamina is neither duped nor confused. He has his sureness. He owns his yes and his no.

For a not dissimilar interpretation see "Tao Now ..."

Been years and years since I read them. I guess Skinner was pretty much discredited after his experiments with his daughter. Jung was a favorite of mine. My training was in Gestalt (Fritz Perls version). I still find it very relevant to the 'practical applications' of Tao and related philosophies. Not sure what you meant by your last sentence?

Thanks, I'll see how quick I can get demoted. If anyone were to ask me, I'd call you a Dao Doll!

Hello Marblehead, yes I understand your assessment of higher value on past history and understanding of how that influences one's present behavior. For me though, the question "Why?" (when applied to psychological matters) has become less meaningful, even distracting. Seems to me there are always multiple reasons "why", from among which one can choose, and all are always subject to the rememberer's interpretation. But then, my view stated here is also subject to such interpretation

Seems to me "looking within" needs further clarification to be useful. If one takes looking within to mean psycho-analyzing ones self, i.e. head-tripping back to infancy to find the causes for one's reactions and feelings, that is seldom useful and sometimes counter productive. If, otoh one practices 'noticing'-- observing the sequences of ones patterns of both physical and emotional reactions in given situations (e.g. when my friend says so-and-so I get tensed up in my shoulders, and then I get angry) without trying to analyze motives or placing blame, one is more likely to eventually change unwanted behaviors. Re inside vs outside, Just about every interpersonal problem I can think of has 3 basic elements: I, the other(s) and the situation. It is useful to consider each of these in determining how best to deal with the problem.