wu-wei

[penfold]

I'm fairly new to Daoist thinking.

 

One idea that has interested me a lot of late is that of wu-wei.

 

Really my question has to do with action.

 

In Zhuangzi I've come across a similar notion of yin-shi ('reacting by flowing' - Gibson).

 

These two notions seem pretty intertwined; for example in Sunzi's Art of War he uses wu-wei in a manner that seems to fit easier with ideas of flow and adaptation than those of naturalness or inner nature.

 

However there does seem, to me at least, a tension here. Passages relating to wu wei in the Daodejing seem to associate it with ideas of simplicity and naturalness (concepts like Ziran & Pu), and ultimately, our inner natures. These seem to be static 'truths' - just as men of antiquity could tap into an inner nature (thus acheiving De) so can we; the implication being that our inner nature is still the same as men of antiquity.

 

Yin-shi on the other hand emphasises dynamic response to situations: "I go down with the water and come up with the water." There is no appeal so something as static as inner nature. Rather the implication is that reality is always changing and we should be fluid in our reactions to this.

 

So while wu-wei appeals to something static yin-shi appeals to the changing.

 

So what is the Daoist ethic? Should the Daoist seek the quiet and unchanging, or should they merely adapt, Chameleon like, to the changing world around them? Or is this a false division?

[lienshan]

In Zhuangzi I've come across a similar notion of yin-shi ('reacting by flowing' - Gibson).

 

So while wu-wei appeals to something static yin-shi appeals to the changing.

Hi penfold ... here are my five pennies to the popular subject of your thread:

 

wu wei compared to not wu wei

 

is like

 

a walk compared to a way

[Marblehead]

Hi Penfold,

 

Here is one way to view the concept of wu wei:

 

Do what needs be done, nothing more, nothing less.

 

Okay. How do we determine what needs be done?

 

Don't expect an answer here from me. Hehehe.

 

It all depends on our goals in life. We all have different goals and desires. We have only two choices: go after all these goals and desires or lessen our goals and desires.

 

To constantly run after our many goals and desires will cause exhaustion. Better to lessen them, I think. So which ones do we trash? Personal preferences, based mainly on our inner essence. I think an important consideration is "What brings us inner peace?"

 

But when we do act or chase after a goal or desire, we should find the most natural way of attainment so that we are not pushing against something that is impossible to move. We cannot move a mountain all at once but we can move it one rock at a time.

[Stigweard]

I'm fairly new to Daoist thinking.

 

One idea that has interested me a lot of late is that of wu-wei.

 

Really my question has to do with action.

 

In Zhuangzi I've come across a similar notion of yin-shi ('reacting by flowing' - Gibson).

 

These two notions seem pretty intertwined; for example in Sunzi's Art of War he uses wu-wei in a manner that seems to fit easier with ideas of flow and adaptation than those of naturalness or inner nature.

 

However there does seem, to me at least, a tension here. Passages relating to wu wei in the Daodejing seem to associate it with ideas of simplicity and naturalness (concepts like Ziran & Pu), and ultimately, our inner natures. These seem to be static 'truths' - just as men of antiquity could tap into an inner nature (thus acheiving De) so can we; the implication being that our inner nature is still the same as men of antiquity.

 

Yin-shi on the other hand emphasises dynamic response to situations: "I go down with the water and come up with the water." There is no appeal so something as static as inner nature. Rather the implication is that reality is always changing and we should be fluid in our reactions to this.

 

So while wu-wei appeals to something static yin-shi appeals to the changing.

 

So what is the Daoist ethic? Should the Daoist seek the quiet and unchanging, or should they merely adapt, Chameleon like, to the changing world around them? Or is this a false division?

 

Other threads of interest:

 

Etymology of Wu Wei

 

Wu Wei

 

Questions about Wu Wei

[Marblehead]

Other threads of interest:

 

Etymology of Wu Wei

 

Wu Wei

 

Questions about Wu Wei

 

Thanks Stig. You are much more organized in that regard than I am.

[rene]

... These seem to be static 'truths' - just as men of antiquity could tap into an inner nature (thus acheiving De) so can we; the implication being that our inner nature is still the same as men of antiquity. ...

 

So what is the Daoist ethic? Should the Daoist seek the quiet and unchanging, or should they merely adapt, Chameleon like, to the changing world around them? Or is this a false division?

 

penfold,

 

It might be that the word "static" here doesn't quite fit and your division as you've guessed is a false one.

 

The dynamic of natural flow also has within it the constant aspect of tao: that quiet and unchanging eternal that is unboundaried in all things. It's not the 'inner nature' that is the same, it's what our inner nature taps into that is the same; the same eternal that is present in every moment and available to all.

 

warm greetings