dawei

Five Important Themes of the DDJ

Recommended Posts

-

Actually, my question was upstream a few levels. IYO - does "tao" include non-differentiation and potential? Or to you is the stream more like: Tao > *bang!* > (non-dif + potential) > (polarity-chi? + non-dif + potential) > (10,000 things + polarity + non-dif + potential) etc... well okay that was really lame so never mind (unless you can see what I'm asking). ^_^

 

Great question...

 

Non differentiation + potential comes "earlier" and is part of "raw Tao". Potential which at "lower layers" becomes energy or chi is part of the differentiation process. It can also be thought of as the motion (or change of state) of Tao. Physical existence (10,000 things) is the further refinement (or vibration) of energy. Everything exists, but it is really just the mind interpretation of the movement (or vibrations) of Tao.

 

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:D

 

This place is the wild west. Pretty much shoot at anything you like...

 

:)

 

I wish. Even in the land of the free - America - you'd be wise not to do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So we are talking about the Dao and the female principle....over to you folks.

 

I would suggest that the female/male principle separation can be seen in the void and silence. With the void being most naturally thought of as the "female" part of creation.

 

:)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We like to think of ourselves as free thinkers. There are many different POVs and opinions to be seen here. The reader has the choice of participating in or ignoring any of the threads. See something you don't agree with? Question it. I even question myself now and again.

 

Ok, I'll take your word for it and find out how much elbow room there is in this sandbox.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would suggest that the female/male principle separation can be seen in the void and silence. With the void being most naturally thought of as the "female" part of creation.

 

:)

Let's not be gross, Jeff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey thanks, FH!

 

For me, Tao is right.....

 

One can't imagine the amount of time that has passed when all that existed was exactly nothing. There was no sound, no dimension, no light, completely nothing.

 

Then for some reason within this there was a small vibration. < Here! Both the 'reason' and the 'vibration'!

 

Over the millions of years this vibration grew stronger and stronger. [...]

 

so...

{nothing} > Tao > *bang!* > (non-dif + potential) > (polarity + non-dif + potential) > (10,000 things + polarity + non-dif + potential) > ...

 

kewl. :)

 

Since the 'original vibration' is still in all things, I can see how one might feel the 'female' aspect arose farther upstream indeed!

Edited by rene

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey thanks, FH!

 

For me, Tao is right.....

 

 

 

so...

{nothing} > Tao > *bang!* > (non-dif + potential) > (polarity + non-dif + potential) > (10,000 things + polarity + non-dif + potential) > ...

 

kewl. :)

 

Since the 'original vibration' is still in all things, I can see how one might feel the 'female' aspect arose farther upstream indeed!

I see the order a little differently... with Dao as the overall generative, transforming, unfolding process:

 

The transforming process of Dao:

{nothing} > (non-dif + potential) > *bang!* > (polarity + non-dif + potential) > (10,000 things + polarity + non-dif + potential) >

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's not be gross, Jeff.

Just think Yin and Yang if Female and Male throws you off... but it is just a word exchange in the end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see the order a little differently... with Dao as the overall generative, transforming, unfolding process:

 

The transforming process of Dao:

{nothing} > (non-dif + potential) > *bang!* > (polarity + non-dif + potential) > (10,000 things + polarity + non-dif + potential) >

 

I like that, too; it sets Dao as a facilitator of the process. Do you think, then, that Dao would have been present in the {nothing} ? Or did it just mysteriously form (ddj25) to get the ball rolling?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like that, too; it sets Dao as a facilitator of the process. Do you think, then, that Dao would have been present in the {nothing} ? Or did it just mysteriously form (ddj25) to get the ball rolling?

That's a great question which we don't see discussed so much.

 

I'll tell you my inclination but I am willing to be wrong.

 

I am inclined to think that Dao is the essential transforming process in every state; Wu to You. It does not itself arise because it is simply the process of transformation. But in the void, the process is dormant; so Dao is akin to a sleep state. You'll see where I get this idea from in a minute...

 

Now... when we look at the opening of DDJ25 it may suggest as some have translated that 'something was formed', but most translations are ambiguous enough to not explicitly say if they mean Dao formed or simply that something formed and this formative process is called Dao. There are some translations which clearly state the latter and I lean towards the latter formative process.

 

There are two great ancient cosmologies which are worth referring to when talking about beginnings. The Tai Yi Sheng Shui and the Huainanzi. The former is interesting due to its detail and it has some of the same lines as DDJ25 in some parts. We talked about this work in the subforum and one can look there (The Water Book). The focus of that is Tai Yi (Great One) and Dao appears as simply the process-part.

 

In the latter work, the focus is on Tai Zhai (what I call the Primal Illumination) and I translate the opening lines as:

 

Prior to the Opening of the Universe

and pouring down of all life forms

This is called the Primal Illumination.

Dao awoke in this boundless void.

The boundless void gave rise to the cosmos;

The cosmos gave rise to [Primal] Qi.

[Primal] Qi spread as a shoreline.

That which was clear and bright formed into Heaven;

That which was heavy and impure formed into Earth.

It is easy for that which is clear and bright to uniformly gather [as the sky]

But difficult for the heavy and impure to solidify [as earth and matter].

 

 

I stick to the idea that Dao was there in the void but it's transforming nature was dormant (void); and when some *bang!* occurs (Primal Illumination) it is because Dao woke up (transforming begins).

 

Now, I will further say that to me, Dao is not the highest level as it is the process-part which keeps to whatever state it is in... And as the process-part it is part of a larger whole. Some call this divine (but not the western religious context) or The Great One or The Great Unity, etc.

Edited by dawei

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dawei. You have just concisely and precisely described the essence of the origin of one-half of what I point at with the word "both". I have never seen it in words before this. Thank you.

 

:)

 

 

That's a great question which we don't see discussed so much.

 

I'll tell you my inclination but I am willing to be wrong.

 

I am inclined to think that Dao is the essential transforming process in every state; Wu to You. It does not itself arise because it is simply the process of transformation. But in the void, the process is dormant; so Dao is akin to a sleep state. You'll see where I get this idea from in a minute...

 

Now... when we look at the opening of DDJ25 it may suggest as some have translated that 'something was formed', but most translations are ambiguous enough to not explicitly say if they mean Dao formed or simply that something formed and this formative process is called Dao. There are some translations which clearly state the latter and I lean towards the latter formative process.

 

There are two great ancient cosmologies which are worth referring to when talking about beginnings. The Tai Yi Sheng Shui and the Huainanzi. The former is interesting due to its detail and it has some of the same lines as DDJ25 in some parts. We talked about this work in the subforum and one can look there (The Water Book). The focus of that is Tai Yi (Great One) and Dao appears as simply the process-part.

 

In the latter work, the focus is on Tai Zhai (what I call the Primal Illumination) and I translate the opening lines as:

 

Prior to the Opening of the Universe

and pouring down of all life forms

This is called the Primal Illumination.

Dao awoke in this boundless void.

The boundless void gave rise to the cosmos;

The cosmos gave rise to [Primal] Qi.

[Primal] Qi spread as a shoreline.

That which was clear and bright formed into Heaven;

That which was heavy and impure formed into Earth.

It is easy for that which is clear and bright to uniformly gather [as the sky]

But difficult for the heavy and impure to solidify [as earth and matter].

 

 

I stick to the idea that Dao was there in the void but it's transforming nature was dormant (void); and when some *bang!* occurs (Primal Illumination) it is because Dao woke up (transforming begins).

 

Now, I will further say that to me, Dao is not the highest level as it is the process-part which keeps to whatever state it is in... And as the process-part it is part of a larger whole. Some call this divine (but not the western religious context) or The Great One or The Great Unity, etc.

 

edits 1) typo 2) delete seen gif.

Edited by rene

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rene... it is just my idea... but I do find that we have many similar ideas... that makes it easy to talk on some level but when we disagree then the talk is more important on another level. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since the discussion seems to have slipped away....

 

I would like to discuss the meaning of the first part of CHAPTER 55...

 

He who is at one with the Dao experiences all things.

Therefore the Sage is whole; he experiences the union of man and woman, so he knows of the ways of mankind.

Without this, he is not following the way of Nature.

The Sage is one of the Ten Thousand Things, but his grip on the Dao is firm.

 

Having experienced all things, he can obtain enlightenment.

Through enlightenment, he can become Divine.

 

There are many interesting concepts in this section. What is meant by "union" in this context? Is it important that the Sage is one of the Ten Thousand Things? It is implied that enlightenment is different that being Divine.

 

Any thoughts?

 

:)

Edited by Jeff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jeff,

 

Yes, I have thoughts. I'm going to keep them to myself though. Hehehe.

 

No, that wouldn't be fair.

 

Indeed, this translation would be a big support for the belief in immortality.

 

The significance of "union"?

 

I will present Henrick's translation of that line:

 

He (the newborn babe) does not yet know the meeting of male and female, yet his organ is aroused—

 

Here "meeting" is the same as "union". Nothing special.

 

I think that it is very important that the Sage is one of the Ten Thousand Things. He is a part of nature and the manifest just as all things are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi MH,

 

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I think the meaning of "union" here may go deeper than the most obvious concept. The following words from the Gospel of Thomas touch on the point...

 

Jesus said to them, "When you make the two into one, and when you make the inner like the outer and the outer like the inner, and the upper like the lower, and when you make male and female into a single one, so that the male will not be male nor the female be female, when you make eyes in place of an eye, a hand in place of a hand, a foot in place of a foot, an image in place of an image, then you will enter [the kingdom]."

 

Also, I agree that it is significant that the Sage is one of Ten Thousand Things. Doesn't that definition seem to be different than what Buddhism would say about the nature of a Buddha?

 

Finally, anyone have any thoughts on the difference between enlightenment and divine?

 

:)

Edited by Jeff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jeff,

 

Yes, there are many who take this word "union much ddper than I do. Their choice.

 

Ah. yes, the levelling of all things. Can't be done though. Sorry. Two men or two women may have a union but no offspring will be produced from that union. The ways of nature rule regardless of what man (and woman) like to think.

 

Yes, there are common thoughts throughout all belief systems. I think that, in general, those thoughts that are in common are the closest to the truth, but not always.

 

Hehehe. In my early days of being a member of this board I did battle with my Buddhist friends on a regular basis. Thankfully those days are in the past. But I do agree with many of the concepts of the Buddhist belief system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jeff,

 

Yes, there are many who take this word "union much ddper than I do. Their choice.

 

Ah. yes, the levelling of all things. Can't be done though. Sorry. Two men or two women may have a union but no offspring will be produced from that union. The ways of nature rule regardless of what man (and woman) like to think.

 

 

My point about "union" or as Jesus says "make male and female into a single one" was a little different than talking about same sex couples. What about balancing male and female components (or energies)? Could this "integration" also be part of the differience between "enlightenment" and "divine"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My point about "union" or as Jesus says "make male and female into a single one" was a little different than talking about same sex couples. What about balancing male and female components (or energies)? Could this "integration" also be part of the differience between "enlightenment" and "divine"?

Hehehe. Okay, that's settled.

 

Yes, we can talk about Yin and Yang - the two polarities of Chi - the energy of the universe.

 

Some like to speak of balance. Thats okay. I prefer harmony as I understand that the influences of Yin and Yang will vary from moment to moment so it takes a lot of effort to maintain balance. Harmony requires less effort, IMO.

 

Talking about enlightenment and divine are beyond my abilities. I am still a lay person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi MH,

 

We seem to have lost even Shaman Flowing Hands from his tread...

 

On enlightenment vs. divine, deci belle was kind enough to give some hints in another thread...

 

This from the book by Longchenpa, You Are the Eyes of the World, translated by Kennard Lipman and Merrill Peterson with introduction by Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche. 2000.

 

Now if I could write like a teacher, I would— but even though I'm not a teacher, I know what I want to say to you all. In this tradition, direct teacher to student transmission of the natural state is the rule; even so, the natural state itself, is not dependent on this or any teaching.

 

The parallel taoist teachings maintain that one see essence on one's own~ then seek a teacher. It is the natural state of human being— one's inherent state. But this not tao. Its source is tao. Additionally, there is that which is beyond tao.

 

After seeing essence and solidifying the achievement, one must still empty openness, sublimate oneself physically and spiritually, take the forward step with hands open and enter the tao in reality— which is none other than this very existence. There is no other time, place or mind …

 

What do you think?

 

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, the thread got tired and was just hanging in its place so I decided, along with help from others, to at least keep it current. Hopefully someone will enter and take the thread back to topic.

 

What do I think? To the quote:

 

I think I should take a nap after reading that.

 

That which is beyond Tao? My, my.

 

One must still empty openness. That will be a trick.

 

I don't do "sublimate".

 

So we are going to take a step into where we already are? Why take the step?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Since the discussion seems to have slipped away.... I would like to discuss the meaning of the first part of CHAPTER 55... He who is at one with the Dao experiences all things. Therefore the Sage is whole; he experiences the union of man and woman, so he knows of the ways of mankind. Without this, he is not following the way of Nature. The Sage is one of the Ten Thousand Things, but his grip on the Dao is firm. Having experienced all things, he can obtain enlightenment. Through enlightenment, he can become Divine. There are many interesting concepts in this section. What is meant by "union" in this context? Is it important that the Sage is one of the Ten Thousand Things? It is implied that enlightenment is different that being Divine. Any thoughts? :)

 

Hi Jeff,

 

I have been watching the debate. In the chapter 55 Li Erh is talkng about a wise person who is apprenticed to becoming an Immortal. They therefore have to experience and know many, many things. Contrary to popular belief they will also experience the union of man and woman (sexual intercourse). Because the sage is one of the ten thousand things he/she will follow what is natural also. Being wise and having understanding about the 'way' in a real way (enlightenment is a physical realisation), they can then become devine (they can skip the process of being reborn and live forever as an enlightend spirit master).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're never alone with a channeled spirit eh Flowing Hands?

With deep respect Lao-Tzu is a construct and TTC a synopsis of extant wisdom, distilled. Spirits may be echoes of a personality or hungry ghosts. It's important to know who or what one is dealng with and you do not.

Whilst in no wise doubting the veracity of your own guide Li Er s/he aint Lao Tzu mate and any opinions s/he might have on TTC have as much, but no more veracity; than anyone elses be those from this side of life or any other.

Shamanic role is that of addressing live folks issues now not catechising ancient texts.

Impersonating spirits and how to deal with those is an early part of mediums training. The presumption being that such work takes place within,in order to serve; a community . Lonely imaginings or wishful thinking of themselves may bring solace but they have little or no value beyond the purely individual. If you are UK based I strongly recommend your joning a development circle in one of the spiritualistic focus Taoist centres.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites