Following the Tao and flexibility

[Lost in Translation]

8 minutes ago, gendao said:

Fetuses grow in water...and are born composed of about 78% water.  Which then drops to 60% by adulthood.  I mean, after reaching adulthood, we are all basically slowly dehydrating, fossilizing, and decomposing

 

Is this another way of saying that life begins full of yang and slowly loses yang and acquires yin?

[silent thunder]

Growth and Decay are no longer separate processes to me. They both flow into each other, perpetually.

They are present in the flowing process of our bodies and minds always. 

 

Superior and inferior... these have no place as one will never triumph over the other.

 

Can you ever order a room so everything is up only?  Can you break sticks in half and be left with only tops? 

Are there waves that form with only crests?

 

These are not manifestations of separate processes, but perception lends that illusion.

 

Growth feeds on decay (all life consumes other life, be it rain and sun and minerals in soil, or plants and animals directly), while decay nurtures all life and is the foundation of all growth.  In this it has become apparent to me that life, is by its nature, acquisitional, selfish and always taking in from the environment and merging the external with the internal through breath and eating.  Whereas decay... decay is nurturing, giving... it is the ultimate release and giving back.

 

They are not separate to me, but one unified flowing expression of the spectrum of the fluid life process.

 

[silent thunder]

[gendao]

1 hour ago, Lost in Translation said:

Is this another way of saying that life begins full of yang and slowly loses yang and acquires yin?

Well, it is often referred to as jing/yang qi/xiantian qi/true yang...the loss of which causes the degeneration associated with "aging."

Quote

When the Yin is the Yin and the Yang is the Yang, this the forward course, the ordinary way of the world. Taking the Yin within the Yang and the Yang within the Yin is the mechanism [of life] stolen by the immortals.

But, this is all quite metaphorical, abstract theory - that is effectively indecipherable and unusable in concrete practice.  Somehow, one must be graced with personal experience to understand what these terms were actually referring to...

So, if anyone figures this sh*t out...please let us know!

Edited April 12, 2018 by gendao

[wandelaar]

@ silent thunder

 

There actually are objects with only one side, and some wonderful properties as a result. See:

 

 

[dawei]

15 hours ago, gendao said:

So, if anyone figures this sh*t out...please let us know!

 

As a saying goes... "God knows but he is not telling" 

 

IT is a kind of chicken and egg thing too... which side (Yin vs Yang) came first...  problem is... they were first united and the question is meaningless

 

Liezi tells it in four simple Great steps:

 

有太易，有太初，有太始，有太素 …

There is a great Principle of Change, a great Origin, a great Beginning, a great Primordial Simplicity. 

 

Yet!

 

The Han divination book, Gu San Fen, relates: Clear Qi had not yet risen, and impure Qi had not yet sunk. Roaming deities are not yet spirits. The five colors have not yet separated. The innermost (中) is composed of things; it is a dark other-world yet a nature exists. This is called the primal chaos (混沌). Primal chaos is the Great Beginning (太始), the first fetus coming forth. This is numbered as One. The one becomes Tai Ji (太極). Tai Ji is as heaven and earth, father and mother. This One Ji, changed the sky to be brilliant and clear and the earth to be full of impure richness. This is the Great Change (太易); The Great Change transformed Heaven and Earth: The Great Change is numbered Two. Two is two parts, Yin-Yang also. This is the Great Origin (太初) [of life]. This Great Origin is an exchange of Heaven and Earth. The Great Origin is numbered Four. Four fills the Change. Four transforms and completes everything. This is called the Great Materialization (太素). The Great Materialization is numbered Three. Heaven and Earth give birth to male and female; This is called the Three; Three provided by Heaven and Earth. The roaming deities move as spirits. As a result, they fly and walk, hidden in transformation. The lower life forms move, like fish, inbetween Heaven and Earth. This is called the Great Distance Past (太古).

 

And Laozi wants to say:

道生一。
一生二。
二生三。
三生萬物

Tao produces one
One produces two
Two produce three
Three produce myriad things - D. Lin

 

But the book of changes says:

 

"易有太極，是生兩儀，兩儀生四象，四象生八卦，八卦定吉凶

Change possesses a unique limitlessness; this arose as two (yin/yang; heaven/earth); two grew as four images; four images grew as eight parts; eight parts determine life.

 

So... is yang first or yin first...

 

Neither/both... where is Rene...

 

There is an emptiness with potential that arose singularly and then split in two parts so that life could arise... Laozi calls it three.  Three is equal to the ten thousand.

 

One can't haphazardly try to pound out creation, what part is Yang vs Yin...  They are forever part of One unfolding to two... to three... to four... 

[Boundlesscostfairy]

The Tao is the laws of physics, nature and the whole of the cosmos..

 

Going with the grain is known as tao,

 

While going against the grain is known as against the flow of the Tao..

 

 

[gendao]

^^  Yea, as I said, none of all that obscure theory will really make any sense until AFTER you've stumbled upon some personal experience of it.  These old treasure maps are usually more useful in looking back, than moving forward to.  As only then in hindsight, will they understandably corroborate what you've actually experienced.

 

But as road maps moving forward...they suck!

For example, even if you intellectually knew "which came first"...or how you were supposed to both "fuse" Yin & Yang...yet somehow become "pure true Yang"...you'd still be at a loss at how to put that into any real practice.  As it's one thing to casually talk about jing/qi/she & Yin vs Yang...but a WHOLE 'NOTHER MATTER/LEVEL to be able to actually experience, feel, distinguish, and cultivate them as "real" phenomena!

Edited April 13, 2018 by gendao

[wandelaar]

3 hours ago, Boundlesscostfairy said:

The Tao is the laws of physics, nature and the whole of the cosmos..

 

Going with the grain is known as tao,

 

While going against the grain is known as against the flow of the Tao..

 

That is also how I see it, but still the problem remains what to do when the society you live in is itself largely going against the grain.

[Boundlesscostfairy]

You either join them or rebel and fight the good fight as a patriot!

[Marblehead]

I've not joined yet.  Might have to with a little more age.  (Less energy to fight.)

 

[Stosh]

8 hours ago, wandelaar said:

 

That is also how I see it, but still the problem remains what to do when the society you live in is itself largely going against the grain.

From wherever you are, there is ,if there's any trend at all, still an uphill and a downhill.

The rest of society , is beyond our pay grade. 

Frankly it doesn't matter what society is doing at the moment , there are always difficulties that crop up , whether battling seasons and bugs , or the drudgery of a repetitive job.

IT would be a handy truth , to point out the self-destructive aspects of society , and claim that we are but pawns in the grip of this trend. It absolves responsibility. But Dao doesnt recognize responsibility justifications or excuses. Your-my life works out to be at the same deficit , regardless of what one can blame for it. 

 

Edited April 13, 2018 by Stosh

[wandelaar]

So there is no special problem in the relation between the Taoist and society compared to life's problems in general?

[silent thunder]

4 hours ago, Marblehead said:

I've not joined yet.  Might have to with a little more age.  (Less energy to fight.)

 

I'm back up to my fighting weight these days...

 

too fat to run away!

[Stosh]

51 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

So there is no special problem in the relation between the Taoist and society compared to life's problems in general?

I don't think so , all the things we call problems ,essentially come down to a difference between how we want stuff to be and how we believe it is. You can either change your local situation to suit your attitudes , OR suit your sentiments to the prevailing situation... either one of those resolves the conflict,  right?

 

 

[Lost in Translation]

10 hours ago, wandelaar said:

13 hours ago, Boundlesscostfairy said:

The Tao is the laws of physics, nature and the whole of the cosmos..

 

Going with the grain is known as tao,

 

While going against the grain is known as against the flow of the Tao..

 

That is also how I see it, but still the problem remains what to do when the society you live in is itself largely going against the grain.

 

What makes you think society is going against the grain? For that matter, what makes you think you know which direction the grain is going?

 

Beavers build dams to block up rivers and cause flooding.

   Is this going against the grain?

 

Lions slaughter the young of competing males.

   Is this going against the grain?

 

Many insects eat their counterpart after mating,

and many more eat their parent upon being born.

   Is this going against the grain?

 

Parasites often kill the very hosts they inhabit.

   Is this going against the grain?

[wandelaar]

So you think the meaning of "going against the grain" is unclear?

[Lost in Translation]

32 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

So you think the meaning of "going against the grain" is unclear?

 

I do. First you must establish the direction of the grain. Then you can argue society is going against it. 

[wandelaar]

54 minutes ago, Stosh said:

I don't think so , all the things we call problems ,essentially come down to a difference between how we want stuff to be and how we believe it is. You can either change your local situation to suit your attitudes , OR suit your sentiments to the prevailing situation... either one of those resolves the conflict,  right?

 

From a purely individualistic viewpoint I guess that is a consistent position.

 

But that brings us to the question of social responsibility? The effects of most individual actions on society as a whole are negligible. Thus from a purely individualistic viewpoint it would not be worth the trouble.  So how should a Taoist deal with the free rider problem?

[wandelaar]

6 minutes ago, Lost in Translation said:

I do. First you must establish the direction of the grain. Then you can argue society is going against it. 

 

I doubt you would be convinced. It rather looks like you are arguing against the very possibility of "going against the grain". If that is so I would like to know whether you also think a non-Taoist way of life is impossible.

[Stosh]

1 minute ago, wandelaar said:

 

From a purely individualistic viewpoint I guess that is a consistent position.

 

But that brings us to the question of social responsibility? The effects of most individual actions on society as a whole are negligible. Thus from a purely individualistic viewpoint it would not be worth the trouble.  So how should a Taoist deal with the free rider problem?

I'm not entirely clear about your phrasing here.

I am indeed speaking as an individual, about the prospects of dealing with life's issues as an individual.

I agree the affect one can have on the whole of humanity is trivial.

But you have to spell out this next issue ,of social responsibility  is connected , or has importance on a personal level with you . 

You're trying to decide if you should get off welfare or something? 

Like I indicated , sociology as an impersonal interest , is really beyond my pay grade to resolve . 

It becomes a diversion , to examine sociology , in the context of a person wanting to resolve or improve aspects of their own life. 

Its possible you already feel you have done a fine job with the cards you have been dealt , great!  but then any questions that you have on the related subject matter is moot.  When the rabbit is caught , the snare can be forgotten. Right? There's no point in dwelling on it, there's no thing anyone can say that will be of practical use to you , in that case.  

[wandelaar]

You are right. Social responsibility - Taoist or otherwise - is another issue. I could open another topic about that. The position of Taoism on social responsibility.

[Stosh]

8 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

You are right. Social responsibility - Taoist or otherwise - is another issue. I could open another topic about that. The position of Taoism on social responsibility.

So are you interested in just defining Taoism , deciding how you feel toward it, or do you think it offers you some venue for better goings on? I thought once that it would improve my discipline , nope, didn't happen, I had to do that on my own , and then give away the credit to the Dao !  if daoism was going to be involved with it at all.   

 

[wandelaar]

I like Taoism, Buddhism, Confucianism (to some extent), Epicureanism, Stoicism, old school Skepticism, and analytical philosophy. But in particular on Taoism I have some questions left. It depends on the answers whether I can make use of them in my own life.

[Stosh]

1 hour ago, wandelaar said:

I like Taoism, Buddhism, Confucianism (to some extent), Epicureanism, Stoicism, old school Skepticism, and analytical philosophy. But in particular on Taoism I have some questions left. It depends on the answers whether I can make use of them in my own life.

So whats an important make or break question ? regarding tao ? its heavily ironic , massively subjective in its application , obscure in its description , and IMO actually makes for a real nice grouping of civilized regular people. ( as difficult to corral as cats)