Mair 17:2

[Marblehead]

The unipede envies the millipede; the millipede envies the snake; the snake envies the wind; the wind envies the eye; the eye envies the mind.

The unipede said to the millipede, "I go hippity-hopping along on my one foot but barely manage.  How is it, sir, that you can control myriad feet?"

"It's not so," said the millipede.  "Haven't you seen a person spit?  When he spews them forth, the big globs are like pearls, the droplets are like a mist.  All mixed up together, the number that falls is immeasurable.  Now, I just move by my natural inner workings but don't know why it is so."

The millipede said to the snake, "I go along on my multitudinous feet, but I'm not as fast as you who have no feet.  How come?"

"How could we change the movements of our natural inner workings?" asked the snake.  "What use do I have for feet?"

The snake said to the wind, "I go along by moving my spine and ribs, thus I have a shape.  But you, sir, who arise with a whoosh from the Northern Sea and alight with a whoosh in the Southern Sea, have no shape at all.  How can this be?"

"It's true that I arise with a whoosh from the Northern Sea and alight in the Southern Sea," said the wind, "but whoever points at me vanquishes me and whoever treads upon me vanquishes me.  Nonetheless, only I can snap big trees and blow down big houses.  Therefore, the great vanquishing depends upon a host of minor defeats.  It is only the sage who can be a great vanquisher."

 

 

Marblehead note:

 

The story is unfinished but basically the mind is faster than the wind and has no observable essence.

 

[Lost in Translation]

Thank you for posting this. I consulted the I Ching last night and was given hexagram 57, which is very similar in its message. This is an important aspect of Taoism that is easy to overlook.

[wandelaar]

To me it's not immediately clear how to interpret this text. What do the other Bums think it means?

[Marblehead]

I hope you get some responses.  Maybe I won't even have to offer mine.

 

[Lost in Translation]

The greatest force - the wind - can tear down mountains and lay waste to entire lands, but it does this through imperceptible changes over truly vast time. And anyone can break the wind by simply moving before it. The wind gives way and does not resist, but neither does it stop. It is truly a force of nature. Yet force of nature or not, the wind - indeed each of us - has its own nature. The wind cannot be a rock, for example. Thus it is vital to understand one's own nature, and through slow, steady effort confront it, tame it, and gently coerce it towards the direction of the sage.

[dawei]

It is about comparison.... every mind is stuck on this... except the sage (in us). 

 

The first and best rule of daoism, IMO, is: Drop distinctions.. you will find in that vast emptiness a myriad of things. 

[wandelaar]

6 minutes ago, dawei said:

It is about comparison.... every mind is stuck on this... except the sage (in us). 

 

The first and best rule of daoism, IMO, is: Drop distinctions.. you will find in that vast emptiness a myriad of things. 

 

Dropping comparisons I can understand, because in particular social comparisons are a big obstacle to enjoying life as it is.

 

But dropping all distinctions? In a mystical state perhaps, or in some extreme philosophical experiment. But we have to return to normal life eventually, mountains have to become mountains again. Without conventional truth we couldn't even post a comment, or appreciate the different possibilities and impossibilities of different sorts of creatures. Or am I missing something?

[wandelaar]

15 hours ago, Marblehead said:

"It's not so," said the millipede.  "Haven't you seen a person spit?  When he spews them forth, the big globs are like pearls, the droplets are like a mist.  All mixed up together, the number that falls is immeasurable.  Now, I just move by my natural inner workings but don't know why it is so."

 

I think that the point is made here that ultimately we have to trust upon our inner nature because our bodily functions kind of take care of themselves. We can speak, but we don't know how we speak, we can walk but we don't know how we walk.

[Marblehead]

Reminded me of John Lennon's "I tried to run before I learned how to walk."

 

Thanks to all for the responses.

 

It's hard for me to imagine a unipede.  But it was a starting point for presenting a concept.

 

Most important to me here is acknowledging that different manifestations have different capabilities and capacities.  Comparison of things is futile.  Therefore we should consider only the true nature of things.  Again, objectivity and then, if necessary, subjectivity.

 

And I agree, we cannot always drop all distinctions.  A mountain is different from an ocean.  But a mountain is a mountain and an ocean is an ocean.  We don't put on scuba gear in order to climb a mountain.

 

So we recognize the objectivity of things then, if necessary, form subjective opinions regarding those things.

 

And really, even the natural course of water can be changed if the obstructions are made strong enough.  But the water will always find another way.  Same with the wind.  Same with the mind.  The fewer the limitations the greater the possibility for change.

 

[Alchemical Walrus]

23 hours ago, wandelaar said:

To me it's not immediately clear how to interpret this text. What do the other Bums think it means?

 

I think there are a couple of layers of meaning to this.

One is each of the things above finds their own spontaneous instincts to be simple matters, but using their own natures as a baseline, they cannot fathom or comprehend other beings with differing natures.

Thus the bug with only one limb cannot comprehend what it is like for the being that has so many different limbs.

The many-limbed millipede likewise cannot comprehend how a limbless snake can move devoid of these many feet.

The snake, possessing form, cannot comprehend how the formless wind is able to move.

Each thing moves, each thing finds its own motion to be natural, spontaneous, and instinctual, but each thing has trouble comprehending the motion of the other things when using themselves as a baseline for understanding.

[Alchemical Walrus]

7 hours ago, Marblehead said:

It's hard for me to imagine a unipede.  But it was a starting point for presenting a concept.

 

Maybe like a sciapod with no arms??

[Alchemical Walrus]

12 hours ago, wandelaar said:

But dropping all distinctions? In a mystical state perhaps, or in some extreme philosophical experiment. But we have to return to normal life eventually, mountains have to become mountains again. Without conventional truth we couldn't even post a comment, or appreciate the different possibilities and impossibilities of different sorts of creatures. Or am I missing something?

 

Perhaps.

Try dropping the distinction between a mystical state and normal life.  

[Marblehead]

1 hour ago, Alchemical Walrus said:

 

Maybe like a sciapod with no arms??

I have no way to respond to that except:  Yeah, maybe.

 

[wandelaar]

2 hours ago, Alchemical Walrus said:

Perhaps.

Try dropping the distinction between a mystical state and normal life.  

 

Ideally the "mystical state" will eventually sort of mix with normal life, and that would be the state where mountain are again mountains. 

[Marblehead]

Someone not active her right now might respond by saying:  Not either/or but both.  Hold to both.