Chapter One of the TTC

[Apech]

27 minutes ago, ChiDragon said:

 

Wu Wei is a compound character. 

Wu Wei is a term with a philosophy behind it. The word Wu is meaningless if it was treated alone here. 

 

Do you distinguish wei wu wei from wu wei?

 

 

[ChiDragon]

14 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

Do you distinguish wei wu wei from wu wei?

 

 

 

Yes, 为無为。 Wu Wei is a compound character and stand alone. The first Wei can be a single character in the phrase. The translation is "for Wu Wei." For example, I will do this for Wu Wei . 

Edited 16 hours ago by ChiDragon

[stirling]

44 minutes ago, ChiDragon said:

I didn't sense that the definition of Wu Wei was understood from your valuable comment. Perhaps something was hidden in your mind just didn't make sense to you.

Do you yourself understand it?

 

44 minutes ago, ChiDragon said:

May I ask how do you truly understand about Wu Wei in your own words other than other translations? Thanks!

 

How about this:

 

Wu Wei arises is the understanding that enlightenment and the world of separateness occupy the same space, though one of them is a "deeper" reality. To a person who experiences the world as a "self", there is a world of separate objects, and a "self" with agency that interacts with them.

 

From the experience of enlightened mind it is obvious that the separateness is a delusion, and that the unity of things takes care of itself. The way this appears is from the same perspective, but with two ways of seeing - there is still the appearance of a body that interacts with the world, but from the enlightened perspective this action is not the product of volition but the action of reality itself acting as a wholeness. 

 

No amount of reading or pouring over translations and commentaries will ever yield an understanding of the non-dual nature of reality, of which Wu Wei is only a single intellectual perspective. The broader realization isn't an intellectual understanding, and the reality of it will never match an intellectual idea about its nature. The only path to understanding Wu Wei is in having it become your permanent experience through realization.

 

[ChiDragon]

15 minutes ago, stirling said:

Do you yourself understand it?

 

Yes, I understood it by the definition as defined in the TTC. My I ask where did you get your definition from? 

 

BTW The definition of Wu Wei is:

Take no action to cause harm  or interrupt the course of nature.

Edited 15 hours ago by ChiDragon

[ChiDragon]

3 hours ago, steve said:

And there are layers of understanding and realization, just as there are relative and absolute truth. Reading and studying alone, even a scripture as perfect as Daodejing, can only take us so far. The mind, its activity, and its contents can only take us so far. We must make room for practice, for simply being, to appreciate the wisdom hiding behind the words. And we must be patient and kind with ourselves and each other if we want to discover something new together.

 

If you want a good example of Wu Wei, I think you have already incorporated in your practice. Good job! 👏 

Edited 15 hours ago by ChiDragon

[stirling]

39 minutes ago, ChiDragon said:

Yes, I understood it by the definition as defined in the TTC. My I ask where did you get your definition from? 

 

BTW The definition of Wu Wei is:

Take no action to cause harm  or interrupt the course of nature.

 

So, you are saying you read the Tao De Ching and after thinking about it came to a conceptual understanding?

[ChiDragon]

1 minute ago, stirling said:

 

So, you are saying you read the Tao De Ching and after thinking about it came to a conceptual understanding?

 

Yes, the conceptual understanding was presented in all the Chapters of the Tao De Ching. Each chapter has a story to tell. By the time the reading was finished, one will know what Wu Wei is all about. 

[Mark Foote]

14 hours ago, stirling said:

It isn't about how "you" choose to act... 
 

 

 

‘Deeds should be known. And their source, diversity, result, cessation, and the practice that leads to their cessation should be known.’ That’s what I said, but why did I say it? It is intention that I call deeds. For after making a choice one acts by way of body, speech, and mind.

(AN 6.63, tr. Sujato Bhikkyu; emphasis added)

 

 

And what is the cessation of deeds?

When you experience freedom due to the cessation of deeds by body, speech, and mind.

This is called the cessation of deeds.

 

(SN 35.146, tr. Sujato Bhikkyu)

 

A better translation, of that last:
 

And what… is the ceasing of action? That ceasing of action by body, speech, and mind, by which one contacts freedom,–that is called ‘the ceasing of action’.  

 

(SN 35.146, tr. Pali Text Society vol IV p 85)
 

 

Shunryu Suzuki's summation:

 

What will be the difference? You have freedom, you know, from everything. That is, you know, the main point.

 

(Sesshin Lecture, Shunryu Suzuki; Day 5 Wednesday, June 9, 1971 San Francisco)

 

 

How volition comes to cease, in speech, body, and mind--here, "the cessation of inbreathing and outbreathing" is the cessation of volition in the consciousness-informed activity of the body, in deeds, and "the cessation of perception and feeling" is the cessation of volition in the activity of mind:

 

…I have seen that the ceasing of the activities is gradual. When one has attained the first trance, speech has ceased. When one has attained the second trance, thought initial and sustained has ceased. When one has attained the third trance, zest has ceased. When one has attained the fourth trance, inbreathing and outbreathing have ceased… Both perception and feeling have ceased when one has attained the cessation of perception and feeling.  

(SN 36.11, tr. Pali Text Society vol IV p 146)  

 

 

This is the contact of freedom through concentration.

However, not everyone who had completely destroyed the three cankers (Gautama's criteria for enlightenment, MN 70) did so by means of concentration, or at least the concentrations that generally followed "the cessation of inbreathing and outbreathing" and that lead to "the cessation of feeling and perceiving". Those final concentrations are referred to here as "the Deliverances":

 

And which, monks, is the person who is freed by means of intuitive wisdom? As to this, monks, some person is abiding without having apprehended with the person those peaceful Deliverances which are incorporeal having transcended material shapes (leading to "the cessation of feeling and perceiving"); yet, having seen by means of wisdom (their) cankers are utterly destroyed. This, monks, is called the person who is freed by means of intuitive wisdom. I, monks, do not say of this (person) that there is something to be done through diligence. What is the reason for this? It has been done by (them) through diligence, (they) could not become negligent…

 

(MN 70; tr. Pali Text Society [PTS] vol. 2 pp 151-154; “the Deliverances” defined as the concentrations, at DN 15, PTS vol. ii pp 68-69; pronouns gender neutralized; parenthetical beginning "leading to" and emphasis added)

 

 

Edited 14 hours ago by Mark Foote

[stirling]

27 minutes ago, ChiDragon said:

Yes, the conceptual understanding was presented in all the Chapters of the Tao De Ching. Each chapter has a story to tell. By the time the reading was finished, one will know what Wu Wei is all about. 

 

I think I see the disconnect... while conceptual understanding is helpful, it is only the permanent experiential knowledge that gives you the full depth of the realization.

 

For example: I read the recipe for what is supposed to be a truly exceptional cake. I memorize the ingredient list, the proportions, the step by step instruction. This however is nothing like actually having baked the cake - totally understanding the process as an experience you have had, and being able to actually hold the still warm cake in your hand and taste it in this moment, not as an idea but as something you can sink your teeth into right now. 

 

The Tao de Ching isn't the experience of the Tao, it is a document that POINTS to the experience. An intellectual understanding of riding a bike ISN'T riding a bike. 

 

Earlier in this thread you asked me:

 

Quote

May I ask how do you truly understand about Wu Wei in your own words other than other translations?

 

I understand because it is my experience in this moment.

[stirling]

1 hour ago, ChiDragon said:

BTW The definition of Wu Wei is:

Take no action to cause harm  or interrupt the course of nature.

 

I have read many definitions. One that I would say is closest to what is being described is: effortless action. Where there is the living experience of the Dao, there is no "I" to "interrupt the course of nature", instead what there is happens as the "effortless action" of reality.

[stirling]

12 minutes ago, Mark Foote said:

How volition comes to cease, in speech, body, and mind--here, "the cessation of inbreathing and outbreathing" is the cessation of volition in the consciousness-informed activity of the body, in deeds, and "the cessation of perception and feeling" is the cessation of volition in the activity of mind

 

Volition is a delusion we carry around with this idea that we are separate beings in the world with agency. It is actually a simple misunderstanding that is entirely clarified with the dawning of realization, though it is very possible to get a taste of it in meditation IF you are looking and it has been pointed to.

[ChiDragon]

31 minutes ago, stirling said:

 

I have read many definitions. One that I would say is closest to what is being described is: effortless action

I think your closest definition of Wu Wei was from someone's translation. What did you compare with to make you think it is the closest?

Effortless action, to me, it sounds that the outcome could be positive or negative. It may cause harm or beneficial from the result of the action. Apparently, the definition is definitely did not match the TTC definition of Wu Wei. I don't think that I can find a chapter in the TDC to substantiate this definition. 

Edited 13 hours ago by ChiDragon

[ChiDragon]

27 minutes ago, stirling said:

 

The Tao de Ching isn't the experience of the Tao, it is a document that POINTS to the experience

OK! Let's assume that the TDC isn't the experience of Tao.Then, it is a document that POINTS the experience of who?

[stirling]

8 minutes ago, ChiDragon said:

I think your closest definition of Wu Wei was from someone's translation. What did you compare with to make you think it is the closest?

 

Aren't they all from translations?

 

Experience.

 

8 minutes ago, ChiDragon said:

Effortless action, to me, it sounds that the outcome could be positive or negative. It may cause harm or beneficial from the result of the action. Apparently, the definition is definitely did not match the TTC definition of Wu Wei

 

There aren't any positive or negative outcomes. Things are as they are. 

[stirling]

2 minutes ago, ChiDragon said:

OK! Let's assume that the TDC isn't the experience of Tao.Then, it is a document that POINTS the experience of who?

 

The Tao.

[ChiDragon]

2 minutes ago, stirling said:

Aren't they all from translations?

Experience.

 

There aren't any positive or negative outcomes. Things are as they are. 

Ok! I will leave it at that with your own experiences.

[ChiDragon]

4 minutes ago, stirling said:

 

The Tao.

The document doesn't POINTS the experience of Tao. Rather, it points out the principles of Tao.

[stirling]

6 minutes ago, ChiDragon said:

The document doesn't POINTS the experience of Tao. Rather, it points out the principles of Tao.

 

 

Quote

1. Tao that can be spoken is not the eternal Tao.
2. A name that can be named is not an eternal name.

 

The Tao isn't knowledge in a book and is inexpressible in language, thus an intellectual understanding of it is NOT it.

[Cobie]

 

3 hours ago, Apech said:

… wei wu wei …

 

 That’d be this person. Like you lots of interests, including Egyptology

 https://terebess.hu/zen/mesterek/weiwuwei.html#:~:text=Terence%20James%20Stannus%20Gray%20(14,mysterious%20'Wei%20Wu%20Wei'. 

 

 

Edited 12 hours ago by Cobie

[ChiDragon]

53 minutes ago, stirling said:

 

1. Tao that can be spoken is not the eternal Tao.
2. A name that can be named is not an eternal name.

 

53 minutes ago, stirling said:

The Tao isn't knowledge in a book and is inexpressible in language, thus an intellectual understanding of it is NOT it.

These two lines are saying that Tao is eternal. It cannot be named with any name. You can't talk about it just with words.
Tao, here, is a thing that is indescribable. In the later chapters, Tao was not just a thing. The actions of Tao will become the principles of Tao. An intellectual understanding has to go more deeper into reading the TTC. Reading one line or two do not give the whole picture of the TTC. One will see Tao, sometimes, is a principle tao(lower case). When Tao is capitalized, it is Tao itself. Ofc, in Chinese do not have the luxury to capitalize the characters as in English. However, it was done mentally in a native mind. 

Edited 12 hours ago by ChiDragon

[Apech]

25 minutes ago, Cobie said:

 

 

 That’d be this person. Like you lots of interests, including Egyptology

 https://terebess.hu/zen/mesterek/weiwuwei.html#:~:text=Terence%20James%20Stannus%20Gray%20(14,mysterious%20'Wei%20Wu%20Wei'. 

 

 

same age as well

[Cobie]

Tao is invisible, eternal,  indescribable. tao is visible; is the actions of Tao; is the principles of nature. (CD)

 

To me that is so reminiscent of stuff in my tradition. Saint Gregory Palamas said God is invisible, unknowable in his very nature; but he becomes visible, makes himself knowable, by his actions. 
 

 

Edited 11 hours ago by Cobie

[Nungali]

20 hours ago, ChiDragon said:

 

Sorry, I had left out something in the definition.
 

 

In the scenario, saving an animal was not causing harm to nature.  However, if you killed the animal, then you are not Wu Wei.
 

 

isnt that a self-referential loop though ?     In nature animals kill each other all the time .   How do you think carnivore animals eat ?  Do you think wu wei requires them to become vego ?   Sorry, but thats nuts ! 

 

The reality is (another self referential loop )   that part of nature is to modify nature .  Even as simple as a bird building a nest ; thats a modification . 

 

At the other end of the scale , I will give a local example ; people hear often marvel at the indigenous and how they suppose they lived without  harming the ecological balance ... well, that was all geared towards human survival ( in the long term ) .

 

It went something like this ; Australia had mega fauna  , they ate the low lying scrub and kept the land clear between the trees and forests .  people came for the first time , and not knowing what they were , these animals did not flee  ; easy hunting .  Then the megafauna numbers decreased , causing  the 'scrub' to grow and the land hard to navigate and hunt in . So they started burning it , a practice that eventually changed the whole environment , large scale . Now we say the indigenous know how to manage the environment by doing 'slow burns' to mitigate bushfires , and in the past , to make 'unfenced kangaroo farms ' . 

 

Which parts were wu wei, and which parts were not  ?  

[Nungali]

20 hours ago, ChiDragon said:

No problem. I love it.
in this scenario, you have no intention to kill the frog, therefore, you are still Wu Wei. Intention is the keyword here. If you have an intention to kill the frog, then, you didn't let nature take its course. You are safe here. Let's put is this way, Wu Wei do not give you credit for good behavior. Only if you did something that cause harm to nature, then you get blame for it. So to speak.

 

really ? 

 

Then define  'harm to nature ' 

 

Do you eat carrots ,  bok choy ...... wheat ?  ... intentionally ?   

 

.

Edited 11 hours ago by Nungali

[Nungali]

here is the thing about 'nature '  ; 

 

I often say, my qualifier , when looking at or adopting a process  is ' can I see a similar process in nature ' .

 

BUT 

 

that requires a full and extensive understanding of nature in the first place .