A Personal Tao?

[Straw Dog]

Hey everyone!

I just had a thought while contemplating the Tao. I know that the Great Tao is impersonal on the macro level, but I think it could be argued that it's personal on the micro level. That is on the level where all the manifold taos interact. Think about it. We are literally composed of the cosmos. How can it get any more personal than that? The Tao constructs everything which constitutes our very being, including our minds and personalities. There is nothing that is not contained within it. An interesting notion I had anyway.

 

[Breathe]

May I ask you to clarify what you mean by "personal on a micro level"?

 

[Straw Dog]

May I ask you to clarify what you mean by "personal on a micro level"?

Fair enough, there are some eight or so definitions for it. I mean it as relating to or affecting a particular person, relating to the person or body, or relating to an individual or individual's character, conduct, or motives.

The Tao constitutes each individual's body and mind, or rather the myriad taos do. We are made of molecules, chemicals, cells, etc. Essentially we are made of star stuff. I understand the Tao in a similar manner to the understanding of "that which is naturally so" or "the cosmic flow". The Tao becomes personal on the micro level because of its role in the construction of the individual. Wherever you go, there it is.

 

[theirreverentconcubine]

For me, being Left-Hand path is much as you describe. I've always been "with tao," without feeling the need to label myself Taoist; and now Setian seems to be the appropriate label.

 

[DreadFish]

I think I can agree with you on that. From my perspective, we can have close personal relationships with people, heart-to-heart, and since all things flow from the Tao, and all things spontaneously honor it through every action, how can there be anything more personal that the Tao itself?

 

[Straw Dog]

I think I can agree with you on that. From my perspective, we can have close personal relationships with people, heart-to-heart, and since all things flow from the Tao, and all things spontaneously honor it through every action, how can there be anything more personal that the Tao itself?

Perhaps it's better then to think about the Tao as being trans-personal, rather than either personal or impersonal. This would make sense considering it ultimately transcends all dualities.

 

[DreadFish]

Perhaps it's better then to think about the Tao as being trans-personal, rather than either personal or impersonal. This would make sense considering it ultimately transcends all dualities.

Aye, sounds good to me

 

[wmjbyatt]

Perhaps it's better then to think about the Tao as being trans-personal, rather than either personal or impersonal. This would make sense considering it ultimately transcends all dualities.

Perhaps its better to remember that, while exploring the esoterics of the Tao is fascinating, interesting, and valuable, the first lesson any of us ever learns about the Tao is that "The Tao which can be spoken is not the eternal Tao."

Now, unless this has been personally experienced as true in the transcendental sense, this should not be taken as doctrinal and suggest to us that we cannot possibly speak the Tao (because doctrinalism sucks), but it SHOULD be taken as a reflection of Lao-Tzu's thought and experience, and we should realize that this immediately means that the rest of the Tao Te Ching is a bald-faced lie. So when we learn that the Tao is impersonal, this is only an approximation of the truth.

 

[Breathe]

Perhaps it's better then to think about the Tao as being trans-personal, rather than either personal or impersonal. This would make sense considering it ultimately transcends all dualities.

Another question.

How do you think the Tao differs from some transpersonal, nondualistic, non-anthromorphic conceptions of Divinity? Do you think there is still some differentiation between them, or that there is none?

For example, do you consider Hindu Brahman (not the Hindu deva known as Brahmā, but Brahman the Absolute, Ultimate Reality) to be the same thing as the Tao, or different?

 

[Straw Dog]

Another question.

How do you think the Tao differs from some transpersonal, nondualistic, non-anthromorphic conceptions of Divinity? Do you think there is still some differentiation between them, or that there is none?

For example, do you consider Hindu Brahman (not the Hindu deva known as Brahmā, but Brahman the Absolute, Ultimate Reality) to be the same thing as the Tao, or different?

I believe these are all just words and metaphors meant to help us relate and reconnect with the origins of our being. Mythology is a metaphorical language to help us apprehend the Big Picture within us all yet forever beyond our total conceptual comprehension. I don't know if they are different. It must depend on what individuals mean by 'Tao' or 'Brahman'. It's possible they are similar metaphors in meaning.

I understand the Tao as "the way things naturally are" or "the cosmic flow" and yet I cannot adequately conceptualize the cosmic flow or the way things naturally are. I use these interpretations because I find them to be the most useful for practicing my spirituality by apprehending the original being that rests within everything and everyone.

 

[Straw Dog]

Perhaps its better to remember that, while exploring the esoterics of the Tao is fascinating, interesting, and valuable, the first lesson any of us ever learns about the Tao is that "The Tao which can be spoken is not the eternal Tao."

Now, unless this has been personally experienced as true in the transcendental sense, this should not be taken as doctrinal and suggest to us that we cannot possibly speak the Tao (because doctrinalism sucks), but it SHOULD be taken as a reflection of Lao-Tzu's thought and experience, and we should realize that this immediately means that the rest of the Tao Te Ching is a bald-faced lie. So when we learn that the Tao is impersonal, this is only an approximation of the truth.

I would say that the Tao isn't a lie anymore than a solid fact, it's a useful metaphor. I would say the same thing about God, but that topic tends to become more volatile for certain believers.

 

[Bhairava]

My girlfriend is literally named Dao.

 

[Straw Dog]

My girlfriend is literally named Dao.

Sweet! How did that end up flowing?

 

[Samantha Rinne]

May I ask you to clarify what you mean by "personal on a micro level"?

The Tao, at least one place I've looked online on my research, compares reality to a holograph. This is (probably) influenced by Buddhism, and its notion of desire realm.

5b What's a hologram?-Tao by Matsumoto-Taoism Zen explanation
Holographic Nature of Our Brain

If we were to see life as this way, on the macro level, the larger universe (what other religions call God) is One. Everything is part of a larger whole. In some ways, this could be considered impersonal, since everyone and everything is not wholly themselves and there is a touch of solipsism.

On the other hand, Taoism is not like Buddhism (or Judaism), they are not strictly speaking a monism. On the micro-level, there is dualism. This is deeply personal, because it divides all the universe in two. Yin and Yang, Man and Woman, Me and You, Self and Other. Because of this micro-interaction, despite the ultimate unity of reality, we are able to experience things like love, hate, fear, and so on.