Is Tao = consciousness?

[Alceste]

Sorry but can you explain what you mean more clearly?

It's kind of ironic to decide it's a "disease of the mind" and "erroneous" to have likes and dislikes.

Not really relevant to my post though, since I was addressing what taoist writers are actually referring to when they mention "the Tao", not my own preferences, likes or dislikes.

Do you know any quotes that imply that the word "tao" in taoist literature might refer to some kind of conciousness? IME, it is usually westerners trying to integrate taoist philosophy with theism who tend to assume tao implies some kind of intelligence.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

It's kind of ironic to decide it's a "disease of the mind" and "erroneous" to have likes and dislikes.

Not really relevant to my post though, since I was addressing what taoist writers are actually referring to when they mention "the Tao", not my own preferences, likes or dislikes.

Do you know any quotes that imply that the word "tao" in taoist literature might refer to some kind of conciousness? IME, it is usually westerners trying to integrate taoist philosophy with theism who tend to assume tao implies some kind of intelligence.

Ironic? No, to say dualism is a disease of the mind is consistent with saying dualism is an error of the mind.

It really doesn't matter if you are talking about your own opinions and preferences or that of other taoist writers, they are still opinions and preferences,..and therefore not the eternal Tao.

There are students of Taoism who consider consciousness to be an integral aspect of Taoism, try googling for it if you are interested, but remember they are only other peoples opinions and hence are not the eternal Tao.

 

[Alceste]

Ironic? No, to say dualism is a disease of the mind is consistent with saying dualism is an error of the mind.

It really doesn't matter if you are talking about your own opinions and preferences or that of other taoist writers, they are still opinions and preferences,..and therefore not the eternal Tao.

There are students of Taoism who consider consciousness to be an integral aspect of Taoism, try googling for it if you are interested, but remember they are only other peoples opinions and hence are not the eternal Tao.

This post is ironic too. Are you sure you're not insisting I am "wrong?" Would that not require some sense of attachment to what you believe is "right"?

 

[crossfire]

Instead of looking for a thing/reductionism, try process thinking--no separation between subject and object.

There are a few different concepts in taoism for what tao means. Consciousness is not one of them. Literally, it means "way". So, the way things are, the way to get where you want to go, the way things came to be etc.

Yes! The Way is the Process!

 

[Ben Dhyan]

This post is ironic too. Are you sure you're not insisting I am "wrong?" Would that not require some sense of attachment to what you believe is "right"?

Right and wrong is just another example of a complementary opposite pair like ying and yang, and the eternal Tao is non-dual, that's the point being attempted to be conveyed.

 

[crossfire]

Right and wrong is just another example of a complementary opposite pair like ying and yang, and the eternal Tao is non-dual, that's the point being attempted to be conveyed.

And yet becoming attached to the non-dual also leads to bias error.

Not one, not two.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

And yet becoming attached to the non-dual also leads to bias error.

Friend crossfire, please consider what you said, how does something become attached to the non-dual?

Non-duality is the Oneness, there is nothing separate from it!

 

[crossfire]

Friend crossfire, please consider what you said, how does something become attached to the non-dual?

Non-duality is the Oneness, there is nothing separate from it!

Hence, there is no need to cling to it. Clinging to it will produce bias errors, just as clinging to duality or other preferences will lead to bias errors.

Only untruth needs to be propped up. Truth can stand on its own.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Hence, there is no need to cling to it. Clinging to it will produce bias errors, just as clinging to duality or other preferences will lead to bias errors.

Only untruth needs to be propped up. Truth can stand on its own.

Friend crossfire, sorry but you don't understand what is being said to you.

The concept of clinging implies a clinger and that which is clung to,..that is two things. Since non-duality is not separate from anything (if it were it would not be non-dual), how does anything cling to it?

 

[crossfire]

Friend crossfire, sorry but you don't understand what is being said to you.

The concept of clinging implies a clinger and that which is clung to,..that is two things. Since non-duality is not separate from anything (if it were it would not be non-dual), how does anything cling to it?

A symptom of clinging is disturbances of the mind: these are real and cannot be dismissed by theorizing them away.
From the Hsin Hsin Ming

Translated by Robert B. Clarke

Do not remain in the dualistic state, avoid such pursuits carefully.
If there is even a trace of this and that, of right and wrong, the mind-essence will be lost in confusion.
Although all dualities come from the one, do not be attached even to this one.
When the mind exists undisturbed in the tao, nothing in the world can offend, and when a thing can no longer offend, it ceases to exist in the old way.
When no discriminating thoughts arise, the old mind ceases to exist.

When thought objects vanish, the thinking-subject vanishes, as when the mind vanishes, objects vanish.
Things are objects because of The subject (mind); the mind (subject) is such because of things (object).
Understand the relativity of these two and the basic reality: the unity of emptiness.
In this Emptiness the two are indistinguishable and each contains in itself the whole world.
If you do not discriminate between coarse and fine you will not be tempted to prejudice and opinion

Translated by D.T. Suzuki


Abide not with dualism, Carefully avoid pursuing it;
As soon as you have right and wrong, Confusion ensues, and Mind is lost.

The two exist because of the One, But hold not even to this One;
When a mind is not disturbed, The ten thousand things offer no offence. No offence offered, and no ten thousand things;

No disturbance going, and no mind set up to work:

The subject is quieted when the object ceases, The object ceases when the subject is quieted.
The object is an object for the subject, The subject is a subject for the object:

Know that the relativity of the two Rests ultimately on one Emptiness.
In one Emptiness the two are not distinguished, And each contains in itself all the ten thousand things;
When no discrimination is made between this and that. How can a one-sided and prejudiced view arise?​

 

[Ben Dhyan]

A symptom of clinging is disturbances of the mind: these are real and cannot be dismissed by theorizing them away.
From the Hsin Hsin Ming

Translated by Robert B. Clarke

Do not remain in the dualistic state, avoid such pursuits carefully.
If there is even a trace of this and that, of right and wrong, the mind-essence will be lost in confusion.
Although all dualities come from the one, do not be attached even to this one.
When the mind exists undisturbed in the tao, nothing in the world can offend, and when a thing can no longer offend, it ceases to exist in the old way.
When no discriminating thoughts arise, the old mind ceases to exist.

When thought objects vanish, the thinking-subject vanishes, as when the mind vanishes, objects vanish.
Things are objects because of The subject (mind); the mind (subject) is such because of things (object).
Understand the relativity of these two and the basic reality: the unity of emptiness.
In this Emptiness the two are indistinguishable and each contains in itself the whole world.
If you do not discriminate between coarse and fine you will not be tempted to prejudice and opinion

Translated by D.T. Suzuki


Abide not with dualism, Carefully avoid pursuing it;
As soon as you have right and wrong, Confusion ensues, and Mind is lost.

The two exist because of the One, But hold not even to this One;
When a mind is not disturbed, The ten thousand things offer no offence. No offence offered, and no ten thousand things;

No disturbance going, and no mind set up to work:

The subject is quieted when the object ceases, The object ceases when the subject is quieted.
The object is an object for the subject, The subject is a subject for the object:

Know that the relativity of the two Rests ultimately on one Emptiness.
In one Emptiness the two are not distinguished, And each contains in itself all the ten thousand things;
When no discrimination is made between this and that. How can a one-sided and prejudiced view arise?​

Thank you crossfire for posting this, Chien-chih Seng-ts'an was the author and I quoted from it also in my post #18.

Since Chien-chih Seng-ts'an was the Third Chan Patriarch, what he is saying is that it is the dualsitic mind that disturbs the Great Way of non-duality. The Chan practice of dhyana (still mind meditation) is meant to bring a cessation of all thought, and subsequently the thinker/'I' doesn't arise to disturb the underlying non-duality of the Tao, or in the case of Chan, Nirvana.

 

[crossfire]

Thank you crossfire for posting this, Chien-chih Seng-ts'an was the author and I quoted from it also in my post #18.

Since Chien-chih Seng-ts'an was the Third Chan Patriarch, what he is saying is that it is the dualsitic mind that disturbs the Great Way of non-duality. The Chan practice of dhyana (still mind meditation) is meant to bring a cessation of all thought, and subsequently the thinker/'I' doesn't arise to disturb the underlying non-duality of the Tao, or in the case of Chan, Nirvana.

I might use the words "expectations" or "anticipations" instead of the word "thoughts" here to add a bit of clarity. Your mileage may vary.

 

[Vichar]

Friend Vichar, to talk of a stone being closer to the Tao is missing the point, for from the Tao itself we can paraphrase...when something is judged as being closer, the concept of further comes into existence!

Whenever a concept is created to represent a perception, simultaneously its complementary opposite comes into being. That is why so long as there is a 'you' seeking the Tao or not seeking the Tao, coming closer to the Tao or going further from the Tao, meditating on the Tao or not meditating on the Tao, the Tao remains obscured, for its the 'you' that obscures the transcendent that is eternally omnipresent.

From the first verse of the Tao Teh Ching, Lao Tzu obseves..."The Tao that is spoken of, is not the eternal Tao",...this reveals the irony that all the words of all the verses that follows are not to be taken as a real, just a selection of salient conceptual representations concerning the real.

Oh and btw, since it seems you are convinced of the extra special closeness of a atone to the Tao, you may or may not resonate with these Sufi pieces...

I have been observing your interaction with
I died as a stone and became a plant;
I died as a plant and rose to animal;
I died as an animal and I was a man.
Why should I fear?
When was I less by dying?
Yet once more I shall die as man to soar...
With angels blest.
But even from an angel I must pass on:
All except God must perish.
When I have sacrificed my angel soul,
I shall become what no mind ever conceived. -Jalaluddin Rumi

and...

God sleeps in the stone,
Dreams in the plant,
Stirs in the animal,
And Awakens in Man.- Al Arabi

Friend ben d, you seem interested in correcting my perception on the Tao. I see what you are trying to point out when you talk about the I that wants things, as well as the relative nature of distance.

But why do we care about the words I am using? You should try to vibe me out and see if I'm really saying those things. I do not think of spirituality as necessarily "closer" and "farther" to spirit (or the Tao) in the same way I might be closer or farther away from my keyboard. I mean it precisely the way I believe you mean it: "farther" from the Tao is more mental, trying with thought and physical action. "Closer" to the Tao is closer to being, of moving in consciousness without movement in thought. If that's not what you mean, that's certainly what I meant.

And yes, hopefully without offending anyone here, I believe we were once a stone before we were human beings. And we were conscious then. If you wish to redefine "conscious" as a certain threshold, as is implied by Al Arabi, then by all means I can go along with that definition as well. But I mean it as somewhat interchangable with "of spirit", which is everything. Tao being everything and nothing. Everything because everything is of the spirit. Nothing because it is nowhere manifest in the illusion of the physical and mental world. Actually, it's not in anything manifested.

But just because it's not manifested doesn't mean it doesn't exist. And just because I put forth effort to get closer to the Tao, doesn't mean that effort is mental or of the ego. Doing without doing is what I'm talking about. Consciousness is individual, just not in the way people are used to thinking about it. In becoming conscious, or more awakened, we are more aware and closer to the real, and the lower identity begins to fade. But attaining enlightenment doesn't mean you become part of a homogenized, spiritual soup without differentiation. You retain your individual awareness--it's just not anything like human awareness (it encompasses it, sure).

When Lao Tzu obseves..."The Tao that is spoken of, is not the eternal Tao". He's not telling us that what follows isn't real. He's not going to waste time like that. He's just pointing out that the spiritual experience is not the mental experience. It is on an entirely different plane of existence. But it's not unreachable or unobtainable. To be honest, it's a more natural state than what we're used to in our individual small "I".

I have been observing your interactions with crossfire and Alceste. I am not posting in the interests of scholarship or academic debate. I do not mind if others attempt to correct me--I welcome any hints along the way on my journey. But I want to strongly stress for others here as well that the Tao Te Ching (in my opinion) is practical advice. It's a guide to living, being, and it can be followed. "I" am not "seeking" the Tao. I wish to simply be, and in doing so I naturally draw "closer" to it. Closer in the sense that the dross separating "me" from "it" is being shed -- since there is not really a me or it, that must mean that I am referring to my own distorted perception being shed, right?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

That's fine and thank you Vichar, your present understanding is just that, your present understanding, as is my present understanding just my present understanding. When the spirit of humility is present, these exchanges can facilitate enhanced learning,..and yes, also ultimately a guide to the very way of life of spiritual unfoldment.

 

[Alceste]

And yet becoming attached to the non-dual also leads to bias error.

Not one, not two.

Yes, this. We don't strive to be flawless in our thoughts, we simply weed the garden.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Yes, this. We don't strive to be flawless in our thoughts, we simply weed the garden.

I know you, Vichar, and crossfire are not getting this, but here is one last attempt.

So long as there is an observer, a you, a we, an I, attempting to do anything at all, then your reality comprises two 'things', you the subject and the objective of your action. In this instance, these are 'striver' and 'flawless thoughts', and 'weeder' and 'garden'.

Now the Way to true reality which is non-dual can't be approached through duality, for logically the way to a goal can't be in contradiction to the goal itself. Therefore the Way to non-duality is through non-duality, dhyana.

So the problem isn't the weeds in the garden, for the weeds are an integral of the non-dual oneness of the garden, it's the fact that there is a perceiver 'you' that arises in consciousness to disturb the tranquility of the actual one reality by conceptualizing two parts, weeds and garden. All following discussion just compounds the obscuration of the underlying non-dual nature of existence.

If you actually understand what is being said here, that is enough, there is an efficacy in true understanding that works without any effort or necessity for the mind to cogitate further once the understanding had occurred. If otoh you still don't understand then that's ok too, just ignore me and carry on as you were.

 

[Alceste]

It is a metaphor, Ben_d. The weeds are your "truths", the garden is unfiltered perception.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

It is a metaphor, Ben_d. The weeds are your "truths", the garden is unfiltered perception.

Friend Alceste, 'I' am only using conceptual language as an expedient to try and convey to you that the non-dual Way will be ever obscured by using your mind to conceptualize the non-dual Way.

Now there is nothing more to say to you,..all the best for your life ahead.

 

[Alceste]

Friend Alceste, 'I' am only using conceptual language as an expedient to try and convey to you that the non-dual Way will be ever obscured by using your mind to conceptualize the non-dual Way.

Now there is nothing more to say to you,..all the best for your life ahead.

All the best to you as well, Ben d, and may your preference for non-duality never become a weed that chokes out the flowers of non-duality from your garden.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

All the best to you as well, Ben d, and may your preference for non-duality never become a weed that chokes out the flowers of non-duality from your garden.

Oh if only it were a preference that needed to be addressed dear Alceste, but alas it is me, the 'I' whose label is Ben who has this predisposition to cogitate about such arcane matters, that must ultimately give way for the non-dual to be always undisturbed...:sad: