To be a taoist...

[crowfeather]

Some like the sound of taoism, and so announce that they are taoists.
But mostly, they are no such thing.
Very few Westerners will ever become taoists, no matter how hard they try, because their culture precludes it.
There is one essential qualification that must be met, before one can even begin down this path...

It is that one fully embraces one's own utter lack of importance.

I don't count, and neither do you.

 

[wizanda]

I don't count, and neither do you.

Think in the west there is a tendency to fill the house with gold and jade, and rather than being happy at being an empty vessel, we're told to fill ourselves up all the time.

Everything counts, it is just to what quantity it affects the rest.

Whereas the sage is content at appearing like a puddle, people are taught to be obsessed with their own outer reflection, whilst their inner image is shallow.

 

[crowfeather]

Thank you. First reply to my first new taoist topic. And a very good reply, too.
Westerners are really up against it, to become anything other than what they already are, by default.
It's an awful long way back, but backtracking all the way is the only means of moving forward.

 

[icehorse]

I believe I am properly registered for this forum! I tried to register, I hope I got it right!

I fell in love with the Tao Te Ching the moment I read it, decades ago. I have felt a kinship with Taoism ever since.

As for not mattering, let me ask you this: If one takes the stance that our job is to keep the planet in shape for those generations to come, is that in keeping with the Tao?

 

[crowfeather]

Probably not. Overreaching oneself, one becomes unbalanced.
It is currently popular, among those without power, to ignore their own path and focus instead upon global concerns.
Cart before your avatar
By first fine tuning yourself, you gain power beyond imagining, which brings good into a World that sorely needs it.
This power is not like any power imagined by those who have none.
It is quiet and irresistible, and is exerted by not exerting it.
It does what it does, all by itself, untouched by human hand, or intent.

That taoteching spoke to you at all, speaks volumes about your own potential.
Just try not to force it.

 

[shunyadragon]

Some like the sound of taoism, and so announce that they are taoists.
But mostly, they are no such thing.
Very few Westerners will ever become taoists, no matter how hard they try, because their culture precludes it.
There is one essential qualification that must be met, before one can even begin down this path...

It is that one fully embraces one's own utter lack of importance.

I don't count, and neither do you.

If in the reality? of taoism there is in reality no existence of the tao that exists in reality, and any claim of one who may claims to be a taoist cannot claim to be taoist.

I might as well try to dialogue with cats.

 

[crowfeather]

You are perceptive.

 

[icehorse]

Overreaching oneself, one becomes unbalanced.

I want to bring a Buddhist idea into this discussion. I think it's okay to tackle big problems, the trick is to not be attached to the outcome.

 

[crowfeather]

Fine.
But there is 'big' and then there is 'global'. Humility is important to discover, let alone maintain. To overreach has a negative impact on humility.
True: attachment will undo most things that might have succeeded, and detachment is always the best course.

Taking the far larger picture, as an aside: if you truly care for the World, as opposed to caring for it only for the enjoyment of future humans, then might it not be more beneficial to the World to let humanity run its rotten course, and vanish from the face of the Earth? Who knows: humans may evolve into something superior, before that happens?
Taoism is a largely non-interventionist way.

Every spiritually-inclined person I have ever met has been unable to entertain viewing anything in other than purely human-centric terms.
I view this as a spectacular failing in humans, and do not consider humans as the be-all and end-all.

 

[David T]

Fine.
But there is 'big' and then there is 'global'. Humility is important to discover, let alone maintain. To overreach has a negative impact on humility.
True: attachment will undo most things that might have succeeded, and detachment is always the best course.

Taking the far larger picture, as an aside: if you truly care for the World, as opposed to caring for it only for the enjoyment of future humans, then might it not be more beneficial to the World to let humanity run its rotten course, and vanish from the face of the Earth? Who knows: humans may evolve into something superior, before that happens?
Taoism is a largely non-interventionist way.

Every spiritually-inclined person I have ever met has been unable to entertain viewing anything in other than purely human-centric terms.
I view this as a spectacular failing in humans, and do not consider humans as the be-all and end-all.

David Abrams "spell of the sensuous" and his" becoming animal: an earthly cosmology" are very good and you might discover be isn't all about humans. John Muir is another who comes to mind as well. I do agree western spirituality is way way about us and all about us and everything is subjective to us. But that's our universities for ya!. Btw I am touring vancouer island this summer, stunning place.

 

[icehorse]

Taking the far larger picture, as an aside: if you truly care for the World, as opposed to caring for it only for the enjoyment of future humans, then might it not be more beneficial to the World to let humanity run its rotten course, and vanish from the face of the Earth? Who knows: humans may evolve into something superior, before that happens?
Taoism is a largely non-interventionist way.

I have often meditated on a non-human-centric view of the world. My moral axiom is that improving the well being of conscious creatures is "good". I do think it would be a shame however, if there were no conscious creatures on the planet who would be apt to appreciate the Milky Way : )

As far as non-interventionalist, hmmm, my take has been a bit different, and that is:

- it's ok to work for change, just be attached to outcomes
- any positive change is apt to be met with counter forces.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

I want to bring a Buddhist idea into this discussion. I think it's okay to tackle big problems, the trick is to not be attached to the outcome.

That has its counterpart in Daoism too.

Therefore the Master
acts without doing anything
and teaches without saying anything.
Things arise and she lets them come;
things disappear and she lets them go.
She has but doesn't possess, acts but doesn't expect.
When her work is done, she forgets it.
That is why it lasts forever.

Tao Te Ching - Stanza 4

 

[crowfeather]

Which is why the master, having observed what he knows, declines to defend, explain, or argue for it.

 

[David T]

Which is why the master, having observed what he knows, declines to defend, explain, or argue for it.

Ha I like that!!! There was a post asking was genisis a myth or literal fact. I asked which Christian perspective was I to choose from, the one that rendered other traditions as fiction and it's tradition as fact, or was I to turn that onto the texts that gave rise to that nonsense and treat it as nonsense? Which Christian point of view was I suppose to take? We live in a wierd wierd dark time where the pope makes more sense than most. Historically The pope is the fool.