Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Chapter of the Week: #66 [Archive]
[Note: I italicize phrases I borrow from the chapter, and link to phrases I borrow from other chapters to help tie chapters together. Some say that this makes reading it tedious at times... oh well 
]
Language, the 'process' we use for thinking is an art. Take painting, for example. A painter's art is a reflection - an interpretation - of reality as seen through the artist's (observer's) eyes. Likewise, thoughts are a reflection of reality as seen through the thinker's (observer's) mind. Thoughts then reflect the thinker's mind (and more deeply his core emotion) with reality as the stimulus. Reality is a light which casts shadows - our thoughts - as it passes through our emotion. Thus, to think that one does not know is best, given the tenuous thread connecting thinking to reality.
Next, how does one know one knows? That's easy. If my knowing can be put it into words and [chref=1]spoken[/chref], it is not knowing, but only a shadow of knowing tainted by emotion and experience. Although, I do feel I am getting close to knowing if I end up with a broad, balanced and emotionally neutral point of point.
Chapter 12 speaks about how our senses [chref=12]blind[/chref] us. For example: [chref=12]The five notes make his ears deaf.[/chref] I can see adding a cautionary word about thought here... Something like: The two thoughts, yea and nay, blind man's mind.
What is obvious to me is how much we, as a species, long to know and to control. To know and control ties in with our belief in free will. The reason we don't hold children and animals accountable for their actions is that they don't know better, thus they are not in control ? their 'will' is not free and some other agency (instinct and such) is in control. Adult humans on the other hand...
Thus this chapter is equally telling by putting it this way,
To have free will (control) yet to think that one does not is best;
Not to have free will (control) yet to think that one has, will lead to difficulty.
]Language, the 'process' we use for thinking is an art. Take painting, for example. A painter's art is a reflection - an interpretation - of reality as seen through the artist's (observer's) eyes. Likewise, thoughts are a reflection of reality as seen through the thinker's (observer's) mind. Thoughts then reflect the thinker's mind (and more deeply his core emotion) with reality as the stimulus. Reality is a light which casts shadows - our thoughts - as it passes through our emotion. Thus, to think that one does not know is best, given the tenuous thread connecting thinking to reality.
Next, how does one know one knows? That's easy. If my knowing can be put it into words and [chref=1]spoken[/chref], it is not knowing, but only a shadow of knowing tainted by emotion and experience. Although, I do feel I am getting close to knowing if I end up with a broad, balanced and emotionally neutral point of point.
Chapter 12 speaks about how our senses [chref=12]blind[/chref] us. For example: [chref=12]The five notes make his ears deaf.[/chref] I can see adding a cautionary word about thought here... Something like: The two thoughts, yea and nay, blind man's mind.
What is obvious to me is how much we, as a species, long to know and to control. To know and control ties in with our belief in free will. The reason we don't hold children and animals accountable for their actions is that they don't know better, thus they are not in control ? their 'will' is not free and some other agency (instinct and such) is in control. Adult humans on the other hand...
Thus this chapter is equally telling by putting it this way,
To have free will (control) yet to think that one does not is best;
Not to have free will (control) yet to think that one has, will lead to difficulty.
Comments
Note: The Tao Te Ching can be obscure, especially if you think you're supposed to understand what it's saying! We find it easier and more instructive to simply contemplate how the chapter resonates with your personal experience. Becoming more aware at this fundamental level simplifies life. This approach conforms to the view that true knowing lies within ourselves. Thus, when a passage in the scripture resonates, you've found your inner truth. The same applies for when it evokes a question; questions are the grist for self realization.
Chapter 66
The reason why the River and the Sea are able to be king of the hundred valleys
is that they excel in taking the lower position. Hence they are able to be king
of the hundred valleys.
Therefore, desiring to rule over the people,
One must in one's words humble oneself before them;
And, desiring to lead the people,
One must, in one's person, follow behind them.
Therefore the sage takes his place over the people yet is no burden;
takes his place ahead of the people yet causes no obstruction. That is why the
empire supports him joyfully and never tires of doing so.
It is because he does not contend that no one is the empire is in a position to
contend with him.
This morning I interpreted the River and the Sea to be consciousness - the 'silent' awareness side of self-awareness. Not 'my' consciousness, but its universal and eternal root - as the Bhagavad Gita puts it: "That which is seen between two unseens". My perception or rather conception of self has changed over the years, but the Sea of consciousness into which all my experience and sensory input since birth flows has remained unchanged. Its light shines eternal and constant. The comings and goings of the senses, emotions, desires, joy and sorrow are another matter. These are like the people. Of course, King consciousness is all blended together with these hundred valleys - my instincts and experiences. This mix contends and gets swept up in the battle, especially when things are 'bad', i.e., not going my way. Only when this blended consciousness of mine takes the lower position can I feel its king. Jeez, this is hard to put into words; it comes out so gobblty gooky. Of course... 'the consciousness that [chref=1]can be spoken of [/chref] is not the constant consciousness'.
I learned early on about following behind. I and a group of folks worked for AWA, an Australian company. AWA promised us certain amenities if we'd work in the outback... back of beyond. However, AWA didn't deliver and the employees grumbled incessantly. I took them at their word and attempted to organized a strike. They all backed down and I got fired.
The moral: I took words at face value which triggered my initiative. I wasn't following their reality, just their words. People can not be led where they don't really want to go, yet we blame leaders for leading folks astray. It is simply the blind leading the blind. And humanity never learns because the older and wiser die and are replaced by the young and foolish, like myself way back in Australia, who have to learn 'it' all over again. Our species would be [chref=80] happier in the way it lived [/chref] if we realized this process... history does repeat itself because we can't really learn from history abstractly - only experientially. Knowing this we might be more [chref=15]tentative [/chref] and circumspect... yeah, right.
Taking the lower position... and... not contend are invaluable models for helping me cope. What ever I might say about them is understatement. As models, I've found them without equal for raising my kids, for marriage, and for my relationship with life in general. Alas, Taking the lower position... and... not contending are beyond the power of will to initiate. Will is good for [chref=8]contending [/chref], not for letting go. What allows me to go to sleep at night is what enables me to take the lower position and not contend.
I also think ?leading by following? can include allowing natural consequences to happen to people, instead of trying to be clever, to have the answers, that will allow people (including myself), to have our cake and eat it too. But life doesn?t work that way. We may think we?re pursuing fulfillment of desires, and getting our way, in the short-term. But in the long-term, we all have to ?pay the piper?.