Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Don't Think, It's All Right
[Note: I italicize phrases I borrow from the chapter, and link to phrases I borrow from other chapters to help tie chapters together. While making it more tedious to read, :? the Tao Te Ching is best pondered in the context of the whole.
Knowing when to stop is the essence of art. And the art of living is knowing when to stop. A life time is the [chref=41]great[/chref] canvas onto which we 'paint' our life as we live out each day. We finish our unique work of art when we take our last breath.
I spent many youthful years cutting up and naming this uncarved block - life. I still do; being the big brained animal that I am. All the more reason why [chref=2]practicing the teaching that uses no words[/chref] is the only 'teaching' that works. By and large, it all boils down to this: [chref=36]If you would have a thing laid aside, you must first set it up[/chref], and so on. Alas, one of the most tempting [chref=53]by-paths[/chref] in life is the desire to find a short cut around the suffering side of life. We want it the 'easy' way. Likewise, we are seduced by the illusion of perfection. It is as though we believe that [chref=2]the good[/chref] can exist without the bad, or [chref=2]the beautiful[/chref] without the ugly. Thus we hack away at the uncarved block driven by the [chref=37]desire[/chref] to have it our way. All we get in return are endless [chref=63]difficulties[/chref].
This is one reason why [chref=70]my words are very easy to understand and very easy to put into practice, yet no one in the world can understand them or put them into practice[/chref]. We want it both ways - easy and perfect. Only when [chref=45]great perfection seems chipped[/chref] (in our stream of consciousness) are we able to [chref=33]know contentment[/chref] a little deeper. Indeed, the great way [chref=64]is easy[/chref] when we can be content with chipped perfection.
Knowing when to stop is the essence of art. And the art of living is knowing when to stop. A life time is the [chref=41]great[/chref] canvas onto which we 'paint' our life as we live out each day. We finish our unique work of art when we take our last breath.
I spent many youthful years cutting up and naming this uncarved block - life. I still do; being the big brained animal that I am. All the more reason why [chref=2]practicing the teaching that uses no words[/chref] is the only 'teaching' that works. By and large, it all boils down to this: [chref=36]If you would have a thing laid aside, you must first set it up[/chref], and so on. Alas, one of the most tempting [chref=53]by-paths[/chref] in life is the desire to find a short cut around the suffering side of life. We want it the 'easy' way. Likewise, we are seduced by the illusion of perfection. It is as though we believe that [chref=2]the good[/chref] can exist without the bad, or [chref=2]the beautiful[/chref] without the ugly. Thus we hack away at the uncarved block driven by the [chref=37]desire[/chref] to have it our way. All we get in return are endless [chref=63]difficulties[/chref].
This is one reason why [chref=70]my words are very easy to understand and very easy to put into practice, yet no one in the world can understand them or put them into practice[/chref]. We want it both ways - easy and perfect. Only when [chref=45]great perfection seems chipped[/chref] (in our stream of consciousness) are we able to [chref=33]know contentment[/chref] a little deeper. Indeed, the great way [chref=64]is easy[/chref] when we can be content with chipped perfection.
Comments
Or so biology [chref=65]hoodwinks[/chref] us into believing. The implication is that if we simply 'choose' to do "just [chref=43]actions[/chref]", we become "just". No disrespect to Aristotle, but his statement rings of Ms. Reagan's "just say no to drugs". Yes, indeed,... if you want to be happy, just do happy [chref=63]actions[/chref] to make yourself happy. That view makes me want to pull my hair out! :roll: And yet, that is how we approach life. We chase happiness through activities that we think will make us happy (this is where [chref=3]desire[/chref] comes into the picture). And, advise others that all they need to do is.... (fill in what ever you think brings happiness).
So, what really motivates the myriad creatures - all living things including us - into a particular action or inaction?
Experience shows that if we feel we need to act we do. Aristotle, and the NY Times article misses this basic point. Believing we can free will ourselves to act "justly, be self-controlled or courageous", for example, still leaves us "sitting around analyzing ourselves". Thinking we should [chref=37]act[/chref] a certain way does not cause us to feel driven to act that way. And so the mind just goes round and round in an imaginary cycle of 'should... if... but...; should... if... but...'.
Emotion is the bedrock of awareness and action. The idea that the machinations of the mind can direct that is like saying the forest resting on a granite mountain is going to influence the granite beneath. 99% of the influence is one way, from the granite base upward ? from the emotion upward.
So what stirs our emotions enough to lead to overt action, or inaction? First and foremost, instinct and circumstances. In the wild, [chref=5]ruthless[/chref] natural conditions exert tremendous forces upon us which connect at the base rock of emotion. The darkness of night, the wetness of rain, the growl of the lion, the chill of winter, hunger.
Civilization has struggled for millennia to shield us from these forces of nature. But, we remain biologically, instincts and all, the same as we were in the wilderness. Thus, in the process, we have shifted life meaning (survival) from a purely physical challenge to an intellectual and emotional challenge. Out of this has arisen our illusion of self and 'its choices' ? namely that by simply imagining it to be so, it can be so. Reality happens at a much deeper and more [chref=6]mysterious[/chref] level than imagination can reach. Imagination is little more than 'self speech' driven by emotion - the lonely animal within. Thus, to paraphrase the Tao Te Ching, "The way that can be imagined [chref=1]is not the constant way[/chref]...".
As long as we believe what we think,
....We are doomed,
........Our misperceptions to repeat.
Oh,... and happy new year!
Certainly some, if not all, of it is physiological. There is an accompanying "drive for" or "discomfort in the lack of" everything a human needs to survive. Hunger if you don't eat, thirst if you don't drink, cold if you lack shelter, etc... So, left solely to these motivators, humans would survive.
But a human can reason out a long term benefit that motivates him/her to act also. That is purely psychological and emmotional but it might be motivated by a perceived future need for something related to survival. Like I go to college to get an education to get a job that I want to earn money to buy food. I am not necessarily hungry right now but I know sooner or later I am going to need some money to buy food.
But it might be tied to something not needed for survival. Like I want that job because I know I will make enough money to buy fancy, exotic, or gourmet foods that I might not otherwise have access to. I would survive just fine on rice and beans but I "create" a need for something else.
I would guess maybe 90% of my life is "created" like in the latter example. But I also think it would be hard to live in a cardboard box now that I know how it could be.
I think "dissatisfaction" is also created. It is only out of wanting something else or deciding that something else is better.
If I lived in a cardboard box and then acquired an aluminum shed, I might think I was in heaven. But since I have lived in a big house with plumming and electricity, I would probably still be dissatisfied.
Hi Topher, Good to have your 'two cents'. The piggy bank has been getting a little light lately...
"Created" is a label for what is, in fact, no different than the path all life follows. We just think it is somehow different for us because we think (wishful thinking actually) we have the control to "create". Belief, including this one, is simply a cherished 'attachment' that creates and maintains the illusion of self,... (Buddha's Second Truth).
Case in point: A cat living in a warm comfortable house would find it just as hard to switch to a cardboard box. Of course, unable to think and dwell on the change in circumstances, the cat would 'soon' adapt (and not dwell on the past). For thinkers like us, some of us can adapt 'soon', while others of us dwell on our losses till our dying breath brings us rest.
We might be saying the same thing but from a slightly different perspective. For instance, I wouldn't say the cat adapts, I would say he just forgets. You said the same thing kind of when you said "not dwell on the past". You also said "thinker". I am not convinced "thinking" is what makes us different than the cat. For all I know, he thinks the live long day. He doesn't seem to have language, though. Without language, he can't keep alive a story about how it was better before the cardboard box.
I heard somewhere that Helen Keller said she had no distinct memories prior to gaining language. Not sure if it is true but it would be interesting to know.
So when I say "created", I mean it more like a story we tell with language -- it doesn't exist outside of language.
Without the ability to produce and maintain a "thought" or "idea" (possible only with language), we all would just be scratching around for the next meal, the next drink of water, or the next place to lie down and sleep, instead of planning or scheming for the future or even dwelling on the past.
So, if we are suffering about life because of the story we tell ourself about it, just tell ourself a different story that doesn't create suffering. We can even recreate our past by making up a new story about it. I mean, after all, we created the story we have now in response to what happened. Why not just make up a new one that we like better?
Why would we make up such a disempowering story about ourself and life? Making people wrong, should, shouldn't, right, wrong, good, bad -- these are ways we use to justifiy that our story is the right one for what happened. It is nothing but BS. Notice that we only hang out with people that agree with our version of the story. The story can't abide scrutiny and we are "in love" with our story.
I only say this like it is a possible. It might make something avaialble to you. It isn't true.
Lately, I couldn't afford it. Now I can.
I get that but I am not as convinced that we have no control over our emotions. It is possible to act contrary to our emotions but only to the extent that we bridal them and even then not more than a fraction of the time. I can totally see how my emotions drive me. But emotions are learned and developed. Maybe not, if you are a taoist. :oops:
I think it is the story we tell ourselves; like read "Old Yeller" and bawl. The dog didn't really die. It is just a story. :twisted:
We can tell ourselves stories that drum up certain emotions and then we act accordingly; happy, depressed, excited, doing something...
Maybe we can't "control" our emotions at all, like I said earlier, but we can control the story we tell ourself.
Isn't that like saying the cat is wrong for being a cat? Why not just have fun with the experience of it? Sometimes we might believe what we think. So what? Sometimes we might not believe what we think. So what?
"We are doomed" is a meaning that doesn't really exist except in language.
Exactly! And this is why the Taoist "story" is so effective for anyone who can 'swallow its hole'.
"Wrong"? Let's talk about fish for a moment. If a fish believes that the juicy worm at the end of your hook is what it appears to be (i.e., a safe treat), it is "doomed"... "language" or no language.
Maybe we are interpreting "doomed" differently? I think of the word in this sense: [chref=72]When the people lack a proper sense of awe, then some awful visitation will descend upon them[/chref]. By believing what we believe, we keep the "sense of awe" and [chref=1]mystery[/chref] at bay. In doing so, we don't see the hook. The irony: the hook is one we have been making over the past 50,000 years or so. :oops:
Okay. I can see your point of view.
I choose the point of view that the fish can swim and it can be eaten. No good or bad in either one. It is as it is. Perfect.
People think and believe what they think or not. There is no good or bad in it. It is as it is. Perfect. This leads to constant rise and fall of civilizations. I don't conisdered it doomed. It is as it is. Perfect.
Doomed is just a story. Perfect is just a story. Neither is true. Which story do you choose?
You mean "good" as in... [chref=2]the whole world recognizes the good as the good, yet this is only the bad[/chref], right? I too see no "good" or "bad" in nature. "Good and bad" are purely human ideas... as are all ideas, of course.
But still, this idea of "good" and "bad" is symptomatic of some simpler and deeper human reality. It all come back to pleasure. If a rat had a brain big enough to think and [chref=56]speak[/chref], it would say, "Sugar is good; cats are bad". And likewise, a cat would say, "Rats are good, dogs are bad".
So what we "think and believe" is connected to how we personally experience - feel - life. Bottom line: All we ever try to do is feel better. If our "story" makes us feel better, we'll "believe" it.
But this is the 'fly in the ointment'. Pure white bread feels very "good" to the rat's taste buds as it's eating, but the long term consequences feel "bad" (malnutrition and death). Our feelings about things in wild natural conditions inform us well - evolution works! As we humans began to [chref=16]wilfully innovate[/chref] without [chref=72]a proper sense of awe[/chref], we changed that equation. We can no longer trust our feelings to inform us as well as they did in the wild.
Our feelings about life drive our thoughts and direct our perceptions. We end up, like the rat, thinking that rich foods are "good". Only in nature's wilderness are rich foods - fats and sugars - "good". We've changed the equation. The same principle of misperception applies to all perception. This is why it is not a "bad" idea to be [chref=15]tentative, as if fording a river in winter[/chref]. The more tentative we can be, the easier it is to [chref=2]keep to the deed that consists in taking no action and practice the teaching that uses no words[/chref].
So this is where I start to look at impact. I can say it is all just a story and there is no inherent "good" or "bad" but when I say that I also know that there is an impact to what we do and say.
It requires deciding based on intellectualizing rather then just the feelings of it. It is much less reliable and less constant.