Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Which Came First, the Chicken or the Egg?
Each week we address one chapter of the Tao Te Ching. 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 57
Govern the state by being straightforward; wage war by being crafty; but win
the empire by not being meddlesome.
How do I know that it is like that? By means of this.
The more taboos there are in the empire
The poorer the people;
The more sharpened tools the people have
The more benighted the state;
The more skills the people have
The further novelties multiply;
The better known the laws and edicts
The more thieves and robbers there are.
Hence the sage says,
I take no action and the people are transformed of themselves;
I prefer stillness and the people are rectified of themselves;
I am not meddlesome and the people prosper of themselves;
I am free from desire and the people of themselves become simple like the uncarved block.
Read commentary previously posted for this chapter.
Chapter 57
Govern the state by being straightforward; wage war by being crafty; but win
the empire by not being meddlesome.
How do I know that it is like that? By means of this.
The more taboos there are in the empire
The poorer the people;
The more sharpened tools the people have
The more benighted the state;
The more skills the people have
The further novelties multiply;
The better known the laws and edicts
The more thieves and robbers there are.
Hence the sage says,
I take no action and the people are transformed of themselves;
I prefer stillness and the people are rectified of themselves;
I am not meddlesome and the people prosper of themselves;
I am free from desire and the people of themselves become simple like the uncarved block.
Read commentary previously posted for this chapter.
Comments
Addressing the question about the chicken and egg is like playing music by ear. It is 'simpler' that words can address. In fact, words complicate the question. Correlating words is a technique that helps untangle the mental knots in which words tie us. The drawback with the method is that it muddles the mind's certainty which leaves us feeling profoundly [chref=15]hesitant [and] tentative[/chref]. Of course, being [chref=20]muddled[/chref] is only a drawback when we need, and cling to, certainty (which is more often than not apparently). Anyway, here is 'an' answer:
It helps to think of it this way: What came first? The big bang came first, of course. Yet, the big bang originated within 'nothing'. '[chref=40]Nothing[/chref]' is the foundation out of which Something 'pops'. Here, imagining the physics of quantum particles popping in and out of nothing may help. In the same way, the 'egg' is the foundation out of which the chicken 'pops'. Thus, 'first' is a convention we use to convey what 'first' stimulates our sense. What at first seems first may not be in the end be first. So when stipulating which came first, the chicken or the egg, we must first ask what we truly mean by 'first'. What is before 'first'? The 'egg' of creation! What do we see all around us now? The 'chicken' of creation!
Did that make any sense? Here is another angle to consider. 'First' mirrors our perception of time, how it flows. What we think of as time is actually energy 'unfolding' in time ? energy leaps forward, time revolved backward. Of course this is completely counter intuitive. Our biology is set up to look forward. Our eyes are in the front of our head, we walk in a forward direction. We remember bits and pieces of the past and project these out into an imagined future. So, what does this have to do with our which came first question? Because, [chref=40]turning back is how the way moves,[/chref] yet we experience reality as flowing forward, 'first' is not actually 'first' because the 'end' causes the 'beginning'.
Of course, it doesn't really matter which came first. But, pondering seemingly silly questions can help us [chref=56]untangle the knots [and] soften the glare[/chref]. And that matters if we ever hope to [chref=7]accomplish [our] private ends[/chref]!
Note: (See page 3 of Correlations.pdf for chicken egg correlations)
Of course, if you believe otherwise....
I think what I believe is of little consequence to what is.
Normally, I understsand this question to be asked with regard to the first chicken or first checken egg. But if you think of it as any chicken, then the egg comes first. That I know from antiquity (Thanks for the reference).
How can nature produce a chicken egg without a chicken? How can nature produce a chicken without a chicken egg? I have no idea. I know of no chicken that did not start with an egg and no chicken egg that did not come from a chicken.
Oh, and what you believe is of the utmost consequence, for that determines what you think is 'is'.
Opps, bed time. Nighty nite...zzzzzz
I said "of no consequence to what is" not "of no consequence to me". I agree is has a great deal of consequence for me and also for anybody affected by me.
Believing the chicken came before the egg doesn't change whether it did or not.
I just keep reminding myself that I am just a point-of-view and that it is just a point-of-view that I am a point-of-view. What is available from that is that we don't have to fight or, even worse, kill each other, which happens all too often in this world, over what we believe.
Then, there are things that, I believe, aren't that important. I like to focus mostly on utility. It might be fun or interesting to inquire on a question such as this chicken/egg thing, but even if I had the answer, it serves me little to nothing as far as I can see. However, useful discoveries can begin as nothing more than an inquiry.
Maybe someday someone will discover something useful out of knowing, or believing they know, the answer to this question. It may also come just out of the inquiry and may not even be related to the question at hand.
(1) Never! But, I like the thought...
(2) This conforms to Buddha's 2nd truth about how the "illusion of self originates and manifest itself in a cleaving to things". Holding onto a "point of view", any point of view, defines who we are. The more tentative the point of view, the more [chref=15]tentative[/chref] 'I' becomes. As 'I' dims, the sense of [chref=56]mysterious sameness[/chref] (darkness, the [chref=19]uncarved block[/chref], death...) deepens. That is not always a pleasant experience, considering our lust for life, and so holding on becomes emotionally irresistible.
(3) "Have to" are the key words here. And what does that mean? Emotion, i.e., "have to", drives action. This is no different that two cats fighting or any other 'war' which nature employs to get things done, like evolution. Of course, the monkey (us) has machine guns which result in more damage than two chimps throwing sticks at each other. But the "have to" emotional drive is the same in us as it is in the chimp. Our fist challenge is simply having the courage to admit that we are driven by emotion. As long as we live the 'free will' fantasy, we have little hope of deeper self discovery - self [chref=16]knowledge[/chref].
(4) Haven't most, if not all, of the most profound discoveries have come that way... round about? As you would expect seeing how no one is in control of 'it'.
(5) In the Taoist world view, all 'things' are connected. The challenge to our mind's eye is seeing the connection, that [chref=14]thread running through the way[/chref], as we say. The more credence we give to differences, the harder it is to [chref=28]return to being a babe[/chref].
I like 'em scrambled... or in an omelet if I have the fixin's.
A chef told me the other day that an omelet by definition has ham and cheese and that anything else is not an omelet. I reckon anything I have in the fridge is fair game and calling it an omelet is good enough for me as long as it doesn't come out scrambled.
Besides, when met with this tid-bit of information, I was left incredulous so I searched the internet and found absolutely no information to back it up.
Maw! Get the kitchen sink. It's omelette time!