Buddy, I'm glad you're here. I admire your honesty and fearlessness in posting what you want to post, and I know the Abbotts are happy you are here. They told me about you and suggested I try the message board just because of you.
If we are being tolerant of someone, are we truly accepting them as they are or are we just being indulgent of their opinions with which we disagree? We don?t tolerate the cold, we just feel it when it hits us. Also, if we free ourselves from the notion of free will, aren?t we in essence practicing free will? The great Taoists throughout Chinese history and literature were hermits and it?s pretty tough to be a hermit if you don?t practice the free will to be one. If you do not choose to ignore ?worldly? distractions, they will distract you, won?t they?
Do butterflies "practice" free will when they fly south for the winter? Why do they fly south? They need to, to survive. Why do I "ignore worldly distractions" as much as I do? I need to, to survive. Sure, I can claim superiority to the butterfly by attributing my 'choice' as free will while the lowly butterfly is simply acting out of instinct. Who benefits from that viewpoint? I do, naturally. If the butterfly has a viewpoint, I wonder what it would be? Would the butterfly acknowledge my [chref=39]superiority[/chref] (over all other life on earth) due to my claim of free will?.... Lots of questions, eh? When I answer them honestly, I always find myself in the [chref=61]lower position[/chref], which is not the place I generally like to be, the 'ego' being what it is. But, I must confess, it is the most content place I've found in life.
Oh, and a thought on tolerance vs acceptance. If I were actually the perfect person I'm able to imagine, I'd be able to truly accept all that is, and is not. However, being a simple animal with biologically based instinct, the best I can do is tolerate what is unpleasant and wait for the grace of acceptance to reach my heart.
As a retired entomologist, who?s specialty was Lepidoptera, the order of insects commonly known as the butterfly, I would concur that all butterflies live to survive and also of course survive to live. Be that as it may, I would also submit that each and every butterfly of a given species lives in exactly the same manner. Certain species fly south to avoid the frigid temperatures, but some (within that particular given species) don?t choose to go to Florida for the beach and others to Arizona for low humidity. Strangely enough or perhaps logically, they (the given species) do always end up in the same general area, whether for the beach, low humidity or whatever. This is instinct, the biological imperative to survive, that is mapped or imprinted. The instinct to survive is as natural as instinct itself. It?s therefore only natural that your instinct for survival, which for you is the cultivation of peace and contentment, involves the avoidance of worldly distractions. How is it, however, that others do not understand or cannot even imagine the contentment you know? Doesn?t everyone want contentment? Is contentment for everyone different or the same? If it?s the same, why aren?t folks seeing it? Are they choosing not to realize that most of life?s distractions are an illusion or are they simply living in the only manner they can? If they are just being obtuse, then they are more to be pitied then censured, or let us say, tolerated. If they can?t help themselves and are governed by instinct, then surely we must accept them as just another integral part of cosmos. Perhaps some folks just need the salt air of the beaches or the low humidity of the desert to survive and do go there instinctively.
On the other hand, for all I know, maybe butterflies do practice free will. Perhaps it?s part of broad conspiracy on their part to all do the same exact thing and they?re just having one on us. I recall a classic anecdote of a Taoist arhat (could?ve been Buddhist, which the title arhat implies, but I seem to remember it as a Taoist) who fell asleep and dreamed he was a butterfly. When he awoke he found himself pondering that perhaps he was actually the butterfly who was now dreaming that he was the arhat. Perhaps everything is an illusion. Is everything an illusion? Quick, tell me, I want to know now.
P.S. I would like to explain that my stint as an entomologist was of a strictly amateur nature. Between the ages of 8 and 12, I was a rather serious collector of insects, but did in fact retire at the age of 13 on some vaguely Buddhist grounds. So in essence, the statement is true. That said, however, the only reason I began this post in such an unforgivably pompous manner was to provoke the ire of everyone just for laughs.
What a nifty little coincidence that Wen zhong was into butterflies! First, here's the great questions...
[cite] Wen-zhong:[/cite]It's therefore only natural that your instinct for survival, which for you is the cultivation of peace and contentment, involves the avoidance of worldly distractions.
(1) How is it, however, that others do not understand or cannot even imagine the contentment you know?
(2) Doesn't everyone want contentment?
(3) Is contentment for everyone different or the same?
(4) If it's the same, why aren't folks seeing it?
(5) Are they choosing not to realize that most of life's distractions are an illusion or are they simply living in the only manner they can?
(6) If they are just being obtuse, then they are more to be pitied then censured, or let us say, tolerated.
(7) If they can't help themselves and are governed by instinct, then surely we must accept them as just another integral part of cosmos.
Now to those questions...
(1) They haven't reach their dead end yet.
(2) Yes, everyone desperately does.
(3) The same. But, just like the words 'love' and 'desire', the word contentment can be 'misused', or rather confused with, ironically, its opposite.
(4) Ignorance
(5) No one chooses to be ignorant. It comes naturally, thus we all are simply doing the best we can given our biology and the circumstances in which we find ourselves.
(6) Pity, a version of compassion, when felt is more connective than tolerance. Tolerance is more connective than censure. Censure is more connective than beheading.
(7) Yes! if we are capable of that most connective of views. Because this view feels so good, why don't more people embrace it?
An easiest way to make sense of the human predicament is to think of us as animals with a big brain who have over millennia pursued as much comfort and security as possible. With each success, through our use of tools, we've removed ourselves from nature's 'back push' on instinct. A simple example is our natural pull to rich food, which in the wild would be self limiting - there are no grocery stores in the wild. Human 'civilization' makes the growing, refining, cooking and access to rich food possible. Our instinct to eat it ends up making us fat. Those potato chips are so hard to put down, eh?
The cause of our predicament is simply the capability which civilization affords us combined with an instinctive nature evolved to live in the wild... not in civilization. That is the key. We are like fish out of water. We've unwittingly inched out way to where we are and are bewildered by the unintended consequences we are saddled with. And now for a most appropriate quote... [chref=16]Woe to him who wilfully innovates, While ignorant of the constant,[/chref]
Stepping back a bit, I did want to tell Carl how much I enjoyed his ?Guide to Taoist Parenting.? Whether it be brainwashing to some or perhaps a successful experiment to others, one need only listen to, or read as it were, two happy, healthy beings such as Luke and Kyle to know that it is rather just simply, the way to go. The only difficulty, as I see it, is that the basic requirement for Taoist parenting is a truly Taoist parent. This is a very rare breed (which is very strange because everyone is a Taoist whether they realize it or not) and it is the reason I felt the need to push for further exploration of the how and why some people recognize the way, and most cannot or do not. His wonderful words on the ?human predicament? are the perfect mini-guide for outright Taoists and ?un-knowing? Taoists alike (hey, Kyle, is the term I?m looking for perhaps inright Taoists? By the way, if you tell me that it?s actually inleft Taoists, I?m going to sock you in the jaw?). Anyhow, our natural capacity for thought has overtaken us and has caused us to over-think virtually everything. I loved that Carl?s dear mother is naturally delighted with the results of his Taoist Parenting, but is still vaguely cautious of the methodology. Surely, it couldn?t be that easy, but here we have Luke and Kyle as proof positive that it is. The beautiful simplicity of it all is baffling to the ?un-knowing? Taoist. And yet, Carl?s mother is herself a truly Taoist parent (hey, she puts up with Carl, don?t she? -please laugh here ). I?m sure she?s part of the reason he found his way and she heartily agrees with that old Taoist Polonius whom as we all know told his son, ?This above all: to thine ownself be true, And it must follow, as the night the day, Thou canst not then be false to any man.? (I?m sorry, I know it?s corny old Taoist joke, but I couldn?t resist). Anyway, trust me, Grandma Abbott is Taoist.
Oh, yes, and now to fear. Why fear? Well, I would imagine that as life is supposedly a great mystery, the answer that it?s no mystery at all frightens us out of our wits. Even in China, long a hotbed for Taoist teaching, the Taoists were always revered, but at the same time also feared as sorcerers for their profound knowledge of the laws of nature and the universe. Professional Taoists (and I use the term ?professional? in the pejorative sense) throughout the ages have recognized fear as a can of worms that is easily opened and rather useful for fishing. The sage Zhiang Zi-ya maintained, however, that the best fish need not be caught, but will arrive on their own.
[cite] Wen-zhong:[/cite]Stepping back a bit, I did want to tell Carl how much I enjoyed his ?Guide to Taoist Parenting.? ... His wonderful words on the ?human predicament? are the perfect mini-guide for outright Taoists and ?un-knowing? Taoists alike ... The beautiful simplicity of it all is baffling to the ?un-knowing? Taoist.
Hey Wen-zhong, are you trying to wake me from my comfortable place at the bottom of the [chref=61]lower position[/chref]? Seriously, I deeply appreciate your kind words of understanding and support. That my view resonates with you means your view resonates with mine... two peas in a pod... it is deeply comforting.
I've also long viewed everyone as Taoist, whether they 'know' it or not. Actually, not only everyone, but everything, living and 'non-living'. This 'oneness' perspective helps burst my lonely illusions of difference. Seeing similarities are ?milestones? on the way to reality, while seeing differences just deceive and mislead me. Differences are only a chamaeleon's skin deep.
Adding up over the years, the similarities are swallowing me up in [chref=56]mysterious sameness.[/chref]. I am less alone.
Comments
"How can I brainwash my children?"
Intolerance and Judgement
Oh, and a thought on tolerance vs acceptance. If I were actually the perfect person I'm able to imagine, I'd be able to truly accept all that is, and is not. However, being a simple animal with biologically based instinct, the best I can do is tolerate what is unpleasant and wait for the grace of acceptance to reach my heart.
On the other hand, for all I know, maybe butterflies do practice free will. Perhaps it?s part of broad conspiracy on their part to all do the same exact thing and they?re just having one on us. I recall a classic anecdote of a Taoist arhat (could?ve been Buddhist, which the title arhat implies, but I seem to remember it as a Taoist) who fell asleep and dreamed he was a butterfly. When he awoke he found himself pondering that perhaps he was actually the butterfly who was now dreaming that he was the arhat. Perhaps everything is an illusion. Is everything an illusion? Quick, tell me, I want to know now.
P.S. I would like to explain that my stint as an entomologist was of a strictly amateur nature. Between the ages of 8 and 12, I was a rather serious collector of insects, but did in fact retire at the age of 13 on some vaguely Buddhist grounds. So in essence, the statement is true. That said, however, the only reason I began this post in such an unforgivably pompous manner was to provoke the ire of everyone just for laughs.
Now to those questions...
(1) They haven't reach their dead end yet.
(2) Yes, everyone desperately does.
(3) The same. But, just like the words 'love' and 'desire', the word contentment can be 'misused', or rather confused with, ironically, its opposite.
(4) Ignorance
(5) No one chooses to be ignorant. It comes naturally, thus we all are simply doing the best we can given our biology and the circumstances in which we find ourselves.
(6) Pity, a version of compassion, when felt is more connective than tolerance. Tolerance is more connective than censure. Censure is more connective than beheading.
(7) Yes! if we are capable of that most connective of views. Because this view feels so good, why don't more people embrace it?
An easiest way to make sense of the human predicament is to think of us as animals with a big brain who have over millennia pursued as much comfort and security as possible. With each success, through our use of tools, we've removed ourselves from nature's 'back push' on instinct. A simple example is our natural pull to rich food, which in the wild would be self limiting - there are no grocery stores in the wild. Human 'civilization' makes the growing, refining, cooking and access to rich food possible. Our instinct to eat it ends up making us fat. Those potato chips are so hard to put down, eh?
The cause of our predicament is simply the capability which civilization affords us combined with an instinctive nature evolved to live in the wild... not in civilization. That is the key. We are like fish out of water. We've unwittingly inched out way to where we are and are bewildered by the unintended consequences we are saddled with. And now for a most appropriate quote... [chref=16]Woe to him who wilfully innovates, While ignorant of the constant,[/chref]
Fear.
Oh, yes, and now to fear. Why fear? Well, I would imagine that as life is supposedly a great mystery, the answer that it?s no mystery at all frightens us out of our wits. Even in China, long a hotbed for Taoist teaching, the Taoists were always revered, but at the same time also feared as sorcerers for their profound knowledge of the laws of nature and the universe. Professional Taoists (and I use the term ?professional? in the pejorative sense) throughout the ages have recognized fear as a can of worms that is easily opened and rather useful for fishing. The sage Zhiang Zi-ya maintained, however, that the best fish need not be caught, but will arrive on their own.
Hey Wen-zhong, are you trying to wake me from my comfortable place at the bottom of the [chref=61]lower position[/chref]? Seriously, I deeply appreciate your kind words of understanding and support. That my view resonates with you means your view resonates with mine... two peas in a pod... it is deeply comforting.
I've also long viewed everyone as Taoist, whether they 'know' it or not. Actually, not only everyone, but everything, living and 'non-living'. This 'oneness' perspective helps burst my lonely illusions of difference. Seeing similarities are ?milestones? on the way to reality, while seeing differences just deceive and mislead me. Differences are only a chamaeleon's skin deep.
Adding up over the years, the similarities are swallowing me up in [chref=56]mysterious sameness.[/chref]. I am less alone.