Wu Wei and the Three Jewels

Comments

• Carl

  February 2010

  Good thoughtful questions! Chapter 67 is what you refer to. I'll paste it below. I shall just write in a stream of consciousness, not to reread or edit it. So, forgive me ahead of time for errors of omission and commission. Beside, what the heck. This are Taoist thoughts anyway.
  
  
  As you loose the certainty that you are 'somebody' ('I', name, your story, etc.), wúwéi (??) or letting things taking their own course, comes as naturally and inextricably as night follows day. Day being the "I am ____", night becoming more of a "only seems as if it were there" sense of self. Nothing else but wúwéi (letting things taking their own course) is possible when you have little thought of self and as few desires as possible. The same goes for the three treasures (or Jewels). It is impossible to not have compassion, frugality, and not dare to take the lead. These come naturally. The reason they are treasures is that we (and all life) are not born 'having little thought of self and as few desires as possible'. These treasures are like the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow (and about as easy to come by).
  
  
  Our lack of them account for our desire to have them, just as imbalance hungers for balance. The treasures are not "good" or "bad", not "beneficial" or "harmful". They are only the result of circumstance (i.e., little thought of self and few desires as possible). Try as we might, we can never "force" anything to occur. What is actually happening when we are "forcing" is that we are being "forced" to do what we do because of underlying imbalance. "Forcing" is just a symptom of imbalance. Imbalance is evidenced by our desire, need, fear, anger, action. Imbalance is how nature works! In other words, nature uses imbalance to initiate the drive for balance. It makes for what appear to us to be a circle of cause and effect.
  
  
  Whether of not this true is impossible to know for all knowing is a result of this ostensibly natural process. That is why we say, To know yet to think that one does not know is best; Not to know yet to think that one knows will lead to difficulty. One of the main difficulties we face in returning to our destiny is setting aside cultures impact on us from infancy. We are taught to 'know'. Thinking that one does not know is regarded as a problem to solve. Cultural trains us to think we need to find the answer to what we don't know, or to find someone who will know. Not knowing is culturally unacceptable. In Taoism, it is just the opposite.
  
  
  
  It is easy to see why it takes a while to get from there to here. Okay, that's enough. After all, One who knows does not speak; one who speaks does not know. That should also include "thinks and writes".
  
  The whole world says that my way is vast and resembles nothing. It is because
  it is vast that it resembles nothing. If it resembled anything, it would, long
  before now, have become small.
  
  I have three treasures
  Which I hold and cherish.
  The first is known as compassion,
  The second is known as frugality,
  The third is known as not daring to take the lead in the empire;
  Being compassionate one could afford to be courageous,
  Being frugal one could afford to extend one's territory,
  Not daring to take the lead in the empire one could afford to be lord over the vessels.
  
  Now, to forsake compassion for courage, to forsake frugality for expansion, to
  forsake the rear for the lead, is sure to end in death.
  
  Through compassion, one will triumph in attack and be impregnable in defense.
  What heaven succors it protects with the gift of compassion.
• VtheCursed

  February 2010

  Thank you for your reply, Carl, and I'll spend some time looking at your response and the verses you mentioned more in-depth.
  
  You mentioned the process of losing our idea of "self" or "I" -- this is something I have read and pondered frequently, but this is also something I haven't quite grasped. I think there may have been a few moments in my past when I really got the idea of it, but they were brief at best.
  
  How does one go about reaching that point of "selflessness"? I recall reading that any attempt to "force" our sense of self to disappear is a contradiction -- because we are using our "self" to get rid of our "self," and therefore it is doomed to failure. It was a more a matter of "getting the point" -- but I've yet to do that, and it's very frustrating.
  
  How is one supposed to go about reaching this point of understanding?
• Carl

  February 2010

  Again, a great question! I was going to make a blog post on it but 'ran away at the mouth' as you can see. So, I'll just send you this and perhaps clean it up and post a more pithy answer later. Still, it is a devil of a subject to write about. Again, I apologize in advance. But, who knows, it may answer in part some of your question. Here goes...
  
  =====================
  Before we get into the particulars of extinguishing self I must clarify what self is in the first place. The idea here is that understanding your problem well helps you solve it.
  
  Let's consider self in the largest possible sense of the word. In biology there is the concept of emergent properties where simple structures, processes and order form a foundation pattern upon which more complex structures, processes and order emerge. I see this principle at work, not only in biology, but throughout existence. Indeed, what is biology but an emergent property of some more primal order? It is helpful, then, to think of self as just such an emergent property, not only of biology, but also of something more primal.
  
  Taking this a step further, it is helpful to see the natural impetus in all things to maintain a kind of self integrity. From the impetus that keeps an atom of hydrogen stable (more or less) to the impetus that keeps the human heart pumping away. In all things, this impetus to maintain self integrity is un self conscious. The atom doesn't think it has to 'keep it together', and neither does the heart as it pumps its life away. The worm, the tree, the crow all feel the impetus to 'keep it together'… to survive, but not think it should. There is impetus to 'just do it', without any thoughts of choice or otherwise. Humans are somewhat different.
  
  We experience an emergent property of thought – the mind. We are able to think that we know. One of the earliest things we think that we know is "I am". All the while, the impetus to survive and maintain self integrity is pulling the strings. Moreover, the more certain one is of "I am", the harder it is to that which is pulling the strings. About 400 years ago, the belief in "I am" got a boost in the West from Descartes: I think, therefore I am; or I am thinking, therefore I exist. From a Taoist point of view, such certainty is just asking for trouble. As chapter 71 puts it:
  
  To know yet to think that one does not know is best; Not to know yet to think that one knows will lead to difficulty
  
  Seeing all we think and do as an emergent property of something more primal, if not eternal, can be extremely helpful once you can 'feel it in your bones'. On the other hand, thinking that the ideals and beliefs we have are true and real in their own right leads to never ending difficulty.
  
  Buddha's Second Noble Truth states that, The illusion of self originates and manifests itself in a cleaving to things. The Third and Fourth go on to say that conquering self, extinguishing self and self disappearing will end suffering. Finally he gives us the Eight Fold Path as a means to accomplish this self disappearance. The question is, does this set up and ideal impossible to achieve. As always, does believing this create unnecessary difficulty for ourselves? Are we shooting ourselves in the foot?
  
  Up to this point we see that the idea of self is perhaps just and emergent property of a simpler reality. This gives some clues on one's goal of extinguishing self. From here it will help to examine the ideal of extinguishing self from an emergent property point of view.
  
  Ideals themselves can also be seen as emergent properties, not only of biology, but also of something more primordial. It is not an accidental whim of nature that human thought is rife with ideals: spiritual, political, romantic, health, intelligence, knowledge, sports… you name it! Ideals provide the direction for our actions, our self actualization. The question is: Our ideals the emergent property of what?
  
  First, let's review: In biology there is the concept of emergent properties where primary structures, processes and order form a foundation pattern upon which more complex structures, processes and order emerge. I see this principle at work throughout Nature. The only primary 'ideal' I see in Nature, as a whole, is balance. This is the 'ideal' around which the 'integrity of self' of all things work. (Whoa! That's a big chuck to bite off, I'll admit. Let's bite of an even bigger one!)
  
  The ideal of balance, behind the impetus of Nature itself, is never realized! Achieving the state of perfect balance is made more perfect by allowing imbalance. In other words perfect balance is counter balanced by some degree of imbalance. The ideal can never be reached for reaching it would become 'one sided', i.e., perfect and complete balance is essentially imbalanced. It is not 'whole' for it abandons imbalance. Naturally, the Tao Te Ching puts this principle more poetically: Great perfection seems chipped, Yet use will not wear it out.
  
  Now we finally come to the how of extinguishing the self. The warning above gave us a clue (i.e., To know yet to think that one does not know is best; Not to know yet to think that one knows will lead to difficulty.) The question is, how does one know and yet think they don't? This really boils down to how depth of your faith in [url=http:/www.centertao.org/tao-te-ching/dc-lau/names] and [url=http:/www.centertao.org/tao-te-ching/dc-lau/words]. The more faith in names and words you have, the further from the constant you'll be.
  
  Chapter 56 gives us more clues: One who knows does not speak [thinks, writes]; one who speaks [thinks, writes] does not know. I added 'thinks, writes' as those are all interconnected with 'speaks'. To put this in an emergent property context: first comes think, then speak, then write. Next we chapter 56 advices us to "Shut the doors, Blunt the sharpness; Untangle the knots; Soften the glare" and so on. These are all metaphorical for softening our faith in names and words. Then come the idea of "mysterious sameness", which points out the illusion of difference. The illusion of difference is essential to maintain meaning and faith in names and words.
  
  Okay, I'll admit, we are only beating around the bush of the why and the how of extinguishing self. This may be as far as we can go. Buddha's Second Noble Truth perhaps show us why. Namely, The illusion of self originates and manifests itself in a cleaving to things. Words, names, ideals, beliefs are all things to which we can cling to maintain our sense of self. Yet, as we have seen, even absent these things, we would still experience the primary property of self. The illusion of self, itself, is a natural emergent property. Any notion of ridding ourselves of it is itself an illusionary ideal. Round and round we go!
  
  This brings us back to the only escape I have found: mysterious sameness. The more I can see similarity in all things, the softer and more muddled my faith becomes in apparent differences (word, names, beliefs, ideals). I'm able to be more like other animals, less dominated by my that which so easily throws me off balance (again, words, names, beliefs, ideals).
  
  Perhaps chapter 36 offers the best view of the 'how' extinguishing self plays out in each of us.
  If you would have a thing shrink,
  You must first stretch it;
  If you would have a thing weakened,
  You must first strengthen it;
  If you would have a thing laid aside,
  You must first set it up;
  If you would take from a thing,
  You must first give to it.
  This is called subtle discernment:
  The submissive and weak will overcome the hard and strong.