February 10, 2009 at 5:26 am #30522February 12, 2009 at 10:48 am #30523
Anybody want to share what they believe prevents them from living in the tao, if that is possible?February 12, 2009 at 10:48 am #30525
Anybody want to share what they believe prevents them from living in the tao, if that is possible?February 12, 2009 at 5:56 pm #30527
It depends on the context in which the phrase–in particular
the word “live”–is used.
On the one hand, the Tao represents the “arrow of change”
as driven by the lifeforce. Since we are all immersed
in the lifeforce as a function of being alive, in this
context it would be *impossible* to not “live in it”.
In this context, to “live in it” is purely an existence statement,
and we are living in it automatically as a consequence of being alive.
On the other hand, the phrase “living in the Tao”
could contextually represent a shorthand way of describing
the alignment of one’s inner will WITH the arrow-of-change,
the natural unfolding of life that is the Tao. In other words,
the phrase “living in the Tao” not only represents the actual
life, but the attitude that one carries with it. In that sense,
to “not live in the Tao” would represent someone who does
not trust the lifeforce, has not surrendered to it, and exhausts
a lot of energy trying to fight the direction the universe is
trying to take the person. Such a person would be in
continuous struggle and would be completely unhappy.
In this latter case, the person can remove their barriers
to “living in the Tao” by simply opening up to trust and surrender–
letting go to the nature of the lifeforce and accepting all
changes as they come. Thus, in this context, to “live in it”
represents not only an existential statement, but also represents
a person’s individual outlook on the manner in which they
exist in it.
SFebruary 12, 2009 at 6:31 pm #30529
What does the Tao mean to you?February 13, 2009 at 1:52 am #30531
The Daodejing states that the Tao is beyond description and
that words are insufficient to describe it. I accept this
wholeheartedly, but I suppose it’s fun to try to come up
with approximations motivated by intuition.
Thus, I would use the following pieces of cloth to describe
a part of the infinite tapestry:
1. If the lifeforce is a river, the Tao is its current.
More than that, it is the continuously changing current
that changes completely from location to location and
moment to moment. As soon as you see “it”, you are only
seeing what was–not what is.
2. If time is simply a measurement of change, then
the Tao is the source of *all* change. It is the change-maker,
or the arrow-of-change. In some sense, it is change itself.
This is why it’s indescribable. You can’t describe something
that is the embodiment of change. Since it is *change*, as
soon as you describe it, it has already become “not what
3. The intersection of the Tao with a human life is the
instantaneously and continuously creating “life path” that
one is walking. It is the sidewalk that is being built
continuously before one’s walking feet, but more than that
it is the “sidewalk building energy” that is doing the building.
But more than that, it is the conscious thought that is driving
the “sidewalk building energy”. But more than that, it is the
continuously 100% purely innovating force that is motivating
the aforementioned thought. But more than that, it is all such
things simultaneously because cause/effect implies the evolution
of time, which goes back to the description in #2. Cause
and effect can not be used. The Tao is pure “cause”, in its
most primal form. And of course, this is just a description
of the intersection, which is a proper subset of the whole,
and has proportion to the whole a number indistinguishable from zero.
I could continue to dig deeper, but I’ll leave you with the
Addendum: Then “multiply it by infinity, take it to the depths of forever
and still you will barely have a glimpse of what I am talking about”*
*from the movie “Meet Joe Black”
SFebruary 13, 2009 at 6:44 am #30533
consistently no buddhist trace for quite some time
what is buddhism without buddhism
there are some who define tao
invoke even religious structure
then it is correct to say one is a notFebruary 13, 2009 at 12:48 pm #30535
Thanks for your interesting post.
Is the life force the Tao? Is life force every not the Tao?
Is there anything in life that is not part of change?
What part of you is seeing “it”, seeing what was and not what is?
If the Tao is the source of all change is there any change that is not part of Tao?
Is it possible for Tao and human life not to intersect, can you share when they are not intersected?
Do you ever leave the Tao, if yes where do you go?
BaguaFebruary 13, 2009 at 9:28 pm #30537
My assumption was that this was a statement about a feeling not that one could remove themselves from the Tao or place themselves back into the Tao. Instead of feeling like one is just existing one feels alive. I have not read the article though.February 14, 2009 at 4:19 am #30539
You ask a large number of highly nontrivial questions!
As such, there are too many to answer with the level of care
as in my last post. Let me just provide you with a few nuggets
to chew on. 🙂
>>>Is the life force the Tao? Is life force every not the Tao?
ANS: The lifeforce and the Tao are NOT the same thing.
The lifeforce completely permeates our reality and is
continually creating, but this is purely a manifestation
of the Tao. It is not the Tao itself. The Tao precedes it.
If you trace the lifeforce to its wellspring and if you examine
the directionality of the lifeforce, then you will get a small
glimpse of the Tao. “Don’t confuse the body with the self”
would be an appropriate analogy.
>>>Is there anything in life that is not part of change?
Everything in life is subject to the evolution of time, and time
is simply a measurement of change.
>>>What part of you is seeing “it”, seeing what was and not what is?
ANS: The part that exists in *this* reality.
>>>If the Tao is the source of all change is there any change
>>>that is not part of Tao?
ANS: The lifeforce completely permeates this reality, and therefore
all change is mediated through the interaction with the lifeforce.
Since the lifeforce is a manifestation of the Tao, all change in
this reality is part of the Tao. There may exist other realities
that exist outside of our realm, but I won’t speak about such things
here–so the answer to your question is NO.
>>>Is it possible for Tao and human life not to intersect,
>>>can you share when they are not intersected?
ANS: NO, it’s not possible. We are all servants of the Tao.
Like all servants, we have no choice in whether we follow the
instructions we are given. Ultimately, we do as we must.
The only choice we have in the matter is the manner in which
we follow them . .. and whether or not we accept them.
Colloquially, people say that someone is
“not following the Tao” if their personal attitude
is one of rejection, lack of acceptance, or trying
to fight the inevitable. In truth, they *are* following
the Tao, but they just don’t *recognize* that they are
or accept that they are. To “align with the Tao” is
to awaken to the big picture that is otherwise being
followed blindly and reluctantly.
In reality, while the Tao is indeed the master,
it is also a great ally. It directs the lifeforce to
interact with us in ways that provide spiritual evolution
of the self. Thus while we are subject to the lifeforce,
it acts to our benefit. If you understand the nature of the Tao,
you will see that there can be no alternative. The
Tao is the ultimate Dirac delta of change, and this is
the necessary vehicle for spiritual evolution.
>>>Do you ever leave the Tao, if yes where do you go?
ANS: If you went anywhere, it would be, by definition,
outside of this reality, as per some previous answers.
Outside of this reality is another matter entirely.
StevenFebruary 14, 2009 at 4:24 am #30541
Nice retro song . . . I like the bit about him being just as “free as any Dog” 🙂 SFebruary 14, 2009 at 10:03 am #30543
Thanks for your feedback, much appreciated.
It seems we are all part of Tao, creator and creation are one. Because our intellect, thoughts or Yi can go in many directions it does not mean we leave the here and now, or creation leaves creator or humanity leaves Tao. This clarity reveals there are is no separation of Tao and humanity and Creator and Creation. From this reality there is no past and future, no us and them, no Tao and lifeforce, but only the absolute reality that creator and creation are one integrated whole. Thoughts, feelings, desires, fantasies and imagination do not take one from this integrated whole, they are aspects of it, they come and go like the sun and moon playing in the sky, the sky never leaves.
IMHO Nei Gong allows one to realize this. Its like a diamond in the rough, the diamond is always there. Nei Gong is about clearing the rough to see what always existed, the diamond or our tao nature.
BaguaFebruary 14, 2009 at 1:26 pm #30545
I don’t know that I agree completely with this perspective. 🙂
You didn’t think I’d let the dialogue end there, did you? LOL.
Two people handcuffed together are inexorably linked and
inseparable, but that does not imply that the two people overlap.
Two sets can intersect (not be disjoint) but still not be
“the same set” or “one set”.
Metaphorically speaking, the Tao is the ultimate singularity
and the embodiment of change. While we are inseparably
connected to it, that does not mean that we are inside the
Thus we are subject to the ripples and pulsations it emits.
We are subject to change and the evolution of time.
Understanding or knowing the Tao doesn’t take you into
the singularity. It doesn’t mean that you are static deep within,
and that change is simply the removal of an illusion–to recognize
who you are. Awakening to your true nature is only *part* of the journey.
The other part, in my view, is to ride the waves of change from
this core space and allow them to instantaneously in each moment
to enrich the core space *itself*.
Without change, there is no reason to be.
Think of it this way . . . Suppose one reached complete
enlightenment and understood their true nature, then what becomes
your purpose if there is no change? You would have effectively
nullified your reason for being! Clearly this is not the full
story . . . but it would have been if your true nature were,
in fact, static.
Either that, or if your true core nature were in fact static
(which I don’t happen to believe), then we intentionally
wrapped ourselves in these layers “of crap” and of mystery
because we were far too bored to continue our meaningless
existence as a static being.
But this latter view seems far too sad and pathetic to me
to be true; I’ll choose the former one that I espoused earlier
in which recognition of one’s true nature is supplemented
continuously by enrichment at the core level as well.
Smiling to your true nature (as it evolves 🙂 ),
StevenFebruary 14, 2009 at 5:27 pm #30547
I will drop the entire dialogue and embrace with what then exists!
Thanks for the interaction and appreciate the playful exchange.
Smiling back to you.
BaguaFebruary 16, 2009 at 12:08 am #30549
This sentence is grammatically hard to understand:
“I will drop the entire dialogue and embrace with what then exists!”
Is this intentional?
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.