Taoism enlightenment: Absolute Happiness.

Philosophy Forums Philosophy
101

Welcome H.Hammer,
My point is not argument but to give Tao, and Taoist practice (zen, meditation) to others. As I am enlightened, I am happy unconditionally, look at others, see they are ignorant, fixed, I discuss Taoism to deliver them, both in Vietnamese & English. Do you see my Taoism deserves your ponder ?

Chuang Tzu called a Daoist is a True Man. Let’s see he writes about True Men in his book.

“But what is a true man? The true men of old did not override the weak, did not attain their ends by brute strength, and did not gather around them counsellors. Thus, failing they had no cause for regret; succeeding, no cause for self-satisfaction. And thus they could scale heights without trembling, enter water without becoming wet, and go through fire without feeling hot. That is the kind of knowledge which reaches to the depths of Tao.
The true men of old slept without dreams and waked up without worries. They ate with indifference to flavour, and drew deep breaths. For true men draw breath from their heels, the vulgar only from their throats. Out of the crooked, words are retched up like vomit. When man’s attachments are deep, their divine endowments are shallow.
The true men of old did not know what it was to love life or to hate death. They did not rejoice in birth, nor strive to put off dissolution. Unconcerned they came and unconcerned they went. That was all. They did not forget whence it was they had sprung, neither did they seek to inquire their return thither. Cheerfully they accepted life, waiting patiently for their restoration (the end). This is what is called not to lead the heart astray from Tao, and not to supplement the natural by human means. Such a one may be called a true man. Such men are free in mind and calm in demeanor, with high fore heads. Sometimes disconsolate like autumn, and sometimes warm like spring, their joys and sorrows are in direct touch with the four seasons in harmony with all creation, and none know the limit thereof. And so it is that when the Sage wages war, he can destroy a kingdom and yet not lose the affection of the people; he spreads blessing upon all things, but it is not due to his (conscious) love of fellow men. Therefore he who delights in understanding the material world is not a Sage. He who has personal attachments is not humane. He who calculates the time of his actions is not wise. He who does not know the interaction of benefit and harm is not a superior man. He who pursues fame at the risk of losing his self is not a scholar. He who loses his life and is not true to himself can never be a master of man. Thus Hu Puhsieh, Wu Kuang, Po Yi, Shu Chi, Chi Tse, Hsu Yu, Chi T’o, and Shent’u Ti, were the servants of rulers, and did the behests of others, not their own.
The true men of old appeared of towering stature and yet could not topple down. They behaved as though wanting in themselves, but without looking up to others. Naturally independent of mind, they were not severe. Living in unconstrained freedom, yet they did not try to show off. They appeared to smile as if pleased, and to move only in natural response to surroundings. Their serenity flowed from the store of goodness within. In social relationships, they kept to their inner character. Broad-minded, they appeared great; towering, they seemed beyond control. Continuously abiding, they seemed like doors kept shut; absent-minded, they seemed to forget speech. They saw in penal laws an outward form; in social ceremonies, certain means; in knowledge, tools of expediency; in morality, a guide. It was for this reason that for them penal laws meant a merciful administration; social ceremonies, a means to get along with the world; knowledge a help for doing what they could not avoid; and morality, a guide that they might walk along with others to reach a hill. And all men really thought that they were at pains to make their lives correct.
For what they cared for was ONE, and what they did not care for was ONE also. That which they regarded as ONE was ONE, and that which they did not regard as ONE was ONE likewise. In that which was ONE, they were of God; in that which was not ONE, they were of man. And so between the human and the divine no conflict ensued. This was to be a true man. “(Quoted Chuang Tzu by Lin Yutang)

102

Please remember, this board is for discussion and debate and not for proselytising.

103

Taoism is formless, organizationless,as Tao is the chaotic combination of yin & Yang, so I don’t proselytise but I discuss Taoism more detailed.Thank for reminding me.

104

(Cont)
The difference between a Daoist and an ordinary person is that Daoist sees he is Dao, the chaos of yin and yang, not distinguished, no nature. This having-no-nature thing, of course, has one side is nonbeing and this nonbeing is the left side which the right side is being, therefore a Daoist sees he is nothingness. This is the key point to infer all his inner world and his actions. To know one leading to know all is here. In compare with an ordinary person, an ordinary person considers, hopes that he is good, or he feels inferiority complex that he is bad. This makes a Daoist different to all. As a Daoist feels he is nothingness, he doesn’t love himself nor hates himself. Since he sees everybody is Dao, is the chaos of goodness and badness, he doesn’t hate anybody, even the minority.Because doing goodness is doing badness, Daoists don’t need to find goodness or fame. In general, a Daoist works to earn money for life, but to do things noisily to be famous, he doesn’t. Corruption, stealing, wasting, v.v… those sins, Daoists feel unknown. Daoists are not goodness, so they feel strange when others serve them in a corrupt way. As a Daoist sees money is Dao, the chaos of goodness and badness, he doesn’t love nor hates money. Not loving money, he never steal things, money. As a consequence, he is frank. Since he sees money is not good and he doesn’t love it, he acts the way “ failing they had no cause for regret; succeeding, no cause for self-satisfaction.” In any situation, they are composed, free, and calm. If they are on a boat in the vast sea, the boat is pierced, Daoists will not fear death. There is birth, there is dead; birth and dead are oneness. Dao is the chaos of living and dead; everybody has the cause of death inside, or germs, Daoists foresee, so they are always calm. Consequently, Chuang Tzu wrote:” enter water without becoming wet, and go through fire without feeling hot. “ A Daoist enters water, still he is wet, and goes throught the fire, he is burnt like everybody. Daoists are like ordinary people, also obeying physical laws, but if threatening them by putting them into water until they die, or to burn them, they don’t fear. The evidence of this is Chuang Tzu was so poor that he had to borrow rice; he was still hungry like everybody, not a god that fire could not burn. Chuang Tzu was an ordinary person, not a god as Daoist religion makes him.

I eat, breathe like an ordinary person, nothing strange. I’m different from my folks that in my mind, I see the chaos of the good and the bad, advantages and disadvantages, honour and shame, failing and succeeding, the right and the wrong, …, nothing distinguishing, no nature, so it is called to see nothingness. Because my mind is nothingness, very true, so when I see people around me who are eager with something, love something, love somebody and so hate somebody, and hating leads to misery, I see that they don’t understand the truth throughly. For example, can Vietnamese love Viet Nam ? Wrong. It is impossible to love Viet Nam. Viet Nam is chaotic; heroes jumble up with monsters in it. VietNam has not had an golden era, not the good. It is not good, how do they love it ? Therefore, nation and people, Daoists abolished long time ago. There is love, there is hatred. The person hating somebody, how do we call him a True Man ? As a result, Daoists treat every people equally; they don’t hate any people nor love any people. Because they are not close to any people, they are not strange to any people and they treat everybody the way they treat themselves. Treating everybody like themselves, that is “to wage war, they can destroy a kingdom and yet not lose the affection of the people.” For instance, to confront with an invasion, although the Daoist has the relatives killed by the enemy, still he wont hurt because his mind is empty, so he won’t feel hatred for the enemy. Not feeling hatred, he uses grace to influence the enemies, like the story Watering the melons for others:

“Tong Tuu was an official in a district near the border of Luong state and So state.
The two heads of communal house in the village of Luong state and So state plan melons. The one in Luong was hardworking and water the melons well so the melons were good. The one in So was lazy and water badly so the melons were bad.
The official in So, seeing goodness in Luong and badness in So, felt angry. The head of communal house in the village in So saw Luong’s melons were better, he envied, therefore, at nights he went to Luong secrecly and destroyed Luong’s melons and some Luong’s melons were faded and died.
Then the head of the communal house in the village in Luong knew that, telling the official, intending to destroyed So’s melons. The official said it to Tong Tuu. Tong Tuu said:

  • Oh! Why is it so ! Doing like that only make hatred, get misfortune. Now I tell you, don’t go there to destroy their melons. At night, go there secrectly and water their melons but don’t let they know.
    The head of the communal house in the village followed him.
    Then the melons in So became better and better. The head of communal house in the village in So was surprised; he investigated many times and found out that the one in Luong came to help.
    The official in So knew the affair well, and he was pleased. He reported to the So’s king.
    The So’s king knew that; he felt sad and ashamed, thinking:”Not only destroying their melons, they must also did many other things sinful.”
    The king then brought treasures to confess their faults and made peace. Luong’s king also believe in them. As a consequence, the two countries stayed in peace for a long time.
    Old saying says:”Change failing into succeed; on the occasion of unluck, make luck”. Lao Tzu said:”Require evil with good”. The two sayings are this story.
    Oh! They are not right; why do we repeat them!”
    (Cont)
105

Honestly don’t think he has committed any such thing.

106

While I do not disagree, I am not completely with you.

I prefer to see it as this:
Badness does not exist without goodness, and vice versa.
The problem is not that they are the same, but that we are still inable to fully estimate situations/thoughts being good and/or bad.

Let me give you an example of the thought:
A business man goes by a beggar and the beggar asks for a coin. The man takes out his wallet and throws a penny his way.
The business man is good, because he gives a beggar a coin. No. because in his subconscious, he did it for an apotheosis.

There’s good, and there’s bad. But when is it which? They are inseperatable, but not the same. This is my perception of yin and yang.
It’s the same thing when you’re trying to evaluate your own karma. It is yet impossible for mankind.

EDIT: grammatic faults due to me being tired.

107

But Daoists practise charity not because they love others, different from Confucianists, always “humanity, rites, righteousness, wisdom, faithfulness”. Daoists’ minds are empty. Chuang Tzu, highest founder of Daoism described that mind mightily in the story The boat hitting the ferry:

“A ferry is crosses the river. There is a boat, noone in, from elsewhere drifts to, hits the ferry. The man driving the ferry, although he is very narrow hearted, still he doesn’t get angry. If there was somebody in the boat, the man in the ferry would swell his cheeks,would glower, would yell, once, twice, three times then would curse badly.
Two cases are the same, but the first, he was not angry then the second, he was angry. Why ? Because in the first case, there is nobody in the boad; in the second case, there is somebody in it…

If they are just calm, having no personal opinions, who can harm them in this life?”

But not only always do goodness, always require evil with good, but also do badness to be balanced. Taoists are not goodness. After requiring evil with good, enemies still don’t understand, then Taoists return like for like, no fixed direction, as Dao has no direction. In Viet Nam war, there were not two battles alike. But Daoists are different from unenlightened persons as they have the ability of requiring evil with good all the time since they don’t feel hatred to anyone, even to enemies.

Another speciality of Daoists are that they are not humble. Being humble is good and being arrogant is bad. Daoists don’t follow the good, therefore they are not modest. Being modest is a yang attitude, is being, existing in a form, while Daoists are formless, nothingness. Daoists speak what they see, not to do goodness, do great work but speak less. When they are humble, they practise politeness, to avoid conflicts with life, to avoid misunderstanding that they are arrogant, have high opinion of themselves. Actually, being humble is very bad. The art of war says being a general must be modest, never be arrogant. Being arrogant when leading army is very bad because in that case the general sees all services of the army is his, from his, then he doesn’t praise soldiers and officers. His inferiors won’t sacrifice for the general any more. Good generals are modest. But if talented generals always be glorious ? No. Sometimes I see they were spoken evil, they were killed brutally in history. Remember Roman famous Aetius and Confucius. In ancient China, I always see other talented generals like that. Ngo Khoi, as greatly talented as saint founder Sun Tzu, at the end of his life, he was arrow-shot until he died. Ton Tan, highly talented, was envied by classmate Bang Quyen as Bang Quyen feared that Ton Tan would work better, leading army of some king to be the dominator, so Bang Quyen cut Ton Tan’s legs. Tin Lang Quan leading army of several states to fight against Tan state, the most powerful state in ancient China. He provoked Tan but Tan did not dare to fight with him. Tin Lang Quan was famous greatly through China that time as the strongest general but after that Tan use treasures to bribe some official in his state to speak evil of him to the king, making the king fear that Tin Lang Quan would be the greatest, the king, then of course the king did not appoint him as a general any more. Lastly, feeling boring, he just spent all his time to drink and have sex with many beautiful women until he died uselessly. Confucius was as modest as he had no ego, but he couldn’t take part in politics as other states always fear him. He was so dangerous to others. In general, modesty is evil, like the law yin is yang and yang is yin. Because Daoists see that clearly, they are not modest. When being modest, they follow politeness, the outside, not the inside, the main thing, i.e, Dao, to avoid conflicts with others. The main part is they we wei naturally. To practise modesty is to wanting other to follow, i.e, to interfere life, not wu wei; that is still put a strong will on life. But life is a chaotic mixture of yin and yang, not follow any strong will, therefore any will, although good or bad, will disappear, will fade, will be destroy. The universe doesn’t follow any will, how does a person can force others to follow his will? Any strong will will be broken. Modest will be broken.

108

[size=150]Sheeple[/size]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheeple