The singularity of good.

Originally posted by bsbray11
It's easy to favor one over the other, but really we need them both, restrained in their proper places. As the Tao te Ching says, the master just sits unassumingly in the center of it all, where there is nothing in particular to enjoy and nothing to struggle against.

edit on 3-2-2011 by bsbray11 because: (no reason given)

I once moved back home with my parents thinking that it was my "job" to sit in their basement and singlehandedly uphold the universe, does that count?

There's always something to do, no master would dare sit and do nothing day after day, that's absurd, but neither would he try to grasp onto the fruits of his labours either.

Gandhi was once asked if he could sum up his life in a single sentence, so which he replied "I can do better and sum it up in three words. Renounce and Enjoy!" (I don't think however, that the interviewer pointed out to him that not only was his reply much more than three words, it was more than one sentence)

Renounce and Enjoy.

Joy, but alas, how can we have complete joy and happiness so long as one among us is suffering, and therein resides the predicament of which future and present bodhisatvas are made and in truth they never go away, they are always with us, provided we never forget about them.

reply to post by NewAgeMan


Indeed, what shall one do with their breath when they notice it inevitably disturbs the air around them?

i also hear upholding the universe is a good trapezius workout

Originally posted by sinohptik
i also hear upholding the universe is a good trapezius workout

From sitting inert in the basement, to swinging from the rafters!

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
There's always something to do, no master would dare sit and do nothing day after day, that's absurd, but neither would he try to grasp onto the fruits of his labours either.

For context here's a couple passages like I had in mind:

2
When people see some things as beautiful,
other things become ugly.
When people see some things as good,
other things become bad.

Being and non-being create each other.
Difficult and easy support each other.
Long and short define each other.
High and low depend on each other.
Before and after follow each other.

Therefore the Master
acts without doing anything
and teaches without saying anything.
Things arise and she lets them come;
things disappear and she lets them go.
She has but doesn't possess,
acts but doesn't expect.
When her work is done, she forgets it.
That is why it lasts forever.

29
Do you want to improve the world?
I don't think it can be done.

The world is sacred.
It can't be improved.
If you tamper with it, you'll ruin it.
If you treat it like an object, you'll lose it.

There is a time for being ahead,
a time for being behind;
a time for being in motion,
a time for being at rest;
a time for being vigorous,
a time for being exhausted;
a time for being safe,
a time for being in danger.

The Master sees things as they are,
without trying to control them.
She lets them go their own way,
and resides at the center of the circle.

academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu...


Of course you can say these same masters have to work for their food to eat, someone had to build their shelter, etc.

Duality is funny like that, though. Every pair of opposites is arbitrary and "objectively" meaningless as described by chapter 2. "Therefore the Master acts without doing anything." Action and inaction are not even differentiated since they define each other in the first place, need each other to exist as concepts and thus create each other as concepts. Thus the renunciation I suppose. Before they are differentiated there is just... well, you can't even talk about it.



Another way to the heart of the OP is the renunciation of "good" and "bad" in the first place. They often make convenient words for conversation but I don't really even believe in "good" and "bad" beyond what is relative to each individual's desires.

Originally posted by sinohptik
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander

 

Im guessing you know, but if you were not aware, you come across through text as quite arrogant.

I suspect your feeling that what I wrote was arrogant is your own baggage.

Originally posted by sinohptik
If i am going to create inevitable division and opposition by speaking in the first place, i might as well make it about unity and Love, instead of more disagreement and division.

If that is your preference fine. Its my preference to point out that its just not objectively "better" somehow than those who create division about other topics.

The love and light crowd are every bit as angry, violent, mean, human, etc., as the people they rail against. You want proof? Contradict them, and watch their loving little claws come out. Lol.

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander


Feel free to contradict this one. i enjoy learning how other people see the world. i am more interested in discussion than arguments. Which means most of what transpires on boards such as these However, realize that this one has his story to tell as well. One perspective being more "valid" than another would just be playing into that whole "good/bad" dichotomy anyway

Not sure what you intend to accomplish with that post (or the rest) other than blanket generalizations perhaps you wouldnt mind clarifying? Are you actually interested in learning from others, or do you feel you already have all of the answers, and therefore, teach others?

And of course, someone saying you are coming off as arrogant would have absolutely nothing to do with you, whatsoever What baggage do you suppose that is derived from? Feel free to make baseless assumptions, as you have been Do not worry though, as you know, such things are not "bad." It allows others to see who "that one" truly is, without the fetters of intentional effort put forth towards the same goal.

Do realize that i was one of those "masters" (laughable title, to this one) who sat and "acts without doing anything and teaches without saying anything." After years in such a state, driven by this bodies and minds limited understanding of such ideas, i still couldnt stop that darn breath from disturbing the air. My brain from creating magnetic fields from its processes. my very act of being, no matter the base, moved and affected the world around me. In realizing the experiential nature of no within/without, this one was lead to do something continually, as opposed to nothing continually, but from the same state and realizing both were a thing anyway. neither one is good or bad beyond the polarized perspectives that might view it. It was realized that such teachings were simply a method for breaking that initial box, defined by ones definition of self. Many get stuck in such a state, or in trying to achieve it, as it is viewed as "good" but all is a cycle. either way, i will not go into further detail, as it is simply not relevant.

How do you view your own acts in this world?

Originally posted by sinohptik
Do realize that i was one of those "masters" (laughable title, to this one) who sat and "acts without doing anything and teaches without saying anything." After years in such a state, driven by this bodies and minds limited understanding of such ideas, i still couldnt stop that darn breath from disturbing the air.

That would explain your feeling that my comment was "arrogant." Who could dare to contradict a master? Especially one who has transcended the term? Only an arrogant ass, of course.

Originally posted by sinohptikHow do you view your own acts in this world?

Im not sure what you mean by that. My breath appears to effect the air too.

And I learn all the time, from everyone and and everything. There is very little of which I am certain, and that of which I am certain I have very good reason to be. How that applies to the world, life, etc, I still work with, and try to understand.

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander

That would explain your feeling that my comment was "arrogant." Who could dare to contradict a master? Especially one who has transcended the term? Only an arrogant ass, of course.

I said the title was laughable (there are no masters, as such. and as we speak i am trying to learn from you), not due to transcendence of it either (there is nothing to transcend). I lived what was stated in some of the quotes bsbray put forward, and in line with what you were perceived to also be talking about. it was an apparently futile attempt to find common ground. It was neither "better" nor "worse" than where i am now, in this time and place. It is just a different stage of this ones journey. i simply relayed my story and that part of the experience of my life. I also explicitly stated i want you to contradict me. That does not mean i enjoy being berated like above though.

So, lets just agree to disagree Well both keep learning, thats what we are all doing

reply to post by sinohptik


Who can teach anyone anything? I sure cant. I say what I have to say when I have to say it, based on what I am and what the moment is. I cant worry how other people take it. Perhaps that comes across as arrogant too. Its not my job to worry if other people like what I have to say. Its just my job to be me. If someone happens to learn something from something I say, wonderful. But that has more to do with them than me. It really hasnt much to do with them either, in a conscious way. They happened to be ready when those words fell. I have learned that way myself from homeless people and from the most highly thought of intellects.


Nothing is less popular than the truth, or what approximates truth here, to us, and unfortunately for me, that seems to be what I am drawn to, what I am good at. IF and only if "I" dont get in the way of it. My ego is as idiotic as anyone elses.

I, as an ego, would much rather, if I could choose, be the person selling dreams. I would be richer, and people would be happier to see me coming.