[ Post a Response | Tao Speaks ]
Posted by rene on 4/16/2011, 12:37 pm, in reply to "Re: nobility"
70.77.199.x
--Previous Message--
:
: Hi rene
:
: 'Should dao be fixed into an idea of 'not
: noble'?
:
: I did not intend to say that, sorry.
:
: When I said:
: the person who embodies the dao does not
: take the dao itself to be "noble,"
:
: I intended that to be "does not
: characterize it as necessarily noble."
: She avoids characterizing it to be noble,
: and avoids characterizing it as not noble.
: it just is what it is.
:
: love,
: rat
:
:
Hi rat.
Methinks you've put your finger on the way most folks get around the entire "either/or" mindset, i.e., by avoiding the comparisons all together.
Even Laozi seems to say "if you deem something beautiful, something else then must also be deemed ugly" .
My way is somewhat different. Because, for me, something can be (and is) both beautiful and ugly at the same time, or noble and not-noble as in this case, there is no reason to avoid characterizations at all.
Maybe the next question, then, is the net result the same? Would my way and the ti tao zhe way produce the same internal outcome?
Who knows? (-: IF there is a difference, it might be in the fullness of the experience.
warm regards
151
Message Thread | Skip to this response ↓
« Back to index
"The Tao is basically utterly open. Utter openeness has no substance. It ends in endlessness, begins in beginninglessnes".
-Li Daoqun
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Webmaster: zentao00@yahoo.com Donations help to support, upgrade and expand the Tao Speaks! community..Fight Spam! Click Here!