Taoist Meditations

[TAO YIN]

Bob,

You said: "Those that i have met that best exemplify my understanding of Tao, have no issues with the experiences of others.. their understanding is evident in the lives they live, in the elegant simplicity of accepting the universe as it is, not as they would manipulate it to be.. and, that includes manipulating others to accept their point of view.."

Just a nit-pick here. I won't nit-pick your other words or post because it would take too long...Now, with "those that you have met who best exemplify..." With their doing so they have manipulated others. You know that right?

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

TAO YIN: As i see it.. Manipulate implies intent to change.. those that i have met that best exemplify Tao, as i understand it, were unconcerned with the beliefs of others.. your suggection of their manipulation seems more like an intent to "emulate" by an observer, rather than the observer being manipulated..

Be well..

[TAO YIN]

Bob,

I understand what you typed. However, as I see it, those who best exemplified, no matter who they are, were manipulated into thinking their thoughts. They were manipulated by their parents, by their relatives, by their friends, by their enemies, by their society, and by their world as they knew it. Once they thought for themselves, they manipulated their minds into thinking they were thinking for themselves. They manipulated their thoughts to make them think they were thinking their own thoughts. They manipulated themself into thinking they were individuals free from ways other than TAO, which was an idea they used to help them express "their" idea, even if they were only expressing it to themselves. They manipulated you into thinking they were "non-manipulative," whether they intended to or not. Unless a person lives in a cave, he manipulates others somewhat whether he intends to or not. Unless a person is dead, he manipulates himself with the ways of the world that he perceives.

[fiercest tiger]

Bobby,

Where and who did you study Taiji from?

[Scott R. Brown]

Hi TAO YIN,

Your view is very interesting. It seems to be primarily focused on determinism and avoids the concept of free will. If we focus only on Yang principles our interpretation of phenomena will be colored by that perspective. Life is a balance between Yin and Yang, therefore a one-sided view only provides us with half the picture.

While it is true our worldviews are influenced by our parents, significant others and environment, our individual personalities also influence the conclusions we will arrive at concerning reality. We are not at the sole mercy of our environment. Our experiences are interpreted according to what we bring to events. It is true that what we bring to events has been provided to us in the form of conditioning; however we may choose whether we wish to accept that conditioning or modify it according to our own natures. We may evaluate our conditioning and experiences and modify the conclusions we come to in light of our own personality attributes.

Whereas you seem to consider life a series of manipulations I prefer to view it as a series of influences or, dynamic interactions. There is a perpetual dynamic interaction between me and world, I affect the world and it affects me. Everything influences or affects everything else, but that is not the same thing as everything “determining” or “manipulating” everything else. In any circumstance there are always choices to be made that affect the consequent events. The choices I make are determined by many factors, not just my previous experiences and knowledge. Emotions, intuitions and how I chose to interpret events also affect how I react. It is the spontaneous confluence of these qualities the affect how I will respond to any event and thus influence the various consequent events.

I experience events and have interactions with others, but how they influence me is determined by how I choose to interpret these circumstances. The more responsibility I take for my attitudes and reactions the more freedom is expressed when choosing my own responses. The more I see myself as a victim of circumstances beyond my control the less freedom I experience. There is some security emotionally in viewing the world as mechanized phenomena, we do not have to take responsibility for our own actions and their consequences, but this view is born out of fear and pessimism. It takes courage to take responsibility for our attitudes and actions, because then we are responsible for the consequences of our own actions. If I am responsible for the consequences of my own actions I must modify myself rather than the world in order to experience the consequences I find favorable.

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

TAO YIN: We are what we have chosen to be.. and, the beauty of it is that we are free to choose again and again.. I see no manipulations in my life, some poor choices at times.. we are each masters of our own destinies, too many fear the responsibility and let someone else take command (but, even that is a self-determined fate).. By your posted words i sense your use of manipulation to be akin to my own sense of "inspiration", influence, self-awareness, etc.. My own definition of manipulation, relative to this thread, includes a distinct intent to change something from what it was to what is desired AND the willingness to use unfair or deceptive means to achieve the desired goal. So, perhaps we differ in our use or intended meaning of the word "manipulate"..

Previously, i used the phrase "their understanding is evident in the lives they live, in the elegant simplicity of accepting the universe as it is, not as they would manipulate it to be.. and, that includes manipulating others to accept their point of view.." The people to which i refer,would respond politely if questioned about their philosophical points of view.. but, they would never ask of someone regarding the same.. theirs is not an "Intent" to convert, they hardly ever use negative terminology and even less likely to comment on someone else's belief systems.. I'm just speculating, but.. it sounds like you feel that you've been manipulated, or.. maybe you are proficient at manipulating others.. in either case it is through your set of experiences that you assign the concept of manipulation to the experiences of others, regardless of their interpretation of "their" experience.. It is unreasonable to assign your value of manipulation to the experiences of others and expect agreement.. for them it may be a simple choice..

Be well..

[TAO YIN]

Scott,

Hello. How do you know that is my true view, if my view truly opposes what I previously wrote, or if I have a viewpoint? Because I used words that you can read in order to try to understand my thoughts? Okay, I’m just playing but you see what I mean? The way you wrote your words, you still break it down as yin or yang, good or bad. From what you wrote I realize you understand this, but I will go ahead and say… If you only focus on the ability to choose by way of free will throughout life’s experiences, then you are not focusing on the ability to manipulate the experience so as to soothe your basic desires.

Aside from our basic human needs of water, food, and shelter; we are either doing one of the two or sitting in the middle. With regards to what I wrote and what you wrote, even if you choose to modify an event so that it conforms to however it is you want to think or feel, you are still manipulating that event so that it plays on your personality’s desires. You are choosing, perhaps through concepts of right or wrong, yin or yang, and then telling yourself that is you and that is who you are. The little voices inside our head tell us we are doing something through choice when all we are doing is a simple human action.

Everyone answers to someone or something. Even if you are constantly sitting in the middle, making choices one day with regards to free will and right and wrong, and making choices the next day with regards to manipulating the event so that it soothes your desires, you are still answering to the concept of sitting in the middle. Taking responsibility for something is answering to someone, even if you’re answering yourself. You are following a role that someone or something has told you, or perhaps you told yourself, is either right or wrong. And after saying all of this, this might not be how I truly feel.

Bob,

Hi. You know what is funny, is the way that we use words in context to try to say something. Objective versus Subjective with English…what a riot! Why did you think of your choices as either good or bad? You are alive, and thinking what you are thinking now. Without those choices on that road, do you think you would be where and who you are now? I understand what you are saying with how you are using the word “manipulate” in relation to this thread. I don’t see manipulate as a “bad” word. Who decides what is unfair and what is unfair? Who decides what is deceptive and what is it truly? Let’s conduct a few simple field tests.

Do you pick that 20 dollar bill up and pocket it, turn it in, or walk past it? With the 20 dollar test, what is fair and what is unfair? With the 20 dollar test, what is deceptive and not deceptive? You are at a bar. This guy just came into the bar and called you out after stealing your wife. You tried to leave it be, but he still called you out, and has done so time and time again. He wants to go outside and “settle it like men.” Do you walk out with him and fight? Do you crack his head open as he walks out the door before you do? Or do you just say no, sit there, and keep drinking? What is fair? What isn’t? What is deceptive? What isn’t? Even if you decide to follow the Tao clouds in the middle and turn the other cheek, are you being fair to yourself? And in your doing so, aren’t you answering to someone that “chose” to tell you that is the correct thing to do? I have been manipulated and have manipulated. In those cases, I chose, even if on an unconscious level through my experiences, to choose to be manipulated. I also chose to manipulate.

Tis only words we give good or bad connotations to… Free will, experience, manipulate, desire, inspiration, blind, and the like.

[fiercest tiger]

Bobby,

I think you need to re-read what you posted and learn to be more humble and respect others and then yourself.

Maybe your hippie look and wanna be Taoist isnt working for you, should cut that hair....I had a vision of you with a hippy look and long greyish hair! hahahha

Anyway "I AM THE TAO"

[Scott R. Brown]

Hi TAO YIN,

I understand you may be playing, but I will comment regardless, because I enjoy doing so.

I can only comment on what you are writing, not on what is in your mind. There is no way for me to know what your TRUE views are as you have no way to know mine. All we may do is draw conclusions based upon our interpretation of what the other person is writing. Sometimes the conclusions we come to are accurate sometimes they are flawed. When I state, “Your view is very interesting. It seems to be primarily focused…” I am drawing conclusions based on my interpretation of what you have written. My interpretation is colored by my own worldview and your ability to accurately communicate your thoughts. I try to carefully express my conclusions using qualifiers such as the word “seems” to indicate that it is my present assessment based upon my interpretation of the information presented. It qualifies the following comments as current impressions and not definite conclusions. My comments are responses to my interpretation of what you write, I do not presume to know your motivations or what you “TRULY” believe. I merely draw inferences and respond!

Your statement that I have broken your comments down into “good and bad” by illustrating them in terms of Yin and Yang is not accurate. Your assumption is reasonable based upon the common understanding most people have of the principles of Yin-Yang. However, I do not subscribe to the common interpretation of Yin-Yang. I have written extensively on this subject on this BB in the past. Please feel free to do a search of my writings on the subject and comment as you feel inclined. It would not be appropriate to reprise it here.

However, to clarify my view concerning manipulation and influence, they are at times merely different labels of the same action and at other times not related at all. It is not necessarily the action (behavior), but the intent that determines which one is presently being employed.

For example: if I discipline my child by providing negative consequences for inappropriate actions it can be fairly said I am attempting to manipulate him. My purpose is to motivate him to choose to behave according to “specific” standards. The negative consequences I provide in this situation are both an influence and a manipulation. The two terms carry basically the same meaning here. Manipulation and influence in this circumstance may be defined as: actions performed with the intent of effecting a “specific” outcome. If my child does not perform the behaviors I intended, (the “specific” outcome) then my manipulation was ineffective and manipulation has not occurred.

When I inform my child that if he doesn’t study for his test he will likely get a poor grade and if I enumerate other expected ramifications of such actions, and then allow him make his own decision, my actions are merely an influence, not manipulation. This is due to the fact I am not intending a “specific” result to be effected. I am not attempting to get my child to choose an action I deem “best”. I am providing information and advice intended to allow the child ‘free will” to choose the consequences he is willing to experience. Under these circumstances it is important to note that the consequences are not determined by me, but are the culturally determined consequences arrived at by noting their cause and effect relationship to the actions performed (i.e. not studying = poor grades). My child will choose his actions and then experience the results of those actions. In this situation no one “made” him choose his actions. His decision may be influenced by possible consequences, but he has chosen which consequences he is willing to accept. He will decide for himself based upon the consequences he chooses to experience and will accept the benefits or deficits by understanding that he has a reasonable expectation they will occur. This is taking responsibility for ones actions. In this second example there is no manipulation taking place, merely choices presented contrasted with their expected outcome. The outcome cannot be said to be manipulating the choice because the child is free to make his own choice and accept what maybe considered negative consequences.

Something similar to this second scenario actually occurred with my 15 year old son in the past two weeks. He made a choice (without input from anyone else) knowing there would be negative consequences and accepted the negative consequences from that choice. He took responsibility for his choice. Fear of negative consequences did not manipulate him into making the choice he made, nor did a desire for positive consequences influence his decision. He weighed the benefits and the deficits he could expect and deemed the negative consequences worth enduring. He made a choice based upon his own standards that were at variance with those he was taught. He chose to be at variance to my manipulations which were intended to inspire him to receive good grades. My standards in this case neither influenced him, nor manipulated him.

I agree we all answer to some standard. But the questions are: Are we compelled against our will to accept the standards? Are we free to change our standards? Once we accept the standards, do the standards compel our behavior?

As children it can be fairly said that we are manipulated into learning proper conduct. That is we are taught with a “specific” result intended and with positive and negative consequences provided as motivation. This is the way children are raised. However, once we develop into adults we have the opportunity to accept or discard the standards we were compelled to accept as children. We may evaluate the codes we were conditioned to accept and modify them as we so choose. Once we have determined what our basic standards will be we then tend to conform our actions to those standards. But it is not those standards that manipulate us. We choose to accept those standards and we choose to conform our behaviors to those standards. We are also free to change our standards at any time. It is not the standards that compel our behavior, we choose our standards and we choose to conform to them.

Now it is also true that the standards we choose are influenced by the world system. I may accept the world is flat because that was how I was taught. Under these conditions my worldview has been manipulated by the prevailing views of the time in which I was raised. They had a “specific” goal and it was accomplished. They intended that I accept the world is flat, and I do. This is fairly termed manipulation! However, I am not compelled to accept this view. Many did not accept the flat world hypothesis. I may be influenced to accept the flat world view due to the prevailing social and cultural norms, but there is no actual compulsion. I may suffer some undesirable consequences if I speak too loudly in opposition to the prevailing view, but even if I outwardly accept the flat world view there is no compulsion for me to actually accept it privately. The authorities in this situation may attempt to manipulate me (that is, effect a “specific” result through social pressure), but since I do not accept the world is flat I experience their attempt to manipulate as merely an influence, not a compulsion. If the Manipulator’s desired (“specific”) result does not occur then there is no manipulation talking place, only the attempt to manipulate.

At any rate I “am” influenced by the prevailing world view even if I do not conform to it.

So we may conclude:

Manipulation is actions performed with the intent to effect a “specific” result. If the "specific"result occurs as a consequence of the action performed and the action performed was intended to create the “specific” result then manipulation has occurred. If an action is perform with the intent to effect a “specific” result and the result does not take place, then manipulation has not occurred. If an action designed to effect a "specific" result creates an undesired outcome as a consequence of that action, the action was an influence and not a manipulation. Manipulation is not present unless the intended (“specific”) outcome occurs as a result of the performed action.

[Scott R. Brown]

Anyway "I AM THE TAO"

Who isn't?

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

FT: Regular length hair, blonde/gray, 5'9", 153 lbs, 55 years in this body... I'm not a "wanna be Taoist ".. i refer to Taoism only because it most closely approximates my understanding of things.. i have no need to adhere to contrived ritualistic standards, neither does Tao.. It's a little confusing to see you caution some one else about humility, but.. i will take it under advisement..

FT: You asked of my training, so rather than type over again, check out this site: http://www.wudang.com/Forums/viewtopic.php?t=21

We are each aspects of Tao, and therefore Tao itself.. but, it is in our awareness of it that we best exemplify the Nature of Tao.. others know our awareness of Tao by our deeds, deeds are the signature of the soul..

Be well..

[fiercest tiger]

Bob,

Okay so u have been training Taiji since 1994 and you like to push hands. Ive been Training Internal kung fu longer so who cares.

You come on and say my system isnt what it is in regards to history which isnt Daoist way telling me about the art i study which you have no Friggin idea of what so ever.

Do you have any clips of your taiji for me to view? Interested Chan piu taught as taiji?

FT

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

FT: Read more carefully, i started Taiji training in 1989.. QiGong prior to that..

You come on and say my system isnt what it is in regards to history which isnt Daoist way telling me about the art i study which you have no Friggin idea of what so ever.

I think you may be reading way too much into our dialogue, i have no idea of your system and wouldn't comment on such.. i may have commented on how you present your Taoist training on this forum .. the system you use may be the best, but.. even the best systems can't account for every student's idiosyncrasies..

As for clips, whatever possesses you to think that i would have any need or desire to share with you or anyone else that demonstrates such negative perspectives? Apparently, you read the history in the link, i've been judged by my peers and by recognized masters.. i simply have no further need for validation, i don't compete anymore.. my students do well and that is my primary concern, to pass this art on to others..

FT: You talk trash to others.. show some respect and you might get some respect.. otherwise, what goes around comes around.. a simple Taoist principle..

Be well..

[fiercest tiger]

Your a D!CKHEAD, honestly you throw words around and never are you using the meaning around them. I dont want respect thats what im not here for but i like to share info, what you think of me i wouldnt give a toss but since its a forum and we are discussing i will view my point across and so far all you have done is bag myself and my system as well my sifu, INTENTIONALLY OR UNINTENTIONALLY!

Where do you teach, what city?

I will be visiting the states next year so i would come and play your push hands indeedy! If talking is how you earn respect i will come to your school and earn respect from showing and feeling you my systems hands, is that ok? This is not a challenge but if you think you can throw this thread back into my face i have no more to say but to show you personally how my system works? Other then that if you dont want this i wont push it any further but please dont think you are higher then anyone else cause you done some demos and one a friggin place in pushhands. lol

ive fought and won, demo'd and won, heal people, im also high in my system and my peers respect me again who cares. You are a **** bob!!!!

FT

[Scott R. Brown]

Hi FT,

You must recall that this whole issue came about when Sacoche started to question the lineage of the art you practice. Your devotion to your instructor is to be admired, but in truth the claims you make concerning its history are pretty fantastic, un-provable and frankly improbable. You accept them because you accept the authority of your instructor. Most of us do not, so we feel free to question it. Truth will withstand hard questioning, but so will blind faith. While Truth will stand on its own due to its inherent nature, blind faith will just ignore what it doesn’t want to face.

To be fair we don’t know your instructor, but the claims of your art’s history ARE open to question. The questionable history does not necessarily detract from your art’s effectiveness and neither does it necessarily call into question your instructor’s character. He may be just passing on what he was taught by his instructor, but if he did make it up then his character IS open to question. No one said liars can't fight, but character matters to most of us and we would rather not learn and train with a disingenuous instructor. I know first hand about disingenuous instructors and I am sure many others who participate here do as well. Many people consider it a favor to shed light on seemingly incredible claims. They perceive their actions as edifying and do not intend insult. Not everyone intends their comments to be a personal slight!

Your reason for starting this thread was well founded. You wanted to share and learn about your recent meditation practices. On these threads you must recognize there are always those ready to tease, rib, and ridicule; this is the way of an open forum. Sometimes these comments require a response, others times ignoring them is more productive.

Far be it for me to speak for Bob. He is well equipped to speak for himself. However, I do not perceive he is intending to insult you. I have had many conversations on this BB with Bob and most of them we disagreed at least in some part. I have never found Bob to behave unfairly or unjustly. His tendency is to behave in as non-confrontational manner as possible. When he has resorted to a firmer tone I have found his manner to remain measured and controlled while making his point.

Your manner inclines towards belligerence and name calling. This type of conduct generally creates greater conflict. Unjustified belligerence is un-necessary, unproductive and uncharacteristic of a person well founded in Taoist principles. It is not your skills that are being called into question, it is your conduct!! Your insistence on answering criticism with “D!CKHEAD” and other pejoratives is what is reflecting your lack of understanding of Tao. We don’t care how high you rank in your art if your conduct falls short. I have been there too, so please do not consider this an insult. I received my 3rd degree blackbelt when I was 20 years old. I look back on myself over 25 years ago and I was very immature. Many here are not concerned with your skill level; anyone may improve their skills with practice. However it is mostly conduct that earns respect, not skill. I don’t know many people who prefer to train with a skilled jerk.

It is generally more productive to meet a Yang attitude with a Yin attitude. Certainly there are times when Yang requires greater Yang. Your use of greater Yang here has been unproductive. It may be that your manner of expressing your frustration requires some improvement or it may be that Yang is simply not appropriate for this circumstance. Demonstrate to us your understanding of Tao by reflecting some of its principles in your conduct.