The end of October, TZF’s weekly thought feature was a quotation from Lao Tsu that asked “How can the Divine Oneness be seen?” and answered, “If you are willing to be lived by it, you will see it everywhere”.
I love that line, “If you are willing to be lived by it”! Not to live it, but to be lived by it.
It requires passivity, acceptance, surrender, doesn’t it? “To be lived by it” means to set aside the “me” that wants to be the one who lives, the one who experiences.
It means that my being me is not for me and it is not about me. It is not even "mine". Rather, it is to provide the “Divine oneness” a means to live “in the world”, and in order for it to work, "me" (always the principal character in any setting, as far as I am concerned) has got to get out of the way.
And, Lao Tsu promises, if I am willing to accept that, to embrace it, with enthusiasm, then I will see the Divine Oneness everywhere.
Very cool.
To be lived by it
Yes. I've found myself quoting more and more often, on the "Christianboard", the words of the Psalm: "Be still, and know that I am God." I suspect that we are often too busy "doing things for God" and informing God of what He needs to do for us or about someone else, that we stifle our awareness of God.
Perhaps we can rephrase JFK's statement: "Ask not what God can do for you; ask what you can do for God." It gets our minds off of getting benefits, freebies and services from God. And then the answer comes back: How about doing ... nothing? That's what you can do. Stand still and just let God be you, experiencing you-ness, blurring the lines between "here" and "there," "now" and "then."
I have found it a painful process, stirring up an angry ego that wants war and "stuff," wants what it wants when it wants it at any cost NOW!!! Perhaps that is why Alan Watts observed that "egoless people have great character." They've fought a bloody and frightening war to get rid of the ego. Worth every battle!
Namaste
Art
Perhaps we can rephrase JFK's statement: "Ask not what God can do for you; ask what you can do for God." It gets our minds off of getting benefits, freebies and services from God. And then the answer comes back: How about doing ... nothing? That's what you can do. Stand still and just let God be you, experiencing you-ness, blurring the lines between "here" and "there," "now" and "then."
I have found it a painful process, stirring up an angry ego that wants war and "stuff," wants what it wants when it wants it at any cost NOW!!! Perhaps that is why Alan Watts observed that "egoless people have great character." They've fought a bloody and frightening war to get rid of the ego. Worth every battle!
Namaste
Art
"I can at best report only from my own wilderness. The important thing is that each man possess such a wilderness and that he consider what marvels are to be observed there." -- Loren Eiseley
-
Ihavesayso
- Posts: 57
- Joined: January 3rd, 2005, 7:54 pm
- Location: Lodi, California, USA
“Be still, and know that I Am God”.
Yes, too cool.
When I first read that line as a seeker (that is, not as a Sunday School brat), I took it to be a practice or a technique, like a hatha yoga posture or a Zen meditation.
But now, I read it as a tautology (is that the right term?). That is, the first part (be still) equals or is a synonym of the second part (know that I Am God). Be still = Know that I Am God
While it works both ways, of course (being Infinite, how could it not?), the message here is not that “Being still” is how to know that I Am God; rather, being still is knowing I Am God.
And here, as I read it, being still is not a physical state. It is an inner state. There are plenty of people who are able to sit in the lotus position, but not able to be still. Likewise, there are plenty of seekers who, even while running a marathon or splitting wood or changing diapers or trading stocks, are able to be still.
For me, “be still” is not about what I am doing, it is about who I think is doing it.
“Ask not what God can do for you; ask what you can do for God” is good. In this context, could we say, “Ask not what God can do for you; ask what you can stop doing”.
jen, nice line from Elsa Joy! She is a long-time friend of TZF. If you have not done so, you may like to read her piece at TZF’s Ampers&nd.
Yes, too cool.
When I first read that line as a seeker (that is, not as a Sunday School brat), I took it to be a practice or a technique, like a hatha yoga posture or a Zen meditation.
But now, I read it as a tautology (is that the right term?). That is, the first part (be still) equals or is a synonym of the second part (know that I Am God). Be still = Know that I Am God
While it works both ways, of course (being Infinite, how could it not?), the message here is not that “Being still” is how to know that I Am God; rather, being still is knowing I Am God.
And here, as I read it, being still is not a physical state. It is an inner state. There are plenty of people who are able to sit in the lotus position, but not able to be still. Likewise, there are plenty of seekers who, even while running a marathon or splitting wood or changing diapers or trading stocks, are able to be still.
For me, “be still” is not about what I am doing, it is about who I think is doing it.
“Ask not what God can do for you; ask what you can do for God” is good. In this context, could we say, “Ask not what God can do for you; ask what you can stop doing”.
jen, nice line from Elsa Joy! She is a long-time friend of TZF. If you have not done so, you may like to read her piece at TZF’s Ampers&nd.
In my limited and beginners understanding of the Tao Te Ching---this is the most profound message I found. All the sayings about 'not doing' 'the use of the pot is where it is not' etc... Finding a way to this passivity and surrender that allows me to get out of the way has been the greatest task of all. I think Simone Weil may have spoke of this too, 'it is perhaps the greatest effort of all...but it is a negative effort'It requires passivity, acceptance, surrender, doesn’t it? “To be lived by it” means to set aside the “me” that wants to be the one who lives, the one who experiences
I'm past the idea that this passivity or not doing means we have to physically stop doing, such as the comments about needing to sit in a lotus position. It is the step past meditation, to me, where we start bring meditation into our daily lives and activities.
I can feel when the 'me/busybody' is still and a deeper life source is flowing into the world around me, from me and through me. These times lately at work are magical and I feel as though I'm swirling in life, connected in every way to each person and event happening. Is this seeing the oneness? Is it at least a step towards it?
A good question, and one we all, sooner or later, each of us in his or her own way, struggles with, wonders about, even dares to hope about.I can feel when the 'me/busybody' is still and a deeper life source is flowing into the world around me, from me and through me. These times lately at work are magical and I feel as though I'm swirling in life, connected in every way to each person and event happening. Is this seeing the oneness? Is it at least a step towards it?
But in doing so, we are urged by all the Teachers to ask ourselves, Who's wondering, who's hoping, who's asking.
You know, there was a time when that statement gave me the willies. Now, when you consider it, it is so obvious that I am surprised we all aren't aware of it. (Of course, we are, because we ARE it, but habits die hard, we are wrapped in buffers of me and mine that prevent it, and that conditioning is difficult to relinquish.)
I realize now that when I originally encountered the mere idea of this, my objections to it were clearly projections of my own insecurities and conditionings. I also realize now that when encumbered by ego-centricity, the idea is disturbing, as well it should be. The ego can't go there, and the me can't either. And if it presumes to do so, then we have a real issue to deal with, don't we? Paradoxically, the mind can't deal with or even grasp the possibility that there is truth to the statement, until such time as the mind is properly positioned in its place, and the "me" recognized to be only a vehicle of consciousness for viewing the world. An instrument. The me is useful, but only for that, seems to me. It takes a long, long time to get free of this identification with a separate body/mind, I have found.
<Sigh.............> Isn't it incredible how it works! And the beauty of it all is that the consciousness that we all are creates the world just as it should be, until we want it different, and then it does it THAT way. I always knew there was grace, but my, how it permeates everything.
I realize now that when I originally encountered the mere idea of this, my objections to it were clearly projections of my own insecurities and conditionings. I also realize now that when encumbered by ego-centricity, the idea is disturbing, as well it should be. The ego can't go there, and the me can't either. And if it presumes to do so, then we have a real issue to deal with, don't we? Paradoxically, the mind can't deal with or even grasp the possibility that there is truth to the statement, until such time as the mind is properly positioned in its place, and the "me" recognized to be only a vehicle of consciousness for viewing the world. An instrument. The me is useful, but only for that, seems to me. It takes a long, long time to get free of this identification with a separate body/mind, I have found.
<Sigh.............> Isn't it incredible how it works! And the beauty of it all is that the consciousness that we all are creates the world just as it should be, until we want it different, and then it does it THAT way. I always knew there was grace, but my, how it permeates everything.
-
Ihavesayso
- Posts: 57
- Joined: January 3rd, 2005, 7:54 pm
- Location: Lodi, California, USA