Life evolved to perceive its surroundings in a way that promotes survival in a competitive environment. In animals with a nervous system, neurons fire, on and off. It is little wonder that we therefore see reality in an on-off light. This simple on-off process underpins our perception of what we call good-evil, yin-yang, life-death, active-passive, go-stop, hot-cold, up-down, before-after, hard-soft, heaven-hell, male-female, and what have you.
This dynamic dipolar perception is useful for getting around and surviving. It boils choice down to the simplest level – yes or no. On the other hand, this polar way of perception hinders any lasting sense of the One. That we as a species think and remember increases this difficulty. Not only do we see things with a ‘yin yangy’ false simplicity, we haul those memories around to nag at our moment-to-moment each moment.
The view of Oneness, mentioned in The Tao of Jesus, forms the core of most religions, even though it may be expressed very differently. The funny thing is, even this meta view[1] – oneness versus polar – is a function of the brains dipolar way of perception, i.e., ‘on one hand we have oneness, on the other we have polar’. It is a house of mirrors, a mind of mirrors. Watching moment-to-moment is the only way to shut the door, soften the glare, and simply be carefully aware. It is only in that nameless, wordless ‘light‘ of consciousness that we can know ‘true’ oneness. Here ‘oneness’ and ‘duality’ blend like so much dust. When you don’t define what is, what do you see? The ‘original’, not a cognitive named copy. Chapter 56 puts it in perspective nicely:
Know not speak; Speak not know. ( 知者不言. 言者不知.)
Subdue its sharpness, Untie its tangles, ( 挫其锐, 解其纷,)
Unify its light, Be the same as dust, ( 和其光, 同其尘,)
This is called profound sameness. ( 是谓玄同.)
‘Profound sameness‘ is simply an attempt to describe how the ‘original’ feels. This description can serve as a ‘canary in the coal mine’ of our mind. When we see differences we know we are seeing an illusion projected by our own narrow self interest. When we see similarities we know we are seeing more of the ‘bigger picture’. Watch the canary!
On a personal note:
Why, Oh why do I post these observations on the internet anyway? More that once I’ve asked myself that. I suppose it goes back to when my brother died in early 60’s.
I was dumbfounded. His death made death feel real for the first time in my life. The phenomenon, life and death became a life versus death quandary which occupied my every waking moment for months. Why, what, how was life and death? One day, sitting on the bus coming home from work it struck me – life and death are two sides of the same reality. The next year I came across the Tao Te Ching which stated in chapter one, “these two are one but diverge in name as they issue forth”. I was hooked. A dozen years past before I could write anything. Speaking about ‘it’ took the form of me being a devil’s advocate on everything.
In the early 80’s I really got struck again by the ‘why’ bug. Why, I don’t exactly know, although, I suspect it was linked to my initial quandary. Realizing that life and death were one never really removed the original ‘why’, it just took some of the steam out of my overwhelming puzzlement. I wanted to see ‘reality’ from a pre yin-yang-hoodwink perspective. This time ‘why’ drove me to work out a ‘correlations’ process as a practical way to return my mind to a pre “diverge in name” point of view. It worked so well that within six months it had blown apart most every cherished bias I had held up to that point. I couldn’t take sides.
I soon learned that this process appealed to practically no one. Why? I couldn’t understand why for a long time until it dawned on me, we are most attracted to that which support our preconceptions (beliefs), not to something that blows them apart, which is certainly the main effect of correlations – they weaken word meaning. Then too, there is the fact that correlations is also deadly boring, until it isn’t.
Now all I do is observe life, notice connections and similarities, write down a few and finally post some of those on line. Why? I suppose it is the social instinct that drives me to communicate. Part of that is a need to be ‘helpful’. I have certainly ‘chosen’ an awfully futile path to satisfy that need to be ‘helpful’. Well, if I had free will, I’d probably pick something else. Oh well… Why indeed!
[1] Meta view: Meta (from Greek: “after”, “beyond”, “with”) is a prefix used in English in order to indicate a concept which is an abstraction from another concept, used to complete or add to the latter.
I am using this term to indicate the idea of stepping outside the box, to step outside the box, to step outside the box… ad infinitum… to see the box (the view “beyond” the view). In this vein, I’d imagine a meta view of balance must include unbalance as integral to ‘perfect’ balance. Unbalance ‘balances’ balance. Seen together, balance and unbalance compose an all inclusive whole. Thus, whether I’m balanced or unbalanced makes no difference for I will need the other to counterbalance the situation. I suppose that explains why nothing ever resolves itself… ad infinitum. If it did, the universe would end… or begin. Poof!
0 Response to “Yin Yang, Nature’s Hoodwink”