of the physical and the spiritual, the harmony of the secret and the human, the emphasis on the primordiality of human vitality, and the belief that human beings may prolong their lives by their own effort, may provide spiritual nutrition and inspiration for all human beings, including us. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. If you liked Father Professor, didn't, you actually took your three minutes. That's all right. Steve had everything last night. I've only been here a few days, but I just wanted to see what his comments are on this very, very interesting paper. I don't seem to have much of a voice since I got here, but I

[01:02]

hope you can hear me. I'll try to say a few words. I'd like to thank Professor Lucharon for this paper. It was very wonderful for me to read the whole paper and to also hear today's summary. It meant something to me personally because I have put quite a bit of my life into this sort of cultivation and found it very useful to me as a modern Western person. I would like to see it become a resource for the modern world. So I think his efforts are very important. His writings in general are a very important part of the process of making this treasure part of our future, or at least our past. So I'd like to thank him for his whole work rather than just the paper. I hope somebody will translate more of it into English someday. It's a very difficult project. And I would also like to thank Paul and Father Joseph for their papers on related subjects, I think,

[02:03]

that they help round out the picture. So I don't know that there's a great deal that needs to be added by me. I'll just say a few things and let the discussion start. It's very difficult to summarize this kind of tradition. I think probably any great religious tradition, the problem is not unique, but there are a lot of things going on in Taoism. It's really, to a Western eye, it's sort of like a circus or something. There's all these wild things happening. Chuan is sort of wild for a literary, literary wildness, you know, but it's still confined within literary sensibilities and cultivated humor and so on. He's basically a logician or a philosopher of language in modern terms, at least in terms of the tools he was using. He used those tools to stand things like that on their heads. It's very

[03:04]

sophisticated kind of approach, somewhat subtle perhaps, but there are other things in Taoism that are not so subtle and really are hard to make sense of, I think. If you're looking at them from the outside or even listening to a summary, it's not so easy. But the whole point here is to not do that. I mean, the tradition is lost if what we're, what we concentrate on is stuff. It's all the stuff. Chuan's point would be lost. Any angle, any part of the tradition would be lost if one sort of missed the main point. So I was particularly impressed with Professor Liu's decision to not only try to summarize this very rich, complex tradition, but to focus our attention through the lens of this notion of holding the line. Because that's probably the only and certainly the best way of staying with the main point. I mean, both

[04:06]

inside the tradition and outside the tradition, if we're trying to get a handle on this, that is the perfect thing to emphasize. It becomes complicated, again, because historically there were many understandings of what this meant and many levels of appreciation of what it meant. But in Daoism, Daoism is not so ambitious. I mean, the emphasis is not on everybody always having the ultimate understanding of something. It would be nice, but it's not the main point. The main point is to get into the game, to be in it. Once you're in it, once you're in life as a human being, not as an ancient person or a person of a certain period of Chinese history or something like that, just to be what you are fundamentally. Once you're in it, then you're part of this enormity that Professor Liu was describing. And maybe you can traverse a great deal of what's involved there, or maybe you can

[05:11]

just appreciate that it's implicit or actual in some way that you don't need to reach for. The main thing is to get into it somehow. And so whether one holds the one in an ultimate sense, which I personally, in my own experience, in my own training, and with my own students, have found to connect to the Chan tradition very perfectly and to Tibetan. Most of my teachers were Tibetan Buddhists, so most of my background is in the Dzogchen tradition of Tibet. There it's the same idea, pretty much holding the one. Someone might find the ultimate sense of that, which is, I think, connected in some ways to Chan and some ways to Dzogchen and other things, and also to the discussion of yesterday morning on the virgin point. I really think that is the issue here. But even if someone doesn't reach that, I mean, the issue is

[06:12]

not achievement in some kind of ambition agenda, it's to just be appreciative. And so I don't really think I should say a great deal here, but just as a way of emphasizing a certain main point that I think is easily missed or lost, the Taoist appreciation for the body is not a foreign notion. I mean, it sounds like why do we keep talking about the body? But the body is what puts us here. I mean, this is the way we are here, and the way we are here with each other, and the way we bear witness to the value, the sacred dimension of being a human being. The body is what puts us in that. And if the body, if we actually have our aliveness, we appreciate, we find within that an empathy for

[07:17]

other people, and what it is for them to be here. Because they have suffering, they have personal histories that can be very traumatic, they have yearnings, they have needs. How can we ever have any empathy or any love for anyone if we're not willing to be here through our humanity? I mean, it's a really critical thing. So my concern here, and I mention this because there's a context issue, the texts of a tradition are not all that you have to look at. Because the texts presuppose certain things, you know, they're speaking to people with a certain background and so on. But we now, looking at this and trying to learn something from it, which I think is happening beautifully here, need to say, okay, well, the texts are saying body this, or spleen that, or liver such and such. But what is the context? The context is that these things help us appreciate our humanity, our presence as human beings. And if you do that, if you start there, if you get into the game at all, you find

[08:20]

more. And your experience of that, the sacred dimension of that situation refines. And so the Taoists talk about an alchemical refinement, and that refinement allows something to move deeper into your innermost recesses as a human being, not just as an anatomical structure. So something refines and moves deeper into you, and in the process opens you up more to the initial issue of being here. You don't leave, you just be here more. So the refinement, the alchemical refinement just puts you here and then puts you more here and puts you more here. It actually just wakes you up more and more to the interdependencies, the enormity of what's happening here as a living phenomenon, and to the ground dimension. And so ultimately, I think, especially for the alchemical traditions, which came rather later in this historical scheme, there's very much an appreciation that the refinement, it's not just some sort of selfish fiddling or cooking, you

[09:23]

know, that's sort of separate from other issues, but it goes into this heart nature that opens you up in the total or complete sense to the whole human situation, sort of saves everybody. It's a soteriological issue, I think. The Taoists don't put it in those terms, and the texts don't necessarily talk that way, but as a human being, doing this stuff, finding yourself, being in the world, by using these teachings to help you be in the world, what you find is a great deal that's not just said in the words. The emphasis, I mean, one has to look at the texts and the history and try to understand as much as possible, learn, but one also has to find what they trigger, what they evoke in your own humanity. And in that way, I think you recover a full picture and just basically yourself at the same time. It's a simple thing that emerges from this. And I think it's already been brought up in a number of different ways in this symposium. So I think this

[10:24]

is just an opportunity to appreciate something fundamental. And keeping the one, I assume, I don't know anything about Christian thinking or theology, but I assume that there's probably some counterpart to holding the one or keeping the one in Christian practice. So I'd be interested to see whether, in the discussion, that issue resonates with you or has its own challenges, its own kind of technology, and how those compare to the Taoist approach. I think the issue is the perfect one to be concerned with. And I think it is exactly what puts us in the world. This morning, there was a discussion of the importance of detachment. And I was as fascinated as anyone here by Father Joseph's discussion and the comparison. I thought it was quite beautiful and something I'll definitely try to keep in mind for my own needs. But it reminded me again of how

[11:24]

Taoists look at this learning process and the process of working with one's human nature and the spiritual dimensions of one's human nature, because detachment doesn't mean leaving. Holding the one doesn't mean leaving. Detachment to a Taoist, especially a Taoist yogi, I spent years in the Taoist practices, much to my wife's chagrin and my current chagrin. But what I found from doing them was not leaving the world of being detached, but just becoming aware of what attachment is. I mean, the teaching of detachment seems to me to be learning what attachment is in a physical, energetic, mental, attitudinal, emotional, presuppositional sense. If you can see attachment, you can see that detachment is what disconnects you from the world. Detachment just means seeing attachment, seeing that it's a disconnection or disintegration, and seeing it, feeling it in

[12:27]

yourself, and seeing that it doesn't have to happen. It's just a less than optimal functioning of something natural in the person that wants to be connected. And you even see that even when it's happening, it doesn't really disconnect you. Even disconnection doesn't disconnect. So the real, to me, I mean, from this point of view, anyway, I'm just arguing essentially, the real detachment is just to see attachment, grasping desire, those kinds of things, to see that they disconnect you from all of, from your humanity, from other people's significance, and to see how to work with this, not to reject it or fight it, but just how to work with it, kind of in a friendly way, and let it find a more proper way of being, that is, the one. So I think holding the one and being in the sacred dimension of our situation, what we share together here, seems to be related. This is at least my

[13:28]

opinion. So, anyway, the other one. Okay, so... I'm going to give priority to people who didn't speak this morning. So, Martin, you can close. I'll be really short, because I'm hoping to hear part of the Christian response to this, especially Professor Roe's comparisons. But you can follow what Stephen is saying about attachment, detachment, and following also Brother David's comment from the German of living beings, and I told Father Wongus in the break, one of the first Chan sessions, Chan Qi I attended, the Master gave a verse at the beginning of the session, which I think describes this comment, that goes, living beings grasping everywhere, cover over the wonderful, let go, release your hold, the

[14:31]

wonderful revealed. So I think it corresponds to the idea that holding to the one actually opens up the wondrousness of interconnectedness, but by grasping onto the many, one loses the oneness, and therefore loses the wonderful. So, just a quick comment. The expressions, keeping the one, keeping the one light, I find fascinating. I see some possible connection referring to the Christian tradition. I think you were speaking mainly of the various ways of discursive meditation, and that is one kind of meditation, which we do find in the Christian tradition. But I think here we're closer to what would be called a memoria, a remembrance of God, the practice of the presence of God, and that is very much an inward reality, very much an inward reality. It starts from

[15:31]

within, because it's the discovery that, you know, God is not the other out there, God is within me. And so maybe, you know, others will probably contribute to this. What was intriguing, regarding keeping the one light, was the use of colors. And that is a new thing. I mean, all of this is an eye-opener, because I didn't realize that Daoism is so rich and so complex. And the sequence of colors, red, white, and blue, not with reference to the red flag, but to the sequence of colors in the tantric yogic tradition. And it's red, white, and gold. In other words, the red is associated with warmth, and with the feminine energy, the white with the coolness and masculine energy, and the gold with the central path, with the union of sun and moon and so forth. I was wondering then if there is any connection there,

[16:32]

because obviously this is a kind of yoga. And how would it connect, perhaps, with the tantric? Do you want to respond to that? I don't have a serious comment about that, because I don't know that perfectly, especially about Daoist color visualization of internal gods and the color. Personally, I don't know very much about that. And I think, in fact, we didn't find any text giving instruction, how to use the first step, second step, third step. There are a lot of words about meditation or contemplation. There's some hint, let the practitioner review the instruction of the master. The master's instruction is not directly written down on the text. So we didn't know, we don't know the truth, the step-by-step. So I give you the 20th century case. That might give you some true experience of that. But your point, in fact, I'm not very confident

[17:34]

about the comparison between Daoist contemplation and the Christian tradition. I expect your correction and your suggestions. And I'm not quite sure, Christian contemplation, you appeal to God, but you mentioned that also the God comes inside. Does that mean your contemplation is not austere, both? I'm not quite sure. For Daoism, it's very inward. For Christian tradition, it's both, more outward. I'm not quite sure. I want to respond to two things. First of all, what you said is very interesting as far as the Indian tantric tradition, because actually, it's almost a pure straight-across transition between qi and prana. The whole thing of prana is almost, you know, one and the same line. The other thing I was responding to, to Stephen's

[18:42]

detachment and attachment, which I thought was very exciting, because maybe if we find out what attachment is, that maybe if we thought of attachment in terms of neediness, that we're needing for things, and what detachment is not being needy. So I refer back to Bhagavad Gita's idea of sthita prajna, when it was established in wisdom, that you can take what comes, and you, in other words, whatever the universe brings you, you can take with a great deal of affirmality, because you neither need things, nor do you find necessary to reject things, because everything that is precious is within your grasp, inside of you. Now, whether we call that atma, or we call that soul, or spirit, whatever, but it's all, we're completely in them ourselves. Earlier, Sister Pasquale had a comment on detachment. Do you want to say what you were going to say? My stretch mark has a pithy little sentence, which you can make a mantra, and it works everywhere. What is, is.

[19:46]

As a comment on detachment, what is, is. Thank you. Father Tom, yes. This word keeping, or holding. Preserving, guarding, the different translation. Oh, guarding. Preserving. What would be maintaining? So, it means something more spiritual than actual holding on to something. Detachment is, in a sense, letting go. But keeping, does that mean, what is the Chinese character for that? And is it the same character all the way through? Shou. So, I know, Livia's translation is guarding. Christophe's translation is keeping. And Robinette's translation is

[20:54]

preserving. I think keeping is simple, as we are used to keeping. I just want to interject that this is an interesting point, because, like, you know, you mentioned in your talk that scientists are trying to, like, locate Chi. They haven't found it so far. But I don't think scientists would even think about trying to find the Holy Spirit. They'd have to do a new body scan to figure out what part. You know what I mean? There's a real difference there. There is a sense in which this is all, has a certain, like, is it physical, is it non-physical? Whereas, in Christianity, I think that we have a sense it's not physical. And is Dao another name for, I mean, one? Another name for Dao? Yeah, there are a lot of different terms. Like the Hunten, and Paul yesterday, he used the Hunten. I didn't mention that. In fact, one, our Dao, our Hunten, our emptiness, a lot of things, also the creature is sometimes,

[21:57]

you mentioned the creature. In fact, the creature is not a serious God. Because that, oh my God, that's not necessarily means I believe in God. So in Daoist, in the Daoist Zhuangzi, there are a lot of terms, or even some 1,000, 10,000 things of the whole universe. The same thing, almost the same thing, because Dao is not a specific entity. For me, I think the Dao is something in the ground of the universe, including human life and human societies. That's my understanding in British. I want to respond to your question about the Christian meditation. Is it outward or inward? I think there is a pluralism in Christian meditation. It can be something outward, subject-object in dialogue. It can be inwards, the partner is the speaker.

[23:01]

And even inwards, it can be a dialogue, a personal presence, talking to your father, your best friend, or your spouse. God is all that. It can also be beyond personal. I don't say non-personal, but beyond personal. For example, God is light, God is life, love, air, I breathe, and so on. So if we come to that level, then it's very close to a Daoist meditation, as you use the term ground. Dao is the ultimate reality, the ground of the universe. Now a Christian can very well come to that experience, that God, instead of talking to God as my father, my friend, at a certain point, it's just God is my life. God is the air I breathe, God is the light,

[24:04]

and God is the ground of my existence. I think it's a deeper level of Christian meditation. But there's still maybe some difference. Then the Daoist, it's not necessary that he thinks about as a religious Daoist. Then he probably would feel that Dao is a personal being, the ground of the universe, but personal. Personal in the sense of not an individual. Often there's a misunderstanding, especially discussing in Chinese. When we say personal, people tend to think an individual, not in a sense. By personal, I think basically means he is a Daoist consciousness. It's a knowing being. I think many Daoist religious practitioners would feel that ground of being is a knowing being. And a Christian, when it comes to that deep center

[25:06]

of just feeling resting in the ground of my being, which is the transcendent ground, would probably still feel it's a knowing reality. There's a communication. The ground of being is a knowing ground. So that's to answer your question. I think in the past we had some discussion. I think I mentioned once, Professor Liu is my teacher. I took a class on reading classical texts when he was a visiting professor at the GTU. And we had several discussions. So this seems to be a very important point here. The inward and outward aspect of the Christian meditation. So tying in, Brother David, do you want to speak too? I'll talk over you, David. Yeah, okay. So let's make some comments on that point. Briefly, I want to bring this back to what you raised, Professor Liu, about polytheism and monotheism. And I know I don't understand what monotheism is about.

[26:07]

But it seems to me maybe this keeping the one is the one... Or a question for the Christians. Is the one, keeping the one, related to the mono or monotheism? Well, I want to get back to this meditation before we see if there are any responses to that. I assume you were talking about the meditation. I need to make a flip of this picture. I think Father Joseph will agree, but God is not a being. This is totally un-Christian. You cannot at the same time say that God is a being and be a Christian. God is not a being. It is very tentatively said that God is being. God is the source of being. That's the only thing that a Christian can say. So this is just a clarification. Source or ground. We are very close, actually. It has a positive aspect.

[27:12]

As a result of the seventh emptying, Yanfei became aware of being one with the great universal. Chen Shuanying, a Buddhist monk of the 7th century, wrote one of the major commentaries on Zhuangzi. He says the great universal, means the great Tao that pervades the universe. Clearly, it's not a speculative knowledge. It's an awareness, an experiential intuitive knowledge through participation and identification with the reality that is now. This is an experience attained by emptying oneself, quieting the activities of body and mind, and can be compared to pure experience of being one with Tao and with the universe.

[28:18]

Let's look at the second story, second dialogue. Seeing the One in the Brightness of Dawn. Both stories, of course, are in the chapter on the great teacher. Let me read the story. It's a dialogue between a certain person called Nan Po Zi Kui and Niu Yu. Niu Yu is an enlightened person. Nan Po Zi Kui asked Niu Yu, You are old, but have the look of a child. How is this? I have learnt Tao, replied Niu Yu. Can Tao be learnt? Nan Po Zi Kui asked. Ah, how can it? replied Niu Yu. You are not the type of person. Po Zi Kui had the ability of a sage, but did not know the teachings.

[29:22]

I knew all the teachings, but did not have his ability. I wanted to teach him so he could become a sage. But that was not such a simple case. It seemed easy to teach the doctrines of a sage to a person with this ability. But I still had to teach and keep at him. It was three days before he was able to disregard worldly matters. After he disregarded worldly matters, I kept at him for seven days, for seven days more, and then he was able to disregard all material things. After he disregarded all material things, I kept at him for nine days more, and then he was able to disregard his own life and death. Having disregarded life and death, he became as clear and bright as the dawn.

[30:26]

Having become as clear and bright as the dawn, he was able to see the One. Having seen the One, he was then able to abolish the distinction of past and present. Having abolished the past and distinctions of past and present, he was able to enter the realm of neither life nor death. This is called Tranquility in Disturbance. Tranquility in Disturbance means that it is especially in disturbance that tranquility becomes perfect. It's a beautiful description, beautiful dialogue. Here, Niu Niu distinguishes between the ability of becoming a sage and knowledge of the way.

[31:35]

The knowledge of the way, Cheng Xuanying interprets as humility, eagerness, attention, and simplicity. While the ability means intelligence and cleverness, aptitude for learning. When comparing the two, Cheng Xuanying says knowing the way is more important. Since knowledge of the Tao is experiential knowledge, one who knows the way to Tao means he has already found Tao, because it's experiential knowledge. That's why to teach others the way is not limited to a kind of objective verbal instruction. It implies a transmission of a personal experience. For this reason, Niu Niu, while teaching his disciple, he joined instruction with keeping at or accompaniment with the disciple.

[32:43]

It's an account of a journey towards enlightenment through progressive detachment. Detachment is the Chinese word for why. Why means outside, literally means outside. It means putting something outside oneself, leaving aside something. Both the two major commentators of Zhangzi, Guo San and Cheng Xuanying, explain why as forget, to forget. I adopted the translation as to disregard or transcend or be detached from. Now the object of why is given in a quotation. After three days, seven days, nine days, the three objects of why or disregarding are worldly matters,

[33:47]

material things and one's own existence, life or death. Worldly matters means what's happening in the world. And things, material things, means things that meet our daily needs. So for him, it's more difficult to renounce things that meet our daily needs than forgetting or neglecting what's happening in the world. But what's most difficult is the third one, to disregard one's own existence, not be concerned with one's own life and death. And this, the third one, is the major theme of the whole chapter. And Zhangzi presents different grotesque stories to emphasize on this freedom from the face of life and death. A true person is especially one who does not lose

[34:50]

equanimity or serenity in face of his own death or the death of his loved ones. Now, after completing this journey of renunciation, of forgetting, the threefold forgetting, suddenly the morning sun rises in his mind and he sees the one in the brightness of dawn. Emptiness and light, they are co-relates. Look at the empty chamber where brightness is born. Now here, Zhangzi or Lü Yu uses the expression, seeing the one. The one clearly means Dao. Normally, in Zhangzi, there's less emphasis on the metaphysical aspect of Dao as in Laozi.

[35:52]

Laozi has more emphasis on the metaphysical aspect of Dao. Zhangzi is more interested with Dao manifesting in humans, the ways of humans. But there are also strong passages in Zhangzi which indicate clearly the metaphysical character of Dao. And one of these passages in this chapter, beginning of this chapter two, where Dao is depicted as the ultimate reality or all-embracing first principle that produces the universe. Dao exists by and through itself. It is its own source, its own root. Without beginning or end, it is eternal. All the things in the universe depend upon it to be constantly brought into being. Thus, this passage clearly points to the metaphysical aspect of Dao. So, for Zhangzi, this experience of enlightenment is not something purely subjective.

[36:54]

It is an encounter with a reality. Mysterious, yet real, reality, object, reality, the Dao. So, enlightenment comes from this encounter. And then, given to the one, the Chinese character is Du. Du means alone, single, absolute, independent, or transcendent. But it should not mislead us to think that the vision of the one is something alone in a sense of separate from things of the world. No, because what follows is the overcoming of the distinction between things. The vision of Dao is Dao as present in things. And this Dao as present everywhere is clearly given in another dialogue.

[37:55]

Chapter 22, a dialogue between Zhangzi and Master Dunguo. Master Dunguo asked Zhangzi, this thing called the Dao, where does it exist? Zhangzi said, there is no place it doesn't exist. Come, said Master Dunguo, you must be more specific. It is in the end. As lowest thing as that, it is in the panic breath. But that's lower still. It is in the tired and the shocked. How can it be so low? It is in the Dao. Master Dunguo made no reply. So, clearly for Zhangzi, the Dao is not something abstract, something concrete present in the things we perceive. And it is this presence of Dao in all things

[38:57]

that brings about this enlightenment of true knowledge. Because it's the presence of Dao in all things that eliminates all the differences. In chapter 2 on the equality of things, Zhangzi asks the rhetorical question, where is Dao not present? And he affirms that there is nowhere that Dao is not present. As a consequence of this presence in all things, Dao identifies them, all things, identifies all things as one. The sage is one who is able to perceive this truth and realize that the universe and I exist together, and all things and I are one. This is true knowledge, true enlightenment. It's the presence of Dao in all things that abolishes the distinction

[39:58]

among the myriads things and eliminates human's preference and craving for particular objects. Eliminates human's preference and craving for particular objects. Eliminates human's preference and craving for particular objects.

[40:08]

@Text_v004
@Score_JJ