[MD] still going?

[Dan Glover]

Hi John,

On Sat, Jan 30, 2016 at 4:27 PM, John Carl <ridgecoyote at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello Dan,
>
>
>> Dan:
>> Yeah I can sympathize with that. Money for work. Gave up on that a
>> long time ago myself. Now if only I could get the electric company to
>> agree...
>
>
>
> Jc:  Yeah, I hear you.  There are different situations.  I've often
> lived as a caretaker where people just need somebody to live there and
> take care of the place.  Lu and I lived for a couple of years like
> that, in a refurbished gold-mining era mansion.  It's rare, but they
> happen.  I've got a situation like that now, where I don't have to
> worry about rent or utilities.  It's nice, it gives me a lot of
> freedom.
>
> And of course, it helps that Lu has a job.  heh.  So no, you don't
> need money if you have a hard-working wife to support you :)

Dan:
Here is a bit more from The Guidebook to ZMM which seems to resound
with what we're discussing here:

"Does nature have its way? Does the Tao win out? Does harmony prevail?
Yes, yes, yes. But also not necessarily, not necessarily, not
necessarily. Eventually yes, but at any specific moment not
necessarily. Eventually, the Tao will see to it that a proper balance
of yin and yang is restored, but at any specific moment things can be
more or less out of kilter.

"The hurricane hits the land and unleashes a torrent of destructive
power. If you happen to be watching, you are not likely to cry out,
"What wondrous balance! What glorious harmony!" What you see is
imbalance, disharmony. There is far too much yanging going on! But
excessive yanging can't go on forever. Eventually the hurricane's
power is spent. Calm returns. And in the yin of calm, the myriad
forces of nature move toward recuperation and renewal. Harmony is
restored.

"As Lao-tzu put it: "Return is the movement of the Tao" (Tao Te Ching,
40; Mitchell translation). But why, you may ask, do things move too
far in one direction in the first place? Why is there not a balance
that would make reverse flow unnecessary? Where is the te of the Tao?
Is it powerless? The answers to those questions turn on the nature of
the Tao's power, which is not totalitarian, but subtle and unimposing.
As Lao-tzu put it, starkly and paradoxically: "The Tao never does
anything, yet through it all things are done" (Tao Te Ching, 37). That
doesn't mean that the Tao is totally inert. Energy flows continually
from it, in the currents of yin and yang and in the tendency to keep
those currents in harmony.

"But the Tao doesn't impose its energy on things in such a way as to
take from them their own part in the cosmic drama. The universe is not
simply the playing out of the internal script of the Tao. The universe
is Tao and more. What more? Well, there is such a thing as chance in
the universe, and there is also such a thing as human choice.

"The hurricane's excessive accumulation and expression of yang energy
is an example of chance. The Tao does not eliminate the excesses of
chance; it only mitigates their effects by swinging things back in the
other direction. The case of human choice is similar. Human beings can
ignore the need for balance and choose to be excessively yangish or
yinnish. The Tao won't prevent the excess but it will eventually bring
about a reversal. Have you ever allowed yourself to wallow in sadness
to the point where you found yourself bursting into rage? Have you
ever worked so long and hard and stubbornly that you eventually
collapsed, physically and emotionally? The Tao does not impose itself,
but it eventually has its way.

"Perhaps now the basic Taoist prescription for the good life is
clearer. Be natural. Don't fight the flow of the Tao's energy. Go with
the flow. If a little more yang is called for, be a little more
yangish. If a little more yin is called for, be a little more yinnish.
But don't go to excesses. Keep some yin at the heart of your yang and
some yang at the heart of your yin. If you refuse to be natural in
that way, if you ignore or fight against the Tao's flow, it will
eventually catch up with you, and a turning back will take place. In
the meantime, though, you can count on a lot of unnecessary
suffering." [pg. 104-105]

Dan comments:
Maybe the bit about money either loving it or earning it to the
exclusion of all else has its roots in the yangish side of the
universe while the love of art and the mastering of craft has more of
a yinish flavor. Alongside the analogy of the hurricane we might see
the excess accumulation of wealth and fame as not only an example of
chance but the effects of an unbalanced lifestyle.

Notice how DiSanto states if we fail to follow a natural progression
of things if we fight against the flow we can count on a lot of
unnecessary suffering when the tide turns as it eventually will no
matter how we oppose it. If I'm reading him right suffering will occur
during the natural flow of things that's unavoidable but by opposing
the forces of the natural progression of things we are bound to bring
needless pain upon ourselves until things catch up to us as they will.
Sort of like running from death. We only end up running to it in the
end.



>>>>
>>> Jc:  We can only conclude that people are dumbing down.  The phenomenon
>>> isn't completely surprising, but ghastly nevertheless.
>>
>> Dan:
>> People in general? Or just those tasked with feeding us drivel?
>
> Jc:  The giant.  It's not really a "those" so much as it is a process,
> eh?  Power evolves, is all.  Until it reaches some natural limitation,
> some crisis point where people get fed up.  People have a deep wisdom,
> that helps me stay optimistic.  Sure, JK Rowling sold a lot more than
> Edward Abbey, but he was popular also, and popular with the kind of
> people I like.   One reason the pursuit of quality is its own reward,
> Pursue Quality and you end up knowing quality people.  Pursue money
> and you end up knowing moneyed people.

Dan:
Ah. Edward Abbey. His writings were in part my inspiration in writing
Apache Nation the first few paragraphs of which I shared here some
years back.


> Dan:
>
>>
>> Since recreational marijuana is illegal in the state where I live I
>> suppose my buddy is breaking the law. Yeppers. I think he might be
>> breaking bad. But I've seen his setup. Nothing but quality. So when we
>> talk about doing bad I think we might have to qualify that insomuch as
>> what exactly is bad?
>>
>
>
> Jc:  Well you certainly can't look to what is legal, for what is bad.
> Laws are subordinate to morality because we all know there are bad
> laws and good laws.   And there are good laws, that aren't good to
> follow in particular situations.  We know what is good and bad, simply
> through the process of asking ourself the question and remaining open
> to the answer.  The MoQ starts thus - What is good and what is not
> good need we anyone to tell us these things?

Dan:
Where do we draw the line? If we disregard the legality of certain
acts then who is to say when to stop?


>> Dan:
>> We all have to have money. If of course we don't wanna crap in the
>> weeds and eat outta Dumpsters. That's why I do what I do and you do
>> what you do. But there is nothing inherently wrong with having money.
>
>
> Jc:  I agree.  But many have fallen into the monkey-values trap.
> Their need for money is a tight-fisted clinging that traps them in a
> cage.  I think it's good to demonstrate creative solutions to problems
> that don't use money, or at least, much money.  The lack of money
> solves many problems also!  For instance, if we couldn't afford cars,
> we'd stop contributing to global warming!

Dan:
Now there's a slippery slope! Coal-fired electric plants are the
primary source of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. So do we stop
using electricity too? Go back to hunting sperm whales for the oil to
burn our lanterns?

>
> Dan:
>
>> We live in a world where anyone can make a big old stinking pile of
>> money. That doesn't mean money is all there is, however. I think lots
>> of people get trapped in that upward spiral where enough is never
>> enough. Money makes em think they're somebody. And conversely those
>> without any cash in their pockets are nobody.
>
> Jc:  It's not that money is evil, it's the love of money that is evil.
> The fundamental valuing of money.  "Thou shalt not ultimately  value
> any but value"  MoQ commandment #1

Dan:
Money is a measure of value. Not the other way around. Agree.

>
> Dan:
>
>>
>> I've been thinking about the woman who called the dealership
>> complaining someone stole change outta her car. I don't know who she
>> is or a thing about her. Did she realize a kid would lose his job over
>> it? And if she did, is she some sorta righteous bitch who figures her
>> shit doesn't stink? Was the kid right stealing her change? No. On the
>> other hand, there're little foibles we all tend overlook each and
>> every day. Rolling through stop signs. Going a few miles an hour over
>> the limit. Picking up a quarter we find lying on the ground. Or in
>> someone's ashtray.
>
>
> Jc:  The whole story causes me to wonder and ask questions.  Like, was
> it the kid's job to clean out the ash tray?  Had he been in the habit
> of throwing the cigarette butts away, but keeping the loose change?

Dan:
Well, these days most people realize to smoke in their cars causes
severe depreciation and thus abstain. Instead they use the ashtrays if
there are any as receptacles for coins and whatnot. At least from what
I gather.

JC:
> Maybe he'd done that for months, with nobody complaining til now.
> But... now, that's probably not how the story goes.  Who knows.  You
> should re-write it.  Or better yet, go find the kid, probe his head,
> go find the lady, ask her her story.  Get the whole story, write it
> down.  That Truman Capote shit sells like hot cakes.  If you get rich
> off my idea, send me a tip :)

Dan:
Hey. Maybe I'll ask around. Discreetly, of course.

Thanks, John,

Dan

http://www.danglover.com