Saturday, March 19, 2011

The parable of the vinegar tasters

Another short tale, this time based on a traditional Chinese painting subject, also known as the Vinegar Tasters.

Three wise men were travelling across the country, going from town to town to teach wisdom. At one town in particular, they were welcomed warmly by the townspeople, and offered gifts of the town's produce. One of the gifts was a large pot of vinegar. The first of the wise men dipped his finger into the vinegar, tasted it, and a sour expression came across his face. "This vinegar is too sour," he said, "take it away." The second of the wise men dipped his finger into the vinegar, tasted it, and a scowl came across his face. "This vinegar tastes terrible. It is far  too bitter, take it away." Then the third man dipped his finger into the vinegar, tasted it, and smiled. "Mmm!" The other two looked at him confused. "Now this tastes like vinegar!"

In the Chinese tradition, the three vinegar tasters are Confucius, Buddha and Loazi, and each one's reaction is representative of their respective religion's attitude on life. Confucius sees the vinegar as soured wine, and sees it in need of correction, just as society should be maintained through strict rules. Buddha recoils at the  taste of the vinegar, and sees it as being too extreme for the body and an example of the suffering of life. Laozi, on the other hand, recognises that vinegar is what it is, and our perception of it is biased by our judgement of what it "should be".

In the same way, all indifferents, be they goods such as vinegar or money or fine arts or even medicine, or events such as celebrations or tragedies or deaths, are all as they are and nothing more, neither inherently good nor bad. Recognise them as such and you will see how your perception has been coloured, and know where you have mistakenly placed your values. Only then will you be able to accept yourself as part of the harmony of Nature, rather than willing yourself against it.

Friday, March 18, 2011

Thursday's Thought for the Week: 17 Mar 2011

I've read a few translations of Chapter 23, from which this week's WQW was taken. The original text of the Tao Te Ching was written in Ancient Chinese, which is notoriously difficult to translate, and so you can find for many of the poems inside a very wide variety of translations, some with very different and even contradictory meanings. Of the translations I read of Chapter 23, they varied from the very metaphorical to the very literal. I decided to go with one of the more literal versions as a jumping off point for this week's TTW, only because it better serves me in talking about the particular subject of this post, that being the topic of communication, although I could as well have used it to speak about a number of other topics had I decided to go with a differing interpretation.

The quote I provided yesterday seems fairly explicit. Nature is capable of making great statements (if you will) not only despite their being brief, but also because they are brief. Humans too, the reasoning goes, should endeavour to be so forceful and succinct with their words. Few people, especially in this day and age of constant interaction, would argue that point much. Email, instant messaging, Facebook, all those confounded doo-dads the older generations dismiss are a double-edged swords at times, especially now that we carry them all around in our pockets. Aloneness is almost a foreign concept, at least where such technologies are prevalent.

Consider also, if you please, another very old saying along a similar vein. It suggests that there is an inversely proportional relationship to how much you talk and how much you ought to talk. I would give you some direct quotes, but history is so replete with examples and variations on the theme, that it would give me great astonishment that someone reading this blog should never had come across it before. The point is, I imagine anyone who has come across a statement to this effect would not lodge any disagreement with it, at least not in principle, unless perhaps that person happened to be the argumentative type. They may even nod sagely in view of this great wisdom, maybe with a knowing smile in someone or other's direction, and lament the way our society has turned towards this need for constant stimulation.

This is a sad state indeed, largely because such people are heedless of this advice with astonishing flair. Now, I'm not about to whinge about people being too undisciplined to actually follow through with advice they know is worthwhile, because goodness, it's not as though I haven't made my opinion on that fact before. No, I would much rather take the simpler recourse and ask people to actually go out of their way and try to, every now and then, shut up.

Those who know me closely will likely scoff at the idea of me being a particularly quiet person, as I can be as unnecessarily boisterous as anyone, given the right conditions, but with that said when I'm with people I'm not very close with, even if they're friends, I'm much less likely to be as loud or talkative. A lot of people tell me that this is some sort of a problem, as though my reluctance to say something in such a scenario is some sort of extreme shyness or antisociability, and I should try and be more "outgoing". The fact of the matter is, however, that if I am with people I don't know, or don't know well, then if I don't have much of substance to say I'm not terribly inclined to talk. There's very little point in flapping your lips around and making noise that nobody particularly cares to listen to, don't you think?

Now, if there's something to be said, or if someone asks you a question, there's little to be accomplished in staying quiet, or being abrupt. That is just as unproductive as talking when you shouldn't. Know when to speak and when to stay silent, and I think you will find that you learn much more from listening to other people than you could from taking over conversations or perpetuating inane and pointless chatter. Live and let live, as they say - if there is business to conduct, then conduct it. If not, relax, enjoy yourself, but remember that like many other things, the more words you offer, the cheaper each word becomes.

On a related topic, and incidentally the initial thought behind this post, is the matter of essay-writing and speech-giving. If you're ever in a position to be writing essays or giving speeches, you will likely be trying to persuade someone, and it is a matter of common knowledge that a good way to persuade someone is to impress them. Following this line of thought, people can and often are tempted to pull out a thesaurus and start using the longest synonyms they can find at every opportunity, even though they may not be aware of the common usage such words may hold, or any particular connotations. This is often a bad idea because people often see such people as either being genuinely unpleasant intellectuals or insincerely unpleasant poseurs attempting to look smarter than they are, but that is not why I bring it up - this is not a blog about essay-writing techniques.

What point I would much rather push is the idea that you shouldn't go out of your way to use big words for the simple reason that it gets in the way of your communication. Now, obviously, if you're referring to a very specific concept you want to get across with some accuracy, then by all means be as technical as need be, but if you're trying to say a very mundane thing in a very round-about way, then all you are doing is wasting time, wasting breath and wasting those precious words I was talking about before. Not only that, but all people should value the truth (I hold that to be a self-evident truth for the time being). If you are using words that your audience doesn't understand, then you are obscuring your argument; you not only make it harder to understand your sentences, you make it harder to understand your arguments, your points, and to do that is to obscure the truth. The truth is, in many cases, as plain as it is simple.

Am I saying you should never lie? Maybe yes, maybe no. That is not the point of this post. Am I saying that we should always be completely upfront and honest with people, no matter how they feel? Possibly, but again, that is not the point of this post. The point of this post is not what people say, but how they choose to say it, and how free they feel to do so. Save your words for things that need to be said. Be forceful. Let yourself have meaning in your speech, not only when you address a crowd or an authority, but at all times. Do not devalue your ideas by throwing them into a sea of nonsense and triviality that serves no purpose other than to alleviate some ill-founded notion of awkwardness, or social mores.

Or perhaps I'm just rambling.

Wednesday, March 16, 2011

Wednesday's Quote of the Week: 16 Mar 2011

I know I said that I'd try and do this every week, and I know I failed at that after one week, but in my defence I've been extremely busy the past two weeks and I don't normally think of blogging on Wednesdays and Thursdays anyway. Of course, that's why I chose those days, but knowing me, it may have been a poor decision in hindsight. Irrespective, here is your quote of the week for this week:

Nature doesn't make long speeches.
A whirlwind doesn't last all morning.
A cloudburst doesn't last all day.
Who makes the wind and rain?
Heaven and earth do.
If heaven and earth don't go on and on,
certainly people don't need to.

This quote is taken from Chapter 23 of the Ursula K. Le Guin translation of the Tao Te Ching by Lao Tzu [Dao De Jing by Laozi]. A follow-up post should come tomorrow.

Saturday, March 5, 2011

A note on another old adage

Following on from my earlier musings on old sayings, another one which came to mind today was one I'm sure you're familiar with: every cloud has a silver lining. For those of you who haven't come across it, it basically means that every bad situation in your life has some positive aspect about it. Like the earlier example, this too is said far too often with far too little thought. In fact, it strikes me that there are a very many sayings supposed to make miserable people chipper that more often than not only serve to annoy them, but I digress.

I don't think I need to go into too much depth analysing the saying. The premise is fairly simple, and seems reasonable enough, that nothing is ever all bad (and I agree with that). Some people seem to take it to an odd extreme, however, and wander through their lives with inane grins, seeing nothing but argentian skies. They seem especially fond of telling others that every cloud has a silver lining, no matter what should have befallen them. Then there are those who trudge their way through life grim and depressed, sure that the sky is blocked out by heavy rain clouds, and any silver lining is merely lightning in the distance. I don't think I need to say that these people are equally as right as the other lot, in the sense that they are not at all.

If you ask my opinion, and since you're reading this I assume you do, then there aren't really any clouds and nor are there any silver linings. If things are looking bleak, it's probably because you're looking down at your own shadow. If things are looking overwhelmingly peachy, you may be staring up at the sun. As always, the key lies in the mean; keep your eyes level, focussed, forward and un-wandering, and you will see what is.