The Dao
I have been getting interested in Daoism a bit lately, partly because of a recent involvement with chaquan - a traditional Muslim martial style in the Kung Fu tradition. Traditionally chaquan is only practiced by Chinese Muslims, specifically the Hui community.
The Hui are fascinating in themselves as in addition to their unique Kung Fu form (often this is the acrobatic/gymnastic form seen in martial arts genre movies) they have beliefs which are a unique blend of Daoism, Sufism (Khwajagan and other Central Asian such as Naqshbandi), Islam and martial arts practice but I shall leave any consideration of them to another post.
In thinking about Daoism lately - particularly in relation to Sufistic and Magical correspondences - a lot of light has been shed on possible approaches to problems of ‘searching’ and ‘development’. The central issue can be seen as one of desire - that is to say, the personality (’false self’ or nafs in Sufi terminology) expresses itself through a will to achieve its desires. Necessarily these desires are ‘false’ and therefore fail to satisfy the inner need of the individual. In a sense they block the perception of truth.
Thus it is that almost all developmental or esoteric systems start from a basis (in one form or another) of combatting these desires and the ‘will to expression’ of the false self. This is why exercises are prescribed and why religious formulations enjoin abstinence or ‘hardships’ in certain areas such as fasting, regular prayers, abstinence from drinking etc. Of course these over time get nullified by elevating them to something ‘holy’ as opposed to practical but that is another story.
The point is that a primary goal is to combat desire and through that limit the action of the Commanding Self. A famous Sufi is reported to have said “ My only desire is to have no desire” and this illustrates both the attitude and a paradox: desire for no desire is still desire - and who/what is doing the desiring?
Bearing this paradox in mind it seems that there are three possible approaches to this issue: the first would be what may be called a quietistic approach where the self is accepted for what it is and one attempts to accept things the way they are.
The second can be seen as the ‘religious’ framework (or what degenerates over time into the religious) where the practitioner strives to eliminate desire through negating and denying it.
The third - and this is the one which primarily interests me at the moment - is the category into which I would place ‘Magick’: the attempt to nullify desire not by denying it but by indulging it to the point where one no longer feels the desire and therefore transcends it. To exhaust desire.
In this latter group one could I suppose place figures such as Gurdjieff (whose description of the ways is similar to the three methods outlined above), Rasputin and others from the Christian Byzantine ‘Holy Fool’ tradition as well as Sufi groupings such as the malamatiyya or perhaps, more properly, the qalandariyya.
Personally I feel that this starting point of combatting desire is often overlooked and the source of much confusion amongst ‘seekers’ and problems with ‘groups’ etc. Certainly in the groups and systems I have been railing against recently there is little - according to my perception - emphasis on opposing one’s desires. Rather, all opportunities are given to indulge them. This may have a deeper rationale that I have missed, or maybe not, in any event it is ok. Not everyone is looking for the same thing.
But it is an interesting paradox - often when people find ‘their teacher’, it seems to generally be a person that in some way delights them or seems ‘right’. But if the aim is to combat the false self - the self that invariably has one in its thrall and by definition would without doubt be the self that ‘found’ the teacher, the donkey that brought one to his door - should not the teacher be someone who appears objectionable?
There is a story in Idries Shah’s The Dermis Probe called The Strange Becomes Commonplace which illustrates this:
A scholar asked Afzal of Iskandariya “what can you say of Alim Azimi your teacher?”
Afzal answered “His poetry intoxicated me and his love of mankind suffused me and his self-sacrificing services elevated me.”
The scholar said “Such a man would indeed be able to fashion angels!”
Afzal replied “Those are the qualities which would have recommended Alim to you. Now for the qualities which enabled him to help men transcend the ordinary:
Hazrat Alim Azimi made me irritated which caused me to examine my irritation and trace its source. Alim Azimi made me angry so I could feel and transform my anger. Alim allowed himself to be attacked so that people could see the bestiality of the attackers and not join them. He showed us the strange so that the strange became commonplace and we could realize what it really is.”
Links
Godbothering
Techieness &
Design
Mystic Mayhem
ParaPolitics
Everything Else
Archives
Recent Entries
Meta
