What are we really made of ?

How can we build a castle, if we do not know how to build strong foundations, or even worst, if we do not know what foundations are?

After getting to know more of being god, evil, self control, empathy, zenism, taoism, teaism ... I realized that the more I read, the least I understand.

If psychologists, philosophers, religious and spiritual leaders, even poets, all of them for centuries have been dealing with the same issue, our feelings, emotions, how to control them, how to behave, so that we can live "happy" together ... If so, then, WHY is that our education system has not focused in knowing ourselves more (the way we work and the things we are made of) ?

We humans are funny. It seems we cannot live isolated, so we chose to "survive" together. We need someone to love, to hate, to help, to hurt, to learn from and to teach to... isn't ironic? Full of feelings and emotions, yet it seems our knowledge on this field remains little.

Most of us have learned how to control our emotions through our parents, people around us, some school teachers, and religion in most cases. But, overall, through my own lenses, a true learning is empirical, through trial and error, through falls, loss, disappointments, suffering and pain.

"Indeed, the first law and proclamations of ethics - the Code of Hammurabi, the Ten Commandments of the Hebrews, ... can be read as attempts to harness, subdue, and domesticate emotional life ... Despite social constrains, passions overwhelm reason time and again ..." Daniel Goleman ("Emotional Intelligence", 1995).

"What really torments civilized people is that they are full of feelings and they know nothing about" D. H. Lawrence ("Sex Literature and Censorship", 1953).

So, I have come to an answer of one of my multiple questions:

Apparently, our human nature is neither good, nor evil. Instead, we are are able to feel and develop different emotions, which along our long history, we have failed to domesticate through ethics and religion. It might be due to our inability to accept or to understand that we were built to develop different and opposite emotions, which can be translated in either good or evil according to our own categorization of concepts.

--

I am about to finish Daniel Goleman's book: Emotional Intelligence, hopefully I get to post something the next coming days ... really interesting BTW ;)

In the how to learn to be empathic? [4] ... "Chado: Ichi-go ichi-e"

ZENISM -> TEAISM

Continuing with my last post, besides Teaism, we mentioned Zenism as the origin of the Chado.

Zen is described as the art of feeling the polar star in the southern sky (What ??)

Reading further, I found more concrete explanations of what the Zen Philosophy is about:

- Zenism says that Truth can be reached only through the comprehension of opposites.

- The followers of Zen aimed at direct communion with the inner nature of things, regarding their outward accessories only as impediments to perceive Truth

(Aha!! this reminds me Maslow's words, when he talks of self-actualizing people as more astute in his/her perception of others)

Perhaps, in hopes of avoiding be misled by the outward accessories of things is that Zen recognizes the mundane as equally important to the spiritual, which can explain the reason why the most respected Zen monks were given the more tedious and demeaning tasks to be performed absolutely perfectly.

TEAISM, CHADO or CHANOYU

Teaism is a result of this Zen conception of greatness in the smallest incident of life.

Teaism involves training to see the world around us. To see, in Teaism, is to let the distorting lens of social custom and valuation fall away, and to perceive and appreciate things for themselves, or in Maslow's words to cognize instead of simply abstract.

In human relationships, having no designs on others and being free of the calculation to impress or compete are principles of Respect. And in Teaism, Respect (between the host and guest) can be achieved through long discipline and practice.

Ichi-go ichi-e 一期一会 (one time one meeting), these words define the attitude of the practitioner of tea. One should hold the host in most respectful esteem, having in mind that, that gathering would occur only once in your life.

--

Let me finish this post with the following. If I wish to learn to be more empathic, I shall take away my distorting lens to be able to see the core and essence of others. I shall think of Ichi-go ichi-e in my future gatherings and encounters with others, avoiding putting designs on people, neither impressing nor competing. I shall nurture Respect, and for this the practice of Teaism can help.

Special thanks to Daisuke and Jose for this gift "The Book of Tea".

In the how to learn to be empathic? [3] ... "From Chado to Vacuum"

I finished to read the Book of Tea, and I got to connect some of my learnings (I think). Let me "try" to explain, hopefully I can get to somewhere.

Japanese Tea ceremony was born from a Zen ritual, where monks gathered and drank tea of a single bowl. Zenism is the legitimate successor or Taoism, both representations of the Southern Chinese mind in contradistinction to the Communism of Northern China.

Let me first start with Taoism,

--

TEAISM -> TAOISM

Okakura wrote that Teaism is Taoism in disguise, therefore I shall first attempt to understand what Taoism is about.

Taoism is referred as the "art of being in the World". More important, Taoism accepts the mundane as it is and tries to find beauty in our world of misery, misfortune and worry, which is pretty much the philosophy of the Teaism.

THE SECRET

The Taoists claimed that the comedy of life could made more interesting if everyone would preserve the unities.

The secret of success in the mundane drama of life, according to taoists, is to keep the proportion of things and give place to others without losing one's own position, which is easier to understand, than exercise it.

To illustrate this, Laotse said that if someone can make a vacuum of himself into which others might enter freely, he or she would become MASTER of all situations. Moreover, it is written that, the Real Man of the Taoism tempers his own brightness in order to merge himself into the obscurity of others.



How do you imagine a vacuum is like?

I imagine being a vacuum is like being a moderator of a round table where everyone's opinion is equal. I may be hallucinating, but I was thinking that a good practical example of Laotse's vacuum, is the way one of the greatest leaders in human history was, Nelson Mandel's way.

Mandela's way of leadership, according to Richard Stengel [ref], is:

- Flexible, both sides of certain situation, maybe opposite, often would be considered to have some kernel of credibility, and some part important to be reconciled (min 8).

- Lead from the back. He would let everyone speak and express themselves, and until the very end, he would summarize what everyone said, and then, he would direct people in the way he wanted them to go (min 11).

What do you think?

To Conclude: Be a vacuum, temper your brightness and merge yourself into others ... maybe one day we will get to MASTER all situations... easy ah?