Tao Te Wednesday

12/7/2011

Whoever relies on the Tao in governing men
doesn't try to force issues
or defeat enemies by force of arms.
For every force there is a counterforce.
Violence, even well intentioned,
always rebounds upon oneself.

The Master does his job
and then stops.
He understands that the universe
is forever out of control, and that trying to dominate events goes against the current of the Tao.
Because he believes in himself, he doesn't try to convince others.
Because he is content with himself, he doesn't need others' approval.
Because he accepts himself, the whole world accepts him.

Tao #30 Stephen Mitchell New English Version

21 Comments

Laura Novak

12/7/2011 01:45:01 am

I'll start with this: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/12/07/BAC41M9GUP.DTL

I notice that the comments reflect support of the city for the most part. And I am curious about the concept of offering other space. Is "other space" the point? or is being in front of a city hall the point? I'm not sure.

Drove by Oakland City Hall the other day. They've flooded the grassy areas where the tents were. Interesting strategy. Can't return where it's wet. And REALLY can't return when that water might freeze at night. So where to next? And how about that in Russia? Will love to see how that plays out there, having once lived there for a semester.

mistah charley, ph.d.

12/7/2011 02:07:46 am

Here's Peter A. Merel's translation of the same text:

TAO TE CHING - Chapter 30. Violence

Powerful men are well advised not to use violence,
For violence has a habit of returning;
Thorns and weeds grow wherever an army goes,
And lean years follow a great war.

A general is well advised
To achieve nothing more than his orders:
Not to take advantage of his victory.
Nor to glory, boast or pride himself;
To do what is dictated by necessity,
But not by choice.

For even the strongest force will weaken with time,
And then its violence will return, and kill it.

Laura Novak

12/7/2011 04:20:35 am

I'm glad you print another translation here, Mistah Charley. It's fascinating to see how differently the text can be interpreted. Thank you!!

Tom

12/7/2011 04:48:48 am

http://msn.foxsports.com/collegefootball/story/Penn-State-to-open-center-for-child-protection-amid-sexual-abuse-scandal-120611

Ottoline

12/7/2011 08:54:56 am

The NYTimes says Sandusky is going to jail as a result of the two new victims' charges, and this time S has bail, not bond, and it's $250k, and if he can pay it he'll have to wear the ankle monitor:

http://tinyurl.com/798vbdy

No comment from S's very persuasive lawyer.

Ottoline

12/7/2011 09:20:45 am

Oh geez, sorry to be so slow to connect the dots: the lawyer who got his client pregnant when he was 51 and he was 16 is the persuasive lawyer claiming innocence for Sandusky.

http://tinyurl.com/795pgyh
(this is an old link.) Hand hits forehead. And sorry to go O/T.

Sherryn

12/7/2011 11:53:33 am

Thanks for Today's Tao. They're like deep cleansing breaths. And I also love the different perspectives other translations give them.

The Occupy Movement here in Philly was forced from their original location and given a permit for a park, but no overnight camping is allowed there. So the Occupiers took to the streets and blocked traffic for a few days in protest, and are now moving to "Occupy Houses" that are in foreclosure due to predatory lending practices.

Sherryn

12/7/2011 12:32:18 pm

Ottoline, that link about the lawyer says it all, What is Jerry thinking hiring someone like him? I'm starting to think Jerry wants to get the book thrown at him.

I was scratching my head over S's "interview" on the New York Times. I never read nor saw an interview with no hard hitting questions, or interruptions asking for clarification. The whole thing seemed staged, and to what end? Then I found this commentary on The Daily Beast

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/12/06/how-jerry-sandusky-played-the-new-york-times-in-his-interview.html

Tom

12/7/2011 12:58:42 pm

This is a post at the premium PSU football site I read. The post is from a former PSU player who played under Joe as did his son. The poster mentions that his son had to talk to Joe about changing his major. The son rarely saw the field. He was a bench player. Didn't matter to Joe. He was one of his.

"The fact that the last few weeks have tarnished this man's legacy is another crime committed. From what I am hearing, as well as read here,his story will eventually come out that he tried on 3 seperate occasions to get Spanier to do the right thing, and Joe's hands were tied. Joe is not the criminal here!
That is not the reason for my post however.
We have seen first hand the real Joe. He is and was all that he was made out to be. He absolutely does care about these kids and does care that they stay out of trouble and get a degree in something that will be worthwhile. I remember when our son wanted to switch majors, and went to his advisor, Todd Kulka. He ended up having to talk to Joe, as Joe wanted to be sure why he was switching majors and what he felt the future will hold for him in the job market etc. Did he try to protect his players? Absolutely, but in a good sense. also, show me a top D1 coach that doesn't try to protect his players. I think these guys would rather deal with the law sometimes as opposed to the wrath of Joe. Joe's doghouse could be a black hole. If I had 4 more sons, I would send them to a Joe Paterno coached team. Now, I am not saying that every day with Joe, was a love affair with these guys but I do know that they will look back on him as a role model in future years and take pride in having had him as a coach. Black or white, Joe loved his players and cared about them beyond what any media type will ever know. I only hope that he will live long enough, to see his name cleared a bit in all of this."

The crucification of Joe Paterno by the Pharisees at ESN and other media has been despicable, wrong untruthful. Lies, fabrications and distortions abound. The bastards that did this irreparable damage to Joe need to experience karma in its harshest form. Whatever really hurts them, deeply hurts them, that's where they need to get it. It's just not right what they've done.

Marleycat

12/7/2011 01:17:31 pm

Joe Paterno may have gone to his boss, Spanier three times. So, when he knew Spanier was going to do NOTHING about protecting those little boys - how many times did he go to the POLICE? NONE! He decided that Sandusky, Spanier, and Penn State were more important than protecting little children from being raped! When you know children are being raped and your boss doesn't do the right thing it's your responsibility to go to the Police, there is no excuse for not doing that.

As a father, how in the world can you say you would send your boys into Joe Paterno's care - knowing that Joe would keep his mouth shut about someone raping your sons, not just to
the Police, but to you, their father. He may genuinely care about his players, but what does that have to do with anything. If I were you, if your boys had any involvement with Paterno and Sandusky when they were very young - you had better ask them if Sandusky ever raped them, because the wonderful Joe obviously would not have told you about it or lifted a finger to stop it.

Ivyfree

12/7/2011 02:48:12 pm

I haven't paid much attention to the Paterno-Sandusky thing, and I don't even remotely care about football. So I may not have the facts straight. That said, Paterno is head coach at a university? Doesn't that qualify him as an educator? Because in our state, all educators (among other professions like healthcare workers) are state mandated reporters. I kind of assumed it was that way in all states.

Talking to his boss doesn't cut it. The only thing he might have done is notify his boss that he was calling the police- but I don't think that's required either. In our state, we have the obligation to report suspected abuse, but the reporter can request confidentiality. And the reporter's right of confidentiality would trump the employer's right to know that a report has been filed, because some people wouldn't report if they thought there'd be repercussions against them. And you don't even have to be sure it happened- if you suspect sexual abuse of a child, you're supposed to report it. It's investigated, and nobody's actually accused of child abuse until there's evidence.

Tom

12/7/2011 03:01:20 pm

Ivy--Your assumption was incorrect regarding reporting in PA. There's lots of information that needs to be digested before a levelheaded opinion can be formed. Wouldn't you want that for yourself? Or would you want to be party to a lynching without the benefit of a defense. 'Marleycat', 'confused', 'Glad I'm not Tom' and others here want a lynching. You?

Nothing's real until it's personal.

V-A

12/8/2011 12:27:03 am

I do not know the facts of the Penn State case. There's too much confusion about who knew what and who did what. I can only say that my well-honed gut for things involving sexual child abuse tells me that the high profile firing of Paterno was meant to save the University from worse allegations. I don't know what Paterno got from the deal. Maybe nothing. But I believe absolutely that Sandusky's crimes were part of a larger ring at the University. For one thing, here's the man who claims he was sexually abused by an Education Professor 30 yrs ago http://articles.nydailynews.com/2011-11-16/news/30407811_1_penn-state-professor-abuse-man-claims

Look how little coverage THAT got.

V-A

12/8/2011 12:32:36 am

Dearest Laura, in honor of your Tao Wednesday post, may I recommend a profile in the New Yorker about a man named Ray Kachel who ended up at OWS/NYC from Seattle. This more than anything I've read or seen about the movement made it real to me.

Let me just say, that the profile is captivating, and reads like a thriller, almost. It does not laud nor condemn OWS, but like all good writing, gives us new perspectives. I had trouble sleeping last night after reading it.

"All the Angry People" = http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/12/05/111205fa_fact_packer

Ottoline

12/8/2011 12:58:58 am

On the subject of Zen and the Ruler's force, did you see thi post at IM on LAPD handling OWS there?

http://tinyurl.com/6s4bx2t

I keep thinking the police training is all about preparing for when they REALLY need to put us down.

Ottoline

12/8/2011 01:25:00 am

Marleycat and Ivyfree: Just a vote from here that I like your posts a lot, even if Tom doesn't. As we all know (incl Tom, by his own report), Tom gets angry, flies off the handle (my personal observation), and has a jones for Paterno's total innocence (which is okay with me). He likes to tell the rest of us what we know, what we think, and who we are, untroubled by lack of knowledge on any of these topics.

I take that as an indication of his passion for the subject (which is good IMO) and his lack of manners (not good because it's a big waste of time, but forgivable). I think Tom is a good man, and I often like to hear from him.

As we know, what WE think doesn't matter much to anyone except ourselves, so of course all sides are worth exploring (all sides that actually interest us, that is), with the goal of clarifying our own thinking.

I do like a forum where all are not in agreement. Thank you again, Laura, for having all of us over.

Ottoline

12/8/2011 01:31:31 am

Sherryn -- the link you gave us really interested me, because I really fell for the lawyer's version of S's possible innocence. I mean it made me wonder. Plus that unsavory info about S's lawyer's personal history with the 16-yr-old client that he impregnated, then married, then divorced. Just shows me how gullible I can be. That alone is worth the price of admission for me, to remind myself of that unfortunate characteristic of mine.

V-A

12/8/2011 01:56:51 am

Ottoline: that you are willing to learn from the Sandusky episode (re: the lawyer's past etc) gives me hope. Just as Laura wrote recently about Palin, that we respond to her based on our past experiences-- that is exactly how the Penn State scandal will play out. People with no understanding of child sexual abuse will make pronouncements, and people who've never dealt with their own issues will make other pronouncements. Most of those pontificating will be men, who are terrified of facing a) homosexual impulses b) childhood episodes of their own.

Almost every family has a Sandusky. They vary by degrees, gender, method. But I would venture every child has been in a dangerous situation with a predator. Some are just luckier than others.

Laura Novak

12/8/2011 02:25:46 am

That's it. Tom, you're out of here. Go find another blog. I have finally lost my incredible patience. I've deleted your comment to Marley Cat with all the crazy hatred it contains.

I am teaching today and comments are going into moderation. I have absolutely had it up to here with playing hall monitor.

Disagreement and discussion are one thing. Hatred, fury and obsession are another and can be spewed at other blogs.

Sherryn

12/8/2011 02:01:08 pm

V A - The New Yorker article about Kachel's story is haunting! I love your idea because it so fits with the Tao Post. It speaks to the basic human need to fit in, to connect with others in a meaningful way, and to stand up for your rights no matter the cost.
______________

Ottoline, that's exactly how I felt while reading it. I found myself disgusted at all the players in this mess, all the finger pointing, but nowhere do I see accountability, compassion, fear, remorse for the vulnerable children.
Yeah, the Penn State community raised money to donate to child abuse causes, but is it to mend their reputation? Or to help soothe the cosciences of the perps who feel supported by the Penn State Community?

RandomKoolzip link

12/8/2011 09:19:56 pm

"Both the weaver and the wearer of the garment of the Ganges, is a sari spun of a stitch."
-Rowan and Martin's Laugh-In

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.

Tao Te Wednesday

Leave a Reply.

Laura Novak

Blogs I Read

Categories

Archives