RAF,

The book by that journalist was pretty thin stuff, on both Physics and the 
mysticism he gleans from Hinduism and Buddhism.  For either a scientist or a 
practitioner, it would be an embarrassing book to still have on one's shelves.  
So, you've done right, I'd say, having it out of your sight.  But, that was the 
sort of stuff that sold, in those days.  The obsolete book by the physicist 
Capra teaches the then-physics a little better, but for the mysticism it is 
best to go elsewhere.  The older book by Mr. Siu is written in a more formal 
and elegant style, not influenced by 1960s mania, and so is fun reading, but 
the connections he tries to make, like Capra and Zukov, are pointless: If one 
is either a working-scientist or a practitioner, that is.  Fun reading for 
general readers!  But then, afterward, it all has to be un-done if one wants to 
become serious about either science or practice, or both.  I say "undone", 
because some have a hard time just forgetting.

Wu-wei is used as a term more in Taoism, but it is a good non-technical Chinese 
word and concept.

Yes, the Wu in wu-wei is close to "not"; it is a negation.  The Japanese 
mis-pronounce it as "mu, yes.  Chao-Cho said "Wu".

Wu-shin would be "no-mind".  That's the awakened state, and is only the entry 
gate to a life of Zen practice and deepening.  Entering the gate changes 
everything; some say it changes nothing, which is true too.

Greetings from the desert,

--Joe

--- In [email protected], R A Fonda <rafonda@...> wrote:
>
> On 11/28/2012 2:46 AM, Joe wrote:
> > Wu li would be something like "Physics". 
> Yes, clearly I have conflated the terms in my recollection of reading 
> that book, several decades ago: > it was said that the Chinese term for 
> physics is 'Wu Li', or "patterns of organic energy." <
> 
> > It's a different "Wu", and is not "not", as the Wu in Wu wei.
> And is /that /"wu" just a different way of rendering the same /meaning 
> /into English as the "mu" of the koan or as in "mu shin"?
> 
> > We miss out on the Tones
> I know so little of any of the Chinese languages that a tone would be 
> meaningless to me, perhaps especially in this case:
> 
> "... The toneless <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tone_%28linguistics%29> 
> pinyin <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinyin> phrase /Wu Li/ in the title 
> ... "
> 
> Anyway, it has been a long time since I read that book, and I don't feel 
> like making a research project out of it, but I seem to remember that 
> the author
> used the term to connote 'non doing', as in:
> 
>  > The Wu Li Master does not teach, but the student learns <
> 
> but, he also worked in a lot of other usages:
> 
>  > chapters of the book are each titled with alternative translations of 
> /Wu Li/, such as "Nonsense", "My Way" and "I Clutch My Ideas". <
> 
> and perhaps some are equally problematic.




------------------------------------

Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are 
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [email protected] 
    [email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to