George
Bernard Shaw wrote: “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the
unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the
unreasonable man.” (from “Man and
Superman.”)
This
quote sums up for me both what I find attractive about Taoism and Buddhism and
at the same time, why I find the wisdom of these ancient Eastern traditions
insufficient. Both Buddha and Lao Tzu, in
different ways, teach the way of Shaw’s reasonable man. As such teaching attest, we have considerable
power over our ability to adapt ourselves to the world, and with the aid of
techniques such as meditation and yoga, we can greatly increase that
power. Our ability to change the world
is always limited, even if we are rich and powerful.
A
simple example: It is a common American
practice to try to improve one’s house.
People at all levels of society are trying to add on, redecorate,
relocate in order to make their house conform to their desires. House
discontent, however, is potentially infinite.
Even Ludwig of Bavaria with his Neuschwanstein and William Randolph
Hearst with his San Simeon were not content with their abodes. On the other hand, one can be very content
with a simple one room apartment or rustic cabin. One can adapt oneself to one’s domicile, or
one can try to adapt the domicile to one’s wants. But if contentment with one’s domicile is the
goal, the way of adaptation will get you there much more quickly (and cheaply)
than trying to shape the structure to fit one’s desire for the perfect home.
As strategies
for finding contentment in this world, Taoism and Buddhism are good ones. And contentment is nothing to sneeze at. If there were ever to be a Utopia, it could
only come from communities of people who found deep contentment within. It would not come from restless souls shaping
and reshaping the world and its institutions to conform to shifting needs and
wants. Left uncontrolled, such needs and
wants always will outpace what institutions can deliver.
The
simple life of a Zen hermit, such as the poet Cold Mountain
living in his cave, has a certain appeal to me.
But I also love the crazy Western world and its restless creative
impulses leading to ever expanding advances in the arts, sciences, and
technologies. As Shaw suggests, this
creativity is spurred by a fundamental dissatisfaction with the way the world
is – a dissatisfaction with Nature as it is given (yet this dissatisfaction is
given by Nature: it is a result of Darwinian natural selection).
In
the end, Western discontentment with its commitment to technological solutions will
not lead to Utopia; it may lead to great destruction. But I think that Nature itself is creative
and human creativity is an extension of the natural creativity that forms
galaxies and the biosphere of the Earth.
Lao Tzu’s way of Nature ignores this creativity and Buddhism considers
it something of an evil. That is why I
could never give either my full allegiance.
But it is also why I do give them my partial allegiance.
