Hi, I just started reading The Quote Room and in the first post by antrocles there is the quote:

"no harm can befall a self-free person" - tao te ching

googled it and couldn't find anything.

What is this refering to?

Is it implying that a person liberated from an ego (sense of self and possibly even thinks it has free-will) does not subject to cause and effect and is therefor free from harm?

Or is it saying that without a sense of self then all events no matter how harmful are never percieved as harmful, it is only the sense of being a seperate entity that makes it seem like suffering?

Your on the right track here. Everyones way of putting it into words is different as words mean nothing especially when it comes to this; words fall short and never can explain it.

"Everything is honored but nothing matters. Forms are born and die, but you are aware of the eternal underneath the forms...you know nothing real can be threatened"

Something I heard in a song that springs to mind. Not sure who said it.

I’ll try and explain what my understanding of that quote is, but I think your interpretations are pretty spot on. I think a “self-free person” is one who has liberated themselves from all delusion and connected themselves with the truth, that is, the true fundamental nature of reality. This truth is also called the self, so when one has realized the self they go beyond duality; they are no longer caught up in the concept of “I” and in viewing themselves as the ego and the body. As they are no longer associated with the ego, they are outside of duality and there is no discrimination made between what is “good” and “bad” and what they “like” and “dislike”.

The liberated being is always operating from the self, and so each step taken and every action made springs forth from the self, rather than being made from the ego and its judgements, labelling, attachments and desires. Therefore, as they are acting from the self, and not the illusory mind, they are liberated from the effects of karma. They no longer create karma as they have transcended karma. They are not bound to the fruit of their actions. The liberated being has mastered themselves and is indifferent to the world around them, they are undeterred by things such as praise/criticism and pain/pleasure as they regard all as equal. Always one with the self, not seeing themselves separate from anything, the liberated being is free from the ego concepts of harm and pain, for there is no “I” to identify with those concepts.

I also like this quote from the Tao:

A mind free from desire
can comprehend the nature of the Tao,
while a mind full of desire
can only witness the Tao’s effects.



I think this is a better summation. Concise and to the point. Words are limited in describing that which is beyond words.

Thanks, for explaining that. I question though:

Why is The Self allowed to not create karma and The Ego not allowed to be free from Karma? Why is self boss here? Ego should make rules round here!

I understand you say they are "indifferent to the world around them" "regard all as equal" but why is it that the EGO can not see the true nature of The Tao and The Self can?

I have heard that mind is like lake, still water and it will reflect reality perfectly. That still doesn't make sense to me though.

Everyone is forced to use some sort of terminology for something beyond terminology but using the terms above...

The Ego is just an artificial construct without any solidity or permanence. It works by pidgeonholing everything - everything it sees must fall into a category, a concept with certain properties. The Tao is the aware nothing in which all things arise, in fact nothing exists in itself outside of that consciousness. Because the Ego only sees objects it can't possibly see that which by definition has no properties - it's entirely blind to it even though it is always the most obvious aspect of every moment. If the Ego can get out the picture then what's left is the Tao. I don't think it's so much the Self can see the Tao; the Self is the Tao. There is only one am-ness / is-ness / being-ness, beyond concepts and without limits.

Self doesn’t create karma because karma doesn’t actually exist. Karma exists only when created, or, it only exists on an egoic level. So self is boss because self is the fundamental nature of reality. When a tree sheds its leaves, it does so because that is its nature. It is just part of the natural flow of life. A liberated being is one who is connected with the self, and everything comes from them as part of this natural flow of life and not from the ego, so karma is non-existent. This is what the Buddhists mean when they talk of nirvana and ending the cycle of birth, death and rebirth. There's no rebirth because there's nothing to be reborn.


Nottwo said it perfectly. The self can see the true nature of the Tao because it is the Tao. The ego is a creation of the mind. There isn’t any “me” or “I”, our ego is just a multifaceted component of desires, traits, likes, memories, experiences etc. that form together to create an identity. The ego does not see things as they are; it sees things through a window of concepts, labels, judgments, expectations, duality etc. The Tao is the level of reality that is beyond all of this. The Tao is our real nature, and the Tao is God/Buddha/Dharma/Self/Brahman or whatever words have been used to describe the eternal reality. This eternal reality is something that is inexplicably real; in fact, it may be the only thing that is real. The Tao Te Ching, Dhammapada, the Upanishads and Bhagavad Gita are all different attempts at explaining the same reality. Some Zen masters have taught that if you want to see your true nature then don’t open your mouth – words and thinking cannot touch our true nature – as it is not dependent on understanding.


Reality exists as a reflection of the mind; it is always reflecting what is going on inside of us. For example, the bird singing outside my window sounds beautiful to me. To my neighbor, he may find it irritating and it bothers him. To my friend who has a phobia of birds, she may find the bird singing brings out some fear within her. Our mind has created our perception of reality based on how we judge and relate to things. Just look at those obsessed with the NWO and what a fear based world they live in. Reality is like a blank canvas, it is neutral, and it is through our minds we create the world we live in by projecting onto it. So when our mind is still like a lake and in its natural state, it will reflect reality as it is - with no interference by the ego. This reality as it is is the Tao. So even though there is a bird singing, the bird singing is the bird singing and that’s all. In fact, it’s not even a bird singing, for bird and singing are only words and concepts that have been created by English speaking humans, so the bird singing is .................. It just is.

Wow, beautifully put, hanumanji!

And now if you can say what part dmt plays in all this too ...

Isn’t that what we’d all love to know

Honestly though, I believe DMT exposes us to different levels of consciousness that are no less or more real than the consciousness we are currently experiencing as humans. I think DMT is like a microscope that allows us to go deeper and explore our existence beyond the physical.

I find it a bit silly when people argue over whether hyperspace really exists or if it’s just in the mind. It’s not one or the other, it’s both! There is nothing separate from us. It is all interconnected and everything exists within our awareness of it. I think this universe is but a speck in the grand scheme of creation. As Krishna says in the Bhagavad Gita - “this universe is strung on me like jewels on the thread of a necklace”. Creation is unfathomable in its endlessness. The experiences we have on DMT with entities and elves and such are just as valid as we are, it’s only the perception that is different. Hyperspace is just another part of the eternal play that is creation, a play with many different characters and sets, yet is all born out of the one. To quote Krishna from the Gita again - “this entire universe is pervaded by me, in that eternal form of mine which is not manifest to the senses. Although I am not within any creature, all creatures exist within me.”

I think they key is to use this, to understand everything is all part of creations play but to not become distracted by it. To understand that beneath it all is still that true reality – creation as it is. This is why I have so much gratitude for how lucky we are to have these experiences, to be able to play with the microscope and go deeper within our existence. I only become more and more appreciative of how special/crazy it all is.

My take on it is that, what is here translated to "self-free person" means enlightened, awakened, self-realised (you can't really put a name to it.) Anyhow, such a person does understand that he/she is the universe, and doesn't differentiate from "harm" or "pleasure". It's all the same, different sides of a coin, still one coin though.

May I propose that "before" (in the spacial sense) is a more helpful way to point to the "location" than "beyond"? The latter suggests to the mind a distance to be covered, whereas in fact there is no such distance. It is not "there", but "here".

Always the problems of words - "The Tao that can be expressed is not the Tao".

But I do agree, "before" is a very nice way of putting it.

My joy is that so many people on the Nexus have an understanding of non duality and can relate that back to dmt in their own individual way. A truly valuable place to be.

I understand that that is the case but I want to know why that is the case. Why does the ego create it's own karma and not the self? If we can continue with analogies, the tree sheds a leaf because it is it's own nature and doesn't generate karma, why then does the single leaf who is an ego generate karma when he commits suicide and sheds himself from the tree? It seems they are the same process just one is initiated in a different way.

I think you are thinking that The Self or Tao is like a train on a track that is in essence 'perfect' and any egotistical deviating is imperfect, but what makes it imperfect? Why doesn't The Self create karma?



To be free of desires, traits, likes, memories, experiencies would mean that your perception of the world would be a stream of nonsensicle sense data... like a new born child and by your definition that would be The Tao. It can not be anything otherwise? To understand anything in the world would fit the definition of ego as you describe. So The Self/The Tao is utter nonsense and nothing else to a human being?





If you could only percieve The Tao you would not hear a bird singing as that is a concept, you would just hear unidentifiable noises that we as egos register as 'bird singing'. I assume this would be bliss, an incredible relief from the restraints of language and conceptualizing but at the same time incredibly horrifying as you have no idea what is going on, where you are or how to stay alive.

That was my first guess and by now seeing from this conversation it is true as the mind that is free from understanding will not percieve the differentiation that is necessary to discern pleasure/pain, right/wrong etc.



A good spot there sunny jim, we are born in to a blank state that hanumanji would call "The Tao" and then experience corrupts us as we form memories and concepts and personalities until we are nothing left but sorrowful ego's moping around trying to get our hands on anything that will show us our true nature again (insert DMT here).

I know this sounds like a cop out, but I think you are intellectualizing it too much. You will never understand the Tao through the intellect, even though that may come across as smug, it is the truth. To ask the question “why?” is to play a game of never-ending theorizing and philosophizing. Who is it that is asking why to begin with? It is only the ego that is concerned with asking “why” this and “why” that.

The Tao isn’t “perfect”, it doesn’t create “karma”, these are only concepts that you are putting onto something that is, as zhoro said, before words. Don’t speak, don’t think. Experience your mind as it is before any thoughts have arisen. That place before any thought has arisen is the Tao. But as the Tao is before thinking, even calling it the Tao is a mistake. As NotTwo has quoted - "The Tao that can be expressed is not the Tao".

A Zen master who I really admire says that ignorance causes everything including birth, old age, sickness and death. The questions can then be asked - “what causes ignorance?”,” when does ignorance appear?” and “why does it appear?”. He notes however, that it is only when you open your mouth that ignorance has appeared. It is only when you ask “why does ignorance appear?” that it appears. If you never have the question, ignorance neither appears nor disappears.


To be free of desires, traits, likes etc. means exactly that, to be free of them. To simply be unattached to them. This is the point of meditation practices such as Vipassana, where you sit with awareness of thoughts, sensations and such as they come and go. You always stay present within your awareness of these things, but you do not cling and attach to them. You recognize them for what they are. This is why equanimity is so highly regarded in Buddhism. It is a truly freeing state when one has the ability to recognize their desires, likes, dislikes, passions - yet remain unaffected by them, to let them pass and not get caught up with it all.

To understand the Tao just means to have awakened to your true nature and to experience reality as it is. There’s nothing special or mystical about it. It is just a human being who is in touch with their real self, they know who they really are, and so their human nature flows in harmony with life. These words “liberated” being and “self-free” person can actually impede understanding of what the true nature of the Tao is when they are taken too seriously. But they are necessary for communicating and establishing a grounding point of what it all is. However, they eventually need to be dropped as words are limiting.


If you are free from attachment to the ego and experience reality as it truly is, then to hear a bird singing is to hear those unidentifiable noises as you say. Words and concepts are only thinking. The bird sings, the ear hears. All there truly is, is the experience of hearing. There is only awareness of sound. I’m not really sure why you equate “liberated” with being in a state where the brain cannot properly filter stimuli and is unable to recognize and comprehend its surroundings. Again all of this Tao stuff is nothing special; it is simply our true nature. It is who we always are; most of us just can’t recognize it because we’re so caught up in our thoughts. To awaken to our true nature is the heart of the Buddha’s teachings.

This quote says to me that once you stop giving a toss about things you are free, and so free from harm. In the case of physical harm befalling me i would like to think that, when i face my own demise, i will think "oh well i have had a good innings and now it"s over". In the case of a loved one recieving physical or mental harm i dont think that i will be immune to the mental harm that will befall me due to my empathy for them. I guess that is where i take issue with this quote. Although i may have not understood it correctly and just shaped it to suit my own parameters for living.
Its a good quote.

Maybe, did you read the thread so far?

I read your first post, before reading other replies, and then offered my own take on the quote. I would not say that i was a classically spiritual person and therefore wanted to offer that perspective on the quote. It seems to me that a lot of spiritual teachings can be taken ambiguously and their meanings can be adjusted by an individual according to how that particular person has developed over the years. This places untold value on the words but the downside of this is when people start arguing about spirituality to the point of murdering each other. I guess if such people were self free they wouldnt give a toss whether anyone had differing opinions to them on the subject.

In your first post you asked the question about lack of free will and being at the whim of cause and effect. When a meteor sized pile of shit hits the fan in my personal life, due to no fault of my own, i find it very beneficial to go in "inshallah", shrug my shoulders and let it go. Letting go of all the negative baggage that i have accrued over the years by just saying its all totally irrelevant. 100 years after i am dead no-one will even remember me or see any significance in any of my personal issues. This can also be very liberating. Perhaps that is being a self free person but i am very unambitious, have found a certain amount of contentment in midddle aged complacency and sloth and am no role model for the furtherment of humanity. Its just another perspective.

I understand what you mean about how people apply the most suitable meaning to their own lifes, that is not what we are doing in this thread though... It is more about trying to understand the what is actually trying to be conveyed linguistically and then talk about what that means to the stock standard norm state of mind we are in.

I think it is a bit sad how we animals still argue until the point of being red in the face, it stems from people always wanting to be right rather than learn/understand the deeper multi-layered meanings of the discussed content. Most will choose to be right when given the choice of being right or free, I attribute this to the ego and how it chains our judgement so that we can't even see beyond our own backsides.

You're perspective that all is irrelevant as a motive to not take things personal is incredibly valid and useful but as I say, our state of mind has us to think and act contrary to this... before you know it rage engulfs your system and it was like you didn't even make it happen, rather anger happened to you which is the way neurologists see freewill currently also... as a biological robot that passively has experience while falsely thinking it has control over many aspects when it doesn't. That is another topic though, I am also in the no role model for further humanity category. It seems life's apparant locked doors and paradoxical dilemmas and devil and the deep blue sea situations makes the only attitude I can muster... "meh" and so I sit here and await my death.

What is the stock, standard, normal state of mind? Does such a thing exist?