dust

Well, calling anyone the "truest of fools" is fairly provocative. But I've seen you keep your cool in the face of worse. And I don't think that his general line of reasoning is entirely unreasonable in a thread about philosophical Daoism being agnostic...

MH... I'm not sure why you're getting so agitated by Spotless when steve and flowing hands are presenting far more provocative assertions!

Oh.. I thought that was just to make sure they weren't falling asleep. But like I said, I don't really know what I'm talking about!

Nowadays 功夫 gongfu kungfu, in both English and Chinese, refers to Chinese martial arts but originally the Chinese means "skill/craftsmanship gained through intense effort". Literally "a person's skill/merit". So, using it in the sense of mindful, intense action makes perfect sense more people should kung fu things Well..I'd just sneeze. Let that shit go. Your body (you) wants to blow something out...so blow it out. I don't think any meditation is about ignoring and subverting one's natural processes, is it? But I don't really know what I'm talking about, so...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism#History http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_atheism Do we really believe that not a single person in history before the 18th Century was capable of thinking outside of their religious bubble?

Yes, ZZ mentions lots of magical creatures and other "supernatural" things... ...as did Aesop, as has many a great writer of stories.. Did they all believe all of their creations to be real? 彼其真是也 以其不知也 ^Daoist agnosticism right there^

MH makes a good point. I'd also like to consider the word "supernatural" -- "many, including some who practice daojia, consider the Dao to contain supernaturalistic aspects" It seems obvious to me that the Dao, which is to say the unspeakable, the essence of the universe, is, in a literal sense, the supernatural; it is the source of nature, of all elements/processes/systems of existence. Being "above" all that we consider natural, it can be said to be "super"natural. But at the same time, it is nature. It's not literally a separate thing floating around above nature. And it is not supernatural in the sense of Sam and Dean Winchester, in the sense that one can learn to harness its special powers and fly away, or make oneself invisible, or live forever.. Supernatural in this sense means "beyond the laws of nature", and this is impossible. Dao cannot be beyond itself. As to the existence of gods and monsters... well, I don't believe in any of that, but using philosophical Daoism as a basis, I don't think that there's any justifiable position other than agnosticism. I don't see Laozi or Zhuangzi insisting vehemently that one must or must not believe in anything in particular..

These last couple of comments on the nature of knowledge vs enlightenment got me thinking.. and, looking at the Chinese, it seems fairly clear that it does not have to be translated as probably should not be translated as "know" The Guodian uses a variation of 智 (with 干 instead of 口), whereas more modern versions use 知. They are similar, but with both of them to choose from we have a variety of meanings.. 智 can be translated as experience, strategy, thinking, cleverness 知 can be translated as experience, knowledge, truth, understanding This is gonna make me have to rethink my Guodian translation...

Don't worry, I misunderstood what you wrote.

If by this you mean the endless shifting of the Way, the eternal rise and fall of things.... well, how could one not believe in it? It seems fairly obvious that this is what happens. I think ZZ believed so too. But people need something "more"... people need to have something that they can't logically explain. As if existence itself wasn't enough.

I figure that he's not being literal...but there is an interesting debate on precisely what he is talking about when he says things like: 人又反入於機 萬物皆出於機 皆入於機 Man then again enters into the great Machinery (of Evolution), from which all things come forth (at birth), and which they enter at death. (Legge) Men in time return again to the mysterious workings. So all creatures come out of the mysterious workings and go back into them again. (Watson) Anyway.. there are enough laowai who believe in an afterlife, in an eternal soul, and enough Chinese who don't, that we don't need to assume that all non-Chinese are reading it wrong simply because none of them believe in eternal existence.

Yes. That video pissed me off. Taomeow, you're an intelligent person. That was an incredibly unintelligent thing to post. I wasn't knocking your intelligence or claiming mine is superior, and you know that. I was saying that I think you should have thought twice before posting such obvious propaganda. Prove it...? I think all we've proven so far is that nobody is really able to "prove" anything on this topic...but I will comment on that video. Yes, Gates wants to lower population growth. But a bit of research as to why...? http://www.gatesfoundation.org/Who-We-Are/Resources-and-Media/Annual-Letters-List/Annual-Letter-2014#MYTHTHREE It's quite logical. You can see it everywhere. The most prosperous countries, the most healthy wealthy people, end up having fewer children, whereas the poorest end up having more. Look at the UK, where the native population (i.e. not counting immigration) has been declining for decades. Then look at China, where over the last 2 centuries tens of millions of people have died from war and famine and drug addiction, with swathes of the population cut away in the S-J War and the GLF, where the vast majority of people have been living in poverty for decades -- and what's the population growth been like? edit: My point is made like this: every nation has seen population growth over the last few hundred years. Innovation in agriculture, the growth of transport networks, better medicine and more knowledge about hygiene, etc -- all of these things have meant that people are generally living longer. But it is in those nations where the people have lived more healthily, and to a higher age, where the population growth has slowed down; conversely, in the poorer nations, those with more poverty and worse education, populations have continued to increase despite having less food and worse hygiene. This is not because people are healthy, and living to old age more frequently. It is because people have more children when they know there's a chance that half of them will die before they even get a chance to attend school. I don't know if I can prove that vaccinations have anything to do with this, but I am confident that they played a part, and I am equally confident that Bill Gates wants nothing but to improve the lives of people in worse-off parts of the world.

I don't know how strict they would be, but http://www.travelchinaguide.com/embassy/visa/business.htm

Yeah, if you want to travel around alone without worry, you will need to spend time learning Chinese. Months at the very least. But how long it takes to become good enough will absolutely depend on how open and friendly you are and how well you study. A friend of mine arrived in Beijing with no Chinese and no acquaintances. He went out every day and just tried talking to people. Within a week he was making friends, within 3 months he was gambling with old men round the way, and within 6 months he was singing Chinese karaoke and traveling off by himself on buses and trains. Visas are generally no problem, unless things have changed drastically. You can get a 3 month tourist visa fairly simply (maybe 6 month too?). And if you get a decent job lined up first (not sure what you're qualified for, but you speak English, so you could teach it), you'll get a work visa no problem (for teaching you'd need a degree and/or TEFL qualification). But any decent teaching contract will be for a year, and you won't be able to skip off for 6 months in the middle of it without your visa being cancelled. If you want to travel around, you'll need to do it on a tourist visa, and that would probably mean (if you were on a work visa to begin with) leaving the country and re-applying. As far as wandering... you can travel the length and breadth of the country on trains and buses, and it's simple and fairly inexpensive as long as you have a decent grasp of Mandarin and some common sense. But as Silent Answers says, even if you learn standard Mandarin to a very high level, you will end up in any number of places where the dialect is essentially an entirely different language. And you won't be able to stay away from highly populated areas for long...

Do you speak any Chinese? Do you have experience of travel elsewhere?

As correctly as any of us! Yes these points are important. None of us had yet linked this back to the story of Chef Ting and his knife. Your Taoist attitude is great...but there's no such thing as an interruption here. Say what you want!!! I didn't know there was a name for it... but yes, this diffusion of confusion through analysis of language and human psychology is something I've long thought to be important. I guess that's one of the reasons I love ZZ..

Yes...I did something funny and it posted the post before I'd written anything. Now edited...

Well now I understand what your understanding is. But claiming unequivocalness seems to me to be misguided, especially when it pertains to ZZ. If you don't cherry-pick (like a misguided Christian trying to find evidence for irrelevant things in the Bible!), you'll find a lot more evidence in ZZ for dying a good death, for not fighting against the true nature of Dao (return). http://ctext.org/zhuangzi?searchu=Heaven&page=3#n2756 "And that creatures cannot overcome Heaven (the inevitable) is a long-acknowledged fact - why should I hate my condition?" http://ctext.org/zhuangzi/adjustment-of-controversies#n2727 "When we stop, and yet we do not know how it is so, we have what is called the Dao." http://ctext.org/zhuangzi/adjustment-of-controversies#n41941 "Under heaven there is nothing greater than the tip of an autumn down, and the Tai mountain is small. There is no one more long-lived than a child which dies prematurely, and Peng Zu did not live out his time. Heaven, Earth, and I were produced together, and all things and I are one." http://ctext.org/zhuangzi/perfect-enjoyment#n2830 "'Heaven and Earth do nothing, and yet there is nothing that they do not do.' But what man is there that can attain to this inaction?" http://ctext.org/zhuangzi/perfect-enjoyment#n2832 "...'why should I dread it? Life is a borrowed thing. The living frame thus borrowed is but so much dust. Life and death are like day and night." http://ctext.org/zhuangzi/perfect-enjoyment#n2833 "In death there are not (the distinctions of) ruler above and minister below. There are none of the phenomena of the four seasons. Tranquil and at ease, our years are those of heaven and earth. No king in his court has greater enjoyment than we have." So if we're going to be claiming "no two ways about it"...well, there are at least 2 ways about it. But Zhuangzi's writing points more frequently to accepting death, not attempting to overcome Heaven, not living longer than anyone else.

Yeah. It's rare that a human, or any other animal with fairly high-level cognitive functions, never has an idea. Strictly speaking, when one is hungry, even picturing a banana in the mind's eye is having an idea (the idea of eating a banana). So I agree that some ideas are prerequisite for any kind of further cultivation. But to have the idea of having no idea, and then going about trying to lose all of one's ideas, including the one of having no idea....... Anyway... let's not pretend that Taoist writing isn't full of paradoxes... Going back to the Chinese, ZZ says, ... 得意而忘言 吾安得忘言之人而與之言哉 得 意 而 忘 言 get meaning/idea/desire and forget/neglect language/words 吾 安 得 忘 言 之人 而 與之 言 哉 I how/why get forget/neclect language/words person and with (him/her) speak/share language ? 1 ... get the meaning and neglect the language. Why would I find a person who neglects language and try to speak with him? 2 ... get the idea and forget the language. How can I find a person who forgets language so that I may speak with her? 3 ... get the desire and forget about language. How could I find a person who has forgotten about language and speak with them? (i.e. no desire) (i.e. I couldn't, but we could share more than words) Maybe. There are lots of people out there who are aiming for this kind of mindlessness...I'm not one of them. Ask one of them... I think that his commentary on the passage holds water. Though it's quite possible that I've misunderstood everything that he said. Earlier, you offered: Maybe forget about your obvious distate for Moeller and elucidate what you mean by "entering Heaven" and what 忘言 has to do with it? edit: http://thedaobums.com/topic/13369-lu-dongbins-100-character-stele/?p=180696 Baiqi's comment offers some ideas (!) that we have not mentioned, including, "忘言also seems to mean this: don't bind yourself to concepts. Once you got the idea and put it in practice, keeping the concept is useless." Where can I find someone who has forgotten about concepts so that I may share some of my concepts with her? ??

You know this doesn't apply to everything though, right? Teacher: "Kids, today we have Fireman Bill with us to talk to us about fire safety. Go ahead, Bill." Fireman Bill: Teacher: "Fireman Bill... do you... know what to do in case of an oil fire?" Fireman Bill: Teacher: "Could you explain to the class?" Fireman Bill: ... Teacher: "Ahh, I get it. Very good. Kids, Fireman Bill is demonstrating some ancient Chinese wisdom. By not saying anything, he's showing us that his knowledge is deeper than if he spoke. If he opened his mouth, that would mean that he doesn't actually know anything. Lao Tzu would be proud, Bill."

You know I'm happy to belabour most issues By essentially I mean fundamentally -- that is, though Moeller's writing style, and his claims that his interpretation is the only correct one, is somewhat arrogant, his fundamental understanding does not really differ from yours or mine -- he just puts it in a different way. "It is rather, that to "get the meaning" or "idea" of the Dao means "to be satisfied" — and that this satisfaction consists in having nothing in one's mind, in having no specific "meanings" or "ideas." Thus, I will argue, that "to get the meaning" (de yi) in a Daoist sense means, paradoxically, to be perfectly content (de yi) by no longer having any mental contents." The idea of freeing the mind of its "contents" is supported elsewhere in ZZ, both in your quote (forgetting things, words, self), and, for example, when Yan Hui and Confucius talk of zuowang: 墮肢體，黜聰明，離形去知，同於大通，此謂坐忘 My connexion with the body and its parts is dissolved; my perceptive organs are discarded. Thus leaving my material form, and bidding farewell to my knowledge, I am become one with the Great Pervader. This I call sitting and forgetting all things.

I sense that you don't agree that they really are saying the same thing, though. Also.. now you're going to have to explain the relevance of an ancient French cartoon....

Are we not talking of the same thing in different ways? Darkstar, via Moeller, suggests that "Fishnets" is not about forgetting words and concentrating on ideas, as some have translated it, but about forgetting both words and ideas to arrive at one's desire: no desire. "In order to arrive at the Dao, one has to go beyond both words and ideas," says Moeller You, accompanied by Mr Lv, are suggesting that it is about forgetting not just words, but also things and self. "The man who has forgotten himself is he of whom it is said that he has entered Heaven," says Zhuangzi. Isn't this essentially the same? I won't ever try to rid myself of my thoughts. Not sure if you've seen the conversation I've been having with Shidifen in the Liezi forum, but you can find me there saying that by no means do I want to forget myself while I still live. And I think that anyone who understands reality realizes that once one has forgotten oneself entirely, once one has no memories and no expectations, no past and no future, one is dead. To be human is to think and feel; a desire to remove thought and desire entirely is easily realized with suicide then, isn't it? Clearly Zhuangzi didn't commit suicide, at least not before writing his magnificent book. Clearly he had some thought for the future, or he would have been unable to complete the difficult process of writing all these stories down. And in constructing his stories, clearly he drew heavily from a past rich with experience, or his words would be no more than incoherent ramblings and useless fairy tales. He was by no means entirely free of self, then. And I don't believe that he was truly suggesting that one should entirely forget words or thoughts or anything else. But I do think that every interpretation presented so far is at the very least quite plausible, and that his stories often work on a number of levels; I think that he's suggesting that one who can be less addicted to the past, less concerned with words, less concerned with ideas, less influenced by an immovable idea of self, can be happier and more spontaneous, and closer to Dao.

You know I'm a bit slow... could you explain why it's important in relation to the fishnets? I should read Jung. I've been meaning to for many years now.