dust

I would "like" that, but... fuck. Too scary.

Nicely put. I think that, perhaps, you had it all along, but were playing the DA to see what would come up?

Yes, different Tao. And no, not different Tao. 道可道，非恒道 道可，道非，恒道 Who said Tao is "right", or that one who follows Tao is "right" ? Show me someone who claims that only his way is The Right Way and I'll show you someone who has missed the point. "... where there is birth there must be death; where there is death there must be birth. Where there is acceptability there must be unacceptability; where there is unacceptability there must be acceptability. Where there is recognition of right there must be recognition of wrong; where there is recognition of wrong there must be recognition of right. Therefore the sage does not proceed in such a way, but illuminates all in the light of Heaven. He too recognizes a "this," but a "this" which is also "that," a "that" which is also "this." His "that" has both a right and a wrong in it; his "this" too has both a right and a wrong in it. So, in fact, does he still have a "this" and "that"? Or does he in fact no longer have a "this" and "that"? A state in which "this" and "that" no longer find their opposites is called the hinge of the Way. When the hinge is fitted into the socket, it can respond endlessly. Its right then is a single endlessness and its wrong too is a single endlessness." I don't believe you.

There are different kinds of Taoism -- different ideas of Tao and how to "go with it" As you say, the Laozi is often little more than a political manual. But you are getting confused, I think, as I have done in the past, if you think that the Laozi is the deciding authority on what is and what is not Tao or Taoism. There are recognized ways of writing words and unrecognized ways of writing words. Human language depends entirely on people for its meaning -- it has no intrinsic meanings, no intrinsic right and wrong. And it, as everything else, changes -- what means something one day might not mean it the next. What means something to one person might not mean the same to another. There is more than one way to write Tao. 戊 戌 戍 戉 成 戎 戒 Each of these Chinese characters has a different meaning and pronunciation. We can see that even one misplaced stroke can change the official meaning in a number of ways. So if a student mis-writes a character and his teacher sees, she will perhaps say "That is wrong." But it is only wrong when she looks at it. If she hadn't corrected the student, the way he wrote it would have been correct for him, in his understanding. Chinese has traditional and simplified characters, and within these, people in different locales use different characters to mean different things. Someone from Beijing reading something written by someone from Hong Kong or Japan might easily think it gibberish, even when the same characters are used. Who's wrong? These days, I like to look at what Zhuangzi had to say..

Nungali and Owledge, I'd really suggest watching the Cohen video to the end, if you haven't already; if even remotely correct, the man poses some very interesting ideas that many of us often don't think about. Nungali, it does address the concern you mention (growth rate decelerating but population still increasing) and Owledge, yes the Suzuki video was just something that popped up on my YT recommendations, and seemed suitable -- it is indeed far too simplistic. Cohen addresses some concrete numbers and processes.

Very glad I watched this: Not nearly as simplistic as the Suzuki video above, and far more hopeful. (Watch the video to get a better understanding of why I say what I say below.) We need to be fairer in our dealing with other nations and their populations, and engage everyone in a better education so that people can naturally live healthier lives well into old age. We don't need our clever scientists to be inventing new ways of keeping people in rich countries alive longer and people in poorer countries bound to the land, slaving away to produce crops that rich people steal away for fuel and feed, as birth rates in these poorer countries increase and billions more end up living in slums.

Yes, I remember reading that a couple of weeks back. Scary. What route? I hope you don't think I'm suggesting what I think you think I'm suggesting.

A little off-topic but since it's my topic, we'll allow it. A very simple explanation as to why we're fucked.

Indeed. I've since watched another couple of GE videos and, to put it bluntly, they're full of shit. Lots of people are impressed, though. What do you mean "it would be no problem at all" ? It's already too late...no "management" is going to make it "no problem at all", really, unless you're talking about population control (which is not what I'm talking about!) I'm talking about, as I clearly stated, not forcing very sick people into life. Even if there were no population problem, I think this would fit right in with my vaguely wu wei way of thinking, but even more so considering the problems humankind face. And I'm not talking out of fear, either -- I'll be dead by the time it's really begun to negatively affect people*, so what do I have to fear? *edit: people in rich places

Yes, I think this is fundamental to any "true" understanding of the Way of Things. I guess nobody wants to accept loss, so many won't even consider the idea of accepting loss.. ignoring the fact that to have a beginning is to have an end.

Looking for a birthday present for someone, but I used up all my good gift ideas at Christmas. Seems like this topic could be useful for others, too. Bearing in mind the wide range of beliefs and ideas represented here, what would you give to someone on this forum as a birthday gift? Ideally a physical offering, such as books, gadgets, plants, incense, organic..things....

Yeah.. I often take notice, but rarely remember

Well, I would have thought this was so, yes. One reason I can't abide famous "masters" is that, to me, a true master doesn't go around shouting about it. The other thing I was getting at, though, is: 天地尚不能久，而況於人乎 ... 同於失者，失亦樂得之 If heaven and Earth cannot make things eternal, how is it possible for man? ... When you are at one with loss, the loss is experienced willingly. (LZ23)

Precisely

So, if a Taoist master allows his or her lineage to be destroyed, are they successful or unsuccessful? 大巧若拙 Great skill seems clumsy, 大成若詘 Great success seems to yield, 大植若屈 Great straightness seems bent

Welcome. Or... semi-long-time-coming welcome I'm sure many would be very interested to hear what your meditation practice is like and how it's helped in your particular situation, if you're ever willing to share more....

Took a shower in the rain the last time it fell heavily. Wonderful feeling. If you really hate it, though, can't argue with reading As far as clouds... meet up with some friends, have a drink and a chat..?

G'day

Be careful with those words By the way, if you wanted to discuss any particular chapter or idea in the Textual Studies section, I'm sure people would be happy to. Seems like you've got some interesting ideas.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transatlantic_Trade_and_Investment_Partnership http://action.sierraclub.org/site/DocServer/TTIP_Investment_Letter_Final.pdf?docID=14701 http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2013/october/tradoc_151791.pdf On the one hand, it seems to me that nobody in any country should be signing agreements with foreign investors if there's a chance that the agreement will be broken by a change in national policy (and, consequently, certain profits and jobs will be lost). Then again, in this case, whether or not the government is right in banning fracking (an entirely different matter), this environmental matter should be entirely in the hands of the Quebecois government, but it seems like a lot of power is in the hands of the US company. Also, most companies that benefit from such agreements are going to be the likes of McDonald's, Monsanto, Wal-Mart... and they need no help from anyone. We should be taking steps to ensure that companies never reach such heights of international wealth and power. Seems to me that such agreements leave much room for abuse.

Well we'd better find another place to say these things eh

I was thinking about this the other day. Another thing is, perhaps, that humans get so caught up in language -- which is, basically, thought -- that we forget about simply trusting our intuition and doing things. We overanalyse, overthink. And I think maybe the structure of our language causes us to focus on (often distant) outcomes, rather than actions themselves..?

Gotcha. (And sorry to have been so dismissive..I do have that tendency.) Yes exactly!

If it's true that there is no beginning, it's true that time as we perceive it is fairly meaningless in the Great Scheme -- but scientists can only look at what they can look at, which is a previously and presently expanding universe. http://www.universetoday.com/11430/the-end-of-everything/ Not sure what to think about theories like this. In a nutshell, he suggests that eventually (10100 years or more), stars and galaxies and everything will have collapsed in on themselves, and all the "dead" blocks of black stuff will either float away forever or come back together and start another Big Bang. That's it: 2 options. Nothing else is possible. Scientists know everything. But, of course, all of this theorizing is based on our very very incredibly limited knowledge of the details of 'stuff'. If the dead blocks continue floating away, forever...where are they going? What about dark matter? (How do we know it won't change its mind?) Other universes? Behaviour that we can't predict because we have no evidence to base predictions on? The current version of the universe is so young that a bunch of stuff that could happen hasn't even happened yet. So, to get back on topic, this is why I like (my version of) Taoism. Very simple: Tao gave rise to all. This happens forever. Done. Now I can get back to singing songs and climbing trees