Taomeow

This would require getting used to a cognitive dissonance, no? I mean, taoist practical spiritual exercises are not separate from taoist philosophy in any way. But then, it's the trademark of taoism, taoist is as taoist does, not as taoist thinks or speaks. In any event, I cited the story as an example of a wise Buddhist's approach to these matters, and perhaps it is not so much a cognitive dissonance as a wise man's ability to tolerate ambiguity that the unwise ones don't know how.

The most important Zen Buddhist master after Dogen, Hakuin, narrates in "Wild Ivy: The Spiritual Autobiography of Zen Master Hakuin" the story of contracting a severe illness brought about by the austerities of his most dedicated Buddhist practice, and being unable to get help from any sources, spiritual or medical. He was going to die, but then he was told there's a taoist hermit living in the mountains who may be the only one who can help. Hakuin made the desperate and difficult journey to the hermit's abode. The next chapter is dedicated to the taoist explaining to Hakuin the nature of his illness and the practices to cure it. Hakuin promptly got better and then completely well, and proceeded to teach, promote, and revitalize Zen for many decades, but he mentions that he practiced what the taoist gave him for the rest of his life. There was no "downfall" -- only prudence that benefited everyone involved. True story.

Hi Kara, I am a bazi reader, and "destiny" is something I clearly see in the "eight characters" or "four pillars" as inextricably intertwined with jing, qi and shen. The "written in the stars" part of destiny is responsible for about 40% of all that is going to manifest in your life or has already manifested the moment you were conceived (e.g. your gender) -- that's the domain of jing. Approximately another 40% is what you can change, influence, improve or worsen, this is the field of application of your free will -- and this is intimately connected with qi. Finally, about 20% is completely unpredictable and lies in the domain of the mysterious -- even gods have no say in it -- and this part is where shen might come into play in ways you can't fully comprehend or predict in advance. It is something like, part of it is your conditions, part of it is your work, part of it is play. Jing permeates the initial conditions of your ming, qi guides what you do with them, shen is how you play with both. That's my current understanding in a nutshell -- took years to crack that nut though.

Actually, I did specify "quoting from memory," so all it means is that I didn't learn the whole thing by heart. Also, there's well over one hundred different translations of Laozi in English, and to believe that yours is the only correct one would be a bit of a stretch for me. A Chinese friend of mine, linguistically educated in the best scholarly traditions in Taiwan, translates the Tao Te Ching for me orally when I want to better understand this or that line, and he asserts that a lot of it can't possibly be translated "accurately" and is very open to interpretation -- and was meant to be by the author. So I stand uncorrected.

I've seen forums where the spread was about 50/50 between taoism and nazism, an interesting blend, come to think of it, but I didn't make it up. I've seen it and marveled... So I avoid taking abstract declarations of what taoists are "supposed" to be like for descriptions of what concrete individuals and/or schools are like in real life, and instead, try to look at what people under this or that banner are actually doing with it. If people are doing something that I find quite a bit off, their taoist declarations, allegiances and scholarly familiarity with this or that profound source of wisdom can't possibly make up for it for me. Can they for you?

@A.A. Khokhlov Thank you for your response. Laozi said (quoting from memory), "When a man tells the truth, I believe him. When a man lies, I believe him too." Truth supplies information on the subject matter, lies supply information on the liar. Both end up revealing the truth to me. Don't know about people in need of saving from liars and fakes, but Laozi didn't think a third party was needed toward the task, and neither do I. If someone asks for help, I'll help as best I can with what I know. If they aren't asking for help, who am I to blow against the wind that propels them on their path?.. The students of your school raised some red flags because, for one thing, there's no telling how many there were because they were using sock puppets, multiple accounts under different names... good to know that they acted on their own and weren't sent on a mission. For another, they didn't appear disrespectful of the fakes selectively -- rather, they designated whoever they didn't like as fakes, and were very disrespectful of some respected, reputable teachers. Good to know it's not the doctrine of your school to act this way. When campaigns against fakes are launched, there's always a lot of room for confusion, because the thing is, fakes tend to launch campaigns against true teachers and schools too... even more than the other way around. It can get very confusing indeed. Which is why I am opposed to this kind of campaigns on principle. Let the truths and the lies sort themselves out on their own merit. But that's just me... and Laozi. @Antares OP is "original poster."

Antares, I was hoping the OP would answer my question, unless you are his official representative, in which case, thank you for your response.

Anyone ever tried studying the studies? If a study is of interest or relevance to me, I go to the original publication, and start with the part titled Financial Disclosure at the very end. If it says something natural or traditional or alternative is bad for you and the party that paid for the study is a pharmaceutical company that makes a drug that treats the condition that is prevented by the natural or traditional or alternative substance, I ignore it. Next, if this test has been passed by the study and it was paid for by an independent party (whose independence I take the trouble to verify if the study is of interest or relevance to me), I study how it was actually conducted. E.g., a study that "proved" the inefficiency and even harmful effects of large intravenous doses of vitamin C for certain conditions for which it is used in orthomolecular medicine (pioneered by Linus Pauling of two Nobel prizes) was revealed in its technicalities as set up specifically to prove what it purportedly proved. Vitamin C solution in Pauling's protocol was freshly prepared for each IV, since it rapidly degrades (within an hour) under the influence of light, oxygen and heat. In the NIH or Mayo clinic study (don't remember which it was), however, the solution was prepared in advance for the whole duration of the study, something like a month's supply, and under these conditions provided the study subjects not with ascorbic acid but with products of its degradation, specifically dehydroascorbic acid, and in the body, 2,3-diketogulonic acid, 3-deoxythreosone, xylosone, and threosone. All of which are of course metabolically active in ways poorly understood, hardly ever studied, but having the in vivo effects either very different or even opposite of those of the original substance. However, the study asserted it was the original substance they studied. Only it wasn't. Next, if the conditions to actually study what they say they are studying are observed, I look at the source of the substance and how closely it resembles the natural original. E.g., the synthetic vitamin E, tocopheryl, is chemically similar to the natural vitamin E, tocopherol, in the test tube, but has a dramatically different (and harmful) effect in vivo. If they say "vitamin E was shown to be bad," I want to know which one they tested, tocopherol (the real thing) or tocopheryl (the franken-E). I don't stop even there if I am going to take a "study" seriously, but this gives you an idea of what I'm talking about. Study the study. If you believe it without studying it, you may be buying into someone's agenda rather than getting informed. If I'm going to believe in something without studying it, it better be of divine origins, not human.

Thank you. Next question if you don't mind: we had instances of Wuliupai students attacking other schools and systems on this forum, which for all practical purposes looked like orchestrated ganging up. I.e. a few of them would appear simultaneously and start attacking a particular school, its masters, its students, its teachings, etc., simultaneously. They typically did not do anything else on this vast and variegated forum, neither initiating nor contributing to any discussions -- only this, an attack on someone or something "other." Is it part of the doctrine of your school to wage such "crusades" (for lack of a better word), or is it done solely on the initiative of certain students or teachers, or is promoting such initiatives part of the doctrine, or is it a mere innocent coincidence? Would appreciate an elucidation.

.

1. What is being discussed then? 2. Where's the border that separates Western students that are not accepted from non-Western ones that are accepted? Is it geographical, linguistic, ethnic, geopolitical? Who qualifies as a non-Westerner, and how does one acquire the qualifications?

А вы что, групповой десант высадили?

Приветствую вас, Аркадий. Даос какой деноминации?

For two days in a row, that little icon on the top right that shows when you get "thank you" comments does show the little red square with the number, but when I click on it, it opens to a blank field with the "wait" wheel rotating therein. The wait then proves futile and nothing further happens except that the red square disappears. If later another one appears, same deal with that. Please advise.

meow

I don't think so. I think my ability to comprehend is every bit as infinite, it's just that my information is incomplete. I've never come across a cognitive wall I couldn't penetrate because my cognitive machinery was too weak to penetrate it. Only Insufficient information, or lack of interest and determination, or sheer boredom, or fear, or not enough time spent on the subject can stop my understanding anything in existence and beyond. My mind is holographically equal to the universe it is part of. So is yours -- if you trust it.

Semen retention is about as useful as anal retention. Someone has to file a class suit against Mantak Chia. Where do you begin? Have normal sex pronto, then do a few rounds of Beating the Heavenly Drum to remove dead jing presently stuck in your head. And never do this "practice" again. And please don't fall for any more practices that interfere with normal natural body functions without a live lineage teacher instructing you in person and closely monitoring what you are doing. Good luck.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dlzrNKN3rZI

Do tell. Carter was president when historical materialism ruled China... Did he figure out that socialism in China is like democracy in America -- a theoretical guiding principle, i.e. something that does not necessarily have to have many (or any) real-life consequences, depending on how the rulers interpret it?

Thank you, Rene! Great holidays to you too.

Yes , and a few other terms, depending on the aspect of unity under consideration. It's something like organ-system-function-meaning -- as a process at that -- and its aspects are tackled by many taoist sciences and practices. But, basically, it's complete harmony between the hidden deep interior, the obvious surface exterior, and the world they interface.

The taoist heart-mind of a real human is one entity. The conflict (disconnection, fragmentation, split) arises when it's sick, and it gets sick invariably when the human condition is that of being stuck in unreality. A healthy heart-mind of a real human is not pitching heart against mind or mind against heart. And neither of them sides with the body against the other or disconnects from the body. This is the crucial idea of original taoism: heart-mind expresses the body and the body expresses heart-mind in love and truth, and there is no other way to be healthy and real for a human being. If they pull in different or even opposite directions, it's a sign of trouble profound and deep -- albeit ubiquitous in our world.

Thank you! That's complete enough and accurate enough. I almost want to withdraw my objections and offer logic at least an honored-guest place in the overall quest for truth, since one quick look at this list is enough to realize that people in general, and politicians, preachers, educators, the media, etc. especially, routinely strip us even of its limited power to establish even trivial truths. Most arguments one hears today presented by anyone anywhere are just that -- logical fallacies. Demagogic tool kits everybody has been trained in using, both consciously and (more often) unconsciously.

Also, logic is useful in online debates. I used to have a complete list of classical logical fallacies which I meant to ask the mods to pin at TDB and ask the bums to study in order to avoid when arguing with each other. I misplaced the list, unfortunately -- if someone can fish it out of the web, I would be grateful.

What I'm driving at is, truth can be accessed by other means than logic. And some truths can only be accessed by other means than logic. Behind Blake's poem there's a cloud of meanings which can't be arrived at any other way but by immersion. Nonlinear. There's no consecutive steps to take. A cloud of meaning, of power, of beauty, of mystery, of danger, of defiance, all at once. A cloud of strong qi unique to this particular poem, not to be found anywhere else. One has to get it all or one can't get it at all. And the outcome of such immersion might be a truth. Or even a great truth. “There are trivial truths and there are great truths. The opposite of a trivial truth is plainly false. The opposite of a great truth is also true.” -- Niels Bohr