Taomeow

You cannot comply your way out of tyranny. -- a random redditor

TDB reflects worldwide dynamics pretty accurately.

I am talking about the I Ching, not wuxing -- it's just that in the case of the three trigrams I mentioned there's an overlap. There's no tradition of representing the other five with a particular "correct" color, but it can be inferred to an extent from their places in the cosmic cycle of seasons they stand for, and their compass directions. Water-North is black, the color of the "abyss,' of the fathomless depth and cold, and Fire-South is red, the color of ascending heat. Earth is yellow because there's a long tradition of associating this color with the "golden mean," with balance and harmony -- in China, for thousands of years, only the emperor was allowed to wear the color yellow, which meant that he represents the whole land, the Middle Kingdom of earth -- implying its central position in civilization. For the rest, you may want to find out what seasons and compass directions are associated with each trigram and figure out what color to assign. The purpose of such exercise can only be decorative though, because colors are particular vibrational frequencies inherently accompanying/linked to particular types of qi -- this is covered by wuxing associations -- while compass directions and seasons (moments in spacetime) of the trigrams are... well... colorless -- unless they partake of the palette supplied by the wuxing. And it is a palette -- an interplay of energies. Your Lake, e.g., is "pink" -- it's not impossible, under a certain light -- at dawn or at dusk -- but much of the time it's also "blue" or "azure" or "grey." I for one wouldn't go with "pink" as my first choice -- unless I could formulate the reason for such choice. If you can, you're good.

I would at least go with the traditional attributions from the I Ching. Earth is yellow, Water is black, Fire is red. The rest can be determined via seasonal associations of the trigrams. Thunder is green -- Spring, etc..

And more cop frustration

Probably for another thread -- but I would be interested to find out whether it's a Buddhist thing or just a modern design thing. In FS, mirrors are used strategically and sparingly -- with many prohibitions and don't's -- they are very important, but they are chiefly used to deflect sha' qi, while anywhere where there's shen qi coming in, care is taken not to bounce it back with mirrors. A lot of emphasis is placed on using them for self-defense, and occasionally for attack. In my NJ home (which unfortunately was bought before I had a FS clue, and eventually revealed itself as a veritable FS nightmare), once I knew that a T-juncture road at the "facing" direction was extremely inauspicious, I placed a smallish bagua mirror on the outside of the house to deflect it. (It was actually the kind of sha' qi you could see with your naked eye -- on a windy day, of which there are many, that juncture sucked in all the trash from the parking lot of a shopping center nearby and deposited it smack against my fence, creating an almost-daily clean-up task. Moreover, any teenagers passing by would contribute here a soda can, there a plastic lunch box to that spot -- trash begets trash.) I aimed the mirror at that straight stretch of the road (the "leg" of the T) facing the house, which was a quiet street with little traffic -- however, fender benders started happening there on a monthly basis, luckily the speed limit there is low so no serious accidents took place... but I couldn't bear the thought of my bagua mirror facilitating them. So I took it off, and continued to put up with having to remove the visible trashy part of the sha' qi like someone sentenced to community service -- indefinitely.

I'm all for clearing the space with feng shui and/or other traditional methods. FS methods range from very simple anyone can use to very complex that require in-depth expertise, depending on the task. For the simple ones, I could recommend a couple of books: Creating Sacred Space With Feng Shui, by Karen Kingston Space Clearing: How to Purify and Create Harmony in Your Home, by Denise Linn Not that much FS there, but quite a lot of good sound advice.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/oldest-strain-plague-bacteria-found-5000-year-old-human-remains-180978096/ Five thousand years ago, the Black Plague, a disease caused by the bacterium yersinia pestis, didn't have human-to-human transmission capabilities. Bacteria and viruses that were to become deadly in a couple thousand years of civilized lifestyles lived peacefully inside our ancestors without making them sick or causing epidemics. Epidemics, in civilized times, are a feature, not a bug. In pre-civilized times, you could contract a deadly strain of plague only if you got directly bitten by an infected rodent, but that was the end of it -- you didn't transmit it to anyone, and if it managed to overpower your immune system, you were the only one who died from it. Accidents happen, sure. But a massive explosion of rat population interacting with human population causing yersinia pestis to adapt to infecting fleas toward infecting humans toward human-to-human transmission took a few thousand years of civilized lifestyles to be enabled. And to think how much progress we've made since then. Especially now that our immune systems are government issue/corporate property. I.e., by now human immune systems (whose intelligence used to exceed that of human brains by orders of magnitude) have collectively acquired Idiocracy levels of competence. (Do rewatch that movie -- it's 18 years old but Nostradamus has nothing on its predictive power.)

The history of evolution

Thank you for the endorsement, Virtue , but I'm getting progressively useless at giving "general" advice to beginners. Something more specific is more up my alley -- i.e. a beginner in one of my arts can get a more useful answer from me than anyone with a "how to start on the path" question. (Frankly, I don't think it matters -- it happens if it was meant to happen, is all.) As for advanced folks, I'm not that good at giving (or taking) advice there either because they're the ones who tend to run into the most serious roadblocks here and there... the farther one goes, the greater the obstacles in the way become -- I'm beginning to think tao is a freakin' videogame with "levels" to pass after all . So, maybe just a two yuan's worth of response from me: There's "systems" and there's "styles" within systems. At a glance, everything you mentioned in your post belongs to one system, different styles. (Unless they fracked it up by mixing and matching with other systems that are incompatible.) Can mixing different styles be a problem for a beginner? From what I've seen, the main danger here is to remain a perennial beginner. I like the saying attributed to a Shaolin monk: "I don't fear the ten thousand different kicks you've practiced. I fear the one kick you've practiced ten thousand times." Pretty much applicable to anything. I don't know any of the teachers in your area you mentioned, but following a couple of links I didn't find any demo videos that could tell me how good they are -- verbal descriptions they give tell me only that none of them seem to be lineage practitioners of anything. I'm of the "lineage teacher is the first prerequisite" mindset. This is one pointer in the right direction for you. Forget what they're certified in -- find out what their lineage is. I.e. who they learned from and who their teacher learned from and who their teacher's teacher learned from, etc.. The best of the arts available to the public are lineage arts (to say nothing of the ones not offered to the public), not do-it-yourself commercial enterprises assembled by ambitious self-promoters who may have learned "something or other" from books or DVDs or from someone who learned from books or DVDs. All real taoist arts are a product of lineage transmission -- and that has nothing to do with "energy transmission," at least for a beginner. (Virtue has mentioned that too -- correctly.)

Chen taiji cats 1. Lazily Tying Coat 2. Tornado Kick 3. Fair Lady at the Shuttles 4. Repulse Monkey

Our habit of "easily solving" all mysteries by killing them -- a habit we acquired, on the evolutionary scale, only a picosecond ago --may prove not to be the healthiest after all. (I suspect we might get that proof in the next zeptosecond on the same scale -- if not sooner.) https://theconversation.com/they-might-sound-gross-but-intestinal-worms-can-actually-be-good-for-you-49868 "For decades, results coming out of lab after lab have shown that some kinds of helminths can be extremely beneficial to their host, and aren’t parasites at all. These helpful helminths are mutualists, a type of organism that receives benefits from its host, and also provides benefits to the host."

A big fan of fractals and spirals, and I do believe that paying attention to them can be a source of many interesting twists of perception. As for simplicity vs. complexity... it's not a simple matter. They somehow manage to coexist on all scales -- and what's more, what looks like simplicity on one scale may prove to be unimaginably complex on another... and yet another fractal scale may reveal that this complexity has the simplest building blocks in its foundation... and yet another, that each of these simplest building blocks is in reality more complex than we could ever imagine... and so on. The same is true of awareness (but I'll leave that part out for the moment). To illustrate: (do watch this if you have a few minutes, it's fun and awesome):

I remember reading a report one of the first European visitors to the "New World" wrote for Queen Isabella of Spain. I wish I could find that document and quote it verbatim, but I remember it almost by heart. That official wrote that never in his entire life had he encountered, or could even imagine, people so perfect in their physique and their morale alike -- so stunningly healthy and beautiful, so happy and easygoing, and so devoted to each other. What was brought about by the newcomers was to change that very fast. As always, I don't credit Europeans as the only perpetrators of civilization -- I credit civilization itself wherever it was unleashed on populations. Including of course in South America, where Inca and Maya empires were as civilized or more so compared to their European contemporaries (and without their "help"), and contrasted sharply in their ways with the surrounding "uncivilized" tribes -- which the "empirealists" treated in exactly the same manner the "civilized" always treated the "uncivilized" everywhere. Inhabitants of the Inca empire especially were loathed and feared by all who came in contact with them, and were perceived as a terrifying gang of thugs and criminals by the natives not incorporated into the empire -- whom the "civilized" continuously raided, hunted, and treated as pools of slaves to capture or animals to sacrifice. Far as I know, it's the same story everywhere. No matter which "superior" "civilization" encounters the non-incorporated, it finds, to its chagrin (and murderous envy) a healthy, happy people -- and proceeds to change that state of affairs fast, and forever.

A peculiar illustration to my original point -- just came across this article about Zoo Atlanta where a vaccinated zookeper infected 13 gorillas with covid-19. The gorillas are apparently seriously ill, being treated with monoclonal antibodies, and "not out of the woods yet." I don't have any information one way or the other, but I seriously doubt our pre-civilized ancestors ever had a chance in immunological hell to infect gorillas with anything -- or vice versa. https://www.ajc.com/news/coronavirus/more-than-a-dozen-gorillas-at-zoo-atlanta-diagnosed-with-covid-19/K4XFA5FS5RATPJPZ4VKOCGOVJI/

I don't find that much difference between any of the institutionalized religions. They are in the habit of not practicing what they preach even if what they preach sounds about right. Perhaps I like the non-proselytizing ones more, the ones that practice "live and let live" regardless of what they preach. But both kinds can be found within both "Abrahamic" and "non-Abrahamic" traditions.

I would prefer you either commented on the message (regardless of whether you agree or disagree with it) rather than on the personality of the messenger, or just ignored my threads since they obviously annoy you. I keep my opinion about you personally and the kind of man you are and what feelings you might harbor to myself -- in accordance with the rules of engagement of this forum. I would like to extend an invitation to you to reciprocate in kind.

That view is very ancient -- in fact, the opposite view is very new. People everywhere used to understand that all things are associated with their proprietary spirits, sometimes manifesting form and shape as this or that "mythical" creature, like a naga or a dragon or a bird of fire, sometimes just an animal, sometimes a humanoid creature. All shamanic systems of interaction with the world were based on animism which was inseparable from respect toward those creatures and many rules and taboos aimed at living with them as good neighbors rather than rude, careless intruders. Prohibitions on "defiling water" were particularly strong in some cultures. Some post-shamanic belief systems inherited those attitudes, but most couldn't (or wouldn't) make a dent in the new way of dealing with nature that became either an enemy to defeat or an impersonal, inanimate set of objects to exploit. We presently live in a world full of disenfranchised spirits that used to inhabit rivers, lakes, mountains, forests etc.. Some of them miserable and sick, and others, mighty pissed and vengeful.

I'm not sure I understand, but I would like to point out that cats predate humans by over 30 million years. It's quite possible therefore to hypothesize that human existence is contingent on whether cats want us around. Who knows if our world would go on if someday cats decided that they're done playing with us and we aren't all that much fun anymore and declared, "thanks for all the fish"-- by way of good-bye. Not sure also what you mean by "cynicism" in the context of this thread. If it has something to do with me and my opinions, you certainly misunderstand my attitude. Then again, one man's cynicism is another woman's clarity. (Or cat's.)

None of us are qualified to put the toothpaste squeezed out of the tube back in. The pre-civilized condition of the human being was simultaneously inside and outside, with no sharp border between "me" and "my environment" -- they were one. That very "all-is-one" state that sages and wannabes of civilized times pine for, attempt to cultivate via practices, write vedas and sutras and memes about, call pompous names like "enlightenment" and "pure awareness" and "paradise lost" and what not -- that's not a fantasy and not an impending reward for "being very good" personally as per this or that doctrine's definitions. That's a distant memory. In the genes, in the DNA, in what remains of the human spirit interwoven with what remains of the spirit of the world, of the heart and soul of all things alive on planet earth. We used to be it. And to this day, some of us are tortured by that memory -- while others are happily amnesiac or, to use a more specific term, anosognosiac. Sounds like a good plan. As for me... I used to think that as long as I'm "cultivating my own garden," I'm good. I thought I mastered the art of shrinking my aliveness to fit into all the prescribed margins. I thought I learned how to make myself small, insignificant, just minding my own lil' business -- and the world that demanded that shrinkage of me would reward me by leaving me the fuck alone, leaving me the fuck out of its insanity. I thought, for as long as I can do those little things, I'll be able to protect and preserve my own sanity counterpoint response to all that jazz. At least that was the plan. (Know how to make god laugh? Make a plan.)

Not the point again. There are more viruses in your body than stars in the universe (scientific fact) but I'm talking about this state of affairs being normal rather than pathogenic until/unless conditions are created to cause them to turn pathogenic. And next, enable them to cause epidemics. And it's not a "no one knows." The first smallpox-like disease appeared in China in the 4th century CE. A civilized society. There's zero evidence that it existed as a disease in earlier, pre-civilized times -- although the virus itself may have existed for, like I said, millions or billions of years. Not the point. The point is, it didn't cause epidemics, or you would have prehistoric mass burials or whatever evidence of any massive die-offs of our species in pre-civilized times. Which is nonexistent. As for "pre-civilization" definition, it is derived from "civilization" definition. Contrary to popular (installed) belief that it means "advanced" vs "backward," or "good" vs "bad," or "cultured" vs "primitive" or any such thing, in reality it means exactly what the origin of the word means -- derived from Latin civitas -- city. Citizen, civil, civic, civilian, etc. are all derived from that word. City. (Incidentally, the moral distinctions superimposed alongside this split into inhabitants of cities and villages are reflected in the origin of the word "villain" -- which originally meant "villager," a resident of a village. Villain, vile -- for not living in a city.) Cities and villages, as opposed to a way of life that doesn't split the human race in this manner, is civilization, and its prerequisite and inherent feature (not bug) is deforestation. In fact you could equate civilization with deforestation -- a ceaseless process of terraforming toward splitting the land into cities and villages, and the human race, into city dwellers, the breeding ground of epidemics, and villages, accompanied by meticulous extermination of all human societies not incorporated into this pattern. Everything else about what civilization "is" is superficial distractions from the fundamental essence of what it is, no matter how loud the noise of this distraction is cranked up. Pre-civilized means living before the installation of cities and villages. In other words, a period covering over 99% of all our species' history of existence. How well we do from here on is anybody's guess -- but I don't buy any of the tall tales about how our ancestors struggled to survive for a couple million years before the last-minute blessings of civilization came to save us... Poor ancestors... no life for them, just miserable struggle to survive... at least according to Hollywood and fathers of the church and narrative-spinners-for-hire we have been instructed to call "scientists" and "experts." Which seems pretty unique, come to think of it, for any species to be this maladapted to its natural habitat... I would even go so far as to suggest instead that our species is maladapted to the unnatural habitat it was forced to create by destroying its natural one, and everybody else's. But I know well enough (you don't have to remind me anymore) how unpopular my take is... Small wonder too. Any animal born in a cage is bound to hate whoever rattles the cage. (A metaphor for the civilized human race, not to mean I'm comparing you personally to an animal born in a cage.)

Today, of course, "teacher" means "the educational arm of the medical industry," "family" means "the medical-industrial complex," and "abroad" means "not privy to corporate inside information" rather than a reference to a foreign country, since the medical-industrial complex is international/global and its members swear allegiance to the international medical cartel rather than any national interests. "Indentured" means what it's always meant, with some red tape thrown on top to cover up the actual core meaning of the concept and the state of being described by the term. And "holy secrets" don't make it to MSNBC broadcasts -- ever.

...way back when Egyptian hunter-gatherers embalmed their pharaohs?.. Methinks you missed the point of both the article and my comment. Of course viruses and bacteria existed long before humans or animals or insects did. Some of them took not thousands but billions of years to adapt to using insects or animals or humans as hosts, while the vast majority still don't. That's not the point that this or that epidemic disease doesn't need an insect or animal host to spread to humans -- the point is, epidemics as a feature of human history didn't exist before civilization, and human immune system itself evolved in a world owned by viruses and bacteria -- and could only allow us to exist in this world if it was competent at its coexistence with them to begin with. It's civilized human lifestyles that created conditions for such developments in the evolution of bacteria and viruses as they had never encountered on earth in billions of years before. (Ever heard of "antibiotic resistant strains?" They don't take thousands of years to evolve -- only a couple decades. And if you use genetic engineering -- say toward biological warfare -- you can force evolution on them much faster than that. And we're only getting started.)