Lost in Translation

Are you asking me for factual content to justify my feelings, or are you asserting I feel this because there is some underlying factual basis?

What are your thoughts on Saltzman's book?

At this point we're entering into a linguistic mess. If everything, from the perspective of Tao, is good (and nothing is bad) then good loses its meaning. Thus everything could equally be meaningless from the perspective of Tao. Subjectively, I choose to interpret everything as good from the perspective of Tao since this has the most utility to me. E.G. it's best for my sanity and overall mental health.

I feel there are two "modes" of valuation: the subjective mode and the objective mode. In subjective mode there are "good" things and "bad" things, and goodness or badness is ultimately tied to utility. This is how what is good for me might be bad for you, and vice versa. In objective mode there is only "good". Why? Because objectively everything serves a purpose, we just don't know what that purpose is. Since everything does serve a purpose, everything is good. Of course, I admit that I accept on faith that everything has a purpose and cannot prove that to be true, but neither can I prove it to be false, so I let it stand.

I feel (slight pun intended) that most people feel something to be true (or false) and then search for arguments that support their position. The person who maintains "I don't know" is rare. Most eventually decide they "know" something and the search ends. Hey, what's that about something that can be spoken of is not the true something? I need to look into that.

This is a good point and possibly worthy of its own thread. The reasons behind suicide matter. If you sacrifice yourself in what you feel to be a good cause vs if you slaughter yourself to avoid personal pain. The end result is the same but the energetic patterns are vastly different.

"The bright path seems dim; Going forward seems like retreat;"

If there is no afterlife then nothing. But if there is an afterlife then ask yourself: Why are you here? The answer to that seems self evident. You are here to learn. Learn what? I don't know. But if you are here to learn and you suicide, well, that's like dropping out of school, is it not? And what happens when you drop out of school? If you are lucky then you get a chance to go to another school, a different school - filled with similar students who are also struggling. If you are unlucky then you are thrown on the street with no education and told to fend for yourself. Tread lightly. Choice and consequence, the rule of karma, is a serious matter.

Beware of cause and effect. You may be able to affect change, but at what cost? Karma, as they say, is a bitch.

I agree. Some may claim otherwise, but keep in mind the giants of Taoism are, themselves, just men. They wrote what they wrote as men. They are not gods. They claim no divinity. I think it best to allow some flexibility when reading their writings. In the end we must all figure this (life, Tao, whatever) out on our own. There are sign posts from other people's path. These sign posts may lead us in the correct direction, but they may also lead us astray. In matters like these I treat all with a healthy degree of suspicion.

I think this is a basic characteristic of Tao. Since it's an experiential process, words can't ever capture it. Thus the problem. You would never expect love from Mathematics. You would never expect justice from History. You would never expect equity from Dance. Why do you expect logic from Tao?

It's just something that caught my attention. Here are what I see as the highlights of each pair: Pair 1: dim, retreat - "It's the wrong way, yo!" Pair 2: hard , empty - "Dude, why you be so stupid?" Pair 3: sullied, inadequate - "Man, you a fool. Throw your life away if you want, I'm outta here!" Pair 4: frail, unreal - "Can you believe this worthless idiot, threw his life away..." Then the shift...

Starting with "The bright path seems dim", these stanzas can be grouped in pairs. Each pair works togerher. Subsequent pairs slightly alter the focus of the whole.

C O F F E E (he says in a zombie monotone)... One of the best discoveries in the history of mankind, right up there with pan fried battered steak, poached eggs, and hash browns with Tobasco sauce. Hmm, I think I'm describing a menu item from Denny's...

At times like this I ask myself, "What would happen if I weren't here?" The obvious answer is the event would carry itself to fruition on its own. Then I ask myself, "Am I OK with that outcome?" If the answer is yes then I do not interfere. If the answer is no then I take action.

I gave you a purple cup. Enjoy!

behavior? acceptable that Is backwards. discuss to like I

The cup is gold? On my computers it shows as white inside a purple circle.

I try to not tell anyone how to think or what to think. Rather, I express how I think and what I think, and ask questions. Socrates knew what he was doing, IMO, and is worth emulating in this regard.

The Chinese may think Dao is Chinese, but Dao might disagree. Knowledge, once released into the world, has a difficult time being contained.

That's a very interesting assertion. Is this unique to Daoism or can it be applied to others? Could we say that Buddhism exists in India only, or that Catholicism exists in Italy only, etc.? How are you defining Daoism in this regard? Are you referring specifically to the religious aspect, or the internal arts, or something else? I find your comment intriguing and think this deserves deeper explanation. [edit] Also, what do you mean by "China?" I know that question sounds idiotic, but a great many Chinese people have migrated out of Asia, and they have taken their language and culture with them, including Daoism. Do you mean the country of China, or the Chinese people, etc?

Of course. I don't know where you got this. Nothing in my post mentioned presenting certifications that indicate skills one does not have. That would certainly be a violation of integrity, and possibly the law. Yes. This is what I was emphasizing. If you already have the skills but lack the "credentials" then get the credentials. Why fight "the man?" Agreed, 100%. But again, this was not what I meant to convey.

Petrichor. ( Learned that one from Doctor Who )

This is a problem. With so many people - and so many transitory people - it is nearly impossible to personally vet everyone that we choose to work with or train with. In the olden days this was solved by simply asking someone who had worked with or trained with someone, i.e. a reference. But even that falls short in our burgeoning population. So what do we do? We create proxy organizations to do the vetting for us! These proxy organizations issue "certificates" and "diplomas", hence we know what's what. But do we really? Do we really know what's what? This is a problem. I don't know how to solve it. Let me just add this: I struggled with the entire notion of "certificated" for years when I was young. I thought they were BS, so I eschewed them. But as I made my way through life I repeatedly found doors closed to me for lack of one. It was in the early thirties that I bit the bullet and finally went back to school and picked up my BS degree. I had already been working in my field for more than five years in a senior capacity before I was received my diploma, and most of my "education" was spent teaching my fellow students, but I got it. Since them I have continued to earn an MS degree, and I again did this mainly just to open doors. My advise to anyone who is struggling in this regard, ask yourself this: which is the path of least resistance, of Tao? Does getting a "certificate" harm you. or does it open doors for you? Does it violate your Te, your integrity? Make no mistake, a certificate is not the same as knowledge or capacity, but it IS a key that CAN open doors, so does it have value?

The "DaoBox?" LOL!