Tao99

I agree! I hate it when people debate on a public forum, trying to make the true/correct/right point. No but really, who can say what is the line between debate and too much debate.

Another good idea is to just ignore this forum altogether. Then you will hear nothing that counters, criticizes, or questions your beloved point of view. Ah sweet silence!

Hey Marble, That was very well-written. Have a good one.

The book says otherwise about this.

run thru the door ...

bits and bytes, ones and zeros the universe blinks on ...

happiness is my 2 front teeth

Yep, absolutely. For me its all there though a bit obtuse and indirect.

You said "about things" and so you don't partake in such limitations in paradigm about things. Your poker belief shows you do partake in such limitations about things. That's it. That's the whole point. Is that such a horrible thing to say? It was a simple critical thinking analysis. An ad hominen is attacking the person instead of the evidence of the point they made. I was simply questioning your point with counter evidence, as is the function of debate. I'm sorry if you took it as something more. I try to avoid the ad hominens.

So then my point WAS correct lol - you do partake in such limitations in paradigm, and what you said above was just crapola. And as always, you miss the point and go straight for the ad hominen attacks.

Taoist adept Liu I-Ming described some important goals.

now that's just a load of crap. Youre the one who said all poker players are "shady" = BAD.

True that. Well said.

In (my) Taoist practice its contrary to the way to depend on some drug or intoxicant to achieve spiritual loosening or anything else. In fact it's the exact opposite of the practice goal which is to depend on nothing, and need nothing, but oneself and one's inner abilities. This way it's always available and can never be taken away. You can thus be stranded alone with no money, no booze, no cigs, no nothing in a homeless shelter, and you still have everything you need to achieve your meditative objectives. No crutches.

getting pregnant might be a good place to draw the non-fuzzy line

I'm so sick of these underhanded Buddhist Threats to people's future, and all based on nothing, trivial disagreements, misinformation, incomplete information and/or DO DO voodoo doodoo. Would the Buddha consider that skillful? If so I'll gladly quit zen. But I think not.

Sorry to disappoint your ego but I don't read all your posts. Man you really like to insult people don't you. Screw the point, it's more fun to insult the person! Would the Buddha be happy with your constant ad hominens here. If so I will gladly quit zen, but I think he would tell you you are very unskilled. Anyway, what you say makes no logical sense. First you say it JUST takes virtue. Then you say screw virtue, all I have to do is see DO and I am magically GUARANTEED liberation in a few lives. WHAAAA??? Which one is it. You can't have it both way. Sorry but what you say makes absolutely no logical sense. Now forget the point, and look for a way to launch an ad hominen = attack the person and not the point. Cmon, you know you want to; you crave it; you can't control your run away ego and you must do it ... GRRRRRRRR ... ARRRRRGH <insert ad hominen here>

Hey Marble - I wonder what kind of demented future his Buddhism sees for you. And all because you refuse to believe in DO. Shame on you! LOL

yea. your welcome. I guess because I'm not on your kiss list, you don't consider what I taught you here as valuable as your current stated favs MH and Mal LOL. I see Stig is no longer on your 'hero list'; could it be because of his response to you above lol You should really read the book before you project onto others what you "guess" they are or are not being/doing. That's just being fair. have a good day and take care

Lao Tzu was pretty clear about what was important to him as far as de or virtues of the Tao. Pretty simple and normal really. Lin Yutang says the chapter contains Laozi's "most beautiful teachings." One translation of this chapter 67 by Waley is Here are my three treasures. Guard and keep them! The first is pity; the second, frugality; the third, refusal to be 'foremost of all things under heaven'. For only he that pities is truly able to be brave; Only he that is frugal is able to be profuse. Only he that refuses to be foremost of all things Is truly able to become chief of all Ministers. Another: I have three treasures. Guard and keep them: The first is deep love, The second is frugality, And the third is not to dare to be ahead of the world. Because of deep love, one is courageous. Because of frugality, one is generous. Because of not daring to be ahead of the world, one becomes the leader of the world. Lao-tzu TTC chapter 67 According to Wikipedia "A consensus translation of the Three Treasures could be: compassion or love, frugality or simplicity, and humility or modesty."

QUOTE(Tao99 @ Oct 4 2009, 11:52 AM) * only logic decides when the case is closed not you, not me. Logic 101 Rule: if the premises are true and the deductive structure is correct, then the case is closed - the conclusion is undeniable and to deny it is "being irrational." sorry I can't play with a denyer of the rules of logic - it irrational and pointless: inky dinky winky woo. I'm right! (in my world). See what I mean? have a good day and take care PS the funniest thing here is that you called my much beloved life-long practice "childish and silly stuff" and I didn't even respond to that remark LOL

lol If it wasn't for YOUR post directed specifically and directly at ME, NONE of this would have happens. In science that makes you the sufficient and necessary cause of it all. You know what I mean? But given your logic point above I will just say - YOU WIN. Not because of the "truth" of your premises or the "validity" of your deductive structure but solely because in YOUR world you won. LOL OK? I hope you are happy now. There is really no point in debating a person who accepts irrationality. have a good day and take care. PS here is the causal post FYI - PSS what a "logical" post you made LOL. It's always funny when denyers of the rules of logic then try to use logic to convince you of a point.

Have a good day and take care.

Wow. You are really rambling. I based what I said COMPLETELY on your OWN self description of another post where you clearly said you only read TTC and CT. That isn't enough to make such sweeping statements about what a Taoist sage would do. That's all I said, and what I based it on. The Art war isn't going to help you understand Taoist mysticism and spirituality sorry. So you are really just going off on me, I guess for the fun of it. PS if you don't know the answer to my question then you really should consider yourself a beginner in Taoism, as I imagine others here know too (not found in your above). But it's a famous Chinese Taoist quote for gods sake. seriously. PSS only logic decides when the case is closed not you, not me. Logic 101 Rule: if the premises are true and the deductive structure is correct, then the case is closed - the conclusion is undeniable and to deny it is "being irrational."