rene

From the very beginning until now its name has never been forgotten. Thus I perceive the creation. How do I know the ways of creation? Because of this.

.

In a manner of speaking. Think aikido, where opponents energy is 're-directed' rather than blocked with force. By advising from the inside, to 'cook the fish lightly' to 'let the people just be', Laozi was able to 'support' by suggesting the gov move in a direction more beneficial and possibly more palatable.

This belongs here too...(-:

cradling a minnow... recalling deep ocean swims dancing with the whales

for me, humble is what i feel as i ponder tao.

Just give it a twirl Finger traipsed across the stars paints new nebula.

I like that, too. And I agree re dao not possessing energy itself... 'energy rod' was the only metaphor I could think of for the visual i had in mind. likely though, it neither runs through spirals nor is it grid or matrix... but rather just an aspect of everything, co-existing without form, permeating in that unboundaried way it does. words suck. images aren't far behind. but hey, it's fun to try. thanks for playing along. (-:

was that for me, Stosh? if so, I agree re labels. What I don't care for is misunderstandings. For example, I've strong feelings about the efficacy of certain practices (which is fine) and others disagree with me (which is also fine) but if they think I'm speaking from a "Taoist's point of view", then that leaves a wrong impression about Taoism... and "Taoism" has enough 'wrong impressions' about it that it doesn't need my ramblings adding to its pile. if your post was for MH, then never mind. (-:

Stosh...nooooo. MH cant stand the idea that I'm not a Philsophical Taoist like he is. I told him if he insists on labeling me a PT, then he'll have to change his parameters of what a PT is. MH - no, that's not what I said or meant. What I said was "If Lao Tzu didn't say it, then I don't need it." Clean out your ears ya old geezer. The reason I'm not "Taoist" of any flavor - is because Taoism includes much much more than just the TTC. I have no problem with anyone embracing whatever works for them or appeals to them. Why would I? I have no need to try and shove someone into fitting into a category. You are right though, regarding ZZ using much of what LZ said. Unfortunately, ZZ twisted much of LZs original clarity into a cloudy mess, imo. But that's the way it goes, sometimes, when one has their own agenda. Not saying you do, only saying ZZ did; and some translations have more 'agenda' showing through them than others. Maybe my perspective would be counter-productive to your efforts?

(-: That I do.

lol while you're down there bowing... poke MH in the butt to get him goin on the ZZ stuff.

ohhhhhh okay!! YAYYYYY ZEROSTAO !!!

An assist for putting CD on the spot? (I just want to understand what it is you're celebrating...) thanks!

Maybe first decide about what you want regarding the concepts themselves? What I mean is, will the discussion be around what concepts ZZ intended to convey... or do you want instead what the concepts in ZZ mean to us? There's a difference between 1. What X-concept means, (ZZ's intent) 2. What X-concept means to me. (My interpretation/application of ZZs ideas) Answers are easy once the question is understood. (-:

Arguments rarely are. Relying on preponderance is a well established method - as long as the foundations are kept in mind. Nice to see you, Stosh (-:

Not necessarily. The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Well, if "Philosophical Taoist" means that every method, practice or text written after The Laozi is excess baggage - then you would be right! Which would mean, if you wanted to also be a "Philosophical Taoist", you'd have to toss out your beloved ChuangTzu, and all your other ideas about this and that. Is that really what you want? Is there a reason you need me to fit into a category you've chosen for yourself?

Wayfarer, hi, nice to see you (-: Thanks for such a great reply as to what and why Taoists do what they do! My 'self' has no aches or longings or worries about death, nor do I think humanity is a 'sickness' (though truly there are some sickos out there...) so I guess not being Taoist is a good choice for me. I'm glad you've found something that works for you. warm regards

Hiya marblehead. (-: You just said that heads and tails are the same, and that heads is different than tails. Starting to sound like "both" to me. Maybe what would be less tricky, is saying "All is not only One". That way, the wholeness of the non-dual is present, and the usefulness of the dual parts (chair for chair, ladder for ladder, etc) can still be part of your reality!

My picture is of 道 running like an energy rod down through the center of spirals, affecting and informing all aspects of the whole. Fun stuff to play with!

Hi, While I agree with Riyue that the 'words' of Laozi primarily accentuate the way to order, what also comes through loud and clear (to me) is the reverting nature of 道, with both order & chaos integral aspects of the whole. To me - while the imagery of things coming 'full circle' is appealing and understandable to most - that every moment of equal creation and destruction is one that moves through time, the path scribed is spiral... cyclically reverting, yes, but not 'quite' to the same starting point. But that is tangential to your conversations about what is what and in what order... which have been quite enjoyable to read. (-: warm regards

Marblehead, hi, interesting thread! Is that the purpose of Taoist Cultivation?? No wonder I'm not Taoist, philosophical or otherwise. (-: To me, it makes more sense to experience the objective and subjective as simultaneous perspectives; utilizing the individual aspects of each, rather than trying to sublimate any differences. Would you really try to attain a condition wherein you found no difference between the heads and the tails of a single coin? For what reason? Maybe what you're trying to acquire is that the two sides are both part of the same coin at exactly the same time. What say you?

Agree. Whatever their 'nature', they are germane to the system. Friction creates necessary tension. Ever see a clock with its mainspring totally sprung? Useless. Residual and inherent energies form the potential for the next event... all part of the way. warm regards