Apech

Yes good point HE: This is on the title page.

Out of words! You! Huh! I suppose it had to happen I don't think it is true that there are satisfactory scientific explanations of consciousness. They may be able to map how the brain evolved but that is not the same thing. Actually the main failing of science in general is to be able to explain consciousness. I don't want to hijack this thread which is about objective reality ... but I think it is important to remember that if we are going to use this term for what we consider to be 'real' then we have to include sentience/consciousness since above all we know that we are conscious ... in fact we know this more for certain than anything else since it is our awareness which allows us to perceive the objective reality. Because you don't like to link the Tao to consciousness ... you feel more comfortable with the idea of impersonality. I suspect this may be a reaction (rejection of) the Judeo-Christian 'God as a person' ... far enough but don't throw the baby out with bath water just yet. Better to look for what the Taoist Classics say anyway ... not that I know the answer to this. There may be a way to count consciousness is without that grey beard in the sky.

Very interesting thanks. There's no doubt in my mind that there are two effects going on in archeology. One is a kind of projection of a set of assumptions by the the archeologist onto whatever evidence may be found. The Victorians were very prone to this, the British were always trying to say that the Egyptians, Greeks and Romans were somehow like them (mostly because they were all Empire builders at one time or another and this was seen as the 'way' civilization). Much was suppressed including a lot to do with sexuality or difficult stuff which ran counter to the idea of 'superior races'. This was so the Victorians could justify their own existence basically. It was not so much a conscious conspiracy as an unconscious blinkered view. The other effect is darker. This is active governmental suppression. I believe this is geared to preventing us knowing who we really are ... stopping us having a true perspective on ourselves which would make us harder to govern.

Thanks for sharing the dream. Very interesting.

Aha! here we go! Where exactly did our consciousness come from? the Tao or not the Tao. If not the Tao from where? If consciousness emanated from the Tao then how can you say it is 'without consciousness'? Consciousness must at the very least be an aspect of the Tao which has become manifest. Yes? You might say, if you stretch it a bit, that the Tao is both conscious and unconscious but you can't say it is 'without consciousness'. Not IMO anyway. (by consciousness I mean sentience, awareness and so on ... not the B skandha).

Amazing remix. Makes me smile, makes me cry, makes me smile again.

I think what you are seeing is Taoism trying to reestablish itself here on its own part of the Forum ... after being swamped by Buddhist posters on the General Discussion section for a while. We created the Taoist Discussion forum for this reason - to try to get to some authentic Taoist ideas. I was a practicing Buddhist for quite a long time (Karma Kagyu) and know the value of the dharma ... its great but not for everyone ... I may even go back one day ... and be wiser for it. I think the combined views that you see in books like the Golden Flower are excellent ... but Buddhist 'obsessions' (if that's the right word ... probably not ) like no-self and so on seem to become almost overbearing at times. Best wishes on your path. A.

2012: the shit is just around the corner.

!?! Very kind of you Marbles.

"Pit the Shit" ... great slogan.

Hatha Yoga: I'm tied in knots, I can't shit.

I am a bumbling fool. When I try to tie my shoe lace I fall forward and bump my head on the concrete. When I watch the news I get confused by all that stuff. I am lazy and self indulgent. I am easily distracted and while away the hours just gazing at the clouds. When I look at water I see that it naturally finds the best route. When I see fire I see it shines and consumes although it has no substance. The wind moves, the birds fly, the sun rises every morning and sets each night with no effort. So there is hope for me. I think of a person who is like this, who achieves everything without effort also. I'll call him a Sage. I can try to be like him, see what he sees and understand what he understands. I'm nowhere near that but I can try. This is my objective. I don't care about the word ego. Use it or don't use it ... depending on if its useful. But I suspect we all use it as a kind of excuse. (Just how I'm feeling today ... ignore this as you please )

Aryuvedic medicine : Now eat your shit!

(First wash your keyboard with soap and water for mentioning the B word twice!!! ) The reason I'm pushing this one is because I think it makes a whole lot of difference (although at first it might not seem to). I think we all (and I include myself) very loosely talk about ego and so on ... because we are heavily influenced by Freud and the psychiatrists and also the Indian religion beginning with B ... because they both talk a lot about self, no-self etc. etc. As if this is the real issue. Almost to the point of obsession! Take that away for a minute. Just say 'I am who I am' ... or perhaps the Sage is like 'this' but for some reason I am not like 'this'. Why? Because I haven't understood completely yet. As you say Steve, things block us from being continuously conscious of the Tao. What are those things? Or perhaps even ... the blocks are the Tao also ... it is the Way that we should be blocked and then become unblocked. Become an uncarved block in fact! What are the blocks? Our slowness? Our confusion? Our stupidity? Our not getting the point? Our distraction? Our laziness? So no ... oh I have an ego which is a piece of shit ... no excuses ... no ... oh my childhood was tough ... no excuses at all. Just thinking out loud.

Mantak Chia : Tighten your asshole and hold that shit. (?) Maybe

But they didn't formulate an entity or pseudo entity like the ego did they? Or did they?

I certainly prefer the term 'refreshing' to 'throwing away" We'd have to have a TTBs ex-mod dumpster truck.... Couple of serious points though: 1) Something like a succession policy or process is a good idea if TTBs is to be around for many years to come. There should be some accepted idea that people take on roles for a period and then hand over in some kind of way. The level of commitment and time input is very unspecific and some Mods go AWOL (for very good reasons) for periods of time which makes the Mod team a bit variable. Its not like we're all sitting poised at our monitors 24/7 ... 2) The point is you pick up skills and experience along the way. if you just stop modding how do you feed back what you have learned to the others. This what you are doing now Stig ... so some of it is about capturing knowledge/wisdom. 3) Maybe what we have never quite defined properly is what modding is supposed to achieve. there's a lot of suspicion amongst certain people that we are somehow grooming TTBs for certain teachers and so on ... this is news to me but is there any sense in which that is true. I would like to see more specific information about techniques, styles and methods ... how do we get that to happen ... without loosing the freeform stuff??? Lots of questions. Maybe there's different mod roles we could explore. Not just the police-mod, the anti-spam-mod, maybe the strategy-mod who thinks about the grand plan (whatever that is?) Sorry to ramble.

Did he ever actually mention this book? If he was trying to sell it he would have done surely.

Definitely true that the Old Kingdom surpassed the Middle and New Kingdoms in many ways including the 'purity' of its religion. As with a lot of churches in Europe I think the Egyptians were using sacred sites which were already ancient to them. The sphinx being one of them. Not sure about the Great Pyramid though as there are reasons to think it was built in the Old Kingdom itself ... but its possible that they just 'enhanced' something pre-existing.

You are a star already!

Ok since it's been raised ... I would like a view on whether Taoism actually has the concept of 'ego' ... which is a kind of objective self. When we see ourselves as 'something' ... talk to ourselves internally (out loud if you are me!) we are objectifying our own being. Do the Taoist philosophers talk about this - otherwise we are getting drawn back to the B-word.

The OP has got a star! That must be a first. A lot of wisdom on this thread I think ... even the stuff about perfumed turds ... although the image is a little off putting.

Peace on earth but not on TTBs? Oh well we live in hope.

I see that different people are using the term 'objective' differently. This is probably as it should be of course. Objective - as in seeing things as objects. Objective - as in impartial. Objective - as a goal to be reached. Could also add 'object' as thing, or 'object' as oppose as in 'I object your Honour the defense is clearly leading the witness' (I've watched too many courtroom dramas). So many nuances in one word ... maybe we are not meant to agree (?)

Cheers, I feel better now.