Iyoiyo

"Etching the way," I like this idea.

What is and is not does not depend on what you, I, or anyone says. I did not mean to claim any detailed knowledge of the Taoist religious sects. Of course I know there are many, that they're complicated, and full well that I don't understand their workings. However, this does not perturb me in the least. I neither want nor need to know anything about them . I merely wanted to say that there is no patent on meanings or names.

This is a case of overlapping definition. In order to discuss things with others I must use words, Taoism is one, and different people mean different things by it. Knowing this makes me leery of talking or writing at all, but I inevitably succumb to my desire to explain. The Tao is like a guy I saw in the grocery store a bunch of times, and later learned had a name: Steve. Steve is not what that person is, but that is what others call him. So, when I want to talk about Steve I use the name, instead of attempting to describe his every feature. The only reason I use the words "Tao" and "Taoism" is because the body of writing labeled as Taoist describes something that I wish to talk with others about. My concept of taoism or "the tao" is based around something which is inherently possible to surround in rite or ceremony, therefore there can be no taoist religion, by definition ( of the word religion; which requires both a god, or gods, as well as structure). And concerning the roots of "taoism," from my place I see that Taoism has it's roots in all facets of reality, it does not root from any one religion, any one continent, or any one people. If someone believes this to be the case, then we are clearly talking about two different concepts with the same name, again. One analogy I have to myself is that the Tao is the mathematics of spirituality. I do not mean that it can be parsed out and understood through formulae. What I mean is that independent agents, unaware of each other, are capable of deriving the same a priori "conclusions."

The short answer is here: Taoism does not believe in anything, certainly not in the devil. it is not a religion. Evil does not exist independent from humanity, in a sense it does not exist at all. Also, should you continue to plumb the depths of Christianity you may want to consider that the Devil can not be the source of Christian evil . . . because God created him, and everything else. God either created evil, or he does not exist Q.E.D. This is a very old argument, but one that no theology has succeeded in resolving.

Ah, there are quite a few really, but I'm too tired to type them now. Perhaps tomorrow.

Hello Bums, I just wrote this for myself, but perhaps someone else might enjoy reading it. In argument, people are very childish. Unable to accept the consequences of admitting fallibility they will argue on behalf of falsehood rather than confront the truth. If certain truths are an obstacle to their victory, they are mostly left unmentioned. This is a mistake. It is not most important to be right individually, what's important is arriving at the truth of the situation. By ignoring information to preserve intellectual "victory," the virtue of communication, and even thought, is destroyed. It is cheating. If one cheats on a test, receiving a high mark instead of a low one, it does not mean that one is intelligent. It's like renting a house, inviting your relatives over, and pretending that you own it. Winning an argument by deceit it is no victory at all: If anything, it is a betrayal of oneself. Having established that thought, I'll move a little closer to my main topic: ownership. Ownership of what? Ownership of things. How is ownership established? Who forges the little chain between someone and something, and says "there, that's yours"? It's a mystery, isn't it? All things that are owned by somebody were, at one point or in some form, things that belonged to nobody. What changed? If I pocket a beach pebble, what makes it mine? I say, nothing. The only thing connecting possessions and the people who "possess" them, is that the possessors want to possess the possessions. But wanting something to be true does not make it so. Just as it's detrimental to believe oneself proficient at roulette (when that is clearly impossible), it is also harmful to deceive oneself in other ways. You will, so to speak, lose your fortune. If you disagree, ask yourself: have I any proof to the contrary? Or is the idea too threatening to my lifestyle, to my concept of the world, for me to seriously consider? It may be easier to think on this issue of "ownership" by narrowing the scope to simply "land ownership". Because all physical possessions are derived from the land, if we can resolve the issue of ownership with respect to the Earth itself the entire issue will be solved. Before we decide if Bill stole Bob's gold, we must establish that Bob owned the gold to begin with. And where did he get it? He took it from the Earth. Who owns the Earth? Certainly there are many nations, and they seem to own the Earth. But, do they? No. They want to. They have the globe all parcelled up. Strong countries are even capable of things like borders, states, and fighting off those who would encroach on their "territory." But does that make the land theirs? No. If I steal a cupcake from a toddler, is that mine? Well, in a sense it is, I can do whatever I want with it. But that is only because of my brute strength, that is not because I own it. The explorers of history were megalomaniacs. Who looks out on a new land and thinks, "well, I guess this is mine now, I saw it first. I want it."? How absurd. Every new place we go, every old place for that matter, has existed for an age, and will remain for ages to come. What flimsy logic can make the land ours? Why doesn't it belong to the dandelions or the toads? Were I to stumble on the proverbial pie on the windowsill, I wouldn't think it was mine. What else is the globe besides such a pie? As usual I have become very sidetracked. Fear not though, this last paragraph contains the original motive behind all this exposition. What I started out to say, is that ideas are no different than places. Coming up with an idea and claiming it for one's own is just as silly as discovering a wonderful new continent and, deciding that because it's new to you it must be new to everybody, claiming it for yourself. In reality, the world exists together with mankind, but there is no reason to think it belongs to us. When we think up a new idea, we are not creating that idea, we are simply seeing it for the first time. Just because it is out of sight does not mean that something does not exist. All places in the universe exist. If one had the time and means, they could all be visited. It is the same for the world of ideas. They all exist, but many have not been visited.

This is an awesome response.

Hello all, this is a long shot, but I figured I'd give it a try. I'm graduating college in a few days, but the downside is that I will be moving away from my wonderful Kung Fu teacher, (http://www.thelittledojo.com/fook-yueng if you're curious about the style) and that is very disappointing. I'll be moving back to my home town in Juneau Alaska which, to my knowledge, does not house any established Chinese martial arts schools at all. So, I was wondering if any bums have personal martial connections in Juneau who might be willing to take on a student. Any help is appreciated.

It sure is confusing, but I often think the same thing.

Additionally, if you truly have little tolerance for stupidity, you could at least learn how to spell and write proper sentences. Perhaps English is your second language. In that case I would be able to overlook quite a lot. Simply because you work in a pharmacy, see people, and have opinions, does not make you an authority on anything: think things through a bit before you start giving out advice. Have you considered that somebody might read something you wrote, misinterpret it (or not) and suffer negative consequences? I have been rash in saying this, but I felt that I had to.

Well, I guess it won't be long before our life spans are down to about 20 years. According to this human degeneration idea my grandchildren might even die before I do . . . right.

It's not usually appropriate to say that something just plain wrong, but every once in a blue moon we get something like this: It makes absolutely no sense, and is not true. If this was an attempted metaphor and physical strength was not actually in question then it would have been wiser to make that more obvious.

I will shortly return to my home in south east Alaska (no more undegraduate study for me!). I hope I can start a garden, but it will really depend on how far the season has progressed by the time I arrive. We really need to plant at the right time in that region (because the summer is so short) or else the plants will not mature before they die. It might be too late to start planting. Although, perhaps I can help my mother with her garden .

Building sensitivity is something that comes slowly, at least to me and my fellow students. I think the best way to improve is to simply practice push hands drills with a variety of partners until you are able to sense pressure easily.

I venture that nobody likes to do things just to make others suffer. It might look that way, but there are other reasons.