3bob

there is a no man's land which is not a place to get stuck... otherwise there is no fear, no doubt, no sorrow, and Truth with Joy beyond all forms of phenomena

something to remember is that most of the high or deep flyers along these lines are also nuns or monks - through either fact or in effect, and not to many of us here are talking about that kind and level of sacrifice for service and attainment... btw, there is nothing wrong with being a householder and its dharma which can attain part way but not normally as far as being a monk or nun, thus neither really being able to do double duty as both (so to speak) without hurting one dharma or the other

if the Hubble telescope can go back so can we... in some way. I wonder What Brian would venture on that?

MH, making apologies is not the point, it is saying one thing and then saying something 180 degrees different a couple of posts later - that should make yourself and any reader wonder.... for instance one moment a noun, the next moment not a noun, one moment no "return", then a few posts later all sorts of returns. Btw, With Tao being beyond the 5 senses, senses (that inform the mind) which by your own admission and in effect add up your "God", do you not wonder how those 5 senses could come to be from a "fairy tale" such as the Tao since Tao can not be measured, seen, tasted, smelled, heard, or touched which are your self stated criteria for reality?

well since the football gods have the Denver Broncos winning tonight all is right in the universe Btw, a couple of times it sure sounded like you back-tracked on what you were making a point about in previous posts? but I'll let you be since I'm sure not a Taoist expert and just speaking from my particular experience.

it could be called an attachment to an anti-belief or belief, instead of an anti-god or god attachment which is of about the same in effect to me... I suggest chapter 14 where it says, "until it returns beyond the realm of things" and chapter 25 where it says, "To be great is to go on -To go on is to be far - To be far is to return; also chapter 40 where it says, "The movement of the Tao consists in returning". Btw, there are all sorts of beings besides those living on earth in physical bodies, such is a major aspect of Taoism which a non-experienced and closed concept of same can not out of hand divorce it from the many thousands of years of a great many reputable people having experience of same. (to various degrees)

The use of "Tao" in the T.T.C. doesn't mention a certain or well defined Zeus like "God" which it sounds like you are referring to, although one might say per the T.T.C. that there is a nature like aspect to God as Mystery... thus how you see or use the word Tao as an attachment to a anti-god or no god concept is still a form or anti-form, which is incongruent with the T.T.C. ? Btw, once a return is made by the Tao to the Tao it re-realizes it never left...

sounds like you have a big advantage over many of us Giovanni, besides your proximity to the excellent food and wine of Italy!

does that mean that your post #6 was a typo? Obviously a human being is only of an atheist thought or of a non-atheist thought (etc.) in their mind where such things exist temporally... Tao, the truest identity, is not nameable or limited to such thoughts or concepts of the mind.... although such names or "born" forms have identities in time and space. But beyond names (and their purpose) I'd say the primary gist of the T.T.C. is to know "what is within me" as alluded to as the Truest identity in Chapter 21. (and throughout)

Tao as a noun or thing is not of the gist of the T.T.C. - as its writings repeatedly and clearly point out ! For if that was so then it would be temporal and come to an end.

Even the One is a thing and named and known so, granted it is the first and last of all things and thus contains all things - so all things are under the One and the One is under the Tao - thus I'd say it to will return to the Tao.... a tiny mote returns to the Tao through returning to the One then going further through the gate of the One where karma and things can not pass and are left behind. (further meaning that when the cosmic cycle of the One has also run its course (after its birth) it to unwinds or is unwound as a thing and returns. The One is not eternal or always existing per-se although the birth and death cycles are effectively so... being that per Chapter 1 of the T.T.C. only Tao is eternal or always existing and the "Mystery of mysteries".

The Taoist teaching per the T.T.C. is that Tao gave birth to the One, and if it is born then it to will "return" per that teaching. In the One and under its following permutations there is all of time, all of space, all of beings and all of manifest form from the most subtle energy to the not so subtle "Ten Thousand". The One is also the first to manifest or be born and also the last to return - thus and by simple extrapolation it seems to follow that the first and subtle workings of karma comes into existence and play under the One... for where else or how else does karma come into existence and play being that Tao is boundless, (thus karma-less) without change?

VK, as I said nobody can prove anything to you, and if you want an experts opinion to prove something to you then become your own expert. (I'm not one) Btw, "yoga" of today means variations or various yoga's to everyone, there is no set "we".

"chopping wood and carrying water" is just fine

VK, Suggest Patanjali, btw, no one can prove anything to you, you must prove it for yourself. (or just have for more concepts floating around)

sad but true which is what happened to me with English related studies

4bsolute, that was some fancy stuff, and if being so no "protection" is needed, thus the title of the string or thread is an oxymoron.

I recently took trig in my old age and that was kinda fun, why didn't they teach that in first grade? (I could have used that when we started playing dodge ball in later grades)

VK, I was very fortunate and found or was given contact with a true guru, thus that is something which is not a maybe or of speculation for me... and of course what I say can only be secondary hear-say or a passing curiosity for anyone else. That is the way it goes for all of us until we experience and know for our own selves. (regardless of even the most well recognized written sources of information which are still not our's first hand. (although such work is meant to lend a hand or give pointers)

important points made by Taomeow, without a certain amount of positive, historic and respected culture (because it is human) we could all just exist to serve the bottom line of making an all mighty buck (or money), thus not bother with or destroy anything else that gets in the way of that and us. (one example bulldoze mother nature till all that is left is a concrete and steel jungle of man-made cages)

one would have to do a fair amount of research and see what they think about various eye witness accounts, (of various well recognized teachers) then they would have to go out on their own and try to verify such research regardless of what a Krishna-whoever said whatever whenever... or one could just roll over without getting their own proofs

you would learn authentic yoga from an authentic guru... who may not be very accessible to millions of people for certain reasons, with an obvious one being logistical factors. (also it is not a questionable beginners automatic right to get a great and qualified teacher which do EXIST, but who don't pop up on every street corner in California or elsewhere - btw, such doesn't happen with other forms of discipline so why would anyone expect different with spiritual discipline's?

various forms of yoga (often Hatha yoga) was not meant to be taken out of context from its spiritual foundation that goes hand in hand with it... the most simple and basic stretches may not get one into difficulties but when other more advanced methods are used without its spiritual foundation or true teachers then problems can and do happen.

if below is what it takes count me out:

if it is a method of getting one-up-man-ship in some form to lord it over on others whether in a subtle or not so subtle way, then yes