Aaron

If no one has objections, i can copy the posts over. I only moved the thread to the general area, because I was testing out the move feature and didn't know I couldn't move it back. Aaron

Hello Vaj, I can't tell you why you drink, I can only tell you why I drink. If you have a problem, if you believe you have a problem, then there's no reason why you shouldn't check out AA or another program. There are people that are willing to help you and can talk to you about these things. You are not alone. If you want to talk, please feel free to message me. Aaron

Hello Manitou, I would say that the inventory is absolutely a humbling experience. My problem is that they refer to it as a moral inventory, as if the reason why people become alcoholics is because they are immoral. I advocate a personal inventory, I just don't think it should be a moral inventory, but actually be about where you have caused harm to others or yourself, which is what they claim it's meant to be, but rarely is it practiced as such. In regards to amends, that is perhaps the most humbling, but it's not enough, if you're simply trying to be humble. As you've probably heard a million times already, "Humility is knowing that you are no better or no worse than anyone else." Humiliation is different. The purpose of the ninth step is to clean up the wreckage of the past, not to instill one with humility. If you keep that in mind, then it becomes a simpler process and one that is less likely to turn ugly for you or others. Aaron

Actually I was a practicing 12 stepper for around 4 years before I got tired of the whole "you need a sponsor" and "meeting makers make it". What I realized, after much time in the program, was that it wasn't the twelve steps that got me sober, but rather a few simple ideas that were realized while I was in the program. First that I couldn't safely drink because I'm an alcoholic (the first step), second the reasons why I drank (fourth and fifth steps), and thirdly, an attempt to clear up the "wreckage of the past" (eighth and ninth steps), so that I didn't end up drinking again. Changing the way I behaved was important too, but in the end, I know for a fact (they keep track of these statistics) that if I had chosen another method to become sober, I would've been just as successful. I'm not saying anything is wrong with AA or the Twelve Steps, but what I can tell you is that it definitely is based on Christian mores and implies a Judeo-Christian element. With that said, I am not anti-twelve steps, I think they do work and for some people they are the best way to get sober. What I am is anti-absolutism, in that many of the people tend to follow the path of "our way or the highway". You have to have a sponsor? I was always of the mind you only needed to have a sponsor to help you through the twelve steps. Meeting makers make it? I haven't been to a meeting in over a year and I don't have the desire to drink. The only way you can truly have a happy fulfilled life is if you're a member of the program (the premise being "We've suffered so much, we're the only ones able to appreciate life"), all of these are false statements that are intended to keep people going to AA. I was a member and I can discuss many other facets with you if you want. I finished my steps with a sponsor, did my fifth step, worked my ninth step, continued my daily inventory (something I still do), but in the end found that I disagreed with many of the things advocated in the program, because I thought it was being advocated so that people could have influence over others (super sponsors to the rescue). Sorry for the sarcasm, but if you're attending meetings you know what I'm talking about. Don't assume because I disagree with the program, that I wasn't a member or "didn't get it", I did, maybe more than you have. My name is Aaron and I'm an alcoholic.

As I see the "literal" translation of Tai Shi, the less and less I feel any kind of connection to the Tao Teh Ching. Not anything against Taishi, it's just my own feelings about the translation. It seems more inclined to be a document for the ruling class and less inclined towards the commoner. Since I am the latter, I have no need for the former. Aaron

Hello Dawei, I don't like a lot of things. It doesn't really matter. It's all opinion. Everyone seems to feel the need to be right, when in fact it doesn't matter. My point is that if someone tells you they have the Truth, then they most likely don't. The truth is subjective. The only truth I'm sure of is that I have absolutely no idea what the truth is, only what I define as truth. Even if I become aware of the Tao, I haven't become aware of the truth, I've only become aware of the Tao. I wouldn't even say I'm compartmentalizing things, what you get from Taoist cultivation is Taoist enlightenment. What you get from Buddhist cultivation is Buddhist enlightenment. That's the real issue at hand, enlightenment doesn't exist, because it works under the assumption that we are in darkness. The more I examine these things, the more I believe we are already enlightened, we just have had people tell us we aren't for so long that we believe it. And think about it, what better way to get people to do what you want them to do, then to offer them something that you have no way of proving exists? Cultivation, as it relates to Tao isn't the best definition of what I think they're talking about. How can you cultivate something so that it blossoms of it's own accord? That's my point, not that it doesn't happen, but that the trick is to allow it to happen on its own, to become a part of it, not out of shear intent or force of will, but because you've allowed it to pick you up and carry you along. My point is that none of these things lead you to Tao, because you are already a part of it. If you just wake up you can see it. Aaron

I'm a former 12 stepper. I've looked for ways to reconcile the two ideas (the Tao and 12 Steps), but in the end, I think the 12 steps, regardless of all of its apologetics is still very much a Judeo-Christian organization with Judeo-Christian ethics, whose goal is to advocate Judeo-Christian ideology, rather than allow for personal freedom. With that said, if it's working for you, stick to it. It's all just hypothetical until we reach the end. Everyone should do what they feel is right for themselves, rather than what other people tell them is right for them. If recovery in the 12 steps feels right, then do it. Aaron

Hello Marblehead, I'm certain that it can be had by anyone. After all it comes from an experiential awareness of Tao, so it's not necessarily exclusive to "Taoists". I'm also of the mind that what most people think of and define as "tao" (the small tao) is actually Te. Aaron

Well I wouldn't say nothing, but perhaps mostly not crazy. Aaron

Hello Marblehead, I'm certain that High De, has nothing to do with virtue, morality, or ethics, but rather has to do with an attitude that occurs when one is exposed to Tao. So for me, the more I think of it, Virtue isn't necessarily a good descriptor for it. Aaron

I was only kidding around Rene... I was poking at the whole "be done with learning" thing, which most people take out of context. I've talked about this with Dawei, which is one of the reasons I brought up the different views as they relate to different philosophies. In regards to discussing the character, I'll wait for him or Taishi to respond. Wikipedia has a very detailed article regarding the topic of your question, including the problem with translating the word. The sources that are cited, seem reliable, so you might be able to find your answer there as well. Aaron

Hello Rene, I am not a learned one, I was actually looking forward to seeing who considered themselves to be one, alas no one took the bait. Anyways after I did some research on the internet what I've found is that the concept of Te/De is defined differently dependent on the philosophy in which it's being discussed. In Taoism philosophy Te refers to inner power, integrity, and inherent character, while Confucians seemed to refer to it as moral character, virtue, and morality. To make it even more confusing Buddhists seemed to think of Te as either gunya (quality, virtue) or punya (merit, virtuous deeds). When Lao Tzu refers to high and low Te, he could be referring to the High Te as the Taoist view and Low Te as the Confucian view. (Buddhism wasn't around china at that time, so I don't think it would've been discussed). The thing to keep in mind is that Wang Bi, as a Confucian, was probably more concerned with integrating the two different philosophies, than he was expressing the ideas of the original texts. I started a thread about this in the main area, if only because I think this is drifting well off of the topic of Chapter 5. I'm not telling anyone to stop talking about it here, obviously there's a need, but it might make it easier for those who come later and are trying to learn more about what Chapter 5 is saying, if we try to stick to what it's actually talking about. Dawei, I mentioned the "Straw Dogs" and "Straw and dogs" comment several pages ago, you must have missed it. Aaron

Hello Marblehead and Manitou, First, it's not of our own determination. If we're practicing high Virtue, it can only spring forth from Tao, low virtue is what springs forth from our own determination. High virtue happens as a direct result of practicing Tao, it is spontaneous and occurs as a result of wu wei. The virtue that is determined by us is low virtue, it is the virtue that springs forth from ulterior motives. High Virtue is determined, not by us, but by what's beneficial for everything. The three things held in the highest esteem by Lao Tzu are Wisdom, Virtue, and Tao. In order to practice High Virtue, you must first have Wisdom, which, stems from experiencing the Tao. Even then, low virtue is better than nothing, it's just flawed, as most things are. Aaron

All religions are similar, that's why I stear clear of them. I am not looking for religion or dogma, but rather the Tao. The Tao is not within a book, nor is it within a ritual or practice, for it cannot be contained. The Tao is all around me, corporeal and incorporeal. It is within the leaves and the rocks, within my flesh and my clothes. I don't need anyone to teach me this, I already know it. I need only open my eyes to see it. I need only uncover my ears to hear it. I need only breathe in to feel it. Meditation will not lead you to Tao, nor will Qigong, or cultivation of virtue. Virtue comes from Tao, it is the spontaneous creation that springs forth from the unfathomable, the experiential. If I learn to work in harmony with the world, to see the nature of the world as the minifestation of Tao, then Te, virtue, will come of its own accord, no one will need to teach me it. Aaron

Hello Dawei, I am referring to the descriptions of it in the Tao Teh Ching and I am not saying that you can't describe it, just that any description given will be inadequate. So yes you can describe it, but you can't. If that makes sense. Aaron

Actually it depends on how you're using the word low. Chapter 13 of the Tao Teh Ching says that "a lowly state is a boon", but Chapter 38 says that "low virtue never frees itself of virtuousness, therefore it has no virtue." Perhaps the best Chapter to read regarding low is Chapter 66, "How does the sea become the king of all streams? Because it lies lower than they! Hence it is the king of all streams." Aaron

Surfingbudda, If you like that qoute, read Alan Watts "The Book". It goes into that concept in depth as well as how society creates a false image of self. Aaron

Hi dawei, I actually meant what I said. The chapter points out that sentimentality is not a product of nature, that allows us to understand that the "bellows" are not sentimental either. And no they cant be described. Anyways i'm out on my I-touch so I'll leave it there. God these screens were designed for someone with hands the size of a five year old. Aaron

My point is that they should grow naturally, of their own accord without my interference. In the same way Tao can grow without my conscious participation. For me it's not something you "do" but rather something that happens becuase of what you're not doing. Wu Wei... non-interference, but that's another chapter. Aaron

I don't think there's anything wrong with a teacher charging for their lessons. If one is going to earn a living teaching and they don't live in a monastery, then obviously they'll have to charge enough so that they can support themselves at the very least. I guess my question is whether or not the lessons are worth the price. As an aside, if it comes down to paying your bills or learning Qigong, pay your bills first, then learn Qigong. It'll be much harder learning if you're homeless. Aaron

Especially if they have a sharp stick in their hands. Aaron

Hello Allan, First I hate the word cultivate. It seems to be the exact opposite of what Tao Teh Ching teaches. How do you cultivate something if it's supposed to grow naturally? Hey I'm going to let these grapes grow naturally, but I'm going to cultivate them! That's like pouring a glass of water and saying you've cultivated the glass. As far as where the bellows are, if you really want to know, it's supposed to be a secret, but I'll tell you. It's twenty five miles south of Detroit, if you pass exit 220 you've gone too far. Aaron

If it works for you, it works. If it doesn't, it doesn't. The idea someone will reach enlightenment visiting an online forum is silly. Enlightenment can't be taught, it can only be experienced. No words said here will lead you to that path. If that's the reason you're visiting, I'm afraid you'll be sorely dissapointed. Aaron

Absolutely. I don't believe the concept of karma exists in the Tao Teh Ching Aaron