Aaron

I would agree with Marblehead, that when one practices what's been taught in the Tao Teh Ching that it helps us to live longer and healthier lives. We sometimes are tricked into believing that spirituality is real, when it isn't. Seeking a purpose where there isn't any is one of the greatest mistakes we make as humans. That isn't to say that we shouldn't be spiritual, but rather that we need to understand spirituality for what it is, a tool for understanding the underlying phenomena of nature that we cannot (or couldn't at one time) completely understand. The fact is survival requires understanding. It requires knowing what to do when it needs to be done. When we don't know, then we start to worry, because that lack of knowledge means that something might occur that will impact our survival. Bob, Bill, and Joe each toss a small stick into the campfire and shortly after catch a fish. They believe that somehow this action has effected nature and caused them to catch fish. From that point on they throw a stick into the campfire believing that it will lead to them catching more fish. It works fine for a few months, then Andy comes along and throws a stick into the fire, only it's a different type of fish and that night the river dries up and the fish are gone. Apparently Andy has somehow caused the river to dry up and from that point on you cannot throw that type of stick into the fire... we wont even mention what happens to poor old Andy. This is what I'm talking about when I say we apply human characteristics to nature. It is our desire to explain the unexplainable, to define the undefinable, that causes us to come up with answers where they aren't needed. The truth of the matter is, regardless of whether you are enlightened or not, the goal of life is stay alive until you finally die, nothing more. If one happens to reach some kind of awareness along the way, kudos, hopefully it will help them to not complicate the simplicity so much. Aaron

Hello Folks, As I mentioned before, everything in nature has one purpose and that is to survive. What I see here is that people are applying human qualities to nature that aren't there. Nature works because environments have developed into specific ecosystems. Ecosystems vary, but the ones that thrive, do so because there is a hierarchy present that allows the animals and plants within that ecosystem to coexist in a beneficial manner. An example is that certain species hunt others, keeping them from overpopulation, while others may actually help certain plants to flourish by spreading pollen or seeds. Even this practical explanation doesn't really explain the purpose of nature, because it's purpose isn't really a purpose at all, so instead I would say that the question that needs to be asked is what is the nature of nature? What is the natural state of nature and where does man exist within that state? Aaron

Hello guys, Let me first say that much of the reason why I have been away from the forums has to do with what Steve said in the beginning of this forum. Why are we so fascinated with dead guys that lived 2,000 years ago? And on an even deeper level, how much good have these dead guys actually done for those who came after? For me, I practice now and I try to stay within the experience and forget about the dogma and ideology. I try very hard to remember that no one is perfect or imperfect and in the same way, no philosophy is perfect or imperfect. We can choose which we want to identify with. I was also thinking a bit lately how I am an advocate of freedom of speech in the sense that the government shouldn't interfere with how their citizens express themselves, but the individuals corporations and people have every right to. In that sense we can advocate what someone should choose to believe or what they shouldn't, but people should always be free to believe what they want to in the end, even if it's that their doorknob is God. Aaron edit- To clarify the freedom of speech thing. Governments should not have the right to censor a person's right to express themselves, but newspapers, radios, people, etc., have every right to decide what they wish to print or say.

The purpose of Nature and everything within Nature is survival, anything more is just a construct of mental conditioning. Aaron

In the context of Chinese God's, then I think it's obvious in that mythological pantheon, then Tao would've existed before, but in the context of say, Vedanta or other Eastern religions and their concept of what God is, which is different, then I don't think Tao would've existed before "God". Of course it doesn't matter, as Mythmaker said earlier, it's all opinion, ego stroking, and here say. Aaron

Hello guys, I liked Mythmaker's post in the mythological sense (pun intended), but I do have doubts that God and Tao can be interchanged. In my opinion God is everything, including Tao, Tao is an aspect of God, so it's hard for me to interchange the two. Aaron

I think that you were half way there, but you went over the line... the line of course is that you see yourself as no better, nor worse, than anyone else. I think it's from this knowledge that true compassion can arise. Aaron

It's funny that this topic came up. Last night I was reading "The World of Zen" and this was the last passage I read before sleep... Anyways, I think I've said as much as I can about my own opinion of All is One in other threads, so I thought I might add some words I thought profound and wise. Aaron

Hello Steve, In my opinion, this type of understanding stems from experiencing, and it doesn't just stem from meditation, but from becoming aware of the world around you in this moment. Take Zen for instance, before one can experience Zen, one must first come to certain intellectual realizations that stem from contradictions that can't be answered. It is only by understanding these Koans (the riddles per se) that one can understand that understanding isn't necessary. Call it a paradox, but that's the gist of it. So you might say that you can't understand reality, but the fact is you are reality, so is my cat, and the spam and rice I had for dinner, calling it an illusion, doesn't mean it isn't real, it just means that it isn't the entirety of existence. We can't escape reality either. We chop wood and carry water before enlightenment and we chop wood and carry water after. The real problem stems with getting hung up on the idea that reality is really that important. In the end what's important is understanding who you are and that comes from understanding what you are, which comes from understanding where you are and are not. Aaron

I was thinking that it might be interesting to practice a form of debate whereby, rather than defending your actual position, you defend the opposite of it. For instance if you actually believed that apples should only be used for baking pies, you would take the position that everyone should be able to use apples for whatever reason they wanted. In Ancient times and modern middle schools, this form of debate was practiced because it allows others to understand the position of their opponent, but it also clarifies the nature of their own beliefs and ideas, which is never a bad thing. In this particular thread I propose that someone post a topic for debate, then open it for others to debate. The thing to remember is that you should not be defending your own position, but rather the opposite of that position. If you want to state your actual opinion at the beginning, feel free to do so, but I would recommend putting it in brackets so that it's not confused with your actual argument for the opposition. Anyways, I thought it might be a good exercise. I'm not particularly fond of the idea of starting it off, but I will be happy to join in. I would recommend that we start with a relatively minor topic, rather than jump straight in D.O., Tao, etc. Aaron

The most ironic part is that for Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, and Taoism (yes Taoism), if you examine the actual morality advocated, there is very little difference between them. I think it's laughable (imo) that what causes such strife is the fact that they don't believe one should follow this moral behavior for the same reasons. And hence the reason I don't practice religion. Aaron

I never get the sense that he's trying to get a rise out of people, rather people are so opposed to what he has to say that they rise on their own. No need for a ban, if you don't like it, just ignore it. Aaron

In my opinion to really get an understanding of reality you're supposed to think about what's right here, so you're one step ahead of the game in my book. Aaron

I've learned a bit about that, at least what you can learn by watching documentaries, but I still tend to take the hard core approach to time. Quantum physics is all and good, but I have to remind myself that most of it is theoretical and can't be proven (yet). As far as our concept of time, did you know that time does not slow down when we are surprised (at least our perception of time doesn't), that's actually a perceptional anomaly. Time is still passing at the same speed, we just believe that it's slowed down. They had actually thought that the opposite occurred. Anyways, it's all hypothetical in the end. There's nothing wrong with discussing it or trying to understand it further, but we should still remember that it's hypothetical, that there are realities that we can concern ourselves with, if we choose. Aaron

It's been awhile since I did a "Nature of" post, but I thought this one might be a good start, especially with the recent threads that have been going on. I think many of us look at our experiences and define ourselves based on those experiences, I had a bad/good childhood, I like/hate chocolate, I am ugly/beautiful, and that's all fine/horrible, depending on how you view it. The problem is that in many cases we look at these experiences and don't see how they're intricately linked. That there is a connection just beneath the surface. Many people look at Taoism and believe that it teaches that there isn't one unified experience that ties these things together, rather there are opposites, that in order to have good, you must have bad, in order for there to be beauty there must be ugliness, but they rarely look at the deeper picture, that in fact good and bad are the same experience, just at opposite ends. Take for example hate and love. If we look at it as a scale of black and white, with black being hate (obviously) and love being white, then we can also see that there are a myriad of different shades of experience as one moves from one side to the other. In the center, where it's grey we may find apathy, pristine in all it's greyness. My point is that when we understand that experiences are not set apart by a solid line, we can begin to examine them in a different light, we can see that we can hate someone just as easily as love them, that the only thing that's changed our opinion of them is where our experience with that person has allowed them to fall. It's also easier to understand how one can hate someone that they once loved, because after all, that experience will not change rather our notion of that experience changes, how we identify it. And that's the gist of it, that the notion is what causes us to separate these experiences, to quantify them. Rather than say I have a relationship with this person, we have to quantify it's value, define it as being hate or love or even apathy. We feel this need because we are caught up in this game of black and white (as Allan Watts calls it), this notion that things are either on or off, good or bad, and so on. The key in my opinion, to truly understanding our own nature is when we can look at things objectively, understand them as being the process by which we are not really identifying this person, but rather identifying our relationship with this person, and from this knowledge we can then honestly look at our relationship and judge it based on the breadth of that experience, rather than the degree. I love and hate you. I do or don't like sex. I believe in or doubt the existence of God. Each of these experiences are tied to each other and because they are tied to each other, we can't completely be tied to one spectrum or the other, but rather that spectrum fluctuates and changes, in fact it must change. It's understanding this change that will help free us from those experiences, because beyond those experiences, in my opinion, there is a transcendence, the ability to view an experience without having an attachment to one side or the other, but rather seeing it for the breadth of what it really is. When we reach this point, I believe that we can finally begin to understand our true nature and from that honestly behave as we should, rather than how society has conditioned us to behave. I hope this wasn't that long, but that's all I've got right now. I look forward to hearing your comments. Aaron edited for grammar

I just don't care for the word illusion, because it is too broad a term. I think it's better to actually explain what it is. A mirage is better, in my opinion, than illusion, because at least it explains what's going on. Aaron

I think it's dependent. (I actually believe I know this, but to say that would be presumptuous.) Time may seem to be an abstract concept, but in reality it's our awareness of what's going on, but it isn't solely human. Animals are aware of time, so is the rock being worn down by the water. If time didn't exist, then nothing would happen, because there would be nothing to relate it to. Without time you cannot speak, because there is nothing for the thought to exist within. Without time you cannot act, because there is no space for the action to occur. Our thoughts occur during seconds, without those seconds, there is no thought to occur, rather it is stationary with nothing to cause it grow and be. In my metaphysical wacky way of looking at it, it is much like Te arising from Tao. Time arises from space. In essence time is the breath that allows reality to be. Without time reality ceases to be, at least we cannot conceive it as being, and instead we have a void, yes a pregnant void, but one that cannot give birth without the former. Aaron

Hello Romie, You are not anger and pain, that's the first thing you need to realize. You may feel anger and pain, but you are actually a human being that feels these things, they are not you. Being rid of anger requires that you first understand why you are angry, this can only be done through DEEP reflection. It took me several years to really understand the full nature of my anger. I, at one time, was a very angry person, even to the point of it becoming homicidal on occasion (though I never actually committed homicide, I had the sincere desire to do it.) When you talk to a normal person about this, they wont understand, because most people never get to this point in their life, but I did because I grew up in very abusive household and suffered emotional, physical, and sexual abuse in that household. It shaped my view of myself and my personality so that I was filled with hate and loathing, much of it directed at myself. The only way I was able to overcome that anger was to finally understand that it stemmed from a fear of being hurt. I had to understand that this fear was natural, that I had been hurt and that was why I felt the way I did. It sounds strange now, but the only way I could finally manage my anger was to admit I could not control life, that life was random, it was filled with cruelty and compassion, hate and love, that I could not be certain today or tomorrow which would occur, but living in fear of it, believing that I was always going to be victimized did nothing to be rid of it. I gave up trying to control life and instead turned my will and life over to the notion of compassion. This isn't bullshit mind you. I actually had to do this. If I didn't I'm sure I would be in prison right now for one reason or another. On a daily basis I have to examine my life and actions and do what I think is right. I have had to learn to live and let live to the best of my ability, to not feel threatened by others. Am I still an asshole? On occasions yes, but not nearly to the extent I used to be. Today I don't wake up angry at the world, feeling like I've gotten the short end of the stick, regardless of my situation, rather I realize that I am no better and no worse than anyone else and by understanding this I can also understand that I am capable of great evil and great good, but it doesn't arise on it's own, I must be aware of my actions and choose which I will be, evil or good. When I get angry at someone today I consciously hope for the best for that person. I used to pray for them, but today I think prayer is futile, except that it helps me to consciously realize what I want to happen in my life. If I consciously wish the best for someone else, the anger goes away, almost always it goes away completely. It doesn't arise later where I say, "remember when you did this to me" for instance, rather I can look at the current situation fresh and address it. I drank for nearly two decades because of fear. I tried to escape my past for many many years, if I hadn't gotten sober, who knows what I would've become or done. I look at each day now as a new beginning, no matter how corny that sounds. I've ceased trying to be good and I just do good. If I end up making a mistake, I make amends for it. I don't try, I just do. That is where the rubber meets the road in the end, when you cease trying and just do. I don't know if this will help you at all. Probably it wont help that much, but I do want you to know that whatever has happened, it happened, whether it was for a reason or not doesn't matter so much, what matters is where you go from here. Examine your past, understand why you are the way you are, and then you can begin to become the person you want to be, it really is as simple as that. Just remember that you will never be perfect, you will still make mistakes. What makes a man a "real" man is that he can accept his mistakes and do right by them. Aaron

Hello Manitou, I would say our emotions are based on one thing, survival. Everything we do is dependent on our need to survive. The problem with modern day society is that we oftentimes misconstrue what's actually happening to us, sometimes we act on an emotion, not out of survival, a need, but rather a want. A key to understanding our true inner condition is to understand whether we are reacting out of necessity, or some inner desire that has to do with wants. Now wants aren't bad mind you, they are tied to survival as well, we hoard to prepare for the future, but sometimes we collect things we'll never need and that's when it becomes tricky. Trying to explain it on a forum is moot though, since it is a very complex process that takes a great deal of time and effort (emphasis on effort) to really figure out. Someone can tell you til they're blue in the face, but until you actually figure it out on your own, it wont do much good. Aaron

I guess my point is that the question is only dead for us, not for those other people who might not have come to a conclusion. And even then it's only dead because we perceive it to be dead. After all this is an abstract concept, not something physical that lives and breathes. I'm still of the mind that even if we believe there is a conclusion that the question is still alive and well, merely answering it doesn't wipe it away and start anew. Aaron

Hello Steve, An asteroid collides with the earth millions of years in the past and causes just enough change to the environment to allow bacteria to flourish. This bacteria over several millions of years eventually becomes the human species, two hundred thousand years later we ask if there was a cause and effect for that action if we hadn't put it there. Purely from the stance of science and physics, I think the answer is yes. Even in Wu Wei there is cause and effect. Cause and effect are the two sides of the same coin. Cause is the beginning and effect is the end, what we have in between is the rest of the experience. Just because we are describing it as such, doesn't mean it isn't so. Aaron

Hello Steve, What I am asking is essentially the same thing you're saying, does knowledge cause us to exist or do we simply exist? I think that we simply exist. Why? Because if no one else in the universe knew I existed, I would know, and that existence isn't based solely on my knowledge, but rather from my interaction with the world. So even if these things around me are illusions, or non-permanent, that does not mean that they are not real. They are just as real as I am. The trick is understanding that beyond reality there exists more. Call it the Godhead or whatever. Then the trick is understanding that if you don't believe this to be true, it doesn't matter. Everything will be fine either way. In the end this has nothing to do with truth, because there is no way to prove any of this, so it can't be true, it can only be experienced. Aaron

I might not agree with it, but I liked how you explained it. I do appreciate the references to one's experience determining their faith in the indescribable. I would agree with that aspect. Aaron

I liked this comment the most. Very well said. Aaron

That's not what I am saying, it's what I'm asking. Aaron