Aaron

It's very hard not to think of this thread in regards to racism, since the very question is based on the pretext that race somehow relegates a person's value in regards to karma. This is sort of like saying it's okay to point out the bad qualities of one race because of all the bad things they've done, as if that somehow has something to do with one's individual merit. This is the old western mindset of the "sins of the father" that's coming into play. I am not responsible for anything my father has done and the good and bad he did is not inherited by me. We each have the ability to choose our future and we each our brought into this world with a clean slate. No one kills an infant because their father was a murderer, at least no one with a sense of humanity and compassion. The universe is not sentimental, it views all things equally. Karma has less to do with reincarnation than our awareness of the nature of reality, Aaron

I liked this a lot. Thanks for sharing. Don't allow society to decide what is real for you, but rather make that decision for yourself based on your own experience. Lao Tzu talked about this in the Tao Te Ching. Aaron

I read the thread in its entirety. It was painful. Mak Jo Si is really negative, big on slandering. He seems to fail to grasp the basic tenets of Lao Tzu, but apparently he doesn't need to since he was directed by immortals. Man, next time I need to call in sick I'll use that line and see how it works. Apparently people will buy anything these days. Aaron

I follow the teachings of Lao Tzu because I believe they are the key to living a harmonious life. If you are in harmony with the world around you, what's the use in burning paper by touch, or holding your breath for 30 minutes? A man in harmony has everything he needs, so for me the philosophical and practical applications are far more important than the esoteric energy practices. Aaron

You've taken Chapter 20 out of context. It has nothing to do with apathy, but rather, coming to terms with your own understanding of the world around you. It's an allegory, not meant to be taken literally. Lao Tzu is advocating being the devil's advocate. So, this has nothing to do with a realization of right and wrong, good or bad, or any other paradoxical quality, but rather that there is no right or wrong, good or bad, that everything is subjective. One culture burns the body of a loved one, the other views it as the ultimate sin, neither is right or wrong, it's their cultural subjectivity that causes them to view it as such. Lao Tzu is telling us that we don't need to believe something is good or evil, simply because we are told it is so. This is the exact opposite of what you're talking about, defining things as good and evil, in fact that is exactly what he is warning us against here. It also has nothing to with retreating from the ways of the world, but rather understanding the way of the world. Squirrels gather nuts for winter, not out of greed, but necessity, so accumulation itself isn't bad either, as long as there's a need for it. I would suggest that you don't read chapters by themselves, simply because much of what is being talked about in the Tao Te Ching goes on for several chapters. With that said, I do appreciate that you're reading the Tao Te Ching. Thank you for sharing your thoughts. Aaron

Something I saw on facebook today and thought I'd share with the group. http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/aug/15/rowan-williams-persecuted-christians-grow-up. Tell me what you think. Aaron

I'm thinking the OP sounds a lot like Tulku. Aaron

If Mak Tin So can call himself a Master, then so can I. Please refer to me as Master Aaron from now on. Aaron

True. We need to remember that words alone are not enough, sometimes it requires action. Too many people talk but do nothing. The fact that you're looking for ways to improve your practice is a sign that you're on the right track. IMO. Aaron

You just don't get it, so I guess there's no point to continue. Aaron BTW- You've shown a great deal of spiritual maturity in your responses. I'm sure you're the best rolemodel for anyone who is looking for a teacher.

I just want to point out that you've misunderstood this passage. Yes we should look for the mystery of mysteries, but this mystery isn't Tao, but the bellows, spring, spirit of the feminine (force of creation) between heaven and earth, a product of Tao. In essence we look for the connection we hold within the source of all things and by understanding this connection we understand our own connection to all things. Just my two cents. Aaron

Well I clothe the poor by giving the homeless clothes. I feed the hungry by donating time at the Gospel Mission, I am not a doctor, but I am more than happy to help fluff a pillow or offer some tylenol to someone with a fever. I am also willing to stop and listen when someone needs to talk. I volunteered over 40 hours to the recent Paddle in to Quinalt Pow Wow. I don't point this out for kudos or so people can say, what a nice guy you are, but rather to make the point that there is a BIG difference between coming to this forum talking about enlightenment, yet not practicing the foundation of it, which is compassion. If anyone here wants to know the actual path to enlightenment, it's practicing compassion in your day to day life, which doesn't include insinuating people are lying or being snarky. Just my two cents. Aaron

Hmm... so you're insinuating I'm a liar, that's fine. I'm okay with that, the truth is subjective, so every truth is lie and every lie is the truth to some degree. Second I thank you for your advice, but I have no desire to "embrace the colors" or "see through the illusion", believe it or not I have achieved a degree of awareness of reality and my experience is not even close to what you're talking about here. I don't feel the need to go into details about it, because it's not something that can be explained. Those that know don't speak, those that speak don't know. Aaron edit- I'm not going to be a part of the whole Taoism vs. Buddhism thing or become involved in prolonged fight over who is right and who is wrong, so please feel free to spout whatever you want, I've said what I needed to. BTW- Feel free to look up my post on silent mind meditation. I think I made it a couple years ago, it might help elucidate you on some of the finer points.

Who said it didn't work? Who said I was complaining. I just don't feel effilang is necessarily the best person to advise me on spiritual matters. Remember I'm not a Buddhist, meditation serves a different purpose for me. I'm not attempting to "see through the illusion" but rather use is as a method to maintain clarity of mind so that I can be at harmony with the world around me. Personally I think we should just drop this and move on, rather than point fingers at who is "enlightened" and who isn't. As an aside, we are all enlightened, whether we're aware of it or not. As Lao Tzu said, "better look for it within you." He never said I had to push this idea on others. Aaron

I am and you are right, sometimes a mirror does get dusty and you have to clean it again, but once it is clean, it's important to know when to stop. Aaron

I wouldn't worry. I spent twenty years meditating. I know what it is. Meditation doesn't make you spiritual, nor does it feed the hungry, clothe the naked, or care for the sick. It can be a very selfish act. Sometimes the answers aren't just within but without as well. Once a mirror is clean, there's no need to keep polishing. Aaron

The sage will help his fellow man and yet no one knows he helped them. He will stay behind and by doing so will be made first. Nothing says you can't help people, it's whether you make a big show of it or ask for something that's important. In Lao Tzu's eyes we weren't supposed to help because we were getting something out of it, but because we were showing compassion to our fellow man. I don't see how what you did could be wrong in any sense and the truth of the matter is that Lao Tzu shared his teachings and there's no reason why we shouldn't do so as well, hopefully through our actions rather than our words, and always with humility and sincerity. Aaron

"Why are you polishing that mirror master?" "So I can become enlightened." "You can't become enlightened polishing a mirror." "Yet you believe you can become enlightened by simply sitting? I am just as likely to become enlightened polishing this mirror as you are sitting." There is more to enlightenment then simply meditating. Aaron

I'm sorry, but it actually is true. I've read the Chaung Tzu and Chaung Tzu references self, but never in the sense of Ego as it's found in Buddhist texts. Aaron edit- I don't do studies anymore, but thank you for the offer.

See I never knew that... thanks for sharing. Aaron

No not all Taoists are scholarly professors, but at one time before you could learn Tai Chi or Qigong you had to first learn the basics of Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu. Over time that diminished, especially when martial arts became about fighting rather than cultivation. Steve talked about this elsewhere, there are a whole lot of traditions and teachers that claim to be Taoist, that have no idea what Taoism actually is. Over the centuries these lineages have deviated so far from Taoism that what they represent today is a mere husk of what they originally were. As far as Ch'an Buddhism, the vast majority of temples in the united states are Ch'an Buddhist. Ch'an Buddhism is the foundation of Zen Buddhism and Bodhidharma plays a very important role in Zen teachings. Ch'an is a bit more orthodox than Zen, but the methods of practice are quite similar. Aaron

Wu Wei is not the way to emptiness, Wu Wei arises from Te or virtue. It doesn't arise from mindless sitting or contemplation. The simplest definition is that Wu Wei is harmonious action. There's the old proverb about polishing the mirror. In essence there's more to enlightenment than simply sitting and meditating. In particular it requires compassion towards one's fellows, the recognition that all things are equal, and the capacity to live in harmony with one's surroundings. This is grossly simplified of course, there's much more to it than that. At least this is what Lao Tzu teaches. Aaron

No they don't. The ego was very much a part of Buddhist thought and you don't find mention of it until around the sixth century when Buddhism began to rise in popularity in China. Also ego is not a 'given' in Taoism. There are no mentions of it or the concept anywhere within the TTC or Chuang Tzu, at least not as the Buddhists tend to see it. There are a few passages regarding self, but they don't reference self as being something inherently wrong or that one needs to be done with self, but rather one should 'diminish' one's self in order to lessen their desires, or that knowing one's self is a sign of true strength. This is vastly different from the Buddhist idea of ego. The issue that arose was that the Chinese did not want to give up one or the other (Buddhism or Taoism) so they chose to interpret things in a way that they could be interchanged in both traditions, regardless of whether they actually were interchangeable or the concepts compatible. Today we find it still occurring in threads like this. There's nothing wrong with it, but it's important to make the separation lest the original teachings of Lao Tzu eventually be forgotten and replaced with the hybridization. NOTE- there are temples that teach only Taoism and avoid Buddhist concepts. If I remember correctly Wudang was one of them. Aaron

There wasn't any offense, I just thought it was inappropriate to present this as Taoism, when it clearly wasn't. A lot of people come here and read these threads to learn more about a specific philosophy, if you present to them ideas that aren't part of that school as being foundations of the philosophy, that really misleads them and they fail to learn what they set out to. If you want to justify it and turn the blame on me, I accept it, no misgivings, but I don't think I'm the one at fault here. And another thing to keep in mind, I'm not particularly against the mishmashing of philosophies, I do it with Zen and Tao, but what I am mindful of is explaining what is what in clear and honest terms, so that people don't misconstrue what I'm saying. If you asked the vast majority of Chinese if they are Taoist, Buddhist, or Confucianist, they would claim to be all three. Taoism teaches us that we don't have to believe something just because we've been told it is so. Also there are (literally) thousands of different sects of Taoism, and not all are strictly Taoist in practice, some are heavily influenced by Ch'an, others by Confucianism, others by traditional Chinese practices, and others by all of these combined. I wouldn't tell them they aren't Taoists if they came here and said something that wasn't taught in the Tao Te Ching or Chuang Tzu, but I would mention that it isn't what Lao Tzu or Chuang Tzu taught. In my opinion, whether good or bad, I think Lao Tzu had the clearest understanding of Taoism, with Chuang Tzu running a close second. It is because of this opinion that I tend to come around to these discussions and point these things out. So feel free to come along and say what you want, even call it Taoism, but when you do, you must understand that, as a student of Lao Tzu, I feel the necessity to clarify the relationship it holds to Lao Tzu's teaching. Aaron

You forgot to add the part where it says, "When qingjing 清淨 (clarity and purity) is used, however, there is ample room for considering a Buddhist influence." Hence my argument that what he's teaching isn't Taoist at all, but a hybridization of Buddhism under the guise of Taoism. Aaron