dawei

When Descartes said, "I think therefore I am"... the existentialist Sartre rightly improved on it as: "I think therefore I am a thinking thing"... but this is not about either, IMO... it is regurgitating the same message over and over; If you distinguish this or that, you place boundaries on it. (Dao has no concept of this or that and therefore has not boundary). ZZ then subtlety mocks the Confucian ideas of Ren and Yi as confused (without true discrimination) and then moves outside of philosophical ideas of riding on the Qi of clouds... so that is where we cannot talk anymore

It is not about the buyer's nor the inventor's side ; It is NOT this and it is NOT that. If you pick a side then you fall into boundaries. There is no "rolodex" since it is just a 'name'... sometimes discussions fall into boundaries of what can be said or not said, and then we can know there is no seeing clearly even though the boundary is set fast in front of everyone else's eyes

Exactly ! By this association, Wind and Fire is Spirit and Light ? I take the TYSS Shen Ming (神明) as more of a compound or joined meaning. Wind and Fire are not. The main reason is that the six Qi are the 'invading' Qi to the body; what causes sickness, illness, and death to the body. TYSS is not trying to write a medical manifesto like the document I reference. But I generally like your thoughts here and if we had more time we could run with the wind and fire on this (or the spirit and light on that).

Not sure this is enough proof that Leizi was the inventor of the 5 Phase theory. He does a basic association that most early sages do to Yin and Yang and Nature. The "Return" is not the issue in TYSS; it is the transformation process (again, think 5 Phase theory is really 5 transformations). Kun changing to Peng is a transformation, thus it is not the Great One but the process of the Great One... thus said... DAO IS NOT the Great one.. Dao is the process... The Great One stands above it all.

Funny how you want to quote a modern take on the idiom instead of sticking to ZZ: "equal fashioning of Heaven"... There is NOTHING indecisive for ZZ. The Monkey may be indecisive and it's a pity that man follows the monkey path... and not ZZ... No wonder you said you have no idea what the chapter is about... but you have so many explanations.

yes, that is my very point. If one puts themself on high and tells all the rest what they can talk about or not... it means we can only go by the 'practice' of one and that is where the philosophy stops... it stops very short, may I add...

I'll look at your idea further.

Yes... a purely modern spin on a classic idiom... and I thought we were supposed to talk ZZ all this time

I want to say it here so it does not detract from the general thread sections... Thanks for your candor and discussion. I truly appreciate it.

Maybe based on our western approach... but we are talking ancient china here... Our mind and muscles are prejudice to a 'way'... it follows what it thinks is 'right'... based on past constructs. This they can both be the same; This is That.

I kind of like that... but it is intrinsically conscious of something... on an unconscious level... but I won't push it too far... three or four in the morning?

Truly good... This (how) is That (why) !

Your prohibited from talking about anything outside of basic philosophy... so don't bring in such alchemy ideas here As you know, this is a known proverb: 朝三暮四 (three in the morning, four in the evening)... better known as 'playing fast and loose'. The monkey's have a fixed mind (predetermined mind as Legge says) and are unhappy with this idea; but ZZ turns it around and offers 4 in the morning and 3 at night; nothing gained or lose in count; just that ZZ shows "this is that"; no real change here but he can play both sides without losing meaning (distinction without distinction). 是之謂兩行 - This is called, walking the dual path (True Way).

I don't like the opening line where 'Xin' is translated as "Mind". Lin Yutang opens it as: "Now if we are to be guided by our prejudices, who shall be without a guide?" I tend to like this a little more since he treats the compound 'Chengxin' as "prejudice" and doesn't refer to teachers specifically; I almost want to use the word 'model' as in principle, at the end instead. He touches on the spirit (or divine nature) of Yu (founder of Xia), a paradox of Hui Shi (or Master Hui) who is from the School of Names, as well he mentions the Ru (Confucian scholars) and Mo (Mohist) as quarreling about right and wrong. Even our speech is similar to the birds but their speech (chirp) is not in distinction but in the moment. He makes quite a point here using the PAST to explain the present... an important concept in chinese thought on 'truth' or the [following the] true Way. ZZ truly shows tit-for-tat (this for that): The Way is obscured through prescription; words through pronouncement. Ergo, the Way (non-distinction) over Words (distinction). I don't like the translation of "light" for 'Ming'. Legge seems to be trying to hard to get to the meaning. This is an inner knowing where distinction is neither this nor that.

I think that the essential point is missed in the two provided translations. I think Legge actually got the early reference of the 'soul' correctly in his translation (When we sleep, the soul communicates with (what is external to us); when we awake, the body is set free); This is what the 'soul' (Hun) does... But later Legge literally translates "true Ruler" instead of trying to figure out what the True Ruler is... so he never ties the later section back to the soul as Lin Yutang does here: "But for these emotions I should not be. Yet but for me, there would be no one to feel them. So far we can go; but we do not know by whose order they come into play. It would seem there was a soul; but the clue to its existence is wanting. That it functions is credible enough, though we cannot see its form. Perhaps it has inner reality without outward form. "Take the human body with all its hundred bones, nine external cavities and six internal organs, all complete. Which part of it should I love best? Do you not cherish all equally, or have you a preference? Do these organs serve as servants of someone else? Since servants cannot govern themselves, do they serve as master and servants by turn? Surely there is some soul which controls them all. "But whether or not we ascertain what is the true nature of this soul, it matters but little to the soul itself. For once coming into this material shape, it runs its course until it is exhausted." Why does Yutang tie back the true Ruler to the Soul? One has to know the idea behind Hun: The Baihutang stated: What do the words hun and [po] mean? Hun expresses the idea of continuous propagation ([zhuan] 傳), unresting flight; it is the qi of the Lesser Yang, working in man in an external direction, and it governs the nature (or the instincts, [xing] 性).

Since this is a creation myth, it may be interesting to loosely join it to the Pangu myth where Chaos is an egg created by the perfect balance of Yin and Yang. When Pangu emerged he set about to separate the two creating Earth (Yin) and Sky (Yang). Thus, I see the ZZ characters as: Chaos - hundun - whole and complete unity; the summation of all Shu -Ruler of South Sea - Yang - Abrupt, quick, lightning Hu - Ruler of the North Sea - Yin - Sudden, thunder In the Songs of Chu, Shu and Hu are juxtaposed as a single term as if to reflect that they are really two sides of the same coin (or egg). So I see them as probably archtypes of Yin and Yang, reflecting the parts which make up the whole (chaos).

Seems Dogma again wants to control the free speech here. Lienshan has a point but lets suppress it for the sake of control... carry onward in the discussion.

You have very strong boundaries like western religion; What one can and cannot do or talk about. It smells of dogma on some level. How do you describe God to an easterner? I feel you need to let go of some chains on the discussion.

Yes, this is true because the six listed here are not correct. The answer is Huang Di Nei Jing Su Wen, in what is known as the Five Periods and Six Qi (Wu Yun Liu Qi). Five Periods: 1. Soil 2. Metal 3. Water 4. Wood 5. Fire Six Qi: 1. Wind 2. Cold 3. Summer Heat 4. Dryness 5. Dampness 6. Fire These correspond to the Stems and Branches theory but the main idea is that we are talking about an ANNUAL process of climate change, thus these periods are about 60 days each.

I would go with Kun (昆) as insect; it keeps with the idea of the smallness of origin of Kun (鯤) as fish-egg. Thus, Kun-Peng is the transformation from a fish to a bird; a flying-fish Sages are more often shown as flying but here we have the smallest fish-egg transformed to possibly a soaring sage-bird I'm trying to catch up on the threads so won't write too much in past threads.

I think that is what happened with the juxtaposed word in the title, 'Taoism' too... people have different thoughts on even what that means. Steve pointed out the very issue I would of addressed, and I agree with: So while some focus on why people are using the term karma wrong I would say we're using the word Taoist wrong [as well then]. But Steve has said all the points I would raise; and Manitou just states above my point about Yin and Yang.

To me, Dao is a karmic process; Yin and Yang fully explain it and we see it in life. It might be interesting to see where the DDJ talks in karmic cycles but I am not a big fan of believing Lao Zi had all the answers. Whether Taoist teach an exact idea that the Buddhist try to expand it as, I am not sure. Within Medical Qigong, which combines the medical, physical, metaphysical, energetic, and spiritual aspects there are clear tendencies towards karmic ideas.

I don't have a problem with the structure of the line in the MWD. That "Sheng" gets added later which is understandable since Sheng Ren is mentioned earlier; but what may be an interesting issue is that so is "Ren" as to 'other people' (contrasted to the Sage). So one could equate the last 'Ren' back to Sheng Ren or to the general [other] people (Ren). I think there is reason to not have used Wu Wei because it is not trying to describe Wu Wei from the [often poorly mentioned] non-action side, but from the actual action side. Chapter 8 uses a physical example of water for the same phrase 而不爭. Water flows but not to strive or contend as an original intention or outcome. Also interesting is that the last character here is supposedly a hand pulling a bow... another interesting line to pursue in terms of tying it back to the opening line of Chapter 77.

It's hard to describe. He first scans with his hands more like a qigong master but then he uses his hands very physically with range of motion of the limb while manipulating the bone. He literally forces the bone back into place but its done in a technique taught down through his family. If anyone has been to a chiropractor you know they crack a spine area and leave it at that. His technique may involve a pressured crack but after that he then begins to move the bone back into its place and he stays with it until it moves back. He did this with one in my upper spine area as well which I have had cracked dozens of times; but if it needs to be done dozens of times then cracking it is not really doing anything. His goal is to get the bone back into its place, not just crack it. He also checks to see if the adjacent bones are really causing the issue which is what he found in my lower back. Everyone has said that my L5 slippage is the problem. He disagreed and said it was the L3-L4 had pushed my L4 outward and the L5 slipped inward. So he worked outside the L3-L4 and then my tailbone which was 'twisting'; then moved towards the main slippage. The amazing thing isn't just his ability to move bones but that he can know the problem without any internal examination or xray; he simply 'feels it' and probably can 'see' it the way some spiritual levels have attained; but he uses physical force when it comes to actually effecting the correction.