Stigweard

I will pitch in to say that the judgement that I had earlier reserved has now been made clear. I very much think that this forum is a good idea. Somewhere where some good solid intent and earnest explorative discussion can take place. I believe it will provide and much needed vibratory input to the overall site.

Interesting Mal. Firstly Sean asked me that if I took the the Gatekeeper role who would I want with me and I told him the only person I would trust as co-position was you. I also followed this up saying that I wasn't interested then in stepping back into the Mod team, just as I am not interested in doing so now. Secondly, "throwing away" is entirely the wrong connotation and I am surprised to hear that you have attached this implication with it. Apech shared his view that 6mths is too short and I agree that a longer term is more appropriate and I agree with his POV. Perhaps "refreshing" moderators is a much more accurate intent then the negative connotation you have attached. As to the "other suggestion", I would be interested to hear it.

It's always good to discover the sub-text of a person yes?

Damn!!! I wanna star too !!!!

Whilst I respect your right to your say, I do think this is an extreme and unfair view of the Mod Team. Sean is making a quid from the advertising here, no problem there. Is there an intentional effort to protect his advertisers? Not from my experience or observation, though again I respect your perception on it. Just remember that you have contributed to this little cesspool quite a bit yourself.

I respect your comments, and thank you for contributing to the discussion

Thanks for that. I am quite certain others would disagree, and they probably have good reasons for doing so. But thankyou all the same.

I wonder if you realize how much this comment means to me? Thank you my friend!!!

I agree with the "let it play" notion

Classic over-generalization. I am allowing for the possibility. Absolutely, and at the time I felt it was a fair question and noticed that I did indeed have attachments to the position. Once I recognized this my decision was pretty clear.

There you are!!! Answer found ... next topic??

Are we objects or subjects? Perhaps we are objects when we are being perceived by others and subjects when we are the ones perceiving. So maybe we are both simultaneously. ???

What is love? Easily answered.... Love is my wife putting up with all my shit and her still being happy enough to wash my underwear.

Let you know? LOL expect a postcard ... hehehe!! There's a further implication to what I posted here: http://www.thetaobums.com/index.php?/topic/19930-is-anything-really-objective/page__view__findpost__p__283306 The way I see it, what we hold as reality is only a case of Chinese whispers, meaning that when we are conceptually describing reality we are several steps removed from reality. Phenomena >>> perception >>> conceptual filtering/censuring >>> conceptual description The conceptual description stage is just a paltry echo or a memory of the phenomena hence past. Thus for the most part we are only remembering reality not living it. For most people the only time they are truly brought into synch with reality is during some extreme event ... pain, pleasure, extreme emotion. In my opinion, which probably counts for very little, the ultimāre of Daoism is about training one's awareness to catch up reality and exist purely in the emerging phenomena stage, the continuous unfolding now of Dao.

A friend of mine once said that talking about your Qi is like talking about your willie (erm cept for the lasses I guess ). Perhaps he is right??

What is really real? I believe we are hopelessly inept to answer that effectively. Out of the glorious multi-spectrum of Universal emanations we are biologically only able to perceive a pitifully small band-width; our eyes can only see so much colour, our ears can only hear so much sound etc. Then this atrophied sensory data is filtered, censured, and distorted through our fixed beliefs of what is and is not real. We then add a final insult to reality by abstracting what we believe to be true into the matrix of words and description. How can this final product we are sharing with each other, this coughed up fur-ball of written beliefs, possibly even approximate what is real? What is real? Perhaps only in the pureness of singular awareness can this be known.

Nothing to add, just wanna share in the groovy vibe Carry on

Exactly my point Which leads to Laozi's statemens: He who knows, speaks not. He who speaks, knows not. Also: Descriptions of Dao, Cannot be the eternal Dao. Though names may be given, They cannot be eternal names. In essence, all things are only temporarily named. Thus: "Every written truth will someday be untruth." The more you attach to your concepts of truth, the more you distance yourself from the experience of truth. Oh and ROFL ... you talk about disinformation and then quote Carols Castenada like an credible source and refer to Don Juan as if a real person. Now THERE is an oxymoron for you