Stigweard

我相信事情的起因有不同的看法和意见

Dunno ... Know any good books written by a woman

I hear what both adept and The Way Is Virtue are saying. There is no doubt that dilutions and distortions have occurred because of the commercialism that is running rampant in Chinese Taoism. Priests in robes are more tourist guides then serious practitioners. But can we truly say its good or bad? In Australia here we were about to lose one of our native species, the Bilby. In order to create a preservation program a massive promotional campaign was launched. The Bilby was commercialized and tourist sites were created close to where the Bilby lives. They even unsuccessfully tried to change the Easter Bunny to the Easter Bilby The result though is that the elevated public interest attracted people who cared enough about saving the Bilby from extinction to invest major amounts of money to create the first Bilby preservation reserve. The Bilby's future existence now has hope. Traditional Taoism is not to far removed from the plight of the Bilby. The accent of Buddhism, Christianity, Islam, and the China's new love-affair with commercialism has seen Taoism become more and more marginalized. Communist control has meant that, until recently, only a very limited number of students can be in any one school; the abbots and teachers can only have so many pupils. This same restriction hasn't been imposed as much on Christianity and Buddhism which has seen these two religions flourish and grow whilst China's own indigenous tradition has stagnated. So commercialism is now serving to bring new popularity to Taoism. Sure it doesn't come without challenges and pitfalls, but it is merely where the Tao of it all is at the moment. Neither good nor bad. Case in point with Master Yuan Xiu Gang. I had the great good fortune of spending a morning training with him and his students at his academy at Wudangshan. Through commercialism the academy gives foreign students an opportunity to come and train full time in traditional Taoist martial arts and practices (some of the students I met there were a year or so into their 5 year apprenticeship). And yes he is also soon to tour with the Wudang performance troupe. These students have the opportunity of a lifetime to learn and become ambassadors of Taoism. Which means more people in the world will have, through them, an opportunity to come into contact with this great tradition. And also, without the forces of commercialism, the TaoBums wouldn't be here and we wouldn't be having this conversation. So I think we just need to learn to take the good with the bad.

OK I see what you have done What are the implications of this from your point of view?

What do you mean exactly?

Just so I can engage your query properly, can please you elaborate some more on what you are speaking of?

Bump

First class!! Wonderful documentary with quality interviews. Love the imagery. Makes me want to go back to Wudangshan ... never did get to the top of that mountain Thank you!

Yup good point. I'll explain my thinking and we'll see if I need to make adjustments. I do see your point ... "They cannot be eternally named" is clumsy phraseology. I was trying to stay as close as I could to the literal "Not eternal name". The meaning I am trying to convey is that names are only temporary -- the object of the name will outlive the name. For example the concept of "name" at one point in history was called "nomen", but now it's called "name". In one thousand years the concept of designating a word to something may be an entirely different word. Therefore a descriptive of something can't be eternal, so something eternal like Dao eludes description. So perhaps something simple like: Though names may be given, Designations are only temporary. ??

Chapter One -- Embodying Dao Descriptions of Dao, Cannot be the eternal Dao. Though names may be given, They cannot be eternal names. The unknown is Heaven and Earth's inception; The known begets the many separate things. Therefore, enduring innocence Comes from the subtle view; Incessant desire for things Comes from the superficial view. Both “unknown” and “known”, The “subtle” and the “superficial”, Are still only descriptions, Of the subtle mystery. Subtle beyond subtlety, The gateway of all wonders. Original Text: Translator's Notes and Commentary: ^ Back to index ^

Quite a lot of questions there Are there mantras in taoism, just like buddhism? Yes in Taoism we have what's called Fu Jyeo -- Secret Talismanic Characters, Words and also Invocations. Is there any similarity to the two belief systems with regard to mantras? Sorry I can't say because I am not well versed enough in Buddhist mantras. Are mantras religious or spiritual? Both. Are mantras more spiritual based? Define "more spiritual based". Where are the forces of the words coming from- the actual deities of the religions or just universal type forces? Intent -- Your intent, the intent of the "author" of the chant, and yes, also the intent that has gathered around the particular tradition. It is said that "ascended masters" of a tradition may be attracted to those engaging in the same practices they did before "moving on". Certain invocations also attune to universal forces. Are they words that are intended to resonate with neurochemicals in the brain in some form? I am quite sure the ancients weren't thinking about "neurochemicals in the brain" To my understanding it is about the Law of Universal Energy Response -- the vibration you hold within yourself "attracts" a mirrored response from the Universe. I know that, when I hear or chant various mantras--you can feel their effectiveness immediately..and it seems amazing...im just wondering where this feeling is coming from...is it coming from within or an external force or energy? If I said it was just coming from within I would be wrong. If I said it was just coming from external forces I would be wrong. Find out for yourself it seems that u dont have to be a taoist to be able to chant these mantras or for them to be effective..or maybe you do? The more you resonate with the tradition of the chant the more effective it will be. Hope this helps

And you pressure test the hell out of your style so you don't drift off into fairy land

LOL ... sorry for not replying. I most certainly am interested

From Wiki: Religiosity and intelligence: In 2008, controversial intelligence researcher Helmuth Nyborg examined whether IQ relates to denomination and income, using representative data from the National Longitudinal Study of Youth, which includes intelligence tests on a representative selection of American youth, where they have also replied to questions about religious belief. His results, published in the scientific journal Intelligence demonstrated that on average, Atheists scored 1.95 IQ points higher than Agnostics, 3.82 points higher than Liberal persuasions, and 5.89 IQ points higher than Dogmatic persuasions. "I'm not saying that believing in God makes you dumber. My hypothesis is that people with a low intelligence are more easily drawn toward religions, which give answers that are certain, while people with a high intelligence are more skeptical," says the professor. Also review: Religiousness, Spirituality, and IQ: Are They Linked? ~~~ Considering Taoism has an indistinct line between being a religion and a philosophy, I would be interested in exploring the link between level of education and Taoist practitioners? Your comments and discussion would also be welcomed and appreciated

Hold up there chappy A couple of points here ... firstly I am not trying to establish emptiness nor D.O. as some sort of "stand alone" truth that has inherent existence. They are a process of phenomena, I got it But, as a process not as things, they are both constant and eternal. Is life constantly morphing from one thing to another? Of course they are and because they are then they can't really be called things, i.e. independent entities existing on their own, and so they are inherently empty. But the process is still both constant and eternal. And please would you stop with the "This is how you think" approach. I am sure I had a go at you earlier because of it. I have not said "Tao is everything" in the context that you are saying so quit that crap please (The thing is though that you can't say either "Tao is everything" nor "Tao is not everything". In fact any sentence that starts with "Tao is" is fundamentally incorrect ... oh the joys ) And this comment: "It's the way of things, but it's not things." That my friend approximates Tao. Tao means Way, so anytime you misconstrue otherwise please remind yourself of this. And if you hear someone trying to make out Tao is a thing then please you have my full endorsement to remind them as well Equally: "Tao is the process of how things work, but the process is empty, thus Tao does not truly exist, but neither does Tao truly not exist." I am going to assume that you haven't had extensive training in Taoist meditation because your statement here is incorrect. Please be careful making such broad comments. Anyway back to my little ditty: "Humanity dependently originates with Earth, Earth dependently originates with the Universe, The Universe dependently originates with Buddha-nature. Endless cycle without inherent substance or selfhood, Dynamic creativity without origin or self."

Beautiful ... thank you. It is a very important clarification that you have made. Also beautiful ... thank you. So, returning to my little game, can we say: Humanity dependently originates with Earth, Earth dependently originates with the Universe, The Universe dependently originates with Buddha-nature.

Yes it can be interesting to see them at work.

You are entirely welcome to view it however you wish.

And as far as the results of the poll go ... yep the No vote wins. I will let the TaoBums gods know

Scotty get your facts right before throwing accusations around ... if you are going to quote me then quote me properly or not at all. I said it was "interesting" and to me and how I use the phrase it is purely neutral. To be truthful it was a light-hearted comment without malice. Read into it however you want to as you obviously have. But I certainly do most sincerely apologize that my usage of words allowed for misinterpretations.

No that's quite OK ... could you please expand on your reasoning? So are you saying that Life, the Universe and Everything dependently originates with consciousness?