Stosh

You have some control, of some of your thoughts, some of the time ,. conditioning by the external circumstances is however very potent stuff Can you dwell on a thing until you are angrier ? can you remind yourself to chill out because you are dealing with a delicate matter? I think anyone does this stuff automatically. But to what extent one does this -short of self hypnosis,, I dont know, but I imagine it hard to teach oneself the beauty of a smell you dont like . , and dont think if I want to entirely abandon what is clearly adaptive learning Wanting to override it ?,, one should consider why they want to. Whether the center of ones soul is love and good .. I suspect that to be biased view along the lines of neo-daoism , that is to say buddhist influence . since good is a subjective notion and loving requires some dichotomies of thought but I cant really discount hydrogens assessment on it

Very good , yep it is. (Except for the part about wu wei , and disrespecting private lives) , but otherwise fairly sound!

Im not sure who is the wise and who not in this scenario but If Cp wants to live well rather than long , thats cool I believe I was taking from Feng's translation and actually was saying TTC supports him on that point. Lately I have been aiming at introducing more of the lines as translated to lessen the weight of my personal take , on things Essentially to consider the tome in light of real time discussion more. I dont think that would hurt any. Its a bit of a grim perspective to think about ones existance in terms of stuck and pathetic etc whereas living well ,,, thats a brighter view -worthy of endorsement, as opposed to spending ones life trying to avoid the inevitable. The weapon quote is easy yes? So there you are. More than you needed to hear I suppose.

1) dunno , I never looked into it , I also dont care what the tradition appears to be , since I can think for myself fine. 2)Though I have read Fengs translation and portions of Hendricks, I can think for myself just fine. 3) there is the manifest and the implied making the whole , that linguists concentrate on the lingo they have at hand isnt surprising , its just fine , they can choose or not choose to speculate about the implied. 4) Tao is a term already in use which I find accurate to define the situation any of us finds ourselves in , and as such, it clearly exists , and has little to do with imaginary parents. The rules of Tao are nothing like the ten commandments because one cant break the rules of the Eternal Tao. 5) never read the Tao of pooh , so I dont want to comment on it , so you are making another straw man argument 6) Please describe the lack of bias of the TTC that you feel exists, this would be the one productive aspect of this interchange. 7) Did I talk of humility ? I may have ,but you'd have to find me the place where I did- so I can understand your context. 8) I listed two attitudes that children often have towards authority , not just rebellion. 9) There is nothing preventing me restricting me from investigating any tradition that I might choose to and I dont see race - ethnicity - or culture as a barrier that should not be crossed ,, in fact, yours regarding it ,is that type of thinking which I think should be exposed to the light of day (and then squashed for the harmony of everyone.)

Oh, they sell the pods too? I thought it only came in dust form. Ill look for it.

That is so wrong, Ill just leave you to wallow in it

All things are purely what ever they are. The idea that homogenaity equals some completeness of virtue called purity Is based on a bias that things 'should' be homogenous which they never are .. remember? its yin and yang which complete a whole. Unless you are just talking about everything , which has no bias, and therefore points no direction to virtue. And in that case we have no disagreement

Regardless of the blatant ethnocentric westbashing Ill explain it further to you Cp, because I still like you. Tao has no bias , so there is no such thing as virtue to it. Humans have the bias in that they-we want to live and do things and so , though Tao sets the ground rules of what may be done it is up to humans to choose which things we will do. Lao wrote a pamphlet on virtue so he proposed that which he believed made the soundest sense -for humans to adopt as preferred behavior. The implied inverse ,,which finishes the scope of all that may be done.. is the NORMAL way that folks approach the world. One only understands this if they are willing to both- test the veracity of what Lao was saying , and give it a fair shake down. When children are taught things by their elders , they dont do a very good job at either of those things since they are either trying to suck-up or rebel. Which is just part of why so many go so confused for so long. Its really a shame. You should help your people learn about their inheritance rather than denounce the clearer understanding of foreign minds.

I think we do. Have a great evening

Yes his bias was to win and profit by it even brutally , Im not saying he was a fuzzy warm loving human The upside of his teachings are that one should think long and hard about the costs of getting into a conflict rather than inflict waste-bloodshed on yourself by rash action. But ,,, Where is our diagreement CD ? I dont see enough difference to expend energy objecting to what you are saying and I dont see where you find fault with my response either ??? Youre just going to have to throw me a bone before I sally forth to attack from the high ground. Then youre supposed to grudgingly give ground ,bleeding my strengh and opening up my supply lines. and when the moment is ripe ...youre supposed to cut off my head,( or you screw up and I get to rout your forces.)

You ask this of me- that I dont see gathering allies as being a wise move ? My point was that when folks all speak their different minds , espouse their different ideas , and get bent out of shape over invalidating points , , they are not waging a Tsun tsu stye war of gathering allies and operating for measurable gain. Kissing up- isnt the general rule here , speaking WHATEVER to gain allies -isnt the rule here . Instead The stuff that folks are espousing they generally do believe, and they are willing to suffer 'sticking their necks out' in public debate! to have themselves be known. It instead appears a stategy-less emotional uphill charge into withering cannon fire with little hope of gain To bestow ones understanding at a risk of invalidation is a gift being offered , (all the time expecting-knowing that it can and will be used against you) It is not warlike . Your post indicates that we are actually largely in agreement but One doesnt really want to divide their psychologial energies either ..conflicts of any type equate IMO ,, I certainly wouldnt be the first person to extrapolate Tsun's work to other fields of endeavor. I thought Tsun HIMSELF said that all of life was characterized by conflict so I see no correction I should have applied regarding my application of the philosophy but I couldve misread parts. Or used better wording

I think he is saying that wu wei is to be seen more as a thing undone ( as in the path not taken--- rather than an active thing one isnt doing non-participation rather than avoidance ) But Im not sure either

Moringa may have two times the protein of yogurt ! SO regarding protein that means one can eat two GRAMS worth of yogurt or one gram worth of ...DRY moringa LEAVES!! Yum Most pills are on the order of one to two grams , It is rather obvious that moringa is not a significant amount of protein taken as a pill,,( any more than eating a two gram chicken pill per day would be.) Though the vitamin value may be of greater potential impact ,, I havent seen any study describing the bioavailability of the powder ,( since the cell walls are cellulose, its important to know) The great advantage of the plants is their hardy nature (because they can grow in really crappy places) but I havent yet seen anything regarding the productivity per acre... (so the supplement you-we may eat , may be the only tiny morsel of food some poor folks didnt get to consume) An interesting addition to the worldwide palate which requires further investigation before I would consider jumping on a bandwagon about.

Is an anvil empty? Raw materials can be considered empty - they have undefined- unfinished form and function but useful tools are full , they have defined form -characteristics and are employed .. but then a tool represents potential for raw materials to become product , and so the tool is also empty. Swapping the word potential for empty would render much argument Empty IMO

The wise man does not seek to prolong his life weapons are instuments of fear , they are not a wise mans tools

No thesis , is not the same as nonimplicative negation since one has vector- duality and the other does not

Absolutely !!! Obvious as all heck, since 'He' says so in the very first chapter. as in Any dao that can dao is not a constant dao or similar phraseology Laos dao is the TTC and its totally biased to yin as virtue His Dao can only be used as a guide because it is biased If he wrote a dao that anything goes , it wouldnt point anybody anywhere Well , I cant say if he INTRODUCED it but he certainly employs it, I was reading" introduced" from the perspective that the TTC largely gives Taoism its current form.

Right now Im thinking that Madhyamaka analysis is flawed in at least four critical places , which you can potentially correct me on. One, That its adherents dont take a position other than negation , ( the said negation not being a positon) Negation is still a position relative to a point being made by others, that it affirms nothing other than the difference of views, still is an assertion -affirmative point. (vague as it is) Once I choose put on a ghi, and step in a ring, and stand in opposition, Im a combatant just like the other guy, choosing to stand there and be beat up, doesnt constitute winning the fight,( it might constitute winning a loss though) Two ,I disaree that it is the only logical view , to say that- because my ideas are born of my senses and my senses are flawed , that the things I sensed dont exist. One can still posit that my sensation is subjective but is responding to external objectively 'real' things.( it just says that my subjective experience isnt conclusively 'real') Three , like others have pointed out , once you claim you dont exist , you have undermined every argument you make ..since you cant make an argument if you dont exist. and fourthly , Though I like yall well enough , and some of the ideas youall keep .. I still think you abandon the philosophy you profess (as soon as you need to eat or pass water or sleep or go to work or pay a bill..... and so on.) Be all that as it may , It has all been discussed since long ago and the repercussions are pretty much nil relative to mundane requirements of living , which subjectively I opine is the place one can benificently apply their brainpower.

If thats aimed at me at all ;I would say I agree alot with it , except the part about 'intolerability' , I find it quite tolerable for me to eat meats ( but I might not say so if I were the meats - but Im not,,,yet... the worms will get me at some point )

Ok , Im listening , ( but I am thinking that he hasnt said all habits have to be gone for good, just that one for the temporary moment lets go of Monkey -mind) Then what do you think its about?

I think he said that one can find emptiness but the inertia of their habits obscures the fact of it.

Gather ye rosebuds whilst ye may at least one translation of the ttc says And similarly, to include charity and duty to one's neighbor among the functions of man's organism, is not true Tao I still dont see the passage though that says that 'one should do the least harm they can' harm is subjective perception - one mans loss is another mans gain It is Artiface if it requires an injunction , isnt it?

While I have no idea whether anyone is really out to get you ,But If you find yourself getting all fired up , and then be having to backtrack , a voluntary break ( involuntary or not) makes sense. Youve contributed quite a lot over a long time and can rest on what youve already tried to communicate.. but I hope at some point you will continue here refreshed.

Well then- I can say I comfortably agree with what you have said , I read in the TTC admonishment regarding interfering with the affairs of others. It makes sense because they will likely just you as a crutch, or someone to blame, or just ignore that which they would ignore hearing from themselves. It makes sense to just leave folks be ,, they often ask for it -to be left be- by name ! as in the phrase " mind your own business" etc and it is often nice to just have somebody listen without tossing their own two cents in, (the goal being to communicate but not really for the other person to try to resolve the issue ) On the other hand its quite obvious that anyone posting here about some difficulty or other , IS going to be inundated with opinions regarding said difficulty . ( and so they have no leg to stand on -if they get such feedback ) If one wants to be seen as wise , and have folks go to them for advice , the ttc says one should pretty much keep their mouth shut and say stuff that really doesnt address the issue,,, , Ironically , wanting to be seen as wise is personal bias revolving around ego ! -which doesnt set one towards finding peace from within ( independent of external factors). So the TTC doesnt really tell you you should either try or not try to be wise , nor does it tell you to keep quiet about other folks business ! It does outline the relationship between giving and getting advice , or being seen as wise vs foolish. .. So one takes ones pick.

Yeah I think I agree K , but I am not sure I understand how you mean that. Blue seems to be doing the right things to address his situation , but claims to be unhappy. Depressed folks tend to take care of themselves with less diligence, withdraw from society, cry easily and hide their emotions. The idea that the connection between ones internal state is predicated on ones external circumstance , is largely a loose one. The earth is neither heaven or hell except for the thinking that makes it so... as in Hamlet . We know little about Blue besides what he has written , so all I would try is to present considerations that may or may not suit him to consider. (any tao that can tao is not a constant tao) Since he appears to be looking for feedback - I consider it invited comment.