sree

You are using inflammatory language. Please don't do that. I have no intention of hurting anyone but that doesn't mean my words are not hurtful to those who find them offensive. If I have denigrated you directly, please cite the instance and give me the opportunity to set things right. Accusing me of offending Allah and using that as an excuse to drive me out of town is not very nice.

I know what you are getting at. So, why don't you point to an instance where either wisdom or insight is laid out in the Tao Te Ching? I have not been discussing the Tao Te Ching at all. All I have been doing is grappling with the ideas others like you here, the commentators and speakers for the eternal Tao, have derived from the Tao Te Ching. You know what I mean?

Taoism is a cult comprising disparate superstitions that appeal to the those who yearn to be misled. It's pop-culture, like Pepsi or Fanta, marketed on the platform of the Tao Te Ching which is a powerful brand that has nothing to do with the Chinese Classic.

You are making a big assumption - that I have not studied the Tao Te Ching thoroughly. I guess it depends on what you mean by "thoroughly". Everyone has his own opinion of what it means and reckons he is the expert on the Tao Te Ching. Western scientists never question each other's competence when they cooperate on a research project. Incompetence is self-evident and it doesn't take long for the fake scientist to be exposed when he shows inability at grasping the subject matter let alone participate in the inquiry. So, why don't we Chinese scholars do what western scientists do - conduct ourselves professionally and not question each others' technical competence at the outset? Let's proceed with our discussion and allow incompetence, if any, to reveal the quack. If it is not alchemy, spiritualism, iron-crotch, martial art and Chi Kung, then what practical knowledge was specifically written into the Tao Te Ching?

It is true, Mr Chi. You may not agree but that is a different matter. Two western scientists, if they disagree, they don't argue, they discuss the matter until the difference is resolved and the one correct conclusion is arrived at, together. And Chinese scholars should do that also - examine together the different point of views - and discover the one and only truth. I maintain that there is no practical knowledge to be gotten from the Tao Te Ching. So, what practical knowledge does the Tao Te Ching holds? Alchemy? Tai Chi? Initiation as an Immortal? Meditation? What?

Wisdom is not written in the Tao Te Ching. Books contain knowledge, none of them contain wisdom. You are a smart guy, Jeff. Surely, you know that. There is no practical knowledge to be gotten from the Tao Te Ching, not even by the Chinese intellectual.

Getting back to topic means different things to different people. In my opinion, we were always on topic. To some people, discussing the Tao Te Ching seems to be text-involved and academic in nature. To me, the Tao Te Ching is a commentary on practical life where the real test of wisdom is. This demands honesty because it calls one to task with regard to one's conduct as an individual and as a society. This topic of the Way (道 i.e.Tao) of Living is relevant for studying and discussing our values and beliefs, be it East or West, Occidental or Oriental, and tear them apart with brutal honesty. Some may think that human life as it is - in America or China or Nigeria or Iran - is the Way and to knock it would be insensitive and arrogant and must be stopped because people are going to get upset. So what? Should we bow to the mullahs, the Communist Party, the guardians of the tribe? To my mind, the Tao Te Ching has more to offer than merely serving as an inspirational guide for the martial artist, spiritualist, alchemist and, last but not least, the atheist. Why won't you allow this Chinese Classic to be discussed by those for whom it was written?

Good stuff, Dawei. I was going to stop my discussion and delete my response to Marblehead because no one seemed to want to deal with the truth. Here is my contribution to the China story. Your information is wrong. China holds only $1.1 trillion down from $1.4 trillion last year. Granted, China holds more US debt than all private American holdings but the amount is still less than 8% of total US public debt. Wal-Mart doesn’t own China. It’s the other way round. 75% of the low-cost stuff Wal-Mart sells comes from China. To supply the world’s retailers like Wal-Mart, Home Depot, Carrefour, Tesco and IKEA with its low-priced products, China has to manufacture low-cost at the expense of the environment and her starving populace while guys like you complain about pollution and human rights as you slurp up the dirt cheap goods made in China. Even the goddam nails and screws at Ace Hardware come from China.

Ok, man. I know you guys have had enough. Don't get upset. This conversation was getting a bit too heavy and I know you fellas like it light and easy. So, just forget it. Ok? No hard feelings.

Is he doing something for you? He is a medium, a ghost rider. And you said you are an atheist, someone who regards mediums as nuts.

Well, the Qi and Gravity are a couple of fools. And abstaining from being human is not a positive choice. It's a realization that comes upon me when I see how real these two puppies are in your life; as real as the dollar in your hand as long as you believe in it.

I don't know more. But I do understand what knowledge is. That's more than I can say for the western scientist. Let me illustrate. At a technical seminar, an expert gave a talk on secondary recovery of crude oil. She was a pretty PhD in her late twenties from Exxonmobil's research facility at Houston. During coffee break, I went up to her and said, "Your presentation was impressive. Would you say that you have a good grasp of the fundamentals of engineering?" She looked at me quizzically with a her blue eyes and replied, "Yeah. I would." I continued,"The three fundamental units in dimensional analysis are mass, length and time. Can you tell me what is time?" She answered, "I am an engineer, not a philosopher." I argued, "But I am talking engineering, not philosophy. Time is a fundamental quantifiable dimension. What is it?" She put down her coffee cup and turned away. You may be elderly, Marblehead, but you are not daft. Can you see what I am getting at? Is putting a man on the moon supposed to be smart? I understand they are heading for Mars. The moon as a satellite a quarter of a million miles away from Earth does exist as an illusion that has sucked up an enormous amount of resource and energy gone to waste. Talk about conspicuous consumption. You are now $16 trillion in the hole and we are not even counting the massive debt loads of states, municipalities, private individuals plus the mountain of toxic assets of the last economic crisis sitting in the balance sheets of financial institutions. . As a life form, I don't think we have anything to be proud of. Why are you being defensive? As creatures on the planet, don't you think we are perverse? You are right, I don't. Right now, I am abstaining from being human.

Proven what? Physical bodies attract each other with a force proportional to their masses? Well, that's one way of seeing it. Just because you choose to see it that way doesn't mean that it is the truth. Even if everyone sees it your way, that still doesn't prove that it is the truth.

What will come to me, Aaron? Did you do all that you recommended and it came to you? Ok, so you can't lay it out and I have to go into that dark hole to find out for myself like Aladdin going down for the magic lamp. Do you realize how corny that is? This is not 600 B.C. This is 2013. The stock market is rallying, the S&P is at a five year high, and I am not buying it. So, what's the deal, Aaron? Regular religion is not good enough and we need something exotic?

Well, you said this: I wonder why you are so sure about your assertions above? You talk as one who "knows". That's why I asked if you know what you are talking about? I don't mean any disrespect towards you as a person. This is a discussion and I am asking you an honest question.

Why do you think I made a boo boo when I said gravity, like Chi, is a superstition? Chi can be easily kicked aside in any community of science because they have no respect. But gravity is the rock upon which the Church of western science is built. No Chinaman would dare mock it. And here I am, kicking gravity aside as a superstition. And who among the people in this forum would dare take me on to debate the truth about gravity? Don't bow to western science, Mr Chi. It's going nowhere and leading mankind down to Hell. This is why westerners are looking East for salvation. We are not the sick man of Asia as Bruce Lee said in his role as 霍元甲 in the movie, "Fist of Fury". Don't let me down, Mr Chi.

So, you think gravity keeps our feet on the ground? How do you know? The Bible tells you so?

Come on, Aaron. Are we two shysters, one talking to another on Patpong Street in Bangkok's night market? Are we peddling Taoist charms to western tourists? I asked you a direct question. Don't play games. Ok?

I was merely stating Marblehead's belief. If this is your belief, which is western science, how on earth can man (人) ever be one with heaven (天人合一) ? You either embrace western scientific belief or you seek the truth. You cannot have both. I don't believe in Chi anymore than I believe in gravity. These are all man-made superstitions

Have you experienced it?

What's wrong with the statement, Mr Chi?

Hey man, looks like you are forming a judgment about me already. And that's ok. It's a natural intelligent impulse because you need to know who you dealing with. In the wild, animals judge all the time and quick or they're dead because they have a split second to scram to safety. How come you take so long to respond? Anyway, I didn't say Lennon was a fraud, you did. I was just taking your lead when you said Lennon wasn't living the life he was imagining. He wasn't just an entertainer which he was when he started out. Towards the end, he was carrying on like Che Guevara.

Do you realize that your belief – no consciousness outside the brain – was formulated when consciousness was looking at the brain and concluded that it came out from the brain? How about this belief that Chi flows with your breath through your nose to light up consciousness which cuts out when breathing stops? I know. Materialism is just an ideology. You can only fake it just so far. It’s the same with Buddhism. That’s precisely my point. When you are one with the Way (道 i.e.Tao) you can exercise that option and terminate for the common good. Who said anything about forcing? I am talking about the Way (道 i.e.Tao) of living. Old age is not natural and not different from living on artificial life-support. Have you seen any old antelope stricken with arthritis stumbling along trying to keep up with the herd prancing away from the cheetahs? Old age is unnatural. It is infirmity, the price we pay for the fear of death. You reckon that it is good fortune to get old and feeble? There is everything wrong with it like osteoporosis, macular degeneration, shingles, dental bone loss, slow reflex, hearing impairment, short-term memory, poor sense of balance ...and I am not even talking about any of the bad stuff. They all contribute to a diminished quality of life. Why even put up with the pains of old age if you don’t have to? Are you afraid of breaking the Seventh Commandment: Thou shalt not kill? I am not talking about death as a fact of life. I am talking about timely termination of the body the way we take a strike jet fighter out of commission before it becomes a liability to the strike force. There are no weak lions in the pride. I wonder why you won’t agree with reason. A materialist would at least be materialistic. Your concern about the body’s mode of disposal is a lot of fuss about nothing. You said we should be honest. I wonder if you are being honest with yourself. Love? Now, you are being sentimental. The Way (道 i.e.Tao) is impartial, says Chapter 5. Even a western materialist will find Chinese philosophy tough shit. Perhaps, deep down you are a mushy Christian. (Not many in this forum can stomach this kind of discussion. Not even a heartless Chinese immortal. Stay down, don't reply if you want to end it.)

That cycle may be complete for the body. What about you? And I don't mean Marblehead (or whatever), the person you are masquerading as far as you can remember. Do you believe that you are a consciousness generated by the brain and when it checks out, it switches the consciousness off and you disappear like a movie show while the other two movies (your Christian and Buddhist friends) play on in the cineplex? The point is, there is no other side. If you were to fall asleep, there is the other side when you wake up and check the clock to see how long you had slept. In the case of death, there is no "after it happens" for you. Since you are a materialist with no sentimental hang-ups, what do you say to a practical way to end it? The body is like a can of corned beef with a sell-by date. After the sell-by date, the contents in the can starts to gradually deteriorate until it becomes rotten. Similarly, after the sell-by date, the body's physiology loses integrity at the onset of old age and gradually weakens. Do you think it is sensible to shut the body down at it's sell-by date before the onset of old-age to avoid the unnecessary medical expenses and, more importantly, the misery of physical illness and mental anxiety? A man still looks good and fit at 70 if he lives an active and healthy life. That's a good sell-by date. Naturally, if you don't junk the can of corned beef then, so to speak, and wait for the contents to get rotten, all the horrible stuff is likely to start happening to the body until the guy keels over at 85. Checking out at the sell-by date, instead of the rotten date, seems like the Way (道 i.e.Tao). What do you say? I am thinking about this for myself even though my sell-by date is still a long way off. The idea of having a nice farewell dinner with family and friends, after taking care of all matters, before checking out instead of an untimely macabre wake and funeral, sounds right. Do you see anything wrong?

Are you implying that Chapter 3 is meant for the thief?