Rara

I like this as it also links to the article re the way we a) have evolved and b ) can continue to evolve! But nothing will ever change the nature of the stomach's decision to feed on itself. Stosh's comment then, about the morals being therefore yet another illusion, is absolutely spot on!

Wow. Fascinating article!

Yes exactly. It has no shame in eating away at the body that holds it and, then itself. What made me realise this was when I went to see a friend's relative at the weekend. He had stomach cancer and I saw him the day before he died. I didn't recognise him - the once 14 stone (roughly 200 lb) man was barely recognisable. His skin wrapped so tightly around his body. He hadn't been able to eat hardly anything in weeks. This is what the body chose for survival. To eat the flesh, whether he wanted to or not.

Personally I would come back to claim what was mine. Mwuhaha!

Lol, end of thread. That was quick. Only one page...that's sort of a relief.

Sure, by all means Some searching the forum still might be debating this though, and therefore an argument to help justify is always healthy. I find the idea "the stomach is a predator that doesn't justify, just eats the body", as a perfect justification in an argument. Please note all, I am not talking about anything else here, like nutrients that the body needs. Merely the characteristic of the stomach and its desire to feed on stuff every few hours!

Oh? Please elaborate... Going on the basis that the stomach eats the person if it isn't fed...

@Icedude To your last response, all cool. Makes more sense to me now where you're coming from. In regards to the mod calling you out on that post, I do find it funny myself. I mean, in a thread just a couple of days ago, you did lecture me on reading TTC again (which btw, I have only recently finished for the 3rd time)

Sinner. That reality TV is terrible I think Proxy is something I will look in to. Makes perfect sense to me!

So what I mean is, how do you know domeone giving you the diploma isn't full if shit? That would be annoying for the actually enlightened to be knighted by a delusional idiot. I had a lecturer at university once that was covering social media marketing. I often found myself teaching him more than he taught me. That was annoying...so I left for another course. Screw that degree, the paper didn't mean a thing at that point.

@Icedude Not sure if you will get to read this but in response, yes, I understand Lao Tzu and Buddha to not have concerned themselves with organisations, rather than opposing the idea of future ones. But Buddha (Siddharta) opposed Brahmin and other ascetics, right? It seems interesting that he was said to actually gain enlightenment, and then make the point of encouraging people to seek truth from within, rather than listening to preachers blindly. But now we hear all sorts of things taught about in Buddhist, and Taoist religion that often become more dogmatic. I think these are the dangers of a lot of people who use titles in the Buddhist and Taoist context. I like Buddha's teachings, and Lao Tzu's. But I think they would be rolling their eyes at a lot of things found in the "religions" people have made for them.

Now we're getting somewhere. In short, I do have my own rejection of spirituality and religion in an oganised form. After much to and throw, I have gone round full circle and realised for myself it is no different from any other religion. It's not that I don't believe in awakenings etc. Don't get me wrong, I have had many experiences of my own. But the idea of pursuing a title is just of no interest to me. Same goes with my uni degree. The piece of paper is nice and all but I would rather just use my reputation of getting the job done well in my every day life. It has proven to be far more useful in the long run. I also do not believe that the Buddha or Lao Tzu's messages (and especially not Chuang Tzu) promoted the idea of having such formal schools. And such schools did develop much later after their supposed existence anyway. Of course, schools always existed but they were different religions at that time. So this is my view, and like you said to me earlier, you are still free to go about your way and believe this is your path. And maybe you are right. But that is not to say that people deterring you is not good advice either. We only give what we have experienced after all.

I appreciate that but that's not what I am particulary asking about. It's simply an observation from when we spoke yesterday in a thread and I just gave up because all you would do is answer one out of every four questions.

What peeps are saying is this. What on earth do you really gain by having someone tell you how awkakened/enlightened you are? How can someone else do this for you? Can you not see the flaws? They will never know anyway because they are NOT you. They would be lying to you and humouring you. But worst of all, they would actually believe they were telling you the truth. All you would gain is a certificate and an ego boost that would get you an illusion of authority. You would walk among charlatans... Wouldn't you just prefer to not be a part of that?

He's good at not answering the actual questions. See other threads too.

I think I have one... "The sage acts without expectation" TTC I believe. I couldn't tell you where though...someone might need to help me out there. So, act without worrying about the outcome. Just do... No particular details of HOW to be mindful are present. I guess this is the point though...otherwise it gets pedantic. Like telling someone how to be happy would be silly. You would need to describe how the lips rise to smile, and that you might even show a lot of tooth. Feel free to laugh from the belly but most importantly, don't forget to feel that emotion of happiness! Yeah, that would be too far.

Haha, thanks for the elaboration. Then I may join you from time to time. I have my moments.

Don't forget also that Jesus was apparently hand-picked.

If it doesn't make sense to you, discard it! Unless you see God with your very own eyes, I can't see how this can be of any use to you. And if you do end up seeing God, is it God or your influenced mind? If this is all true though, so much for free will!

Sometimes, sometimes not. I don't worry about it. I used to flog myself if I drank too much but that made things even worse. So just if the mood fits seem to work for me!

All these threads are the same haha. Useless is good

Now who's irritable?

It is pointless talking with you. Talk about hitting nerves. Again, you chose to highlight ONE part of what I was trying to say in order to to prove whatever point you want to make. But I had better stop mentioning you. I must be attacking or bullying you, whatever I say.

@Exalted The fact that you have said on more than one occasion, to paraphrase... you were surprised to not find many competent Taoists on the forum... I don't doubt that this could be the case - all I'm doing is asking. Simply conversing with you about your views.

Ok sure...and I thought I made it clear that I understood this, but didn't get the manner in which you chose to approach it. Admittedly, there was some more overflow from the other thread we were bickering in also. If I'm not in agreement, and if I perceive something you've written as being sarcastic or in bad taste, it's only natural that I respond the way I seem fit, right? That said, it felt to me that you thought you had the need to get defensive because I was highly opposed to some things you said. Like you didn't wan't the challenge or were "above it" or whatever. You didn't answer most of the things I've been asking and to my mind, you've been quite dismissive...plus, you have made many blind judgements of me! But this is just my opinion. I am unsure whether you can even perceive things any way like I do - so our little debate is probably not worth the energy anyhow.