Is Tao a Living Organism? (Please, Discuss)

[Vajrahridaya]

Surely my creator knows what is best for me. Why should I assume to know better?

 

Your creator?? What do you mean by this, or are you joking?

 

You might have your info confused here.

 

Maybe...

 

But anyway... Buddhism teaches that the potentiality for this universe is based upon the end of the previous universe. We have direct insight into this through meditative contemplation transcending linear thought processes and time and space limitations.

 

Take care!

[Marblehead]

Your creator?? What do you mean by this, or are you joking?

 

Of course I was joking. Actually, that is from a story told by Chuang Tzu to emphasize a point with a tale of three elderly friends discussing what might become of them after they die.

 

Be well!

 

 

But anyway... Buddhism teaches that the potentiality for this universe is based upon the end of the previous universe. We have direct insight into this through meditative contemplation transcending linear thought processes and time and space limitations.

 

You Buddhists sure have some fantastic imaginations.

 

Actually, Dr. Wang, while not directly suggesting it, left open the possibility for parallel universes in his introduction to his translation of the Tao Te Ching "Dynamic Tao".

 

Be well!

[Vajrahridaya]

Of course I was joking. Actually, that is from a story told by Chuang Tzu to emphasize a point with a tale of three elderly friends discussing what might become of them after they die.

 

Be well!

You Buddhists sure have some fantastic imaginations.

 

Actually, Dr. Wang, while not directly suggesting it, left open the possibility for parallel universes in his introduction to his translation of the Tao Te Ching "Dynamic Tao".

 

Be well!

 

I think it's more of a powerful imagination that thinks that reality is contained in the limits of 5 sense perception and the human experience that is popularly accepted as human.

 

Oh how we limit ourselves by perceived and popularly accepted conditions labeled as "reality".

[Marblehead]

I think it's more of a powerful imagination that thinks that reality is contained in the limits of 5 sense perception and the human experience that is popularly accepted as human.

 

Oh how we limit ourselves by perceived and popularly accepted conditions labeled as "reality".

 

You still riding that old horse? You need to put her down. She is, oh, so tired.

 

What? I had to read that again.

 

"... the human experience that is popularly accepted as human."

 

How else is the human experience supposed to be experienced if not as a human? As a platypus?

 

Be well!

[xabir2005]

Edited August 15, 2009 by xabir2005

[xabir2005]

[Vajrahridaya]

You still riding that old horse? You need to put her down. She is, oh, so tired.

 

What? I had to read that again.

 

"... the human experience that is popularly accepted as human."

 

How else is the human experience supposed to be experienced if not as a human? As a platypus?

 

Be well!

 

No, LOL! Yeah, that came out wrong. I mean the human experience that is popularly excepted as the limits of human potential is based on a very limited criteria. What I'm saying is that people have an idea of what it is to be human and it's based on very little knowledge of what a human actually is. Scientists don't really know what a human is, it's a word labeling a mystery. We don't fully know what our potential is on a popular level, only some really advanced yogi's really know our potential. As in, humanities general consensus of what a human is, is built on a very limited premise.

 

I'm trying to structure a sentence that really gets to the point of what I'm actually thinking. Because, I don't really think in words, I think in images and subtler, as in remembered emotions linked to the images and perceptions, contexts, etc. Or, at least I'm aware that I do.

 

It's not an old horse, it's a renewed horse, in every moment, behold, I make all things new! No, just kidding. I don't think it's a horse that has been ridden to the end of it's road yet.

 

I don't believe the lies of solidity that the 5 senses tell us are a way to gauge reality, other than in a practical means to live out the illusion. Science even says that by the time we perceive a feeling or a sight, it's actually passed. That we receive information through our senses more slowly than the speed of life.

 

I'm saying that we are largely conditioned to think of ourselves in a limited way, which in my opinion is really a large scale dumbing down of society.

 

Anyway...

[xabir2005]

There is a state of wu where one becomes a non-descript observer and one may even see themself in the scene. But everything that is seen is of the Manifest nature. I will agree with you that the Mystery is non-descriptive. And that is because the Mystery is "potential", it is not yet Manifested.

I think you are familiar with the experience of "The Witness". One can remain an aloof Witness of everything, even in dream states one can be the watcher of the dream character. I'm not denying this experience but a further insight will be how "The Witness" is really the non-dual witnessing in which the observer and the observed is one.

 

If you read Ken Wilber's Some Writings on Non-duality by Ken Wilber you'll have a better understanding on the progression from Witness to Non-Dual.

 

When Non-Dual is experienced... everything is the mystery.

Edited August 15, 2009 by xabir2005

[Marblehead]

Hi Xabir2005,

 

Nice post. I have some issues though. (How wooda' thunk?)

 

There is no reason for the manifest other than that manifestation can't help but manifest when the conditions are there. Rain can't help but fall when the dark clouds have gathered.

 

I agree with this as well as with all the supporting comments you made.

 

This does not mean that I am the tree or the mountain, but rather, the mountain have the same taste as yourself.

 

This doesn't work in my brain.

 

But neither are you an entity within your head looking out.

 

I do agree with this.

 

... reality has always been non-dual.

 

I don't agree with this though. I know, my Taoist friends. It is said that only after man identified beauty as beauty was duality created. But even without man, in the Manifest duality exists. There is up and down, there is north and south and nearly all other animals understand the difference between the two.

 

However, your use of the word 'reality' may cause me to state my response differently.

 

... does not mean you no longer distinguish between conventions, ...

 

That was cute and I'm going to let you get away with it. Hehehe.

 

I don't like the quote and don't accept the concept as being valid.

 

When you experience non-dual, it is very very clear how reality is just like this. You will have no doubts about this. You don't have to imagine yourself as anything. There is just That. It is a tacit realization... without the 'self', there is just Obviousness and Aliveness throughout!

 

That's nice. I don't accept it but it is nice none-the-less.

 

So you see. I am stuck in this body. Some people consider it a problem because it is said that if we had no body there wouldn't be anything to worry us. But I have this body. Or maybe this body has me. I have no idea if I will still have realization after I die because I have never died yet.

 

So I will just enjoy this wonderful manifest existence that I have and try to have as many pleasurable experiences as I can have and try to avoid all hardships and pain.

 

But I will make this promise to everyone here - after I die and I still have realization and if there is a way, I will come back and tell y'all what it's like to be dead.

 

Be well!

 

Okay. Time for this old man to go to bed. To be continued ...

Edited August 15, 2009 by Marblehead

[xabir2005]

Edited August 15, 2009 by xabir2005

[Vajrahridaya]

'Marblehead' date='Aug 15 2009,

 

This does not mean that I am the tree or the mountain, but rather, the mountain have the same taste as yourself.

 

This doesn't work in my brain.

 

He means one taste as in they taste of freedom, they are both translucent and not-solid. One experiences everythings conventionality and ultimateness simultaneously. The wu and the yo of life are simultaneous.

 

 

... reality has always been non-dual.

 

I don't agree with this though. I know, my Taoist friends. It is said that only after man identified beauty as beauty was duality created. But even without man, in the Manifest duality exists. There is up and down, there is north and south and nearly all other animals understand the difference between the two.

 

He doesn't mean conventionally, or relativity does not exist. It does, it's just seen through right to the Tao of it all. The experience of things becomes anchored in the unspoken clarity of perception without crutches.

 

When you experience non-dual, it is very very clear how reality is just like this. You will have no doubts about this. You don't have to imagine yourself as anything. There is just That. It is a tacit realization... without the 'self', there is just Obviousness and Aliveness throughout!

 

That's nice. I don't accept it but it is nice none-the-less.

 

What about just floating through without having to explain anything to yourself? What is the experience of things then? Even the inner arisings if arising without reified identity?

 

So you see. I am stuck in this body. Some people consider it a problem because it is said that if we had no body there wouldn't be anything to worry us. But I have this body. Or maybe this body has me. I have no idea if I will still have realization after I die because I have never died yet.

 

The body is not a problem, it's our perception of the body or how we interpret the signals that come through it and are in it that can pose a seeming problem. The human vessel is an amazing function of the cosmos.

 

So I will just enjoy this wonderful manifest existence that I have and try to have as many pleasurable experiences as I can have and try to avoid all hardships and pain.

 

So, attachment and aversion is part of being one with the Tao?

But I will make this promise to everyone here - after I die and I still have realization and if there is a way, I will come back and tell y'all what it's like to be dead.

 

Be well!

 

Okay. Time for this old man to go to bed. To be continued ...

 

Death is generally not like that, and generally those that die don't have these abilities and most people who know people who have died don't have the abilities to hear even if you were trying to say something.

[Marblehead]

Hi Vajrahridaya,

 

Just wanted to let you know that I have read your post. I will comment to this though:

 

So, attachment and aversion is part of being one with the Tao?

 

Aversion, in many cases yes.

 

Attachment, no. But wait! There's more! We need to know when to stop.

 

In all honesty, I have found peace and contentment in my life. There is no reason for me to search any longer. It is time for me to walk the talk.

 

I will be posting Taoist writings in various threads and will always remain open for discussion of those posts.

 

Be well!

[ralis]

Marblehead,

 

What would you like to discuss?

 

 

ralis

[Marblehead]

Hi Ralis,

 

I would prefer something pertaining to Taoist philosophy. Would that be fair?

 

I'm not sure - Do you consider yourself a Buddhist?

 

If so then perhaps we could compare the two belief systems based on one of the chapters of the Tao Te Ching?

 

I don't want to ignore other belief systems but I find much more value in discussing what they have in common as opposed to how they contrast.

 

If you like I could start a new thread with a chapter from TTC or you could pick one to discuss.

 

Let me know.

 

Be well!

[xabir2005]

Edited August 23, 2009 by xabir2005

[Marblehead]

I would only point out that many, if not all the authors referenced above are also Buddhist scholars therefore it should not be surprising to see their Buddhist thoughts in anything that they write.

 

It is my opinion that the only way one can view true Taoist concepts is to study the writings of those who wrote prior to the introduction of Buddhism into China.

 

After that you are getting only someone else's interpretation - many of which are very far from the true essence of Taoism. 'Translation' and 'interpretation' are two totally different animals.

 

That is why my understandings are based on the TTC and Chuang Tzu.

 

Be well!

[xabir2005]

I would only point out that many, if not all the authors referenced above are also Buddhist scholars therefore it should not be surprising to see their Buddhist thoughts in anything that they write.

 

It is my opinion that the only way one can view true Taoist concepts is to study the writings of those who wrote prior to the introduction of Buddhism into China.

 

After that you are getting only someone else's interpretation - many of which are very far from the true essence of Taoism. 'Translation' and 'interpretation' are two totally different animals.

 

That is why my understandings are based on the TTC and Chuang Tzu.

 

Be well!

I don't think Dr Tan is biased, he does not claim to be Buddhist as far as I know.

 

Just take a look at his variety of articles: http://www.kktanhp.com/

 

From Western Mysticism, to Buddhism, Taoism, Hinduism, etc.

 

It's a fact there are similarities between Buddhism and Taoism... of course, I'm not saying it's all the same, and Dr Tan himself have pointed out on the differences between Taoist and Buddhist's view on life, suffering, meditation, etc.

 

p.s. Dr Tan is truly experienced (and my friend Thusness thinks Dr Tan's experience and insight has deepened in recent years). An interesting fact about Dr Tan... he is one of the most famous meditation teacher in Singapore (my country), and is also the meditation teacher of our current Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong.

Edited August 23, 2009 by xabir2005

[rene]

 

After that you are getting only someone else's interpretation - many of which are very far from the true essence of Taoism. 'Translation' and 'interpretation' are two totally different animals.

 

That is why my understandings are based on the TTC and Chuang Tzu.

 

 

Here are 100 renditions of Chapter 1 of the TTC. It's easy to spot those influenced by other paths. Along with Buddhists, Jesuits were early translators as well.

 

Unless you read the original in Chinese - every translation you read is someone else's interpretation.

[Marblehead]

Here are 100 renditions of Chapter 1 of the TTC. It's easy to spot those influenced by other paths. Along with Buddhists, Jesuits were early translators as well.

 

Unless you read the original in Chinese - every translation you read is someone else's interpretation.

 

Exactly. I do not have the ability to read the original Chinese dialect that the TTC was written in so I must rely on others. I have heard from someone who does have command of the Chinese dialect that the TTC was written in that there are even issues with Henricks' translation but it is still none-the-less considered amongst the best translations.

 

I have even seen translation into vulgar American English. I had many belly laughs while reading one.

 

Be well!

[rene]

Exactly. I do not have the ability to read the original Chinese dialect that the TTC was written in so I must rely on others. I have heard from someone who does have command of the Chinese dialect that the TTC was written in that there are even issues with Henricks' translation but it is still none-the-less considered amongst the best translations.

 

I have even seen translation into vulgar American English. I had many belly laughs while reading one.

 

Be well!

 

You mean the one Hogan did ?

 

It's an excellent interpretation. I like that Hogan doesn't pretend that it's an accurate "translation" - but rather catches the essence of it all - and he did so rather well, imo - and the fact that it's on the Terebess site speaks volumes.

 

From that link, you can back up to the index - to see which other TTC authors made that particular cut. Lots of other reference material on Terebess, for those interested. I enjoy the sections on tea.

[Marblehead]

You mean the one Hogan did ?

 

It's an excellent interpretation. I like that Hogan doesn't pretend that it's an accurate "translation" - but rather catches the essence of it all - and he did so rather well, imo - and the fact that it's on the Terebess site speaks volumes.

 

From that link, you can back up to the index - to see which other TTC authors made that particular cut. Lots of other reference material on Terebess, for those interested. I enjoy the sections on tea.

 

Yep. That is one of them. There is another one, I don't remember where it is but it is on the internet although it is not in the Terebess collection, that is even more vulgar than that. He uses a lot of what most people would consider to be curse words.

 

Terebess is a fantastic site!

 

Be well!