Sky Dancers

[Stigweard]

[Apech]

Speaking only for myself, I am still content with energy, Chi, with yin and yang being the polarities of this energy.

 

To me, light is just one of the aspects of energy.

 

This is the point. Either elevating the feminine or elevating the masculine is to deny or forget perhaps that they are just two sides of a coin ... two aspects of energy if you like.

 

We can value both of course ... in the world and in ourselves (since no-one is completely yin or yang) ... but to somehow idolize the female is a mistake.

 

I don't agree that women are superior because they can have sex more than 3 times in a row or whatever ... that is a ridiculous argument ... and I don't agree that women are more creative but that maybe creativity for a man and for a woman is a different process. True creativity involves male and female or course.

 

In GENERAL* I am with Scotty a lot of the way on this one.

 

*

[Vmarco]

Speaking only for myself, I am still content with energy, Chi, with yin and yang being the polarities of this energy.

 

To me, light is just one of the aspects of energy.

 

Actually,...energy is just one aspect of Light. Light is Tao. WuJi = Undivided Light, TaiJi = Divided Light (electrodynamic Field).

 

V

[VCraigP]

Apech

 

I support Stig in this.

 

It's a question of balance.

 

Stigs point. Things are AFU.

Stig's idea. Things are AFU because of excess Yang.

 

Actually I see it as false yang. ie, if yin is suppressed Yang will appear overpowering in comparison while Yang itself may actually deficient, the suppression of Yin makes Yang dominant, ie holding more power in comparison.

 

If Yang were to relax the suppression of Yin this may lead to a new level of flourishing Yin AND Yang, ie a higher order energetic state in which both are stronger through allowing true nature to be expressed.

 

Stig's points about Womens power (perceived or real) are relevant anthropologically when one seeks to understand how we arrived where we are today. IMO it has been fairly well established that women were seen as Stig has expressed it, and that Men did in fact in many societies respond to this perceived power by overcontrolling it. This includes what has become modern western society.

 

Also, IMO, to look at the sexes in modern society and see their roles as balanced is really wrong. Just as it is wrong to view the modern world and see it as balanced.

 

Koyaanisqatsi

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sps6C9u7ras

 

Craig

[Vmarco]

 

The dark, cool element in life is water ☵. It seeks the lowest places.

 

The light, warm element in life is fire ☲. It seeks the highest places.

 

Fire naturally rises and water naturally sinks therefore the two elements are moving away from each other and thus harmony and union is not achieved.

 

Here, with fire rising from underneath and water sinking from above, the two primordial forces of Yin and Yang meet, have union and creation follows.

 

 

 

Water is not Yin because it's dark and cool,...Water is Yin because it's moving away from form, integration, pressure increase, converging, towards DARK/COOL of unforming, disintegration, pressure decrease, diverge. Your Daoist principles are discussing human perceptions of objects, and denying the Tao of that object.

 

Fire does not seek a higher place,...there is no fire in the higher place,...fire is a process of the rhythmic balanced interchange of yang (heat) becoming Yin (cold). Yang is always known by is centripetal motion, while Yin is always known by its centrafugal motion.

 

Yang and Yin are two aspects of the same moving thing. Yin descends for an apple blossom to form, that form is Yang, Yang winds crystallized light into an apple, the apple falls, hits you on the head, and Stig says, "Ah, gravity", and walks away telling everyone of his discovery.

 

But, if Stig would have stayed under the tree, he would see Yin become predomenant, by decaying the apple, who expanded, unforming, disintegrating, pressure decrease rises up, to complete the cycle,...thus seeing Tao as Tao.

 

Fire does not naturally rise, the heat of the fire rises, expanding into cold. Water does not compress, it is in the process of diverging from compressed Yang form into Yin's vapor. Again, you're not seeing the rhythmic cyclical nature of the moving Tao.

 

Your Daoist principle order of things may have been great for the times it was interpeted for,...but its missing a recognition of the Tao, from the Tao's point of view. The Tao's point of view must be the same as the Quantum view, or Light's point of view, or the Tao would be untrue,...and the Tao is not untrue.

 

So, if the Tao is not untrue, then there is something untrue or misguided about your interpretation of the Tao, because your interpretation is not harmoneous with the nature of nature.

 

Although I understand that Daoist principles have evolved into a philosophy and religion, the Tao is neither a philososphy nor religion. You have been arguing for a philosophy,...while I'm arguing Tao.

 

Moving, incandescent objects are borne from moving, dark, objectless space. All incandescent Yang is surrounded by Yin's dark. Where is it ever true that light conquers dark? There is no amount of light that can illuminate all dark, for in Duality, darkness always surrounds it. Rudolph Steiner once said that light was the antipathic aspect of polarity, whereas darkness is its sympathic expression.

 

The Patriarchy wants to deny the rhythmic balanced interchange of nature, by indoctrinating ideas like light conquering dark. They don't want to know that all phenomena, through the nurturance of darkness, dies into light. Polarity's Yang light does not hold within itself the potential to birth, for it is a result already spawned through Yin's darkness.

 

A prevalant human construct suggests that light is good and dark is evil,...not because it is, but because to understand the truth would wreck the fragile fabric of society's patriarchial brewed philosophical and religious beliefs they cling to for their identity.

 

From what I'm reading, your ideas are not supporting a Matriarchy point of view, but a patrifocal view of a matriarchy point of view.

 

 

V

[Enishi]

Reversing which gender is "on top" isn't going to fix anything, it just creates a different form of oppression. In an environment like that, the oppressed group is better off distancing itself from the aggressor.

Edited August 31, 2011 by Enishi

[Marblehead]

Actually,...energy is just one aspect of Light. Light is Tao. WuJi = Undivided Light, TaiJi = Divided Light (electrodynamic Field).

 

V

 

Hehehe. You have your ball rolling. I'm not going to get in the way.

[Vmarco]

So you see Vmarco, you don't need to try and rearrange Yin and Yang away from it's traditional use because, as you can see here, the traditional use actually supports the idea of matriarchy.

 

 

For the most part, this has been a most interesting thread, considering the content of post #1 (and #3). Stig is arguing for Yin as Eve,...while I'm arguing Yin as Lilith.

 

If you cannot see the difference, than you cannot see the difference.

 

V

[konchog uma]

In many, many ways, Yin is hidden to the cerebral-centric human. We may say water is Yin,...but really, water is just an early stage of Yang Form returning to Yin formlessness. Actually, from my point of view, Light is the best teacher of Tao,...and as nothing about us is not Light, it's quite useful.

 

yin and yang are indeed found in all things. i think instead of classifying this thing "yin" and that thing "yang" its more beneficial to say that a thing is yin because _______ and yang because ________.

 

if you are comparing directly water to ice for example, you would say that water is yang to ice's yin, or of course, in some ways, yin to ice's yang (hardness for example). in the case of fire one has a pretty clear yin/yang pair, but in most cases things go both ways. that is to say things always embody both, as you pointed out.

 

i used to look at things and say "oh thats yin" or "oh thats yang" which is good in the beginning... but now if i identify a yinness about something i look then for its yangness.

 

just 2c, a healthy reminder...

Edited August 31, 2011 by anamatva

[Apech]

Apech

 

I support Stig in this.

 

It's a question of balance.

 

Stigs point. Things are AFU.

Stig's idea. Things are AFU because of excess Yang.

 

Actually I see it as false yang. ie, if yin is suppressed Yang will appear overpowering in comparison while Yang itself may actually deficient, the suppression of Yin makes Yang dominant, ie holding more power in comparison.

 

If Yang were to relax the suppression of Yin this may lead to a new level of flourishing Yin AND Yang, ie a higher order energetic state in which both are stronger through allowing true nature to be expressed.

 

Stig's points about Womens power (perceived or real) are relevant anthropologically when one seeks to understand how we arrived where we are today. IMO it has been fairly well established that women were seen as Stig has expressed it, and that Men did in fact in many societies respond to this perceived power by overcontrolling it. This includes what has become modern western society.

 

Also, IMO, to look at the sexes in modern society and see their roles as balanced is really wrong. Just as it is wrong to view the modern world and see it as balanced.

 

Koyaanisqatsi

http://www.youtube.c...h?v=Sps6C9u7ras

 

Craig

 

Sure Stig has a point. Things are FU to a degree and probably always have been. the anthropological theory is well known ... but I have to say it is illustrative at best. Women have been suppressed for a long time in some societies that is also true. The causes of this I think are not exactly as referenced though.

 

I think the core is power relations not gender relations. For instance the word 'man' actually originally meant someone who managed ... usually land. So in the Domesday Book the 'man' the person who managed the land was sometimes female.

 

I think the new age ... if we are in one is one of equality and the answer is not to elevate the woman into a goddess (or the male into a god) but to say we are all individuals whether stressed female or male.

 

Can I also ask all those quoting lists of goddesses names - why are you so selective! Why Isis particularly ... why not Nephthys, Hathor, Wadjet, Neith, Serqet .... ditto for other cultures.

 

... by the way as this looks like the beginning of another GenderWarz ... I hope we are not heading back to ....

 

 

THE PIT :lol:

[konchog uma]

just like cellular division, and daoist cosmology, one divides into two. but nothing stops there. 2 divides into 4, in cells, making a neat little tetrahedron, and in cosmology, adding "both" and "neither" to the mix. 4 divides into 8 and i think the bagua has that covered, and before you know it you have 64 but my point isnt numerological, because it never stops. if you had the time you could find a way of dividing things sensibly into five million parts and classifying them thusly. but you don't. annyway my point is that things don't stop with yin and yang, or with the ideas of both and neither. life is fluid and nothing is binary without being quadriary<sp> and on and on, so all this philosophical debate is nice but... you guys are never gonna figure it out hahahahha

[Birch]

"I think the core is power relations not gender relations. For instance the word 'man' actually originally meant someone who managed ... usually land"

 

 

Finally :-)

[ChiDragon]

Well, according to the TTC Tao gave birth to One.

 

As far as I know female is the only sex capable of giving birth so if we want to personify Tao, Tao is Woman.

 

Yes, Chapters 6 and 42 will support your statement. Tao can be an endless reproductive female.

Edited August 31, 2011 by ChiDragon

[Vmarco]

yin and yang are indeed found in all things. i think instead of classifying this thing "yin" and that thing "yang" its more beneficial to say that a thing is yin because _______ and yang because ________.

 

if you are comparing directly water to ice for example, you would say that water is yang to ice's yin, or of course, in some ways, yin to ice's yang (hardness for example). in the case of fire one has a pretty clear yin/yang pair, but in most cases things go both ways. that is to say things always embody both, as you pointed out.

 

i used to look at things and say "oh thats yin" or "oh thats yang" which is good in the beginning... but now if i identify a yinness about something i look then for its yangness.

 

just 2c, a healthy reminder...

 

Those are excellent points. Everything is both Yang and Yin,...what we are perceiving is the stage of "rhythmic balanced interchange." No,...water is not yang to ices's yin,...but the other way around. Ice, albeit water, is solid, thus Yang-ish, while water is moving away from solidity, thus Yin-ish. As you said "in some ways, yin to ice's yang (hardness for example)."

 

There is always a preponderance of either Yang or Yin,...they are NEVER in balance,...their "rhythmic balanced interchange" is in balance. Any balance between two opposites is their dissolution.

 

It is of the most importance to recognize the difference between Yang and Yin, because it through Yin that the Gateless Gate to understanding Who we are is uncovered. Yang is Yin, and Yin is Yang, just as Form is Empty, and Empty is Form.

 

If we are only seeing Form and the Yin-ness of Form (Eve), we are recognizing Yin as herself (Lilith). Adam and Eve are not equals within a "rhythmic balanced interchange." Adam and Lilith are the Yang and Yin. But as Lilith was demonized, so to was the Yin of Tao demonized, and apparently unrecognized by contemporary Daoist principles.

 

V

[Marblehead]

but... you guys are never gonna figure it out hahahahha

 

Caused a chuckle. Thanks.

Edited August 31, 2011 by Marblehead

[Marblehead]

There is always a preponderance of either Yang or Yin,...they are NEVER in balance,...their "rhythmic balanced interchange" is in balance. Any balance between two opposites is their dissolution.

 

Darn! I was hoping to see the word "harmony" in that paragraph. Oh well.

 

... so too was the Yin of Tao demonized, and apparently unrecognized by contemporary Daoist principles.

 

V

 

You can exclude me from that group who demonized Yin.

[Stigweard]

Apech

 

I support Stig in this.

 

It's a question of balance.

 

Stigs point. Things are AFU.

Stig's idea. Things are AFU because of excess Yang.

 

Actually I see it as false yang. ie, if yin is suppressed Yang will appear overpowering in comparison while Yang itself may actually deficient, the suppression of Yin makes Yang dominant, ie holding more power in comparison.

 

If Yang were to relax the suppression of Yin this may lead to a new level of flourishing Yin AND Yang, ie a higher order energetic state in which both are stronger through allowing true nature to be expressed.

 

Stig's points about Womens power (perceived or real) are relevant anthropologically when one seeks to understand how we arrived where we are today. IMO it has been fairly well established that women were seen as Stig has expressed it, and that Men did in fact in many societies respond to this perceived power by overcontrolling it. This includes what has become modern western society.

 

Also, IMO, to look at the sexes in modern society and see their roles as balanced is really wrong. Just as it is wrong to view the modern world and see it as balanced.

 

Koyaanisqatsi

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sps6C9u7ras

 

Craig

What? You mean my little rant actually made sense to someone? Who woulda thought?

 

Thanks matey

[Stigweard]

Water is not Yin because it's dark and cool,...Water is Yin because it's moving away from form, integration, pressure increase, converging, towards DARK/COOL of unforming, disintegration, pressure decrease, diverge. Your Daoist principles are discussing human perceptions of objects, and denying the Tao of that object.

 

Fire does not seek a higher place,...there is no fire in the higher place,...fire is a process of the rhythmic balanced interchange of yang (heat) becoming Yin (cold). Yang is always known by is centripetal motion, while Yin is always known by its centrafugal motion.

 

Yang and Yin are two aspects of the same moving thing. Yin descends for an apple blossom to form, that form is Yang, Yang winds crystallized light into an apple, the apple falls, hits you on the head, and Stig says, "Ah, gravity", and walks away telling everyone of his discovery.

 

But, if Stig would have stayed under the tree, he would see Yin become predomenant, by decaying the apple, who expanded, unforming, disintegrating, pressure decrease rises up, to complete the cycle,...thus seeing Tao as Tao.

 

Fire does not naturally rise, the heat of the fire rises, expanding into cold. Water does not compress, it is in the process of diverging from compressed Yang form into Yin's vapor. Again, you're not seeing the rhythmic cyclical nature of the moving Tao.

 

Your Daoist principle order of things may have been great for the times it was interpeted for,...but its missing a recognition of the Tao, from the Tao's point of view. The Tao's point of view must be the same as the Quantum view, or Light's point of view, or the Tao would be untrue,...and the Tao is not untrue.

 

So, if the Tao is not untrue, then there is something untrue or misguided about your interpretation of the Tao, because your interpretation is not harmoneous with the nature of nature.

 

Although I understand that Daoist principles have evolved into a philosophy and religion, the Tao is neither a philososphy nor religion. You have been arguing for a philosophy,...while I'm arguing Tao.

 

Moving, incandescent objects are borne from moving, dark, objectless space. All incandescent Yang is surrounded by Yin's dark. Where is it ever true that light conquers dark? There is no amount of light that can illuminate all dark, for in Duality, darkness always surrounds it. Rudolph Steiner once said that light was the antipathic aspect of polarity, whereas darkness is its sympathic expression.

 

The Patriarchy wants to deny the rhythmic balanced interchange of nature, by indoctrinating ideas like light conquering dark. They don't want to know that all phenomena, through the nurturance of darkness, dies into light. Polarity's Yang light does not hold within itself the potential to birth, for it is a result already spawned through Yin's darkness.

 

A prevalant human construct suggests that light is good and dark is evil,...not because it is, but because to understand the truth would wreck the fragile fabric of society's patriarchial brewed philosophical and religious beliefs they cling to for their identity.

 

From what I'm reading, your ideas are not supporting a Matriarchy point of view, but a patrifocal view of a matriarchy point of view.

 

 

V

Vmarco,

 

I understand that you have cottoned on this great new theory of Yin and Yang. That Yin is insubstantial and unformed and Yang is substantial and formed. That it is based on your conceptual ideas of what you think is the nature of Light. Cool and groovy.

 

But matey Daoism is about raw nature pure and simple. It's about trees, waterways, and wind in your hair. It's about sunrises and moonsets and marvelling at the turning of the stars.

 

It's simple nature ... ziran.

 

When Yin and Yang formalized I can be quite certain they didn't carry on with all these conceptual abstractions. They saw a sunny side of a hill and said "yang", and saw the shady side of a hill and said "yin". And it was used to help folks get more into the groove of simple nature.

 

It's got diddly-squat to do about matriarchal and patriarchal structures of society, though the nature of society no doubt arose out of this worldview. It's just nature and our relationship with it.

 

Personally I think you need to go camping, get out in the wild, light a fire, go swimming, climb a mountain. Go experience what originally inspired the notion of Yin and Yang.

 

If you did you would actually notice that fire burns upwards, its why woods folks tell you not to have your house on top of a wooded hill. And it tends to be rather bright and rather hot as well.

 

And lo and behold water flows downwards seeking the lowest places and it is lovely and cool and dark.

 

So quite frankly, sod off with you trying to say that this natural view is somehow a patriarchal view which is also somehow morally corrupt. You are welcome to have your pseudo-scientific view of life, but every time you jump on this forum and try and denigrate the Daoist view of Yin and Yang, I will be there to shove your view back down your throat.

 

For now tho, I am going to go enjoy my morning union with Yin and Yang with some good old fashion breathing and Taijiquan.

 

[doc benway]

[konchog uma]

Those are excellent points. Everything is both Yang and Yin,...what we are perceiving is the stage of "rhythmic balanced interchange." No,...water is not yang to ices's yin,...but the other way around. Ice, albeit water, is solid, thus Yang-ish, while water is moving away from solidity, thus Yin-ish. As you said "in some ways, yin to ice's yang (hardness for example)."

 

well water is warmer than ice.

 

so thats yang.

 

If we are only seeing Form and the Yin-ness of Form (Eve), we are recognizing Yin as herself (Lilith). Adam and Eve are not equals within a "rhythmic balanced interchange." Adam and Lilith are the Yang and Yin. But as Lilith was demonized, so to was the Yin of Tao demonized, and apparently unrecognized by contemporary Daoist p

 

well, i think your mixing metaphors, trying to bring eve and lilith into a discussion of daoist principles. theres little reason to believe anything in the bible literally, even the first 5 books. lots of metaphor, lots of regurgitation of other culture's mythologies, i don't know if lilith or eve really existed at all, and i'm inclined to stay out of the discussion. i think i already said my contribution with the 'everything is both is some way' bit.

[Stigweard]

I have a name for this, it's called "making shit up."

I really think that you have some interesting and possibly valuable insights at times.

I share your passion and position regarding the feminine and goddess principles - it's a sore loss for some cultures but I think it's being rejuvenated.

 

But you have this compulsion to make shit up just to conform to your theories.

Yin and Yang have formal definitions.

If you want to reverse them, fine, use different words.

Otherwise you're simply corrupting the meaning of specific labels gratuitously.

 

We could equally reverse the meaning of masculine and feminine.

Let's do that now, shall we?

 

 

It's equally valid to say there is never a preponderance of either Yang or Yin... they are ALWAYS in balance. From a holistic view.

Imbalance and interchange are relative and local phenomenon only.

I am hearing you Steve, and obviously I agree with you.

 

[Marblehead]

I am hearing you Steve, and obviously I agree with you.

 

 

You guys remind me of me. Hehehe.

 

Good thing I am someone else now.

[Stigweard]

You guys remind me of me. Hehehe.

 

Good thing I am someone else now.

Bahahah!!! Take it as a compliment to who you once were. Doesn't say anything for who you are now though

 

[Vmarco]

But you have this compulsion to make shit up just to conform to your theories.

Yin and Yang have formal definitions.

If you want to reverse them, fine, use different words.

Otherwise you're simply corrupting the meaning of specific labels gratuitously.

 

 

It's equally valid to say there is never a preponderance of either Yang or Yin... they are ALWAYS in balance. From a holistic view.

Imbalance and interchange are relative and local phenomenon only.

 

Yes, Yang and Yin can have formal definitions, and thus synomynous attributes. It is you making shit up, and attempting reverse fundamental laws of nature from the perspective of your human-centric, sensory based, thinking, that intertwines Yang with Yin, and Yin with Yang, in way that could only be described as schizophrenic. How anyone can spew that dark, cold is contracted, generative, centripetal is beyond any logic,....contracted, generative, centripetal are attributes that make incandescence and heat,...in any World.

 

My dialogue on Tao has nothing to do with traditional interpretations, but things more obvious than night and day. Thus I have no idea what you're spouting, but it isn't Tao. Or perhaps you simply have read my posts, but are just blindly agreeing with Stig. Only you know.

 

V

[Vmarco]

well water is warmer than ice. so thats yang.

 

 

That's way narrow! Sounds like Stig's thinking process. Look at it quantumly,...Yang is a particle, Yin is a wave. You cannot ever see them both at the sametime.

 

Things that are moving, charging, towards the sphere of solidity is moving in a centripetal Yang direction,...things that are expanding, discharging, back to a torus is moving in a centrafugal Yin direction.

 

This stuff is more basic than kindergarten arithmatic,...thus I have no idea why you're not seeing it. That is meant to be disrespectful,...I'm just asking why.

 

Warm water is not more yang than cold water. LOL Water comes from the disintegration of rocks, which expel CO2,...water is Yin because its moving away from solidity.

 

V