We all have issues-

[Stosh]

So be it.

 

I was relating that the 'negative sentiment about reasoning' is clearly destructive ,demonstrated by history.

I didnt lump Pol-pot as equating any one.

I was saying that the attitude folks broadly construe from the 'abandon knowlege' motto is misinterpretation and therefore contraindicated to me, although it was used by Pol pot to justify his attempts to exterminate the intellectual class.

And it appeared unreasonable to think that the respected scholars and yourself consider knowlege to be 'bad'.

 

But if you honestly think knowlege is bad..I've heard that sterno or dextromethorethan will dumb you down to a virtuous level.

 

If you dont think it that way , and construe me to be confused ,you could take the time to explain...oh darn !you cant explain it to a Westerner". Drat !

 

Twinner said..

I've seen a lot of people come on to the board with their own ideas about what Taoism is. If you want to lump Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu with Pol Pot, that's fine, but I think you have a very weak understanding of what Taoism is about.

 

Well I'd have been willing to explain. We seemed to have a lot of similar opinions and comparing notes might have been interesting, but if anyone is expecting that my own ideas are supposed to match somebody elses for validation I reject it as circular argument...Who validated them?

 

The opinions I venture are my own , the interpretations are my own. I leave it up to the reader to decide whether they have inherent validity.

 

If Lao and Zhuang were wise, and they somehow tapped in logically to a perspective which fell well into accord with reality., then the reality they tapped into is still there to be understood.

The stories etc describe and delineate the virtues they CONCLUDED were rational ones for men, no angels dropped out of the sky to tell them what were virtues and what were vices, in fact the zeitgeist of the day was that personal perspectives were all important in deciding what would be good for an individual to pursue.

 

In that very same spirit, even today, many people come to their own conclusions about what constitutes virtue just as Lao and Zhuang did,( which you mentioned),, and in doing so, write their own dao. Traditional tao still provides helpful suggestions, but there is no law and no guarantees.

 

When tao was elbowed out by Confucianism it later re-emerged somewhat blended with Buddhism and had an entirely different view of Laos work and importance because,the very existance of the written work lended emphasis to what was only a part of a much larger philosophical and religious position.

 

It is True, I believe, that tao doesnt really have a delineated path that is going to lead one to a great life or here-after, what it provides is a reasonable framework for understanding causality ,learning ones own path, suggests solutions to quandaries, and tells you that much of how you feel is internally generated construct, and therefore somewhat under your own control.

 

So I dont really want to categorically say ,that what you(Twinner)said is wrong on all counts .

I do however consider it to be a very narrow view that you are presenting ( possibly intentionally) to simply create hubbub.

Edited April 24, 2012 by Stosh

[eye_of_the_storm]

Not in a long, long, long time. Like 20 years to be exact. Except for "The Book", which I read a couple years ago. That book was quite profound.

 

No, regardless of what Watts might've said, there's no path, you are already here.

 

Aaron

 

 

Thats what he says! ahah

 

I really like his work.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUXodFgbDfQ&feature=my_liked_videos&list=LL7WeeBG4ZtA0WJTuiNa2ebA

 

Alan Watts ^ fear of enlightenment

 

^ I think you may enjoy it

[Aaron]

So be it.

 

I was relating that the 'negative sentiment about reasoning' is clearly destructive ,demonstrated by history.

I didnt lump Pol-pot as equating any one.

I was saying that the attitude folks broadly construe from the 'abandon knowlege' motto is misinterpretation and therefore contraindicated to me, although it was used by Pol pot to justify his attempts to exterminate the intellectual class.

And it appeared unreasonable to think that the respected scholars and yourself consider knowlege to be 'bad'.

 

But if you honestly think knowlege is bad..I've heard that sterno or dextromethorethan will dumb you down to a virtuous level.

 

If you dont think it that way , and construe me to be confused ,you could take the time to explain...oh darn !you cant explain it to a Westerner". Drat !

 

Twinner said..

I've seen a lot of people come on to the board with their own ideas about what Taoism is. If you want to lump Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu with Pol Pot, that's fine, but I think you have a very weak understanding of what Taoism is about.

 

Well I'd have been willing to explain. We seemed to have a lot of similar opinions and comparing notes might have been interesting, but if anyone is expecting that my own ideas are supposed to match somebody elses for validation I reject it as circular argument...Who validated them?

 

The opinions I venture are my own , the interpretations are my own. I leave it up to the reader to decide whether they have inherent validity.

 

If Lao and Zhuang were wise, and they somehow tapped in logically to a perspective which fell well into accord with reality., then the reality they tapped into is still there to be understood.

The stories etc describe and delineate the virtues they CONCLUDED were rational ones for men, no angels dropped out of the sky to tell them what were virtues and what were vices, in fact the zeitgeist of the day was that personal perspectives were all important in deciding what would be good for an individual to pursue.

 

In that very same spirit, even today, many people come to their own conclusions about what constitutes virtue just as Lao and Zhuang did,( which you mentioned),, and in doing so, write their own dao. Traditional tao still provides helpful suggestions, but there is no law and no guarantees.

 

When tao was elbowed out by Confucianism it later re-emerged somewhat blended with Buddhism and had an entirely different view of Laos work and importance because,the very existance of the written work lended emphasis to what was only a part of a much larger philosophical and religious position.

 

It is True, I believe, that tao doesnt really have a delineated path that is going to lead one to a great life or here-after, what it provides is a reasonable framework for understanding causality ,learning ones own path, suggests solutions to quandaries, and tells you that much of how you feel is internally generated construct, and therefore somewhat under your own control.

 

So I dont really want to categorically say ,that what you(Twinner)said is wrong on all counts .

I do however consider it to be a very narrow view that you are presenting ( possibly intentionally) to simply create hubbub.

 

I'm getting on very early before work and I only have a few minutes to respond, so this wont be lengthy.

 

Wrong and right are subjective experiences and if you had paid attention to what I was saying, you would realize that. In reality we apply a value to the object or thought, but it doesn't mean that value changes the object or thought. I have spent nearly twenty years trying to expound upon and improve upon Lao Tzu's ideas. I haven't been able to, nor was Chuang Tzu or anyone else that came along. Certain people got it right the first time and he was one of them. I don't admonish people for learning. If you're an electrician you need to learn the skills of your trade, what I admonish is people learning merely to fill their head with more knowledge or to show how much they know.

 

Also actions are much more important that words. Most of the discussions on here serve no real purpose other than to stroke our egos. In real practice you learn just as much by watching as you do listening.

 

You obviously have a very large vocabulary and I doubt I could compete with your intellect, so let me be kind enough to bow out now, since I've been wrong on all counts anyways. I'd hate to waste your time since you know what it's all about already.

 

Aaron

Edited April 25, 2012 by Twinner

[Stosh]

Im already aware wrong and right are subjective experiences.

and Im already aware about the ideas those dudes had about word associations and the implicit judgement they carry. And again I find just about all your conceptry to be consistent with my own.

Not EVERYTHING we think is identical though.

Which provides a potentially fruitful situation...we arent on totally different pages!

It is my aim in discussion to throw clarity on ambiguous terminology, then folks can still voice different opinions about various points and understand 'what the heck' one another is saying!

Neither you or I really need much validation from each other, but that doesnt mean either of us should be casting aspersions or intentionally misinterpreting minor points of theory.

 

My personal take on Tao IS my own, (and I am willing to talk about it.), and I believe that EVERYONE ends up having to interpret what the old texts mean about their lives. For instance, the dude staring at the baggage cart,..As for me, if I go to Rome, I am going to see the sights, not stare at the baggage carrier,but I can take the wisdom of the point too! and not get bent out of shape because some tourist attraction was closed.

Edited April 25, 2012 by Stosh

[Aaron]

Im already aware wrong and right are subjective experiences.

and Im already aware about the ideas those dudes had about word associations and the implicit judgement they carry. And again I find just about all your conceptry to be consistent with my own.

Not EVERYTHING we think is identical though.

Which provides a potentially fruitful situation...we arent on totally different pages!

It is my aim in discussion to throw clarity on ambiguous terminology, then folks can still voice different opinions about various points and understand 'what the heck' one another is saying!

Neither you or I really need much validation from each other, but that doesnt mean either of us should be casting aspersions or intentionally misinterpreting minor points of theory.

 

My personal take on Tao IS my own, (and I am willing to talk about it.), and I believe that EVERYONE ends up having to interpret what the old texts mean about their lives. For instance, the dude staring at the baggage cart,..As for me, if I go to Rome, I am going to see the sights, not stare at the baggage carrier,but I can take the wisdom of the point too! and not get bent out of shape because some tourist attraction was closed.

 

Why must you visit Rome? That's the first question you must answer. Second, why are the sites so important? The issues we have derive from our desire for more than what we need. Why learn something you don't need, but only want?

 

Many people practice qigong with no intention of self-discovery or introspection, no desire to learn the Mystery of Mysteries, only a desire for power. Even worse is when they are tricked into believing in immediate enlightenment or awareness. This kind of awareness can never come without deeper introspection, because the key lies, not without, but within. The sage stays with the baggage cart because he has everything he needs right there. Some are ready to accept this, others aren't.

 

Aaron

Edited April 26, 2012 by Twinner

[Stosh]

Why must you visit Rome? That's the first question you must answer. Second, why are the sites so important? The issues we have derive from our desire for more than what we need. Why learn something you don't need, but only want?

 

Many people practice qigong with no intention of self-discovery or introspection, no desire to learn the Mystery of Mysteries, only a desire for power. Even worse is when they are tricked into believing in immediate enlightenment or awareness. This kind of awareness can never come without deeper introspection, because the key lies, not without, but within. The sage stays with the baggage cart because he has everything he needs right there. Some are ready to accept this, others aren't.

 

Aaron

It is just my take , immature and undeveloped dualistic etc as it may be, that I have a life burdened and blessed with human nature, and I am accepting of that. I do not HAVE to visit Rome, it is my whim, I am not full of the satisfaction of the dead, because if I was I would have no purpose or role in existing (albeit as an illusion within the great Tao), maybe someday my whim will be to attain enlightenment and forget my own purpose, but it aint happened yet. Im just a Shmo trying to play the best hand I can generate. Ive been reading other threads and they are fascinating, and its clear to me that I am a relative lightweight here, so maybe Ill change my mind at some point..or I may dig my heels in like an obstinate ox, It doesnt matter, Ill die someday anyway.

[Marblehead]

I have been told that I have issues but in reality I think that it is just that some other people have issues with me. Oh well. They will just have to get over it.

[zerostao]

I have been told that I have issues but in reality I think that it is just that some other people have issues with me. Oh well. They will just have to get over it.

perhaps

and i was glad that alan watts and carl jung have been mentioned. both being early influences that led me to consider the tao. it is like jung himself had become the archetype of a wise old man (sage)

with watts, it may be an easier bridge for many westerners to eastern thought

"writings and recorded talks still shimmer with a profound and galvanizing lucidity."

those able to dip their toe into the jungian pond and understand, then jung is a true giant

[jeffrito]

I love Chris Hedges!

 

Also I come from a strong Atheist background, so that's how I think, it's in my blood.

 

I had an experience in 2005 that opened my eyes to the reality there is much we don't understand.

 

I can't say I am an atheist any longer as a result, but I am still highly skeptical in nature.

 

So many teachings are just made up gibberish, it's like panning for gold, and not knowing which bits are real gold till you test them each yourself. It's maddening.

 

I try not to fill my head with too much nonsense, unless a teacher or system has been validated scientifically or personally.

 

I know truth is out there, it infuriates me I am not evolved enough to grasp it though.

 

Thanks for posting this clip.

 

I'm going to get this guys book, he makes a lot of sense.

[ShaktiMama]

I have a problem with many religion's notion of enlightenment, especially when they tend to believe that enlightened people transcend the natural impulses of man. I have yet to find any proof that this is so, rather I find proof that it isn't, in particular historical evidence and news articles regarding religious authorities that have purportedly achieved enlightenment that end up doing things grossly immoral and un-compassionate in any context.

 

Okay, so I admit I'm assuming this, that there is the possibility that others can escape desires and wants, but if so, who are they and how did they prove this? My point of course is that because we are intrinsically tied to this world and body, there is no way of escaping the dual nature we live within, even if we are aware of the non-duality of existence.

 

I am well aware that the world is non-dual, not only intellectually, but also experientially. Many doubt this, that's okay, I don't need to prove it, but I did realize that for awhile I had doubts about these experiences because I failed to be free of desires and wants, of simple things like hunger. In fact I have major food issues still, which stem from growing up in poverty and not having enough food. How do I know I have these issues still? Well I had a friend reach out for my bowl of soup, wanting me to put it down and I bristled up and told him point blank, "don't touch my food." Even though I knew he didn't need or want it... it was the threat of losing the food that caused me to tense up.

 

So my point is that everyone has issues, regardless of their spiritual advancement and to fail to acknowledge this misleads people. The idea that we can escape all desire and suffering is not realistic, nor is there really any evidence to support that anyone has, so why do we continue to propagate it as a truth? Isn't it infinitely better to encourage people to work on their character defects, the ones that prevent them from experiencing quality in their life, without having to use misleading information to get them to do so?

 

Anyways, just some thoughts I was having. I'm sure some people will have ideas about this. Anyone want to take bets on who on the TTB chimes in with the absolute truth regarding this? I'm joking, that'd be a fools bet, we all know.

 

Aaron

 

 

Hi Twinner,

 

I only glanced thru the rest of the answers so I just wanted to share my POV.

 

Some spiritual traditions and from my own personal experience speak of us having lived many, many lifetimes.

I also have understanding there is more than one universe, more than one dimension, more than one space and time, more than one reality, more than one alternate reality. If I am pressed I would say there is an infinite number of these locations for us to have an experience. Now if we let this notion expand into eternity and that we are eternal beings this will show how many lives it is possible to experience up to this lifetime.

 

Enlightenment is the beginning of an experiential understanding about this lifetime, not all of them. Not all beings have a remembrance or feeling of what it was when Consciousness first knew Itself. When one does this does not guarantee Enlightenement but comes a greater measure of self awareness.

 

To give an idea of infinite worlds, look down at a nubby carpet. Count all the bumps of the material and then imagine each bump is a universe that contains worlds and living beings. Then realize that all those universes are contained in one plane. Then think about all the ways alternate realities can present themselves as I discussed above.

 

To think one person can clear themselves of the negative energy accumulations, that which holds them back, is a bit...well....egoistic. One can clear a huge amount in a short amount of time it is true and one can die quickly without the proper support quickly because the body is accustomed to sharing it's space with the ego and all these other energies. It is not recommended. I would, based on a teacher of mine, offer that it takes two to three years of introspection, examination and clearing to get to a base line of understanding about Self and Other. In some of the more traditional process, maybe 15-20 years with a teacher if you are just using meditation and inquiry.

 

Under all those layers of accumulated lifetimes is the True Self.(It is why when we look at people energetically they look muddy or shadowy.) The beings you are looking for will not feel the need to prove themselves as enlightened. It is not important and is a false thought form of the ego to prove oneself. And, you will have an understanding of their state when you walk into their Presence. If you can see auras, their auras tend to be gold or a brilliant yellowish white gold color. Like a halo but it surrounds their whole bodies. For those who really shine it is hard to look at them with your inner eyes.

 

Auras don't lie so because it is an electromagnetic signature. So yes, that puts the Christ and the Buddha into that category.

 

Desires and wants are of the ego. Becoming ego less is a process. I am personally aware of people who drop the ego and realize that death is just a leaving of this experience of living in the body vehicle on a planet. They realize : "Vanity of vanities, saith the Preacher, vanity of vanities; all is vanity." Ecclesiaste 1:2 The newer translations of the Bible, vanity=meaningless.

 

It's true. When people come to this realization that this is so they want to drop the body vehicle. Some do by killing the body, committing suicide after the realization. I totally understand that reasoning. When my ego was dying I was ready to go that moment. "Let me go. This is so silly. I will come back and make another body" was a thought process that was unfolding at that time and what I told my teacher. I had a person assigned to me to make sure that during this period I wouldn't do something along those lines.

 

I did choose to stay and continue to release all these negative collections from lifetimes among lifetimes. Doing so reveals more and more of our True Essence within. We become more and more helpful in assisting others to gain liberation.

 

Why do we have a body? To play here on this earth, to have an experience. To leave without fully understanding that is a negation of our purpose to be here, to gain liberation and become a play of Consciousness.

 

This is why the good teachers laugh and smile all the time. This is why they treat themselves and others with kindness and compassion.

 

Still learning, still evolving.