Do You Have A Hidden Agenda ?

[Owledge]

...but refuse to show any of my non-human attributes so to not present others as being inferior?

Yeah, you're doing that anyway.

[Marblehead]

Yeah, you're doing that anyway.

Well, that response caught me off guard.

 

Anyhow, on the other hand, which is the left hand for right-handed people, if I am God and I hold the reason true for everyone else as it applies to me, something that I must do, wouldn't everyone else be God as well?

 

(And just to show that I do try to not be biased, for left-handed people the other hand would be the right hand.)

[Owledge]

..., wouldn't everyone else be God as well?

Bingo!

[Marblehead]

Bingo!

Don't do that!!!

 

Now I have nothing to respond to. That's commonly called a thread-ending post.

 

Say something, even if it's wrong, and it likely will be. Hehehe.

 

But yeah, we all, and all things, are a piece of the "big picture". (Sometimes some of the pieces go missing though.)

[Owledge]

*hoot*

[Protector]

*hoot*

 

oh no you didn't

[Vmarco]

Okay, you have been successful. You have totally lost me.

 

I tried applying logic and reason to what you said above and it just didn't work. I guess my ability to apply reason and logic to what others have said is faltering in my old age.

 

(But that's not the first thing to go when one gets old.)

 

The Tao upsets peoples logic. Wholeness is beyond the sum of opposites simply means,...all yang added to all yin,...or all positives added to all negatives,...equal zero.

 

This is why, when you understand everything that is false,...there is the truth. If you seek truth, you will never find it,...for there is no truth in Yin and Yang.

 

V

[Owledge]

oh no you didn't

*hoot* *hoothoot* *ho-hoot* *bleep* *hoooot* *hoot*

[Marblehead]

The Tao upsets peoples logic. Wholeness is beyond the sum of opposites simply means,...all yang added to all yin,...or all positives added to all negatives,...equal zero.

 

This is why, when you understand everything that is false,...there is the truth. If you seek truth, you will never find it,...for there is no truth in Yin and Yang.

 

V

Oh!, No!, not another zero!!! Damn whoever invented the zero!

 

There are no truths in the mind of a doubter. But the mind of the doubter still exists.

 

Truth! We each have our own. Who is right? doesn't matter, I think.

 

But yes, equal and balanced yin and yang equal zero. And this is why there will never be equal balance within the universe, that will occur only in singularity. For living things that means death.

[Marblehead]

Owledge and Sinfest are being a hoot.

[dawei]

Is the Light, Still in the Projector, which gives rise to the image on a theaters screen, present with the form, or the celluliod. Both the celluloid and image on the screen are in time,...however, with simple observation we understand that there is no present in time.

 

How is a fulcrum present with the lever of a childrens seesaw? The lever effects its motion upon the fulcrum, and without the fulcrum, no motion would be perceived to have occurred,...but does the lever in motion have anything to do with the presence of fulcrum? When the lever ceases to move, it no longer is perceived to exist.

 

The 6 senses cannot observe the fulcrum,...the 6 senses can only observe motion. To observe the fulcrum, one must has access to the 7th and 8th consciousness,...that which is beyond the "i think."

This is spot-on.

 

And I think it shows the error in a misunderstanding of Tao and the elevation that occurs when one does not see that Tao is operating within the WHOLE. I see this mostly from philosophical taoist who cannot move beyond Tao as the highest; so Tao incorrectly becomes the WHOLE.

 

To give another analogy: A car engine engine generates exhaust; is the car engine present in the exhaust? It has an operation and function but not a transferable form. I know that some will say that the engine has form to begin with and so the comparison does not apply. It applies through microcosm understanding of no-form to form. If we want a no-form example: Just look at gravity. Is it present in the rock which landed on one's head? When I feel that bump, I feel the rock's contact point. I cannot feel the rock nor gravity. Ergo, I do not feel the rocks form nor gravity's formlessness; I only feel their resulting operation and function.

 

Thoughts?

[Owledge]

Owledge and Sinfest are being a hoot.

Grabbing for straws, hm?

 

There's a thing inside of you that's afraid of mental silence.

I recommend bloody axe murder on it.

[dawei]

Although I'm not an Atheist, it's rather easy to prove that no god exists,...the proof is Undivided Light. Undivided Light is proof that no god exists. Besides, god is merely the Yang part of Duality,...the Bible says so,...God is light, and in him is no darkness (Yin). That quote is speaking specifically about Duality. God is a manifestation of Duality. From the Tao point of view, Duality, thus god, does not exist.

Here is how I understood it: I think it is a rather logical and clever argument. The key to understanding, IMO, is the bolded part. From the Tao POV, thus god, does not exist: Non-being (god) cannot exist if it is a manifestation (being).

 

The only problem I might have with it is the idea of microcosm, or Both/And; anything in the manifest world is as a microcosm of the metaphysical world. We see this in ancient Taoist beliefs. Man is a microcosm of earth; which is a microcosm of heaven; which is a microcosm of Tao. But what this would mean is that god (manifestation) would be a microcosm of something else non-being and that is where such an idea would fall apart; thus god does not exist.

[dawei]

ve mentioned before that I consider Undivided Light to be Pure Chi Energy. And afterall, energy preceeds light.

Why? Because light must have a mover or originator? Even if we stick within philosophical taoism, I don't see this supported... if I read beyond just Lao Zi word; and there is plenty to read to learn about this stuff.

 

In the Huainanzi mentions a 'Primal Illumination' which is where the dao began work[ing]... which would suggest undivided light is prior to energy and dao... so I agree that energy arises... and is a microcosm of something... light... and spirit is ok too.

 

 

 

No,...I would say I'm a Taoist,...and a Freethought Buddhist.

 

Neither the Tao, or Undivided Light is energy, or the "cause" of energy. Energy is a simultaneous by-product of the division of light, or duality. Duality EFFECTS ITS MOTION upon the fulcrum of the Tao,...but the Tao did not "cause" this to occur.

 

It is rather a mistranslation to say that the Tao birthed One, and the One birthed Yin/Yang. The correct version, for those who understand the Tao, is that One was birthed from the Tao,...the Tao doesn't birth anything,...nor contain any energy.

 

Ki is not energy,...from Ki, all energy arises. Energy is merely the motion of what is perceived to be separate, to return to Source. Energy in its purest form,...the purest form for an illusion,...is Spirit. Pure energy or Spirit shows the Way back to Source, which can only occur through the realization that energy does not exist. There is energy which arises from Ki,...but Ki holds no energy.

 

Wholeness is beyond the sum of opposites,...beyond Yin/Yang, and as a consequence, beyond One.

I generally agree; One was birthed from the Tao is to suggest an 'arising' via function or operation of Tao.

 

Energy arising from Ki (Qi) is an interesting thought. Then Qi is more like Tao creating an arising.

 

Your 'wholeness' point is something I have always agreed with. Beyond One, particularly if one is interpreting One from Lao Zi Chapter 25.

[Marblehead]

 

Thoughts?

Yes, I have them on occasion.

 

Am I seeing an attempt to reify (personify) Tao or is it just my imagination?

 

Tao is everything but it is no 'thing'.

 

Te is how Tao functions.

[Marblehead]

There's a thing inside of you that's afraid of mental silence.

I recommend bloody axe murder on it.

No. I have no fears. And then, while I am logged in here at TaoBums I am not supposed to be practicing Empty-Minded Meditation. Don't need to be killing anything right now.

[Marblehead]

Why? Because light must have a mover or originator? Even if we stick within philosophical taoism, I don't see this supported... if I read beyond just Lao Zi word; and there is plenty to read to learn about this stuff.

 

In the Huainanzi mentions a 'Primal Illumination' which is where the dao began work[ing]... which would suggest undivided light is prior to energy and dao... so I agree that energy arises... and is a microcosm of something... light... and spirit is ok too.

So where does light come from?

 

You folks are trying to get mystical on me and I'm not going to go there.

 

The state of Singularity was pure energy, not light. In fact, there is no light until there is a detector of said light, all that exists is energy.

[dawei]

So where does light come from?

 

You folks are trying to get mystical on me and I'm not going to go there.

 

The state of Singularity was pure energy, not light. In fact, there is no light until there is a detector of said light, all that exists is energy.

SNAP!! I think you just went there...

 

I will say I don't disagree with your comments. Ultimately there needs to be a 'motive force' for our minds to understand this. For this reason, when I consider the metaphysics and transformation from void to manifest, whether light is in manifest vs void, it has some energy behind it. I think it is kinetic vs potential.

[Marblehead]

I think it is kinetic vs potential.

And I think I don't know.

 

Based on what science tells me and what I accept as being logical, I shouldn't even talk about Singularity (before the beginning).

 

All Taoist Philosophy tells me is that there was a beginning, that there are cycles, and all things revert back to their origin. Yes, somewhere Chuang Tzu somewhere said that before the beginning everything existed but all was chaos. I can't recall that he tried to define "chaos". I prefer thinking that this "chaos" was pure energy but I could easily be wrong.

[Informer]

Yes, I have them on occasion.

 

Am I seeing an attempt to reify (personify) Tao or is it just my imagination?

 

Tao is everything but it is no 'thing'.

 

Te is how Tao functions.

 

Sounds a bit like Panthiesm.

 

"Pantheism is the view that the Universe (or Nature) and God (or divinity) are identical.[1] Pantheists thus do not believe in a personal, anthropomorphic or creator god. The word derives from the Greek (pan) meaning "all" and the Greek (theos) meaning "God". As such, pantheism denotes the idea that "God" is best seen as a process of relating to the Universe.[2] The central ideas found in almost all pantheistic beliefs are the view of the Cosmos as an all-encompassing unity and the sacredness of Nature."

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantheism

 

Maybe with a twist of Gaia:

 

"The Gaia hypothesis, also known as Gaia theory or Gaia principle, proposes that all organisms and their inorganic surroundings on Earth are closely integrated to form a single and self-regulating complex system, maintaining the conditions for life on the planet.

 

The scientific investigation of the Gaia hypothesis focuses on observing how the biosphere and the evolution of life forms contribute to the stability of global temperature, ocean salinity, oxygen in the atmosphere and other factors of habitability in a preferred homeostasis. The Gaia hypothesis was formulated by the chemist James Lovelock and co-developed by the microbiologist Lynn Margulis in the 1970s. Initially received with hostility by the scientific community, it is now studied in the disciplines of geophysiology and Earth system science, and some of its principles have been adopted in fields like biogeochemistry and systems ecology. This ecological hypothesis has also inspired analogies and various interpretations in social sciences, politics, and religion under a vague philosophy and movement.

"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_hypothesis

[Marblehead]

Sounds a bit like Panthiesm.

Yeah, I know a Pantheist, a really nice fellow, I have had some very worthwhile discussions with, who I once told, "You would make a good Taoist." and his immediate response was, "You would make a good Pantheist."

 

 

I think I'm not ready to talk about the Gaia hypothesis yet. But just from what you posted I see the rationale.