ChiDragon Posted October 15, 2013 The beginning of Heaven and Earth before human intervention. This is after the human interfering with the course of Nature. Some may think that human is part of Nature but human has a nature of one's own. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bearded Dragon Posted October 16, 2013 That's starting to sound more buddhist than taoist. If you look fundamentally in terms of the interplay of yin and yang I don't see that any change is better or worse. Of course certain changes are better/worse in terms of localised human existence, and I realise that we are killing the planet, but purely in terms of fundamental changes it doesn't matter if the planet dies prematurely or not. Planets die. Such is the nature of the universe. We are just one of many functions that effect the lifespan of the planet. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChiDragon Posted October 16, 2013 A Taoist is more concern in dealing with Nature. While, a Buddhist is more concern in dealing with the life of all living things. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TzuJanLi Posted October 16, 2013 Greetings.. A Taoist is more concern in dealing with Nature. While, a Buddhist is more concern in dealing with the life of all living things. A 'Taoist' isn't concerned.. they are alert with a still and unconditionally curious mind.. from which they see/experience what is actually happening, and with minimum effort they achieve maximum results in harmony with the collective whole.. there is no distinction between nature and the Life of all living things.. Be well.. 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChiDragon Posted October 16, 2013 (edited) Greetings.. A 'Taoist' isn't concerned.. they are alert with a still and unconditionally curious mind.. from which they see/experience what is actually happening, and with minimum effort they achieve maximum results in harmony with the collective whole.. there is no distinction between nature and the Life of all living things.. Be well.. Greetings.... I hope Taoists do have some concerns about the health of their bodies, otherwise they wouldn't want to go through all the troubles to be an immortal. I am sure that wasn't acquired with a minimum effort. Yes, in general, "there is no distinction between nature and the Life of all living things"; but there is a difference in philosophy between a Taoist and Buddhist. The issue here is the philosophy rather than a general argument. I believe the notion about "minimum effort" was derived from the idea of "Wu Wei" in most case for some individuals. I will not go into the part about "with minimum effort they achieve maximum results in harmony with the collective whole." Indeed, this concept is not too far out of reach. Edited October 16, 2013 by ChiDragon Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TzuJanLi Posted October 17, 2013 Greetings.. Greetings....I hope Taoists do have some concerns about the health of their bodies, otherwise they wouldn't want to go through all the troubles to be an immortal. I am sure that wasn't acquired with a minimum effort.Yes, in general, "there is no distinction between nature and the Life of all living things"; but there is a difference in philosophy between a Taoist and Buddhist. The issue here is the philosophy rather than a general argument.I believe the notion about "minimum effort" was derived from the idea of "Wu Wei" in most case for some individuals. I will not go into the part about "with minimum effort they achieve maximum results in harmony with the collective whole." Indeed, this concept is not too far out of reach. "Concern" is a word that is too ambiguous for a Taoist's clarity, the word implies 'worry', pondering, uncertainty.. the Taoist lets go of such attachments and acts in harmony with what 'is' in such a way as to be healthy without being 'concerned'.. The Taoist realizes they are immortal regardless of going 'through all the troubles', the Taoist is interested in the quality of their immortality (health) not the possibility, that's a given.. the belief that a ritual, in contrast with a practice, will create immortality or health is misconceived.. rituals are based on beliefs claiming unverifiable anecdotal accounts as evidence, where practice is based on verifiable results.. some practices are mislabeled as rituals and vice versa.. Be well.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChiDragon Posted October 17, 2013 (edited) An atheistic Taoist does not believe in immortality but only follow the basic fundamental principles of Nature as model. Edited October 17, 2013 by ChiDragon Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TzuJanLi Posted October 18, 2013 Greetings.. An atheistic Taoist does not believe in immortality but only follow the basic fundamental principles of Nature as model. The Taoist realizes they are the 'essence' of this physical manifestation, and it is the 'essence' that is eternal, that never dies.. the Taoist, as a student of nature, is neither theistic nor atheistic, they are agnostic.. realizing the practicality of continued alertness and aliveness, paying attention to what is happening without attaching to beliefs.. the fundamental principle of nature is change, is evolution, observing that that which doesn't change stagnates and dies.. Life is change.. Be well.. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
soaring crane Posted October 18, 2013 (edited) the Taoist, as a student of nature, is neither theistic nor atheistic, they are agnostic. As you wrote, it's not strictly 'theist' but there's a tremendous and evolving pantheon of Taoist Deities/Gods. Each sect has their subset. Edited October 18, 2013 by soaring crane 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TzuJanLi Posted October 18, 2013 Greetings.. As you wrote, it's not strictly 'theist' but there's a tremendous and evolving pantheon of Taoist Deities/Gods. Each sect has their subset. You are speaking of religious Taoism, a mutated belief system contrary to the principles of Taoist philosophical understandings.. religious Taoism illustrates the deep influence/conditioning that ritual religion instills upon society.. the clarity enjoyed by the non-religious Taoist reveals the wisdom of letting go of conditioned beliefs.. Be well.. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Simple_Jack Posted October 18, 2013 You are speaking of religious Taoism, a mutated belief system contrary to the principles of Taoist philosophical understandings.. religious Taoism illustrates the deep influence/conditioning that ritual religion instills upon society.. the clarity enjoyed by the non-religious Taoist reveals the wisdom of letting go of conditioned beliefs.. And you are putting forth an Orientalist version of "Taoism" that exists only in the minds of Westerners... 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TzuJanLi Posted October 18, 2013 Greetings.. And you are putting forth an Orientalist version of "Taoism" that exists only in the minds of Westerners... LOL.. no.. you are demonstrating your preference.. Do you suppose that understanding the principles of Tao is limited to a cultural origin? Be well.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChiDragon Posted October 18, 2013 Do you suppose that understanding the principles of Tao is limited to a cultural origin? Don't you.....??? I am just curious to ask; where are the principles of Tao came from....??? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
三江源 Posted October 18, 2013 (edited) . Edited July 8, 2014 by cat Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChiDragon Posted October 18, 2013 You are speaking of religious Taoism, a mutated belief system contrary to the principles of Taoist philosophical understandings.. religious Taoism illustrates the deep influence/conditioning that ritual religion instills upon society.. the clarity enjoyed by the non-religious Taoist reveals the wisdom of letting go of conditioned beliefs.. Since both of the religious and philosophical Taoism do exist, can we accept one but deny the other....??? Are you kidding, Chi.Dragon? Are you pretending to be humancentric and pretending to believe the principles came from a human? I believe Lao Tze is human for once, don't you...???. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
三江源 Posted October 18, 2013 (edited) . Edited July 8, 2014 by cat Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TzuJanLi Posted October 18, 2013 Greetings.. The understanding labeled 'Tao', is the product of paying attention to what is actually happening.. 'Tao' means 'the way', as in the 'way' things are, not the way people 'think' they are.. Be well... 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChiDragon Posted October 18, 2013 (edited) Greetings.. The understanding labeled 'Tao', is the product of paying attention to what is actually happening.. 'Tao' means 'the way', as in the 'way' things are, not the way people 'think' they are.. Be well... If you take a close look of the TTC, then Tao is not just "the way" but it could be as one of the definitions. Edited October 18, 2013 by ChiDragon Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChiDragon Posted October 18, 2013 Do you think he was one human and that he made up this stuff on his own? Yes.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TzuJanLi Posted October 18, 2013 Greetings.. If you take a close look of the TTC, then Tao is not just "the way" but it could be as one of the definitions. TTC does not define Tao, it is observations about the relationship of Tao with Life.. Be well.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
三江源 Posted October 18, 2013 (edited) . Edited July 8, 2014 by cat Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
zerostao Posted October 18, 2013 Don't you.....??? I am just curious to ask; where are the principles of Tao came from....??? from nature, and nature is not confined to any one specific culture Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
三江源 Posted October 18, 2013 (edited) . Edited July 8, 2014 by cat Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChiDragon Posted October 18, 2013 from nature, and nature is not confined to any one specific culture Ah, okay, then where is the name of Tao came from. Did you know Tao before you read the TTC....??? Did you discover Tao from Nature....??? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Brian Posted October 18, 2013 What a curious turn this thread has taken... Is this really an argument over who owns the Tao or who defined the Tao or who named the Tao? Seriously? For what it is worth, I knew the Tao long before I had heard of the TTC or Lao Tzu or Taoism or "the Tao" -- knew it to be beyond name or definition and to be poorly reflected in many philosophies, sciences, ideologies, religions and cosmogonies. When I read the TTC, I recognized it as another poor reflection of that-which-is but a better poor reflection than many other poor reflections. Over time and through study, I recognized more and more examples of these poor reflections in the works of man, from many societies throughout recorded history. Also over time, and especially as I have stopped seeking answers, I slowly unforget my long-ago obfuscated connection to the Tao (for lack of a better word), but I certainly won't argue about "discovery rights" any more than I would about who discovered the sun. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
