ShifuC Posted December 26, 2013 And we are not disagreeing or anything like that. We are having a discussion. Will we always agree? I doubt it. :-) i see you brother. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hamida Posted December 28, 2013 Let's stay on track, keeping the facts straight is part of the cultivation of Xing Kung. "Keeping the facts straight" may not be possible among people who probably don't share the same vision. There is also the fundamental problem of our common belief in the existence of an objective world in which we, together, live. To avoid the Cardinal Vice of 生氣 (anger) in Xing Kung cultivation, "staying on track" would require the same diligence of combatants finding their way safely through a minefield. The two incendiary explosive devices (IED's) are (1) the vision of Quanchen Taoism, and (2) the belief that an objective world (containing all of us) exists. Let's deal with (1) first. How does one view Quanchen Taoism? One’s vision, in itself, could be offensive if any form of Taoism is seen as 邪教 (demonic cult). This was how the Confucian literati of imperial China perceived Christianity, Taoism and Buddhism for these were the religious superstitions of the underclass. Mutual contempt exists. It is this disdain (we have for each other) that blocks conversation. And condescension for others is not a matter of choice. It is the way we are. Do you agree? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ShifuC Posted December 29, 2013 If by "the way we are" you mean immaturity happens to everyone, then yes, I agree. But people can also become mature. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hamida Posted December 29, 2013 If by "the way we are" you mean immaturity happens to everyone, then yes, I agree. But people can also become mature. Becoming "mature" is an ideal state of human perfectibility. If by "the way we are" you mean our present state of "immaturity" prior to perfection through Xing Kung cultivation, then becoming "mature" would be synonymous to becoming the True Person(真人) of Quanchen Tao. Am I correct? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites