Why Daoism over Buddhism

[zenguine]

If it leads you to yourSelf, who is to suggest one path is better than the other? In this way there is only one path i feel

[Brian]

 

Can you separate your experiences from your intellect?

 

Everything humans do is intellectual.

 

Or is working toward 'enlightenment' nothing but a process of self-lobotomization?

Increasingly so. I spent more than forty years honing and nurturing my intellect before I was shown the folly of putting all my eggs in that basket. Decoupling from the artificial constraint of understanding turns out to have enabled several degrees of freedom.

 

I strongly disagree but I used to view things that way, too.

 

Not self-lobotomization but recognizing the limitations, boundaries and proper role of the intellect.

 

One of my favorite Einstein quotes is:

The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift.

Seemed like mumbo-jumbo to me for a very long time.

[C T]

Can you separate your experiences from your intellect?

 

Everything humans do is intellectual.

 

Or is working toward 'enlightenment' nothing but a process of self-lobotomization?

Maybe thats why there aren't buddhas at every gas pump, after all.

 

The intellectual side of things is usually where clinging and aversion arise, and also where the ground of discontent is found. Naturally, this discontent drives some to seek answers from mysticism and spirituality, and funnily enough, most don't find answers there either, because of the very fact that they are unable to leave aside their intellectual baggage. When you mingle enough with lots of people who head out to retreats and ashrams and monasteries etc, this becomes quite amusingly evident. Im not putting them down by saying its amusing, merely stating that its a common practice, thats all, and people are quite prone in their attempts to want answers for every single dilemma they have, on all levels of being, without realising that spiritual practice is not about getting answers, but acknowledging and being ok with the fact that we are really not as powerful and all-knowing, that there are tons of stuff we will never be able to understand, that our potential, even if it were to increase by a tiny percentage would suffice in transporting us to pure buddha fields, and that our limitations in truth is inseparable from the Path itself. What use is there for a Path if not for self-perceived limitations?

 

Shatter the self-impositions, the self-doubts, the desires for things seen and unseen, and we become free from all grasping and aversion.

[Apech]

Ive hownd my interlecked, Ime 'king brilyant.

[3bob]

Increasingly so. I spent more than forty years honing and nurturing my intellect before I was shown the folly of putting all my eggs in that basket. Decoupling from the artificial constraint of understanding turns out to have enabled several degrees of freedom.

 

I strongly disagree but I used to view things that way, too.

 

Not self-lobotomization but recognizing the limitations, boundaries and proper role of the intellect.

 

One of my favorite Einstein quotes is:

Seemed like mumbo-jumbo to me for a very long time.

 

Nice quote Brian,

I'd add that work in one way or another is what human beings and all beings do! Also the ability to work in one field can be transferred to another field, for instance the practice of abilities of observation and concentration...

Edited February 2, 2015 by 3bob

[Brian]

 

Nice quote Brian,

I'd add that work in one way or another is what human beings and all beings do! Also the ability to work in one field can be transferred to another field, for instance the practice of abilities of observation and concentration...

Absolutely. I think my history of "intellectual work" or rational kung fu helped prepare me for future work. It is all about energy, you see.

 

As an aside, from a physics perspective, "work" and "potential" are balanced against each other -- potential is the capacity to do work and work is the change in potential. One can "flow" into the other but they can also both be increased (or decreased) without upsetting the equilibrium. Just food for thought...

[3bob]

power=current x voltage, or have some pie

 

and to synchronize to an infinite buss voltage at a frequency beyond measure takes some help from such a buss, although some would argue that that idea or claim it impossible. Also but on another angle and if one will -there is the analogy that a single electron over here is really no different from an electron over there, or regardless of various busses...

[Marblehead]

And as long as there is no resistance current will flow.

[3bob]

current flows through resistance but some heat is the generated when doing so, and if we can't take some heat what are we doing in the kitchen cooking karma? (does that mean Taoism has less resistance than Buddhism - hell I don't know, the house is burning either way but nothing wrong with dancing in and through the fire since fire can't burn a spark anyway)

Edited February 3, 2015 by 3bob

[Unlearner]

And as long as there is no resistance current will flow.

 

In an ideal sense, but even the wire through which its transmitted has resistance. It's important to not confuse the mathematical/physical model we use to understand with the real thing. The Dao that can be spoken of is not the eternal Dao.

 

"You must be your own lamps, be your own refuges. Take refuge in nothing outside yourselves. Hold firm to the truth as a lamp and a refuge, and do not look for refuge to anything besides yourselves."

-The final words of Siddhartha Gautama, the Buddha

 

^ Meditating on this today. I find this message resonates very well with me. When I look to other religions, they all speak of dependence on something else. Something which controls the very fate of their afterlife, which seems rather arbitrary when you consider how many religions claim having the correct path which will win favor with their god(s). This is why I rejected theism as a religious practice (as a concept, that's a different argument).

[3bob]

Well unlearner it looks like you will have to unlearn your summation of "other" religions or paths since what you said is false in many cases. For instance chapter 21 of the T.T.C. (among others)

[Unlearner]

Well unlearner it looks like you will have to unlearn your summation of "other" religions or paths since what you said is false in many cases. For instance chapter 21 of the T.T.C. (among others)

 

Let me clarify, I was speaking expressly on theistic religions. I would not call Daoism a theistic religion.

 

... or is there something else to which you were referring?

Edited February 3, 2015 by Unlearner

[3bob]

theistic religions also have various translations and meanings that are veiled, for instance go to the esoteric sub-forum.

[Marblehead]

In an ideal sense, but even the wire through which its transmitted has resistance. It's important to not confuse the mathematical/physical model we use to understand with the real thing. The Dao that can be spoken of is not the eternal Dao.

Yeah, but we can't talk about Tao. All we can talk about are the Ways of Tao. Birds fly and dogs don't.

 

Well, okay, I guess I will have to stick with the path of least resistance. Hehehe.

 

To your last paragraph, I understand what you are saying. Theistic religions tell us to look to a higher power. Non-theism tells us to look within.

[Marblehead]

Let me clarify, I was speaking expressly on theistic religions. I would not call Daoism a theistic religion.

 

... or is there something else to which you were referring?

Yeah, his post confused my mind too.

[3bob]

Yeah, but we can't talk about Tao. All we can talk about are the Ways of Tao. Birds fly and dogs don't.

 

Well, okay, I guess I will have to stick with the path of least resistance. Hehehe.

 

To your last paragraph, I understand what you are saying. Theistic religions tell us to look to a higher power. Non-theism tells us to look within.

 

There is more to it than that for instance anyone care to translate the following into Taoism (?):

 

"Jesus answered and said unto her, Whosoever drinks of this water shall thirst again:

But whosoever drinks of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life".

Edited February 3, 2015 by 3bob

[Jeff]

There is more to it than that for instance anyone care to translate the following into Taoism (?):

 

"Jesus answered and said unto her, Whosoever drinks of this water shall thirst again:

But whosoever drinks of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life".

 

Or also...

 

Luke 17: 20-21

20 Now when He was asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, He answered them and said, “The kingdom of God does not come with observation; 21 nor will they say, ‘See here!’ or ‘See there!’[d] For indeed, the kingdom of God is within you.”

 

[Marblehead]

There is more to it than that for instance anyone care to translate the following into Taoism (?):

Well, sure, there is always more. But sometimes we don't need more. To know when one has enough.

[Marblehead]

Or also...

 

There's always more, isn't there?

[Brian]

As an aside, I discovered that my understanding of swimming improved more from swimming than from reading about swimming.

[3bob]

MH, Have you ever wondered why Tao needed "more" or perhaps manifested "more" - as in "the 10,000"?

(or why would a perfectly content Tao complete in itself get involved in such?)

[Marblehead]

 

MH, Have you ever wondered why Tao needed "more" or perhaps manifested "more" - as in "the 10,000"?

(or why would a perfectly content Tao complete in itself get involved in such?)

Hehehe. No. Not once. I have never even wondered why life evolved from single-cell organisms to the complex beings humans are today.

 

I actually don't spend a lot of time wondering "Why?"

 

And I'm going to try to not wonder about that very probing question of yours. It is a good question though, however, I doubt there really is an answer.

[3bob]

I find that hard to believe MH, for to be human is in part a wondering of why, and the TTC is full of trying to explain and or understand some of the "whys" ... for instance why bother with study, practice or participation in jack shit, why "return", etc.. times 10,000

Edited February 3, 2015 by 3bob

[Marblehead]

I find that hard to believe MH, for to be human is in part a wondering of why, and the TTC is full of trying to explain and or understand some of the "whys" ... for instance why bother with study, practice or participation in jack shit, why "return", etc.. times 10,000

My dear doubting friend. Why must you question my not questioning why?

 

Is that "your" nature? It's not mine. Really.

 

If you were to ask "How?" we would be dealing with a completely different concept.

 

I look at the TTC more at telling us the "Therefore"s rather than the "Why"s. If, then, therefore.

 

I don't even try to find the "Why" of my dreams when I have one.

 

Oh, sure, I watch a lot of documentaries on TV and I am constantly being told the "Why" of this, that, and some other thing. Like why did fish leave the water and start living on land. But the "If, then, therefore" would be good enough for me. With that knowledge one needs not ask "Why?".

 

If I study then I will know about whatever therefore I can better relate with that whatever. I guess my "Why?"s would be a given?

[3bob]

sounds like, "or how to beat around the bush" which is still related to a why...

Edited February 3, 2015 by 3bob