How Are Having and Giving the Same Thing?

[DreamBliss]

In ACIM (A Course of Miracles), which I am currently studying, I am told that ultimately, having and giving are exactly the same thing, and furthermore, that having rests on giving.

 

So I try to understand this intellectually at first... I have a tomato. I give you the tomato that, until then, I considered myself to have had. Now I have no tomato. How is having no tomato the same as giving that tomato to you?

 

I know that part of the conflict in this comes because as long as I have not moved beyond or past ego, my mind is inherently conflicted. Ego sees these two states as opposite. But the Holy Spirit, as it is called in ACIM, sees them as the same because God sees them as the same, and whoever I am beyond or outside of the ego sees them as the same. It is only in an egoic state they appear opposite.

 

I also know that this ties in with a couple other concepts, that I am one with everything, and can never really loose anything because I am one with all. Also that there is a mindset of lack or something missing here, coming from the ego and how it sees the world. If I give you the tomato, the implication in my mind is that, as I said, now I have no tomato. I am lacking the tomato.

 

So help me understand this as much as possible with my conflicted mind. Having and giving are the same thing, but how?

 

Thanks!

 

P.S. Off subject, but in case anyone wants more details about my journey, which I have still not really completed anywhere, you can get an overview here:

https://blisswriter.wordpress.com/2016/08/10/8-10-2016-so-i-completed-the-30-day-writing-challenge/

 

Just put that there as I am coming back here after a long absence and there are bound to be those curious.

 

P.P.S. I am learning the piano! If you have any books or dvds you want to get rid of, or which you would recommend, on this subject, please let me know!

Edited August 30, 2016 by DreamBliss

[Karl]

Your reasoning was correct they are in conflict. I should draw you to the origin of ACIM

 

While the odd role that MK-ULTRA played in launching the psychedelic movement is well known, its involvement in bringing about another part of America’s descent into intellectual neo-feudalism is not. Incredibly, MK-ULTRA was also involved in bringing about the “New Age” quasi-religious movement, which debased the reasoning of anyone who succumbed to its philosophies. Another progenitor of this movement, which believes in “channeling” and other fictional elements, was the book A Course in Miracles, written by two MK-ULTRA employees; William Thetford and Helen Schucman.[18] In the book the reader is asked to believe that Helen Schucman, a Jewish scientist hired by the CIA to study how to control the mind, was chosen by Jesus Christ to channel his current ideas to humanity.

[thelerner]

I think appreciation and generosity are two sides of a golden coin.  They compliment each other and make our lives better.  Be thankful, be giving. 

 

On my phone I have a Notepad app.  One page is titled Things I'm Thankful For- where I remind myself of all the good things I appreciate that happen to me.  Cause they're easily forgotten or taken for granted.  On another page I have Generosity- which is things I do for others.  Looking at it, makes me feel better and perhaps more importantly closer and connected to the people I help.  It opens the heart a little. 

 

Connection.. maybe that's what its all about.  Those who help us, those we help..  Knowing we're not alone, part of a system of humanity.  We have power, to be a conduit for good.  Appreciating and passing it on. 

Edited August 31, 2016 by thelerner

[3bob]

there is an exchange of energies in giving and receiving, one may start by giving something physical and then receive something non-physical which is of far more meaning... which can then be passed along which acts like a multiplier in positive force for all parties involved.... an opposite or negative multiplier can also take place as in losing what we have if never shared or given.   

[Bindi]

I tend to agree with Karl on this, and would spend more time examining the origins of this book and its spiritual integrity, and less on trying to find meaning in the dubious material delivered by the author's garbled inner Jesus voice.

[Jeff]

Hi Dreambliss,

 

I would agree that this can be a difficult concept to wrap your head around. In that framework, one must realize that everything is "in" and "of" God. Any concept of yours or mine breaks down that connection/oneness with God.  What the book is saying is that when one naturally and freely gives, there is no loss.  The giving is more of a "flow through" and it is replenished by God.

 

This concept can most easily be seen with energy healing.  If you think of it as "your" energy, one quickly becomes fatigued and worries about losing your vital energies.  If on the other hand, you see yourself as more of a conduit of the energy flowing, you quickly realize that the energy is basically unlimited.

 

Also, if you are looking for a similar concept in the biblical gospels, I would suggest that your read Jesus's story of the good servants in Matthew 25:14-30...  The punch line is...

 

"For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath."

 

Regards,

Jeff

Edited August 31, 2016 by Jeff

[redcairo]

I read A Course in Miracles a long time ago. I nearly didn't because it's a channeled work allegedly and I had a really powerful bias about all things in that category.

 

Jane Roberts singlehandedly redeemed that entire topic for me. Not, unfortunately, most of its authors. :-)  But "intuitive writing" on its own (around since the dawn of time) is ok -- a blend of the source the communicator though. So obviously its value depends a lot on the person writing, too.

 

ACiM is not a bad thing at all. It's just one specific way of presenting a rather fundamental paradigm-set which anybody especially in the Western world tends to have trouble wrapping their head around.

 

No worries. You'll just be a mystic with ACiM, not a Moonie. :-)

 

OK now to your point.

 

You have a tomato. You give it to Jack. Now Jack has a tomato and you don't have a tomato. I'll not argue the potential quantum-physics trivia about how technically nobody has a tomato so all you really traded was an idea attached to some emergent-property-as-energy-particles because hey, in the experiential "focus-reality" world, Jack has your tomato and no amount of philosophy is going to change that. :-)

 

But things which work in the "logical" world of mind are often non-sequiturs internally and vice-versa. There are plenty of things which I am capable of comprehending when I am in a sufficiently altered focus but in full beta my brain really just can't wrap around it. This goes not just for ideas, but even for sense experiences. Sometimes you have to learn to work with information in the state of mind for which it was intended. You are not going to be able to use logic to understand mysticism. You are trying to intellectually suss it out and it just doesn't work that way. With mysticism you have to go through, not around.

 

And the problem is, to get it to you, someone has to put it into words verbal or written. Words have definitions. There is no way to "correctly" convey much of anything in words short of VCR instructions. There is always a degree of reading between the lines and intuitively allowing things to mean what they need to mean, not just their dictionary definition. Logically, having and giving cannot be the same thing because the definition of these words is different. But mystically, they probably can.

 

This is one reason why traditionally the path of 'teaching' is not to convey the answer, but to provide a question or an experience or a practice which, when the person goes through that, will then result in them coming -- on their own natively -- to an understanding. Because most understandings can't be conveyed in words, even if you can put them in words.

 

(For example you can tell someone about 'intimacy.' It's just a word. Not until someone experiences it, will they understand it. And they will experience and understand it regardless of, and apart from, the word. Once they have that in place, then you can use the word, and it works for them and they may gain understanding of some other things by employing their existing experience and understanding. But at that point the word is merely a pointer, a label, a map -- it's not the territory of what is real, it's only the letters on the nametag. The "logical" part that was "information" was never "experience" and getting 'through' it requires experience.

 

Eastern philosophies have as much armchair-intellectualism as Western sorts do and it's easy to get trapped in that, especially on the internet, because discussion is verbal, so its hitting the logical mind. Intellectualism is not invalid, it's simply only energy at a certain level. The center is the sun, though, so in the end if you want something that genuinely evolves you, you're going to have to include energetic interaction at your heart level, one way or another. You can 'think about' things forever... interesting... but it doesn't get you there. So when you approach a 'fundamental belief system set' like ACiM, see if you can do it with slightly less 'logic' and slightly more 'prayer for assistance with understanding' and see what comes of it. Much of this can come through as "intuitive insights" if you let it.

 

ACiM can get you thinking about the world we live in. It's all a dream, it's all symbology, it's all energy, and we have the ability to interact with and hence influence and design the energy within and around us. Walk around and look at everything from that perspective. Consider how long it took culture to get the tech just to make a modern stop sign, or the implied meaning in a 'sliding glass door.' Think about how sidewalks surround and enclose us: a safe path 'between' the individual and the masses, but also a pre-made path for conformity. Everything is a dream symbol.

 

It is energy, but it is poured into a certain form, function, with which we can experientially interact. But the energy of your arm is just energy, like the energy of your armchair and the tree outside. Fundamentally the energy does not differ; the density, intensity, and creative expression of the energy differs by 'instance' but it's all energy. Physics says we 'trade atoms' with everything around us, which is why the sages have said we should love everything around us. Because if we don't it's not a good result for obvious reasons. Energy doesn't have hard boundaries, we just think it does. It's moving all over all the time. Things are moving through us all the time. (Which is a useful visualization: to imagine negative stuff just 'blowing through you' so you are not setting up resistance, and are letting it go.)

 

Once I was talking to an aspect of self and my cat jumped up on me and for a moment I perceived her like he/she/it/they did. It was rather like a bundle of energy and what I found so fascinating was that their perception of her was that the "cat" part was a "property." By that I mean, the fact that she was female, or she was striped, are just 'properties' -- they don't define her as a being. Well neither did being a cat, it turns out. She was just "a being." The fact that being also happened to be "a cat" was as arbitrary a property as the fact that she was striped.

 

That amazed me for some reason, but later, when I integrated it better, I realized the underlying element is that we are all just 'awareness' at root. An emergent property (a few levels up) is the 'energy' our science can measure. With sufficient density-of-energy there is the emergent property from awareness of 'identity' (self-aware) and this grows by degrees, through duality, and gradually into actual "autonomy." Which we have some of. Not as much as we think. :-) But to get back to topic, the awareness underlying the energy that "composes" your elbows, is just like the energy that composes everything else including your sofa and your tomato. 

 

I guess you might say that in a way it means everything is "fundamentally equal." We learn to let go of attachment to things, people and events not because they cannot have meaning to us, but because everything has meaning. We might prefer to hang out with that meaning more than we prefer to hang out with other meanings. That's ok. But it is no more valuable inherently than other meanings. The baseline for existence is equal.

 

Alan Watts (who wrote on Zen) spent effort trying to get readers to understand that what is outside us is just as much 'us' as what is inside us. I never got it. I read his stuff circa age 20 and I really tried. Seth (Jane Roberts) did more for me in one book (The Nature of Personal Reality) than many years of reading on Buddhism ever got me for some reason. But maybe it loosened the lid, so to speak. ;-)  Or maybe being of Western culture I just relate a bit more to that communication style.

 

So you go through learning that everything is really just vibrating energy.

And then learning that you are really just vibrating energy also.

Because EVERY-thing is.

Which is to say there is no such thing as things.

Only the translated symbolic appearance of an energy which for biological (time and space-based) convenience we consider an object.

 

And learning that your intent, emotion, etc. can actually influence energy. Whether and how it manifests or doesn't for example.

 

And learning that our labels like "car" and "skyscraper" and "tomato" are in fact just labels. The map, not the territory. The things they point to are vibrating energy which being energetic creatures ourselves, we have a relationship with.

 

We perceive not that-thing-there but rather, the "energetic, dynamic interface between" that-thing-there and "us" (I'll leave out the 2-million volume version of what-is-us for now, ha). 

That means everything we perceive is actually the metabolism or chemistry between, or to be more basic, half-that and half-us, you could say... sort of.

 

As an analogy, we're green, it's blue, we perceive teal. We can never perceive blue because our perception abilities have to go through green. And we can never perceive green because it is not projected outside of us to be an 'other'. So whatever it is we perceive, "we" are part of what we perceive.

 

And we can change ourselves! Which is changing everything else we perceive, too. Because if our magnet suddenly shifts direction for example, it would push some things away, pull some things closer. If our green suddenly got lighter, darker, it would change the teal result in what we experienced. That is to say that reality is essentially 'us' -- 

-- the dynamic interaction point that is the marriage of what we perceive as self, and what we perceive as other, meeting in the middle.

 

You contain the fundamental, the energy, of everything. But it is your interaction with reality as a 'canvas' -- with energy that is projected as "the-other" (not self) -- that lets you create whatever you like.

(The crown chakra is a great deal of this. Well all chakras are of course. But especially Crown, as it showed me.)

 

So the 'source' of the very existence of your tomato is you.

 

Sure, give Jack the individualized-instance of that energy-perceived-as-form for the sake of experience. But the tomato was created from you, of you, and in YOUR experience (not Jack's) is utterly dependent on the existence of you.

 

You cannot know Jack's unique instance of perception of that tomato -- because for Jack, its existence in his reality, let alone its squishy detail, is half HIM.

 

And that works because really, you and Jack are one. But at a fundamental level (way below conscious or even subconscious mind) he's only paying attention to being Jack, and you're only paying attention to being you, and the tomato is only paying attention to being a tomato, so you're all in the place you should be. :-)

 

So you are never without a tomato because you were really never with one. There is no tomato. There is only energy. A quality, which filtered and translated we call a tomato. And you can hold or release, pull or push, change or maintain, energy however you like.

 

You can be physically with or without something, but with the proper (there's the rub...) application of intent to the energy of self, you can simply arrange to have all the tomatoes you want. Or not. 

 

As long as you're thinking of yourself as 'without' a certain thing you're essentially telling yourself, a sort of constant self hypnosis, that this energy is missing from your basket, which only attaches to that being-so, and your experience says, ok, if you say so, whatever you say goes, see the basket's still empty, no tomatoes here!

 

If you think of yourself as inherently having everything, because you do, and hey maybe you'd like a tomato soon ok, then relax and let it flow through you, and soon enough you'll have a tomato (or many) move into your reality.

 

It requires some suspension of disbelief, some acting as if, all the time but especially initially, which is tough for logical folks who don't want to be suckers or moon-eyed woo sorts, I know what that's like. It's very difficult to get out of thinking about something instead of just being it.

 

I worked with these ideas 'walking in' to metaphysics when I was a very logical sort, and I had a lot of success with it eventually, in spots. I say it with those caveats because I am not a billionaire sunning with my cabana boys at the moment so probably I did something wrong at some point or maybe I would be. ;-)  Teasing. Well, mostly.

 

I don't know if any of that helped at all. Because it's all just words. Aurghck!

 

RC

[DreamBliss]

I think I am gaining some understanding here...

 

The tomato's only value is what I have assigned to it.

 

The tomato is a symbol. In my perception it is a physical object. In reality it is a manifestation of energy that has taken a particular form I label tomato, and associate with other labels such as vegetable (or fruit or whatever humans categorize it as) and spaghetti sauce.

 

Of course I am a symbol and the person I think of as having given the tomato to is a symbol.

 

In reality that person and myself are one, not separate. It is because I see that person as separate and not me that I feel loss if I give them something, or they take it from me.

 

We are not separate from the tomato either, and really the tomato is not separate from its vine, although it appears to be. All ideas, all symbols, all manifested energy.

 

From this viewpoint then, it does not matter if they get the tomato from me, or I keep it, or it stays on the vine. As we are all one it is all the same. Their "having" or "possessing" it is the same as me "having" or "possessing" it, and the same as it remaining on the vine. Whatever or whoever "has" it is the same as me "having" it.

 

Now from a strictly physical viewpoint it does not feel or seem the same. If they eat the tomato I will not feel full. There is a belief, mindset and perception system in place here that says, essentially, that I have to eat the tomato to experience fullness from it.

 

But if the mind can not discern between a real or imagined experience, theoretically, I should be able to imagine eating a tomato and experience the real physical effects of fullness.

 

At this point in my spiritual development however, I will not test this theory, or I will starve to death. Maybe an enlightened being has this ability?

 

As far as what can or can not be mentally grasped... In mu opinion I can figure out anything. I can intellectually find my way around or through any subject. Or at least most any subject. But I will never really KNOW it until I have EXPERIENCED it.

 

I have talked about this before, what I learned at that Vipassana retreat. I can not find the words now. I just remember that the goal is to directly experience a teaching. It is not enough to read a book, which gives you the experience of others. That will allow you to understand it at an intellectual level. But to know it for yourself you have to experience it for yourself.

 

In this case I have to experience the truth of giving and having being the same thing. I think the first step is understanding it intellectually, wrapping one's head around it so-to-speak. That will go to work on deeply ingrained and adopted ways of thinking that can not see these things as the same.

 

The next step is to somehow, in some way, experience this. I have no idea how that will happen or even if it can. But I will practice openness and receptivity to this lesson.

 

As far as the validity of ACIM... I honestly don't care. I appreciate Osho, and he was also controversial. I appreciate Abraham, and there are some around here that disagree with these teachings.

 

What maters to me is what is having a positive affect on my life? What is transforming my life, helping me challenge beliefs, habits, mindsets and ways of thinking? What is it that is eroding these adopted and deeply ingrained blocks to that which is Truth that I have acquired from my family, religion and society?

 

The answer, at this moment, is ACIM. It is helping me to see the world differently, It is challenging and transforming me. I believe and think that its influence is beneficial and positive, so I will continue to study it. But that may not be the path for others.

 

I will listen to my guts, my instincts, that still, small voice inside that Christians call the Holy Spirit. I will pay attention to my feelings. I will place my awareness on what I feel as I read. It is by these thing that I will come to my own decision about the validity of any work.

 

I believe and think we have to be careful about or beliefs, feelings and thoughts about channeled material. As if it is somehow lacking or less valid than "normal" writing. All writing is channeled. I am a writer and I know that.

 

These words are not my own. They come to me from somewhere, some Source, travel through me and come out colored my my me-ness, whatever that is. Your words will come out unlike mine, even if they are the same.

 

If I recall correctly one of the teachings of ACIM is, "Where there is fear there is not love." I may have the Source wrong here, could have gotten that from Tolle. This is what I would advise you watch for and become aware of in your life.

 

Is fear at the root of what you are believing, feeling, saying or thinking about something? Do I have to tell you how horrible a master fear is? Do I have to point to the past and show you what humans, rules by fear, have done?

 

You do not understand a "channeled" text. Humans fear that which they do not understand. It is a knee-jerk default reaction. If you are being aware, in the present moment, you can catch it. If you can become aware of it you can change it. Free yourself from fear.

 

I will close with one of my all-time favorite quotes (those who know me saw this coming:)

Edited September 1, 2016 by DreamBliss

[Karl]

I think I am gaining some understanding here...

 

The tomato's only value is what I have assigned to it.

 

The tomato is a symbol. In my perception it is a physical object. In reality it is a manifestation of energy that has taken a particular form I label tomato, and associate with other labels such as vegetable (or fruit or whatever humans categorize it as) and spaghetti sauce.

 

Of course I am a symbol and the person I think of as having given the tomato to is a symbol.

 

In reality that person and myself are one, not separate. It is because I see that person as separate and not me that I feel loss if I give them something, or they take it from me.

 

We are not separate from the tomato either, and really the tomato is not separate from its vine, although it appears to be. All ideas, all symbols, all manifested energy.

 

From this viewpoint then, it does not matter if they get the tomato from me, or I keep it, or it stays on the vine. As we are all one it is all the same. Their "having" or "possessing" it is the same as me "having" or "possessing" it, and the same as it remaining on the vine. Whatever or whoever "has" it is the same as me "having" it.

 

Now from a strictly physical viewpoint it does not feel or seem the same. If they eat the tomato I will not feel full. There is a belief, mindset and perception system in place here that says, essentially, that I have to eat the tomato to experience fullness from it.

 

But if the mind can not discern between a real or imagined experience, theoretically, I should be able to imagine eating a tomato and experience the real physical effects of fullness.

 

At this point in my spiritual development however, I will not test this theory, or I will starve to death. Maybe an enlightened being has this ability?

 

As far as what can or can not be mentally grasped... In mu opinion I can figure out anything. I can intellectually find my way around or through any subject. Or at least most any subject. But I will never really KNOW it until I have EXPERIENCED it.

 

I have talked about this before, what I learned at that Vipassana retreat. I can not find the words now. I just remember that the goal is to directly experience a teaching. It is not enough to read a book, which gives you the experience of others. That will allow you to understand it at an intellectual level. But to know it for yourself you have to experience it for yourself.

 

In this case I have to experience the truth of giving and having being the same thing. I think the first step is understanding it intellectually, wrapping one's head around it so-to-speak. That will go to work on deeply ingrained and adopted ways of thinking that can not see these things as the same.

 

The next step is to somehow, in some way, experience this. I have no idea how that will happen or even if it can. But I will practice openness and receptivity to this lesson.

 

As far as the validity of ACIM... I honestly don't care. I appreciate Osho, and he was also controversial. I appreciate Abraham, and there are some around here that disagree with these teachings.

 

What maters to me is what is having a positive affect on my life? What is transforming my life, helping me challenge beliefs, habits, mindsets and ways of thinking? What is it that is eroding these adopted and deeply ingrained blocks to that which is Truth that I have acquired from my family, religion and society?

 

The answer, at this moment, is ACIM. It is helping me to see the world differently, It is challenging and transforming me. I believe and think that its influence is beneficial and positive, so I will continue to study it. But that may not be the path for others.

 

I will listen to my guts, my instincts, that still, small voice inside that Christians call the Holy Spirit. I will pay attention to my feelings. I will place my awareness on what I feel as I read. It is by these thing that I will come to my own decision about the validity of any work.

 

I believe and think we have to be careful about or beliefs, feelings and thoughts about channeled material. As if it is somehow lacking or less valid than "normal" writing. All writing is channeled. I am a writer and I know that.

 

These words are not my own. They come to me from somewhere, some Source, travel through me and come out colored my my me-ness, whatever that is. Your words will come out unlike mine, even if they are the same.

 

If I recall correctly one of the teachings of ACIM is, "Where there is fear there is not love." I may have the Source wrong here, could have gotten that from Tolle. This is what I would advise you watch for and become aware of in your life.

 

Is fear at the root of what you are believing, feeling, saying or thinking about something? Do I have to tell you how horrible a master fear is? Do I have to point to the past and show you what humans, rules by fear, have done?

 

You do not understand a "channeled" text. Humans fear that which they do not understand. It is a knee-jerk default reaction. If you are being aware, in the present moment, you can catch it. If you can become aware of it you can change it. Free yourself from fear.

 

I will close with one of my all-time favorite quotes (those who know me saw this coming:)

Yet you are not facing your fear but attempting to evade it. You are preceding into the realm of the dead head. You don't see the express train motoring down upon you but it is there all the same.

[rex]

'Having rests on giving'. This is proposing that giving is a precondition for setting up the causes for receiving in turn. Maybe sooner, maybe later, maybe in kind, maybe not from an original recipient. It also implies mutual interdependence for each other's benefit.

[Daeluin]

A knower of the truth

travels without leaving a trace

speaks without causing harm

gives without keeping an account

The door he shuts, though having no lock

cannot be opened

The knot he ties, though using no cord,

cannot be undone

 

The sage is always on the side of virtue

so everyone around him prospers

He is always on the side of truth

so everything around him is fulfilled

 

The path of the sage is called

"The Path of Illumination"

He who gives himself to this path

is like a block of wood

that gives itself to the chisel --

Cut by cut it is honed to perfection

 

Only a student who gives himself

can receive the master's gift

If you think otherwise,

despite your knowledge, you have blundered

 

Giving and receiving are one

This is called

"The Great Wonder"

"The essential Mystery"

"The very heart of all that is true"

 

dao de jing 27, tl Jonathan Star

[rene]

Daeluin, hello!

 

As much as I enjoy seeing The Laozi shared, from my perspective it is not possible to cause no harm, it is not possible to cause no benefit. Every action and non-action is one of simultaneous creation and destruction. Such is the way of Tao.

 

Warm greetings

[Brian]

A knower of the truth

 

travels without leaving a trace

speaks without causing harm

gives without keeping an account

The door he shuts, though having no lock

cannot be opened

The knot he ties, though using no cord,

cannot be undone

The sage is always on the side of virtue

so everyone around him prospers

He is always on the side of truth

so everything around him is fulfilled

The path of the sage is called

"The Path of Illumination"

He who gives himself to this path

is like a block of wood

that gives itself to the chisel --

Cut by cut it is honed to perfection

 

Only a student who gives himself

can receive the master's gift

If you think otherwise,

despite your knowledge, you have blundered

Giving and receiving are one

This is called

"The Great Wonder"

"The essential Mystery"

"The very heart of all that is true"

dao de jing 27, tl Jonathan Star

Bravo!

 

<close_thread>

[Karl]

A knower of the truth

 

 

 

travels without leaving a trace

speaks without causing harm

gives without keeping an account

The door he shuts, though having no lock

 

 

cannot be opened

The knot he ties, though using no cord,

 

 

cannot be undone

The sage is always on the side of virtue

 

 

so everyone around him prospers

He is always on the side of truth

 

 

so everything around him is fulfilled

The path of the sage is called

 

 

"The Path of Illumination"

He who gives himself to this path

 

 

is like a block of wood

that gives itself to the chisel --

Cut by cut it is honed to perfection

 

Only a student who gives himself

 

 

can receive the master's gift

If you think otherwise,

 

 

despite your knowledge, you have blundered

Giving and receiving are one

This is called

 

 

"The Great Wonder"

"The essential Mystery"

"The very heart of all that is true"

dao de jing 27, tl Jonathan Star

There is on teensy, weensy little problem with all that ;-)

How do we know who is telling us the truth ?

 

Where am I ? How do I know it ? What should I do ?

 

If you already know the answer to those questions then no guru is possible, nor necessary. Otherwise you will find yourself clinging to one practice, or another, trying to discover what you already know but refuse to discover. If you would only ask yourself, but few want to ask, and fewer still dare listen.

Edited September 2, 2016 by Karl

[Papayapple]

I think appreciation and generosity are two sides of a golden coin.  They compliment each other and make our lives better.  Be thankful, be giving. 

 

On my phone I have a Notepad app.  One page is titled Things I'm Thankful For- where I remind myself of all the good things I appreciate that happen to me.  Cause they're easily forgotten or taken for granted.  On another page I have Generosity- which is things I do for others.  Looking at it, makes me feel better and perhaps more importantly closer and connected to the people I help.  It opens the heart a little. 

 

Connection.. maybe that's what its all about.  Those who help us, those we help..  Knowing we're not alone, part of a system of humanity.  We have power, to be a conduit for good.  Appreciating and passing it on. 

I NEED THAT APP OF YOURS NOW! What is it called?

[Marblehead]

Daeluin, hello!

 

As much as I enjoy seeing The Laozi shared, from my perspective it is not possible to cause no harm, it is not possible to cause no benefit. Every action and non-action is one of simultaneous creation and destruction. Such is the way of Tao.

 

Warm greetings

 

Have you been reading Chuang Tzu again?

[3bob]

Rene,  I do not see or hear harm in the deep song and great dance of "Tao", for is not benefit or harm only seen or heard by the beholder of such?

[rene]

Have you been reading Chuang Tzu again?

Who?

[rene]

Rene, I do not see or hear harm in the deep song and great dance of "Tao", for is not benefit or harm only seen or heard by the beholder of such?

Is not the beholder and everything seen or heard part of the deep song and great dance?

[Marblehead]

There is a Chuang Tzu story that speaks to having and giving.  I will paraphrase it:

 

Chuang Tzu had been off visiting with friends and returned home late and after dark.  Upon entering his home he spied a robber with some of his clothes in his arms.  Before either could say a word security knocked on the door and asked them if they had seen any strangers in the area as there had been reports of a robber.

 

Chuang Tzu replied, "No.  I was just giving my friend here some clothes I no longer need."

 

Security left and right away the robber left too.

 

Chuang Tzu sat down and thought, "I wish I had more I could have given to him."

[3bob]

Rene, depends on the beholder doesn't it?

[rene]

Rene, depends on the beholder doesn't it?

3bob, have you found something (or someone) who is not part of Tao?

[rene]

There is a Chuang Tzu story that speaks to having and giving. I will paraphrase it:

 

Chuang Tzu had been off..."

Yep, there ZZ goes again - complicating a simple idea. Almost makes one wonder why so much effort was spent moving away from simplicity. Almost. Everyone needs a hobby, I guess.

 

Warmest regards, old friend. (-:

[Marblehead]

Yep, there ZZ goes again - complicating a simple idea. Almost makes one wonder why so much effort was spent moving away from simplicity. Almost. Everyone needs a hobby, I guess.

 

Warmest regards, old friend. (-:

But Rene, some people like to hear the entire joke, not just the punch line.

[rene]

But Rene, some people like to hear the entire joke, not just the punch line.

Yay! Something for everyone (-: