Uroboros

There are, in my experience, different "layers", though.

There is a common, superficial opening of the MCO that does not completely open the Three Gates.

Plus, how do we differentiate between our minds and Qi?

Meaning, we can visualize it and then a feeling manifests....did we truly open it? Its already open to a certain extent, it would have to be.

Did we truly open the Three Gates and transform the current way it operates?

What effects have happened?

Most important question, IMHO, has the practice transformed/ changed the way I experience life?

Some things to ponder.

Peace.

"God" as a name is a lie, the greatest trick and whatnot.

For "god" is a title, for the deities whom have necessary hands in the maintenance of the functionality of reality; personified via mysticism as such the god of commerce, goddesses of fertility, and so forth.

 

The all encompasing infinitesimal omniversal unity of "God" is not personable, cannot be named, and may or may not be the yin or yang of Tao; it cannot be known.

 

Worship, praise, honor. These things are reserved only for the unspeakable unknowable immutable ever-present truth.

Not for persons, places, or things we can discuss or refer to.

I agree. "god" is a name with many, many meanings attatched to the core concept that add complexity and

misunderstanding.

If this "god" was anything, it would be everything.

All encompassing.

Its interesting that the most common idea of "god" is a reflection of our parents.

The wrathful, judgemental "god"! The loving, compassionate "godess"

Much easier to understand if you make "god" a person for many. Which seems to create many misconceptions.

Dieties could be manifestations of the "one" yet not the whole "one".

Peace

That is a powerful concept. Of course, I'm not into gods and stuff like that, but, for one who does believe, this can be a powerful guide in ones life.

 

For me though, I prefer the concept where somewhere Jesus said to not look outward for God but to look within.

 

The statement "I am God" is just a tad too egotistical sounding for me. But I have no problem with saying that "God is within my essence."

 

This can be very empowering for a 'lost soul'.

If "god" is everything, then we must be "god". All of existence must be as well.

Otherwise, "god" is not every thing.

Peace.

Hehe, It was a question worth asking! Haha.

Ahh, so you naturally feel and connect to your body intensely. That big of a shock that many dont? Wowser.

We are vast and complex. Our bodies are so intelligent...Often my body knows what to do and I just get in the way with my "intelligence"! hah.

The trauma can be stored deep, tis true. In working on my body, BKF water method style, I have noticed allot of stuff in my head..which makes me wonder if its stored trauma from times I hit my head. Happened a few times as a child.

Which brings me to a question....how often do we truly heal from traumas? I dunno....

Can we really connect to our subtle bodies, in a fully integrated and coherent manner, with all this "stuff" in our dense bodies?

Hm...I wonder if that is why so many psychics are mediocre at best.

Wake up, eh...

Cat, have you found the BKF Water Method beneficial to your practice/ well being?

Interesting topic...The Old Ones....I can see how such a being could exist.

We are so small yet so large...there are so many things that could exist that we have little knowledge of.

If such a thing does exist...are we truly capable of inter-acting with it without being consumed/ damaged?

Hmm..

Peace.

I have to agree with him, though. I recently started the water method he teaches and I have become aware of SO much :stuff: stored in my body.

I was aware of a good bit of it before....Just in my head, HUGE amounts. Lawd.

Sometimes, the organs show themselves to me, its a beggining process.

So I know I am not truly embodied in my body.

when I talk to people, they are very unaware of whats going on inside. Until it gets really bad.

How do you feel about it, Cat?

Peace.

Fantastic article, Panda!

Thank you for sharing.

Its interesting how deep the Western Traditions go... Especially considering how few go there.

Peace.

I actually do think it is useful to compare them as we so often talk about LZ that now being able to draw on where they are different seems useful at times.

 

I would agree that LZ was more a realistic and spoke of a worldly Tao and he wanted to give concepts/Names or describe it; Name is Great; Way is this; Way is that.

 

ZZ is more other-worldly, transcending even Tao, thus transcending concepts and names; He wants to show its action; Not name it [Way] as much as show how [the] Way works at every level of existence (but he transcend the concept of existence as he often questions this word--against non-existence and non-of non-existence; because it is cyclic instead of just dualistic).

 

I think to simply say he gives reasons is still conceptual; Whereas LZ wants to say 'this' is the ten thousand and this is what it does (reasons); ZZ wants to present the actual ten thousand to us; show us birds of various sizes (Peng vs Dove) and HOW they actually live, think, exist.

 

He wants us to get in their skin, and realize this is our skin.

 

Instead of trying to emphasis we are but one of the ten thousand like the birds, he wants to make it a more 'collective' ten thousand; deconstruct it to what it is: One thing.

 

He seems to put this forward in an eye opening statement like:

 

"Heaven and earth were born at the same time I was, and the ten thousand things are one with me. " -- Tr. Burton

Wonderful perspective.....I can see what you are saying, the differences....ZZ does seem to use stories to take us to a place, a slice of life and see it in a certain way...

Building these slices to guide us to the whole...eh..

very cool! Thank you for all the great explanations! Helps to understand more about where these people are coming from.

Peace.

I find a point he makes very insightful and important. Many people are disconnected from their bodies. I know I am.

So starting there is a good thing. He mentions that in his books, as well. Its our foundational form in this form. densest body.

If we cant even feel the densest form of ours, what business do we have in the subtle ones?

Things to ponder. He (BKF) talks about feeling your organs, the blood in your veins, all of that as being connected, em-bodied.

I figure thats a great place to start. build the foundation and all that jazz.

Peace.

 

It is more being a reason than a principle.

reason as in way? The way things are/ come about?

well... let's see... a few chapters coming up...

 

"There was existence; there had been no existence. There was no existence before the beginning of that no existence. There was no existence previous to the no existence before there was the beginning of the no existence. If suddenly there was nonexistence, we do not know whether it was really anything existing, or really not existing."

 

"Therefore from non-existence we proceed to existence till we arrive at three; proceeding from existence to existence, to how many should we reach?"

 

"I can (conceive the ideas of) existence and non-existence, but I cannot (conceive the ideas of) non-existing non-existence, and still there be a non-existing existence. How is it possible to reach to this?"

 

"The door of Heaven is Non-Existence. All things come from non-existence. The (first) existences could not bring themselves into existence; they must have come from non-existence. And non-existence is just the same as non-existing. Herein is the secret of the sages."

 

 

'In the beginning there was nothing; by and by there was life; and then in a little time life was succeeded by death. We hold that non-existence was the head, life the body, and death the os coccygis. But of those who acknowledge that existence and nonexistence, death and life, are all under the One Keeper, we are the friends.'

 

---

 

It is not that he does not speak to Wu and You but he raises above its duality; he deconstructs it as One complimentary whole.

Thats a wonderful chapter! I see, thank you for the explanation. ZZ chooses to move beyond duality, eh...

 

The "Tao/tao" are different between Lao Tze and Zhuang Tze. Please notice there is a difference how Tao was spelled. There are a "Tao" and a "tao".

 

The "Tao" was in Lao Tze's mind while "tao" was in Zhuang Tze's. Lao Tze's Tao, sometimes, is either visible(Yu) or invisible(Wu). Sometimes, Tao is "tao" which is a principle.

 

Zhuang Tze's "tao" is a reason which explains why are things happening that way.

So tao, to ZZ, is a principle, a way that things come about?

Interesting...

Thank you both for explaining this to me!

Peace

I pretty much have to agree with this. But we can still see it in some of his concepts without speaking to it directly.

 

 

Edit to add:

 

Actually, Chuang Tzu did not speak to some of the things that interested Lao Tzu. This is likely one of them.

So ZZ talked about things that LaoTzu didnt? Isnt the Mystery and Manifest just a part of existence? Hence my confusion as to why ZZ would not talk about it. Even If only in an abstract, in direct way.

My previous post was actually a question. Outdates? Not his concern? I meant, why?

Wu/ Yu is not ZZ's concern anymore. At this point in time, Wu/ Yu was outdated.

Outdated? Not his concern?

If its a part of Taoist philosophy, a part of existence, the Tao, why would ZZ not speak to it, if not by using the same terms?

Peace.

I dont expect anything of you. I expect things of my own self.

Current humanity does have quite a few problems.

If you dont like the path you are on, then change it. if you dont, you can change your relationship to it.

You could also do nothing.

Lots of choices.

It is a somewhat tribal setting. In the sense of the tribal mindset.

Peace.

Sometimes we look out at the external world and we see so much wrong, so little right, for us....

When there is so little right that we feel there is no path..

We may need to make our own right and tread into the bush.

Peace.

The dove is not lazy. It is limited by its [smaller] perspective. I may not understand the soaring ability of Peng, but Peng has lost the ability which they possess too.

That is a brilliant insight. They both have different perspectives/ views and cannot see parts of the others perspectives/views.

This seems to point towards Wu/ Yu. That it is easy to focus on just one, without ever going into the other.

We then only have half the experience, though.

The Peng does not know what it is like to be the size of a Dove and the Dove has no idea what it is like to be the size of Peng.

hehe...the Ant thinks the Dove is gigantic....like the Dove to the Peng..

What is the Peng to the Ant?

The sky.

I think it's okay to prefer this over that; I'd rather have happy than sad, but maybe when we cling so hard to our choice that we cant also see from the other perspective... is when the pitfall comes. But that's just my idea, and we're going off-topic again. Sorry, MH.

Oh yes, preferences are helpful!

I agree, its the clinging, the attachment to one single thing that seems to create loads of problems.

It does for me, atleast. haha.

Some things are better to hold onto, though. Some things feel "right" on a deep level where I have to do it.

Few things are like that, though.

We are off topic?!

Oh, we are...sort of...kinda...maybe.

Peace.

Your words ring of Laozi. Considering from only one perspective: choosing small over large, or large over small; manifestations over essence, or essence over manifestations gives only one-half of the all...

 

Ever desireless, one can see the mystery.

Ever desiring, one can see the manifestations. ~ ddj1

 

***

In the Mushroom in the Morning story... Zz's actors take the lower position, that of manifest, and chide the higher position, or essence. This might be a poke at the spiritually highfalutin of the day, or it might be the first introduction of actors/theme that will appear throughout. My guess is the later, but since I've not read Zz in a long time and remember little of it, time will have to tell. (-:

Hehe, choosing one over the other, this over that, him over her, etc...is a big pitfall.

I have seen plenty of people limit themselves and their experience of life doing that.

I know I have done it. I love choosing both...Maybe is a great answer, to me. haha.

In my head, I think maybe more often then yes or no. HAHAH....

My mind cant make up its mind so I pay it no mind. HAH

I am certain there are Urob . But if the ones who can best bring it forth are stuck in a chinese grammar lesson, ... I don't see any way to coax it out correctly ..I need a little distance for perspective.

Well, I hope you feel some calm and tranquility with some delicious food, soon.

There are plenty of people who can read chinese/ understand the grammar on here. Maybe we can persuade some to come talk and help us see if there are some other layers to it!

Cookies work...We need cookies.

Take care of your self, Stosh.

Peace.

There is no illusion to breathing. Do it or die.

 

Now, there can be such a thing as forcing one's breathing. This is not good, IMO. Let the breathing happen spontaneously. The body knows what it needs. It will do the right thing. Trust it.

I meant, is there more to breathing then we mostly experience?

The topic of the illusory nature of reality/ experience, how does that relate to breathing?

Is the prana/ qi in the breath a component? Then is the gross air breath the illusory nature?

Just thinking about other ways the illusions may help us "see" life in different ways.

If I put awareness into my breathing, it stabilizes by itself. Without force. You are right, MH, the body is very intelligent.

Peace.

Yeah, we need to breathe. That's important.

Illusions upon illusions!!

I can breathe without breathing!!

Oh wait...nope. Not yet.

Although, that is an interesting thought...if all things are not what they seem to be, then what is breathing in this topic?

What is the illusory nature of breathing?

I hope that is not off topic...straying too far.

Peace.

Hmm...Stosh, when I read these things, like mythology and other writings that use words/ symbolical representations of "things"..

I feel that there very well could be deeper meaning.

My previous ramblings point to my current wiggly line of thinking on that. hah.

In Myth, there are the Archetypes that represent deeper, spiritual/ mental principles at work/ rest.

Could there be such things in the Chuang Tzu?

Maybe.

Peace.

We are all like the waters in this painting.

 

Some of us are a small drizzle, others wide rivers and a few are but small drops here and there, trickling off the leaves in search of the ocean.

 

But we are all water, and sooner or later we shall all lead back into the great sea of our original nature.

 

That is a gorgeous picture. Thank you for sharing, Effilang!

Lovely picture. That is T'ang (Taoist) style. Somewhere in there is something of man but it is so insignificant that it would be difficult to see.

 

From what I have seen and read, nature is always the story in this style, not man.

 

Yes, three little houses at the lower right.

I do enjoy the perspective of man being tiny within the whole.

Yet still within it. a part.

The scope and beauty of nature shown within pictures of that style always just take my breath away..

They usually give it back, too!

Peace.

That's okay. Oftentimes we find the answers to our questions in the wierdest places.

Its true. I often times have found answers in weird places...

I wonder what the question is?! hahah

What is a chinaman, anyways?

Its off topic, I know. The term is just being thrown around now and Its very vague.

Ancestry wise? Well, which tribe/ region is a "chinaman"?

Lots O different ones.

Culturally? Well, we are talking about and feel a connection with parts of that culture.

So maybe we are, who do not fit ancestry wise, are like the strange step children.

Peace.