Taoist Texts

Yeah you see thats the thing..most people are born trains, they cant jump off themselves. Their destiny is sealed at birth.

Why would Tao need our services? To understand whether one may or may not do that, the train-or-plane analogy is helpful. Trains do not change tracks or directions. They cant even slow down or go faster because there are other trains on the same track. Normally there are no such things as private trains, but there are plenty of regular trains in the world. The private planes on the other hand fly where and how the pilot pleases, but there are precious few of them.

Mechanism is an apt metaphor, thats true. Mechanism suggests something predetermined and unchangable, human life on fixed tracks like a train on rails. Only one way to go and one direction to go to.

Winston Smith, the main character of Nineteen Eighty-Four, works at the Ministry of Truth.[1] It is an enormous pyramidal structure of glittering white concrete rising 300 metres into the air, containing over 3000 rooms above ground. On the outside wall are the three slogans of the Party: "WAR IS PEACE," "FREEDOM IS SLAVERY," "IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH." in keeping with the concept of doublethink, the ministry is aptly named, in that it creates/manufactures "truth" in the Newspeak sense of the word. ..As well as administering truth, the ministry spreads a new language amongst the populace called Newspeak, in which, for example, "truth" is understood to mean statements like 2 + 2 = 5 when the situation warrants.In Newspeak, the ministry is known as Minitrue.

SecretGrotto, on 27 Jan 2015 - 20:32, said: Where are the true Neidan masters that are still alive and known by all as a consequence of their achievement? Or are they hiding in the mountains to cultivate still, perhaps even leading a Celibate lifestyle because of their isolation? ZOOM, on 19 Jan 2015 - 13:34, said: I was told years ago that your teacher would look younger and younger. How about some before / after photos of him or other progressed members to prove your claims and to prove that you have actually the right to show up as you guys do!

Umm ..you see, this is how it works: How do children learn what is right and wrong? Children do what they see, more than what you say. It is important for you to provide a good model for your child to follow. Children pass through different stages of moral development beginning in early childhood and advancing through adulthood. Very young children do not really understand the concept of right and wrong. For them, what is "good" is what they like and what is "bad" is what they don't like. Therefore, it is important for adults to provide controls and limits for them. This is especially true for children who have no words to tell themselves, "No, don't pick the flowers." At about age 4 or 5, children begin to label or identify things that are "good" and "bad." They can talk about them, but the true understanding is still outside of their own feeling. Children of this age follow rules only because they are told to do so. That is why it is very important for adults to provide consistent and gentle guidance. As a child uses words to describe self-controlling behaviors, such as "No. No. Don't touch," they begin to internalize, or understand, what those words mean. By age 7 or 8, children's understanding of right and wrong seems to be based more on fear of being punished. For example, a child might feel that the reason people do not steal is that they will be caught by the police. Generally, children still have not developed true moral values. Again, it is important for adults to help children understand what is right and wrong, and why. By age 9, children are beginning to understand the Golden Rule: Do unto others, as you would have them do unto you. This is the beginning of a true understanding of right and wrong, of guilt and values. http://www.kidsgrowth.com/resources/articledetail.cfm?id=1801

what is to fear if they do nothing wrong? Its their decision and all consequences good or bad will be this-worldly and solely theirs, nobody else to blame.

People with virtue do not need to be told. People without virtue - do not care who says what. Whoever discards human virtue to go with a neidan one - really really deserves what is in store for him.

yes, greed is always strange. The greedy for desires will not pay for Virtue, because Virtue is a negation of desires; but they will pay for a promise to stay young in order to satisfy the desires, so the greedy for money will sell them that promise. Its a meeting of greeds, which is educational to watch. Q. What are quaifications to be a teacher of immortality? A. (1) Have a webpage that says so (2) Be not dead yet.

You are right Dusty, there is no looking or seeing specified. The reason for that is twofold: first because they talk about fish so there is no question of wheter they see them or not. Of course they do, so that goes without saying.Second: Hui is not interested in merely seeing fish, he is interested why doing so should bring joy to an individual of different species, Zhuang. In reply Zhuang proposes to consider the main question 其本: whether a human can emphatise (know) with another one at all? His proof that a human does that is simple and elegant: The mere fact that you, Hui, have asked me, Zhuang about whether do i feel (know) about the fish, shows that you do empathise with me, otherwise you would not have asked.

may be he was listening to fish 魚部:鱳：魚名。出樂浪潘國。从魚樂聲。 《魚部》

designed to make us), that ZZ certainly had ong-term designes 1莊子與惠子遊於濠梁之上。 Zhuang-zi and Hui-zi were strolling on the fish pond dam at Hao river 2莊子曰：「儵魚出遊從容，是魚樂也。」 Zhuang said: the fish came to the surface, our stroll became enjoyable, due to joy from seeing the fish. 3惠子曰：「子非魚，安知魚之樂？」 Hui said: you are not a fish, why would you enjoy looking at fish? 4莊子曰：「子非我，安知我不知魚之樂？」 Zhuang said: you are not I, how you know I should not enjoy seeing fish? 5惠子曰：「我非子，固不知子矣；子固非魚也，子之不知魚之樂全矣。」 Hui said: I am not you, and certainly can not comprehend your reasons; likewise you are not a fish, so you have no reason to enjoy seeing fish. 6莊子曰：「請循其本。 Zhuang said: that’s is the crux of the question, can one man comprehend another or not 7子曰『汝安知魚樂』云者， You said ‘why should you enjoy seeing fish 8既已知吾知之而問我，我知之濠上也。」 And by that question you have established comprehension between us, now I understood that right here .

May be, but wiki has its doubts so yeah..search on knowing joy gives a surprising number of hits. It was a heavily bandied about concept. And why joy of fishes, who cares about that? I am thinking.

no no none of that and bsedies its clothes that maketh the man and you guys are dapper i am sure i will just point that in those times there was quite a discourse on 'knowing the joy' of others http://ctext.org/pre-qin-and-han?searchu=%E7%9F%A5%E6%A8%82&page=2 http://ctext.org/pre-qin-and-han?searchu=%E9%9D%9E%E6%88%91&page=5#n63221 and i posit that this story is a part of that. So the issue is what exactly is 'knowing the joy of others' and why?

well actually yes thats what makes them stories and not just rants

like this

that might be the paraphrased story but what is its point if any?

these ones. What dya all think this is about? 莊子與惠子遊於濠梁之上。莊子曰：「儵魚出遊從容，是魚樂也。」惠子曰：「子非魚，安知魚之樂？」莊子曰：「子非我，安知我不知魚之樂？」惠子曰：「我非子，固不知子矣；子固非魚也，子之不知魚之樂全矣。」莊子曰：「請循其本。子曰『汝安知魚樂』云者，既已知吾知之而問我，我知之濠上也。」 Zhuangzi and Huizi were walking on the dam over the Hao, when the former said, 'These thryssas come out, and play about at their ease - that is the enjoyment of fishes.' The other said, 'You are not a fish; how do you know what constitutes the enjoyment of fishes?' Zhuangzi rejoined, 'You are not I. How do you know that I do not know what constitutes the enjoyment of fishes?' Huizi said, 'I am not you; and though indeed I do not fully know you, you certainly are not a fish, and (the argument) is complete against your knowing what constitutes the happiness of fishes.' Zhuangzi replied, 'Let us keep to your original question. You said to me, "How do you know what constitutes the enjoyment of fishes?" You knew that I knew it, and yet you put your question to me - well, I know it (from our enjoying ourselves together) over the Hao.' http://ctext.org/zhuangzi/floods-of-autumn#n2828

Unfortunately yes, speaking of alchemy thats true. Also, when instead of answering the question smbody refers you to a teacher - it means that they do not know, all the while pretending to be knowlegable.

Moderately prosperous society (Chinese: 小康社会; pinyin: xiǎokāngshehui) is a Chinese term, originally of Confucian origin, used to describe a society composed of a functional middle-class. The term is most well known in recent years as used by Chinese leader Hu Jintao when referring to economic policies meant to realize a more equal distribution of wealth. In the usages (tifa) of Xi Jinping, the term "China Dream" or "Chinese Dream" has gained somewhat greater prominence. Origins[edit]It has been loosely translated as a "basically well-off" society in which the people are able to live relatively comfortably, albeit ordinarily. The term was first used in Classic of Poetry written as early as 3000 years ago Pope Francis on Twitter: "When a society lacks God, even ... https://twitter.com/pontifex/status/514334822253481984 Sep 23, 2014 - When a society lacks God, even prosperity is joined by a terrible spiritual poverty.

actually kudos to forestofemptiness for positing the issue like that: "running the cosmos". Its a question that LZ took an intense but a passing interest in, answering it with 'the Heaven follows ziran' (the innate autonomous workings). Nobody does run the Heaven, its on a wondrous autopilot with unlimited mileage. So thats that and there is nothing more to say on the issue except imitating it by creating a governing machinery that will runon its own too.

"you need to pay the money"....."that we dont need"...."but we will take it anyway" line these guys should be in stand up.

who is running the cosmos? Thats the thing though, the principles are not universal at all. What happened historically was that the author of TTC was using the logic 'as above so MUST be below' to assure the correctness of governing the below by imitating the Heavenly way above. It was only possive due to a presence of a very special being below, the one with Heavenly qualities - the king. Thats a condition sine qua non. A state without a king or a being who is not a king is out of luck according to TTC.

valar dohaeris

we are all still hangover from the x-mas carousing so hair of the dog all around and pick a chapter