Apech

Hey,

 

Some thoughts on Chapter 15:

 

1) The first line has always bothered me a little because of the reference to the sages of antiquity and the fact they are described in the past tense. Mercia Eliade, an excellent scholar, coined a phrase for this perspective: "nostalgia for paradice," a sort of romantic illusion that there was a legendary time when people were wiser and magic was afoot. It makes me wonder if the author or authors of the TTC and all the translators and interpreters since were wise in their decision to bring that illusion forward. For me the first line contains a major flaw in "production values" because it causes me to stop immediately and challenge the image as a counterproductive fantasy. The author/interpreter loses credibility for the entirety of the chapter even though there is wisdom throughout. But that might be a minor and purely personal point, perhaps I am being too exacting.

 

... <snip>

 

Interesting comments. Nearly all ancient cultures saw time or perhaps history differently to us. They refer back to an original golden age and see all that comes after as (mostly failed) attempts to get back to that time or to reflect it. For instance the Biblical garden of Eden or in Ancient Egypt the Sep Taui (First Time). So the language of this chapter probably reflects a generally held idea that in ancient history things were much better than now .. sages were real sages and so on. Whether this is just an kind of literary device to make the reader aspire to something higher or actually an appeal to the way in which man lived before 'civilization' occurred is a matter of debate. Probably a bit of both.

Even to day in for instance martial arts you often here tales of long dead great masters who were 'true masters' compared to whom the current teachers are mere shadows and so on ... so the tradition lives on.

Apech,

I have to concede you sound way more informed than me and I understand your exasperation about claims of ET involvement in Egypt's past. That's why I enjoy following Andrew. Collins views on the pyramids, he has been quite critical of the tendency in new age circles to revert to UFO theory's in explaining the achievements of the Old Kingdom.

 

I did state that I was not convinced about ET involvement in the building of the Great Pyramid because I also believe that homo sapiens are smart enough to have built it. Just not the current bunch.

 

For culture that created such sophisticated buildings (if you can call them that) and could build with stone blocks weighing up to 200 tons, I would of expected more in the way of infrastructure to of been found . You mentioned the mastaba tombs or step pyramids as an example of evolution in building technique but I think it is an error to link those constructions to the Great Pyramid -despite what the orthodoxy says. The construction of the Great Pyramid is too much of an advancement to compare to other smaller tombs. Is it possible that some of those smaller step pyramids were built after the Great Pyramid as a pale imitation ?

 

As my DIY cosmology allows for the possibility of aliens migrating/travelling from other star systems in our past, and giving that researchers like Christopher Dunn have conclusively proving (IMO) that granite was machined to incredible precision in Egypt, I still can not rule out ET involvement. Can we machine granite like that today? Can some one correct me?

 

This thread is quite topical for me as I spent today grinding back a concrete floor -shit job. Even with a diamond tip head it still took 9 hours and that's just concrete. I have some experience in the construction industry but I'm mainly involved in furniture making now. While I'm not comparing my modest building achievements to Egypt, I still have some idea about analysing construction. The point I'm making is I'm not off in New Age la, la land. The truth as I see it is that we still don't know where these people came from - the jump in progress is staggering. One minute hunter gathers berry collectors the next precision machining and constructing at levels that still baffle scientists today. Perhaps that's the problem, every thing about the Old Egypt casts a big dark shadow over evolutionary theory - I for one am in awe.

 

Ben

Hi Ben,

The orthodox dating makes the Step Pyramid of king Djoser (Zoser) the first to be built (the architect was Imhotep) ... the Great Pyramids are placed later and Egyptologists have a theory of architectural development from one to the other. I am not advocating this view but I just base things on the best proof available and what makes sense to me.

Again the Egyptologist's have shown various ways in which the Great Pyramid may have been constructed - including a system of internal ramps - and these ways involve technology known to have been in use at the time (because they have found the tools).

Despite this the main point is that the Great Pyramid outshines anything else built in Egypt (or anywhwere else) for several millenia ... so it is an outstanding achievement ...

I don't know if ET's were involved ... but I personally would discount that unless there was direct evidence because things can be explained in other ways. As I said before ... I think it is even more amazing that they built the GP if there were no aliens ...

Anyway its all fascinating stuff ...

Just to say - excellent thread - keep it going.

Could someone explain to me how a guest is 'exacting'?

If I came to stay at your place you'd quickly understand :lol:

... seriously that doesn't seem to match the other translations ...

Also don't like the 'timid' in one translation ... is a sage timid - I don't think so. I hope one of our Chinese scholars can give us the low down on some of these words...

BTW I really like this chapter ... like a guide on being a warrior ... but I think it has to clear that it is not based on fear of any kind .... but sensible caution ...

Just do more practice esp. sitting meditation ... concentrate on building up the positive and slowly try to reduce the gratification - so one replaces the other - don't make drastic changes unless you are actually harming yourself (or others). Don't worry if you give in to it ... just go back to practice and start again ... at least 3 months for any real change ... probably longer ... no rush ...

PS. Basically what Sloppy said.

How long does the 'being Amy Winehouse' stage last? I'm worried now.

The astonishing precision and unimaginably complex construction of the Great Pyramid is the archaeological evidence. I fail to see how slaves and a despot went to all that effort for a kings tomb. As someone who has no knowledge of engineering and struggles to add up, I'm going to throw a big statement out there- we could not build the Great Pyramid today.

 

The lidless granite box in the interior alone constitutes an anomaly for the school of linear history. How did they drill into granite with such precision? The box is flawless. I agree that its strange that archaeologist have not found much in the way of civic infrastructure but that's assuming that the elder culture was simular to ours. Judging by some depictions of the ruling elite in Egypt with enlarged craniums, they were not.

 

Ben

Not sure you are saying this Ben, but I just have to point out that the Pyramids were not built by slaves - but skilled Egyptian artisans working in 'gangs' - they inscribed some stones to this effect and also the workers villages have been found. They were groups of artists, scribes and tradesmen - well educated for the day.

There was a civic infrastructure centered round the king and the temple/priests - they even had 'factories' of sorts which manufactured daily items and also food - bread and beer in mass quantities - these existed even in pre-dynastic times (i.e. before Egypt was a unified country).

The architecture of the pyramids demonstrates a historical line of development from 'mastaba' tombs - the step pyramid and so on. But it is still true that there followed a period of decline called the 'First Intermediate Period' and that Egyptian culture never quite reached the heights that it did in the Old kingdom.

In my opinion there is no need to substitute man's natural intelligence or an age old knowledge with ET involvement. In fact it would make their achievements less extraordinary not more to do so.

Breeze of ninja fart,

A whiff of enlightenment!

A flaccid flower.

A flaccid flower.

Which I hold close to my heart

Or my limp member.

1) Don't!

2) Oh go on then if you must.

3) I told you!

Completely agree that the achievements of the Old Kingdom Egypt outshone what cam after ... although the religion was developed and they weren't as backward looking as some would have us believe ... the idea of the conservative Egyptian mind comes from Greek commentators right at near the end of their culture.

Also it is absolutely true that the confidence in continual linear progress is a myth and has never happened in history ... Dark Ages is a good example ...

I think the wisdom that we tap into is far older than any of the scientists imagine ... so perhaps periods of 'decline' are just readjustments in our minds and outlook which are somehow necessary when you get the big picture.

Mandrake,

 

I was going to write a message about the same thing, but I realised you were first. Anyway, I am not going to refrain posting on this issue.

 

1. First and foremost. It's a problem that the moderators of this forum fail to address: effective moderation. Let me use bold writing to point it out.

 

.... <snip>

Gerard,

Much as I respect you I feel moved to point out that this forum is moderated in a way that people on here seem to generally accept and respect. Obviously different people will have their own definition of what effective moderation is - but I think most of us want as little moderation as possible and for the conversations to be as spontaneous, tangential and at times passionate as they can be. If people disagree strongly that is ok ... what is not ok is personal attacks, insults and so on (read the Mod Guidelines). Just because we don't step in at every hot headed remark does not mean that we are not effectively moderating. In fact self moderation is the ideal - where the participants themselves remind each other of the right etiquette and approach when discussing these subjects.

Right now I've got that off my chest I feel a lot better.

A.

Welcome to TTBs - we are all cryptic here in our own ways.

I can only comment that it is talking about the central realization of the nature of Tao - and it's interesting, in view of discussion on Ch. 8 that it says follow it and you can't see it's back ... so 'follow' is a way of speaking and not some kind of instruction ... if you see what I mean.

Try logging out and back in to see if it goes away.

I screamed out in pain

I'm mad as hell and I'm not

going to take this!

going to take this?

Man with red hot poker said

Grinning ear to ear.

under where? No wear!

where the getting will be got;

hiding my candy.

hiding my candy

someone got sticky fingers

reaching for my sweets

Frean at last, frean at last ....

the postman cometh

bringing sweepstakes for cheapskates

stayed home in my briefs

stayed home in my briefs

they are tucked in under here

under where? No wear!

(nowhere ... get it? ... no? ... ok)

Yuck! My cat just did that on a rug. She can be excused though as she is sick.

 

Yeah, "'go with' their own nature" is valid, I think. The biggest problem I have with the word 'follow' is that it connotes some form of dogma that one is 'following'. Too close to religion for my pleasure.

Hair balls maybe .... the cat not you !!!! :lol::lol:

Yes that religious type of following ... like following a messiah is pure contrivance ... people want something, power, money, health and think they can get it by pretending to be a slave. Of course they don't mean it ... and any good messiah would tell them to stop and find their own way.

Oh, oh. Majc is getting frisky. Hehehe.

 

Well, I am a commoner and very proud of it.

 

But it doesn't matter if we are talking about the word "ziran" or "tzujan" when we refer to the natural flow of any of the ten thousand things. Do we follow? Only in that we follow our own nature. If a thing's nature is different from all other things then there really isn't any other thing it can follow.

 

Like water, yes, all things flow their own course in the now moment.

 

But yes, there is a difference between the flow of Tao and the flow of man. We think too freaking much trying to determine the best route and we end up wasting half our life thinking instead of living, going with the flow.

 

I do agree the the word "follow" is a tricky word when speaking to this concept. But many translators use it for lack of a better word.

Maybe 'go with' their own nature (?) ... something like that ... would have the right meaning.

I'm a commoner as well ... in fact commoner than most people ... that's why I just spat on the carpet .....

Yes, that was expressed a bit better. I think that the problem word is "follow".

 

Do we actually follow something or do we just 'be'?

I kind of assumed that translators use 'follow' because the Tao is 'the Way' - so you could follow the way ... like a path or road without it being authoritarian etc. Also the word follow can mean 'be aligned to' or 'in accord with' ... I don't see the problem. People seem to have a problem with hierarchies when we live in universe which is naturally structured and has inherent grading and hierarchy (for instance the electron shells in the atom ... lots of other examples.)

So you could say that a hydrogen atom follows the way of hydrogen in its chemistry for instance ... it does not behave like Calcium or Argon. However they all follow the natural laws of chemistry in their actions and reactions with one another.

As human beings we are not all the same ... we have differing constitutions and personal history ... we each have to find our own way ... but this does not mean that there is no Way ... which we are all involved in.

Land, never his own.

Wind, only visits the leaves.

Carrot roots, dirt clumps.

Carrot roots, dirt clumps.

Love this gritty soup you made

Pass the dust bowl, please.

Feliz natal.

Hope an old guy in a red dressing gown comes down your chimney this year.

It's experience and no, the heart is not the only field without limit.

The heart could be seen as a modal center for sentience/feeling and is where we open up to the infinite field ... with the proviso that we are talking in terms of fields without making them eternal sub-strata of reality (that's for you Vaj.) ... so it is not so much that the heart-field is an infinite field but that our hearts open to the infinitude inherent in that which is.

That's how I see it anyway.