steve

The Dao Bums
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    11,757

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    272

Posts posted by steve

  2. Posted

    9 hours ago, kakapo said:

     

    Evil exists solely because good people turn a blind eye to it and allow it to continue, and for no other reason. 

     

    If good people did something about it, it wouldn't and couldn't exist.

     

    8 hours ago, Tommy said:

    I believe that good and evil is mostly subjective depending upon which side of the fence one is sitting on. 

    ...

     

    What you say about good and evil is a very simplistic view. That evil is obvious and good is obvious and the two are easily distinguished. Sometimes it isn't that easy. But, hindsight always tells us that it is.

     

    I just finished an interesting and entertaining fantasy novel called Babel by RF Kuang.

    It is an interesting study in good, evil, and perspective set against the background of English colonialism.

    Not a perfect novel by any stretch but quite compelling overall.

     

    • Thanks 1

  3. Posted

    On 1/11/2026 at 11:03 AM, liminal_luke said:

    It´s often said that the "separate self" does not exist, and I suppose this goes for the self of Gods and Goddesses too. 

     

    IMO it is an error in view to claim that a separate self "does not exist."

    Nor did I claim that gods, goddesses, and demons do not exist.

    That is not my view or the meaning of my posts.

    I do understand how people can come to that conclusion, sorry to not be more clear.

     

    On 1/11/2026 at 11:03 AM, liminal_luke said:

    If Gods and Goddesses do exist then, at least on some level: they are us and we, them. 

     

    This, I can get behind... and in front...  and in the middle too. 

     

    "I am he
    As you are he
    As you are me
    And we are all together

    ...

    Goo, goo, g'joob!"

    • Like 1

  4. Posted

    2 hours ago, Apech said:

     

    @steve that's interesting but I believe you may have made some category errors.  Some representations are anthropomorphic but that does not mean that the thing being represented is 'human' (depending on what human means I suppose).  There are entities at all levels of reality but we see them through human eyes and with human minds.  Also natural phenomena are not 'unexplainable' but may be 'unexplained' in some cases.  I suspect you think that the world populated by non-human entities is a fantasy of primitive thought because it does not equate to your scientific preconceptions.  Actually it is the more normal view and truer for that.  Given the practice which I know you follow you might want to revisit how you are conceptualising all this.

     

    Peace.

     

    A.

     

     

     

    Yeah, I've probably got it all wrong.

    Peace

    • Haha 2

  6. Posted

    There is an interesting hypothesis of consciousness being rooted in quantum states in intra-neuronal microtubules.

    This is a collaboration between an anesthesiologist, Stuart Hameroff, and physicist, Roger Penrose.

    There are plenty of valid criticisms but it's an interesting line of inquiry.

    https://academic.oup.com/nc/article/2025/1/niaf011/8127081?login=false

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1571064513001188?via%3Dihub

  7. Posted · Edited by steve

    4 hours ago, old3bob said:

     

    ask all the enlightened or advanced masters and students  worth their salt why they are not afraid to use terms like  "evil, demonic, and hell realms or beings" in their spiritual teachings & warnings that give and have protections against same,   (along with graphic depiction's of such like on the Tibetan Wheel of Life and so many other examples across a very board spectrum of ways and religions) some of which have lineages and precepts going back thousands of years...

     

    Just like the gods and goddesses, I see these more as convenient anthropomorphic representations of human qualities and characteristics and of unexplainable natural phenomena. Some positive (gods and goddesses) and some negative (demons). I’m not afraid to use the terms but I think they are less necessary and less meaningful in the context of modern knowledge. 

  8. Posted

    I wonder what value there is in ascribing the negative characteristics and manifestations we see as “evil” as opposed to human? It feels to me that it is a way to distance ourselves or absolve ourselves of responsibility, a form of dehumanization such as is used to normalize atrocities.

    • Like 3

  9. Posted

    4 hours ago, Cobie said:

     


    These are all dictionaries for the use of the characters in modern Chinese. You need a dictionary for the meanings as used in transcripts of Classical Chinese.  There often is some difference in the meanings. I use: A Student's Dictionary of Classical and Medieval Chinese, Author: Paul W. Kroll 

     

     

     

    May I ask, do you speak and/or read Mandarin @Cobie?

  11. Posted

    45 minutes ago, Taomeow said:

     

    About stuff that strikes one as stranger than average.  Anything. :) 

     

    I don't remember which season I stopped at but I loved the series at first and then it started jumping the shark with evil Russians, so I abandoned it.  Not saying there are no evil Russians, but the Hollywood version is invariably stranger than a normal evil Russian.  

     

    I loved the first season and the rest not as much but the overall effect worked for me, largely because of the nostalgia. The mall was silly, the evil Russians too caricatured. That said the Americans were far more evil. I mainly liked the fact that we enjoyed it as a family and my kids lived the series.

     

    I also recently watched Life of Chuck and really enjoyed it.

     

    Just teasing about the “other stuff.” Some of it is fun!

    • Like 1

  12. Posted

    12 hours ago, TaiChiGringo said:

    I’m curious how this resonates with others’ experiences. How have your own Taoist, Qigong, or internal practices shaped your sense of internal organization, alignment, or subtle body awareness? Have you noticed anything similar to what I describe in Chen Taijiquan: feedback, regulation, or embodied learning that feels discovered rather than taught?

     

    Your experience resonates strongly with my own. 

    For me, neijia, neigong, and neidan are journeys of self discovery. 

    A teacher can give pointers and direction, as well as exercises to engage with, but we must engage and discover for ourselves the true meaning, proper technique, and results. 

    Externally, the teacher can adjust the posture but internally, the inner details of posture must be discovered.

    This is the only way we can learn to self-correct and make meaningful progress in our practice. 

    Once we have developed adequate skill and confidence, engaging with others allow us to test our progress and discover our weaknesses and errors, such as in tui shou, san da, and so on.

    This is why it is said in taijiquan that we must 'invest in loss.'

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1

  13. Posted · Edited by steve
    perhaps not the best approach at the moment

    On 1/3/2026 at 9:51 PM, Cadcam said:

    My mind is still, but I'm not comfortable with the sitting in stillness,  and so i try to find something to do, but my mind isn't attracted to any activity, and so i return to the stillness.  I'm not creative in this state. I'm close to giving up looking for distractions because nothing satisfies. Perhaps then I will return to feeling compassion. 

     

    If there is discomfort sitting in stillness, that mind is not still.

    If the mind tries to find something to do, that mind is not still, it is active and restless.

    The restlessness and discomfort interfere with connecting to the source of creativity and compassion.

     

    • Like 1

  15. Posted · Edited by steve

    3 hours ago, ChiDragon said:

    I am related to the family.

    My heartfelt condolences!

    I pray for healing for your family.
    And for your dear young doctor.

     

     

    I apologize for the order of my replies, I often reply from latest to earlier… 

    🙏🏼

    • Thanks 1

  16. Posted

    If you trust wu wei as a principle, you must let it happen. The more you is there, the less it happens. I am a straw dog, and will be stashed away between performances, Dao continues to flow.

    Feel the Dao in every moment. I trust this moment more than I trust what I think about it.

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1

  17. Posted

    5 hours ago, ChiDragon said:

    Effortless action, to me, it sounds that the outcome could be positive or negative. It may cause harm or beneficial from the result of the action. Apparently, the definition is definitely did not match the TTC definition of Wu Wei. I don't think that I can find a chapter in the TDC to substantiate this definition. 

     

    Dao treats us like straw dogs, no?

    Positive or negative is a human judgement, Dao does not play favorites.

  18. Posted · Edited by steve

    10 hours ago, stirling said:

    To truly understand Wu Wei, we must consider a radically different perspective on reality. Most of us assume that we exist as separate players in an world of separate players, each making their own decisions. From the perspective of the Dao, or Rigpa, or enlightened mind, this is a nonsense. The separateness can be seen in operation, but also is very obviously a delusion, once understood.

     

    Your entire post above is gold.

     

    And there are layers of understanding and realization, just as there are relative and absolute truth. Reading and studying alone, even a scripture as perfect as Daodejing, can only take us so far. The mind, its activity, and its contents can only take us so far. We must make room for practice, for simply being, to appreciate the wisdom hiding behind the words. And we must be patient and kind with ourselves and each other if we want to discover something new together.

     

    Although, if we trust the old masters, an occasional swift kick in the arse or thwack on the shoulder with the keisaku can be helpful too.

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1

  19. Posted

    12 hours ago, DynamicEquilibrium said:

    無為 

    Wu wei the action of Wu instead of non-doing can be a good translation in your opinion ? 

     

    I think you would also need to translate Wu in that case but it has potential. 

    • Like 1

  21. Posted

    1 hour ago, ChiDragon said:

     


    Sorry, I had left out something in the definition.
     

     


    In the scenario, saving an animal was not causing harm to nature.  However, if you killed the animal, then you are not Wu Wei.
     

     

    What if you kill to eat?

    • Like 1

  22. Posted

    On 12/31/2025 at 7:23 PM, ChiDragon said:

    Chapter 14 The invisible Tao
    1. 視之不見,名曰夷。
    2. 聽之不聞,名曰希。
    3. 摶之不得,名曰微。
    4. 此三者不可致詰，
    5. 故混而為一。­
    6. 其上不皦，
    7. 其下不昧，
    8. 繩繩不可名，
    9. 復歸於無物。
    10.是謂無狀之狀，
    11.無物之象，
    12.是謂惚恍。
    13.迎之不見其首，
    14.隨之不見其後。
    15.執古之道以御今之有。
    16.能知古始，
    17.是謂道紀。

    Translated in terse English...
    1. View it couldn't see, name and call it Colorless.
    2. Listen to it couldn't hear, name and call it Soundless.
    3. Touch it couldn't feel, name and call it Formless.
    4. These three are inseparable
    5. These three objects blended in one.
    6. Its top is not brilliant.
    7. Its bottom is not dim.
    8. Its continuance is unnameable.
    9. Returned to being formless(state of invisibility),
    10. Is called a form of no form.
    11. An image of formless,
    12. Is called obscure.
    13. Greet it cannot see its head.
    14. Follow it cannot see its back.
    15. Grasp the presence of Tao to see all existing things,
    16. Able to understand the ancient origin,
    17. It's called the Principles of Tao. 

     

    PS

    It reads just like one of the 21 Nails, a dzogchen scripture.

     

    I love the connections

     

    And hell if it isn’t poetic,

    The highest form!

     

     

    • Thanks 1

  23. Posted

    2 minutes ago, ChiDragon said:

    The correct translation is let nature take its course without interfering that is causing harm to nature.

     

    Sorry, but I think that is too restrictive a definition of wu wei.

    What if I step on a toad as I'm saving a drowning animal?

     

    I'm playing with you a little here.

    Forgive me.

     

     

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1

  24. Posted

    18 minutes ago, ChiDragon said:


    I just want to make myself clear, I didn't say Wu Wei, "do nothing" is the correct translation!

     

    Understood, I didn't think you said that.

     

    18 minutes ago, ChiDragon said:

     

    The correct translation is let nature take its course without interfering by humans.

     

    That's a reasonable translation.

    If a human saw a wild animal drowning in a storm and rescued it, would that be interfering with nature?

    In other words, is a human following nature trying to help other living creatures in a natural disaster?

    I think the definition of wu wei is more complicated and sophisticated to explore than what can be contained in a phrase or two characters.

     

    18 minutes ago, ChiDragon said:

    Something one don't understand need to be explained. This is why we are having this discussionr. We should not have the attitude that a new thing didn't learn before is not acceptable. After we have ironed things out, then something new has been learned. What do you think?

     

    I think that wu wei is not so much about what I think, more about what I do and what I am.

    Thinking does have its place, however, to a point. 

    Words can be a good guide but also an obstacle. 

     

  25. Posted

    1 hour ago, ChiDragon said:


    I don't mind taken your challenge of "the mission impossible." Do you know how much I went through in a book with the Chinese interpretation of each phrase in the TTC line by line. Each line was interpreted in the native language with lots of annotation. Even the term Wu Wei had a lot of explaining to do. Do you think just by saying "do nothing,"  you will accept that it is the principle of Wu Wei. It is because you understood the English translation of "do nothing" is the principle of Wu Wei. Come on, my friend Steve.

     

    I think we’re saying the same thing but finding it hard to understand your meaning here.