Forgiveness

[3bob]

I have to agree. A careful reading is necessary to put the author's points in proper context.

 

Agreed Blasto, good point:

 

Here is a link (to links) with some of the authors material that is on-line

 

http://www.cha.harvard.edu/vov/publications.shtml

[3bob]

Yep, Bob, I can't argue with what you have said.

 

I just felt the need to point out that forgiveness is not a one-sided affair.

 

And I agree, as long as there is negative energy flowing there is little chance for peaceful conditions to exist when the two effected are in close circumstances.

 

I'm not trying to negate the value of forgiveness, I am only trying to point out that unless we can forgive and totally let go there is little chance for inner peace especially when some condition recalls the event.

 

I would never be able to forgive Hitler for what he did. Some events in life are just unforgivable. And I hesitate to say this but sometimes only restitution will allow for total letting go.

 

Peace & Love!

 

Among people on a brass tacks and human level I agree with much of what you say as a means of trying to cope on that level... yet there are greater evils than Hitler - which may be hard to imagine considering the horror that he was part of. A question: can we forgive the Tao or the Sages or Heaven or whatever we hold to be true and natural for not stopping such horror before it took place? And who or what should be blamed for not taking certain preventitive measures at the beginning of mankind?

[Marblehead]

A question: can we forgive the Tao or the Sages or Heaven or whatever we hold to be true and natural for not stopping such horror before it took place? And who or what should be blamed for not taking certain preventitive measures at the beginning of mankind?

 

Hi Bob,

 

Now that is a heavy question.

 

Regarding Hitler, much of the blame can be placed on the British. I won't go into detail.

 

To the question in general, I will first say that Tao, the Sage, and Heaven bear no blame for what happens anywhere in the world. Individual people have made choices and elected to do evil things. Again I suggest that the blame for evil acts toward others must be placed directly on the person who is commiting the acts.

 

Can we blame society? No. And I say that because there are many in society who do not do evil. And that was their choice. I will not even accept the thought that a person's environment or culture caused them to do evil because doing evil is not something that is openly accepted by any culture I know of.

 

Yes, there are sub-groups within certain cultures that do evil but these act are performed by a very small minority. Events of today have many people thinking negative things about Moslems but this is very unfair. Most Moslems just want to live their life the way they have chosen and be left alone by others. These people wish for pece and happiness just as much as I do.

 

It is my opinion that there are evil people on this planet and they will do evil every chance they get. That is why we must be aware of what is happening around us. We cannot defend ourself if we pretend that everyone is going to do the right thing and we remain totally passive. Hey, most churches don't leave their doors open for people to go in and pray because so much damage has been done to churches when they were left open for the followers of the religion.

 

It is my understanding that as long as our brain is functioning properly we have choices we can make. When an individual makes a choice to abuse another then the individual performing the abuse should be held responsible. If people are held responsible for their actings there would be a lot fewer acts of evil, in my opinion.

 

Remember, Tao is not like an intelligent designer. If we believed in an intelligent designer then we could pass blame on the design. Taoism is very closely linked with evolution (my opinion, of course). And evolution includes the concept of survival of the fittest. The strong get what they need, sometimes at the expense of the weaker.

 

We humans try to mediate this but from what I see we aren't doing very well.

 

Peace & Love!

[Guest paul walter]

Greetings..

 

Forgiveness is its own trap, entangling a process of conceived agendas.. Just 'let it go'.. Yes, Marblehead, caution born of experience is wisdom, in-as-much-as that caution doesn't turn to prejudice.. dwelling on the past is living in the past.. so, i greet every one with a 'clean slate', even those that have transgressed, but.. experience identifies appropriate action prior to repeated occurances.. Forgiveness is an unnecessary mental ritual, the very act of which confirms the past is still a burden..

 

Be well..

etc

Yes, forgiveness has the trappings of the abusive Christian heritage a lot of us were born into. Culture makes good use of this 'self-blame' in order to perpetuate the myth of a kind and forgiving society. You will find this thinking enacted in the realm of politics when the idea of 'justice' being done is just too unrealistic a concept to imagine (e.g. Apartheid, Rawanda etc etc). Consequently the onus is on the individual to forgive and to get on with production lest the airing of real truths disrupt the social fabric. I am nearing the end of recovery from complex PTSD resultig from severe domestic vilence at the hands of a girl who has been a victim/perpetrator all her life ( she is able to remain in this state through the considerable support of her culture). While I was busy forgiving her for years for what she was doing to me I was giving her the power to not learn for herself (though that was not possible I now see, or at least in a reasonable amount of time). Not many people would be as fortunate as me in such an extreme situation since I have considerable 'releasing' strategies that can dissolve trauma(mind/body) and not hold grudges (or as psychs might call it:victim mentality ). Under the circumstances of the abuse i had mistaken the opening of the heart, or forgiveness as an effective way of cementing change. What it did was simply keep me alive, which in itself was a good thing, though I continued to think that socialised people understood concepts like foregiveness, justice etc. on the same level I did and that that would be enough to stop what was happening to me. Only after having the space to reflect(and it was a considerable amount of space since I was kicked out onto the streets and living in parks )did I realise that I had been the one doing all the work in terms of responsibility for this persons actions.

The thing is not to 'forgive' so as much as to realise that some people have no standard of proper behaviour in relation to others or towards themselves, therefore relying on your 'forgiving' attitude to paper over their lack of self-regulation. Indeed one of the last contacts I had with her made it clear that I will never forgive her (or her supporters) again and that it is up to her to forgive herself, a process that would give birth to the neccessary atonement (making amends for the guilt that will appear when a conscience is developed) and change of behaviour that the person needs but can't access. So I think foregiveness has a place but only for the individual who has to face their own 'bad' actions. It can be a handy tool that can reconcile the person with 'themself' just before the 'letting go' of problems is about to happen-just a tool, not an adjuct of moral philosophy. The Tibetans have nice things to say on this topic too. I have a lot in me to add all on this but since I might be rambling I'll stop here. Paul.

[3bob]

Hi Bob,

 

Now that is a heavy question.

 

Regarding Hitler, much of the blame can be placed on the British. I won't go into detail.

 

To the question in general, I will first say that Tao, the Sage, and Heaven bear no blame for what happens anywhere in the world. Individual people have made choices and elected to do evil things. Again I suggest that the blame for evil acts toward others must be placed directly on the person who is commiting the acts.

 

Can we blame society? No. And I say that because there are many in society who do not do evil. And that was their choice. I will not even accept the thought that a person's environment or culture caused them to do evil because doing evil is not something that is openly accepted by any culture I know of.

 

Yes, there are sub-groups within certain cultures that do evil but these act are performed by a very small minority. Events of today have many people thinking negative things about Moslems but this is very unfair. Most Moslems just want to live their life the way they have chosen and be left alone by others. These people wish for pece and happiness just as much as I do.

 

It is my opinion that there are evil people on this planet and they will do evil every chance they get. That is why we must be aware of what is happening around us. We cannot defend ourself if we pretend that everyone is going to do the right thing and we remain totally passive. Hey, most churches don't leave their doors open for people to go in and pray because so much damage has been done to churches when they were left open for the followers of the religion.

 

It is my understanding that as long as our brain is functioning properly we have choices we can make. When an individual makes a choice to abuse another then the individual performing the abuse should be held responsible. If people are held responsible for their actings there would be a lot fewer acts of evil, in my opinion.

 

Remember, Tao is not like an intelligent designer. If we believed in an intelligent designer then we could pass blame on the design. Taoism is very closely linked with evolution (my opinion, of course). And evolution includes the concept of survival of the fittest. The strong get what they need, sometimes at the expense of the weaker.

 

We humans try to mediate this but from what I see we aren't doing very well.

 

Peace & Love!

 

Thanks for sharing some of your thoughts and views on the matter MH.

 

The Tao is non-evolutionary or changeless. (as recorded in doctrine given by Sages)

Which then brings us to its first born or to "the One"... do you see where I'm headed?

 

Also from TTC 25 there is this excerpt, "...heaven follows the ways of Tao, Tao follows its own ways", or from TTC 41, "...The Tao is hidden and nameless; Yet it alone knows how to render help and to fulfill". Thus (and not mentioning many other examples) in my view the Tao is not only intelligent beyond human conception but also the source of all intelligence (although with various permutations taking place to it) for every realm.

 

To get back to the "One", where really are the individuals that can do something outside of the One, or how could heaven let something take place that does not follow ways of the Tao - which it follows? Or how could there be an evil disconnect somewhere within or under the One?

[Marblehead]

Thanks for sharing some of your thoughts and views on the matter MH.

 

The Tao is non-evolutionary or changeless. (as recorded in doctrine given by Sages)

Which then brings us to its first born or to "the One"... do you see where I'm headed?

 

Also from TTC 25 there is this excerpt, "...heaven follows the ways of Tao, Tao follows its own ways", or from TTC 41, "...The Tao is hidden and nameless; Yet it alone knows how to render help and to fulfill". Thus (and not mentioning many other examples) in my view the Tao is not only intelligent beyond human conception but also the source of all intelligence (although with various permutations taking place to it) for every realm.

 

To get back to the "One", where really are the individuals that can do something outside of the One, or how could heaven let something take place that does not follow ways of the Tao - which it follows? Or how could there be an evil disconnect somewhere within or under the One?

 

Hi Bob,

 

Tao is dynamic. Every changing. No, I will never, ever personify Tao nor will I ever accept the concept of universal consciousness not will I ever subject myself to the concept of an intellibent designer.

 

Yes, man follows earth, earth follows heaven, heaven follows Tao and Tao follows Tzujan (the laws of nature).

 

The reason there are evil people and the reason evil people do evil things is because there is no intelligent designer. Everything that happens happens within the limits of Tao, which, of course, is limitless. Regretfully, these evil acts are within the parameters of Tao. The acts are possible because there is no force preventing them.

 

Hey, one day our sun will burn out and become a brown dwarf. Earth will be a frozen wasteland. There will be no more life on earth. But to Tao it matters not. Creation and destruction are the same thing - just processes in time and space.

 

Tao and all of the nature of the universe have no choices. They must do what they must do. And BTW, the rains do not fall on all equally. You can go to some parts of Africa as see that. Or to desert America.

 

So do the people in Africa have to forgive nature for being harsh with them? I think not. Nature has no choice. Do the snow geese have to forgive the fox for killing its chicks? No, the fox had no choice. Do we have to forgive the man who raped and killed the 12 year old girl? No. The man had a choice and elected to be evil. Should the man pay for his choice? Absolutely!

 

When people choose to do evil they are still acting within Tao. True, they have lost the spirit of Tao but they still operate within the limits of Tao. Their Virtue has gone astray. And this is why I think it is so much more important to talk about virtue than it is to talk about Tao. We can do nothing regarding the operation of Tao but we have full control, yes, I said that, full control of our virtue.

 

Enough for now. Hehehe.

 

Peace & Love!

[3bob]

Hi Bob,

 

Tao is dynamic. Every changing. No, I will never, ever personify Tao nor will I ever accept the concept of universal consciousness not will I ever subject myself to the concept of an intellibent designer.

 

Yes, man follows earth, earth follows heaven, heaven follows Tao and Tao follows Tzujan (the laws of nature).

 

The reason there are evil people and the reason evil people do evil things is because there is no intelligent designer. Everything that happens happens within the limits of Tao, which, of course, is limitless. Regretfully, these evil acts are within the parameters of Tao. The acts are possible because there is no force preventing them.

 

Hey, one day our sun will burn out and become a brown dwarf. Earth will be a frozen wasteland. There will be no more life on earth. But to Tao it matters not. Creation and destruction are the same thing - just processes in time and space.

 

Tao and all of the nature of the universe have no choices. They must do what they must do. And BTW, the rains do not fall on all equally. You can go to some parts of Africa as see that. Or to desert America.

 

So do the people in Africa have to forgive nature for being harsh with them? I think not. Nature has no choice. Do the snow geese have to forgive the fox for killing its chicks? No, the fox had no choice. Do we have to forgive the man who raped and killed the 12 year old girl? No. The man had a choice and elected to be evil. Should the man pay for his choice? Absolutely!

 

When people choose to do evil they are still acting within Tao. True, they have lost the spirit of Tao but they still operate within the limits of Tao. Their Virtue has gone astray. And this is why I think it is so much more important to talk about virtue than it is to talk about Tao. We can do nothing regarding the operation of Tao but we have full control, yes, I said that, full control of our virtue.

 

Enough for now. Hehehe.

 

Peace & Love!

 

The Tao (as un-nameable) - is not the "Two" which instantly turns into the "Three" and thus are like aspects of the Tao, and in them all dynamics or change are taking place. (and which can be named as process in the I Ching) Anyway, that is my very basic understanding. Further, there is also the following line in the T.T.C. 25, "Standing alone without change, yet pervading all without fail" I'm not sure how Taoists in general interpret those lines but I don't see how anyone can apparently deny the fairly straight foward content and context of those lines per the T.T.C. of Taoism? I'm no expert or even a rookie but additional comparisons or views from some of the Taoists here along those lines would be appreciated?

 

And thanks for the discussion MH. I hope to comment on some of your other points when time and energy permit.

 

Om

Edited January 25, 2010 by 3bob

[Marblehead]

Further, there is also the following line in the T.T.C. 25, "Standing alone without change, yet pervading all without fail" I'm not sure how Taoists in general interpret those lines but I don't see how anyone can apparently deny the fairly straight foward content and context of those lines per the T.T.C. of Taoism?

Om

 

Hi Bob,

 

Okay. Let's look at Chapter 25. Henricks' translation:

 

1. There was something formed out of chaos,

2. That was born before Heaven and Earth.

3. Quiet and Still! Pure and deep!

4. It stands on its own and does not change.

5. It can be regarded as the mother of Heaven and Earth.

6. I do not yet know its name:

7. I "style" it "the Way."

 

"Chaos" is equal to Singularity - Oneness - Scientifically, the 'time' prior to the Big Bang.

 

 

This 'something' that formed out of Chaos was Mystery. Mystery formed prior to any Manifestations - before heaven and earth.

 

Yes, it stands on its own and does not change until Chi interacts with it to form Manifest. Indeed, Mystery is quiet, still, pure and deep; that is why it is called Mystery. Mystery is considered the Mother of all things.

 

BTW I consider Mystery to be what science is now calling Dark Matter. The visible components of the universe (Manifest) consist of only about 4.6% of the totally (Tao). Mystery (Dark Matter) is about 23%. The remaining 72% is thought to be Dark Energy (Chi).

 

Now, to give it a name, which, of course, we should not do, we can style it "the Way". The way of what? The way of Tao. So here we have the way of Tao, that is, how Tao manifests itself through the interaction of Chi and Mystery.

 

Line 4 can be argued, of course. My arguement is that Mystery does not stand on its own (because without the interaction of Chi there would be not purpose or function of Mystery) and it is in constant flux, ever-changing, creating new manifest and absorbing destroyed manifest.

 

The only concept (I say concept because it really is not a thing) that truely "stands on its own and does not change" is Tzujan, that is, the processes of Tao and all of its configurations and manifestations.

 

Now please remember, I am (that is, my basic belief) an Atheistic Taoist. That means that I will never accept any suggestion that there is some kind of Creator in charge of everything, somehow intelligently making things work the way they do.

 

Peace & Love!

[soaring crane]

Greetings..

 

Forgiveness is an unnecessary mental ritual, the very act of which confirms the past is still a burden..

 

Be well..

 

So many of your posts reflect my thoughts, I wonder about that sometimes.

 

Has anybody else considered forgetting without forgiving? I guess it takes practice (or you just have to be naturally a little stupider than most). Whenever I find myself in the position of having to forgive or aplogize (or accept someone else's apology), I have to fake it and then I feel a twinge of self-loathing. But, I can't always answer, "no" everytime someone asks me to accept their apology, or demands one from me. So, societal expediency sometimes dictates the outer crust, but that in turn conceals the deeper truth (mwaaa haaa haaa haaa).

 

This is connected to one of my biggest difficulties with internet forums, in fact.

 

 

 

[Marblehead]

Has anybody else considered forgetting without forgiving? I guess it takes practice (or you just have to be naturally a little stupider than most).

 

Hi Soaring Crane,

 

I would like to speak to this just a little bit.

 

Forgettng the offense does not include forgetting the lesson. Yes, I agree with TzuJanLi in that we can release the pain, hurt, disappointment, whatever that accompanied the offense. We replace the memory of the pain, etc. with the lesson learned from the experience. This way there is no need to forgive because we have turned a negative into a positive. We really were offered a gift.

 

Forget the event, remember the lesson.

 

PS Faking an apology only builds discontent within ourselves. And even if you can't be true to others, at least be true to yourself. If you faked the forgiveness or apology at least admit it to yourself and justify it as best you can.

 

Peace & Love!

[TzuJanLi]

Greetings..

 

Accepting the apology is evident when i don't display the awareness of the transgression, when i greet the transgressor without resistance, it's a new 'Now', another opportunity to redefine 'who we are'.. i look to that opportunity without prejudice, but i am also cautious of the potential that the transgressor may not choose to redefine theirself in alignment with the apology.. that caution doesn't diminish the opportunity, though..

 

The 'lesson learned' is evident in one of two ways.. it is stored in our mental filing system with a 'red-flag', or.. it is internalized as 'who we are'.. if it is internalized, it doesn't pop-up as a red-flag, it is simply part of our natural awareness.. our responses to evidence of a reoccurance are fluid and without conflict, we identify the situation prior to its maturity and manage it appropriately.. if we rely on the 'red-flag' alert from our mental evaluations, we are likely too late for 'appropriate management'.. our 'startle reflex' kicks-in and conflict emerges, the mind is invested in its value system..

 

An apology offered is part of the 'appropriate management', if the energy feels sincere.. we simply respond comassionately, realizing the sincerity is the result of an energetic shift of awareness toward interconnectedness.. a sincere 'thank you' is 'my' response, and nothing more need be said.. i appreciate the effort to shift energies and awareness..

 

Be well..

[3bob]

Hi Bob,

 

Okay. Let's look at Chapter 25. Henricks' translation:

 

1. There was something formed out of chaos,

2. That was born before Heaven and Earth.

3. Quiet and Still! Pure and deep!

4. It stands on its own and does not change.

5. It can be regarded as the mother of Heaven and Earth.

6. I do not yet know its name:

7. I "style" it "the Way."

 

"Chaos" is equal to Singularity - Oneness - Scientifically, the 'time' prior to the Big Bang.

 

 

This 'something' that formed out of Chaos was Mystery. Mystery formed prior to any Manifestations - before heaven and earth.

 

Yes, it stands on its own and does not change until Chi interacts with it to form Manifest. Indeed, Mystery is quiet, still, pure and deep; that is why it is called Mystery. Mystery is considered the Mother of all things.

 

BTW I consider Mystery to be what science is now calling Dark Matter. The visible components of the universe (Manifest) consist of only about 4.6% of the totally (Tao). Mystery (Dark Matter) is about 23%. The remaining 72% is thought to be Dark Energy (Chi).

 

Now, to give it a name, which, of course, we should not do, we can style it "the Way". The way of what? The way of Tao. So here we have the way of Tao, that is, how Tao manifests itself through the interaction of Chi and Mystery.

 

Line 4 can be argued, of course. My arguement is that Mystery does not stand on its own (because without the interaction of Chi there would be not purpose or function of Mystery) and it is in constant flux, ever-changing, creating new manifest and absorbing destroyed manifest.

 

The only concept (I say concept because it really is not a thing) that truely "stands on its own and does not change" is Tzujan, that is, the processes of Tao and all of its configurations and manifestations.

 

Now please remember, I am (that is, my basic belief) an Atheistic Taoist. That means that I will never accept any suggestion that there is some kind of Creator in charge of everything, somehow intelligently making things work the way they do.

 

Peace & Love!

 

Ok MH, agreed chapter 25 could be debated. (along the lines you bring up)

Anyway, my basic belief follows the pointer of:

 

"Yuan-shih T'ien-tsun -- The First Principal

He has no beginning and no end. He existed "before the void and the silence, before primordial chaos." He is self-existing, changeless, limitless, invisible, contains all virtues, is present in all places and is the source of all truth"

 

(which can not really be nailed down by any beliefs or concepts)

 

Peace and Love also!

 

Om

[Marblehead]

Ok MH, agreed chapter 25 could be debated. (along the lines you bring up)

Anyway, my basic belief follows the pointer of:

 

"Yuan-shih T'ien-tsun -- The First Principal

He has no beginning and no end. He existed "before the void and the silence, before primordial chaos." He is self-existing, changeless, limitless, invisible, contains all virtues, is present in all places and is the source of all truth"

 

(which can not really be nailed down by any beliefs or concepts)

 

Peace and Love also!

 

Om

 

Hi Bob,

 

First, let me point out that the gender "He" is inappropriate. Lao Tzu used the female gender "She" seven times in the TCC and never once used "He" when referring to Tao.

 

Following the concept of cyclical tranformations, what existed prior to primordial chaos was another universe. Something (primordial chaos) cannot be created out of absolute nothingness. Something had to exist for it to become primordial chaos.

 

So the quote above is, for me, without value. I suggest that there is no first principle because everything is in constant change. Tao itself is dynamic - ever changing. At on point manifesting itself and at another point remaining hidden.

 

I know that there are many different translations of the TTC. Afterall, it is the second most frequently translated book in history only after the Christian Bible. There are many translations that have a heavy Christian influence; there are many that have a heavy Buddhist influence.

 

I will never accept anything that suggests a personification of Tao. I believe all such acts to be errors. There really is no "first principle" in Taoism, in my opinion. No matter where in time one points to there was a time before and a time after. There are only eternal cycles, birth and death, creation and destruction.

 

And while it is true that I cannot prove that there is a supreme essence (being) it has never been proven that one exists.

 

I think we have gone astray of the subject of forgiveness but I guess that's okay as it appears that no one else cares to discuss that subject any more. Hehehe.

 

I think that it would be wrong to suggest that Lao Tzu ever suggested that there was a creator (conscious entity) of all things. This is why I returned to Taoist Philosophy after reading some of the Taoist Religious literature.

 

But I am still willing to discuss this further but to remain as close as possible to what Lao Tzu suggested I think we should stick with exact chapter discussions. I generally use Henricks' translation as my support. (No, I don't always agree with him. Hehehe.)

 

Peace & Love!

[3bob]

Hi Bob,

 

First, let me point out that the gender "He" is inappropriate. Lao Tzu used the female gender "She" seven times in the TCC and never once used "He" when referring to Tao.

 

Following the concept of cyclical tranformations, what existed prior to primordial chaos was another universe. Something (primordial chaos) cannot be created out of absolute nothingness. Something had to exist for it to become primordial chaos.

 

So the quote above is, for me, without value. I suggest that there is no first principle because everything is in constant change. Tao itself is dynamic - ever changing. At on point manifesting itself and at another point remaining hidden.

 

I know that there are many different translations of the TTC. Afterall, it is the second most frequently translated book in history only after the Christian Bible. There are many translations that have a heavy Christian influence; there are many that have a heavy Buddhist influence.

 

I will never accept anything that suggests a personification of Tao. I believe all such acts to be errors. There really is no "first principle" in Taoism, in my opinion. No matter where in time one points to there was a time before and a time after. There are only eternal cycles, birth and death, creation and destruction.

 

And while it is true that I cannot prove that there is a supreme essence (being) it has never been proven that one exists.

 

I think we have gone astray of the subject of forgiveness but I guess that's okay as it appears that no one else cares to discuss that subject any more. Hehehe.

 

I think that it would be wrong to suggest that Lao Tzu ever suggested that there was a creator (conscious entity) of all things. This is why I returned to Taoist Philosophy after reading some of the Taoist Religious literature.

 

But I am still willing to discuss this further but to remain as close as possible to what Lao Tzu suggested I think we should stick with exact chapter discussions. I generally use Henricks' translation as my support. (No, I don't always agree with him. Hehehe.)

 

Peace & Love!

 

Can mind ever know of absolute if mind is created and creating, spun out of the un-named and un-nameable as the aspects or processes you speak of which can be named?

 

Agreed, there is no proof in the sense you speak of. For no one can or ever will find proof in mind for that which beyond mind. I have no problem at all with eternal cycles but again to me those are aspects that are spun out so to speak into time and space as time and space.

 

Om

[Marblehead]

Can mind ever know of absolute if mind is created and creating, spun out of the un-named and un-nameable as the aspects or processes you speak of which can be named?

 

Agreed, there is no proof in the sense you speak of. For no one can or ever will find proof in mind for that which beyond mind. I have no problem at all with eternal cycles but again to me those are aspects that are spun out so to speak into time and space as time and space.

 

Om

 

Hi Bob,

 

If you ever catch me suggesting that I know of an absolute truth please bring it to my attention because I will have been lying to you. Hehehe. I ever try hard to keep from saying that I know something for sure. I have my understandings - they might be all screwed up.

 

I really doubt that anyone knows the absolute. We are restricted by how our brain works. Like in that thread about string theory, we live in our three-dimensional world. String theory suggests that there are eleven dimensions. So what's with those other eight dimensions? Will the human mind ever evolve to be able to perceive these other dimensions?

 

But then the human animal is young compared to the age of this present universe. Potentially we have a long way to go if we don't kill ourselves in the process.

 

So I forgive you and myself for taking this thread off topic but we we just practicing wu wei. It's all Tao.

 

Peace & Love!

 

 

Yeah, time is just the movement of space (and objects within). During the period(s) of singularity there was no time.

[3bob]

Hi Bob,

 

If you ever catch me suggesting that I know of an absolute truth please bring it to my attention because I will have been lying to you. Hehehe. I ever try hard to keep from saying that I know something for sure. I have my understandings - they might be all screwed up.

 

I really doubt that anyone knows the absolute. We are restricted by how our brain works. Like in that thread about string theory, we live in our three-dimensional world. String theory suggests that there are eleven dimensions. So what's with those other eight dimensions? Will the human mind ever evolve to be able to perceive these other dimensions?

 

But then the human animal is young compared to the age of this present universe. Potentially we have a long way to go if we don't kill ourselves in the process.

 

So I forgive you and myself for taking this thread off topic but we we just practicing wu wei. It's all Tao.

 

Peace & Love!

 

 

Yeah, time is just the movement of space (and objects within). During the period(s) of singularity there was no time.

 

Righto, only absolute can know absolute, or only Tao can know Tao, everything else is to slow (so to speak) to keep up and spins out into time and space. Chapter 21 alludes to me of a catching-up if you will. (terms wise)

 

Om

[Marblehead]

Righto, only absolute can know absolute, or only Tao can know Tao, everything else is to slow (so to speak) to keep up and spins out into time and space. Chapter 21 alludes to me of a catching-up if you will. (terms wise)

 

Om

 

Chapter 21 is one of those where Henricks uses the masculine noun "Father" twice. Other translations use "Mother". I think that this has something to do with the use of gender nouns in the Chinese language as to how the noun is going to be genderized by the translator.

 

I prefer "Mother" because it is said that Tao "gives birth" and only the feminine gives birth. (No, we can't count the seahorse. Hehehe)

 

Anyhow, since we (science) can detect only 4.6% of the essence of the universe, it is a given, in my mind, that there is much more to the totality than what we can observe with our five senses and the instruments we have created for the purpose of observation.

 

Peace & Love!

[3bob]

Chapter 21 is one of those where Henricks uses the masculine noun "Father" twice. Other translations use "Mother". I think that this has something to do with the use of gender nouns in the Chinese language as to how the noun is going to be genderized by the translator.

 

I prefer "Mother" because it is said that Tao "gives birth" and only the feminine gives birth. (No, we can't count the seahorse. Hehehe)

 

Anyhow, since we (science) can detect only 4.6% of the essence of the universe, it is a given, in my mind, that there is much more to the totality than what we can observe with our five senses and the instruments we have created for the purpose of observation.

 

Peace & Love!

 

True, instruments can see into the sub-atomic particle levels, but this is still cutting things in half, again and again so to speak... but where the cuts end is the beginning of where instruments can not and never will see, for if they could then corruption could also reach there.

[Marblehead]

... for if they could then corruption could also reach there.

 

 

That's an interesting thought. And very true, I think. I had never thought of it that way but it really is true, isn't it? The mystery (of anything) is much more attractive than the obvious.

 

For an inquiring person, what we don't know often attracts us much more than what we already know.

 

And to think we know what we cannot know truely is a corruption of the mystery.

 

Peace & Love!

Edited January 27, 2010 by Marblehead

[3bob]

That's an interesting thought. And very true, I think. I had never thought of it that way but it really is true, isn't it? The mystery (of anything) is much more attractive than the obvious.

 

For an inquiring person, what we don't know often attracts us much more than what we already know.

 

And to think we know what we cannot know truely is a corruption of the mystery.

 

Peace & Love!

 

Yes - Well said Marblehead -

 

True freedom is the deepest joy that can not be corrupted, or cut apart!

[Marblehead]

Yes - Well said Marblehead -

 

True freedom is the deepest joy that can not be corrupted, or cut apart!

 

 

Yeah. Freedom. I like that word - freedom.

 

Of course, we all are limited in some ways in the extent of our freedom but one thing for sure is that, unless we allow it, no one cna take away our freedom of mind, soul and spirit.

 

Others can place very strict limits on our bodily freedom but as long as we have our inner freedom we are unlimited by the physical.

 

Peace & Love!

[JustARandomPanda]

Post deleted

[Tao99]

Post deleted

Edited January 28, 2010 by Tao99

[JustARandomPanda]

Post deleted

[Tao99]

Post deleted

Edited January 28, 2010 by Tao99