Sky Dancers

[Aetherous]

I have a name for this, it's called "making shit up."

 

Totally.

 

This stuff is more basic than kindergarten arithmatic

 

[Marblehead]

Bahahah!!! Take it as a compliment to who you once were. Doesn't say anything for who you are now though

 

 

Yeah, but no one, not even I, know who I am now. Darn those changes - just can't stop them.

 

Dynamic Tao! That's it!!! It's all Tao's fault!

[Vmarco]

Vmarco,

 

That Yin is insubstantial and unformed and Yang is substantial and formed. That it is based on your conceptual ideas of what you think is the nature of Light. Cool and groovy.

 

But matey Daoism is about raw nature pure and simple. It's about trees, waterways, and wind in your hair. It's about sunrises and moonsets and marvelling at the turning of the stars.

 

Personally I think you need to go camping, get out in the wild, light a fire, go swimming, climb a mountain. Go experience what originally inspired the notion of Yin and Yang.

 

For now tho, I am going to go enjoy my morning union with Yin and Yang with some good old fashion breathing and Taijiquan.

 

 

I recall reading about when the Steam Engine trains were about to reach 50 mph in the 1800's, and not only did the majority of people think that anyone traveling that fast would go insane, but some even thought it would bring about the destruction of the physical world by unbalancing nature.

 

Well, change is coming Stig. Your traditional Daoist principled views do not match the nature of Tao. But I do understand your Charles H. Duell nature,...you know, the guy who said "Everything that can be invented has been invented." Charles H. Duell, U.S. Commissioner of Patents, in 1899.

 

Unlike yourself, I have spent many years in wildernesses, forests, mountains, and deserts,...and know the difference between Form and Empty, and Empty and Form. Your posts indicate a person fully absorbed by materialism and phenomena, and thus too blocked to understand the Tao.

 

But, hey, hope you enjoyed your morning union,...although I think even ACIM had a better grasp of Tao than you.

 

ACIM commented: What about the beauty and goodness in the world?

 

The so-called positive aspects of our world are equally as illusory as the negative ones. They are both aspects of a dualistic perceptual universe, which but reflect the dualistic split in the mind of Man. The famous statement "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder' is also applicable here, since what one deems as beauty, another may find to be aesthetically displeasing, and vice versa. Similarly, what one society judges as good, another may judge as bad and against the common good. This can be evidenced by a careful study of history, sociology, and cultural anthropology. Therefore, using the criterion for reality of eternal changelessness that is employed in the Course, we can conclude that nothing that the world deems beautiful or good is real, and so it cannot have been created by Reality.

 

Therefore, given that both beauty and goodness are relative concepts and thus are illusory, we should follow the injunction to always ask ourselves: "What is the meaning of what I behold?" (text, p. 619; T-3I.VII.13:5). In other words, even though something beautiful is illusory, it remains neutral, like everything else in the world. Given to the ego, it serves its unholy purpose of reinforcing separation, specialness, and guilt. Given to the Holy Spirit, on the other hand, it serves the holy purpose of leading us to an experience of truth that lies beyond perception. For example, a sunset can reinforce the belief that I can find peace and well-being only while in its presence, or it can help remind me that the true beauty of Man is my Identity, and that this beauty is internal, within my mind and independent of anything outside it."

 

One of your problems Stig is your unwillingness to go beyond your human perceptions,...just like 99.6% of your fellow humans. You appear to cherish your perceptions, as if they can show you the Tao.

 

However,...."it is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society" J Krishnamurti

 

 

V

[Marblehead]

Hey Vmarco!

 

You got your Buddhism and Taoism mixed up in that last post.

[fiveelementtao]

So, V...

I don't know what your past experience in forums is. You have made it clear that you have no formal training in Taoist practices...

Taoism and Taoist practices are BASED ENTIRELY ON putting one's observations into phenomenal experience and proving them through practice. Taoism isn't a philosophy. It is a practical way of life. If you want to come onto a Taoist forum and share your ideas, you will not get very far in communicating or gaining respect of your opinions without that understanding.

 

If your goal on this forum is to engage in dialogue and be respected, I strongly urge you to re-think your tactics. Your intellectual observations may be self-evident to you. But, the point of sharing an opinion is to be able to effectively communicate that to others. If you want to do that on THIS forum, you will need to communicate with an authority that can only come from experience... Taoists are not going to be impressed by your writings alone...

 

This is a Taoist forum. Many of the people on this forum have joined it because they practice energetic and meditative techniques that are derived from ancestral traditions (which you might call "patriarchal") the goal of which is manifestation of spiritual concepts in the "real" world. There is quite alot of philosophy in that tradition, BUT part of the litmus test of one's Taoist philosophy comes from the practical application of that philosophy in the real world or what you would call the phenomenal world. Taoism is all about understanding how that phenomenal world reflects the immaterial spiritual world. If you have a personal dislike of the phenomenal, practicing taoists will intuitively pick that up in your posts and have the instinct to constantly challenge you. (regardless of how well thought out or how well reasoned your logic is)

 

I'm telling you this because based on the last fiasco that happened, and although I went to great lengths to defend you, I am Ironically having the same instinct that others had which is to aggressively attack you. And instead of attacking you regarding semantics as most are doing. I am wishing to bring to your attention how and why people may feel hostile toward you...

 

You see...When people like Stig or MH talk about their understanding of yin and yang, wu wei etc.. as practicing Taoists, (not just intellectual taoists) they are also capable of effectively demonstrating their understandings in their physical practices whether that be through Tai Chi or their Nei kung practice etc.. and anyone standing in their physical presence would understand their points. The proof of their observations would not be solely in the realm of intelllectual ideas... I don't get the impression that you are able to demonstrate your conclusions in any other way except through cleverly worded intellectual arguments... Therefore I am losing respect for your opinions the more I read them...

I'm not trying to attack you, I'm hoping you will rethink how you interface with people here...

 

Practical experience transmits authority to one's opinions.

 

I also recommend that if you want to be respected that you make an effort to own your own observations with disclaimers like, "In my opinon." "in my experience", "Based on my research." etc... When you make categorical statements "This IS that" etc... whether or not your observations are valid, unless you have that weight of authority that practical experience brings, people will intuitively want to fight with you.

 

I am wanting to fight you just because I am seeing that when you are challenged, instead of responding with deeper explanations that effectively communicate your ideas to people, you start to resort to personal insults, judgements and deamening statements like the following...

It is you making shit up, and attempting reverse fundamental laws of nature from the perspective of your human-centric, sensory based, thinking, that intertwines Yang with Yin, and Yin with Yang, in way that could only be described as schizophrenic. How anyone can spew that dark, cold is contracted, generative, centripetal is beyond any logic,....

 

My dialogue on Tao has nothing to do with traditional interpretations, but things more obvious than night and day. Thus I have no idea what you're spouting, but it isn't Tao.

 

As I said before, just because your reasoning is self-evident to you, doesn't mean others will instantly agree with you. You need to do more than quote other famous people to defend your ideas or attack people when they disagree with you. It comes off as immature... You need to provide examples of your reasoning that is applicable in the real world or Taoists will not respect you...

 

Just my limited observations based on my limited experience here ...

Edited August 31, 2011 by fiveelementtao

[Stigweard]

Yes, Yang and Yin can have formal definitions, and thus synomynous attributes. It is you making shit up, and attempting reverse fundamental laws of nature from the perspective of your human-centric, sensory based, thinking, that intertwines Yang with Yin, and Yin with Yang, in way that could only be described as schizophrenic. How anyone can spew that dark, cold is contracted, generative, centripetal is beyond any logic,....contracted, generative, centripetal are attributes that make incandescence and heat,...in any World.

 

My dialogue on Tao has nothing to do with traditional interpretations, but things more obvious than night and day. Thus I have no idea what you're spouting, but it isn't Tao. Or perhaps you simply have read my posts, but are just blindly agreeing with Stig. Only you know.

 

V

Ah yes ... all those who don't agree with you are schizophrenic and morally corrupt. You my friend are a bigot. This is the sort of insultive language that got you previously banned and is winning you no friends here at all.

 

And if you had been paying attention to anything beyond your own dogma you would realize that NOONE is saying that "dark, cold is contracted, generative, centripetal". Only YOU are basing these associations on your abstracted theories of Light dynamics.

 

Daoist associations are based on the simple reality of natural forces ... dark/light, cold/hot, wet/dry, water/fire, female/male.

 

It is YOU who is trying to curve-fit the Yin/Yang theories to suit your agenda. It is YOU who has walked into our little muck-pool beating your chest declaring we are all a mob of schizophrenic ignorant fools. And it is YOU who is once again heading towards a TaoBums vacation.

 

[C T]

told you so. save your breaths, lads.

[Marblehead]

told you so. save your breaths, lads.

 

Well, you deserve a commendation for your non-action. Excellent demonstration of wu wei!

[Stigweard]

So, V...

I don't know what your past experience in forums is. You have made it clear that you have no formal training in Taoist practices...

Taoism and Taoist practices are BASED ENTIRELY ON putting one's observations into phenomenal experience and proving them through practice. Taoism isn't a philosophy. It is a practical way of life. If you want to come onto a Taoist forum and share your ideas, you will not get very far in communicating or gaining respect of your opinions without that understanding.

 

If your goal on this forum is to engage in dialogue and be respected, I strongly urge you to re-think your tactics. Your intellectual observations may be self-evident to you. But, the point of sharing an opinion is to be able to effectively communicate that to others. If you want to do that on THIS forum, you will need to communicate with an authority that can only come from experience... Taoists are not going to be impressed by your writings alone...

 

This is a Taoist forum. Many of the people on this forum have joined it because they practice energetic and meditative techniques that are derived from ancestral traditions (which you might call "patriarchal") the goal of which is manifestation of spiritual concepts in the "real" world. There is quite alot of philosophy in that tradition, BUT part of the litmus test of one's Taoist philosophy comes from the practical application of that philosophy in the real world or what you would call the phenomenal world. Taoism is all about understanding how that phenomenal world reflects the immaterial spiritual world. If you have a personal dislike of the phenomenal, practicing taoists will intuitively pick that up in your posts and have the instinct to constantly challenge you. (regardless of how well thought out or how well reasoned your logic is)

 

I'm telling you this because based on the last fiasco that happened, and although I went to great lengths to defend you, I am Ironically having the same instinct that others had which is to aggressively attack you. And instead of attacking you regarding semantics as most are doing. I am wishing to bring to your attention how and why people may feel hostile toward you...

 

You see...When people like Stig or MH talk about their understanding of yin and yang, wu wei etc.. as practicing Taoists, (not just intellectual taoists) they are also capable of effectively demonstrating their understandings in their physical practices whether that be through Tai Chi or their Nei kung practice etc.. and anyone standing in their physical presence would understand their points. The proof of their observations would not be solely in the realm of intelllectual ideas... I don't get the impression that you are able to demonstrate your conclusions in any other way except through cleverly worded intellectual arguments... Therefore I am losing respect for your opinions the more I read them...

I'm not trying to attack you, I'm hoping you will rethink how you interface with people here...

 

Practical experience transmits authority to one's opinions.

 

I also recommend that if you want to be respected that you make an effort to own your own observations with disclaimers like, "In my opinon." "in my experience", "Based on my research." etc... When you make categorical statements "This IS that" etc... whether or not your observations are valid, unless you have that weight of authority that practical experience brings, people will intuitively want to fight with you.

 

I am wanting to fight you just because I am seeing that when you are challenged, instead of responding with deeper explanations that effectively communicate your ideas to people, you start to resort to personal insults, judgements and deamening statements like the following...

 

 

As I said before, just because your reasoning is self-evident to you, doesn't mean others will instantly agree with you. You need to do more than quote other famous people to defend your ideas or attack people when they disagree with you. It comes off as immature... You need to provide examples of your reasoning that is applicable in the real world or Taoists will not respect you...

 

Just my limited observations based on my limited experience here ...

Thank you for your observations, and the reminder to be nice

[steve]

It is you making shit up, and attempting reverse fundamental laws of nature from the perspective of your human-centric, sensory based, thinking, that intertwines Yang with Yin, and Yin with Yang, in way that could only be described as schizophrenic. How anyone can spew that dark, cold is contracted, generative, centripetal is beyond any logic,....contracted, generative, centripetal are attributes that make incandescence and heat,...in any World.

 

My dialogue on Tao has nothing to do with traditional interpretations, but things more obvious than night and day. Thus I have no idea what you're spouting, but it isn't Tao. Or perhaps you simply have read my posts, but are just blindly agreeing with Stig. Only you know.

 

V

:lol:

 

Methinks I struck a nerve.

What did I make up? The phrase "making shit up"? Nope, I borrowed that from a friend who coined it in response to another acquaintance who, like you, likes to make shit up.

 

You're welcome to disregard all traditional Daoist definitions of Yin and Yang and make up your own associations but to do so and continue to use the words Yin and Yang is foolhardy and confusing to people who don't know better. Stig and I, and a few others, are trying to foster an environment where people new to Daoism can learn some basic principles and ideas as defined by Daoists and their classic literature rather than Vmarcoism. It's fine to debate and discuss alternative interpretations but inaccurate pedantry isn't very helpful or skillful.

 

You may as well just make up your own words to label your own cosmology - Vmaoism.

Instead of Yin and Yang, how about Vmin and Vmang? That has a nice ring to it, I think.

That's what I'll use from now on when I refer to your theory.

 

Not only do you ignore the traditional Daoist cosmology completely (which is fine but then it's not related to Daoism) but some of your assignments simply make no sense.

For example:

Yang = infrared = heating

Yin = ultraviolet = cooling

Which has more energy and generates more heat? Ultraviolet or infrared?

 

You are welcome to call me names and diagnose me with schizophrenia (now THAT'S the pot calling the kettle black) but what you are really doing is calling traditional Daoism delusional. That's completely fine with me, I don't even consider myself Daoist, but then why bother to try and associate yourself and your personal cosmology with a tradition that you spurn and denigrate?

 

 

Edit -

 

After reading 5ElementTao's post I'm hoping you'll 'listen' to what he's saying. When I use the word 'listen' I mean in the Krishnamurti sense. You quote him quite a bit but I wonder if you have ever 'listened' as he suggests? It can be very illuminating (sorry for the bad pun)...

 

You're clearly intelligent and very well read and I think we share some common ideas and insights. I genuinely think you have a lot to contribute, but your approach needs to be reconsidered if you hope to have any sort of a relationship with the members here. And if you choose not to, that is fine too...

Edited September 1, 2011 by steve
addendum

[Stigweard]

:lol:

 

Methinks I struck a nerve.

What did I make up? The phrase "making shit up"? Nope, I borrowed that from a friend who coined it in response to another acquaintance who, like you, likes to make shit up.

 

You're welcome to disregard all traditional Daoist definitions of Yin and Yang and make up your own associations but to do so and continue to use the words Yin and Yang is foolhardy and confusing to people who don't know better. Stig and I, and a few others, are trying to foster an environment where people new to Daoism can learn some basic principles and ideas as defined by Daoists and their classic literature rather than Vmarcoism. It's fine to debate and discuss alternative interpretations but inaccurate pedantry isn't very helpful or skillful.

 

You may as well just make up your own words to label your own cosmology - Vmaoism.

Instead of Yin and Yang, how about Vmin and Vmang? That has a nice ring to it, I think.

That's what I'll use from now on when I refer to your theory.

 

Not only do you ignore the traditional Daoist cosmology completely (which is fine but then it's not related to Daoism) but some of your assignments simply make no sense.

For example:

Yang = infrared = heating

Yin = ultraviolet = cooling

Which has more energy and generates more heat? Ultraviolet or infrared?

 

You are welcome to call me names and diagnose me with schizophrenia (now THAT'S the pot calling the kettle black) but what you are really doing is calling traditional Daoism delusional. That's completely fine with me, I don't even consider myself Daoist, but then why bother to try and associate yourself and your personal cosmology with a tradition that you spurn and denigrate?

 

Vmin and Vmang ... yes yes yes !!! Another "ism" has been born!!

 

Love it!

 

[konchog uma]

That's way narrow! Sounds like Stig's thinking process. Look at it quantumly,...Yang is a particle, Yin is a wave. You cannot ever see them both at the sametime.

 

that doesnt really negate what i said. and what i said isnt narrow. what i said is that water is more yang than ice in the way of temperature, and more yin than ice in the way of hardness.

 

its just an example that points to a principle. extrapolate. Thats whats worth focusing on, not whether or not you agree with me. i know that warm = yang is simple, but its not narrow because thats not the breadth and depth of my understanding. i was trying to illustrate one point. it was Supposed to be simple

 

This stuff is more basic than kindergarten arithmatic,...thus I have no idea why you're not seeing it. That is meant to be disrespectful,...I'm just asking why.

 

hahaha vmarco i see it in my way, you see it in yours. maybe we can talk as long as we aren't trying to convince each other. i was talking about not getting lost in abstractions but seeing things in holistic way. thats all. i don't personally care whether you believe me or not, im not trying to convince you.

 

also "that is meant to be disrespectful"... well thanks, i think i know what you meant, but nice freudian slip! ahhahaah

 

Warm water is not more yang than cold water. LOL Water comes from the disintegration of rocks, which expel CO2,...water is Yin because its moving away from solidity.

 

i think that there are probably as many versions of string theory as there are capable physicists. that is to say that when you get to the fundamental levels of reality, things are SOOO basic (yin? yang? oneness?) that they become open to multiple interpretations. so you have yours and i have mine, and thats fine. nothing i said was really meant to negate your interpretations, just to remind you that thinking in dualistic terms leads to mental rigidity, which is very un-dao!

[Todd]

 

Things that are moving, charging, towards the sphere of solidity is moving in a centripetal Yang direction,...things that are expanding, discharging, back to a torus is moving in a centrafugal Yin direction.

 

 

 

 

There are things that I like about your interpretation of Yin and Yang. I like that you see past the common association of Yin with matter and Yang with energy. I like the Yin=space/Tao and Yang=form (which includes matter and energy) way of looking at things. To me, this is an inner meaning of Yin and Yang. It doesn't negate the outer meanings of Yin and Yang though, it is just what is inside of them.

 

My view is actually very much like what anamatva has expressed. There are infinite levels of complexity and Yin and Yang can never really be separated.

 

This leads us to your concept of Yin and Yang forces. You say that the Yin force is centrifugal (pushing away from the center) and the Yang force is centripetal (pushing toward the center). You also say that the shape of Yin is a torus (donut shaped), and the shape of Yang is a sphere. These shapes make sense, since if you elongate them, they form something like a vagina and a penis respectively.

 

I have a few questions for you, however:

 

Would something that is more Yin not also express more of the Yin force? And would something that is more Yang not also express more of the Yang force? If this is the case, the wider the torus became, the further and faster it would spread, and the tighter and denser the sphere became, the faster it would contract. Is this a situation in which manifestation would have any degree of balance? Would not Yin and Yang separate quicker than you could blink?

 

 

Perhaps you have misnamed the Yin and Yang forces within your system? Or do you see the inherent nature of all things to separate and not to interact?

[三江源]

.

Edited March 25, 2015 by 三江源

[Mokona]

Stig,

 

But matey Daoism is about raw nature pure and simple. It's about trees, waterways, and wind in your hair. It's about sunrises and moonsets and marvelling at the turning of the stars.

 

Love it.

 

Hope your website and twitter for the Tai Chi and Qigong is going well.

 

 

K,

 

3 times in a row is probably easy for alot of guys(especailly younger ones), they probably are to embarresed to go into the licking while they give themselves time to "prepare" once again, I would think. Kat Williams the stand-up comedian even jokes about it, but it's true.

 

IMO - Once a conversation turns into more of a personal worldview discussion, it can be hard to find common ground. Though I'm sure both sides will fight for the validity of their points.

[Vmarco]

[zanshin]

I see Earth as deeply feminine, so perhaps Sky by default as masculine, not based on concepts or theories but as mirror of nature. The Earth is where things take root and grow. I missed the thread first time too and enjoyed reading it.

[Brian]

I can't believe I allowed myself to read this entire thread!!! Every time I manage to get out of my brain for a little while, my brain finds a way to suck me back in again. Sneaky bastard...

 

 

While I'm here, though, and stuck back in the phenomenological, I'll put my physicist hat on and share an insight or two:

 

Electromagnetism is a form of energy, not the other way around. "Everything" can be viewed as "energy" but viewing everything as light is incorrect and viewing energy as a form of light is backwards -- energy is more than "just" electromagnetic radiation (AKA "light"). Physicists have spent much of the last century working backwards in time to piece together the decoupling of the fundamental forces in an attempt to reveal a single primordial energetic -- I personally believe this is synonymous with the Tao and further believe that we will never truly understand it even if we manage to express it mathematically.

 

From a quantum perspective, light is neither wave nor particle but can manifest as either or both depending on the observation. The now-classic situation of a single photon interfering with itself is a demonstration of the latter. Similarly, the so-called "particles" are likewise neither particles nor waves but are localized anomalies, propagating statistical spikes in the probabilistic energy density. Feynman liked to say that if you can't explain the topic in simple terms ("in a freshman's lecture") then you don't really understand it -- I think the preceding sentence supports that.

 

OK, back out of my brain! (Out of the phenomenological and into the noumenological, to be sesquipedalian about it...) Time to be still for a while.

[Vmarco]

[Brian]

Gravity, for one.

Actually, my post above was not aimed at you.

I have no problem with using the word "light" as synonymous with "energy" -- except within the specific context of physics where these individual terms have distinct significance. In fact, I personally think it is more intuitive to not make the distinction, unless the topic of discussion warrants that specificity, especially since people in general conversation don't usually have the physicist's definitions im mind.

Just as you play fast & loose with the terminology related to the Tao and the area of Taoism, however, you display in this thread a rather superficial grasp of quantum theory (and quantum electrodynamics in particular) but you spoke with an air of authority on the topic. My post, therefore, was aimed at the casual reader of this thread who might have gotten the impression that your statements reflected the cumulative results of the hundreds of years of observation, experimentation and thought that have been devoted around the world to the topic.

Is physics "right?" Of course not! Neither is any other attempt to describe or explain any component of reality, be it love, cell division, compassion, genetics, consciousness, morality, cosmogony, or why the sky is blue. The Tao that can be spoken is not the Tao -- every honest line of thought eventually leads to "I don't know." Modern physics has developed models that deliver some pretty impressive results, though. On top of that, many of these models (as well as the underlying mathematics) are truly beautiful!

I am of the opinion, personally, that the beauty & elegance of a model or solution are strong indicators of its "truth." It seems to me that the natural world grows increasingly magnificent as it is examined more closely while human fabrications grow more ugly.

Your self-appellation as "a Progressive" is quite revealing, I think. In the course of snarkily lashing out at me for pointing out some relatively minor technical details that had little or no impact on the topic of the thread, you demonstrated a lack of understanding of mathematics, relativity (both special & general) and history that paralleled your weakness in quantum theory (and about the Tao, based on the reaction you got from several whom I respect). As a "Progressive," you seem to view yourself as transcendent. Where Newton spoke of standing on the shoulders of giants, you dismiss the works and thoughts of others except when you cherry-pick details to meld into your own interpretation.

I've been away from the forum for a while but it is my impression from the things I've read in the last week or so that you had some sort of epiphany years ago. Whether a genuine glimpse of a higher truth, a schizoeffective episode or just a bad 'shroom, I honestly have no idea -- so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt! It appears to me, however, that you have used this experience to rationalize the delusion that you understand it all and therefore you seem to eschew personal effort, whether at energy work or the study of natural philosophy or whatever.

As the bumper sticker says, though, "You're not deep, you're just high!" and I've devoted all the energy to you that I will.

Edited February 8, 2013 by A Seeker

[三江源]

.

Edited March 25, 2015 by 三江源

[Vmarco]

Edited May 11, 2012 by Vmarco

[Brian]

Viewing everything as light is NOT incorrect on a taoist forum, far from it. and viewing things backward is quintessentially taoist: See Isabelle Robinets latest book"The World Upside Down".. we can never understand, by looking in a linear way.

 

Sorry, cat! All I was trying to say there is that "light" & "energy" are not synonymous and that light is one manifestation of energy, just as "cat" & "mammal" are not synonymous and that a cat is one type of mammal. No deeper linearity vs. non-linearity point was intended.

 

For what it's worth, I think that modern physics and taoism are remarkably similar.

 

Of course, "light" & "energy" are just words and they can be defined or redefined at will. Words are significant, however, for several reasons -- not the least of which being that they help us to share ideas and that they help to shape those ideas. We could easily choose to reverse the two so that "energy" is a form of "light" but that would mean changing things in the common vernacular, too, in order to maintain some semblance of consistency: we would need to buy energybulbs and keep a flashenergy in a drawer in case a bolt of energyning hits a transformer and our electric energies go out, we would need to talk about kinetic light, potential light & gravitational light, we would have to talk about lighty people (or something) instead of energetic people, and we would have statements like "I just don't seem to have the light to vacuum the carpet today so I'll do it tomorrow." Seems unnecessary when we have perfectly good words already in use!

Edited May 11, 2012 by A Seeker

[konchog uma]

i think this was the last one of VMarco's posts i read. Its terrible to feel that you're going to be attacked snidely for the CRIME of disagreeing with someone. Rigidity is not the dao, is not the buddha nature, isn't anything that isn't going to do much but break eventually. Worthless dust.

 

I'm with you RainbowVein, it saddens me to read.

[Vmarco]