sean

Proposed simplification of forums

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Nungali said:

 

Ceptin 'Hindu' ain't really a thing .

 

But I guess there are no traditionalist 'Indians' here to protest that .

:D Try telling that to ~ 1 billion of Hindus who live in my country of birth, not to mention the millions of those who live all over the world now.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

 

Maybe we should just have Daoist, General and Non-Daoist.  If simplicity is the goal.

 

I like it, but some non-daoists may object to the negative definition -- even though (or maybe precisely because) it is a very daoist way to avoid pigeonholing phenomena into names.  Daoists are fond of approaching a verbal description of what something is indirectly, by pointing out what it is not.  "The name that can be named is not the eternal name."  "This is as true as that an ox is not a horse" (the taoist equivalent of our notion of an "axiom" in mathematics.)  And so on.  

 

So, what do we call all things Non-Daoist without starting with a "non?"  Maybe go with

 

Daoist

All Names That Can Be Named

General

 

;) 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

edit: Nvm. What's the point.

 

To the forum in general..

 

Thank you for the great information. Don't let it fall, development and info of these practices is something that is maybe lacking in the 'new age' spiritual awakening. This forum provides a good amount.

 

Edited by welkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Taomeow said:

 

Ah, yes, I just didn't recognize the spelling.  So, no problem there either?  I am not a bit expert on things Hindu/Vedic (used to know them better but am very rusty).  Way back when, I did sing (though only in my car) this awesome chant --

 

Shambho Shankara namah Shivaaya
Girijaa Shankara namah Shivaaya
Arunaachala Shiva namah Shivaaya
Om namah shivaya...

The Shankara in that chant is Lord Shiva, not Adi Shankaracharya, who is associated with Advaita Vedanta :) 

 

(minor detail fwiw)  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, dwai said:

The Shankara in that chant is Lord Shiva, not Adi Shankaracharya, who is associated with Advaita Vedanta :) 

 

(minor detail fwiw)  

 

Yeah, I thought it was about Shiva since it says Shiva.  :)  A propos, you will probably find it funny but I've always read your screen name sort of as "dvai" -- which to the taoist in me would mean something like "a houtian person," as opposed to "advai" -- "a xiantian nonperson."   I'm probably making up those words but that's how I've always seen it.  (I'm a fan of dealing with phenomena of the manifest worlds on their own manifest terms, and nothing kills my interest faster than a sermon of oneness in response to happenings in the world of "dvaita."  So someone called "dvai" would instantly command my respect for spiritual honesty. :) )     

 

Edited by Taomeow
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Taomeow said:

 

Yeah, I thought it was about Shiva since it says Shiva.  :)  A propos, you will probably find it funny but I've always read your screen name sort of as "dvai" -- which to the taoist in me would mean something like "a houtian person," as opposed to "advai" -- "a xiantian nonperson."   I'm probably making up those words but that's how I've always seen it.  (I'm a fan of dealing with phenomena of the manifest worlds on their own manifest terms, and nothing kills my interest faster than a sermon of oneness in response to happenings in the world of "dvaita."  So someone called "dvai" would instantly command my respect for spiritual honesty. :) )     

 

Dwai is also my real name (part of it at least) :) 

 

That’s the way to be - start as houtian and then realize you always have only been xiantian, in which houtian merely appears to be :)  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dwai said:

Dwai is also my real name (part of it at least) :) 

 

That’s the way to be - start as houtian and then realize you always have only been xiantian, in which houtian merely appears to be :)  

 

And that's why I'm a taoist. :)  I've never been "only" this or "only" that.  They are not an inferior-superior hierarchical relationship.  Duality is not a "mistake."  Not an "illusion."  Not the orphaned child of the "real" unity.  They are both real.  They are equal sides of the same coin, same denomination, same value.  The coin says "zero."  Flip...  the coin says one, two, three, ten thousand things.  Flip...  no things.  Flip...  but we digress. :)  

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Apech said:

 

 

Maybe we should just have Daoist, General and Non-Daoist.  If simplicity is the goal.

 

That might make sense if this was specifically a Daoist forum. It may have started out as one, but by now, we are a VERY mixed bunch.

 

I still like 'The Dao Bums' as more of a generic term, however. It does have a certain ring to it. You might as well call it 'The God Seekers', though (in principle).

 

Yes, the existing structure can be simplified. But simplify it too much, and you will be doing a disservice to people who are hoping to find a specific kind of information here.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Nungali said:

 

Yes, its the same here; there is no 'Aboriginal religion'  but many different Aboriginal  spiritual traditions .

 

It doesnt stop people generalising though .

 

I was in fact contemplating a division of TDB into 'General', 'Daoism' and 'Aboriginal religion'.

 

Just for making things REALLY weird.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Just wanted to clarify my position on the forum structure.... When I said that Truth was independent of organized religion, and we were all researchers of Truth, I didn't mean that as a cop out to mix everything under the name of Truth. No, not all. I'm all for having a forum with a specific sub-sections including Taoist, as suggested. We have members here like Tao-meow and Walker who know a great deal about Taoism and need a platform to exchange. And of course, other beautiful traditions and approaches deserve their sections too.

 

We are also "TruthBums" or researchers of Truth like I said, but at the end of the day, we all need a path. I think Sri RamaKrishna puts it in a beautiful way. He says:

 

"God can be realized through all paths. All religions are true.The important thing is to reach the roof. You can reach it by stone stairs or by wooden stairs or by bamboo steps or by a rope. You can also climb up by a bamboo pole..."

 

Then he cautions that you obviously can't reach the roof if you try the wood stairs for a few steps, then come back down, then try the stone stairs, come back down, go outside and try holding the bamboo pole.

 

A lot of people here have chosen the Daoist path which is awesome, so we should have it. It would also be nice to have two other sub-sections, one for for Christianity and Buddhism, since these historically had some decent activity in these forums, but if you're wanting to simplify, I also understand the three-fold structure with "every that is not Taoism".

 

And the general section would be like the "WWF Royal Rumble", everything goes. You can compare the stone stairs to your bamboo pole, and also complain that the creaks when people walk on the bamboo stairs are hurting your ears/meditation time. But you can also help other people take better steps, have more balance when using the bamboo pole, because everyone sees your efforts to climb to the roof through a different vantage point, and everyone (I think) wants to be helpful on Bums.

 

Technically, there is also the path of no-path, or complete spiritual sobriety that is focused only on Truth. But this is not popular, I don't know anyone who teaches this (currently, or any members on Bums that are presently active) so we could have this in the Other approaches that are not Taoism.

 

 

Edited by Sebastian
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Taomeow said:

 

And that's why I'm a taoist. :)  I've never been "only" this or "only" that.  They are not an inferior-superior hierarchical relationship.  Duality is not a "mistake."  Not an "illusion."  Not the orphaned child of the "real" unity.  They are both real.  They are equal sides of the same coin, same denomination, same value.  The coin says "zero."  Flip...  the coin says one, two, three, ten thousand things.  Flip...  no things.  Flip...  but we digress. :)  

 

In reference to the idea of there not being an inferior-superior hierarchical relationship between what I'll call mystery and manifest you may have happened upon a workable and more accurate understanding of "emptiness."

 

In any case, I liked what you wrote.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I still feel meditation practices that are clearly linked to a certain metaphysical tradition should be included in the respective forum. But there could be a more general section for Arts.

 

So the structure would look something like this overall:

 

General

Daoism

Buddhism

Hinduism

Occultism

Arts

- Martial arts

- Healing arts

- Other arts

 

Perhaps with a few subsections added under some of the headers, e.g., for textual studies.

Edited by Michael Sternbach
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Sebastian said:

 

"God can be realized through all paths. All religions are true.The important thing is to reach the roof. You can reach it by stone stairs or by wooden stairs or by bamboo steps or by a rope. You can also climb up by a bamboo pole..."

 

 

 

 

Huzzah, Sebastian!  B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Taomeow said:

 

And that's why I'm a taoist. :)  I've never been "only" this or "only" that.  They are not an inferior-superior hierarchical relationship.  Duality is not a "mistake."  Not an "illusion."  Not the orphaned child of the "real" unity.  They are both real.  They are equal sides of the same coin, same denomination, same value.  The coin says "zero."  Flip...  the coin says one, two, three, ten thousand things.  Flip...  no things.  Flip...  but we digress. :)  

You're assuming an inferior-superior narrative here :)

The phenomenal world, which a result of duality, is indeed not apart from the non dual. And really, the non dual doesn't give rise to the dual. The dual just appears to be. How can something that is an appearance be anything apart from, or inferior to that in which it appears.

 

Is a movie inferior to the screen? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/9/2019 at 4:28 PM, sean said:

What if "Discussions On The Way" becomes the new "General Discussion" with a new forum to house "Focused Traditions".

 

THE COURTYARD

 

- Welcome!

  - Newcomer Corner
- Discussions On The Way (previously "General Discussion")
- Focused Traditions
  - Daoist (previously top level "Daoist Discussion")
    - 道家学说
    - Interviews
    - Textual Studies
  - Buddhist
  - Vedic
  - Occult
- The Rabbit Hole (merges "The Rabbit Hole", "Off Grid". Basically an off topic forum to talk about whatever, but not an "anything goes")
- Meta-Talk (merges Forum and Tech Support, Moderation Logs, Rules and Use)
 
PRIVATE GARDENS


- Personal Practice (still has everyone's private subforums under this)
- Gender Gardens
    - Nonbinary (for nonbinary, gender questioning and intersex)
    - Women (for women and female identified)
    - Men (for men and male identified)
- Group Studies
- Lending Library
- Local Meetups and Events (merges Local Meetups and Upcoming Events)

 

Sean

 

 

Can we get playful with the names - working with the idea of "adventure" and this being a world with many "lands"?

 

For example - General Discussion/ discussions on the way could be the Silk Road. A title which would express both the exchange of non-sectarian ideas, and a sense of "danger" to the "personal value" of strongly held ideas/ ideals/ tenants/ what not..

 

Taoist Discussion could be something along the lines of Realms of the Immortals

 

Buddhist discussion seems a bit trickier to me, but perhaps something along the lines of Lands of the Laughing Buddhas, or the Pathways of Boddhisattvas.

 

Vedic/Hindu could be something like Shiva and Shakti's playground or Where Brahman Walks.

 

Off Topic as a bit of Wild Lands or The BadLands - to be traveled at one's own risk...

 

Meta Talk would be The Matrix where the plotting and planning happen...

 

Local meetups could be The Watering Hole..

 

Anyway, you get the idea.. 

 

I'm not soo big on overly simplifying here, although I'm certainly on board with the "weirding." 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, dwai said:

You're assuming an inferior-superior narrative here :)

The phenomenal world, which a result of duality, is indeed not apart from the non dual. And really, the non dual doesn't give rise to the dual. The dual just appears to be. How can something that is an appearance be anything apart from, or inferior to that in which it appears.

 

Is a movie inferior to the screen? 

 

What can be more hierarchical than to dismiss an entire world by proclaiming it "just appears to be" as opposed to some other, bigger-better, higher-more important, "real deal" ?   What can be more pyramid-like than looking down, from the vantage point of some higher order abstract absolute, on the totality of the observable universe, all of nature, all of life on earth, and every creature trying to "live out its years" as happily as possible?  "Non dual doesn't give rise to the dual" does not do anything for the investigation a taoist might undertake -- how "being comes from nonbeing" and "nonbeing reverts to being" -- since it tells only half the story and tells it in a static way that the Way, whose pattern is motion and change within the motionless and the unchanging, can't possibly accommodate.  I've been quite preoccupied with this investigation for quite a while now, and not because I overlooked other ways to look at it.  Just because they didn't fit in my cup of tea.  Yes, I know there is no cup, but it does not matter in the least.  The cup that isn't there is every bit as important as the cup that is, because they both rely on me to be created and uncreated.  I am the co-creator of the cup and I won't have it any other way.  :D 

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
44 minutes ago, Taomeow said:

 

  "Non dual doesn't give rise to the dual" does not do anything for the investigation a taoist might undertake -- how "being comes from nonbeing" and "nonbeing reverts to being" -- since it tells only half the story and tells it in a static way that the Way, whose pattern is motion and change within the motionless and the unchanging, can't possibly accommodate. 

 

What fascinates me is not so much the dual or non-dual but the possibility of movement between them.  Since I´m more familiar with the dual side of things, the idea of "going to" the non-dual (powering up the ole Merkevah) and bringing back some of that unity juice to the workaday world seems especially appealing.  Perhaps the non-dual benefits in a similar way from being infused with the dual -- though I wouldn´t know anything about that.

Edited by liminal_luke
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whimsical names can be problematic ... interpretation might vary according to the individual understanding.

 

For example, I , as a philosophically oriented Daoist might read Realm of the Immortals as leaning to the more lineage or religious end of the Daoist spectrum. Conversely, I,  as a religious lineage holder might find a lot of philosophical discussion disappointing.

 

Either way a rose by any other name...

 

Such whimsicality might underscore the need for better navigation.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, manitou said:

Depends on the movie  

Touché 😃

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, OldDog said:

Whimsical names can be problematic ... interpretation might vary according to the individual understanding.

 

For example, I , as a philosophically oriented Daoist might read Realm of the Immortals as leaning to the more lineage or religious end of the Daoist spectrum. Conversely, I,  as a religious lineage holder might find a lot of philosophical discussion disappointing.

 

Either way a rose by any other name...

 

Such whimsicality might underscore the need for better navigation.

 

 

One would grow accustomed to whimsical names, and considering the "welcome screen" as some sort of "map" may actually assist in navigation and understanding the process of navigating for those with troubles in this regard, imo of course.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, ilumairen said:

 

Can we get playful with the names - working with the idea of "adventure" and this being a world with many "lands"?

 

For example - General Discussion/ discussions on the way could be the Silk Road. A title which would express both the exchange of non-sectarian ideas, and a sense of "danger" to the "personal value" of strongly held ideas/ ideals/ tenants/ what not..

 

Taoist Discussion could be something along the lines of Realms of the Immortals

 

Buddhist discussion seems a bit trickier to me, but perhaps something along the lines of Lands of the Laughing Buddhas, or the Pathways of Boddhisattvas.

 

Vedic/Hindu could be something like Shiva and Shakti's playground or Where Brahman Walks.

 

Off Topic as a bit of Wild Lands or The BadLands - to be traveled at one's own risk...

 

Meta Talk would be The Matrix where the plotting and planning happen...

 

Local meetups could be The Watering Hole..

 

Anyway, you get the idea.. 

 

I'm not soo big on overly simplifying here, although I'm certainly on board with the "weirding." 

Love the creativity :) 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, ilumairen said:

 

Can we get playful with the names - working with the idea of "adventure" and this being a world with many "lands"?

 

For example - General Discussion/ discussions on the way could be the Silk Road. A title which would express both the exchange of non-sectarian ideas, and a sense of "danger" to the "personal value" of strongly held ideas/ ideals/ tenants/ what not..

 

Taoist Discussion could be something along the lines of Realms of the Immortals

 

Happy wandering.

 

56 minutes ago, ilumairen said:

Buddhist discussion seems a bit trickier to me, but perhaps something along the lines of Lands of the Laughing Buddhas, or the Pathways of Boddhisattvas.

 

Forest path.

 

56 minutes ago, ilumairen said:

Vedic/Hindu could be something like Shiva and Shakti's playground or Where Brahman Walks.

 

The Lingham Winding Road  (ha ha)

 

56 minutes ago, ilumairen said:

Off Topic as a bit of Wild Lands or The BadLands - to be traveled at one's own risk...

 

I like The Badlands

 

56 minutes ago, ilumairen said:

Meta Talk would be The Matrix where the plotting and planning happen...

 

Local meetups could be The Watering Hole..

 

Anyway, you get the idea.. 

 

I'm not soo big on overly simplifying here, although I'm certainly on board with the "weirding." 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/08/2019 at 9:21 AM, dwai said:

:D Try telling that to ~ 1 billion of Hindus who live in my country of birth, not to mention the millions of those who live all over the world now.  

 

Errrmmm ....

 

It was  the natives of the sub continent and its various native religions that educated me about this . It ain't some Nungalian wackoism.   I converse with them a fair bit about Vedanta (  but not here , as they dont post here, as far as I know ) .

 

And yes, Hindu IS a commonly accepted general term for those that dont mind being 'imperialised'  and all lumped into one basket .  .  even though 'Hindu' can be a polytheist, a monotheist or an atheist  ( that's some 'religion'   ! ) .

 

And , of course, there is our old friend  context  ... if you can remember why this was stated in the first place and the question that evoked the comment .

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Michael Sternbach said:

 

I was in fact contemplating a division of TDB into 'General', 'Daoism' and 'Aboriginal religion'.

 

Just for making things REALLY weird.

 

Why not just the central theme and its two  'polarities '  ( law of 3  :) )

 

The Main forum is

 

Dao Bums

 

and the other two are

 

Left Cheek

 

Right Cheek . 

 

 

 

Spoiler

  

   And  Behold  ! 

 

    The Eye in the Triangle

 

 

 

 

 

all-seeing-eye-the-eye-of-providence-vec

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites