Secrets of Universe

[Li Jiong]

This thought came to me as I was reading thru all these posts again including my own ignorance.

Quite possibly there are no secrets in the universe, even though humankind is constantly digging deeper and deeper into things,looking under every rock, looking into space, diving deeper into the oceans.

Quite possibly keeping still and watching nature respond to it's elements, components and forces, gives us all the internal answers we seek, we are just so busy expecting some other human bean to give it to us ,obviously ,because we don't trust or think we have it within ourselves alone, we miss it all completely.

If you think you can get all the knowledge by yourself, just do it, that's your freedom. I am just curious why you come to here, just for spreading your controlled illusion?

[metzu]

If you think you can get all the knowledge by yourself, just do it, that's your freedom. I am just curious why you come to here, just for spreading your controlled illusion?

to coin a phrase from Lao Tzu, I can see the entire universe ,without leaving my room

I apologize if I have offended you with my sharing , I see you are from China, so your circumstances of perception naturally will be somewhat different then my own here in America, and naturally your experiences in life will have carried you down a different path then the necessities of my own path.

Possibly it is controlled illusion and I have not become aware of it yet, certainly now I will be able to check out how I feel about what you have shared.

Thank you for sharing.

Joe

 

Forgive me for not answering your question, I have arrived here, along the way, to check out what I have learned from having been involved with daoism over the years ,to see if there is something I missed , or still need to learn. Having taken a sabbatical as someone suggested earlier on a different post, I have returned simply for the purpose I shared with you above. My intention is not to cause contention or to look for followers of the way I am on.....nor to create a discipleship of some kind. Just one person in the billions still asking questions ,and making statements of how I personally experience the philosophy of Taoism or Daoism working in my own life. Again you are possibly right everything I percieve could be an illusion. Not knowing whether I am a butterfly or a human being.

Edited September 25, 2008 by metzu

[林愛偉]

There are some information in our school come from last civilization circle. I will reveal some here. Darwinism says humanity's ancestor is simian, it is really a bullshit. As we know, humanity has been in universe for at least giga years. Merely tens thousand years ago, human still can fly on the sky and live under the water. Somehow we lost these abilities now.

 

Universe contains everything, but do you know, it comes from Wuji, and at anytime, the summation of all things is always Wuji, or we can say Zero or nothing. Is it imaginable?

 

We know the law of gravity, it seems matter all attract each other. However, as a Taoist, we know if there is a Yin, there must be a Yang. Attraction exists together with repulsion. Attraction is Yin, and repulsion is Yang. So there must be a kind of matter which repulses the matter that we are familiar with. We call this kind of matter negative mass matter.

 

The antimatter that the scientists seeking for may be just a misunderstanding of negative mass matter. When the negative mass matter meets with positive mass matter, they can be annihilated together, both disappear, and a huge energy will be released.

 

Ok, now we can understand why the summation of all things is always Wuji(zero). There must be a negative mass matter world in the universe, and the mass is equal with the mass of positive mass matter world which we are familiar with. Although the mass of each world is infinite, the summation of them is zero.

 

 

Wonderful! So glad some came out with this. Only in the realms of Relativity do Yin and Yang work as Yin and Yang. When in the state of non-duality, where is there a One and a two...the distinctions and the distinguisher both are no more...and so, they are not no more...

 

Peace and Blessings,

Lin

[metzu]

Wonderful! So glad some came out with this. Only in the realms of Relativity do Yin and Yang work as Yin and Yang. When in the state of non-duality, where is there a One and a two...the distinctions and the distinguisher both are no more...and so, they are not no more...

 

Peace and Blessings,

Lin

 

certainly you are corrct in your assumptions of how you percieve things. From the One came... two... heaven and earth or for the purpose of arriving at my point of view the yin and the yang...same difference... and from that eventually came mass confusion of thoughts and ideas, concepts be they illusional or delusional......now in returning to the One.....do we eventually let go of all the ideas and concepts and thoughts that seperate us from the One......which could actually mean letting go of the idea of The Tao?

[林愛偉]

certainly you are corrct in your assumptions of how you percieve things. From the One came... two... heaven and earth or for the purpose of arriving at my point of view the yin and the yang...same difference... and from that eventually came mass confusion of thoughts and ideas, concepts be they illusional or delusional......now in returning to the One.....do we eventually let go of all the ideas and concepts and thoughts that seperate us from the One......which could actually mean letting go of the idea of The Tao?

 

 

Yes.

[Li Jiong]

to coin a phrase from Lao Tzu, I can see the entire universe ,without leaving my room

It is right for LaoTzu, but I am afraid of that is not right for you. Can you really see the entire universe?

[metzu]

It is right for LaoTzu, but I am afraid of that is not right for you. Can you really see the entire universe?

 

Don't you think if Lao tzu could do it you could do it as well, or anyone else could do it as well?

To answer your question: Yes I am very close, and you are helping me right now, to open my mind to see a little more of what is necessary.

Thank you, Li Jiong.

Joe

 

 

Yes.

Thank you.

[Taoist81]

Haha if the "Bible Man" or whatever thing was directed at me - I would really prefer if it wasn't, because I'm not a practicing Christian. I just meant to give some background on what was probably the formative process of my inclination not to believe in Darwinism.

 

I'll also try to always be friendly with people, even if they want to ridicule me for what I do or don't believe in - and try to bear in mind that I'm on a forum where people believe in babies emerging and crawling out of their foreheads from GB14. And so take it with a grain of salt.

 

Regardless though, I am not trying to convince or change anyones mind, or proselytize. Just talking and exchanging ideas. Neither do I care what people think about me as long as I am doing my best to live, think and be right.

 

That said - for all of the puritanical stuff I read about Taoism being a "religion", lineage, Daoshi vs. Dao Ren and all that - If it's such, and people want to dwell on that, than you can't pick and choose as it's convenient to your preconceived or preconditioned notions.

 

For the people who are into the all you can pay for buffet spirituality - that's fine with me too, and what you do is your choice, and I respect the decisions that you make for yourselves.

 

Here's the thing though - As long as no ears from Zhongnanhai are pressed against the doors, Taoism is not congruent with Darwinian evolution. Period.

 

I was going to say something like - so the obvious question becomes "Is you is or is you ain't?". . . .

 

But, the truth is that everybody has higher or lower enlightenment quality than others, and mine may be the lowest of all.

 

My guess is, though that if you polled all of the lineage holders, priests of high accomplishment, and diligent cultivators of the Tao in Asia - at least 85% of them wouldn't believe that they evolved from a monkey, and they would (and I can) cite semi-canonical texts to refute it.

 

Anyway, for those hoping to become better monkeys - good luck with it. I am not trying to stop you.

 

No wudang, the "Bible Man comment" was actually in reference to a radio preacher who calls himself the "Bible Answer Man". He and other creationists just happen to use the same disproven old arguments and outright lies that non-christian creationists tend to use (i.e. those that don't look at the actual proof of evolution, which is by now an observable FACT).

How do you figure that evolution is incongruent with Taoism, especially with the passage quoted above from the TTC "Tao begat One, One begat Two, Two begat Three, Three begat the Ten Thousand Things". What better way to poetically describe Common Ancestry?

Edited September 25, 2008 by Taoist81

[wudangquan]

No wudang, the "Bible Man comment" was actually in reference to a radio preacher who calls himself the "Bible Answer Man". He and other creationists just happen to use the same disproven old arguments and outright lies that non-christian creationists tend to use (i.e. those that don't look at the actual proof of evolution, which is by now an observable FACT).

How do you figure that evolution is incongruent with Taoism, especially with the passage quoted above from the TTC "Tao begat One, One begat Two, Two begat Three, Three begat the Ten Thousand Things". What better way to poetically describe Common Ancestry?

 

Hey Taoist81,

 

I'm not, personally a big fan of Christianity, and I'm not interested in defending it. Because of my epilepsy and another genetic "condition" I started having OBE's and some audio/visual percpeptions that were outside of normal consensus realty at a pretty early age. I spent the first 15 years of my life with those people trying to "cast it out" of me.

 

That's a big part of the reason I learned how the bad juju works. Because I had it done to me every Wednesday and Sunday for years, but I was having (what I perceive to be) genuine spiritual experiences, and I knew that what they were doing was something manipulative.

 

As far as the Lao Zi quote goes . . .

 

I agree that matter and all forms in the phenominalogical universe have the same origin. From men to monkeys to the internet to rocks and trees.

 

That correlation doesn't necessitate the internet having developed from trees, or men having developed from monkeys though, imho.

 

Now, if you wouldn't mind - I would like to ask two questions for you.

 

While there is always adaptation and mutation within a species, can science offer any conclusive proof (other than anecdotal evidence of rocks dating fossils, fossils dating the rocks, and their own conjecture) of genome level change?

 

Would you disagree with this statement: Any mutation resulting in a genetic change always produces a lower organism. (Based on millions of tests with fruit flies etc)

[Taoist81]

Hey Taoist81,

 

I'm not, personally a big fan of Christianity, and I'm not interested in defending it. Because of my epilepsy and another genetic "condition" I started having OBE's and some audio/visual percpeptions that were outside of normal consensus realty at a pretty early age. I spent the first 15 years of my life with those people trying to "cast it out" of me.

 

That's a big part of the reason I learned how the bad juju works. Because I had it done to me every Wednesday and Sunday for years, but I was having (what I perceive to be) genuine spiritual experiences, and I knew that what they were doing was something manipulative.

 

As far as the Lao Zi quote goes . . .

 

I agree that matter and all forms in the phenominalogical universe have the same origin. From men to monkeys to the internet to rocks and trees.

 

That correlation doesn't necessitate the internet having developed from trees, or men having developed from monkeys though, imho.

 

Now, if you wouldn't mind - I would like to ask two questions for you.

 

While there is always adaptation and mutation within a species, can science offer any conclusive proof (other than anecdotal evidence of rocks dating fossils, fossils dating the rocks, and their own conjecture) of genome level change?

 

Would you disagree with this statement: Any mutation resulting in a genetic change always produces a lower organism. (Based on millions of tests with fruit flies etc)

Wudang,

Condolences for your experience with fundies, it seems many of us here have experienced them on some level.

Before your questions, it must be noted that "the internet having developed from trees" and especially "men having developed from monkeys" displays a fundamental misunderstanding of the theory of evolution. Men did not "come from monkeys", "the theory" (quotes because the Theory includes so many disciplines, from genetics to geology, now that calling it one thing is a bit misleading) doesn't say that. Only that men descended from the same line. More like saying that the internet "evolved" from pong, though, to be completely honest you are falling back on the Fallacy of False Analogy because the internet was manufactured, it did not evolve per se.

 

As for your questions, rather than attempting to elucidate the numerous studies that have gone into answering both of these questions this site offers a great synopsis: http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=15-ans...-to-creationist

Another great synopsis: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-misconceptions.html

Speciation (as you put it "genomal" changes): http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html

 

The really difficult thing is that Creationists recycle all of the old disproven stories and people take them as fact. There has yet to be a Creationist video or book put out that didn't use bad (and outdated) science and out right lies about science.

[wudangquan]

Touche', my good man.

 

http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/...nt_use.asp#apes

 

(admittedly I would like a different source, but there aren't alot of arguments coming out of non-theistic or non-spiritual camps).

 

Also - I'm as prone to fallacious logic as anybody. I usually can recognize it, and I sometimes employ it, but generally and in this conversation specifically - it was unintentional.

 

Here's what the bottom line probably is:

 

Neither one of us, nor scientists (Darwinist or ID people or whatever) can reproduce the conditions of pre-history. How much less can we reproduce conditions before nature as we know it . . .?

 

My belief that large scale evolution didn't take place is just that - a belief, and it's mostly based on a sort of . . . Gut feeling I guess is the word. The idea is so counter-intuitive to me, as to become unacceptable.

 

I believe that human society, and human science is very proud of itself, and its knowledge, but I think it's ultimately based on mostly foolish assumptions and ultimately most of it is wrong.

 

I also believe that evolution cannot be proven beyond anecdotal evidence.

 

Again though, I'm not suggesting that anyone need to change their beliefs, or that I am better (or worse) than anyone who thinks differently.

 

So . . . I think that really - this is a matter of faith on both sides of the issue, because neither side can (demonstrably) go back in time to collect evidence, or re-create the conditions of the times we're talking about. Or even reproduce the results on anything except a microscopic level.

 

I do think that mutation cannot produce new genetic information - only eliminate specific traits (which may be valuable).

 

And - I believe in the permanence of "things" after the initial distinction that must have happened. I think that things, including people, planets, galaxies and universes go through a basic metabolic process of formation-stasis-degeneration, and then a new cycle begins - not that the next cycle improves on the previous one.

 

Getting into a link posting ping pong tournament seems like a bad idea. I'm not a qualified biologist. Perhaps you are, but . . . Again I think it comes down to belief in the end.

 

I believe that dinosaurs and people co-existed, and that natural selection (as in most species co-existing at the one point, and then dying off due to environmental factors) but not Darwinian evolution.

 

Buy my new dinosaur qigong DVD series for only 3 easy payments of 39.99. It really works. Why else would humans still be around?

 

Jonathan

[.broken.]

We call the positive mass matter world which we are familiar with "Houtian world", which is represented by the red area in our Taiji symbol; and we call the negative mass matter world "Xiantian world", which is represented by the black area in our Taiji symbol. We call the refined nutritious substances of positive mass matter "Houtian Qi(Chi)"; and we call the refined nutritious substances of negative mass matter "Xiantian Qi(Chi)". Both "Houtian Qi(Chi)" and "Xiantian Qi(Chi)" have the property of wave-particle duality.

 

"Xiantian world" is where the spiritual individuals (some call it Yang Shen or Yang Spirit) live. Any instruments made by positive mass matter could not perceive "Xiantian world", only when your enchanted eye opens, you can see it. Or if you cultivated your spiritual baby (Yang Shen) successfully, you are able to apperceive "Xiantian world" naturally. Of course, it is not easy to achieve such a high level. That's why people always question me a lot, it is really very hard for them to accept the knowledge that they never experienced.

 

I have regularly wondered about the relationship between the two 'worlds' (for want of a better word). Like your school of Daoism, I too think of it as a yin/yang seperation and relationship. What confuses me is this:-

 

Much of what I have read mentions that the dead also go to what you call the Xiantian world, where the Yang Shen live, before being reborn. Are my sources correct in what they say?

 

Also, I have read the experiences of some 'enlightened' people who say that after the realisation of one-ness, comes the realisation of the void, or wuji. Is the centre of your Taiji symbol that void?

 

On the other hand, if one could not accept new knowledge, he/she will never make true progress. That's why so many are always stay in a very low level whatever how many years they have been engaged in spiritual cultivation or say meditation or Qigong. And I am one of the very few who can accept new knowledge even if it is beyond my experience. That's why I have cultivated my spiritual baby (Yang Shen) successfully within merely about 20 years of Kungfu practice and Internal Cultivation.

 

I have a very heavily scientific mind. All revolves around logic and experience/evidence. As such, I have always accepted evolution as the most logical explanation for how humans came about. However, I am well aware that there are two quite seperate places to view things from: as a part of time and as outwith time.

 

Meditation/Cultivation lead us to living in the moment. By being in the moment all we experience is just that, experiencing one perpetual, timeless moment. This is what I meant by living outwith time.

 

Living as a part of time is clearly when the mind is scattered and attaching to various thoughts. Leading to the so-called illusion of past, present and future.

 

Evolution, in my opinion, is a valid explanation for the part of us that is within the 'illusion'. As is the big bang, the formation of star, galaxies, planets, etc. What caused the big bang? Well, that's a great matter for debate which I shall not delve into now.

 

Two very contrasting perspectives, I am sure you'll agree. Even these two perspectives could be viewed as two seperate polarities, just as with the Houtian and Xiantian realms of existence. And it is just that. Those that bridge the two realms can see why both views exist. Be they based on 'ignorance' or 'truth' does not discredit their validity as both have their place... or if you will, their relevance.

 

To say that one is correct and another isn't pulls a switch in the minds of those who hear/read it. They will either believe, or they will sit in the middle balancing the two options, or they will dismiss it immediately (and all the shades of grey inbetween the aforementioned stances). We are talking about people's beliefs here, and they are so precious to us humans. Beliefs give us stability - if a belief is proven wrong by direct experience many will deny that it ever happened or their whole world view gets torn down.

 

That, Li Jiong, is what I believe you are getting at. Being open to the ideas that threaten your stability, being open to the ideas that shake the very foundations of your ego, being open to the concepts that make you defend your attachments...

 

That is what it truly means to have an open mind.

 

And, as Li Jiong said, it is the attribute to keep an open mind that speeds up spiritual progress.

 

Yours perpetually,

James

[Taoist81]

Did you look at the SciAm link? It addresses most of this...

 

Touche', my good man.

 

http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/...nt_use.asp#apes

 

(admittedly I would like a different source, but there aren't alot of arguments coming out of non-theistic or non-spiritual camps).

 

Also - I'm as prone to fallacious logic as anybody. I usually can recognize it, and I sometimes employ it, but generally and in this conversation specifically - it was unintentional.

 

Here's what the bottom line probably is:

 

Neither one of us, nor scientists (Darwinist or ID people or whatever) can reproduce the conditions of pre-history. How much less can we reproduce conditions before nature as we know it . . .?

 

This is another common misunderstanding, the theory of evolution does not address abiogenesis, only how speciation occurs. However, there have been studies that reproduced the conditions that we know early Earth had and, surprise, surprise, amino acids (the building blocks of life) began to form. Despite Lee Strobel's (another example of a lying IDer) claims to the contrary these results have been reproduced many times. Answers in Genesis and their "Creation Museum" are a joke, but even they admit that this is not a valid argument against Evolution.

 

My belief that large scale evolution didn't take place is just that - a belief, and it's mostly based on a sort of . . . Gut feeling I guess is the word. The idea is so counter-intuitive to me, as to become unacceptable.

 

I believe that human society, and human science is very proud of itself, and its knowledge, but I think it's ultimately based on mostly foolish assumptions and ultimately most of it is wrong.

 

I also believe that evolution cannot be proven beyond anecdotal evidence.

 

Again it must be asked if you looked at the links? There have been numerous observations in the lab of evolution. Anecdotal evidence is thrown out in decent studies. If you are calling fossils or other records of the past anecdotal then you are simply mistaken.

 

Again though, I'm not suggesting that anyone need to change their beliefs, or that I am better (or worse) than anyone who thinks differently.

 

So . . . I think that really - this is a matter of faith on both sides of the issue, because neither side can (demonstrably) go back in time to collect evidence, or re-create the conditions of the times we're talking about. Or even reproduce the results on anything except a microscopic level.

 

I do think that mutation cannot produce new genetic information - only eliminate specific traits (which may be valuable).

 

One doesn't need to go back in time to test or observe evolution. Mineral deposits etc. record conditions of early Earth, but again, Evolution is not Abiogenesis. And again, did you look at the links, it has been demonstrated that mutations can produce new traits, new information. For example the bacteria that evolved to digest nylon. They developed the trait then passed it on. The list goes on.

 

And - I believe in the permanence of "things" after the initial distinction that must have happened. I think that things, including people, planets, galaxies and universes go through a basic metabolic process of formation-stasis-degeneration, and then a new cycle begins - not that the next cycle improves on the previous one.

 

Getting into a link posting ping pong tournament seems like a bad idea. I'm not a qualified biologist. Perhaps you are, but . . . Again I think it comes down to belief in the end.

 

Agreed, ping pong link posting is not necessary. You don't seem to have looked at the ones above and the AiG site, despite being thoroughly unreliable for science (they base their information on a Bronze Age Myth, not current research), they disagree with many of your arguments one the link you posted, including the "no new genetic information" belief, because science has provided concrete proof. While you are not conversing with a biologist, you are conversing with someone who has studied biology both in college and out. It comes down to evidence, not belief.

 

I believe that dinosaurs and people co-existed, and that natural selection (as in most species co-existing at the one point, and then dying off due to environmental factors) but not Darwinian evolution.

 

Buy my new dinosaur qigong DVD series for only 3 easy payments of 39.99. It really works. Why else would humans still be around?

 

Jonathan

 

Now that is funny. It would be quite amusing to see "Flying Pterodactyl Qigong" or the "Plesiosaur Water Method Meditation".

[Li Jiong]

I have regularly wondered about the relationship between the two 'worlds' (for want of a better word). Like your school of Daoism, I too think of it as a yin/yang seperation and relationship. What confuses me is this:-

 

Much of what I have read mentions that the dead also go to what you call the Xiantian world, where the Yang Shen live, before being reborn. Are my sources correct in what they say?

 

Also, I have read the experiences of some 'enlightened' people who say that after the realisation of one-ness, comes the realisation of the void, or wuji. Is the centre of your Taiji symbol that void?

I have a very heavily scientific mind. All revolves around logic and experience/evidence. As such, I have always accepted evolution as the most logical explanation for how humans came about. However, I am well aware that there are two quite seperate places to view things from: as a part of time and as outwith time.

 

Meditation/Cultivation lead us to living in the moment. By being in the moment all we experience is just that, experiencing one perpetual, timeless moment. This is what I meant by living outwith time.

 

Living as a part of time is clearly when the mind is scattered and attaching to various thoughts. Leading to the so-called illusion of past, present and future.

 

Evolution, in my opinion, is a valid explanation for the part of us that is within the 'illusion'. As is the big bang, the formation of star, galaxies, planets, etc. What caused the big bang? Well, that's a great matter for debate which I shall not delve into now.

 

Two very contrasting perspectives, I am sure you'll agree. Even these two perspectives could be viewed as two seperate polarities, just as with the Houtian and Xiantian realms of existence. And it is just that. Those that bridge the two realms can see why both views exist. Be they based on 'ignorance' or 'truth' does not discredit their validity as both have their place... or if you will, their relevance.

 

To say that one is correct and another isn't pulls a switch in the minds of those who hear/read it. They will either believe, or they will sit in the middle balancing the two options, or they will dismiss it immediately (and all the shades of grey inbetween the aforementioned stances). We are talking about people's beliefs here, and they are so precious to us humans. Beliefs give us stability - if a belief is proven wrong by direct experience many will deny that it ever happened or their whole world view gets torn down.

 

That, Li Jiong, is what I believe you are getting at. Being open to the ideas that threaten your stability, being open to the ideas that shake the very foundations of your ego, being open to the concepts that make you defend your attachments...

 

That is what it truly means to have an open mind.

 

And, as Li Jiong said, it is the attribute to keep an open mind that speeds up spiritual progress.

 

Yours perpetually,

James

Sorry, I would not publish the secrets of another world too much, but I can tell you the truth is quite different with what common people think.

[qirin]

So . . . I think that really - this is a matter of faith on both sides of the issue, because neither side can (demonstrably) go back in time to collect evidence, or re-create the conditions of the times we're talking about. Or even reproduce the results on anything except a microscopic level.

 

I do think that mutation cannot produce new genetic information - only eliminate specific traits (which may be valuable).

 

evolutionary theory has evolved quite a bit since darwin, and a lot of the changes have taken place in the last few years. darwin's theory never dealt with the nuts and bolts of how evolution occurred, because people did not know about DNA or embryology.

 

"transitional species" both do and do not exist. all of the developments that lead an organism to dramatically change function from one form to another serve purposes at all points in between, and so every transitional species is from the perspective of its own time a fully functional individual. for instance, the wings of insects began as elaborate gill structures, and eyes evolved from primitive photoreceptors on the surface of amoeba.

 

an embryo "unpacks" the information in its DNA and uses that information to "build" an organism. by watching this "unpacking," we have discovered that all creatures, from bugs to people to horses to palm trees, are made using the same basic "palette" of genetic information. this "palette" comprises only a small part of the DNA of an animal, and changes to the palette generallly do not produce viable organisms. the rest of the DNA says how to use the palette, and changes in this part of the DNA produce small changes in the organism that, over time, lead to greater and greater changes.

 

in other words, all life on this planet seems to have been "written" using a genetic programming language that is pretty similar to real programming languages. evolution occurs when some of this information becomes scrambled and rearranged, resulting in new implementations of the same "genetic software." at certain points in history, there have been major changes to the programming language, so that trilobytes are not written in the same language that dolphins are, but these instances are extremely rare and resulted in huge explosions of new species. one is the pre-cambrian explosion; there are maybe six or seven others.

 

all of these ideas are to some extent theoretical; however, they form the basis for modern genetic engineering which has produced results that are hard to argue with. but that's the nature of science. unlike religious belief, science does not "hold positions." of course some of our understanding of evolution is wrong, and over time we will revise it. maybe qi will be found to play a role. as soon as that can be demonstrated, then science will accept qi as a part of evolution. if you can demonstrate the existence of god, scientists would have to accept that as well.

 

as far as the original comment that started this thread about gravitation, there are a number of forces understood by physics besides gravity that contribute to the stabilization of the universe. there is a "repulsive force" and it doesn't come from "negative matter." it's called the "electromagnetic force" and it is what keeps you from walking through a table. the universe ostensibly does not collapse in on itself because the big bang caused everything to accelerate outward, and that inertia is what keeps things from collapsing back in.

 

I am not saying I think modern science is 100% infallible. the point is that there could be nothing more unscientific than claiming it was. the nature of science is an unending quest to broaden our understanding of reality, even when the answers we get don't fit into our current beliefs.

Edited September 28, 2008 by qirin

[Li Jiong]

Don't you think if Lao tzu could do it you could do it as well, or anyone else could do it as well?

To answer your question: Yes I am very close, and you are helping me right now, to open my mind to see a little more of what is necessary.

Thank you, Li Jiong.

Joe

In theory, it is possible. But if you just think "if Lao tzu could do it you could do it as well", but never cultivate yourself to the level that Lao tzu achieved, then the possibility will never be the reality. Lao tzu achieved that level at the age of about 160, and after a long time cultivation for about 150 years.

[Stigweard]

In theory, it is possible. But if you just think "if Lao tzu could do it you could do it as well", but never cultivate yourself to the level that Lao tzu achieved, then the possibility will never be the reality. Lao tzu achieved that level at the age of about 160, and after a long time cultivation for about 150 years.

 

So would you say you have achieved this level?

[Li Jiong]

So would you say you have achieved this level?

Sorry, I am not yet. My teacher has achieved this level.

[metzu]

In theory, it is possible. But if you just think "if Lao tzu could do it you could do it as well", but never cultivate yourself to the level that Lao tzu achieved, then the possibility will never be the reality. Lao tzu achieved that level at the age of about 160, and after a long time cultivation for about 150 years.

Li Jiong

It is my understanding, it is questionable whether or not Lao Tzu was actually a real person,

or an illusion created by a certain group of people.

Joe

[Li Jiong]

Li Jiong

It is my understanding, it is questionable whether or not Lao Tzu was actually a real person,

or an illusion created by a certain group of people.

Joe

We know Lao Tzu was actually a real person, he has achieved a very high level of spiritual cultivation, much higher than Sakyamuni, Jesu or Mohammed.

But if you think it is an illusion created by a certain group of people, that's your freedom, I don't mind, I think Lao Tzu won't mind as well

[metzu]

We know Lao Tzu was actually a real person, he has achieved a very high level of spiritual cultivation, much higher than Sakyamuni, Jesu or Mohammed.

But if you think it is an illusion created by a certain group of people, that's your freedom, I don't mind, I think Lao Tzu won't mind as well

Li Jiong

Joe doesn't mind that Lao Tzu won't mind, or that anyone who ever lived or ever will live minds, be they real people......or a perception of an individual created from someone elses imagination.

Joe (metoo not metzu)

[林愛偉]

Don't you think if Lao tzu could do it you could do it as well, or anyone else could do it as well?

To answer your question: Yes I am very close, and you are helping me right now, to open my mind to see a little more of what is necessary.

Thank you, Li Jiong.

Joe

Thank you.

 

 

Hi Metzu,

 

Cultivation isn't a one lifetime event. It happens over successive lifetimes, and at one moment

everything becomes totally clear, withotu distinction. There is no up or down, sky and Earth...etc.

 

It is a gradual effort which results in the sudden attainment. Gradually cultivating daily, life after life, and when the conditions are proper, wisdom shines through. Deeper cultivation results in more and more purer wisdom. Then at an even higher point, wisdom is completed. Takes a lot of work though.

 

Peace and Blessings,

Lin

[林愛偉]

We know Lao Tzu was actually a real person, he has achieved a very high level of spiritual cultivation, much higher than Sakyamuni, Jesu or Mohammed.

But if you think it is an illusion created by a certain group of people, that's your freedom, I don't mind, I think Lao Tzu won't mind as well

 

Li Jiong,

 

Lao Zi, though very wise indeed, was not higher than the state of a Buddha. Either he was an transformation of a Buddha, which would make him a Buddha, or a reincarnation of a Bodhisattva, which has been investigated deeply. He is recognized as the Bodhisattva Mahakasyapa, who undegone similar birth in previous lifetimes.

 

Here is the record statements of the SIxth Patriarch's Diamond Platform Sutra, with Commentary by Xuan Hua Shang Ren:

"The Tenth Patriarch of the Chan school, Arya Parshva, lived in his mother's womb for more than sixty years. He was born with white hair and a white beard just like Laozi. Laozi lived in his mother's womb for eigthy one years and was born with white hair, and a long white beard. They named him "Lao Zi", meaning "Old Child", but he was actually a reincarnation of Mahakasyapa, a disciple of the Buddha.

 

He was reborn in China due to the good roots of the Chinese people, yet they didn't believe in the Buddha Dharma. Mahakasyapa was sent to China to begin Daoism, which is the same as the Brahman religion of Indian and which cultivates purity of conduct."

 

In the world of cultivation, none of these methods of "Buddhism and Daoism" have a label. They do not fight with each other to see who is better. They are all simply just cultivation methods, one family all interrelated. No one is taking credit for the accomplishments of Lao Zi, but what is truth is truth; Daoism and Buddhism is really aspects of the same teaching of cultivation.

 

Even Patriarch Lu Dong Bin cultivates Chan and is a Dharma Protector, yet he appears int he world as a Daoist for the Daoists. At those levels, there are no distinctions. Only at the levels of ignorance and relativity, are there distinctions of the mind.

 

Where we are is a kindergarten class. All these great cultivators are wondering what's taking us so long...but they sit by and push us to continue along the way.

 

So please, say what you will, but making statements like that really help people create more false thoughts about Daoism proper. Lao Zi can be a Transformation body of a Buddha, that would be great, and or a Bodhisattva. But I have not once met a being higher than a Buddha. Just doesn't happen.

 

Be well brother. Keep up the good work.

 

好好修行吧.

 

林爱伟

 

Peace and Blessings,

Lin

[metzu]

Hi Metzu,

 

Cultivation isn't a one lifetime event. It happens over successive lifetimes, and at one moment

everything becomes totally clear, withotu distinction. There is no up or down, sky and Earth...etc.

 

It is a gradual effort which results in the sudden attainment. Gradually cultivating daily, life after life, and when the conditions are proper, wisdom shines through. Deeper cultivation results in more and more purer wisdom. Then at an even higher point, wisdom is completed. Takes a lot of work though.

 

Peace and Blessings,

Lin

 

Hi Lin,

I hope I have not given the impression, that this is something I have been doing for a couple of years, my search began 40 years ago,life after life after life, the Phoenix and I are old compadres.

As a matter of fact in one of those lifetimes, while laying quietly,eyes closed on my bunk(I was awaiting trial), I felt a jolt of electricity that had me sit straight up from my top bunk and look around, as I looked out the window, on the roof across from the building I was housed in, stood this huge magnificent beautiful bright orange bird, all a glow as though it was the sun itself. My concentration was broken when I heard someone say," let him go.' I got up and walked to the tier railing and a bunch of guys had some guy that was being released on bail, and they were trying to make him give up his watch before he went home. I told them they didn't need it they weren't going anywhere.

Was it actually a Phoenix outside my window? Has anyone ever actually seen a phoenix, or is it really a myth?

In one of my lifetimes, I did purple haze for 6 months everyday and at the end of the journey I was taking 10 hits at a time. Does that explain me seeing beautiful birds?

Then again, one time when I was coming from a very uncompromising situation, with some people who had challanged my beliefs(I was involved with christianity at the time) I left their building and when I walked outside , looking up into the magnificent star filled night ,hands outstretched I prayed the our father, as I was praying I actually saw satan, red outfit and all, pointy ears, and pitchfork ,do a spin out like the road runner and zoom off and away from me in a streak of red trailer light.

I didn't arrive at today unprepared.

Joe (metoo not metzu)

[林愛偉]

Hi Lin,

I hope I have not given the impression, that this is something I have been doing for a couple of years, my search began 40 years ago,life after life after life, the Phoenix and I are old compadres.

As a matter of fact in one of those lifetimes, while laying quietly,eyes closed on my bunk(I was awaiting trial), I felt a jolt of electricity that had me sit straight up from my top bunk and look around, as I looked out the window, on the roof across from the building I was housed in, stood this huge magnificent beautiful bright orange bird, all a glow as though it was the sun itself. My concentration was broken when I heard someone say," let him go.' I got up and walked to the tier railing and a bunch of guys had some guy that was being released on bail, and they were trying to make him give up his watch before he went home. I told them they didn't need it they weren't going anywhere.

Was it actually a Phoenix outside my window? Has anyone ever actually seen a phoenix, or is it really a myth?

In one of my lifetimes, I did purple haze for 6 months everyday and at the end of the journey I was taking 10 hits at a time. Does that explain me seeing beautiful birds?

Then again, one time when I was coming from a very uncompromising situation, with some people who had challanged my beliefs(I was involved with christianity at the time) I left their building and when I walked outside , looking up into the magnificent star filled night ,hands outstretched I prayed the our father, as I was praying I actually saw satan, red outfit and all, pointy ears, and pitchfork ,do a spin out like the road runner and zoom off and away from me in a streak of red trailer light.

I didn't arrive at today unprepared.

Joe (metoo not metzu)

 

Edited September 28, 2008 by 林愛偉