Spiritual Forums

Spiritual Forums (https://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/index.php)
-   Taoism (https://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/forumdisplay.php?f=127)
-   -   ch 71 (https://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=120557)

FallingLeaves 08-02-2018 12:06 AM

ch 71
 
these guys were awesome! here is my take on this one.

Knowing vs lack of knowing
It is better, lack of knowing
Knowing is a disease.

In the end only when the disease is sick
Appropriate lack of the disease happens.
Sages lack the disease
It happened the disease was sick.

In the appropriate way, lack of the disease happens.

virtue121 11-03-2018 02:19 PM

I do not think that ignorance is better than knowing. Our true nature is omniscient/all knowing.

markings 29-03-2018 04:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by virtue121
I do not think that ignorance is better than knowing. Our true nature is omniscient/all knowing.

And our way of knowing, storing and analyzing everything (to death) with our mind, basing everything on what we think we already know i.e. memory, that is exactly the disease that obscures our true nature.

The not knowing talked about is not about worldly knowledge but spiritual 'knowledge', traditions and theories. The sage discards it all and is happy not to know anything.

inavalan 29-03-2018 04:37 AM

there are the four possible cases, progressively better:

to not know that you don't know - the worst
to know that you don't know
to not know that you know
to know that you know - the best

markings 29-03-2018 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by inavalan
there are the four possible cases, progressively better:

to not know that you don't know - the worst
to know that you don't know
to not know that you know
to know that you know - the best

Once more this applies to worldly knowledge.
As far as spiritual knowledge goes the stages, best to worst must be reversed.

Only "not to know that you don't know" leaves one free to respond in an natural manner, free from mind interference.

inavalan 29-03-2018 09:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by markings
Once more this applies to worldly knowledge.
As far as spiritual knowledge goes the stages, best to worst must be reversed.

Only "not to know that you don't know" leaves one free to respond in an natural manner, free from mind interference.


So, you believe that ignorance is bliss ...

Different people use same words with different meanings. For me "natural response" doesn't mean something desirable. Also, for me, "mind" is the inner counterpart of the brain, so, I find it desirable for "mind" to interfere.

It's easy to misunderstand each other.

"A mind is a psychic pattern through which you interpret and form reality." - Seth, Session 763, Page 41

markings 30-03-2018 06:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by inavalan
So, you believe that ignorance is bliss ...

Different people use same words with different meanings. For me "natural response" doesn't mean something desirable. Also, for me, "mind" is the inner counterpart of the brain, so, I find it desirable for "mind" to interfere.

It's easy to misunderstand each other.

"A mind is a psychic pattern through which you interpret and form reality." - Seth, Session 763, Page 41

IMO the "natural response" refers to the most appropriate and effective response in a situation.
Spiritually this arise when there is a response to an uninterpreted and pattern free answer or reaction to something.

markings 31-03-2018 09:13 AM

To expand a little, R.D. Laing in 'The Divided Self' writes that we are 'crazed people', brought to this state by our upbringing. Many psychologists would in one way or another agree to this to some extent.

inavalan, are you saying that this is the state from where we make the best decisions?

Spirituality aims to act from a point before interpretation, the state of pure perception, the true natural state, and not 'interpreted perception' which is already corrupted and distorted by our history and culture.

H:O:R:A:C:E 01-04-2018 05:29 AM

i'm finding myself in agreement with particular notes from each of the several
contributors to this thread, and in disagreement with others. i'd like to see the
discussion progress into a harmonic whole, and not devolve into chaos.

providing a "definition of terms", as they come into use, may help...
but i also have a sense that "Truth" is "unquantifiable" [impossible to express or measure in terms of quantity...
immeasurable according to standards beyond itself], so that may be a trap to avoid falling into.
perhaps just "speaking one's truth", which as much authenticity as is possible will suffice?
[and respecting that another 'instrument' in the orchestra may strike different tones.]

markings 02-04-2018 09:55 AM

Let's start with the definition of truth. There is no such think as personal truth. There is perception, opinion, notions, feelings, urges which are all personal but none can and should be elevated to the level of truth in any sense. To use truth for one's personal experience is to devalue it. That my experience is true does not make it "a truth". The difference is in the longevity of what is described. It may be true that right now I am angry. The truth may be that 5 seconds ago I was angry, but that anger of a while back is not "a truth" because it does not and cannot stand on its own.

There is only the Truth, and it is that which never changes. If it changes it is not Truth.


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:07 PM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c) Spiritual Forums