Why I'm not a Taoist

[ayar415]

Originally Posted by Still_Waters

QUOTE 157 EXCERPT: How do you wish to proceed on that particular point?

It should be obvious (at least to me) that focusing on "seeing my body from afar" will most likely lead nowhere as in that Krishnamurti dialogue meeting (without Krishnamurti of course) that I mentioned previously. Let us investigate this particular point or drop this "going nowhere" discussion.

Yes, we must investigate your "seeing my body from afar" to find out if it is beyond the realm of the 5 senses. It was a real experience that you had. You were aware of your experience of seeing without your body in the wake mode.

Why do you assume that the 5 senses need your body to function? Is it because you believe that consciousness comes from the physical brain? Please reflect on this.

I don't accept that consciousness (i.e. my existence) emerges from biological processes. I am the human consciousness and have everything to do with the existence of the body, but the body has nothing to do with my existence as the human consciousness.

Krishnamurti did tell Bohm that thought comes from the brain cells. There is no empirical evidence to prove that. Mental illness has no biological basis, said Dr. Thomas Szasz who argued that the brain is a material fact but the mind is a metaphor.

[Still_Waters]

QUOTE 166 EXCERPT:

Originally Posted by Molearner

... male and female he created them.” In my mind I take the liberty of understanding this way: “as being both male and female he created them”. So the original ‘man’ was a spiritual man(i.e. made in the image of God)…..not a physical ‘man’.

That particular Biblical passage has always intrigued me as well but I never really meditated on it much. However, my sense is also that the original entity (I prefer the gender-less terminology "entity" used by Edgar Cayce instead of "man" or "woman" in this particular context) IS indeed spiritual and not physical.

Having personally seen an Indian sage mysteriously appear out of "thin air" (literally) in an open field and having that confirmed afterwards by the sages of India including my own spiritual mentor, I have meditated extensively on the nature of the "physical form" and the body. That led me to the same conclusion as you in that one's original nature is spiritual ... not physical... and that, furthermore, the physical form is projected from one's spiritual center. Also like yourself, I frequently use the oft-quoted expression "Man is made in the image of God" (somewhat equivalent to the Hermetic principle, "As above, so below") and that contributed to my understanding that virtually anything is possible once one addresses one's self-limiting thoughts... including the form-producing thought that one is "male" or "female". (Incidentally, advanced yogis can change their outward forms and that includes gender so I am convinced that each of us is "created" BOTH male AND female as my teacher pointed out to me many many years ago.) This is an unexpected but most welcome development in this thread.

Since this is a Taoist thread, however, this discussion inspired me to search for gender-related chapters in the Tao but, interestingly enough, the Tao is virtually gender-free. The Tao does not make the frequent references to gender found in the scriptures of the Abrahamic religions. The only reference that I could find actually was very favorable to the feminine aspect.

Tao 61:

"The feminine can always conquer the masculine
...by yielding and taking the lower position.
In this way she becomes as low-lying land:
...in time, everything comes her way."

Once again, with appropriate credit given to Winter Light, here is a link to five alternate translations of Chapter 61 in its entirety.

https://ttc.tasuki.org/display:Code:...,rh/section:61

EDIT:

In addition, here is a link to an interesting article on Taoism and Gender Roles. One quote which I found personally interesting was : "Yin, the female part of the symbol which is black is calmer and cooler and is often represented by still water." The reference to "still water" as a representation of the female was particularly interesting for this biological male. In any case, the article indicates that male and female were considered equally essential for one's balanced life.

https://taoismvsaustralia.weebly.com...der-roles.html

[Still_Waters]

QUOTE 171 EXCERPT:

Originally Posted by ayar415

Is it because you believe that consciousness comes from the physical brain? Please reflect on this.
Krishnamurti did tell Bohm that thought comes from the brain cells. There is no empirical evidence to prove that.

What gave you the impression that I believe that consciousness comes from the physical brain? In any case, that is certainly NOT my position now and it surprises me that you would even ask that based on what I have posted previously. Even modern psychiatry is coming to the conclusion that consciousness operates independently of the brain, as expressed eloquently in this talk by Dr. Bruce Greyson, Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry and Neurological Behaviors at the University of Virginia.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2aWM95RuMqU

As for Krishnamurti's point that "thought comes from brain cells", I was not aware that Krishnamurti had actually said that. (It's been a long time since I read Krishnamurti's books. Perhaps I was more intellectually-oriented at that time or that would definitely have raised a red flag with me.) You are correct that there is no empirical evidence to prove that. After attending that "going nowhere" Krishnamurti dialogue group (without anyone near the level of a Krishnamurti) and hearing this from you regarding this particular Krishnamurti statement, I am becoming less and less enamored with my memories of Krishnamurti from my readings years ago. My sense is that I probably would not relate very well to him if I were introduced to him for the first time today.

[winter light]

Originally Posted by Still_Waters

RE: https://ttc.tasuki.org/display:Code:...c,rh/section:1

Thank you so much for this link. It is EXCELLENT.
...
Once again, with appropriate credit given to Winter Light, here is a link to five alternate translations of Chapter 61 in its entirety.
...

Hi SW. Just wanted to clarify that I'm not affiliated with that site. So I've received more than enough credit. It was just something I happily discovered a while back and wanted to share the discovery.

Sorry for the belated response. I had no intention to mislead. Between the roundabout in my head and the roundabout in the discussions I have a hard time knowing when to jump in.

Really glad that you are getting a lot out of it. I love comparing the verses as each perspective gives new depth into appreciation and understanding of the Tao. And for me each verse almost stands alone and puts me "in the zone" when I need it. The most important line for me in the whole thing: "Blunt the sharpness". That's my whole path in three words.

[Still_Waters]

QUOTE 174 EXCERPT:

Originally Posted by winter light

Hi SW.
I've received more than enough credit. It was just something I happily discovered a while back and wanted to share the discovery.

I just wanted you to know how much I appreciated your discovery of 5 alternate translations to the Tao and to give you credit for that great find. It really allows me to improve the quality of my posts on the Tao here.

Having said that, I agree with you that I've given you adequate credit for sharing your discovery with us. I will stop, as requested.

[django]

Originally Posted by Still_Waters

QUOTE 166 EXCERPT:"Man is made in the image of God" (somewhat equivalent to the Hermetic principle, "As above, so below") and that contributed to my understanding that virtually anything is possible once one addresses one's self-limiting thoughts... including the form-producing thought that one is "male" or "female". (Incidentally, advanced yogis can change their outward forms and that includes gender so I am convinced that each of us is "created" BOTH male AND female as my teacher pointed out to me many many years ago.) This is an unexpected but most welcome development in this thread.

Extending this principle, something that your post made me think actually, yes we are male and female on one spiritual level, two distinct sexes in one, but on a deeper spiritual level we are male and female in one, two halves in one, and then I imagine there is a deeper level again where there is no distinction, not two, not even two halves in one, but both at the same time, and perhaps this is the original pattern that we are trying to become aware of. Speculation on my part, at least the last bit, but it made sense for a moment to me.

[ayar415]

Originally Posted by Still_Waters

QUOTE 171 EXCERPT: What gave you the impression that I believe that consciousness comes from the physical brain? In any case, that is certainly NOT my position now and it surprises me that you would even ask that based on what I have posted previously.

So, you don't believe that consciousness comes from the physical brain. Neither do I. However, that doesn't mean much if our respective beliefs are purely based on conviction.

I can understand why you are drawn to Dr Bruce Greyson's work. Your extraordinary personal psychic experience needs validation. A Taoist master won't cut it. Authority that has gravitas has to be from the west.

I am skipping a movie to listen to your Greyson youtube. I don't expect to learn anything from him but I will keep an open mind out of deference to you. Talk to you tomorrow.

[Still_Waters]

QUOTE 176 EXCERPT:

Originally Posted by django

I imagine there is a deeper level again where there is no distinction, not two, not even two halves in one, but both at the same time, and perhaps this is the original pattern that we are trying to become aware of.

That is my intuitive understanding as well .... the point at which "there is no distinction" and no differentiation whatsoever. That may indeed be where the investigation of "original nature" leads.

[Still_Waters]

QUOTE 177 EXCERPT:

Originally Posted by ayar415

I can understand why you are drawn to Dr Bruce Greyson's work. Your extraordinary personal psychic experience needs validation. A Taoist master won't cut it. Authority that has gravitas has to be from the west.

My experiences have been sufficiently validated even without Dr. Bruce Greyson's work. Greyson validated what I had already concluded but his validation was not necessary for me personally. However, his points were very useful to me when dealing with others where the Taoist experience and the NDE might not have been convincing. My discussions with skeptics can thus proceed in many different directions depending on what would be most convincing to the others.

I tend to investigate Truth from as many perspectives as possible, including science (especially quantum physics), psychology (especially Carl Jung), medical views (to a more limited extent), and others. My paradigm of the Reality must include everything of which I am aware as best as possible. When contradictions arise, I weigh and measure as best as possible. However, I might add that my pure meditative insights and direct experiences have ultimately proved to be very reliable and consistent with my interactions with those whom I consider to be great wisdom sages.

I would be interested in hearing your reactions to Dr. Greyson's talk.

[ayar415]

Originally Posted by Still_Waters

QUOTE 177 EXCERPT:

I would be interested in hearing your reactions to Dr. Greyson's talk.

I have, so far, listened to 30 minutes of Dr. Greyson's talk, and have been researching his background to get a drift of where he is coming from.

Tibetan Buddhism seems to be the driving force behind Dr. Greyson and his mentor, Dr. Stevenson, in their work which was funded by wealthy industrialist Chester Carlson.

You and I don't believe that consciousness comes from the brain. I have my reasons, and so have you. May I know why this realization is important to you?