XPost: alt.support.depression, alt.support.schizophrenia, alt.bu   
   dha.short.fat.guy   
   XPost: alt.philosophy.taoism   
   From: slider@anashram.com   
      
   On Tue, 13 Aug 2024 22:37:04 +0100, one  wrote:   
      
      
   >> the higher principles won the day and   
   >> the so-called white version of morality lost...   
   >   
   > Not sure about the topic at this point.   
      
   ### - we've been playing around with language & perception in order to   
   perhaps arrive at a higher truth/understanding, you avoiding being pinned   
   down by escaping-off into ambiguity & plays on words, whereas my basic   
   argument has been steadily along the lines of, e.g., this quote:   
      
   "Anyone who perceives their shadow and light simultaneously sees   
   themselves from two sides and thus gets in the middle." --Carl Jung ;)   
      
   this spelling/marking the 'end' of the dualistic approach...   
      
      
      
      
   >> i mean, i look around here and everyone's cups are already filled to   
   >> overflowing, there's no room for anything more or different, people   
   >> don't   
   >> like/resent anything 'different', they like to feel that they've gots it   
   >> all nailed down already...   
   >   
   > I don't know about, everyone. Nor everyone's cup   
   > being as you say it appears to you to be.   
   >   
   > You appear to have a projection screen projecting screens   
   > that screen what apears to you to be, stereotyping.   
      
   ### - no, taking into account that words & terms are not (and cannot be)   
   definitive, and are in fact often completely misleading, we're thus forced   
   to use language/words in novel ways to communicate...   
      
   iow: we can't take anything said literally, knowing its limitations all we   
   can honestly do is to 'allude' to certain things people already know in a   
   variety of ways, knowing that the other person understands what one is   
   'trying' to say through a veil of inaccurate words... poetry being one   
   such use of novel language to allude to things that cannot be accurately   
   defined... thus metaphor, similes & analogy are the only tools we have...   
   there are always exceptions to any rule but we're not talking about those   
   (we, for example, might be/represent those exceptions, standing on the   
   sidelines observing/making-observations)   
      
      
      
      
      
   >>> The world is said to be sacred.   
   >>> Trying to change it is not advised.   
   >>   
   >> ### - are you suggesting/saying that the tibetan buddhists are in error   
   >> working to enlighten the whole world? that it's not advisable??   
   >   
   > Paradigms vary.   
   >   
   > I was saying what a saying is   
   > given a Taoist paradigm, imo.   
      
   ### - nevertheless, we still both know what we're talking about in the   
   context its currently been framed, you just have a terrible tendency to   
   keep going-off on irrelevant/dualistic tangents is all, if otoh that's   
   your way of saying/stating you no longer wish to continue along this line   
   of thought/thinking then thats fine too, we can stop at any point but your   
   argument loses the debate...   
      
      
      
      
   >> or does   
   >> that perhaps only apply to those who don't really know what they're   
   >> doing,   
   >> an injunction as such to those people to wait until they 'do' know what   
   >> they're doing!   
   >   
   > When being spontaneous, one does.   
   > When being drawn by a cause, one does.   
   >   
   > How to do without doing, to be in the Zone,   
   > to transcend right and wrong could be an other   
   > mode and still yet suggest a duality exists.   
      
   ### - the vast majority of humanity lives entirely in a dualistic good/bad   
   interpretation of life, the universe & everything wherein everything has   
   either a positive/negative value, philosophies like buddhism and/or the   
   tao being systems of ideas purporting to exist 'beyond' such a simplistic   
   approach (there's 2D/dualism which is flat, and then there's 3D buddhism   
   which has depth)   
      
      
      
      
      
   >> - iow: don't look for the spiritually advanced among ordinary people,   
   >> such types are more usually outcasts, tramps, even mentally ill... they   
   >> never quite 'fit-in', they're outsiders looking in...   
   >   
   > I often see the most spiritually advance among ordinary people   
   > as well as among other people, given an aye to sea.   
      
   ### - "out of the mouths of babes & sucklings" ya mean? that happens too,   
   only they're not usually aware of it themselves or even realise they've   
   said anything of any moment... truth exists everywhere and occasionally   
   leaks-out/bursts-through, usually completely unnoticed but occasionally   
   observed by the astute...   
      
      
      
      
      
   >>> Theirs could be a difficult Road, Way, Tao.   
   >>   
   >> ### - one accepts that the life of a policemen is never an easy one...   
   >>   
   >> after all, they're forced every day to always see both sides of every   
   >> coin   
   >> and debate/decide something, it's their work/job ;)   
   >   
   > Whether, they, are forced, choose, have a free form   
   > of will, desire and/or knot could be semantics.   
      
   ### - smile, there you go again 'deflecting' from the point made and   
   escaping-off into ambiguity using the very semantics you say/suggest   
   is/can-be misleading?   
      
   fyi... examining different lines of thought doesn't automatically commit   
   one to them, rather the opposite actually: observing them frees us from   
   them...   
      
      
      
      
      
   >> i like the bodhisattva story... i mean, here was a dude who'd reached   
   >> enlightenment! actually made it all the way! and he could have   
   >> presumably   
   >> just gone-off doing all the incredible things enlightened people can   
   >> probably do with such gifts... his problem was that he clearly saw that   
   >> humanity had nothing, nada, were spiritually poverty stricken with no   
   >> hope   
   >> of ever finding anything, zip! and that kinda hurt him ya see?   
   >   
   > I see a story you appear to recall.   
   >   
   > An impression of mine was that a bodhisattva takes a vow.   
      
   ### - the buddhists know (or should know) that there will come a time when   
   they have to 'get-off the road' in order to realise the teachings... at   
   which point they will drop all the dressing up in robes & rituals etc (the   
   outer forms of buddhism) and cease to 'be' buddhists altogether...   
   buddhism being only a means to an end, a road/path of learning and not the   
   end itself, the journey not the destination...   
      
   i.e., there 'is' also such a thing as arriving ya know ;)   
      
      
      
      
      
      
   >> to him it was unthinkable that he could just piss-off to go-live an   
   >> exalted life of riley while that poor bunch of bastards have nothing   
   >> whatsoever, and in all likelihood never will...   
   >>   
   >> he had compassion for them, see? or maybe he was just an idiot hah!   
   >>   
   >> either way, he decided to stay with them, and then at least they had   
   >> 'him'   
   >> then didn't they!   
   >>   
   >> perforce they loved & revered him for that, of course they did, but he   
   >> just *couldn't* abandon them, ya know?   
   >>   
   >> only a great being could ever do something like that!   
   >   
   > If that's what a great being is, for you, then that's great.   
   >   
   > Sounds to me like its more of a martyr/ego trip.   
   > A kind of a partial realization, not a full-fledged mystical   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)