XPost: alt.philosophy.taoism, alt.buddha.short.fat.guy, alt.philosophy.zen   
   From: wudao@wuji.net   
      
   dagnabit wrote:   
   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~   
   noname wrote:   
   > Sometimes life *is*   
   >a cast-iron bitch, but once you let go of expectations, it gets easier to   
   >see the beauty of the way the thing works. When we fuck up, things get   
   >harder; when we don't, they get easier: duh. Likewise when things keep   
   >working better and better, it seems not too unlikely that one isn't fucking   
   >up too severely.   
      
   Such a scenario paints a picture of Tao   
   in terms of what following Tao might eventuate as unfolding.   
      
   Yet there are no guarantees.   
   Tao don't play that.   
      
   Sometimes one can fuck up for a long time,   
   without any instant karma hitting one upside the head.   
      
   Then, all of a sudden, blammo.   
   Sometimes Tao decides to do things that Way.   
   Assuming Tao was a decider of all things.   
   Which it isn't. In Taoist thought.   
   It can't be because it must not be.   
      
   >Of course if you just fell off a new horse and broke your leg, it's tough   
   >to see the beauty in it, because the beauty of it's still in the future,   
   >when the broken leg makes you not-good-enough to be impressed into the army   
   >during a war.   
      
   Once one has figured out how to follow Tao,   
   and becomes a Sage, one does not fall off a horse.   
      
   One is cautious, as when crossing an icy stream, in winter.   
      
   >I've been able to see the beauty of it for a while now. For example,   
   >election campaign in the US is proceeding precisely as it must. Guess what,   
   >*everything* proceeds *precisely* as it must.   
   >   
   >You assignment, if you choose to accept it, is to figure out what that   
   >means, so you can decide for yourself what you think about it.   
   >   
   >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~   
   >no need. if everything proceeds as it must,   
   >then thinking of it is simply superfluous.   
      
   You assignment must mean something, I think.   
   I'd think it was a typo that must have been made.   
   Proably by not-thinking, or thinking too much,   
   instead of paying more attention.   
      
   Except, I'm wrung lotsa times too.   
      
   noname then asked:   
   >If you do not think of what is, how can what must be next become?   
   >   
   >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~   
   >   
   >are you claiming that your thinking   
   >formulates reality in subsequent   
   >consequence? when did you become   
   >god?   
      
   If what was next never was, since what is, always is what is,   
   then what you thought it was, wasn't, because it wasn't.   
      
   When what is changes into what is, it remains what is.   
      
   All that changed was thinking about it, as if it was.   
   And then it wasn't. And it became what must be next.   
      
   I think it must be like that.   
   Because that's how I think it must be.   
      
   Other than that, noname's views can be fun.   
   A single choice, made by a free-thinker with free-choice, is able,   
   instantly and without notice, to change everything, all at once.   
      
   And one wouldn't notice it, unless one paid attention to it.   
      
   So it's really the choice   
   and not the thought that must change.   
      
   Everything.   
      
   If you think about it.   
   As such.   
      
   All at once.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)