What is the meaning of Tao?

>>19145647
If you have to ask, you won't get it.

>>19145647
What if I tell you that the Unnameable Tao named Itself?

>>19145647
Tao is to be

>>19145647
Tao is one of those Gondola videos where he sits on a rooftop or something and the sky vibrates.

File: Void_Manga.jpg (215KB, 507x502px) Image search: [Google]

215KB, 507x502px

>>19145647
Tao is happen from power of Pisces Zodiac age
Taoism create many innovation technology in ancient china while jesus the fish of spirit create new Rome in the west

the two fish divide human thinking but tie them all by rope of love that is tao

Note: Age of Pisces is gone

>>19145647
What do you mean?
There.

>>19145647
If you have a staff, I will give you a staff

If you do not have a staff, I will take your staff away

>>19145653
>>19145656
>>19145666
>>19145739
>>19145743
>>19145764
Why do you have to be so cryptic?

>>19145764
The cliff's notes version: If you are wise, I will share my wisdom with you. If you are ignorant you will be made no less so merely by interacting with a wise man, though it may leave you questioning your current mental dynamic. As in, if you got the original meaning that's its own reward. If I have to EXPLAIN it to you then you've already missed the lesson. But always there are other lessons to learn.

>>19145739
so what is the new age and what it will be like then?

File: lao-tse [1280x768].jpg (78KB, 748x561px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 748x561px

>>19145647

The Dao is

File: aquarius.jpg (1MB, 3281x2187px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3281x2187px

>>19145790
Aquarius age
look at it's symbol you will see it in eveythings

>>19145804
The water bearer?

Isnt a new age supposed to have a new religion and everything?

And a new political system? So how does that work out?

>>19145791
no

The Dao both is and isn't

File: lao.jpg (67KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 800x600px

>>19145816

not being is also being, being is also not being

File: 2007103018455167552_800.jpg (182KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 800x600px

>>19145804
I don't exactly sure
but 9/11 and internet is like all human will merge or united in to the one or something like that
Pisces make technology and spirit divide
Aquarius will unit it again

>>19145813
look
>>19145885

>>19145885
I thought you actually know something but it is clear you are illiterate. Please stop posting gibberish or contribute.

Die well.

#nohomo read/listen to this book: https://www.audible.com/pd/Self-Development/Change-Your-Thoughts-Change-Your-Life-Audiobook/B002V01FVK?qid=1497365895&sr=1-1

I quit religion 2 years ago but can get behind this.

File: randolph.gif (1MB, 360x202px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 360x202px

>>19145901
you die first moron :)

>>19145647
You seek and you won't find
You stop asking and you live it

File: ImagesX5ABGRF.jpg (9KB, 259x194px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 259x194px

To kill for money or revenge

>>19145910
Why did you quit?

>>19145772
they're not being cryptic. That is really all it is.

>>19145676
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GIJcswa8f1E
Deep

>>19145804
Which one?
http://www.google.co.za/search?q=aquarius+symbol&client=ms-opera-mini-android&channel=new&prmd=ivns&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjqmfX5k7vUAhUBrxoKHS-DBXIQ_AUIBigB

File: f677b6a0a53dd9888c364a99982e552d.jpg (45KB, 453x604px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 453x604px

>>19145786
Finally a good answer. From what I've learned Taoism is for your own understanding and kind of a lone journey right? There is no books that can teach you about Taoism, more like books to guide you to your own answer. Something like that right?

Grew up in a culty / fundamentalist Christian religion (as a Jehovah's Witness) and had constant internal struggle with "ideal" self and "ought" self.

Finally at 29 y/o (still a virgin then too), i took the plunge and started reviewing "apostate" literature on the JW which was nothing more than exposing the lies/deception of the religion's foundations and hypocrisies.

I had to leave all my conditional "friends" and family behind as they'd shun me if my congregation ever excommunicated me for now being an "apostate".

My whole "world view" changed in 36 hours as I desperately kept going down the rabbit hole.

Finding out my strict-as-fuck-religion was indeed not the "TRUTH", I researched all other religions and came to the conclusion they're all hypocritical and grand measures to control society.

As far as I'm considered, we're probably living in a simulator and we're just some entity's experiment:

"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" - Epicurus

p.s. Christopher Hitchens red pilled the shit out of me. RIP

>>19145935

Didn't tag you properly but just explained why I left religion here:

>>19146098

>>19146109
Im surprised you think that way. I'd hate to insult you but if you were weak-minded enough to blindly believe in church stuff you should worry about yourself believing in atheist shit too.

>>19146354

being part of a cult is a helluva drug...

as based as you think you are, you're probably in some "caves" you don't even realize

>>19146427
>says the guy who thinks Christopher Hitchens is redpill material
Just because you were in a cult sect of the Christian faith doesn't mean the entire thing is false. How arrogant do you have to be to come to that conclusion just because you got tricked by a cult?

>>19145647
Cloud in the sky, water in the jar.

>>19146469

Fair enough.

If there was one piece of evidence, preferably a Youtube video, to help an atheist to appreciate Christianity, what would you share?

File: images.jpg (12KB, 472x311px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 472x311px

Based? Im only pointing something out to you. I neither confirm nor deny that I might be in a 'cave' as I can only see as far as my eyes can
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1RWOpQXTltA
Deny God = one of the guys in that cave
Believing in God = the other guy in the cave.
I hope that makes since cause I barely understand myself :P

>>19145804
ay that's my birth sign

>>19145647
Yes

>>19145647
*hits you with stick*

>>19146525
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nkllFXIsV6M
Probably the only evangelist that I like

>>19146546

I'm sure you've researched/heard about religion acts as a VR... If not, it might be an interesting perspective to consider:

https://ieet.org/index.php/IEET2/more/Edge20160628
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/may/08/virtual-reality-religion-robots-sapiens-book

File: zhwdA.jpg (198KB, 500x357px) Image search: [Google]

198KB, 500x357px

>>19146572

>>19146591
Thanks for the insight it seems really interesting. But it seems alil similar to that Plato shit I sent you. To bad I could be born in the age of the useless class

>>19145647
Dao is the source, journey, and destination.

Just as logos was the word of God, and was with God, and was God.

File: 912f4dede0d7b58d6ede280a878c1db2.jpg (72KB, 542x900px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 542x900px

>>19145772
Because the Truth does not reveal itself to those who do not understand it.

File: IMG_3880.png (569KB, 638x460px) Image search: [Google]

569KB, 638x460px

>>19145647
The Tao Trio?

File: 463px-Tao_symbol.png (14KB, 463x463px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 463x463px

Do none of you fucks own a copy of the Tao Te Ching?

1. Tao
>The Tao that can be known is not Tao.
>The substance of the World is only a name for Tao.
>Tao is all that exists and may exist;
>The World is only a map of what exists and may exist.
>One experiences without Self to sense the Wold,
>And experiences with Self to understand the World.
>The two experiences are the same within Tao;
>They are distinct only within the World.
>Neither experience conveys Tao
>Which is infinitely greater and more subtle than the World.

>>19145772
That's really the best you can do by something indescribable. Once you start explaining it, you lose your grasp on it.

Here's what I can gather though, yeah? The best I can do without going too far off-base:
>the Tao is the way things are
>to act with the Tao is to act naturally within the world, acting without effort
>Yin and Yang are not opposing forces (good vs. evil, etc.) but more like two sides to the same coin. The crest and trough of a wave. North and south poles of a magnet.
>Like cutting a magnet in half, you will simply be left with two magnets, so eliminating Yin or Yang will bring Yang or Yin out from the other.
>Think of yourself on a raft in a river. You COULD paddle upstream, but it would be an awful lot of effort, and you wouldn't get very far.
>If you allow your raft to drift with the current, perhaps directing yourself left or right, but nevertheless downstream, you have a much easier time.
>So it is with life
>This is living in accordance with the Tao

>>19145647
The tao that can be named is not the real tao. Your question has no answer.

>>19147871
However, that does not mean the question is meaningless. By continuing to ask yourself the question and consider the answers you come to you can continue to probe the Tao and gain at least some inkling of insight into the greater whole.

>>19147995
You are correct to a point.
That path ends at an impasse for you.

>>19147856
>>to act with the Tao is to act naturally within the world, acting without effort

Who gets to determine what is acting naturally within the world? Rape and cannibalism are natural occurrences in this world. Are those who rape and cannibalize acting with the Tao?

>>19148353
Better you continue to search and come across an impasse than to sit motionless and ignorant.

>>19148384
You determine whether or not you are acting naturally with the world.

Rape and cannibalism are natural things that occur, yes, but that does not mean that such things come naturally to humans.

If you notice, all animals have their own forms of behaviors that they exhibit. While there are similarities, there are vast differences in what is their way of existing with nature.

Many species of animals will mate for life while others will fuck anything that looks like a hole where the dick should go. Which one is according in accordance with the Tao?

Both are.

>>19148600
>You determine whether or not you are acting naturally with the world.
OK, then I am already acting with the Tao. that was easy.

>that does not mean that such things come naturally to humans.
They do. But what does this matter? I have determined that when I eat another human, I am acting naturally within the Tao.

>Which one is according in accordance with the Tao? Both are.
Why do you get to determine that?
>You determine whether or not you are acting naturally with the world.
Are you those animals? Why do you get to say whether they are or are not acting within the Tao?

>>19148670
But would you be? You can certainly tell yourself that any action you take will be acting in accordance with the Tao, but that doesn't make it true.

The way to know whether you are flowing with the Tao is to look within and question yourself. Are you truly content with how you act? Is constant selfish fulfillment what you desire, or is it a short-term answer that must constantly be fulfilled? Are you certain that you would be perfectly content to kill and eat another human being just by simply telling yourself that you are.

You know which actions are within the Tao and which are not, but you are not hearing it.

To know the Tao is to know yourself.

As for the animals; I am not determining whether they are acting with the Tao. They simply are. My opinion on the matter doesn't have any effect upon the way that nature flows around me.

>>19148721
>But would you be?
Yes. I determined it to be so.

>but that doesn't make it true.
Then we're back to my first question:
>Who gets to determine what is acting naturally within the world?

>Are you truly content with how you act?
Yes. Rape is fine.

>Is constant selfish fulfillment what you desire, or is it a short-term answer that must constantly be fulfilled?
It's both.

>Are you certain
Yes.

>but you are not hearing it.
WHO GETS TO DETERMINE THIS???

>I am not determining whether they are acting with the Tao.
Yes you are. You did right here:
>Many species of animals will mate for life while others will fuck anything that looks like a hole where the dick should go. Which one is according in accordance with the Tao? Both are.

>They simply are.
Do you try to get chimpanzees to stop cannibalizing each other? Why don't you get them to act naturally within the world? Do you NEVER interfere with non-humans? Do you brush your teeth even though that is small life simply being? Would you stop a dog from mauling a child? If yes, why isn't that part of nature flowing around you?

>>19145656
The Tao that can be named is not the eternal Tao.

Enter the gateless gate.

>>19148901
>the eternal Tao
This is also a name. Thus, the eternal Tao is not the eternal Tao. Thus, there is no eternal Tao.

See here's my issue: every person that ever says words are inadequate to explain their truth (as if "truth" isn't a word) -

Why are they talking?

And more importantly, why would anyone listen to them? Think about it - you are listening to and contemplating the words of someone who is of the opinion that words are useless.

Me, I think words are just fine at explaining and naming things. It's why I use them.

For instance, the words "the Tao is experiential, and no amount of speculation or reasoning can give you the experience described," works SO much better than being cryptic and using words like "the Tao that can be named is not the eternal Tao" because not only am I not contradicting myself, I am passing salient and - most importantly - digestible information.

>>19145910
Thanks anon

>>19145647
cumming in tight asian ass

>>19145885
not related to Taoist philosophy at all

>>19148925
because a mirror of the truth is better than nothing, and through communication we can come closer to the truth.

staying alone locked away from the world is equally against the will of the Tao as talking of it endlessly trying to define it.

and when they say "there is no true meaning in words" think about it.
the words that come out of your mouth are just a way for us to understand the ideas in your mind (which are ultimately wordless even if we try to ascribe words to them)
because of this, your ideas and ultimately the world is "translated" through the concepts and form of the language you speak, this is true for any kind of symbolic language, written, spoken/physical, mathematical, and so on. they all have a degree of truth in them but limit the expression of that truth based on the inherent structure of that "language". they merely serve as tools so we can present these ideas in a more structured form for our own benefit, as well as communicate these ideas to others on a level field of understanding. we both understand English thus we can use the English language to transmit ideas as best we can.

>>19148941
>Me, I think words are just fine at explaining and naming things
in English, how would you differentiate between the love for a friend, for a pet, for a parent, for a sibling, for your gf, for your wife, for your grandparent?

most likely you'd just say "love" or "like" for them all, or else qualify the statement with a bunch of extra information making communication more awkward.

in other languages, like Italian and French, there are specific words for all of these ideas, because they are all different feelings.
the love you feel for a parent isn't the same as the love for your gf, thus language limits us.

the Taoists believe the best way to communicate is not to be more verbose but less, until you can communicate with no words
I have a book of Zen koans, many of which express these ideas.

Zen is closely related in its ideas to Taoism, being as it originated in China and was influenced heavily by it.

>>19148794
You seem to be misunderstanding what I mean when I say 'you'. I'm not talking about the conscious mind that you flaunt around as if it is the entirety of your being.

I'm speaking of the rest of you. If you are not living with the Tao it will become clear through the interaction of your unconscious mind and the conscious. The unsettling feelings that manifest from unknown places. The memories that spring up unbidden which sour the mind. Or just the voice that pips up and questions your actions. This is the true self that is calling out to you to change your behavior and live with the Tao.

Your questions show that you don't really understand the basic idea of the Tao. The best explanation that can be told has already been given.

>>19147705

>>19148901
Mankind didn't name the Unnameable Tao, it did it itself.
And fuck me sideways if I know the actual name.

>>19149062
>through communication we can come closer to the truth
But you purposefully obfuscate your communication. You contradict yourself.

>against the will of the Tao
Why? WHO GETS TO DEFINE WHAT IS AND IS NOT ACTING WITHIN THE TAO?

It's amazing how everyone is quick to jump on how you can't say what Tao is, but they can INSTANTLY tell you what you are doing is NOT Tao. "I don't know what's right, but I can tell you you're wrong."

>in English, how would you differentiate between the love for a friend, for a pet, for a parent, for a sibling, for your gf, for your wife, for your grandparent?
You just did. You used a phrase.
>love for a pet
is different than
>love for a parent
The fact that there isn't a single word, but a modular phrase makes English MORE versatile, not less.

But, if you stubbornly cling to the idea that a single word is better, then perhaps you should take the time to LEARN THE WORDS of English.

like, adore, love, venerate, cherish, affection, adoration, idolize, infatuation, passion, longing, yearning, endearment, attachment, warmth, intimacy...

English has more words than almost any other language. On top of this, English is very much a living and adapting language. A non-Eglish word an English culture deems more fitting is quickly adopted into English. Go ask any English speaker if they know what amore is, or if they can use seista in a sentence.

>in other languages, like Italian and French, there are specific words for all of these ideas
>the Taoists believe the best way to communicate is not to be more verbose but less

So contradiction again. Which is better - using a different word every time, or using less words such as just saying you "love" everything?

>until you can communicate with no words
>Why are they talking?
>And more importantly, why would anyone listen to them?

>I have a book of Zen koans, many of which express these ideas.
A whole book of people trying not to say anything. Delightful.

>>19149305
>You seem to be misunderstanding what I mean when I say 'you'.
The you you are talking about is not the eternal you?

>I'm not talking about the conscious mind that you flaunt around as if it is the entirety of your being.
Perhaps if you used words, you could explain yourself better. Like asking if that is what I think instead of just assuming and making yourself look foolish.

>I'm speaking of the rest of you.
Which is? Use your words.

>If you are not living with the Tao
But I am.

>it will become clear through the interaction of your unconscious mind and the conscious.
How? WHO GETS TO DETERMINE WHAT IS AND IS NOT ACTING WITHIN THE TAO???

Because I determined that I am, and I determine that I have no issue between the conscious and subconscious. Yet it seems every person here is INSISTING I am wrong without saying why.

>An entire way of life centered around people who can't adequately convey their thoughts.

>>19150760
It is clear that you are not acting with the Tao by your anger and frustration. People here have been using their words like you ask and been describing the concept succinctly You've been asking who gets to determine the Tao and you've been told repeatedly now that knowledge of walking the path is held within yourself. Rather than constantly raging at people answering your questions you should listen and go meditate so you can come to your own conclusions about how you are living your life.

>>19151055
>It is clear that you are not acting with the Tao by your anger and frustration.
1) I am neither angry nor frustrated.

2) Why is it clear? Why is anger and frustration not acting within the Tao

WHO GETS TO DETERMINE WHAT IS OR IS NOT ACTING WITH THE TAO???

>describing the concept succinctly
No, they haven't. I have yet to ask "what is the Tao?" Look above at the all caps question that I am actually asking, then quote me where the succint answer is.

> knowledge of walking the path is held within yourself
So why - when I say I have determined I am walking the path - do you get to say I am wrong?

The reason I keep bringing up that all caps question is no matter how many times you give the "within" answer, you immediately contradict yourself by saying what I have determined is wrong.

WHY DO YOU GET TO SAY I AM WRONG?

>>19151079
>I am neither angry nor frustrated
>proceeds to use all caps and excessive punctuation marks
Something seems a little off

>>19147705

The reason people are saying that you are wrong in your assertion that you live with the Tao is because your actions and words. By the way that you are typing it is clear that you are upset and having a difficult time wrapping your head around the concept; so your assertions that you've determined you are living with the Tao are clearly false.

If you were living with the Tao you wouldn't need to be reaching out to others to have them confirm your actions, you would already know.

Ultimately, it is not others who are saying that you are wrong, but you yourself. The rest are simply picking up on that.

>>19151141
What's off is the lack of nuance in 4chan's formatting. How can I emphasize that question without indicating frustration to you?

The questions you once again ignored to instead try and attack me with labels like "angry" and "frustrated" which have no relevance to whether you can respond to what I've asked.

>>19151178
>The reason people are saying that you are wrong in your assertion that you live with the Tao is because your actions and words.

And do you not see a contradiction in saying "the determination of whether you walk with the Tao lies only in you, but I can tell you aren't."

For a third time, and honestly with no anger or frustration:
Who gets to determine whether or not I act within the Tao?

Because every time you answer, you say I get to, but every time I say I have, you say "No."

This is hypocritical.

>>19145647

Cats.

>>19151079

You rack a disciprine.

>>19151509

Mu.

>>19151509
They are saying you don't live with the Tao because you yourself say as much. Hopefully having a second person iterate this to you will help it sink it a bit.

>>19151607
>They are saying you don't live with the Tao because you yourself say as much.
Now you are lying. I clearly said I walk with the Tao. If you missed it, I say it here again.

I have determined that I act with the Tao.

Now according to every answer here, I am the only authority on this. You cannot deny th truth unless there is another authority.

So for the nth time: Who gets to determine what is or is not acting with the Tao?

>>19151614
>The Tao that can be known is not Tao

There's your answer.

>>19151614
>You cannot deny th truth unless there is another authority.

There must be an authority for there to be truth? That's a really curious way to look at things.

>>19145647
Tao is this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGM8trFqaJ0

>>19152764
now just watch.

...

Keep watching

...


How is it we distingish between what happens to us and what we do?

Watch your breath, the veil of your thoughts, your body movements, are you certain you are doing it, or does it do YOU?

You see, the tao is just what IS. Call it the interpenetration of all things; the singularity, it's just that which is, and will continue being.

It's the void. That which you are behind this temporal mask.

>>19151935
>There's your answer.
No. Please see everything I've said in this thread.

>>19151955
>There must be an authority for there to be truth?
If there isn't, then how can you deny that I am acting within the Tao? If you can deny this, then by what authority do you do so?

File: oscar gamble.jpg (166KB, 523x720px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 523x720px

>>19145647
not even joking pic related

>>19151079
Stop lying to yourself.

>>19151509
The Tao decides everything

>>19152795
The Tao decided whether you are living with the Tao. These other people are living (for the most part) with the Tao and that is how they understand you are not.

>>19152825
Quote my lie and how you determine it to be a lie.

>>19152832
So when I say I act perfectly within the Tao, you cannot say otherwise - only the Tao gets to. And considering I act perfectly within the Tao, I should know what the Tao has determined, which is that I am acting perfectly within the Tao.

>>19152842
>The Tao decided whether you are living with the Tao.
And the Tao told me I was doing everything right.

>These other people are living (for the most part) with the Tao
No they aren't. The Tao told me.

And so it's not missed.

We have gone from

>>19148600
>You determine whether or not you are acting naturally with the world.

to

>>19152842
>The Tao decided whether you are living with the Tao.


So either I am the Tao, or one of these responses is wrong.

>>19152860
Yes you are the Tao. Or more accurately, your inner self is the Tao.

>>19152871
So then you agree when I say my rape and cannibalism are acting naturally within the world, and does not interfere with the Tao. If not, please explain what other qualification is needed besides my inner determination that I am acting within the Tao.

>>19145647
It is.

>>19152885
You honestly believe that those things are okay deep in your heart? You REALLY honestly believe it? Then yes they are okay. But I have a feeling you don't believe it, because it is my belief that humans are inherently good.

>>19152899
>You honestly believe that those things are okay deep in your heart?
Yes.

>You REALLY honestly believe it?
Yes.

>Then yes they are okay.
Then Taoism is sick, and shouldn't be followed by anyone. Any person whose belief system lets them go "There's no reason to stop that rapist because they truly think what they are doing is fine," should seriously reconsider their life.

>it is my belief that humans are inherently good.
"Good?" Where did "good" come into play? We're talking about "acting naturally within the world."

>>19145647
to flow

>>19152915
You literally just admitted that you don't believe they are okay by saying that it's sick to allow such things. Please think about what you are doing and saying.

>>19152931
And while talking to a person who believes rape and cannibalism are perfectly OK, you agreed with them.

You think my lie is worse? Because my lie is about a hypothetical. What if you meet a psychopath - a person without empathy? What if you meet people who literally think this way - because they DO exist. And you just said that is fine.

Think about what you are saying.

But back to the actual point - at least you have (implicitly) answered my question of who gets to determine what is acting within the Tao. You're braver than most anons on here.

>>19152948
My assertion that it would be okay was also a hypothetical. Nobody, not even psychopaths believes that rape is okay

>>19152885
Except it does interfere with the Tao. It throws off balance. You are not the Tao. You are forcing your action on to someone else, disrupting harmony. Thus fucking up the whole "action without inaction" thing.

>>19145647
Self awareness makes it impossible to understand the Tao.

>>19152957
Except they do. There are people who do think it is okay and even do it. It is fairly common and happens all the time. I think you confuse knowing there will be a punishment if they get caught = knowing it is wrong. There are people who do not know that those things are wrong. Or who just have a very different system of morality.

>>19152957
>My assertion that it would be okay was also a hypothetical.
Even hypothetically, it shows Taoism - or at least your understanding - is a blight on humanity.

>Nobody, not even psychopaths believes that rape is okay
Incorrect, and irrelevant.

>>19152960
>Except it does interfere with the Tao.
How do you determine this.

>It throws off balance.
What, physically? All these posts and now "balance" is brought up?

>>19152960
>You are not the Tao.
>>19152871
>Yes you are the Tao.

Sounds like you guys need to straighten this out before talking to me.

>>19152960
>You are forcing your action on to someone else, disrupting harmony
So do you stop a fox from forcing their action on a rabbit? Why are animals acting naturally within the Tao when they do this, as stated here:
>>19148600
>>19148721
Or perhaps you are willing to answer these questions that were ignored:
>>19148794
>Do you try to get chimpanzees to stop cannibalizing each other? Why don't you get them to act naturally within the world? Do you NEVER interfere with non-humans? Do you brush your teeth even though that is small life simply being? Would you stop a dog from mauling a child? If yes, why isn't that part of nature flowing around you?

>>19152978
They're conscious minds believe it is okay, but their inner self does not. These people are just too far or too disconnected from their inner self.

>>19152994
>but their inner self does not.
Give me ANY evidence of this, or method to determine it, besides "It's obviously true because I think what they do is wrong."

>>19152987
I truly hope that one day you will understand. Know that you will not get the answer from me or any of these other anons. Those who talk don't know, those who know, don't talk. A true master leads by example.

>>19153023
>I truly hope that one day you will understand.
>I cannot defend this line of reasoning, so I'll just pretend I'm right

If you want to pretend to be a teacher, you should learn how to teach. I'm not here to learn. I know this stuff already. I'm here to challenge, and you failed.

>>19153023
>Those who talk don't know, those who know, don't talk.

>>19148925
>See here's my issue: every person that ever says words are inadequate to explain their truth (as if "truth" isn't a word) -
>Why are they talking?
>And more importantly, why would anyone listen to them? Think about it - you are listening to and contemplating the words of someone who is of the opinion that words are useless.

>>19153045
If you know this stuff already then why are you asking so many questions.

>>19153058
>I'm here to challenge, and you failed.

>>19153070
Just because you fail to understand doesn't mean it's not true. I'm sorry but I can't speak with you any longer as there is no positive outcome in doing so.

>>19152994
Gonna have to agree with the other guy. Any proof that this "inner self" differs from what they do? Because given we see rape and all sorts of shit occur in nature, it seems more likely that humans also just have these same desires and may not care/think it is wrong at all. Especially when we have people who clearly lack empathy and do not care. So, it's gonna take a lot to prove that this inner self exists and showing that every human has it rather than it just being part of how people are.

It sounds like a made up justification. Your fuck up was saying that the Tao is anything at all. Because once you apply traits to it, anon can very well challenge them and show the flaws. Even when you try to apply your retarded peace and love shit to it, it falls apart. And I'm pretty sure no real Taoist even makes the claims you make. I know the Tao te Ching doesn't. There the Tao is just a force, the unity from the world's duality.

Maybe you should brush up on it some more before arguing for it and being made to look like a fool.

>>19145764
this sounds like schrodinger's manifestation

>>19153080
I haven't failed to understand. You have failed to defend the concept. The truth of the concept is irrelevant. That a person fails to defend the existence of evolution doesn't make it less true, it means the person defending it needs to study more.

>I'm sorry but I can't speak with you any longer as there is no positive outcome in doing so.
It is seriously disheartening that someone challenging your views causes you to stop communicating. You have tried to box in the Tao, and are refusing to break open that box. Recognize the box does not trap the Tao, it traps you.

>>19146546
this looks like the artists from attack on titan.

>>19145764
the man shaves the chicken so that he may think himself feathered.
but to the chicken, the chicken is not feathered or shaved, it just is
it does not feel colder because it has been shaved, it just feels colder
i feel like the chicken is far more buddha nature in this regard

File: Screenshot_20170614-155117.png (1MB, 2560x1440px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2560x1440px

>>19145647
It means that you have to accept that you are insignificant in the big scale of the universe. Without your ego trying to take over your existence you will be free. You can avoid suffering by giving up desire. The word of the gods is written in nature, by observing nature and being part of it you will understand those words and you won't have to do anything else rather than exist.

>>19152969
>Self awareness makes it impossible to understand the Tao.
in its purest form, yes

>>19153045
>I know this stuff already.
It's quite clear that you do not. Perhaps you should actually go read the Tao Te Ching?

When you understand the meaning of Dong, you will understand the meaning of Tao.

>>19151079
>WHO GETS TO DETERMINE WHAT IS OR IS NOT ACTING WITH THE TAO???
Nobody. Because, first line in the text, "The Tao that can be known is not Tao". If anyone tells you what the Tao is then they do not know themselves.

>>19153557
>Perhaps you should actually go read the Tao Te Ching?
I have. What happened to "those who know don't talk?"

>>19153660
>Because, first line in the text, "The Tao that can be known is not Tao".
I didn't ask who gets to say what the Tao is. I asked who gets to determine what is acting within the Tao. There are a lot of people here declaring something is not acting within the Tao. No one has given a good answer as to why they can say this.

>>19153557
>read the Tao Te Ching?
>>19153660
>first line in the text

So other anons don't miss it, both of these anons are indicating a book is the final authority on what is or is not acting within the Tao.

OK so you know how western math is about exploring a concept, then simplifying it? Add that to the mindset of killing the Buddha and there you start

>>19145647
Impossible to exist, in modern times.

>>19153979
It is not a final authority, it is simply the greatest approximation of the Tao that has been codified. The book holds no more authority than a text book on mathematics; both of these novels contain text that speak of things that exist whether or not they are codified and in both cases the text do not completely encompass the whole of their ideals.

>>19145647
Dao literally means a path, everyone has one, but no two paths can be the same. Everything you experience has a chance to leave a print on the path, a print on the soul. The Dao is boundless, your previous, present and next lives might not leave even a single footstep on that path, while a single lifetime can be enough to reach the apex. We are all destined to achieve the Dao, but without conscious effort you're basically trapped within the cycle of reincarnation until someday, every experience and understanding, gained from each and every life comes together to fill the whole picture.

>>19145647
Simplicity, patience, and compassion.

>>19145647
The tao that can be described is not the true tao

>>19154070
>it is simply the greatest approximation of the Tao that has been codified
Name a circumstance where you consider the Tao Te Ching to be wrong.

>The book holds no more authority than a text book on mathematics
Every single textbook on mathematics says the exact same thing on the same subject. Because math is a language of logic. If even one assertion in established math was proven to be wrong, we would essentially be forced to throw out ALL of Mathematics. Math defines its terms and states its processes VERY clearly.

>exist whether or not they are codified
That a whole other - and delightful - discussion on whether or not Mathematics is created or discovered.

>do not completely encompass the whole of their ideals
100% untrue in the case of Mathematics. If you learn about the transative property of addition, you will learn the complete, comprehensive whole idea. There isn't any "well it usually works but sometimes people disagree."

Math is a terrible, TERRIBLE analogy.

>>19145647
The spoken Tao is not the true Tao.

The OP who gets buttmad over not being able to understand the Tao is not in accordance with the true Tao.

>>19145833
this is gregarious to 'dao is the path, dao is the goal'

Be as you would when you have reached your goal, you shall traverse your path with happiness and reach it

>good and evil, black and white or grey?
dao is perspective, aware openness that it is what we make it to be

I am what I am becoming

wisdom in love becomes senses, love in wisdom becomes thought

>>19148941
>experiential
this is a misuse of words because it suggests the Tao is an experience.

>>19154924
>If even one assertion in established math was proven to be wrong, we would essentially be forced to throw out ALL of Mathematics.

>x - y + y = y
>(x - y + y)/(x - y) = y / (x - y)
>1 + (y/xy) = y/(x - y)
>1 = 0

So should we throw out all mathematics texts now that I have proven that 1 = 0?

As much as you might like to think it, mathematics is fair from being an all-encompassing system and is simply the best explanation that we have come up with so far in describing the natural world around us.

So it is with the Tao.

>>19145647
Yes.

When you understand the meaning of poo ching wang, only then will you hear the doots of Mr. Tao.

File: h5ncd9g0ii3z.jpg (27KB, 583x563px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 583x563px

>>19145647
The tao is realizing that nothing exists

-except everything

>>19156252
No, I am saying you must experience the Tao to attempt understanding. I am differentiating between scholastic pursuit and methodic pursuit.

Are you saying you CAN'T experience the Tao?

>>19156350
>So should we throw out all mathematics texts now that I have proven that 1 = 0?
You should go back to school to understand math better.

>x-y+y = y
>x+(-y)+y = y
>x = y

You can also perform your system, but you messed up step 2.

(x-y+y)/(x-y) =/= 1 + (y/xy)
(x-y+y)/(x-y) = x/(x-y)

>mathematics is fair from being an all-encompassing system
Never said it was. Never implied it was. I said it was complete and comprehensive. And more specifically, I said it was complete within a category. Because as per Goedel, while Algebra may be able to completely prove all assertions within Algebra, Algebra cannot be used to prove Algebra itself.

> is simply the best explanation that we have come up with so far in describing the natural world around us
No, that's science. Science USES math. Science is NOT math.

You REALLY REALLY REALLY need to get away from your math analogy.

>>19145647
According to Google it is a Chinese word signifying 'way', 'path', 'route', 'key' or sometimes more loosely 'doctrine' or 'principle'.
>>19145653
This is untrue, and could only be stated by someone with more self-importance than actual importance.

>>19146546
You should actually read Plato's Republic, and then come back here and talk about this once you understood that the Allegory of the Cave is an argument used by Socrates when speaking with Glaucon to show the importance of education. The fact that you misinterpreted this is what they call irony.

>>19157350
>Because as per Goedel, while Algebra may be able to completely prove all assertions within Algebra, Algebra cannot be used to prove Algebra itself.

YES! YES! NOW YOU ARE GETTING IT! It is the same way with Tao! The system that can not fully describe itself is not a complete system! Algebra can be used to describe fractured pieces of the whole, but can never be used to describe the entire thing. It is the same way with Tao and language. You are searching for a whole, complete answer where there is none; the best that can be done is splintered pieces can be spoken of.

>>19157947
>The system that can not fully describe itself is not a complete system!
That's wrong too. Go read Godel's Incompleteness Theorem. I bet you'll love it.

>You are searching for a whole, complete answer where there is none
No, I've been doing two things.
1) I've been asking a very specific question directly relating to the actions people are doing in this thread. "Who determines what is or is not acting within the Tao?" or in other words "Why do you get to say, that is not acting naturally with the world?"
2) I have been challenging and ruining people's conceptions of the Tao. I am killing buddhas, and it makes people mad when their deity dies. Hopefully one of them will learn from it, instead of foolishly trying to "teach" me by building a box around their intellect.

File: 1489010784989.jpg (161KB, 500x628px) Image search: [Google]

161KB, 500x628px

>>19157975
Dude, you're the only one that's been getting mad in this thread. It's actually been quite amusing watching this weird math guy misinterpret things and rustle your jimmies constantly. I'm pretty sure these fuckers all keep saying you 'don't follow the Tao' because I'd have a harder time getting a hooker in Vegas than picking up your intent.

Incidentally, Taoism doesn't have any deities, nor does Buddhism; at least not in the Western, Abrahamic sense.

>>19158014
>Dude, you're the only one that's been getting mad in this thread.
Projection.

>I'm pretty sure these fuckers all keep saying you 'don't follow the Tao'
Of course they are. Who cares? Not me. I act naturally within the Tao.

>I'd have a harder time getting a hooker in Vegas than picking up your intent.
This is the wisest thing said in this thread.

>Taoism doesn't have any deities, nor does Buddhism
Agreed. It's all too unfortunate that Taoists and Buddhists do.

Reading this thread, it seems like Taoism is a load of shit and most of you think you're enlightened beings.

>>19158097
I don't think anyone in this thread considers themselves enlightened. Many have named the Tao, but aren't aware of it because the name they've given is roundabout. They're like the Supreme Court judge ruling on obscenity.

>I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description [The Tao], and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it, and what anon has posted in this case is not that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_know_it_when_I_see_it
>I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description ["hard-core pornography"], and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it, and the motion picture involved in this case is not that.

An effervescent nature is not unique to the Tao. Art is the same way. So is charisma/animal magnetism/the "it" factor of fame. And hilariously so is obscenity.

>>19158250
>effervescent
Oh fucking hell. That's right. The nature of the Tao is bubbly and enthusiastic...

>evanescent*

The Tao is “Reason” in this sense, that the substance of things may be in part apprehended as being that necessary relation between the elements of thought which determines the laws of reason. In other words, the only reality is that which compels us to connect the various forms of illusion as we do. It is thus evidently unknowable, and expressible neither by speech nor by silence. All that we can know about it is that there is inherent in it a {5} power (which, however, is not itself) by virtue whereof all beings appear in forms congruous with the nature of necessity.

The Tao is also the Way – in the following sense. Nothing exists except as a relation with other similarly postulated ideas. Nothing can be known in itself, but only as one of the participants in a series of events. Reality is therefore in the motion, not in the things moved. We cannot apprehend anything except as one postulated element of an observed impression of change. We may express this in other terms as follows. Our knowledge of anything is in reality the sum of our observations of its successive movements, that is to say, of its path from event to event. In this sense the Tao may be translated as the Way. It is not a thing in itself in the sense of being an object susceptible of apprehension by sense or mind. It is not the cause of any thing, but the category underlying all existence or event, and therefore true and real as they are illusory, being merely landmarks invented for convenience in describing our experiences. The Tao possesses no power to cause anything to exist or to take place. Yet our experience when analyzed tells {6} us that the only reality of which we may be sure is this path or Way which resumes the whole of our knowledge.

As for TO ON, which superficially might seem the best translation of Tao as described in the text, it is the most misleading of the three. For TO ON possesses an extensive connotation implying a whole system of Platonic concepts than which nothing can be more alien to the essential quality of the Tao. Tao is neither being nor not-being in any sense which Europe could understand. It is neither existence nor a condition or form of existence. At the same time, TO MH ON gives no idea of Tao. Tao is altogether alien to all that class of thought. From its connection with “that principle which necessarily underlies the fact that events occur” one might suppose that the “Becoming” of Heraclitus might assist us to describe the Tao. But the Tao is not a principle at all of that kind. To understand it requires an altogether different state of mind to any with which European thinkers in general are familiar. It is necessary to pursue unflinchingly the path of spiritual development on the lines indicated by the Sufis, the Hindus and the Buddhists; {7} and having reached the Trance called Nerodha-Sammapati, in which are destroyed all forms soever of consciousness, there appears in that abyss of annihilation the germ of an entirely new type of idea, whose principal characteristic is this: that the entire concatention of one's previous experiences and conceptions could not have happened at all, save by virtue of this indescribable necessity.

I am only too painfully aware that the above exposition is faulty in every respect. In particular it presupposes in the reader considerable familiarity with the substance, thus practically begging the question. It must also prove almost wholly unintelligible to the average reader, him in fact whom I especially aim to interest. For his sake I will try to elucidate the matter by an analogy. Consider electricity. It would be absurd to say that electricity is any of the phenomena by which we know it. We take refuge in the petitio principii of saying that electricity is that form of energy which is the principle cause of such and such phenomena. Suppose now that we eliminate this idea as evidently illogical. What remains? We must not hastily answer, “Nothing {8} remains.” There is some thing inherent in the nature of consciousness, reason, perception, sensation, and of the universe of which they inform us, which is responsible for the fact that we observe these phenomena and not others; that we reflect upon them as we do, and not otherwise. But even deeper than this, part of the reality of the inscrutable energy which determines the form of our experience, consists in determining that experience should take place at all. It should be clear that this has nothing to do with any of the Platonic conceptions of the nature of things.

>>19158334
>>19158338
>>19158341
A student asked Master Yun-Men,
"Not even a thought has arisen,
is there still a sin or not?

The master answered,
"Mount Sumeru."