It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Spiritual Reorientation 5: The Return of Power

page: 2
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 12 2014 @ 01:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aphorism
a reply to: Itisnowagain


Without words is there any thing at all?


Yes. Stop speaking and using words. What changes?


From the tao te ching:

The unnamable is the eternally real.
Naming is the origin
of all particular things.

Free from desire, you realize the mystery.
Caught in desire, you see only the manifestations.

It is words (naming/labelling) which is the origin of all particular things.
edit on 12-5-2014 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 12 2014 @ 01:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Itisnowagain

A strange interpretation.



We join spokes together in a wheel,
but it is the center hole
that makes the wagon move.


The center hole does nothing to make the wheel move.


We shape clay into a pot,
but it is the emptiness inside
that holds whatever we want.


It is the bowl itself that holds whatever we want.


We hammer wood for a house,
but it is the inner space
that makes it livable.


The inner space of the house is a direct consequence of the wood. It is the wood that makes it livable.



We work with being,
but non-being is what we use.


No one has ever used non-being in the history of the universe.



posted on May, 12 2014 @ 01:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Aphorism

Yes - I never wrote it.

We work with being,
but non-being is what we use.

I thought it very odd!!



posted on May, 12 2014 @ 01:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Itisnowagain
 





The unnamable is the eternally real.
Naming is the origin
of all particular things.

Free from desire, you realize the mystery.
Caught in desire, you see only the manifestations.


You've given it meaning, and honored the eternally real with the name "unnamable".



posted on May, 12 2014 @ 01:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aphorism

We hammer wood for a house,
but it is the inner space
that makes it livable.

The inner space of the house is a direct consequence of the wood. It is the wood that makes it livable.

Space is not the consequence of anything. Space was prior to anything and will be there after any thing.



posted on May, 12 2014 @ 01:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Aphorism
'Unnameable' is now a name and can never be the real. That is why the tao cannot be spoken!



posted on May, 12 2014 @ 01:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Itisnowagain



Space is not the consequence of anything. Space was prior to anything and will be there after any thing.


How can there be space if there is nothing to contain it? Space does not contain itself.



posted on May, 12 2014 @ 01:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Itisnowagain




'Unnameable' is now a name and can never be the real. That is why the tao cannot be spoken!


Yet here we are speaking about it.



posted on May, 12 2014 @ 01:10 PM
link   
The tao that can be told
is not the eternal Tao
The name that can be named
is not the eternal Name.



posted on May, 12 2014 @ 01:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aphorism

Yet here we are speaking about it.

Oh no - you cannot speak of that.



posted on May, 12 2014 @ 01:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aphorism
How can there be space if there is nothing to contain it? Space does not contain itself.

Space is boundless.
Have they found the edge of space yet?

Why must space contain itself? Or be contained?
edit on 12-5-2014 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2014 @ 01:26 PM
link   
a reply to: AfterInfinity




So the only way to know the Tao...is to not know it. Which basically means get on with your life and don't worry about it...?


Those are your words, I never defined what Tao is. I said what it isn't? Yes, probably should leave it alone and go on with your life.

It isn't a thing to be known. If you objectify and pursue it as if it was something to be attained, learned, discovered or known, you're already heading the wrong way. Saying you can achieve it, is the same thing as saying you don't know what it is. It is pursuing an illusory goal. Like trying to define the words 'Ocean wave', without reference to water or ocean. As if it was somehow a separate thing of its own. Crazy talk.
So yes, if you're going to do that, perhaps it is better to do nothing at all and don't worry about it. Leave it alone in fact, because you would be chasing something that doesn't exist and, even worse, calling it Tao. And even worse than that, trying to teach it to others while believing yourself to be en route to your illusory goal.

edit on 12-5-2014 by Visitor2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2014 @ 01:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Itisnowagain




The tao that can be told
is not the eternal Tao
The name that can be named
is not the eternal Name.


Why can it not be told, and why can it not be named? Only because people tell us so.


edit on 12-5-2014 by Aphorism because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2014 @ 01:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Itisnowagain




Space is boundless.
Have they found the edge of space yet?


Nothings have no edges.



posted on May, 12 2014 @ 02:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aphorism
a reply to: Itisnowagain




The tao that can be told
is not the eternal Tao
The name that can be named
is not the eternal Name.


Why can it not be told, and why can it not be named? Only because people tell us so.



Say you never seen or tasted a strawberry in your life. Take a heavily complex and thorough Book about strawberries, containing an immaculate description of it's taste, look, texture and smell with 100% accuracy. Include pictures, back it up with complete and comprehensive chemical and mathematical formulas and analysis.

Now place that book next to an actual strawberry
Now eat the strawberry.
Which one is more real? Which one is the true representation of the word and concept called 'strawberry'? The strawberry or the knowledge of it? Can the strawberry be substituted with words, idiations, imaginations and thoughts? No. With knowledge, concepts theories and arbitrary labels? No

Now compare that experience (for lack of a better word) with the assumptions of a guy who has never seen, tasted, or smelled a strawberry and has only tried to learned about it.

That's the one who wrote your question. Why pursue false substitutes? This isn't some secret mystical word play, it's common sense.
edit on 12-5-2014 by Visitor2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2014 @ 02:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Visitor2012




It isn't a thing to be known. If you objectify and pursue it as if it was something to be attained, learned, discovered or known, you're already heading the wrong way. Saying you can achieve it, is the same thing as saying you don't know what it is. It is pursuing an illusory goal. Like trying to define the words 'Ocean wave', without reference to water or ocean. As if it was somehow a separate thing of its own. Crazy talk.


I'm interested to hear how you have come to these conclusions, being that the tao isn't to be known? Shortly after admitting that you know the tao cannot be known, which is a glaring contradiction, you say: "saying you can achieve it, is the same thing as saying you don't know what it is". Being that it cannot be known, saying one cannot achieve it is the same as saying you don't know what it is. So how do you know it is an illusory goal? If it isn't to be known, then for all you know it isn't an illusory goal. For someone claiming the tao cannot be known, you seem to know a lot about it.
edit on 12-5-2014 by Aphorism because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2014 @ 02:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Visitor2012
 





Now place that book next to an actual strawberry
Now eat the strawberry.
Which one is more real? The strawberry or the knowledge of it? Can the strawberry be substituted with words, idiations, imaginations and thoughts? No. With knowledge and arbitrary labels? No


No one is saying knowledge about strawberries is the same as strawberries. That is a ridiculous analogy. But we can nonetheless talk about strawberries.



posted on May, 12 2014 @ 02:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aphorism
Nothings have no edges.

Is there more than one no thing?? Can 'nothing' be plural?
edit on 12-5-2014 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2014 @ 02:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aphorism
a reply to: Itisnowagain




The tao that can be told
is not the eternal Tao
The name that can be named
is not the eternal Name.

Why can it not be told, and why can it not be named? Only because people tell us so.

I think you should go ahead and speak about it. Go ahead - name it and tell us about it.
What was it again that you are talking about?
edit on 12-5-2014 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2014 @ 03:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Aphorism

I am confused, who has the power to spiritually reorient?




So, according to Plato, the "cave dwellers" are those who look at the ordinary material world and think that this (material world) is all that there is to "reality". They (irreligious materialists) are only looking at "appearances/shadows" and not the true reality of the "spiritual realm".

That "divine realm" is what Socrates and Adeimantus were discussing when Socrates was arguing (to Adeimantus's head-nodding agreements) that Homer would be strictly CENSORED in a perfect/ideal Greek city state for anything "derogatory" he had written about either Zeus or the rest of the Greek pantheon of gods.

In short and in sum, according to Plato/Socrates it is those who do not believe in God/gods who are looking at a "material realm of shadows" as distinct from the world of pure eternal ideas.

Without getting into religion at all, you hear the same sort of "stuff" from modern physicists. The real world is the world of quarks, photons and/or tachyons which are just as mysterious to most people as is Zeus, Apollo or the Holy Spirit to them.



ca.answers.yahoo.com...


edit on 12-5-2014 by InTheLight because: (no reason given)

edit on 12-5-2014 by InTheLight because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join