12-06-2007, 01:16 AM
I'd say Taoism is the least religious, if it is a religion.
It has no god. Not even an Eagle. No Bodhisattvas... etc...
Hey QuietXKiller!
I don't think DJ would call the Rule a suggestion, but how can I know?
There may be no dogma. My point was that people can turn it into a dogma or religion. Personally, I feel Jesus' teachings are a pretty comprehensive path and need never have become a religion, but they did.
BratscheWarrior,
Castaneda's work is not original. Do you think he came up with it on his own? He tells you in the books that he was taught by a Yaqui indian. He tells you this knowledge has a lineage going back hundreds of years.
Did he make it his own, as best as he could? Sure he did. We all do. Do you imagine it is supposed to remain someone else's?
This is a mute point you are making. I've never claimed to be original. There is nothing original about me. I've never had an original thought in my entire life. The problem, for you, is that you imagine that people do. Maybe you'll get over this someday. None of these thoughts are mine or anyone's. I own none of them - no one does. I am not these thoughts. They arise, and I post, and they pass away, and sometimes arise again.
I may be a book on a shelf somewhere in the library of infinity. As long as the pages keep turning, I have no problem with that.
Nothing is mine. If I have called something my own, I apologize that you got stuck on it, but writing is too cumbersome if I have to say "in the collected consensus of this bundle of thought-objects that arise out of the void appearing as a mind now which is being identified as "mine"" instead of IMO.
If you're looking for contradictions, I'm an easy target. Going back and forth between the "me" and the impersonal, I appear to contradict myself all the time. I'm not concerned with it. If you want to be, knock yourself out. But I can't continue to invest this much attention towards your keeping accounts on "me".
Yes, I do sound like a philosopher. But remember that you are listening from "there" and I am speaking from "here". If you were here with me, I'd appear to be seeing what is. Not always. Much of the time I am just retrieving inventory. Anyway, who knows what a philosopher is? It means 'lover of wisdom/Sophia'. To know who Sophia is, you'd have to be familiar with Gnostic writings. The word "philosopher" has come to mean something intellectual only, but most people we call philosophers were great initiates as well.
So I've already addressed labels. I won't clarify, explain or defend or expose anymore with you. From now on, I'll just write "labels" and you can figure out the why and how yourself since this seems to fascinate you.
It has no god. Not even an Eagle. No Bodhisattvas... etc...
Hey QuietXKiller!
I don't think DJ would call the Rule a suggestion, but how can I know?
There may be no dogma. My point was that people can turn it into a dogma or religion. Personally, I feel Jesus' teachings are a pretty comprehensive path and need never have become a religion, but they did.
BratscheWarrior,
Castaneda's work is not original. Do you think he came up with it on his own? He tells you in the books that he was taught by a Yaqui indian. He tells you this knowledge has a lineage going back hundreds of years. Did he make it his own, as best as he could? Sure he did. We all do. Do you imagine it is supposed to remain someone else's?
This is a mute point you are making. I've never claimed to be original. There is nothing original about me. I've never had an original thought in my entire life. The problem, for you, is that you imagine that people do. Maybe you'll get over this someday. None of these thoughts are mine or anyone's. I own none of them - no one does. I am not these thoughts. They arise, and I post, and they pass away, and sometimes arise again.
I may be a book on a shelf somewhere in the library of infinity. As long as the pages keep turning, I have no problem with that.
Nothing is mine. If I have called something my own, I apologize that you got stuck on it, but writing is too cumbersome if I have to say "in the collected consensus of this bundle of thought-objects that arise out of the void appearing as a mind now which is being identified as "mine"" instead of IMO.
If you're looking for contradictions, I'm an easy target. Going back and forth between the "me" and the impersonal, I appear to contradict myself all the time. I'm not concerned with it. If you want to be, knock yourself out. But I can't continue to invest this much attention towards your keeping accounts on "me".
Yes, I do sound like a philosopher. But remember that you are listening from "there" and I am speaking from "here". If you were here with me, I'd appear to be seeing what is. Not always. Much of the time I am just retrieving inventory. Anyway, who knows what a philosopher is? It means 'lover of wisdom/Sophia'. To know who Sophia is, you'd have to be familiar with Gnostic writings. The word "philosopher" has come to mean something intellectual only, but most people we call philosophers were great initiates as well.
So I've already addressed labels. I won't clarify, explain or defend or expose anymore with you. From now on, I'll just write "labels" and you can figure out the why and how yourself since this seems to fascinate you.