Taoist Mormon ??? does it work? (Jesus, moral, punishment, Earth)

[lilithu]

Originally Posted by Somkid

The Tao can be practiced by anyone as long as it is practiced as the philosophy it was intended as.

Again, the distinction between "philosophy" and "religion" is a Western distinction. And your story of what Lao Tse "intended" is like all the other stories that people tell to say their version is the correct one.

[Katzpur]

Originally Posted by Sola'lor

Bishka is BeckySoup?!

Uh... You crack me up, Sola'lor. I'm really blown away by the fact that you didn't realize that.

[Somkid]

Originally Posted by lilithu

Again, the distinction between "philosophy" and "religion" is a Western distinction. And your story of what Lao Tse "intended" is like all the other stories that people tell to say their version is the correct one.

I agree with you and we are not discussing Western Philosophy we are discussing Chinese Philosophy thus there is a difference between philosophy and religion.

The Tao is and was intended to be a natural philosophy, the experts all agree someone some where turned it into a religion with dogma and gods. There is tons of stuff about this matter on line. As far as the "story" of Lao Tsu it is not my story how the heck could I make that up he lived thousands of years before my time I am simply imparting to you what is taught in universities in Asia it is not my opinion nor is it their opinion it is a matter of documentation and record.

[lilithu]

Originally Posted by Somkid

I agree with you and we are not discussing Western Philosophy we are discussing Chinese Philosophy thus there is a difference between philosophy and religion.

No, I am saying that in the East there is even less of a difference. There was no distinction made between "religion" and "philosophy." There was simply the way of life, and different schools of thought disagreed on how to best characterize it. This distinction between "religion" and "philosophy" comes from the Western preoccupation with compartmentalizing things, as if once it's labeled it's understood, and from the desire to designate some things as "rational" and others as "irrational."

Originally Posted by Somkid

The Tao is and was intended to be a natural philosophy, the experts all agree someone some where turned it into a religion with dogma and gods. There is tons of stuff about this matter on line. As far as the "story" of Lao Tsu it is not my story how the heck could I make that up he lived thousands of years before my time I am simply imparting to you what is taught in universities in Asia it is not my opinion nor is it their opinion it is a matter of documentation and record.

Dude, people can't even agree on whether Lao Tse was one person or not, whether he even existed, and you're telling me that all Asian scholars agree that Lao Tse intended Taoism to be one way and got mad when it went another.

I didn't say that you made up the story. I don't even know whether it's made up. I just know that it's a common story. Kind of like the way that Mahayana Buddhists give authority to their branch of Buddhism by saying that the Buddha imparted secret wisdom to their founder.

[idea]

Originally Posted by lilithu

No, I am saying that in the East there is even less of a difference. There was no distinction made between "religion" and "philosophy." There was simply the way of life, and different schools of thought disagreed on how to best characterize it. This distinction between "religion" and "philosophy" comes from the Western preoccupation with compartmentalizing things, as if once it's labeled it's understood, and from the desire to designate some things as "rational" and others as "irrational."


Dude, people can't even agree on whether Lao Tse was one person or not, whether he even existed, and you're telling me that all Asian scholars agree that Lao Tse intended Taoism to be one way and got mad when it went another.

I didn't say that you made up the story. I don't even know whether it's made up. I just know that it's a common story. Kind of like the way that Mahayana Buddhists give authority to their branch of Buddhism by saying that the Buddha imparted secret wisdom to their founder.

and I thought Christianity was the only sect that troubled itself with such divisions... neither defiled nor immaculate...

when will we learn the art of interbeing? This is because that is. This is not, becuase that is not. This is like this, because that is like that...Phillosophy, religion, God, Jesus, Taoism...we can only inter-be, we cannot just be. let us not imprison ourself with labels and concepts, there are infinite levels to everything.

[lilithu]

Originally Posted by idea

and I thought Christianity was the only sect that troubled itself with such divisions...

Nope. Human nature all around. Both at our best and at our worst.

One of my colleagues told me about an exhibit of Tibetan Buddhist artwork she saw recently. One image depicted the Buddha with his foot on an elephant. It was meant to represent Buddhism squashing Hinduism. She said it was the first time she realized that the East had the same kinds of squabbles as the West. People always romanticize it as so peaceful.

[idea]

2 Nephi 11:2...there is an opposition in all things…. The way this is worded, it does not say “everything has an opposite” (although that is also true, and is what the rest of the passage describes) the word “in” inside.... is used – does that mean that everyone has two sides? The word “all” is also used… Do you think there is opposition in God? in Lucifer?

I am confused why some Taoists - I will use the word some, believe there is no good or evil - it seems like two contradictory statements, saying both that there is opposition and that there is no good or evil, it seems opposition is defined by good and evil.... Is there anyone who can explain this?

[lilithu]

Originally Posted by idea

I am confused why some Taoists - I will use the word some, believe there is no good or evil - it seems like two contradictory statements, saying both that there is opposition and that there is no good or evil, it seems opposition is defined by good and evil.... Is there anyone who can explain this?

I think it's because we form emotional attachments to the concepts of good and evil. We like/love that which we consider "good" and dislike/hate that which we consider "evil." This isn't necessarily productive as people become fixated with eliminating "evil."

I think the Taoist view would be that there are things that are in alignment with the Tao and therefore beneficial and harmonious and there are things that are not in alignment with the Tao and therefore disruptive and harmful. When the latter happens, the proper response is to bring things back into alignment, not to try to eradicate it.

The unfortunate thing is that some people mistake the teachings to mean that it doesn't matter what you do. Saying there is no good and evil does NOT mean that all actions are the same and you can do whatever you want. Well, you can, there is no judge, but there are consequences.