rene

And glad you added a 'thanks/like' button! Feedback is nice...but even better is just knowing someone actually saw your post, lol.

Did you by chance send an email to recent members, particularly tdb refugee's, who might not be aware of this new location? Going to the old one does not roll over to this one, nor does it give any information as to the new address. Would sure hate to lose anyone who wasn't here over the weekend, and has no other way to find it! Thanks!

No worries And, I disagree with 'creative aspect' as well...unless its stated (or assumed) that the feminine aspect is one -half of the creative aspect. LOL That's the trouble with all these words/labels/names; very limited. To me, all of the feminine/mother occurrences in the DDJ (valley spirit, mother, etc) are metaphoric pointers to Ch1's 'Mystery'... which arises unboundaried with the Manifest in full support. Always there. Supportive. Like a mother. Ch6 The valley spirit never dies; It is the woman, primal mother. Her gateway is the r

Maybe it's better to say Mother is one half of the creative aspect (not creator). Or, maybe it's better to say nothing at all. Sans MH, I yield to you as the authority on ZZ; primarily as my (limited) read of ZZ obfuscates LZ's perspective. Wonderful analogy btw, of the Zen 3 mountain stages! Thanks for the hand

Starting with DDJ Ch6, the Primal mother is reference to the female aspect, yes. *** Not as the creator aspect as you said earlier (below) ...which I said wasn't in the TTC, and it's not. Some traditions like to think that it is - so it better lines up with their own ideas. It's only a matter of semantics if and when base concepts are understood. Until then, words choices matter, yes? In this instance there's a big difference between 'female aspect' and 'creator aspect'. Warm regards.

I understand that, yes. That ^^ is not in the TaoTeChing... so it would be difficult to use it to compare (as an underlying definition in the TTC) "Mother being the creator aspect" <-- is someone's idea, or someone's (mis)understanding, of the TTC - based on something they read, or a biased TTC translation. Similar examples would be Tao=God; and Te=(moral)Virtue. Kindly allow me to expand on something. Chuang Tsu's Inner and Outer Chapters - is a stand alone body of work. It's not, and never intended to be (imo) an interpretation, re-write or c

Hard to tell, there may be something in ZZ that points to LZ's reference to the valley spirit. Maybe this will illustrate my point... LZ: "There is food in the brick building." ZZ: "I see that you have a car with strong wheels that's good because the roads are rough and in your journeys you'll need some nourishment so if you don't divert too far off the road or stop for too long to visit with strangers on the way you may come across a brick building which is better than a wooden building especially because there's been lots of wildfires lately which is actu

All I have is the TaoTeChing; and I use the Feng/English translation - which can be found here. We'd need someone that enjoys ZZ to do any LZ-ZZ comparison justice.

Through a preference for complexity over the simple clarity of the TTC. The stories in ZZ are wonderful and can stand on their own merits, imo! And, IF one is already familiar with Laozi's ideas, they can be found buried very deep in ZZ's stories... BUT if one is unfamiliar, LZ's ideas will either be missed or misunderstood. The author of the text quoted in the OP is a good example... of close, no cigar. You can thank ZZ for that. (ZZ=ZhuangZi, Zhuangzi, ChuangTzu,etc; LZ=Laozi, LaoTze, etc...)

Lots of thoughts...but you might not like them. I read the whole thread... and (for me) the difficulty is revealed in this part of your quote in the OP - You see, ChuangTze altered and obfuscated everything in The Laozi (original name for the TTC, before it was changed for political purposes) so using material based on Chuang-Tze's ideas to discuss LaoTsu's ideas (let alone Taoism's ideas) is problematic. The remaining posts in the thread confirm that. Otherwise, I'd love to engage.

Agree, and, that reminds me of Laozi's Ch70- ..... Those that know me are few; Those that abuse me are honored. Therefore the sage wears rough clothing and holds the jewel in his heart. ....... Many parallels all over, just waiting to be seen!

I think it's brilliant, lol. Even today, people go through the motions of what they think they're supposed to do - without understanding the underlying connection; which, if they did, would no longer need to go through the motions. But isn't that the point of organized religions? To keep people 'going through the motions' until they do? In the beginning - that may have had good intentions; today it's more likely just good business. Disclaimer: I've not read the Gospel of Judas, my thought above is based only on the OP.

That they do, and many Taoists (Religious and Philosophical) have that confusion as well. Easy to understand why though, imo; difficult to sell a path without convincing someone they have to stay on it - so reinforcing the 'confusion', would be of value.

Thanks Cheya! And, its up my alley... but it's not the only thing on my street. You know how I'm always saying Both, same time? The 'Not-two' finger points to only half of that. Oh well. LOL Thanks again!

Is there a non-facebook link to it? I'd love to see it. Thanks!