JosephM

Thomas, I understand your position. My whole and only real point/position is my summary (6 posts above) and (the epilogue) in the the Zen quote above. If you can't see it there, then perhaps there is nothing i can say to make it clearer. If you do see it there, you win and i take back everything else i said in this thread as my failure to communicate clearly and adequately. Happy New Year. Joseph

Yes, he says it well .... epilogue 2 by Allan Watts ------> https://mariaerving.com/alan-watts-taoist-farmer-story/

" The only way to make sense out of change is to plunge into it, move with it, and join the dance." Allen Watts PS. BTW , i disagree with some of the things mentioned in the video including Americans giving to charities and philanthropy which has risen , not declined in last few years. Also Volunteering here in the US is at record high levels.

There comes a time in a journey such as yours where church organizations may no longer provide you with that which you require for spiritual growth. There are many others just like you. This short sermon/writing might be of some consolation to you. Here ---------> Click on title below

Now .... a Zen epilogue about a Taoist farmer There was an old farmer who had worked his crops for many years. One day his horse ran away. Upon hearing the news, his neighbors came to visit. "Such bad luck," they said sympathetically. "May be," the farmer replied. The next morning the horse returned, bringing with it three other wild horses. "How wonderful," the neighbors exclaimed. "May be," replied the old man. The following day, his son tried to ride one of the untamed horses, was thrown, and broke his leg. The neighbors again came to offer their sympathy on his misfortune. "May be," answered the farmer. The day after, military officials came to the village to draft young men into the army. Seeing that the son's leg was broken, they passed him by. The neighbors congratulated the farmer on how well things had turned out. "May be," said the farmer. ----------------------------------------------------------------- The lesson of the Taoist farmer is, of course, that no event in and of itself can truly be judged as good or bad, lucky or unlucky, fortunate or unfortunate. Only time can tell the whole story. He doesn't divide Life into good events and bad events, like piles of laundry. He experiences Life as one thing: undifferentiated energy/consciousness. For the Farmer, this open-minded approach is not a strategy. It is the byproduct of what he was searching for and his ultimate realization. Dennis Atsit

Thomas , In summary ...... Lets not drift away from the real point of this discussion. The use of opposites that are created by perceptions in the minds of men/women without an understanding that in reality they don't exist creates arbitrary positions that something is right or wrong, sin or good, condemnable or praiseworthy, etc. , as if all is black or white when in reality ones arbitrary point at which they use the terms is subjective, relative and based on a reality only created in their own mind. In conclusion, doing so (not understanding the above) contributes greatly to the divisiveness that separates human beings and is at the root of most wars and arguments and is an obstruction to peace within. The End

Hitler was not alone in his beliefs. Millions of Germans followed him and believed that the Jews needed to be eliminated. Will my condemning him and the others change reality or the number of hairs on my head? Your first paragraph in the quote presupposes opposites as reality concerning me. It in essence says .. If i can't condemn Hitlers actions then it follows i can't praise those i have learned from or value. 😄 I have learned from from both those who have made not so wise choices and those who have made wiser choices. At what point on the line of wisdom does condemn sit and at what point on the line of wisdom does praise sit? And where sits the one reality in relation to your use of those opposites? 😊 FYI - God as Potter and we as clay .... read Jeremiah Chap 18

Thank you Lucian and the same to you and yours.

Yes, one can say it is the same reality but if one did not know Iceman, then ones reality might say no one could last 1 hour naked in the ice and their perception of reality would then be different and limited at least until until they met iceman. 😊 In this world we see darkly as in a glass. We do not understand all of the circumstances and actions that take place in this universe. The path of Hitler would not be my choice at this time in my evolution. I neither condone nor condemn his actions that i don't truly understand. But this i have been shown ... that if i were raised with the identical genetics, predispositions, conditioning, and exact experiences of Hitler, at that time in history, i would be him. All are vessels of the One, some to honor and some to dishonor or shame. Being a product of the potters wheel myself, i will leave judgement to the Potter , strive to refrain from creating arbitrary opposites and forgive everyone at the same time using the wisdom that has been given me.. Joseph

Thomas , To me, in your last 2 posts you make a case for the dangers of opposites even if that may not be your intention. I say this because your position admittedly interprets different views oon reality as pointing out or implying the other is wrong when that is the problem with unconsciously using those terms. Each person places their view on a continuum as a point at which the other is called wrong and the point they have chosen is right. Those are 2 different realities in their minds and were created by the use of opposites. Thomas also said ..... "Reality is what will freeze you to death (if you are unprotected) regardless of your opinion. If it is, for example, -80 degrees F in the arctic and you are naked, no shelter and no fire or other such sources, whether it feels like -84 to you and -78 to your companion, the reality that you are confronted by will kill you. " While i would agree with the example you gave using the temperature and parameters you gave earlier that the most likely scenario (reality) would be physical death for a normal human being, i would not be so absolute about it and at the same time not care to try and attempt to improve on science 😊 . That was not a reality you expressed by opposites but actual temperatures on the continuum of heat according to science which is more precise than the use of a so called opposite. However, keep in mind an alien might have a different physiology than us humans and might not perish which would be a different reality for them in the same scenario. And to further complicate things ... Here is an interesting human that puts holes in what many people consider reality for humans. Click Here -------> Wim “Iceman” Hof

There is nothing else i know to say to help you perceive what i see. There indeed was the holocaust yet there was no right or wrong, good or bad moral or immoral ...... there was only the holocaust and your privilege to call it whatever is convenient for you to call it.. In reality, it is what it is. There is no need for me to use opposites that exist only in concepts the mind creates as if it knows what it really is. Not using such words doesn't forbid me from taking wise action from a peaceful state. How do words do justice? (Rhetorical -no response required) What do opposites do to reality except to distort it and divide people? (Rhetorical -no response required) Merry Christmas and best wishes for the coming year to you and yours, Joseph

No, it is different for different people. Your amount of heat to strip off clothes is not the same as mine. It is subjective. Husbands and wives fight everyday over the supposedly useful uses of the word cold and hot in their homes that in essence are arbitrary. Friendships are lost daily, countries are divided and wars are fought over the arbitrary use of the words good and bad, right and wrong. If one can't understand that one chooses arbitrary points on a continuum that we deem as opposites when in fact they are not, then neither will one understand that right and wrong , good and bad, or in the case of this thread good and sin, are also merely arbitrary concepts and if not understood as such leads to anxiety, strife and a less peaceful existence.

Your definition agrees with (meteorology) cold fronts which is a temperature that is colder (has less heat) than the air it is displacing. The word as used for cold in cold front is an arbitrary temperature as it is only in relation to the existing temperature it is replacing. As you can see, we have created the term for convenience but it is not an absolute and although you could define cold as whatever you like and likewise bad, wrong, or ugly, the fact remains it is arbitrary and doesn't exist in reality. As i have posted 10 posts above this one ... "However useful opposites seem to be in organizing ourselves or simplifying our life, they simply do not exist except as arbitrary points on a continuum in our mind." To realize such and truly understand this goes a long way toward peace and less strife in ones life.

Yes, same coin, with 2 different arbitrary views. created by man for convenience.

To the point......... Opposites are an illusion. They are created by people and not what they seem to be. However useful opposites seem to be in organizing ourselves or simplifying our life, they simply do not exist except as arbitrary points on a continuum in our mind. I have used hot and cold as an example because it seems to me the easiest to understand but it is applicable to good and evil, right and wrong, pleasure and pain, love and hate, beautiful and ugly, rich and poor, success and failure..... and even life and death. My original point was/is that overcoming or transcending the polarity of opposites we have created goes a long way toward establishing a peaceful, forgiving and harmonious life here on earth and even on this forum. 😄

There is something much deeper to be gleamed from the understanding and it has to do with the underlying principle.and the way the mind works. If you still see things as right and wrong you have missed it and i cannot help.

Yes, the words as we use them (hot and cold ) are arbitrary points on the continuum of heat. Heat or energy if you choose to call it that exists. Cold does not exist except as an arbitrary point subjective in its use. We can't say in reality that cold exists except in our own mind as a concept because it is always a measure of heat that can accurately be expressed in degrees of heat. Cold is not a thing or something but rather a point of low energy/heat that one might say is cold. That point is arbitrary as my wife and i can attest to. 😊

I think you missed the point. -1 and 98 degrees are not arbitrary per se nor did i call them arbitrary. They are our scientific measures of heat. Hot and cold which people use as opposites are the arbitrary points. And likewise the other things i spoke of. In naming the continuum such as heat it is important to note there is only heat and not cold.Heat is present to some degree , cold is not. Therefor it makes a difference which one is the continuum

The point is ...... In reality, there are no opposites. Opposites are concepts created by people. Points on the continuum are arbitrarily labeled by people when in reality they are just degrees of one thing. IE: In reality temperature is the continuum and hot and cold are merely arbitrary points people make up for convenience. Temperature can be accurately expressed in degrees but the terms we use are arbitrary (hot and cold). Only heat exits and the degree to which it exists can be expressed. Same with good and bad, love and hate, saint and sinner, God and the Devil. etc. They are in reality a single continuum. There is only love, only God and the degree to which it is evolved and present in consciousness at the time is content. In context God is in all things. When you understand this forgiveness and love become unconditional because you can then see that people are where they are at a level of evolved consciousness and you would be no different if you were the other. While one level of consciousness may be more beneficial for sustaining life, it is in reality, not better or worse than another. It is what it is and part of the wondrous dance of life.

Yes, your first definition is similar to my understanding which is "a continuous sequence in which adjacent elements are not perceptibly different from each other, although the extremes are quite distinct" . I have found that overcoming " the polarity of opposites " goes a long to advancing ones spiritual quest to love, to forgive, to appreciate and see the beauty in all things that exist which is to live in peace and harmony rather than strife and discord.

I have no problem with you believing the behavior discussed is wrong. I also have no problem with Paul believing the behavior discussed is right or good. That is why we state our view / opinion and if another is adamant about their view just agree that we see things differently. I also have no problem with you thinking right and wrong are not always arbitrary even though i see them as always subjective arbitrary points on a continuum. Just my personal thoughts and experience, Joseph

Paul and Thomas, All these words for such an uncomplicated issue! I think we need to move past the arbitrary points of right and wrong that people choose on the continuum of life. They simply are not polar opposites but rather a degree or arbitrary point along a line that represents degrees of promoting life on this planet. It is much like temperature that is a line (continuum) with no moving molecules of energy on one end and the maximum amount of molecules active on the other. It can be measured in degrees but arbitrary points of hot or cold are a matter of subjective experience and arbitrary points chosen by people rather than polar opposites. My wife and i still can't agree on whether its hot or cold in the house after 51+ years of marriage! 😊😊 But we still love each other.😍 PS Once an arbitrary point is truly chosen it is near impossible to change the others mind by reason.

Thomas, In all fairness, that seemed like a loaded statement more than a question to me. Paul was just indicating he saw nothing wrong with two people not married having consensual sex for their enjoyment. He was not advocating using another person without reciprocity (mutual benefit). They both benefit, therefor using people as you ask in your question without a question mark could be taken as rhetorical or even divisive and not requiring an answer. All occurrences of your quote above use a period and are a misstatement of what he really said even though you continued to demand an answer to what he didn't say. Is mutual consenting sex using people? If they are of age and it is private, it is at least legal in the US. In his defense, Paul wasn't recommending it for you or others, he was merely indicating he saw nothing wrong with it and yes if asked he would tell another he saw nothing wrong with it.. Joseph

Thomas, What does 'wrong' mean that is not directly related to the law or morality of a society ? To me, actions are neither right or wrong. Actions have consequences but the concept of right and wrong is at the whim of society. Even your barbaric example or genocide is accepted by some tribes that exist today. It may be classified as wrong by another society or people but i would submit that it is neither. It is simply what it is and is either acceptable to one's way of thinking or not acceptable. Right and wrong are motivation derived logically from ethical or moral principles that govern a person's thoughts and actions. conscience, moral sense, or scruples. In other words they are conditioned subjective judgements and not absolutes as many use and would have them . Just my view when not in Kansas grasshopper...😄😄😄 ...... Sorry couldn't resist and the laugh did me a whole lot of good. Thanks for your response to my last post.

While it seems to me one can say it is a sin to use another person, it is only a sin to him/her who believes thus. One could say that such a person is 'missing the mark' but then again that is just making a law that when violated by the one making it, is sin to the one who by believing has made it so. If i use someone as in the examples mentioned there are indeed natural and sometimes unpredictable consequences for my actions but i do not see how one can say it is moral or not moral as the word morality here is nothing more than "a particular system of values and principles of conduct, especially one held by a specified person or society" . They are ever changing and subject to the whims of both people and society. How can one say a person is fully actualized and free from guilt if he/she chooses to draw marks/lines or set up rules of morality? It seems to me that such is in actuality , an impediment. Besides Maslow's 'self actualization' is only a concept but to know ones 'true Self' is realization. To live free from the law/laws, written or unwritten is in my view to be dead to the conditioned self but alive to that which is in and through all. Against such there is no law and hence no sin. Joseph