X-Digest-Num: 70 Message-ID: <44114.70.384.959273824@eGroups.com> Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 22:12:31 +0800 From: Lin Zhemin Subject: Re: Dao De Jing [was Re: Promoting Lojban] X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 384 Content-Length: 3797 Lines: 89 Removing it from Lojban list... zo robin. cusku di'e > {.ie} We don't even know for sure who these people were! So, do you know in the world who Mr. Jesus Christ was? > > > logic, on the other hand, is voluminous and well-documented, with various > > > competing schools, and this was developed further by the Buddhists. > > Real Buddhist never "develop" things. > {ki'a zoi gy. real develop gy.} You meant "what is `read develop'" ? If you know some stories of Buddha (the "Siddartha" written by Hermann Hesse is, though not real, a very good book to understand some spirit of Buddhism), you can know that the prophets or the monks are not trying to write something, to study some literature (i.e. philosophy, etc.), nor asking people to do something. They just reflect and think about themselves, practice in order to help the reflection, and thus hope themselves reaching the reveillance. There are two branches of Buddhism: the Dasheng (Big? I don't know its English counterpart) and Xiaosheng (Small). People believe in Dasheng would try to tell you some results of their reflection and thus hope you to reach the reveillance; while people in Xiaosheng merely hope themselves to reach it: they don't hope to educate or initiate other people. Later "development", e.g. those explanation, religious works, etc. are just appendices to Buddhism, and thus unnecessary. Maybe I know too little about Indian religions (not only Buddhism) to tell you something about them. After all, I think just as their western counterparts, Indian religions are multiple and have huge varieties of branches. As the magicians of the middle age in Europe, many oriental people believe in strange spells for strange purposes, which is rediculous and not philosophical / realistic. > Remeber dialectic has always been important in Buddhism. Euh.. I just can't see it. Maybe there are some debates and many explanations by some masters, I don't see the dialectic part of Buddhism. Dialectic, you mean there are some theses, antitheses and syntheses? > {.ienaisai} The Sanskrit alphabet is _very_ important in certain systems, and > letters are invoked to produce internal (and, some claim) external effects e.g. Like Moses' scrolls. But that's something like Druides.. > Krim krim krim hrim hrim hum hum dakshina Kalika Totally insignificant to Chinese people, since we don't understand Sanskrits.. :Q > {pe'i} the wuxing is cosmologically less important because of the existence of the > trigrams. It's quite amusing to see people's attempts to synthesise the two - 5 > into 8 doesn't go! Trigrams? Sorry that it is not listed in my dictionary.. > experiential/analytical {ta'o} I'm not using experiential in the Lakoff/Johnson > sense here. Could you explain this? I don't know about Lakoff/Johnson. (Private email appreciated.:-)) > as advertising. Some things don't change much! It's a bit like all the Taoist > immortality stuff - you won't get people to do difficult and boring > physical/mental exercises without promising a _big_ reward. AFAIK, according to Daodejing/Zhuangzi (not the religion `Taoism'), to the Buddhism, to the original practice of Yogas, there is no _reward_ conpromised. And there is never `immortality' in original Taoism, i.e. the philosophy of Laozi and Zhuangzi. What you said may be another "Taoism", invented by Master Zhang in Han dynasty, in which one believes the immortality via exercises, western paradise, spells and religious medication, the skill of fly and the summon of phantoms... That's the original religion of China that you've told in another message. -- .e'osai ko sarji la lojban. ==> 請支持邏輯語言。 co'o mi'e lindjy,min. ==> 再見，我是林哲民。 Fingerprint20 = CE32 D237 02C0 FE31 FEA9 B858 DE8F AE2D D810 F2D9