this should be interesting, Fuhrer :P

is this related to any ingame event by any chance? or its totally separate from that?:P

well if it is separate then need to think about it or wait for someone to make a start

its very deep, and generally i dont agree with Mr. Tao :P (if he's a guy that is - excuse my ignorance)

... better i wait for someone else to start =D

heyyyyy no fair ... wut if I decide to start eh?

besides ... the first post is a great start :P

I believe its because ppl were more "stupid" back then. Nowadays I dont hear much about 2 paths and all that stuff. I think its gettin more common with stuff like make your own path and other similiar sayings.

And to answer your "real question": I got no problems with white and black ppl living together :)

I made a short answer because I dont really see any discussion only spammin and Xs being to shy to post what he really thinks...

Hmm, I believe there are at least as many realities and truthes as there are living beings. Could it be that Tao meant that good and evil only exists in the individual´s truth and therefore it doesn´t matter how people consider themselves?

There's always other options than the ones we see.

In your example with either "working or stealing" I believe that is an example on how society have shaped us. You can only see the good and bad side the side who supports society and the side who doesnt.

Then all that is based on materialism. What do you need money for? A home, food but mostly other unnecessary stuff is what you will spend most of your money on. If you dont would only pay for your food and house you would probably got loads of cash. What will you do with that cash? You will probably realise that you got enough money to buy loads of stuff or bigger toys like cars.

I believe that is what most ppl will do. Even if you decide to save the money you still save to spend it something.

Although to show there's other options than working hard or be a criminal there's ppl who doesnt work or steal. Those ppl are considered to be living outside society and most ppl regard them as something bad, very bad. Those lifestyles are labeled as shitty living and most ppl never consider it an option.

Now for example of such ppl who live outside society you will have Squatting and DIY movements. Some of those ppl never had a job or did a crime* but still they been living for many years. They got their own options to survive because they managed to think outside the classic frames work or steal which society gave us.

So I still believe there will always be more than just 2 paths if you manage to get out of the frames that shaped us.

2 paths sayings I believe are invented by old so called wise men in the past who just spammed bullsh!t because ppl asked them.

*Squatting is only legal in Belgia but still it happens in many countries and most of the countries in the world doesnt have any laws regarding it. So squatting may be considered a crime but still the only person affected by this crime is you.

Could you be refering to fate, since if everything we did, do and will do wouldn`t decided by ourselfs if something like fate really exists? I don`t want to in it though, because believing in fate would mean to me that everything is meaningless, since everthing existing was meant to be like it is anyway. (Sorry for offtopc).

Anyway,

Quote:

If I'm a hardworking person, intelligent `n all, good education, and can't seem to get a job or enough to make money in order to be self sufficient, I have 2 options ... 1. Continue cribbing and attempting to work hard? 2. Stop cribbing and simply pull off a crime which will pay off well (be it cheating at gambling, robbing a bank, assassinating for money/land, using insider info to buy/sell stocks or whatever) Option 1 has another dilemma, 1.a. What if I never make any money and become homeless in the process not even being able to revert to option 2 later. 1.b. what if I never make enough to be self sufficient and end up begging friends/family for funds just enough to scrape through it ... What is the "middle path" for this situation???? is there a middle path??

First question here is how much money do I need to be "self sufficient"? I believe there`re another answers for most individuals. I often wonder how much money people believe to need every month. The question is what does the individual believe to be its minimum to live.

I met people that spend like 15.000.000 €/ month and still always claimed that they have like nothing compared to their needs. Well, they chose option 2, because it was impossible to get jobs with that kind of income anyway. Also i met people who had no job, no money and got only job offers where they actually had to pay for the job, so option 2 would be most likely the logical chose over time, but I lost contact so no idea if that happened. My sister and her boyfriend live together. he works and she goes to school and they are very poor. Yet they are quit happy as far i can see.

What I´m kinde to get at, is the question if there`s any relationship to what we believe to need and to being saint or sinner, in other words good and evil. Well, I think there CAN be a relation since if you believe to need a lot the possibly might be higher that you attend to crimes or whatsoever, but every case is different. I met poor and rich people that could be considered saints and demons and here we are back to individual`s realities xD Btw, i did some things that could be considered crimes to help those close to me, so thats another possibly risk of both points: people commiting crimes in good intentions while getting used to it till they start doing them of so called ill intention.

Hmm, if I think about it, I intended to write something totally different but I dont remember what it was >.<
Wonder if you kinda get what I tried to say or did I keep the important stuff way to short? oO

Umm, as far as I know, there is always a middle path. What it actually is, is an exit. A middle path is neither the black nor white; so itself is a path leading out of the constraint.
There is always a middle path in everything; if you can't see it, then it simply means that you haven't look hard enough.

BTW, this is only true for relative truths. Absolute truths are by definition absolute; so there is no middle, left, or right side to them.

Xs wrote:

Quote: The tao doesnt take sides;it gives birth to both good and evil. The master doesnt take sides but welcomes both saints and sinners." Book of Tao I was asked by someone as to why in the citation above there are only 2 references which are as far apart as white and black. (not literally) As to why there can't be a standard which is somewhere in the middle. The question is an interesting one and for sure raises the age old question of why there are only 2 paths in something? The right path and the wrong path... why can't there be a situation whereby the path is somewhere in the middle of those 2 choices ... At this point I'm NOT entering my opinion in here but am very eagerly awaiting the arguments from anyone who can explain either why there are only 2 forms of choices the right ones and the wrong ones OR counter that perspective and explain why a middle path should exist OR put a spin on the matter entirely ... Note: If this discussion is lively and thought provoking enough I'll edit this post to include a poll at a later date. Edit: Yes I realise this discussion doesn't quite belong in Theology itself, however this is the best place for this post and for that reason it has been placed in this section.

hehehehe Yao looks like you cracked the code even though I gave the answer in the very first post.

Black, white, grey.
Black = Extreme
White = other extreme

(not saying either is right, just saying both are extremes)

Behavior which is based entirely on extremes (from an attitude perspective) is an extremist. Terrorists and pacifists are good examples of these. Where does everyone else lie? in the middle.

So yeah, I agree with Yao. The truth, or in the initial statement's case the book of tao, doesn't like extremists. Pick any religion you want to, even in the best, violence is offered as a last resort BUT it is offered.

Just to be thorough, there are two different kinds of middle path. The first was presented by Xs: Black, White and Grey - a mixture of black + white producing a grey color.

The other case of middle path is neither white, neither black (which implies neither grey also).

To me, the first case is not really a middle path; it is more like a compromise and depending on the level of compromise, it can be a bit more left wing, or a bit more right wing and rarely ever right at the middle. That is why I don't consider it as true middle path.

A real middle path is the absence of both black and white in its entirety.

Using Xs' example of terrorists(violence) vs pacifists(non-violence), the first case of middle path would be indifference, but the true middle path (2nd case) is actually compassion.