Одговори на темата

Порака: <blockquote data-quote="Abraxas" data-source="post: 310535" data-attributes="member: 2368">Еве еден интересен текст во врска со паралелите помеѓу таоизмот и телемата:The basic thread that runs through all these themes is the application of non-action, or non-interference. Upon examination, both non-action, and non-interference are very similar, if not the same, and will be treated as such in this article.How should I explain what is meant by non-action, and the practice of non-interference? It is very clear in my own mind what these terms mean, but there is a difficulty in putting those ideas across accurately. I should first of all explain that non-action does not mean absence of action, it is the performance of the one correct action for any given situation, it is to travel the path of least resistance. I will give you an analogy to help clarify its meaning. You have a blown up balloon and you slowly press your finger into its surface. If the balloon were to extend itself and actively try to fight your finger off, it would be practicing action, not non-action. If the balloon were to yield away from your finger at a pace faster than what you were pressing, it would be practicing action, not non-action. If the balloon neither rose to meet your pressing finger, nor ran from your fingers touch, nature dictates that after your finger was released, the balloon would return to its normal shape, its "natural state of rest", without any effort on its part. This is what is meant by non-action. As I stated, it is the path of least resistance, it is the one true course that should be adopted and it is the true way of nature. It could be said that the true nature of anything is a will to inertia, that is, non-action, and that the way to do this non-action is to "oppose no obstacle to the function of that true Nature"{8} (dare I say True Will?). The practicing Magician might be able to see the formula of Harpocrates at work here.Now, what of non-interference? Everything that was said of non-action can be said of non-interference too but with one added extra. You are not to interfere in the affairs of another. If you look closely into the practice of non-action you will see that to not interfere in the affairs of others is already a part of its definition, thus you could say that non-action and non interference are the same. This is so because if you were to interfere in the affairs of another you would have to make an effort to leave your "natural state of rest" and "extend" yourself into their affairs, and thus, have action, not non-action.I hope this has adequately explained the basics of the way of the Tao.Most readers by now will already have been able to draw their own conclusions as to what the similarities between the two systems are. For those who need a little help it should be suffice to say that at the very basic level of both systems is the belief that one is to follow the path of least resistance. One is to follow this path, to do the correct action (the True Will, non-action) for any given moment and to not interfere in the affairs of others. The methods for achieving this are identical.It is interesting to note that in the Book of the Law the universe is seen as the interplay of two qualities (I use the word 'qualities' for want of a better word), Nuit and Hadit. In the Tao Teh Ching the universe is seen as the interplay of two qualities, Tao and Teh. If you look closely into the definition of these terms you will find that Nuit is generally the same as Teh, and Hadit is very similar to Tao. I will leave it up to the reader to investigate these claims for himself/herself.Целиот текст тука:<a href="http://www.oocities.org/athens/atlantis/2569/othtxt/taothel.html"> Link</a></blockquote>

Верификација: Колку нозе има кучето? (напишете со букви)

На врв Bottom

Барај

Барај

Одговори на темата