I expect that this is the way that it does work.

In fact, this is precisely why I would have full and complete respect for a sentient robot or android. It would be the same essence as me.

In fact all living things, and even nonliving things have the same essence. There's nothing else to be. It was the reductionistic view that was the illusion all along.

When I read these words I felt a very strong desire to respond to them. Because I am in total agreement with what you say here, however, possibly not in a way that you were thinking when you wrote it.

Having performed many scientific calculations and having read many scientific theories over the course of my life it has indeed occurred to me that our knowledge of physics is extremely elementary. In fact, it is this very reductionistic approach to physics that allows us to make an well-defined mathematical statements and relationships at all.

Clearly we do have mathematical models and statements that consider large collections of fundamental constituents as well, but most of those models are based on statistics that merely assumes random (or averaged) behavior.

However, more to the point, our scientific theories are extremely simple when we get right down to it. We're looking for explanations of how "Newton's Billard Balls" behave. And even on that level we have found them impossible to pin down.

However, going in the other direction is not so easy. In fact, the best theory we have to date in that regard is called "Chaos Theory" which is currently taking on the new title of "Complexity Theory".

Complexity Theory considers an idea of "Strange Attractors" which can also be thought of as "Emergent Properties". These are properties that scientists believe emerge from complex systems.

In other words, they have decided to simply take the unwarranted (IMHO) view or premise, that complex collections of waves and/or vibrations arise from the complex nature of a conglomeration of the simpler laws of physics and the constituent particles that follow these simpler laws.

However, if you actually stop and think about this, this represents nothing more than a biased viewpoint.

In other words, Jeanniebean is simply recognizing "From the Top Down" so-to-speak, that the effects of the world that are important to humans are indeed these very complex vibrations such as emotions, and thoughts.

So Jeanniebean recognizes that we ultimately are in control of these complex fields of vibrations. I imagine that she assumes that she has a will that she is free to exercise that can indeed affect these vibrations. In other words, she believes in what many people call a 'free will'.

However, from the scientific point of view, working "From the Bottom Up" so-to-speak (i.e. from the reductionistic simple laws of physics upward), scientists then imagine that these complex fields of vibrations (or forms) are "Emergent Properties".

Well, of course they're going to be thinking like that, because they started with Newton's balls and worked up to the human brain. So of course, it's going to appear to them to be an 'emergent property'. That precisely what it's going to appear as when working backward from a reductionistic point of view.

In some ways this is extremely ironic. Because in one way, the very idea of reductionism is the idea that the whole is nothing more than the sum of the parts. In fact, many biologists were against this view and they were attempting to argue that the whold is 'greater than' the sum of the parts. So now, with this idea of 'emergent properties' science is actually starting to recognize that this is true. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts. But that flies in the very face of the reductionistic point of view that started out assuming that everything could be reduced to its fundamental constituents.

So it's a bit of an oxymoron. Now the idea of "Emergent Properties" (which grew out of the reductionistic point of view) is actually going back to the idea that the whole is more than just the sum of the parts.

I think this shows perfectly how these two different approaches bring to light two entirely different views.

Jeanniebean begins with the premise, "I AM", and with that she also recognises the dynamic quality of will, as in "I WILL". I AM, and I WILL.

I AM = Desire
I WILL = Intent

Wow! How profound. This is the basis of many mystical teachings.

And then she works outward from there to explore the nature of her being.

In the meantime, scientists have started with Newton's balls and have worked up from the Big Bang through evolution to mice, monkeys and finally men. And now they are attempting to understand "Desire and Intent" in terms of "Emergent Properties"?

And they haven't even fully understood their balls yet?

So when you say, "When physcists speak of vibrations and fields, they are using these words in a very specific way.", I would agree. They are using these terms in a very crude and rudimentary way that is genuinely not even well-understood on the simplest most fundamental reductionistic level.

They can't even say what a quark is for sure and they're going to make assumptions about what constitutes a human mind, consciousness, emotions, and will?

Hey, I'm all for science and technology. But science as a foundation for human philosophy of life? I just don't see where it's anywhere near that level yet. Even our best science is basically equivilent to kindergarten knowledge in comparison with the human condition. It just isn't in a possition to be making such far-fetched speculations about things like "Emergent Properties" of the human psyche when it truly can't even describe it's balls yet. Let's take one thing at a time. Better stick with the balls till we get them squared away first.

I feel much the same as Jeannie.

What is science but our best attempt to record what we observe to be happening all around us?

What is philosophy but our best attempt to try to make sense of our existence?

How can these two things be seperated when one totally embraces the other?

In other words, science is merely a 'subset' of philosophy and therefore must be a valid inclusion into any philosophy that dares to embrace the question of reality in general.

On the other hand, I can see where someone might reject philosophical thinking when considering only the "Scientific Method of Inquiry".

So in other words, I can see where, from a scientific view, a person might not be interested in philosophy. But it doesn't seem to hold the other way around.

So to say that they have nothing to do with each other seems like overkill.

In fact, if science were truly reduced to only that which can be determined via the "Scientific Method of Inquiry", then scientists would need to give up their quarks because it's impossible to even verify the existence of a quark using the purest notion of the "Scientific Method of Investigation".

Even the mathematics that describes quarks does not even allow for a quark to exist as a single entity. Yet science still refers to this "behavior of reality" to be refered to as an individual 'thing'.

I sometimes wonder just what we could truly say about the world if we truly had to restrain ourselve to only adhering to the "Scientific Method of Inquiry". Quarks would be out for sure! And who knows what else?

So does this mean that quarks are a purly philosophical idea?

How much of Quantum Mechanics is pure philosophy, and how much can actually be called "science"? That's an interesting question in and of itself.

String Theory, on the other hand, is pure philosophy. Yet it's normally associated with science and does indeed constitute what the vast majority of modern day physicists are indeed working on.

Like Jeannie asks, "Where's the line between philosophy and science? Where do you even begin to draw such a line?"

I'd be glad to consider such a line if someone could show me where it can, or should, be drawn.

Truly.

It's a relief to know that we're not crazy. It's just reality itself that's crazy.

Well, I for one believe that even a hologram is 'real'. It has rules of behavior and requires observable phenomenon.

I have no problem believing in the physicality of the universe. However I see no need to associate that physiciality with the true nature of my essence. It's just not necessary.

We often associate matter with "energy and mass". However this isn't what gives our physical reality it's solidity.

The solidity of this universe comes from the Pauli exclusion principle (which is also part of Quantum Mechanics).

This principle simply states that no two fermions can occupy the same quantum state at the same time.

And electron is such a particle.

However an electron is like nothing you have ever seen in the macro world.

For example if you have a basket ball and set it on a table and walk around it 360 degrees, then you will have see the basket ball in its entirety.

But now if you place an electron on that table and you walk around the electron 360 degrees, you will only have seen half of it and you will not have completely circumnavigated it. In order to computer your journey around the electron you will need to walk around it a second time.

Electrons are 720 degree "objects". You must walk around an electron twice in order to see all of it once.

So the very nature of an electron is quite different from our daily experience. This is also true of all Fermions (i.e. leptons, quarks, and particles made of leptons and quarks).

On the other hand, if you find a boson you can see all of it by only walking around it once. However you could not pick it up. You're hand would go right through it like a ghost. The reason being that Bosons do not exhibit the Pauli Exclusion principle and they can indeed occupy the same quantum state at the same time with other particles.

So even though a boson may have 'mass', it's not 'physical' in the normal way that we think of things being physical. It can pass right through other bosons and even fermions. Although it may interact with them using other forces, but not because of the Pauli Exclusion principle which only applies to Fermions.

So the parts of this universe that truly give us a sense of 'solidity' are the parts that are "720 degree objects". Objects that totally blow away our sense of what we would deem to be intuitively logical.

I agree. I see nothing illogical associated with a probabilistic description of things. That particular aspect of QM doesn't defy any logic.



Yes, it's the behavior of non-locality that defies logic.

However this is like a proof by counter-example.

In other words if we are to ask, "Is Quantum Mechanics logical?"

Then to prove that it is, we must show that it's logical in every discription that it makes.

However, to show that it's illogical, all that is required is a single counter-example.

QM's demand of non-locality is the counter-example. Therefore QM cannot be said to be logical because a counter-example to that assumption has been shown.

This does not mean that QM is illogical in everything that it describes. It simply means that it cannot be said to be logical overall because a counter-example to what we deem to be logical has been found.

However, this brings us to a more subtle place. There must be a disctinction between Quantum Mechanics (the mathematical description) and Quantum Behavior (what is actually observed in the lab).

In other words, we can't just say that Quantum Mechanics (the mathematical formalism is illogical), and therefore it must be wrong.

And the reason that we can't say this is because the real world, Quantum Behavior (what is actually observed in the lab), does indeed exhibit the behavior that is described by Quantum Mechanics (the mathematical formalism).

So if we must conclude that something is illogical, then we must conclude that the actual behavior of the universe is illogical, and not merely our mathematical description of it.

This is basically the vantage point where I'm coming from.

I see the universe itself as defying 'logic' at the quantum scale.

At least in a temporal manner.

For our sense of 'logic', time is of the utmost importance. The reason being that our logic is based on 'cause and effect' (i.e. something happens before something else). This is the whole basis of the idea of natural processes. Some previous event naturally causes some new affect, in a linear temporal manner.

However, once we reach the realm of non-locality the very notion of before and after breaks down and therefore our sense of logic (which is based on ideas of cause and effect) must also break down.

The very notion of non-locality demands a break down of logic as we know it.

No. Sorry I can't help you out there.

I learned about the numerical symbol of 10,000 things when I took a course on the history of number. The instructor explained that the interpretations of Mandarin symbols are abstract and often change with context. He stated that while it is believed that this symbol did indeed represent an actual count of 10,000 in a strict mathematical use, it was also used more often to simply represent many things, or an uncountable number of things, or even all things.

So that's how I learned about that particular symbol.

I learned from simply looking at several English translations of the Tao Te Ching that the Mandarin symbols are open to a wide variety of interpretations. Most authors who have attempted to create a translation warn of these in their own books before offering their version of the translation.

In fact, that interpretations are often quite diverse and because of this it leaves open the possiblity of creating a freelance interpretation based on a collection of various English interpretations. And interpretation of interpretations.

The idea is simply to read many of them until you get the general idea of what is being conveyed and they you are in a position to write your own interpretations from that.

I've been thinking about writing a very poetic interpretation simply as an art form.

I tend to view life and communication from the point of view that it should be an expression of thoughts, feelings, and a personal experience.

I'm not one to try to demand a precise rigid view that should only be interpreted in a very limited way. Especially when it comes to something like the philosophy of Taoism. I feel that any attempt to place a formal rigidity onto it would be the antithesis of what it is attempting to express.

Of course, that's just my own personal view.

These answers to these questions are extremely unclear in physics Jeannie.

In fact, when you ask these questions of science you may get several different answers.

For example, there is the Quantum Mechanical model answer, and then there is the String Theory answer (which today is a large part of the scientific effort)

In String theory the smallest "known" particle would be a string. Of course, no one has ever seen a string so in that sense it cannot be referred to as a "known" particle. It's merely a hypothetical speculation at this point.

So this brings us back to Quantum Mechanics. In Quantum Mechanics the picture isn't much better. Creative had suggested in a previous post that quarks are the smallest "known" particles. However, like strings, no one has ever seen a lone quark or even evidence for such a thing. So quarks can't truly be referred to as "known" particles either.

In fact the theory of Quantum Chromodynamics (which is the mathematical theory of "quarks" demands that no quark can ever "exist" in an individual lone state. So the theory itself denies the very existence of the so-called "particle" that it describes.

In other words, the theory itself is actually doing nothing more than describing the behavior of observations that cannot truly even be said to be "individual particles".

In fact the very name "Particle Physics" is a misnomer because non of the quantum particles can truly be described in terms of pure particles. In fact, many scientists have called them "Wavicles" over the years because it's truly oxymoronic to refer to them as "particles".

The so-called "quantum particles" aren't particles at all. They are a very strange behavior which science honestly doesn't yet understand.

So if we are to be intellectually honest about Quantum Mechanics we must recognize that it doesn't say anything about particles at all, in fact, it basically denies the existence of any such thing as a particle. All that Quantum Mechanics truly does is describe very strange behavior that no scientist has yet been able to explain in a logical way.

In fact, a scientist named John Stewart Bell has proven mathematically that quantum behavior cannot possibly be describe using what we normally think of as logic. His work has shown that quantum behavior defies logic and it can never be explained via logic because it violates the normal logical restrictions that we have placed on physical reality.

Therefore Quantum Mechanics is ultimately a science that shows that this universe is neither made of 'particles' nor does it obey the laws that we normally associate with "logic" and macro physics.

Also QM doesn't truly "describe" the behavior of quantum phenomenon other than to give probabilies of how it might behave in a particular situation.

So this would be like asking me where a friend of yours is and I tell you that she most probably has gone grocery shopping or she might be at the beauty parlor, or maybe at the bowling rink, or possibly at some resturant eating a meal.

That's the best I can say.

Well, you might ask, "In other words you don't know where she is or what she's doing?"

No that's not true. I know that she's doing at least one of the things I've mentioned and nothing else. So don't go looking for her at the Ice skating rink, for example, She won't be there. Don't look for her at a used car lot buying a car, She won't be there.

The information I gave you is true. She will only be at one of the places that I've mentioned and no where else. But I can't say which of those places she's at with absolute certainty.

This is the way that quantum mechanics is. It can give you very precise information in terms of probabilities. But just the same it's only giving you probablities in the end.

And it doesn't say anything about whether something is a particle or a wave. If you look for a particle that's what you'll find, if you look for a wave, that's what you'll find. In that sense, you create the universe by choosing what you would like to see. You are the creator of what you decide to measure.

Well, in truth that would be pretty difficult would it not?

What is science but a collection of observations made of the world around us. To insist that philosophers cannot ponder the observations of science would be to suggest that they cannot even ponder any observations of the physical world really.

I mean where would it stop? Could a philosopher speak about the "Big Bang" (i.e. a universe that had a beginning versus one that is eternal), without being accused of referring to "science"?

Taosim, for example, is entirely based on the idea that the physical world is eternal. Back then, they didn't know about things such as galaxies, other planets, or a big bang. In fact, they didn't even realize that the stars in the sky are just other suns no different from ours. So their philosophy was based on an eternal world where potentially the earth is the only world and the sun is the only sun, etc.

I would love to hear how these ancient philosophers would react to todays knowledge of the true vastness of the universe and the fact that this Earth and Sun are not only temporary but don't even hold any special place in the scheme of things.

I think they might keep their fundamental beliefs, but at the same time they would be forced to think of them a bit differently. All because of physical observations (That we now call "science")

But does "science" hold the rights to all physical observations?

More importantly can the dicipline of science be said to be absolute and perfect in its knowledge. I think the answer to this second question is defintely a resounding no. Even the theories within science itself demands that our knowledge is incomplete and imprecise. Not to mention that even prominent scientists disagree on the philosophical interepretations of observations.

I personally feel that the only place where science causes problems with respect to philosophy is when very secular-thinking philosophers attempt to hold science out as supporting their secularism whilst demanding that science cannot be used to support any other philosophies. That's a very one-sided view, IMHO.

It's that kind of extremism that seems to be causing problems between philosophy and science. It's just plain old fanatical extremism. The same thing that causes problems in all other walks of life.

I personally see no conflicts or problems between philosophy and science in general. But then I view science for what it truly is. I don't hold it up on a pedestal of unrealistic expections of perfectionism.

Truly.

A Story finale

Kathy gets back home and there's a whole subplot going on with her sister. Unfortunately I won't be able to get into that here since it would have required developing other characters. Just to breeze over that part, Tanya is still pretty self-centered, and wants to get back into cigarettes and drugs. But there are no drugs to be had, and she is even having bad reactions to cigarettes after having been in a coma for so long.

With the help of Maime's lectures she finally realizes what love truly means through Kathy's example, and another fellow that has been innocently in love with Tanya for years. She also happens to be over her mental illness which may have ultimately been nothing more than the result of guilt, depression, and drugs.

Tanya even blows up at this innocent guy who is in love with her, and tells him that she used to be a whore and a horrible person. He says, “I don’t care what you used to be, the past was a different time, all I care about is who you are now”. He shares with her some of his own personal history that he’s not real proud of and suggests that all anyone can do is take life one day at time. Then he asks her if she can love him for a day.

Tanya finally sees the wisdom of living in the now and not wallowing in a past that can never changed.

~~~

The story ends at the State Fair, where Kathy's half-breed horses do indeed win the grand prize and are now the talk of the town, only this time with pride.

A Story part 6

As Kathy pulls into town there is still mud everywhere and there is a large tractor trailer stuck in the mud and a large tow truck backing up to it to hook on and tow it out.

Kathy pulls up to the supply store with her buckboard. The men sitting on the porch of the supply story start talking about her half-breed horses, and laughing behind her back. Kathy is totally unaware of the gossip that's going on around her. She is just set on getting her supplies.

One of the town hecklers calls out to her, "What kind of horses are those?", he then laughs looking around at his buddies who are egging him on.

Kathy looks at him a bit confused and just replies, "They're farm horses". The whole crowd breaks out into laughter as the "joke" seems to have backfired.

The heckler then asks, "Well what BREED are they?". He then look back toward his buddies like as if he has really got her pinned now.

Again, Kathy just looks at him with a confused look on her face and say, "I don't know, their just horses". Kathy has no clue what the heckler is trying to accomplish. She's not interested in breeding horses which is what her Grandmother had been famous for before the 'accident'. She was totally clueless that this farming community prides itself on having the best horse breeding farms around. So it's common in this area for people to make fun of an 'inferior' bread.

Kathy goes into the store and loads up her buckboard. When she comes out the men are still making fun of her horses behind her back. She starts to climb up on her buckboard and notices the tow truck that is trying to pull the tractor trailer out of the mud. It too is just spinning wheels and appears to be just as hopelessly stuck as the truck it had planned on pulling out of the ditch.

Being a naturally helpful person, Kathy yells over to the driver of the two truck and asks, "Do you want me to pull you out of that ditch". The driver yells back, "With what?". Kathy replies, "My horses can pull you out that ditch". The driver laughs and simply replies, "You think so?", Kathy says, "Sure". So the driver say, "Well this I gotta see!"

Kathy innocently gets off her buckboard and unhooks her team of four horses and walks them over to the tow truck. She backs them up to the bumper where there is a large ring that she drops her hitch onto. Then she yells to her horses "Gee! Gee!". The tow truck driver yells down from his cab, "Wait a minute ladly! I need to unhook first!" But Kathy doesn't hear him and just yells to her horses again "Gee! Gee!"

The muscular horses dig into the mud until their massive hooves contact the solid earth beneath the chains become taught and the tow truck lurches forward inch by inch. The tow truck driver still yelling, "I didn't unhook! I didn't unhook!"

Kathy still doesn't hear the driver and inspires her horses to keep working, "Gee! Gee!" the horses lurch forward inch by inch pulling the large two truck forward until the chains behind it become taught and the cab of the tractor trailer also begins to move forward.

"Gee! Gee!" Kathy repeats as the walks her horses up onto the road the two massive trucks screeching and shrieking behind her every so slowly be moving.

The crowd of men on the porch of the supply store who had been previously laughing at her horses now stand in silent awe as they watch Kathy's four mongrel horses pull the massive trucks out of the muddy ditch and up onto the road.

Todd also happens to drive up just in time to catch this awesome sight unfolding before him. He too stands in awe of the sight.

After both trucks have been pulled onto the road, Kathy unhitches her team and walks them back over to her buckboard. The men on the porch still in shock of what they have just witnessed stand as wide-eyed statues.

As Kathy hitches her horse back to her buckboard Todd approaches her and say, "You've got to enter those horses into the state fair horse pull". The prize is $10,000.

As Kathy drives off heading back home finally one of the awestruck men breaks the silence as he asks, "What the hell kind of horses were those?"

~~~

A Story part 5

The following week Todd returns expecting that the horse would most likely be dead by now. He is surprised to see the horse, not only fully recovered, but actually working again. He tells Kathy that he has never seen such a recovery and then goes about asking her for a date. She is surprised by the request and isn't sure what to make of it. She doesn't trust men and after having lived with her sister she's convinced that all men are lowlifes that only want one thing. So she declines his request. He's not easily dissuaded though and offers to check over her other horses to be sure that the infection hasn't spread. Kathy accepts his offer and they slowly get to know each other.

As time goes on the crops are doing very well and it looks like the farm will produce enough money to pay for land taxes and supplies for the coming winter.

One night a storm blows in. Kathy, Zed, and Maime run around battening down all the hatches and putting the animals in the barn. The weather stations on the radio are predicting damaging winds and rains. Zed overexerts himself and isn't feeling well.

The rains come and are indeed a very drenching downpour. The fields are flooded and the winds come and play havoc with the crops. The creeks overflow and the radio announces that some bridges are out.

Zed is not feeling well, and begins to clutch his chest. His heartbeat become erratic. Maine, having worked as a nurses aid understand the symptoms and calls the doctor. The doctor agrees that Zed is in desperate need for medication but there is no way that anyone can bring it to him because the roads are nothing but mud and the bridge is out.

Kathy has fallen in love with both Maime and Zed, they have become her family. She is desperate to save Zed. She goes to the barn and rides Keanu to town through the mud, and jumping over flooded streams and even swimming through a torrents with Kathy on his back. They make it to the drug store and back just in time to save Zed's life.

After the storm they see that all of their crops have been totally destroyed the entire summer of farming was all for naught and they have no insurance. They are distraught and not sure what to do.

The phone rings and it's a call from the hospital where Kathy's sister has been. They say that Tanya has come out of her coma. Kathy is elated with the good news. Maine can't believe that Kathy is so happy, "They way that girl had treated you I'm surprised that you've ever want to lay eyes on her again".

"Oh no! Tayna didn't mean to be mean, she was just confused", Kathy defends her wicked sister. Then Kathy starts talking about bring Tayna "home" as soon as possible. Maime argues that they may not even be able to stay at the farm over the winter with no food and no money to play for the property tax and the money they had borrowed for seeds.

Kathy is determined and tells the hospital that she's gladly take her sister in. So Tanya is brought to the farm in an ambulance over the new makeshift bridge that had been temporarily constructed after the storm.

A friend of Maime's at the store in town hears of Tayna's recovery and offers to dentate some supplies and wheelchair for Tayna as she recovers. Kathy hooks up four of her half-breed worthless horses to buckboard and drives them into town to pick up the supplies. She hasn't taken her horses into town before and has no clue of how she will be received.


~~~

A Story part 4

They continue to work like this throughout the growing season. One of the horses gets sick and they have to call in a veterinary doctor named Todd. When Todd arrives he is disappointed as the horse has contracted some really nasty infection that is extremely difficult to cure. He tells Kathy that the chance of recovery is pretty hopeless. She responses by breaking down into tears like a truly helpless little girl. Todd sees that she can't handle the emotional strain and begins to tell her that maybe there's more hope than he had thought. He gives the horse a shot and places a bandage on it's leg.

Todd truly believes that the horse is hopeless and he feels great sorry for Kathy whom he finds himself becoming attracted to.

Todd returns to his office and tells his secretary that Kathy's horse is hopeless and that he merely gave it a tranquilizer to relieve it's pain.

In the meantime, Kathy goes into her Grandmother's room in the farm house and pulls her Book of Shadows off the shelf. She begins to read it intensely looking for something special. Then she goes to a draw on a stand in the living room and pulls open a draw to remove a large dagger.

Maime sees Kathy with the blade and asks, "What are you going to do with your grandmother's athame?"

Kathy simply replies, "I'm going to heal a horse".

Maime grabs a shawl and says, "Well, I'm coming with you!"

They go outside to the barn and bring the sick horse (Keanu) out into the middle of the paddock. The horse lays down on the grass before them. Kathy then pulls out the large dagger and holds it up toward the sky.

Zed watches on from a loft in the barn. At first he thinks that Kathy is going to kill the horse and put it out of it's misery, but then he hears Kathy begin to shout incantations toward the moon.

"Oh Great Goddess of the night,
Please send the power of your light
Cleanse this horse from all its plight
Renew its soul and make it right"

Zed notices that the moonlight has brightened as he looks on with wide-eye curiosity. Even Maime puts her hand up in the air as if to shield her eyes from the bright moonlight. Maime as performed rituals with Kathy's Grandmother, but not like the one she'll witness tonight.

Kathy shouts with passion and love toward the North:

"Oh great spirits of the North
Malkuth, Gaia, and Assiah
Pour out your crystal love
upon this suffering equine"

A white cloud appears in the sky just beneath the moon. Filaments of mist grow from the cloud and appear as the rack of a great white stag. The cloud itself takes on the look of the face of a stag as Maime and Zed watch with disbelief.

Kathy turns to the east and shouts with passion and love:

"Oh great spirits of the East
Hod, Odin, and Yetzirah
Fill this horse with the breath
of your everlasting life"

A wind comes in from the east and Maime has to cling to her shawl to keep it from being blown way. Owls fly in from and swoop down near the sickly horse. Zed is whacked in the face by the barn shutter on the window he is peer out.

Kathy turns to south and shouts the passion and love:

"Oh great spirits of the South
Yesod, Hephaestus, and Atziluth
Ignite your flame of life
rekindle Keanu's spirit"

A great ball of fire soars across the sky like a meteor in the night. A fragment of fiery orange light sparks from meteor and flashing on Keanu's body. The horse lets out a screeching neigh as its body quivers and shakes.

The faces of Maime and Zed are illuminated by the orange fiery light as the watch with speechless open mouths.

Kathy turns to the West and shouts with loving passion:

"Oh great spirits of the West
Netzach, Chesed, and Briah
Fill the heart of this equine beast
with the blood of your loving spirit"

The western sky turns dark blue, and then purple, and finally deep maroon as cloud forms and rain begins to fall on the paddock.

The horse jumps to it's feet and shivers off the water and begins to trot around in a circle.

Kathy turns to the moon once again and shouts with great gratitude.

"Thank you! Mother of all creation!
Thank you for you love!"

Maime turns to Kathy and says, "If your grandmother was here she would tell you that it was your love that healed this horse my dear".

~~~

A Story part 3

When Kathy arrives at the horse farm, she is greeted by an old farm hand named Zed, and the maid name Maime. They have been hanging around taking care of the place until it is sold. Kathy announces that she is going to move in and run the horse farm. They are taken aback and also try to talk her out of it. But after talking with her for a while they see that she is stubbornly determined. Neither of them have any place to go so they offer to stay on with her and help out. They will accept whatever income the farm can generate.

Zed shows Kathy the worthless half-breed horses. They are the laughing stock of the town. Half draft horse, and half race horse. They have the bulk and brute strength of a draft horse, but the wild and restless mentality of a race horse. Zed himself cannot control them well enough to use them to pull the farm equipment.

Kathy has always naturally had a way with her Grandmothers horses and every animal that she has ever encounter. She is able to approach the horses and calm them a bit. Zed is impressed.

But as soon as they hook a horse up to a piece of farm equipment it bolts and breaks the hitch running off through the field dragging the tattered remains of farm implement. It appears to be worthless. But Kathy refuses to give up.

She works with the horses every day and asks Zed if he can beef up the flimsy farm equipment. So he goes about welding on stronger hitches and beefing up the equipment, while Kathy continues to work with the horses using a wagon that they can pull, but refuse to pull slowly.

Finally Zed sets her up with riding plow and she prepares to plow a field. The horses still refuse to go slow but the plow manages to hold up as she races across the field leaving behind her a wake of freshly plowed ground.

Zed runs into the kitchen and tells Maime. Maime looks out the window and see Kathy racing across the field with a trail of dirt flying high into the air behind her. "My gosh that girl just won't take no for an answer", she says.

Zed replies, "At this rate she'll have that whole field plowed by noon!"

~~~

A Story part 2

Tanya, being of age and quite savvy realizes that she can win "custody" of her sister and be eligible to collect assistance for doing so. So she does this with the money in mind.

Tanya is becoming increasingly mentally ill, and increasingly nasty to Kathy. She treats Kathy like a slave. Tanya also becomes a prostitute to pay for her increasing drug addictions. She threatens that Kathy will need to pay her own way via prostitution too just as soon as she becomes of age which is rapidly approaching.

Kathy stays in her little bedroom that is filled with stuff horses that her grandmother had given her. She talks to the stuffed horses like as if they are alive. But of course the horses just sit there like stuffed animals.

Her Grandmother calls her often to check on her. Kathy always tells her that things are going great and that she can't wait to visit with her Grandmother again on her horse farm, but that never comes to pass.

On Kathy's 18th birthday the phone rings and Kathy runs to answer it believing that it will be her grandmother. But instead it's the news that her Grandmother had died.

Kathy is devastated and in emotional shock. Tanya is practically jumping up and down with excitement because they will now inherit the horse farm which Tanya plans on selling immediately for a large wad of cash.

They argue over the fate of the farm, Kathy desperately wants to move from the big city and onto Grandma's horse farm. But Tanya won't hear of it. She argues that they need the money and wouldn't be able to run a horse farm anyway. Kathy is distraught but unable to do much about it.

Tanya takes Kathy and heads out toward a lawyer's office where they must both sign the papers to sell the farm. Kathy sees no way out of this predicament and reluctantly goes along arguing the whole way. As they approach the law office Kathy grabs Tanya's arm in one last attempt to rebel against her plans. Tayna's purse falls to the ground and the contents spill out. A vial of her drugs rolls out onto the street. In mindless reaction she dives out into the street to retrieve the drugs and is hit by bus.

Tanya doesn't die, but instead she is knocked into a coma.

After this ordeal, Kathy is back home in the apartment alone. The lawyer comes to the door with the papers that need to be signed to sell the farm. Kathy sits down at a table with him and almost signs the paper without thinking then she stops and says, "I don't want to sell the farm!"

A social worker who happens to know Kathy also drops in to pay her condolences and show concern for Kathy's welfare. The three of them begin to discuss the fate of Kathy and the farm. They are both trying to explain to her that it would be better for her to just sell the farm and take the cash. But Kathy won't hear of it, and even though she is only just 18 she demands to be allowed to move into the farm.

The Lawyer says, "Well, it is paid in full, so there won't be any mortgage payments". The social worker just shakes her head and says to Kathy, "Honey, it's a lot of work to run a horse farm".

~~~~

A Story

By the way, I've been watching some movies lately and they have inspired me to go back to writing on a screenplay for a movie that I had started some time back called "Hoofed Angels".

It's a movie about a young girl who has a wicked sister. The young girl (Kathy) is a witch, like her grandmother. Her wicked sister (Tanya) is Catholic like their father.

The movie takes place in the 50's. Tayna is mentally ill and become nastier and nastier throughout the movie. Kathy is extremely innocent and naive as well as being just barely underage for the first half of the movie.

Kathy's grandmother raises draft horses. But there's an accident in the beginning of the movie where a tractor trailer truck crashes and overturns, setting lose thoroughbred races horses. The race horses breed with the grandmother's draft horses, thus rending their offspring worthless mix-bread mongrels.

Kathy and Tayna's mother and father are also killed in a car accident on that same nasty highway. Bad highway!

Anyway, I thought I'd post an abstract of it for anyone who might be interested. (in the next several posts)

~~~

Yes, this is the way that I think of it too. There are many stones of sovereignty throughout life. Because they are indeed metaphorical. Therefore they can be associated with many difference facets in life.

Ever since I have studied the Qabalah I've become aware of the 10 consciousnesses of being. And thus I have become aware of many stones of sovereignty associated with each one, and even in combinations of them.

Looking back over my life, I see which stones of sovereignty I've held and at which times. I've spent my entire life in the pillars of logos and ethos, and almost no time at all in the pillar of pathos. I've held the stone of sovereignty of Malkuth, and Yesod, and Hod, and Tiphereth and even Geburah. But I have since allowed those stones to fall from my grasp.

I'm now looking to reestablish my possession of the stone of sovereignty associated with Malkuth and Yesod. And then I can begin a brand new journey to find the stone of sovereignty of Netzach. A stone that I have always wanted to hold but never have.

I think the flames of Atziluth have died from beneath my cauldron of creation.

My thoughts of Briah, Yetzirah, and Assiah, have become mere shadows dancing on the walls of my empty castle in unison with the flickering candlelight of empty dreams.

If only I can make it to the city of Murias where the faeries of affection float fearlessly in the underwater castle of exultation. Then perhaps my life will take on new meaning and my soul will be rejuvenated by the Goddess of Love.

Your loving mercy outshines the brightest star in all the sky, Oh Great One.

It's my understanding that what is considered to be "the way" is not the Tao, but the "Tao Te Ching".

In other words, Lao Tzu wrote a paper called the "Tao Te Ching" which loosely translates into "The way to strength and virtue through scripture"

Within that document Lao Tzu often refers to the "Tao" (which can mean "The Way", or "The Flow", or "The Essence", in fact, it was the nature of these ancient Chinese symbols to be open to a very wide berth of abstract notions. Any translations into English are necessarily going to lose that level of abstraction. These symbols were originally meant to convery more of an 'emotional and intutitive' type of communication rather than a literal sense that we give to Enlish words.

As an example, another symbol that Lao Tzu often used is often translated into English as "Ten Thousands Things". Whilst taken in the strictest mathematical meaning of that symbol this is the precise number that it would represent. However, this was also the highest number that the Chinese knew of at that time. So this symbol also represented informally (All Things) or (Infinitely Many Things) or, (as Many Things as you can Possibly Imagine).

To try to take it too literally to mean precisely 10,000 things would be silly as it's clear by the way that Lao Tzu uses this symbol that he simply means, "All Things".

So, similarly the symbol for the Tao itself, could mean, "The Way", or it can simply mean "The Way Something Behaves" (i.e. it's fundamental essence).

In fact, given the way that Lao Tzu uses the term I would personally take it to mean: That which gives essense to all things.

He writes:


The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao.
The name that can be named is not the eternal name.

The nameless is the beginning of heaven and Earth.
The named is the mother of the ten thousand things (mother of everything)

Ever desireless, one can see the mystery.
Ever desiring, one see the manifestations (the ten thousand things)


So in other words, that which gives essence is the Tao. That which exhibits essence is not the Tao.

Of course this is my own personal interpretation. I'll quickly grant that.

Lao Tzu also writes:

Heaven and Earth last forever.
Why do heaven and Earth last forever?
They are unborn. So ever living.

Lao Tzu assumes that the universe is primordial with no beginning and no end. Keep in mind that back in the days when he wrote this no one knew of any such things as galaxies much less a Big Bang, etc.

So this philosophical view assumes that Earth is everlasting.

He says as much: "Earth lasts forever".

I'm personally not concerned with this trivial observation. For me it is indeed trivial. Just because there exists some sort of temporal dynamics to physical existence of this universe doesn't necessarily need to be translated into a philosophical catastropy.

Lao Tzu also speaks of an eternal Heaven. And he clearly refers to the Tao as being eternal. So there is a timelessness in this philosophy.

I think it would be wonderful to be able to speak with some of these ancient philosophers and she how they might modify, and or change their views in terms of today's knowledge of the universe.

I personally have no problem with a temporal physical world. I believe that the underlying essence (the Tao) is indeed based on pure conciousness (the lifeforce of being) and therefore the material world is just a dream of the Tao. The dream does not need to be eternal. Only the dreamer needs to be eternal.

The Tao is unknowable. That's the whole point to it.

To question the Tao is to miss the point.

It's clearly a faith-based philosophy, just like all philosophies are that are based on an underlying eternal spiritual (or lifeforce) essence.

It's basically saying that the Tao is from whence everything springs. (i.e. Our true essence springs from the Tao as does everything). Moreover we are this true essence. After all, what else could we be in this philosophy?

It also asserts that the Tao is eternal.

Hence, we are eternal because ultimately we are nothing more than the essence of the Tao.

It's a spiritual view of life, IMHO.

The Tao is the "spirit", and to say that we can't know the "Tao" is the same as saying that "Spirit" is beyond comprehension.

It's the same idea as all spiritualities placed in language of the Chinese culture.

This is my interpretation.

That's all I'm offering here. My own interepretation.

I would love to hear how other people interpret the "Tao".

It would be interesting to hear what other views exist.