What do you think about Taoism.

Near 2 month i read alot about lao tzu taoism, i love the ideals about the philosophy of Tao. What do you think about it.
( I want to write more but my english really bad so i just write it short.

Yes, it helped me a lot to come to terms with things.

Though nowadays I don't particularly remember the things which I read, those which were useful probably became part of me.

But I don't follow any particular teachings nowadays.

Yes, it helped me a lot to come to terms with things.

Though nowadays I don't particularly remember the things which I read, those which were useful probably became part of me.

But I don't follow any particular teachings nowadays.

 That is the best thing about Taoism, you chose your way. Your tao(dao.

Yes, it helped me a lot to come to terms with things.

Though nowadays I don't particularly remember the things which I read, those which were useful probably became part of me.

But I don't follow any particular teachings nowadays.

Have you ever think that pure self maybe dao is what we are in nde

I did some reading about Taoism a while ago, but got put off because it seemed to be a very passive philosophy, accepting without complaint whatever the world had to offer. I prefer Herman Melville's "If man will strike, strike through the mask!"

I did some reading about Taoism a while ago, but got put off because it seemed to be a very passive philosophy, accepting without complaint whatever the world had to offer. I prefer Herman Melville's "If man will strike, strike through the mask!"

This appears to be what Rupert Spira is endorsing in his the thread (video) I put up recently. (Just Say Yes) 
It might interest you to watch it?

Have you ever think that pure self maybe dao is what we are in nde

I did some reading about Taoism a while ago, but got put off because it seemed to be a very passive philosophy, accepting without complaint whatever the world had to offer. I prefer Herman Melville's "If man will strike, strike through the mask!"

Perhaps these ideas lead in the same direction.

During an NDE a person may watch what is going on, for example doctors carrying out some procedure to some body. They may observe it with disinterest, at first not recognising that it is their own body, and then afterwards being unconcerned about their actions.

I have some memory of something I read, many years ago now, I think about a Buddhist way of being, and one part which I puzzled over as well as objecting to was the idea that one should be a spectator in life.

Having had many years to mull over this idea, I don't think it is easy to understand if we consider the concept of a spectator in the everyday sense, for example watching a sporting event, rather than being one of the actual participants. In that sense it represents not just a passivity, but also an inability - as a spectator we cannot change the events which occur in front of us - a source of frustration at times.

But now I tend to see it as a multi-level thing, at one level we may indeed be one of the players out there on the sports field, getting deeply involved in the action. But simultaneously we are also a passive spectator of what we are doing, what is occurring. The two are not separate.

Though I realise this may or may not accord with specific teachings, it is my own expression of things.

This appears to be what Rupert Spira is endorsing in his the thread (video) I put up recently. (Just Say Yes) 
It might interest you to watch it?

Thanks, but it's a bit long, and he speaks incredibly slowly, even on double speed.

I don't know. I don't think accepting everything and thinking you can't make any difference - either for yourself or for others - is a very helpful, or even a very admirable philosophy. Even less so, if the motivation is happiness for yourself.

Certainly I think it's helpful to accept that you can't make a difference in some areas, and not to fret too much about politics, for example. But I think if we adopt a general principle of passivity there's a danger we'll just become lotus-eaters.

Thanks, but it's a bit long, and he speaks incredibly slowly, even on double speed.

I don't know. I don't think accepting everything and thinking you can't make any difference - either for yourself or for others - is a very helpful, or even a very admirable philiosophy. Even less so, if the motivation is happiness for yourself.

Certainly I think it's helpful to accept that you can't make a difference in some areas, and not to fret too much about politics, for example. But I think if we adopt a general principle of passivity there's a danger we'll just become lotus-eaters.

Yes, you have to have a lot of spare time to watch videos like this, as well as talking slowly, there are often very long gaps when he says nothing.

I don’t know if I agree about the motivation. Surely if everyone could achieve this state it wouldn’t be a bad thing, but it would mean a big change of worldview for most people to do so. I think there are lots of examples that I can think of where achieving this would harm no one, and benefit individuals greatly.I take the bits I like, discard the bits I don’t.

Yes, lotus-eaters - boooring! Is there evidence of a sense of humour in Taoist writings, as there is in NDEs? No one wants a boring life.

As a spiritual personalist I have a problem with any philosophy that advocates becoming one with god, dao, brahman or source etc. I strongly oppose all such philosophies.

Nevertheless, I agree with some beliefs of Taoism. I believe that conciousness in its highest state is formless and I don't believe in any anthropomorphic gods.