Taomeow

I'll give you an earful of MHO but first I want to give Creation a chance to share what he thinks I'm referring to... Let me guess... It's not the color of his shirt you think I had in mind, is it?

What people say "about" him is always filtered through the prism of who they are... There's this episode in the interview where he describes an average student who comes to a master with "Mommy! Mommy!!" as his unconscious expectations... This student will be disappointed by a teacher who won't be that. There's enough "masters" catering to this frustrated infantile quest, Bruce is not one of them, he's going to give real stuff, not serve as a receptacle for projected needs... many people will be uncomfortable with this I'm sure. He is absolutely not "heartless," he just has a better idea than most what "heart" really is and won't fake it to cater to immature hearts' desires... I'm finding (not just from the interview -- I'm familiar with his books from way back when) that I'm in agreement with much and in disagreement on one crucial point with him, but "ego" or "heartless" or some such ain't where it's at. I don't stand to lose anything from his refusal to "play house" with a student. I'd stand to lose a lot if he taught BS like many who don't refuse to play this coveted game do in order to compensate for the fact that they teach BS or for whatever other reason. His practice is good, though its simplicity is illusory -- it is a very difficult meditation requiring discipline and courage. Assessing his value without doing it is pointless. The value is in what's in it for you, not in what he is or isn't like vis a vis your expectations. (I mean a generic "you," not anyone personally.)

Groundmister, a juke is a juke, and finny is nover (how's that for nowhere+never?) as ensilting as dadpen. Ricism is nover finny, but finny is occysionilly orrivyrint.

Thank you for your thoughts, Mal. I think you're more of a taoist than most, if I use this "name" as a compliment rather than a label. You are more taoist in the sense of naturally resonating with the taoist "general, inexact" attitudes. Soft, flexible, yielding out of strength rather than weakness... what they call "a steel needle wrapped in cotton" in taiji. With this kind of attitude, any discussion can be fruitful and reveal something to both parties that they may have overlooked... cultivation can take place and growth can sprout out of any soil, including the "negative" "what it is not" soil of a non-taoist text. Incidentally, this is the taoist texts' favorite method to describe what can't be defined -- through what it is NOT, rather than what it "is." Laozi himself starts out with a bunch of negatives (the tao can't, the name isn't, etc.) and proceeds in the same vein (she doesn't compete, I am not clear, etc.). This is a reputable (and traditional) roundabout way to let what it "is" emerge the way a statue emerges from under the sculptor's hammer and chisel that keep removing what it is "not." You don't have to name the statue. Once you've removed everything it is "not," what remains is what it "is." Talking of tao is like that... So, it's usually easy for me to spot what it is "not" in a text -- that's what a love affair with taoist basics (more than any training) can do to an empiricist who has come to believe that taoism is "not" about the same thing buddhism is "about." It's not the names, terms, labels at all. It's the... um, I'd say attitude to life. To a taoist and to a buddhist, they are not different in details and terms, they are different fundamentally, at the level of their core values. This is my problem with mixing the two together. There's different kinds of "unclear" and "imprecise." "Unclear" in the sense "you have to do it to get it, it can't be explained with words" and "unclear" in the sense "obscured on purpose." "Imprecise" in the sense "fuzzy-logical" and "imprecise" in the sense of "anything-goes-ness," sorry for not finding a more precise word that exists. So, a text that mixes buddhism and taoism in the second sense of "unclear" and "imprecise" is not my cup of tea, but someone else might savor it... it all depends on what one is after. I'm after things taoist that haven't been "improved on" by buddhism, christianity or Western occult wherever I can find them. And within this kind of "precision," there's also much room for "imprecision" -- some things you can't really tell apart, key word "some." BKF believes, e.g., that Tibetan buddhism is an offshot of taoism, and whatever parallels and similarities one finds (many) are the outcome of this rather than of "buddhist influences on taoism." Or take reincarnation -- it's a pretty universal shamanic proto-taoist concept, so one can't really tell for sure that it's "buddhist influences" when some taoist sects (or some individual taoists) accept it. Yet there's things very distinct that are neither compatible nor intermixable too... The historic squeeze on taoism has been tremendous, it survived due to its "vitality, energy, spirit" but much was done to eliminate it, just like most shamanism has been eliminated... Buddhism was one of the tools applied in a major way. So when I'm looking at a text that squeezes out taoism to squeeze in buddhism, this looks soooo familiar... and more than clear. Me no like...

If somebody called you a figgot, nugger, kake, spek or chonk, I bet you wouldn't be as angry. Happy vowel appreciation month.

Yes. Oddly, it reminded me of a novel by Iris Murdoch I read a long time ago. Its main protagonist gets attacked, injured, and suffers brain damage, which proves to be reversible. At first he doesn't remember anything -- who he is, what's his life all about -- total amnesia. But gradually it all starts coming back to him, till the picture is complete... or at least it seems complete to everybody, but the guy is tortured by a nagging feeling that he's still forgetting something... something very important, something crucial. He finds it agonizing to feel this way but he can't put a finger on what it is he forgot. Many pages later, he's put in a situation that provides a breakthrough. He forgot his god. He forgot his religion. He was a buddhist before the blow to the head, and that's what slipped his memory. Everything that mattered to him spiritually, no less -- that's what he forgot. So, with this source, we're dealing with a similar but opposite problem methinks. I was reading it with the same nagging feeling -- something is forgotten -- till I came across these "energy rays" instead of "qi." What's forgotten is taoism... Everything else is mighty fine with everything else therein. No taoism, no big deal...

So what's the meaning of substituting "subtle energy rays" and "universal energy rays" (Western occult terms, introduced by Alice Bailey purportedly channeling "Rakorski") in a context where any taoist text would say "qi?.."

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=d63jKihoYRg[/media ]

Another thought about ideologies... I know a couple that are too big for anyone to make a cosy home there, too wild to tame into pets and take for a walk on a leash... But with most, trying to fit in (at least for me) has been not unlike this cat's endeavor: [media] [/media]

There's taoist cultivation routines that aim at easy competence in all aspects of everyday life, good health, and longevity, nothing more ambitious or ideologically charged than that. (One of my teachers is a cultivator of this nature, and he excels at reaching exactly these goals so far -- always contented and joyous, never sick, and I think he can realistically aim to reach an exceptionally ripe old age in this state.) If, however, these goals are cranked up a notch to the level of the "three treasures" of Perfection, Nondecay, Immortality... well, this may entail some ideological framework. If you want Perfection rather than mere competence, you need to figure out what that is. If you want Nondecay rather than just good health, you need to have a working model of what that entails (indestructible unchanging what exactly?..), and if you want Immortality rather than just longevity, you have to contemplate the phenomenon and decide what's in it for you or anybody else... So, I'd say ideologies kick in when goals become lofty. There's plenty of room for cultivation without such goals, but once someone is after whatever outside ren, one's natural uncomplicated humanity... that's when one has to really watch out. Another thing to watch out for -- and that's the trickiest of them all -- practices with built-in ideology, even when nothing is verbalized about a particular ideology. A simple example would be, um, going to the gym, weight lifting, working the machines... This practice is as ideology-laden as it gets!! It's a default ideology that's built in, and it is based on certain ideals which are taken for granted... but are well worth examining and getting to the bottom of. A not-so-simple example -- upward vs. downward flow practices. They have built-in ideologies too, and someone who doesn't know it may develop the ideology through the practice rather than the other way around. An upward flow always stimulates the very process of hooking onto (or creating) ideologies because the gong is aimed upward at the brain -- what it will do there is stimulate what brains do. Ideologies are what brains do. Whatever organ gets the cultivation energy, gong, will be the one whose output of its proprietary product will be emphasized pretty much on autopilot. So this can definitely be worked with -- if one wants "more" ideology or "less," the practice has to be chosen consciously toward this goal... otherwise surprises (not always nice ones) are guaranteed.

As opposed to coincidence fact... Take any two suspicious facts, there's never any connection between them, only coincidences. Take any two billion suspicious facts, same deal. No one ever talks to anyone else to arrange for to make things happen, they always just happen. No one ever hides anything, everything that happens is always out in the open, especially when we are ruled -- why, there's total and absolute transparency, the rulers never have anything to hide! They are the rulers, how can they have anything but your best interest as their goal?.. ...and here's how the world is really ruled: Fact (makers of the fact are here) . . Lie (they tell)..................................................................Truth (they know) . . lie1.......(you are here)...........lie2 . . lie1a......lie2a....(you are here)....lie1b......lie2b . . lie1a(a).............lie1b ..........lie2a(a).....(you are here).......lie2a and so on, from the top of the pyramid to the ever-widening base. They never position you between the Lie and the Truth. They offer only the Lie to the public, and if anyone gets suspicious, why they can dig deeper -- Lie is conveniently split for them into Lie#1 and Lie#2, make your free choice! They position you in between these, to argue ad nauseam. And if you break away from both, realizing that both lies are lies, you are offered what -- the truth? -- no, the truth is set aside for the makers of the fact, remember? -- you are offered a further fragmentation of one of the lies you have chosen into more alternative lies to choose from. Ad infinitum. So if you say "there's no conspiracies," you've merely chosen the basic Lie1a©, is all. If you say "Icke tells nothing but the truth, " that's your Lie76(33)(f). And so on. The world is arranged just so -- and you better remember it and you better believe it -- that if you are not the maker of the fact with irrefutable and detailed proof of having made a free choice instead of having been zapped into doing or not doing stuff -- you can be 100% sure you are nowhere near the truth no matter what you believe or disbelieve. Not in the same universe with it.

Ask a cat if she would spend her life sleeping 22 hours while having her every whim catered to in the remaining 2. I would take the second potion, have my every whim catered to in the 2 waking hours, and spend the remaining 22 mastering all the ancient arts of dreaming in the world to absolute perfection. This would take me to realms and adventures beyond imagination, to cultivation practices of the highest order, to the Dark Mother, to all the timelines I meant to visit but just couldn't find the time, the multiverse is my oyster. Where's that wizard? Why is he wasting his time peddling his goods to the wrong market?

There once was a master in East Midland UK whom writing a haiku no mortal could sway. When he wrote, spoke, or sang, when he whistled or snored, the five-seven-five rule he always ignored, that entrenched haikuphobe in East Midland UK.

Here's a gift for you! You will be a great poet gifted in haiku.

Yeah, I'm seeing them here in the vicinity of a major naval base and I've never seen them elsewhere. So I definitely can't be sure they're of the off-planet origin. Could be a co-creation though.

A UFO means an "unidentified flying object." You believe you can identify every single flying object? Well, I saw ones I couldn't identify on three separate occasions, not counting the ones that were not identifiable to me but otherwise either unremarkable, or not seen clearly enough to begin with. Of the ones I couldn't identify that I consider remarkable and saw clearly, one appeared over my head without getting there -- just appeared -- stayed immobile for a while, shining in the sun, and then disappeared, also without leaving -- just disappeared. I couldn't identify it. Can you? A formation of another five, three days ago, flew slowly one after the other, very close, very bright, going higher and higher, at 5:55 pm, against the dark sky, toward the bright moon. I was staring at them for several minutes. I couldn't identify them. I contacted a friend about Chinese flying lanterns and he sent me a video of this festival in Taiwan, with hundreds if not thousands of these being launched. Beautiful. But not the same. The third one (chronologically between the ones I've described) I could identify but it made no sense. If I tell you what it was I'll lose all credibility. But it was. Here's something I don't believe in. I don't believe we "create our reality" pop pep talk style. I believe we co-create our reality with people, forces and circumstances both within and beyond our countrol if we're realistically equipped, and create our delusions if we're defensively equipped. What I don't believe in is "positive thinking creating great lives, negative thinking creating lives that suck." I think to convince oneself that this is so one has to start out by ignoring the existence of a few billion small children -- who are not yet capable of creating reality, only accepting it when what adults give them is acceptable, or not accepting it and dying. I am not capable of holding a belief that presupposes their nonexistence. I've seen them. They do exist, I believe.

Worrying and perceiving are not the same. But maybe you could explain to me why some people, who understandably don't want to perceive anything that they feel might worry them if they did, react to accounts of such perceptions as some kind of affront or wrongdoing or blunder of judgement on the part of the perceiving party. Perceptions are perceptions. If I say "I saw it," I'm not saying "I worry," I'm not saying "I don't have anything better to do." Yet that's what you heard. Why?..

On December 22, I saw five UFOs in formation, up close, picture perfect except my phone suddenly lost power and refused to take a picture. Unless they were Chinese flying lanterns, which I have to stretch my imagination very thin to believe they were, we may not be quite out of the woods yet.

It wasn't violence. It was reality taking its toll on rationality.

[media] [/media]

This is not about being proud of having had a hard life. This is about having preserved and even improved on your humanity in the midst of a hard life, something that is the ultimate human accomplishment. The one and only thing to be proud of. The only one.

Reminded me of the first apartment we had in New York. The neighbor upstairs worked some semi-night shifts, came home at 3 a.m., every night, and immediately turned on his TV, full throttle, our ceiling was shaking from the sonic blast. This, till 7 a.m., when he apparently went to sleep. We never saw him, he was a ghost, a mighty loud one. My husband hardly spoke any English at the time, so he didn't even know how to say anything to the neighbor, or anyone else for that matter -- whenever the phone rang in our apartment, he would run... away from it as far as possible, screaming "take it, take it!" -- for fear he would make an ass of himself by not understanding whatever the calling party had to say. So, he asked me if I would be up to us going to the neighbor at 3 a.m. and me doing all the talking. I said I would try. "But don't you lose your temper, who knows who he is and what he's up to every night, a criminal, a drug dealer, a murderer... Be careful, talk to him very nicely, OK?" OK. I'll try. We rehearsed what I would say. All the nice things, with an apologetic smile, with humble explanations of our predicament. With pretty please and sugar on top. So, OK, 3 a.m. came, the TV got turned on, we were ready. We went upstairs, knocked on the neighbor's door. Knocked, rang, knocked, rang, then finally he heard the door and opened it. I smiled sweetly and opened my mouth to start delivering my speech. My husband pushed me aside, grabbed the guy by the hair on his bare chest, pulled him so close their noses almost touched, and yelled in his face in immaculate New York English, "I'm gonna fuckin' kill you!!!" Turned around, stomped downstairs, I followed, he waited for me to get in and slammed our door shut with a bang that almost brought the building down. No more TV, ever.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZSDyIMO5II

It's worth contemplating... There's some strange power in acting out of character, in opposition to your own regular flow, the image I have is the eye of the storm -- whatever rages around, the inner stillness is intact... don't know why this image, and then another one -- from Journey To The West, where Quan Yin, the Goddess of Mercy, who carries a vase of compassionate blessings (and is usually depicted holding it) observes from above a fight between Monkey and her own buddies, and seeing that Monkey is winning, hurls this vase at his head, knocking him out cold.

The only master whom I consider a bit of a con, of the ones I've met, is medium-priced. Not a rip off, not free, just average. I had better ones for more and for nothing too. Shamans got paid for shamanic work, you know. They did no other work, so if a tribe wanted to have a shaman, no one demanded free services. The catch, of course, was that you paid what you could or what you wanted, no set charges. I still think it's the right way to go about it. But then there's so many clients who would rip off a master who'd set it up like that today... being ignorant and a master of nothing is no guarantee of being honest, you know.