Uncle Screwtape

How much does it cost to attend a seminar? I imagine costs are considerable: flights, accommodation, venue hire, venue staff, food, security, insurance and goodness knows what other overheads are incurred. His website claims it is a non-profit organisation. Richard

In Opening the Dragon Gate, Wang Liping is described by the authors as having died and come back to life. And when his mother worried about him, she was told that her son was not ill and she was asked: who can become a spiritual immortal without going mad? That's possibly where people get the idea of his immortality from; though as someone pointed out: there are different types of immortality. On the subject of money, there is a difference between covering your considerable costs only and growing rich off your teaching. It's worth looking into before casting aspersions. For my part, I have only read the book; and I learnt a lot from it. All sorts of notes are scribbled in the margins. It's a valuable read for anyone interested in Taoism. Richard

Brilliant!

Incidentally, as far as using the I Ching goes, there is no need to ever use it as a divinatory tool. You can just learn from reading it. Richard

I have never known the I Ching to be innacurate, so I cannot say. A few months ago I got a divination where I leapt upon one thing it said but, knowing what I do now, I can see I had ignored too much else of the divination. I know why I did, too: I made the mistake of looking for what I wanted to see. A lot depends on my mental state at the time of asking. You really need to very, very still. As still as possible. And receptive. I wasn't in the aforementioned divination; I was all over the bloody place, in fact. I choose the yarrow stalk method because it takes much longer and helps place me in a meditative state (the divination I got wrong I raced through with coins). By the time I come to the reading I am listening much more to my instinct than my intellectual processes, and this is something I have taken years over. A good exercise is to do a reading for someone where you only know the question and none of the background. You have to rely on your inner voice totally then (interestingly, I have found these readings to be the most accurate). There is a lot in the I Ching about cultivating the sort of character required to engage fully with the changes. I don't believe it is something you can just dip in and out of. It's a lifelong committment. It's an art you need to refine. I also have a personal feeling that if you ask silly questions you should know the answer to already you get silly answers. That is how it seems to me anyway. Plus, you don't keep asking about the same thing, do you? Because . . . YOUTHFUL FOLLY has success. It is not I who seek the young fool; The young fool seeks me. At the first oracle I inform him. If he asks two or three times, it is importunity. If he importunes, I give him no information. Perseverance furthers. Richard

Here is my preferred online version. The Ta Kuan and, I think, the Shuo Kua are at the bottom of the page, too. http://www.geocities.com/clearlight610/chou_i/chou_i.html

Depends what you mean by 'now'. If it is at the exclusion of the past and future, as if they don't exist, then no, I don't. But if you mean a type of unbounded now that has the past, present and future unfolding as a constant becoming then I try to. Richard

I think any diet works together with other practices, such as chi kung. Richard

I agree with you there as far as historical evidence, but wherever the text came from, it is clearly an exposition on change, on the interconnected and relative nature of things and events. And it very obviously puts us at the helm of fate. But regarding the modern view that Fuxi didn't exist, here is an interesting article that discusses the first few crumbs of archeological evidence in a trail that might, just might, lead to Fuxi. http://www.cybermacro.com/articles21.html And here is an article discussing fragments of archeological evidence that some think point to the Yellow Emperor. http://fuzhou.china.com.cn/english/2004/May/94765.htm Richard

I don't know much about alchemy but I have described it loosely as that n the past, yes. Richard

You can't see my signature? Maybe I have to adjust my settings. Here it is: I Ching Discussion Group (If you think calling me Uncle is weird, you can call me Richard. )

I learnt a lot about Buddhism, too. Thank you. Just goes to show these things can be discussed without petty argument.

I agree with you. At least as far as estimations of the source are concerned. But when it comes to living in the everyday world of relationships, jobs and the rest of it, there are ways and there are ways of negotiating your way through. And I don't see any reason why we can't cope with both at the same time: engaging with its essence but understanding and dealing with its manifestations.

Then I cheerful to be in the wrong on this one.

I take part in debates because I have some continually evolving ideas and I want to submit them to a type of peer review. This helps me get them clear in my mind, it reveals where I am confused and the ideas themselves are either refined or abandoned, as the case may be.

Just to make clear: I wasn't comparing Taosm to Buddhism. I don't know enough about the latter to begin to even if I wanted to. I just felt there were some misconceptions flying around about Taoism and I wanted to clear them up. I like Buddhism, though I think this feeling is rarely reciprocated.

Through my interactions I came to realise that the people I knew had some wildly differing and sometimes decidedly odd opinions of me. I would rail at this and my friends would laugh when I told them how others who claimed to know me had described me. But it dawned on me that 'I' am like an empty space that is defined by the walls around it. None of my friends are right but none of them are wrong, either. To one person I am this, to another I am that. It depends who I am with, where I am and what the context is. Am I with friends or colleages? Am I working or at rest? Am I in my own environment or in a strange one? It isn't just that I am different each time but that the person perceiving me is different too. This has really helped me to understand my interactions and to get on better in different situations with varying people. It has relaxed me a great deal, too. I am not sure now if that answers your question. But it answers a question.

I personally think it is exactly the opposite. Immortalism requires, as far as I understand it and I am willing to be corrected, an acceptance of the impermanent nature of reality and interdependence in that it is change which has to be harnessed and the illusiory nature of a separate self. It does look like there is a lot of grasping and denial going on, but I have never read about someone who is said to be a Taoist immortal, or spoken to someone who is on the path of the immortal, who was did not work witht that and merge at all levels, as you put it. So I don't see the same difference you do here. I am assuming no such thing. In fact, I said that Taoism is a co-creative system. Wuji is the void of latent, infinite potential. It requires actualisation. That is what we do. The creative requires the receptive to complete it, to make it manifest. There can be no single bike. What I said about the Three Realms addresses that.

I am very aware of how Buddhism has influenced Taoism and I think it's great. But what I described is very, very, very old Taoism. In fact, it is arguably among the very foundations upon which what we came to know as Taoism emerged. At least in this case, any similarity with Buddhism is coincidental.

I do agree. Integration is the key. I actually believe that the skilfull use of words is a very highly refined Taoist art. Good Taoist writing and art uses the subtle suggestion of mystery in a truly masterful way. Every stroke of an artist's or calligrapher's brush forms a frame for silence and stillness. Take a look at a classical Chinese painting and you'll see mountain ranges and landscapes and rivers emerging from nothingness always giving the suggestion of impermanence. I think texts like the TTC and the I Ching achieve similar feats: the integration of form and formlessness.

Independent of what? Of us? Taoism is a co-creative system as far as I am aware and we as humans are of Tao but play a role in its processes. Think of the Five Phases. Each phase or 'element', interacts with every other according to its nature and this interaction sets a direction of change. Ultimately, there is no one thing that is independent of any other. But we have to be careful here. We mustn't confuse ourselves by applying principles of one of the three realms to the reality of another. It's like when someone says that free will is an illusion because we live a deterministic existence. That refers only to the lower three realms of people, events and things whereas our inate creative freedom belongs to the upper three realms of space, time and the universe. There are many subtle levels within Taoist thought and the idea of oneness should not be mistaken as a denial of the individual self. I know it seems paradoxical but it really isn't. Usually, at least as far as Taoism is concerned, what is called a paradox is just a knot in our understanding that has yet to be untied.

I know how it can seem, but mostly, concepts and words are just tools we use on the path of cultivation. I can't speak for everyone, of course, but it is something I have found to be generally true.

It may be a problem for you, but not for me, nor for others I know. Not least of all because it is not to me 'vague poetry' but perfectly clear. But how do I know where to go? That's the point. Ultimately, there is nowhere to go. I say 'ultimately' because there is a lot to do before then for me. I am more than happy to follow sign posts for now.

I will say this just one more time: it is given a name for the benefit of discussion. In the experience (and I use the word 'experience' because I am forced to use words on the Internet) there is no naming, no thinking, no . . . nothing. There is no reification or clinging or attachment, not even a subtle one. That's the point. (I apologise for all the emphasis but it seems to be needed.)