innerspace_cadet

Am I happy? I would say that happiness is found in multiple degrees. I wouldn't say that I have the depth of happiness that a Hindu ascetic, Saint Francis of Assisi, or the Dalai Lama has found. But recently I've come to the realization that there isn't anything in my life that I can complain about. So I would define my happiness as contentment.

Stimuli making contact with conscious awareness. Mountains do not feel the wind, let alone "experience" it because they are inanimate objects. So I would say life is the source of experience.

I second that, it is a good article. So much of the New Age movement's ideas seem well intentioned, but have cruel consequences. If someone breaks into my house and ties me up and tortures me for hours on end, does that mean I "attracted" that into my life as per the Law of Attraction? People don't become rich by sending "positive vibrations" out into the universe, because the universe isn't an ATM machine that will just grant your desires. Rich people got that way by living below their means, investing their savings in businesses or other assets and working hard.

Thanks everyone for the replies; I just requested a copy of "Healing with Whole Foods" from the library.

I remember an interview a journalist had with the Dalai Lama. He asked him what the key to health was, and the Dalai Lama simply answered "routine". If you can develop healthy habits, that's half the battle. I think the key is not to live to 135, but if you can live to be 90 and are independent for most of those years, then that's a good thing. We are creatures of habit, and bad habits will do us in if we let them.

LOL

In a lot of the Eastern systems, philosophies, etc. that I've studied, practicing morality of some kind or another is considered the foundation for progressing on to meditation. In Buddhism there are the five moral precepts, in yoga it is the yamas and niyamas. But what if you are already say, a drug addict, who is violating the 5th precept of Buddhism not to take intoxicants? You can't just tell him or her to walk away from the drug to adhere to a set of moral practices cold turkey. That is what I never understood: what if you already are addicted to something that would cause you to violate the moral foundation of these systems? You wouldn't be able to meditate until you had a handle on the addictive behavior that is causing you to break these precepts. How long do you have to practice the ethical basis of say, yoga, before you can advance to the meditative aspects of it? Is it different for different people?

In a lot of the Eastern systems, philosophies, etc. that I've studied, practicing morality of some kind or another is considered the foundation for progressing on to meditation. In Buddhism there are the five moral precepts, in yoga it is the yamas and niyamas. But what if you are already say, a drug addict, who is violating the 5th precept of Buddhism not to take intoxicants? You can't just tell him or her to walk away from the drug to adhere to a set of moral practices cold turkey. That is what I never understood: what if you already are addicted to something that would cause you to violate the moral foundation of these systems? You wouldn't be able to meditate until you had a handle on the addictive behavior that is causing you to break these precepts. How long do you have to practice the ethical basis of say, yoga, before you can advance to the meditative aspects of it? Is it different for different people?

I once read Georg Feuerstein's "The Deeper Dimension of Yoga" and in it was a paragraph that intrigued me to no end. He said--I'm paraphrasing--the average American would be undone if he lost his job, and had his wife leave him and his best friends turn their backs on him, but to an advanced yogi, these catastrophic events would barely cause a ripple in his mind. I decided then and there that equanimity would be my quest. I'm writing this as a person who gets upset if someone so much as looks at me the wrong way, or thinks that someone doesn't like me. I don't have a game plan yet. Plan A is to practice Buddhism. Plan B is to practice Taoism. Plan C is to practice both. I haven't decided on which of the three to go with.

I feel partly responsible for the way this thread has progressed; after all, I posted the first reply to the original post. Though I feel very strongly about Communism, I could have been less strident about what I said. I didn't anticipate that the thread would get so acrimonious.

No, you aren't the only one. It is never unreasonable to be skeptical or critical of teachers/systems; it is the sign of a healthy mind. Healthy skepticism could someday help you avoid a sticky situation, such as joining a cult that requires you to fork over your money and your autonomy. (Tom Cruise didn't join Scientology because he was being too skeptical; it was because he wasn't being skeptical enough.) If you want to learn about the evidence for say, meditation's beneficial properties, there are scientific studies done covering just that. Studies have also been done on Tai chi, qigong, etc.

I honestly can't think of a communist-run country that didn't repress or at least severely restrict religious freedoms at some point in its history. China has recently relaxed its grip on religion, but that's not saying much, considering it was trying for the longest time to squeeze the life out of it. Inequalities or disparities in wealth, power or influence have existed in every society, but communism is a horrible way to tackle that problem. It aims to create an essentially classless society, which is virtually impossible. Everyone is not equally gifted, talented or hard working, and no amount of wealth redistribution or collective ownership will change that. It flies in the face of human nature. You can see it with utopian communes in America; once the community grows to a certain size, collective ownership becomes untenable.

I think it is heartbreaking that the monk had to violate his own precepts against nonviolence to stop the Communist wolves from destroying his country. It is also interesting that he sensed that there was an evil lurking behind the smiles of the Chinese communists. I think what he sensed was a dangerous and fanatical attachment to a utopian ideology that promised heaven on earth, which in reality gave the Tibetans nothing but hell on earth. If you want to really know the hell that is communism, I suggest you read the "Black Book of Communism" which was written by former communists.

Sam Harris makes a lot of good points against religious dogmatism, but he sets up a lot of straw man arguments. He seems to make atheist "reason" the only alternative against "religion" but he doesn't recognize that religions do change over time; he makes "religion" out to be this fundamentalist boogeyman that is stuck in the iron age. Yes, the literal interpretation of these Biblical texts can lead to barbarism, but not everyone reads these texts in that way. Any passage of scripture can be "spiritualized" to use his term. The 800 pound elephant in Sam Harris' argument is the fact that religion is not going to go away; human societies have had religion for at least 40,000 years, so why does he assume that reason is going to do away with the human propensity for religion any time soon? What he objects to primarily is fundamentalism, which is not a product of the iron age, but an overreaction to the modern world. He makes a good point that morality is inherent in the human mind, as a result of evolution. But so is the propensity to impose patterns on random events and ascribe some mystical or divine agency behind them. Humans may be moral animals, but they are also religious animals.

Recently I've really gotten into frugality. What does this have to do with spirituality, you might ask? Well, it isn't spiritual to spend money on things you don't need, or to have nothing saved for retirement when you are 70 years old and can't--or don't want to--work anymore. On my 33 birthday back in February, the realization that I will be 43 before I know it hit me really hard...it was sort of a wake up call. So...I've recently come across the idea of a "spending fast" where you don't spend any money on anything except absolute necessities. Starting tomorrow, I will embark on a 100 day span where anything non-essential is cut out. Hopefully this ordeal will help me reconsider what I really need vs. what I merely want, and help me reorder my priorities in life. I downloaded a 100-day gong sheet, but set a rule that if I slip up even one day, I start the whole thing over again. So wish me luck.

Thanks for the encouragement. Yes, I will try again, maybe push it for a whole day. My spending patterns weren't built in a day, so to speak, so it will take longer for me to undermine them.

I held out until 5:00 p.m. today, then bought a soda and some junk food. I think kaizen is the way for me to go instead.

I agree with Findley that the cultivation of exotic abilities can be a distraction. IMO, it can also become a trap for your ego. What drew me to Buddhism was a very simple statement from the happy fat man himself: "I teach dukkha, and the end of dukkha, that is all." My favorite images of the Buddha are those Chinese versions of a fat dude with an enormous smile on his face. That's what the spiritual path is about for me--bliss and joy. Spiritual practice need not be complicated or even esoteric. Sure, I could learn how to burn ants with my chi, but if I am still stuck in harmful attachments and patterns, what good is it? But then again, I'm pretty much a lone wolf; the only "guru" I have is my Tai Chi teacher, and she doesn't charge hefty fees for her services, and her "system" is tried and true.

After getting the okay from my doctor, I have decided to go on a three day fast this coming weekend. Friday won't be too difficult as I work only 4 hours every Friday and I'm off Saturday and Sunday. I'm not doing this to lose weight or punish myself, but I want to see if I can re-evaluate my relationship with food and drink, and hopefully normalize my blood pressure (it is usually in the 150/80 range). As this will be my first ever fast, I am debating whether to do a strict water-only fast or a simple juice fast. What do you guys think? I've got a lot of juice stocked up in my fridge, but I'm tempted to do a water only fast.

Thanks for the info and feedback. I think instead I will do ADF (alternate day fasting) because doing a straight 3 day fast will wipe me out too much. After all, I still have to work next week.

Many religions teach the importance of not being attached to worldly things, not only Taoism and Buddhism but also Jainism, Hinduism and Christianity. I think non-attachment is a universal truth, but that doesn't make it any easier to practice, let alone fully realize. That is why the Buddha said that the greatest warrior conquers himself. To answer your second question, I try not to "think" about rebirth and karma any more than what I "think" will happen in the next moment. What happens-or doesn't happen-after death will be as it is, regardless of my beliefs about it.

True, I didn't think about it that way.

I used to frequent the e-sangha forums before it crashed. They would always advise me to put my doubts about rebirth "aside" and just practice. But it always remained the elephant in the room, and there is simply no point in practicing Buddhism unless you are willing to at least entertain the notion that you will come back as something else in a future life, and your intentional actions have something to do with it. This is because Buddhism is intended to help people break this cycle. The whole scheme implies that life is something to be transcended, which really ends up devaluing life. And the idea that someone was born into poverty because of past life actions is really just a result of the all too human tendency to superimpose a pattern on reality where there is none. It might be nice to think that Hitler was reborn in the hell realms for what he did, but I suspect there really is no cosmic justice whatsoever. You don't need to be a Buddhist to attain some inner serenity, which is what all these Buddhist "seekers" are after anyway.

Last night I decided that I wasn't going to spend 6 or 7 dollars today on diet soda, I was only going to spend what I needed on things. I wanted to live frugally and simply. So I drank just one diet soda by 10 a.m. But I did not bring any lunch with me to work, so I went out to get some things at the gas station to eat, which not surprisingly included a sandwich, doritos, and a diet soda. Which thereafter led to another diet soda, and another. Do you guys have any advice for me about conquering these bad spending habits? I don't spend my money on much besides books, beer and diet soda. Diet soda has been a persistent addiction for me, and its burning a hole in my wallet. Are there any Taoist practices that would help me let go of this pattern? This is important for me, because I want to save money and invest it.

My IQ was tested in college and it was in the 131-141 range. But even though my IQ did not change, I went from being agnostic and atheist to believing in a higher power again. My concept of "God" is very different, however, from the average American's. So being an atheist or a believer in God is not directly proportional to intelligence. The one thing that struck me about this study is that smarter people are nocturnal; and I can relate to this, because I can stay up until 2 or 3 in the morning, but no matter how early I go to bed at night, I'm still mentally foggy in the morning.