dwai

Check your stance...perhaps you are putting too much strain on your knee. A good rule of thumb is to commit physically to about 70% of your capability. I read this in BKF's books and I found that they are very true. Gradually, as practice deepens, your 100% keeps expanding...so your 100% today will become your 70% at one point (and so on). I've had problems with my left knee and i put it down to two things: 1) going too low/deep in my stances (partially as a machismo thing) 2) not releasing into the ground (so the stress instead of grounding, stays localized in the joints). Hope you feel better soon. dwai

My intention was to emphasize that the Natural World is part of the Tao and the Tao is the superset or pre-eminent existence of which the natural world is a miniscule part. Again, by Natural world I mean that world that can be accessed by sensory inputs. Happy Trails to you as well...I have realized that these discussions are infact detrimental to progress...so adieu

do the bridge (Setubadha Sarvangasana) and during the pose relax your breathing, release tension in the neck and jaw. When you do the bridge, you'll find yourself straining in all three areas. Simply relax and breath slow and easy....close your eyes and stay there for a few minutes. You'll find that if you relax and you can hold the pose longer... also as scotty said - smile and belly breathing (albeit too much belly breathing can permanently distend your abdomen, as I found out).

If a rock falls and kills a man, it is no one's intent (provided there wasn't another person who dropped the rock). It just happened. Stuff just happens...they are called accidents ...or do they? ;P There is a way in which the natural world operates...and one way to minimize suffering is to harmonize with that way. There is also a state that transcends the way the natural world operates...and to access that and activate pure prajna is also another way to minimize suffering. But there is not much difference between transcending the way of the natural world and harmonizing oneself with it. The latter is a subset of the former...it is also a way to access the former. my 2 cents worth...

Suffering happens because all the things that give us "pleasure" are transient and impermanent. Our relations (are subject to time, opinions, circumstances), our material comforts, our psychological and emotional comforts, etc. Human beings tend to seek happiness and pleasure and shirk away from pain and discomfort. Why human beings, all living creatures do that. So, when we are faced with the impermanence of those things that we think give us pleasure, we are depressed, sad, angry, envious (all the negative emotions). The key to removing suffering is to realize that these things (that we suffer for) are impermanent and transient. We have to learn to take things at face value, for what they are...not what our categorical framework(s) ascribe as being their value (usually amplified). The other is to realize that there is a state in which none of this matters...the state of the absolute, eternal Self...of non-duality. The restlessness that we all feel (at some stage in our life), the thirst for succor (sometimes of the spiritual kind), jumping from one thing to another is all symptomatic of a deep-rooted, suppressed, almost forgotten grain of truth embedded in our systems...to rediscover the "real" Self. Identification is the identification with those things that are not really about who we are really...all those transient material things...our home, car, relations, etc. This identification is a mis-identification. The real Identity is what remains after all these Non-Self things are stripped away and put aside. Thought I'd share this article I'd written last year on the topic of "non-suffering" (or Happiness) -- Looking for Happiness -- Where can I find it?

Hi, Any opinions, suggestions on the Daoyin practices as explained in the Scholar Warrior? The description seems to deal with "forcing" flow instead of allowing flow to happen (Fire vs Water)? Anyone experienced with this system?

That is logically feeble. Ignorance is a property of A Self. You cannot call a Chair ignorant or a table ignorant.

That is what is Samsara my friend...a cycle of birth and re-birth. But that is at the Lower Reality level (Vyavaharika/Samvritti). Free Will too is a lower reality, as is Karma. Once Non-duality is realized, perhaps the Cosmic Joke can be understood.

There is a huge chasm separating my understanding and your understanding of my Understanding. You are not going beyond the concept of Subject in the Subject-Object duality when it comes to the Self. The Self that you are arguing against is the Self of Duality. The Self that I am talking about is Pure Subject...Self-aware Consciousness. I have answered your questions...I would suggest you re-read my responses. Best, Dwai No...Non-duality means No sound, no scenery, no hearer, no seer. There is no distinction between Subject and object. There is only Subject. Alaya Vijnana is posited as infinite, eternal mindstreams that are interconnected like "Indra's Net" and is the store-house of all experience in the universe. That is simply (imho) back-pedaling to retrofit the concept into the Absolute Self experience. So the "Interconnectedness" or "Oneness" experience is not because of infinite mindstreams. There is only One Infinite, eternal Consciousness...which is the Absolute Self. You see, you are saying the same thing I am saying. Except you are starting from B to get to A and I am starting from A to get to B.

Indeed... Experiencing even peeks of Non-Duality itself will balance you, make you tranquil and enhance your joy. Haven't you looked upon everything around you after a good Chi-cultivation session or meditation or Yoga and rejoiced them? For me, everything takes on a different feel. It is hard to describe, except that it brings joy. That is your prerogative. But why do you think it is defeating and personally tragic? I haven't tried to stop anyone from doing anything. All I'm saying is that after a certain point, the experience becomes completely free of all baggage, philosophical, religious, personal, etc. All that remains is experiential knowledge. All Buddhism, Taoism, Vedanta all are tools that take you to that same point, beyond which percepts and concepts don't have any value. Holding on the Theory of Dependent Origination is not going to do you any good any more than holding onto the theory of The Self. There is only Pure Subject there (in that state)...it is, simply (Thusness?) The Tao cannot be named (ie described). If it can be named it is not the real Tao.

Hi Marblehead, Certain posts, in my humble opinion are bad, period (I only have two people blocked, in case you were wondering). Or maybe I haven't got the maturity to deal with them without getting irritated...I'm still learning... Thanks, Dwai

BTW, life is so much nicer now that I have learnt people's posts can be blocked What does Dandelion root do? Is there some medicinal value?

I could ask the same question about Dependent Origination. Who is ignorant if there is no Self? Let me give an analogy: Let's say you develop amnesia suddenly. Do you stop being You? Don't you forget your "identity"? My friend gave me a great analogy once: He said he considers Tao/Brahman to be like a bowl of Soup. The Soup is boiling and there are bubbles that rise to the surface and explode. If Tao is the Bowl of Soup, the Bubbles of Soup are like Samsarins who rise to the surface and think that they are separate from Tao. But once they explode they go back into the soup again". I like this analogy...maybe the Soup needs to stay hot. So Karma, Freewill. Delusion is simply a by-product of this "boiling". Or consider Brahman/Tao to be an Ocean and Samsara as it's waves. As the waves rise, they feel like they have their own existence (and in a relative sense they do). But they end up going back into the Ocean and there is no difference between the Ocean and the waves any longer. Why does it happen (differentiation from Brahman/Tao ie)? It's just the way it is. From the perspective of the Absolute, the Relative is well...the Absolute. That is enlightenment...when the "sentient being that is Lucky" realizes that he is the Absolute. As long as Lucky remains encased in his physical existence (of relative reality), he will remain that way physically, but his consciousness will be grounded in the absolute. That state is called that of a "Sthita-Prajna" (one who is established in a spontaneously intuitive state of consciousness).

Er...actually if you consider the case of a Blackhole, you'll find that matter (condensed energy) seems to sink into a "void" (thus destroyed). Of course, there are hypotheses of Whiteholes that complement the blackholes but none have been found yet and are considered to be founts of energy/matter without any evident cause/source. But to think of it, "Blackhole - Yin, Whitehole Yang, Wormhole - Taijitu"?

The Manifest is as important the Mysterious. Only a fool or a lunatic will deny the reality that he/she exists in. But when someone has access to the mysterious... Well said. I do agree that some religions and philosophies have been harmful to non-believers. That's why when a Buddhist comes up to me and says "Buddhism is the Best and The Only way", I feel the necessity to correct them. Since exclusivism is a disease that separates. Exclusivism makes up false differences between "the Haves" and the "Have-nots", "the Right" and "the WRONG", "the in" and "the out". Moreover, the thing about categorical frameworks is that they have limited access to the mysterious (if at all any). Since they deal with the manifestation(s) of the Mysterious. So, based on the rules engineered (of categorization), the results will vary. Like I had pointed out to someone earlier, a Man's reality is different from that of Fish, or a Bird. That is because our categorical frameworks differ. If tomorrow I were to become a dog or a tiger or a cat or a crow, I would perceive things differently and categorize them differently. Does that mean that the Man's view is superior to that of the dog's? Or does that mean that the two views are merely different. That was a result of having different apparatuses of cognition and perception. Now consider man himself. Two men from two different socio-cultural backgrounds will have different rules based on which they create their reality. Someone had brought up the point about the "modern" way being superior to that of a "tibetan Yak Herder's from 200 years back". I would contend that they are simply two different views, based on different categorical frameworks. Neither is better than the other...they are simply different (at a certain level however, they can be different...but that depends on needs vs wants, etc). Same thing with Religion. Every religion is based off a different categorical framework. In general we will find 3 major categories. The Abrahamic (Judaism, Islam, Christianity), The Dharmic (Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism) and the Native (Native American, Native African, etc). They are variations of three primarily different ways of cognition-perception. None are better or worse at one level. They will only take the seeker as far as the framework allows. Some are closer to Mystery than others. Some rely on personal experience, while others rely on heresay and dogma. Those that are experiential tend to be closer to Mystery. Those that don't are closed from mystery. Also, there is the difference in approach. Some of us like to see the commonalities (unless otherwise convinced that the differences are greater than the similarities) in a comparison. While others like to separate entities in a comparison. My contention is that one will see the similarities only after having inspected the differences (because otherwise the inquiry might not progress to the "similarities" phase). Usually the Commonalities phase follows the "differences" phase.

But there is no denying the Duality that we see all around. Your confusion is natural because you don't understand the two-level model of Reality, as posited by Vedanta as well as Buddhism. The Lower level of Reality is real and dualistic. But it is only real within the constraints of the the lower level. When contrasted with Absolute Reality (the higher level) it is illusory, since at the higher level, the differences don't exist. It is like how Newtonian Mechanics are real in the Classical sense but fall apart in the realm of Quantum Mechanics (perhaps a poor analogy, but something materialistic enough that you can wrap your brain around it). Also, actually there IS a Krishna driving us around in our chariots. But not a flesh-and-blood Krishna. The Krishna that is driving us around and opening our eyes to things beyond what the five sense organs can show us (can seem magical to some) is our Consciousness...the Self that is inherent in all Sentient Beings

You are right...but the merging is used in the relative sense...where there is an illusory difference between you and Tao. The merging in the absolute sense is simply a realization that you are Tao. Free Will is a mechanism by which Karma can be actuated. Without free-will, Karma won't work. Without Karma, the relative world cannot be maintained. Let me give an example: The Taoist tries to harmonize with Nature/Tao so that his/her actions are in conformity with Tao. The reason the Taoist tries to harmonize with Tao, is because he/she wants to minimize the impact his/her action has on his/her Karma. The farther one's action goes against the Tao, the more Karmic debt is accumulated.

Why would accepting something mysterious be considered reification? And what is wrong with reification? Different strokes for different people and all that... Taoism in it's highest level is about Merging with Tao, a non-dual idealism. Internal Taoist alchemy specifically deals with this topic. Just the same as Tantric traditions do in Indic traditions. Literally the same thing...only names are different that's all (this is my humble opinion of course).

and this one:

Read Jnana Yoga - A Way of Life by Dr. Ramakrishna Puligandla. It is lucid in it's explanations and will give you a good basis of understanding of Non-duality. Ramakrishna Puligandla Also I'd recommend reading Prof. Antonio de Nicolas. Both are fantastic human beings and are top-notch scholars with experiential knowledge. Antonio de Nicolas Also Prof Arvind Sharma of McGill Univ: Advaita Vedanta by Arvind Sharma These are all "modern" approaches to Wisdom Traditions in general. You could read more classical texts such as: Shankara's Vivekachudamani or start reading the Upanishads and they are a treasure trove of information on Non-Dualism.

Dark night of the Soul is not the same as Ru Ding now is it? Bruce's description of Ru Ding is very perturbing.

That is true..."Yea...I get to agree with Marblehead!" That lacked enthusiasm: !!!YEAAAAA!!!!!!! I get to agree with Marblehead!!!!!!

silly child! you don't know what you are saying. It is not getting "closer" to the Self. It is dropping the Non-Self. BTW, how was the ride on Krishna's Chariot? Did you have you balls in your mouth the entire time? ;D