zenbrook

Thank you for sharing Peace, ZenB

Aiwei - I'm suprised at you! All that dusting and still you cling to the mirror? ZenB

No, you were right first time - it is what's MOST important. Welcome and enjoy ZenB

People are pussycats. It's the Buddha who's dangerous. Peace, ZenB

*bows* ZenB

Oh dear..... sorry to be so pedantic, but surely the link you provided suggests that Lao Zi did indeed found Taoism - at least in its religious aspect as per the quote given from the Platform Sutra: I know, I'm a sad git. Perils of a life spent in academia Peace, ZenB

Perhaps, in line with Chod's ethos and imagery - a breakfast cereal-killer? Poor, I know. ZenB

I think Freeman Dyson has it right: 'Science and religion are two windows that people look through, trying to understand the big universe outside, trying to understand why we are here. The two windows give different views, but both look out at the same universe. Both views are one-sided, neither is complete. Both leave out essential features of the real world. And both are worthy of respect.' So, in answer to your question is such a fusion possible? - I hope so, yes. Beyond that, I wouldn't even begin to speculate. I'd suggest, however, that we neglect meaning in the pursuit of truth, religious or scientific, at our peril. Peace, ZenB

I agree, Pero. I'm no great fan of the closed fist approach to teaching inherent in Vajrayana, but there are genuine dangers associated with some of the practices - kumbhaka is one of them - and I regret the increasing shallowness (as I see it) of the tradition that is resulting from the piecemeal selling off of the inner tantras. Which is somewhat contradictory, I know. But that's another story Peace, ZenB

Although it was quite some time ago, I remember a book by Lama Yeshe - the Bliss of Inner Fire - which detailed the practice of tummo. I can't for the life of me remember much else about it, but I seem to recall a chapter on trulkhor - though I'm pretty sure it wouldn't contain actual instructions, for, as Pero has commented (and YouTube videos notwithstanding!), you require transmission from a teacher in order for the practice to be effective. Lama Yeshe was informative and fun to read, however. Probably not absolutely indispensable but I would hazard about as indispensable short of absolute as it's possible to be Peace, ZenB

And maybe there are those who gaze at what they think is the wall, when really it's the void in front of them Peace, ZenB

Or maybe just unsatisfactory grammar That being said, I'm not sure I'd go so far as to suggest a mindset - a habitual or characteristic mental attitude that determines how you will interpret and respond to situations - is necessarily fixed.... but I'm sure someone will tell me why I'm wrong! And it may be that some words are utter bollocks however you look at it. Which is one reason I don't like to read over my old posts Peace, ZenB

Brilliantly gnomic I disagree, cat. Well, at least, I do if I understand you correctly. If I don't, my apologies in advance. Assuming your statement contains at heart a hint of criticism, then I'd have to stand up and be counted in favor of 'armchair zen'. For many people, this represents their 'stage on the path' and perhaps it is unfair to disparage simply in order to accord with an elitist or dogmatic interpretation of what 'zen' should be. One person's zen, after all, is another person's useless navel-gazing and I've met plenty of professional meditators who would have done well to emphasize a little more kindness or simple awareness in their lives. I'd rather people were questioning their beliefs, reading about methods for opening and softening (and, yes, perhaps writing about what they have learned on internet forums), than rigidly adhering to any fixed mindset - whether loftily spiritual or not. Do not be too quick to judge, I guess. I'm sure there are tao bums who have done, or are still doing, their time with regard to actual deeply rigorous discipline. But, yes, gnomic utterances are fun - though not always as easy as they might appear (at least, not for this armchair-bound bum) Peace, ZenB

no buddhas, no mind. fatherpaul soars beyond sky, i'm left treading dung Peace ZenB

Great stuff..... but why run before we can walk? We need to taste the void (or emptiness, sunyata, whatever) in order to know what is not, in order to know what truly is. Then we can begin to appreciate the middle way and the Buddha's idle talk begins to make sense Great stuff, though........ Peace, ZenB

(Given the fact there's no-one else here.... I'll stick in my two penneth and await the drubbing!) It's an aim.... and a worthy, indeed absolutely necessary, one at that. Just don't see it as an end, only a beginning. And the beginning, as we all know, is where the end is at Peace, ZenB

You have said it, but do you understand it? Form is emptiness, emptiness is form. The geese return year upon year. Peace ZenB

The mind that does not understand is the Buddha. There is no other.....

I guess the peril inherent with having anything to do with the truth is that we 'do not mistake understanding for realization, and do not mistake realization for liberation.' Whilst I cannot argue with you, I do not yet think I have understood Peace, ZenB

Interesting. Now why should that be? I'm not sure I would go this far. A 'magical' or 'occult' path may well be spurious - I would suggest that any and every path is by its very nature - but nonetheless I would still offer that every path has a value. Perhaps I may be so bold as to suggest that intention comes into it? 'The living meaning of Zen is beyond all notions. To realize it in a phrase is completely contrary to the subtle essence; we cannot avoid using words as expedients, though, but this has limitations. Needless to say, of course, random talk is useless. Nonetheless, the matter is not one-sided, so we temporarily set forth a path in the way of teaching, to deal with people.' And people, it could be argued, set forth a path to keep Zen masters in their jobs Peace and convivial crepes, ZenB

Father P.... I wonder? Potentially very dangerous and/or useless I can just about go with. But 'real'.........? What do you, of all people, mean by this? Peace, ZenB

I think, at least, that's kind of what I'm getting at. The 'highest' teachings/practices are so much dog shit if the person approaching them treats them casually. The 'simplest' can be the most profound if the seeker is sincere. But it's more than that: all the teachings/practices are only ever method and as such are utterly spurious. Everyone of them, even those worth their salt, are the ultimate sham.... the real thing is not to be found there. Actually, the real thing is not to be found, but I guess we need to do something until we figure that out. The problem with BS detectors is that one person's BS is another's skillful means. And acknowledging that can take us in a whole other direction spiritually. Having said that, it's still all too easy to mistake fingers for moons Peace, ZenB

Precisely Precisely I'd go even further - any attempt to 'get to' the real thing is, by it's very nature, spurious. As well it should be. Which is just the most absolutely and utterly fabulous thing Peace, ZenB

G'day and welcome! Get stuck in!! Peace, ZenB

Yes, it doesn't Peace, ZenB