zenbrook

Wow.... this one'll run and run For me, spurious mysticism is as real as it gets. And I don't mean that in any sense that could be considered derogatory or unfavorable towards either the mystic or their experience. Go figure, huh? Peace, ZenB I should add... anyone tells anyone else how it is, is BS, period. Not that I'm, like, telling you that or anything Peace, ZenB

When facing a single tree, if you look at a single one of its red leaves, you will not see all the others. When the eye is not set on one leaf, and you face the tree with nothing at all in mind, any number of leaves are visible to the eye without limit. But if a single leaf holds the eye, it will be as if the remaining leaves were not there. Takuan Soto Peace, ZenB

Thanks, Ian. I too will put your recommendation to the test. Sounds fabulous. Peace, ZenB

Absolutely. Being something of a newbie, I assumed I was perhaps missing something with regard women losing essence... but Aiwei here seems to make sense. Not that he doesn't make sense elsewhere, of course Peace, ZenB

I don't know about 'drop some knowledge' - drop myself in it, more like! You're right about the Nyingmapa - the 'ancient ones' - they do have a connection with 'secret yogas', though arguably no more so than the other schools. More to the point is the origin of the yogas themselves - when the newer so-called 'reformed' schools of Tibetan Buddhism arose, everything/one left over went on to become a school in itself - the Nyingmapa. It thus comprises several distinct lineages that all trace their origins back to the Indian master Padmasambhava (Sanskrit for 'lotus-born'; Tib. Guru Rinpoche, 'precious teacher'), the legendary founder of Tibetan Buddhism. Historicaly, Nyingmapa are categorised into Red Sangha and White Sangha. Red Sangha denotes a celibate, monastic practitioner; whereas White Sangha denotes liberation or abstention from such vows. The Nyingmapa are often referred to as the 'school of the ancient translations' because they are founded on the first translations of Buddhist scriptures from Sanskrit into Tibetan, in the eighth century. To cut an awfully long story short - the Nyingmapa canon contains a large corpus of tantric teachings, including the Dzogchen, or 'Great Perfection' teachings. Included are many different forms of yoga, which serve different purposes. Most are secret in the sense of self-secret - without the requisite level of understanding, the practices make no sense. Others are secret because they can cause genuine harm to the psycho-physical being. Kumnye as Tharthang Tulku teaches it is not terribly problematic - trulkhor as per the video can certainly be. I guess the important point to make is that each yoga serves a precise principle and function. Trulkhor, for example (at least as per the video), is preparatory practice for the actual practice of tummo. To practice trulkhor for any other reason is vaguely meaningless. To practice tummo is in itself part of a greater whole in terms of spiritual means and aims. I'm not sure there's anything to be gained from messing with either without being a Buddhist follower of the Tibetan tantras. I was quite surprised the trulkhor was made public like that. I guess that's the way of things now - I don't think it's particularly useful, but maybe it'll inspire someone to be a little kinder or more aware. Then again, probably not Ultimately all these yogas (at least in the tantric tradition) serve the purpose of generating some kind of 'psycho-physical effect' that then becomes the focus for meditation - the crux of the practice. Take away that crux and it's all so much tantric fantasy. Makes for good TV though Peace, ZenB

It strikes me, peering at some our discussions here, how very diverse and often contradictory our individual approaches to topics appear. And sometimes how very similar. I thought it might be interesting to survey the reason for the richness apparent in our posts by asking the following: 'If you had to sum up, honestly and without artifice, in a single brief sentence, what Taoism means to you - what would you say?' So... who's to start? ZenB

I'm not sure that's true, cat. Granted, I think my naivety expected answers more along the lines of 'good physical health' or 'answers to the meaning of life' or 'better sex', but the response has been instructive nonetheless. Even fatherpaul had to say something Really what I was trying to get at was perhaps a stripped down version of the lobby, so that when following a thread I could contextualize people's responses and thus better respond myself (i.e. respond to what they are actually saying as opposed to what I think they're saying). I agree there's something to be said for working it out as we go along, but I also don't see the problem with asking directly. Anyway, thank you to everyone who's responded so far (you too cat ) Peace, ZenB

Dug up the following, which seems to confirm my suspicion - God referred to in the plural is a little like the 'royal we' of the British Queen. God is great etc.... In the Eerdmans Bible Dictionary we read the following explanation of the word "Elohiym": "As a name or designation of the God of Israel, the term is understood as a plural of majesty or an intensive plural, indicating the fullness of the supreme (or only) God ... the canonical intent is clearly monotheistic, even where the accompanying verbs or adjectives are grammatically plural (e.g. Gen. 20:13, Exod. 22:9 [Mt 8])" Hope this helps (sorry it's not more exciting) Peace, ZenB

Okay, that really hurt. And, no, my knees are not properly aligned Must try harder! ZenB

Really beautiful, Sean God, there's so many talented folk around. Many of them right here, I've no doubt. Kinda makes you glad to be human sometimes. Thank you. ZenB

Just for the record, this video demonstrates trulkhor as opposed to kumnye exercises. The difference between them is vast, as they serve very different aims. There's been a reference to the Six Yogas of Naropa elsewhere on the site recently - these trulkhor exercises are preparatory exercises associated with the practice of tummo, one of the six. Although, like kumnye, they are concerned with manipulating chi (lung in Tibetan), the principles underlying both practices are very different and they shouldn't be confused - it should also be borne in mind that there are different forms of kumnye with equally different functions. I don't think there's much to be gained from flirting with either practice - it's kind of an all or nothing deal if you're a ) not going to waste your time or b ) not going to seriously hurt yourself. But just my opinion Peace, ZenB

Brilliantly said, BCT. Though where'd be the fun in that? I think either/or/both/neither of the preceding posts' suggestions are valid approaches to take (along with all the others too). Perhaps it's simply the truth that there's no right or wrong way to go about being a Taoist - though traditionalists will certainly argue one way, academics another, modernists another, mavericks.... who knows? - the point is to do whatever is meaningful and useful to you, even if that approach is at the expense of others' interpretations. Criticisms will likely be hurled with regard to this 'touchy-feely' or 'new-age' approach - often from those who feel they have a cultural heritage to defend (a viewpoint I have great sympathy with) - but that does nothing to diminish the point: it's your life, your path, and, yes.... your Tao. Teachers can be really useful, but a good heart is worth more than the best of them. As my first teacher told me: 'any teacher is a tool - period. And some of your teachers will be bigger tools than others.' Peace - and good luck exploring!! ZenB

Yes. God, how I wish I could just leave it at that. I broadly agree with you. But I would have to disagree to the extent that any definition or characterization of a religious/spiritual/philosophical tradition becomes problematic when you consider the differences that come into play when we, with all our mixed up and juicy little ways, struggle to interpret them. Hence principle and function. What are we trying to achieve or what is it we envision when we adopt one path or another? Take Buddhism: the monk may well be employing the principle of renunciation in order to achieve the function of a path that will lead to emptiness, whereas the Dzogchenpa may employ the principle of self-liberation in order to achieve her goal (function) of fully realized non-dual awareness - both Buddhist, both very different in terms of approach. I'd suggest the same can be said of Daoism. So is it correct to say that 'assuming we are not drowning in wine and having sex all day, enjoying sensual things is natural and in accordance with Laozi's philosophy'? I'd suggest the disclaimer you started out with would be useful here - 'It's only where my thoughts have evolved to from the path I've followed.' There are bound to be other interpretations of his philosophy, because we're all ultimately following our own Dao. For what it's worth, my interpretation would be pretty much in line with yours, I think - but I adore the fact that other interpretations flourish! Gonna finish...... off for a beer and a shag. My kind of Daoism Peace, ZenB

Beautiful Thanks for the reply - I'll get back to it once I'm back (I'm away today) Peace, ZenB

Bliss is overrated. It's the real juice of practice - the anger, the sadness, the raw everyday emotions - that fuel the spiritual path. 'When you feel so sad and tender, that also brings ideas for how to uplift the rest of the world. Joining sadness and joy is the only mechanism that brings the vision of the Great Eastern Sun.' So said Trungpa and while I may not agree with everything he said, it seems relevant here. The point is not to shy away from this sadness.... here's his student, Pema Chodron, with perhaps more in the way of relevance: 'When we train in letting go of thinking that anything-including ourselves-is either good or bad, we open our minds to practice with forgiveness and humor. And we practice opening to a compassionate space in which good/bad judgments can dissolve. We practice letting go of our idea of a "goal" and letting go of our concept of "progress," because right there, in that process of letting go, is where our hearts open and soften-over and over again.' Peace, ZenB

I know there are strongly held points of view that maintain that 'stopping the internal dialogue' is a high-level or advanced meditation. However, in my experience that's simply not borne out by reality. Indeed, some people find it relatively easy to enter a state of 'mind without content' - and can remain there for some time. The problem with this, is that nothing of real worth takes place in this state.... more often than not, it the very fact that we do not recognize the empty essence of mind that makes it such a difficult practice - for those that enter it freely, re-engaging with content becomes the order of the day. I'm reminded here of the story of the Tibetan yogin who entered meditation on emptiness for many years, only to emerge asking his wife whether the radish curry she had been cooking when he began his meditation session was ready! His wife gave him a sound beating for his uselessness! It's just a story, but the point's pertinent - once mind without content has been stabilized in meditation, one must allow content to re-arise within the vastness.... and threatening that peace and stability can be the scariest practice of all for many. (There are also those for whom meditation on emptiness seems impossible, whereas the practice of further vision - discovering presence in movement - comes somewhat more naturally.) So I guess what I'm saying is: if you feel it, don't knock it - when your mind's silent, your mind's silent - and ultimately you're the only true judge of that experience. 'Late at night, when everyone is quiet, sit alone and gaze into the mind; then you notice illusion ending and reality appearing. You gain a great sense of potential in this every time. Once you have noticed reality appearing yet find that illusion is hard to escape, you also find yourself greatly humbled.' Peace, ZenB

Absolutely! Although, of course, the absolute's another matter altogether Peace, ZenB

So do I, freeform - and thanks for the links. Oil be checking them out posthaste. Which has got to be a new humour low not even worthy of a smilie. Peace, ZenB

I guess I should preface this by the ZenB disclaimer: the following relates to my own experience and as such should be taken with a coupla sackfuls of salt. The goal of meditation is less 'stopping' thought and more 'remaining uninvolved' with thought. It's the natural capacity of mind to think, to have thoughts, and consequently we shouldn't be in too much of a hurry to get rid of them. We do, however, need to relax our relationship with thought, to the point where we can begin to connect with the source of thought - the vast, spacious, luminous quality of mind some call Tao, some call emptiness, some, I guess, call God. This, in itself, is a somewhat Herculean task, but it is the principle behind meditation practices such as samatha (or zazen or shi-ne or listening, depending on brand). Emphasis on 'emptiness' in spiritual practices usually focuses on this aim. Beyond emptiness, if you will, we need to allow the natural capacity of the mind for thought to re-emerge - the ultimate aim of vispassana meditation (in Tibetan, lha-tong - further vision). So a quiet or empty mind should not be seen as the ultimate goal - indeed, the prerequisite for tantric practice is precisely this state of mind. It is, however, a crucial step along the path - and one which I feel at least is all too often overlooked by seekers of non-dual spirituality. This, of course, is the reason non-duality is non-dual - emptiness and form being two sides of the same coin, as it were, the natural spaciousness and natural luminosity of mind go hand in hand. I think the (admittedly somewhat cheesy) analogy of apple juice is appropriate here: if you want the bits in a freshly squeezed glass of apple juice to settle - you just leave it alone - the bits will settle of themselves. The same with thoughts. Patience and relaxed attention.... or, at least, thus have I heard Peace, ZenB

I'd agree with that! Since my late teens I've suffered with Ankylosing Spondylitis - a form of arthritis - and to compound that, I've led a mostly sedentary lifestyle, including years of prolonged sitting meditation. Exercise has always hurt, and coward that I am, I've always found myriad good reasons for not indulging. Now, however, I'm in almost constant pain. I no longer engage in formal seated mediation yet the years of (physical) denial are catching up with me. I take anti-inflammatories and strong pain-killers daily and find myself having more time off work. So......... I decided enough was enough and have this week!! this week......! started Tai Chi lessons. And boy, do I feel it! The instructor seems friendly and competent, and seems to take great pains (if only!) to make sure I'm okay. For the record books, however, it still fucking hurts. I'm hoping to start up a personal practice mcthingumy to chronicle my exploits. Until then, this is just to confirm - Tai Chi is strenuous (though to be honest, it looks bloody strunuous to me also ) Any advice will be most warmly received. Peace, ZenB

'Have you found the beginning, then, that you are looking for the end? You see, the end will be where the beginning is. Congratulations to the one who stands at the beginning: that one will know the end and will not taste death.' Gospel of Thomas v.18

Compulsive nose-picking is called rhinotillexomania, apparently. I wonder what the corresponding name is for those compulsively seeking enlightenment? Any suggestions? Peace, ZenB

My only defense the subtle application of tantrum yoga

Not as surprised as me, Pero!! It was precisely the promotion of renunciation as 'the only way' that I was arguing against. Like you, I view it as one possible method among many. Unlike you, I failed to express that adequately, for which I apologise. I hope that doesn't mean I have to go back in the ring with Aiwei? Peace, ZenB

Hello everybody. First a disclaimer: this is the first forum I've ever signed up to, so please forgive any failures in etiquette or other apparent inadequacies. I am undoubtedly making this up as I go along. Having browsed some of the other introductions, I'm afraid mine will seem rather lame in comparison. I have studied bits and pieces here and there over the years but I can say with hand on heart that I am no wiser now than when I first heard tell of Tao as a youngster. I have worked variously as a shop floor assistant selling 'oriental' arts and crafts (where I first studied with a Taoist teacher), a bookseller, traveling salesman, farm worker, home carer, chauffeur, social services coordinator, meter reader and driver of large goods vehicles. I currently work with the homeless. I have also studied Tibetan religion both academically (culminating in a PhD from the University of Bristol - well, at least it would have done had I submitted!) and as an enthusiast, spending a large part of my life engaged pointlessly in visualizing all manner of colourful spiritual paraphernalia. I did get to wear robes, however, so it can't have been all bad. Having left formal religious and/or spiritual practice behind, I now try to do as little as possible. If life has taught me one thing, it's that it hasn't. Nonetheless, I'm very glad to be here and I'm sure you will all remind me of just why these things matter and why I'm signing up to a Taoist forum online rather than browsing porn. Sincerely yours, ZenB