sean

No, you may well have very valid criticisms here cloud_recluse and it's good to bring things like this to the community. Outrage at inhumanity can be a natural, healthy response IMO and staying silent about evil that we perceive because we don't want to upset a delicate new age wonderland isn't noble. I know nothing about Castaneda's life. I read one of his books in my late teens and dug it, and then did some of the practices from a Victor Sanchez book that made practical excercise out of his work ... but besides that I have no knowledge of the man and I've learned a lot from your writings here.

Ethical training can be as simple as paying attention to how your behavior effects the depth of your meditation practice. I think it's pretty obvious that going out and punching pregnant women in the stomach and violently raping teenage girls to death will 100%, unequivocably, across the board, no exceptions whatsoever, destroy your meditation practice and probably ruin any chance for awakening in this lifetime. From that extremely clear example, one can begin to derive a gradient of morality that is more or less an accurate roadmap for how to behave in life. It's a superego map only to the same extent that having a map for how and why to do anything that isn't instantly pleasurable regardless of how it effects ourselves or others is a superego map. By this definition meditation practice itself is a superego trip, which it partially is IMO. I don't frequently think in Freudian terms, but I think there is a necessary tension between id and superego that needs to exist or else we become psychopathic hedonists on the one hand, or self-loathing, ascetic accountants on the other. Another very natural form of ethical training is simply asking yourself, "what is good?". The answer (ethics) cannot neccessarily be articulated in simple, verbal terms (fundamentalism). But as contemplatives we should be used to this problem and recognize that this is not a criteria for judging wether something is real or not. The Bodhisattva impulse itself is impossible, which is part of it's power as a koan. "The passions of delusion are inexhaustible. I vow to extinguish them all at once." This is a call to engage an infinite process of now that can never be accomplished and already is. This is holding both "Form is emptiness" and "Emptiness is form" simultaneously. Yes, the impulse is to move to bliss and wisdom because that is what it good and true and beautiful (ethics) and yet it appears we open up to deeper, more exquisite pain as well. And the contemplative path makes one stronger for this burden ... so that it hurts more but bothers us less. Sean

Thanks guys! Yeah, let's see how the categories play out. It's possible I overdid it and we could keep things much simpler. So far there hasn't been as much interest in adding things as I'd hoped. Sean

Hey Yoda, you had mentioned in another AYP thread "Meditation is quite up to the task, too. It sets into motion everything else needed, when needed, as needed." ... and I agree 100%, meditation is absolutely essential ... it's just that IMO meditation alone can't fully transform the shadow, especially the aspects of our shadow that have to do with our ethics/relationships with others. I would even go so far as to say that meditation can even deeply exacerbate our interpersonal shadow elements. Meditation opens us to being more sensitive. It's like how Trunk says, eventually mystics tend to get reclusive because they tend to be more open to how things feel, energetically. Meditation increases our potential for bliss and for pain. Most people want to selectively kill off specific emotions, set themselves up against depression and anger and only feel the good stuff. But you can't selectively repress emotions ... so you push away the fear and sadness and you also deaden your potential for love, passion, and bliss. Without ethical training, a contemplative is a timebomb waiting to expode in a way... maybe even worse than just your everyday bored American. We typically spend more time alone than most people (the impulse for which often originates from a shadowed trauma IMO). Then we increase emotional sensitivities through meditation. In our private little sanctuaries this often leads to an increased perception of bliss and so we are tempted to arrange our lives more and more in this happy little new age fantasy around an illusion that we are somehow "getting" more bliss. But the reality (again IMHO) is that we are not "getting" happier, just becoming more sensitive to reality, and paying attention to the underlying bliss and happiness of things as they are. Which is totally cool. And it energizes a lot of positive values, and spills over into how we treat people. But if we repress the fact that we are also opening ourselves up to feeling pain more deeply, if we get smug that we are more blissful than others while subtly armoring ourselves from the fact that we will now always cry with deeper tears at a tragedy, that as we crumble the illusion of separation we also can no longer treat the suffering of other as "theirs" anymore ... it's ours, and we begin to physically feel it ... without this understanding I think we can try to dig deeper and deeper holes of separation, of "us vs. them" ... and a really really bad situation is setup that can lead to guru-disasters, and RJ and Eric fireworks. As for Taoist self-inquiry, I don't think Taoism really addresses this component, it's speciality is a bit different. I listened to a talk recently by Alan Wallace, where he said that the Chinese had Buddhism for personal ethical and spiritual development, Taoism for subtle and gross body cultivation, and Confucism for interpersonal and social ethics. All three were held without contradiction for, as a whole, the Chinese civilization lacked an exclusivist notion that you have to be one thing and then repudiate or dismiss everything else. Just my two cents as aways. Sean

Ian made a really interesting comment recently in the Emptiness and the conditions for awakening thread. This is something I am really trying to work through myself right now, and also a fascinating topic IMO. There are so many approaches to cultivating emptiness (jhana, samadhi, flow). And so many theories about what emptiness is and how it fits into a path of cultivation it can be mind numbing. For the sake of clarity, I'll distinguish at least gross, subtle, empty (often called "causal"), and nondual dimensions of reality (these can also be thought of as bodies as well). If you look at the hierarchy you can imagine that there are these two, broad, primal impulses, one "upward" toward emptiness and transcendence (Eros) and the other "downward" toward gross incarnation and immersion (Agape). In traditions that emphasize transcendence, there is often the belief that one must navigate formless states beyond awareness of the senses, the jhanas for example, in order to truly transform one's false identification with body-as-Self. In extremes this can lead to neglect and even mortification of the body, severe asceticism, etc. In the more immersive traditions, it's felt that "this is it", the body, and life, and family and the marketplace are where we grow. Practices that honor manifestation, life, celebration, movement and love are engaged. In extremes this can lead to chaos, getting lost, addiction, hedonism, etc. So it seems like there are these two impulses going in completely different directions. One is "upward" toward stillness, peace, freedom and sees the "downward" impulse as "lower"; a bunch of pagans and a cult of chaos. The other is "downward" toward love, light and movement and sees the "upward" impulse as escapist, delusionary and even a cult of death. What's going on here? Well first, I think the reality is that, nowadays, it's much more complex than simply Eros vs. Agape. Today there is so much cross-fertilization between traditions occuring, and access to the best insights in each. So IMO it may be more accurate to say that, in modern times, the various methods and schools are each sophisticated attempts at different types of alchemical operations that move and blend up and down, around and through the dimensions in different ways and with different emphasis. Let me paint some examples with really broad strokes. I see Michael Winn's emphasis as remaining rooted in the gross while using gross and subtle movements designed to open up to emptiness. To "bring down emptiness". This influx of emptiness is appreciated for it's ability to act as a faciliator for subtle and gross evolution. Bodri, Jhananda and to an extent Theravadan Buddhism and Esoteric Christianity in general, seem to place the utmost priority on techniques that quickly bring one's awareness into the deep, empty states detached from gross and subtle. It's believed that prolonged awareness of emptiness without form not only automatically completes the subtle work, but that it's the only non-imaginary way to do the work. Further, gross and subtle body work is thought to possess little if any power to cultivate any sort of spiritual transformation when done without a foundation of emptiness. Yogani's Advanced Yoga Practices also teaches emptiness through stillness meditation as the essential foundation for spiritual transformation. Subtle body (pranayama), and gross body (asana) are also included as methods of safely accelerating and embodying the process. The litmus test for progress is always "ordinary life" off the cushion. Considering CST as a path for a moment, it strongly emphasizes the gross body as the most clearly measurable ground where transformation occurs. Subtle, empty and nondual realms are seen as speculation distinct from what is externally measurable in the physical world and are almost entirely cut out of the "official" conversation. Refining gross body movement, nutrition, and community are seen as suitable ways to open emptiness (flow) into one's life. The neo-Advaitans, ie: Adyashanti, Gangaji, Eckhart Tolle to some extent, and many others, their emphasis is strongly on the nondual. Even emptiness (samadhi) is seen as just another state, no fundamentally different than anger or laughter. Here the idea that any sort of practice is needed at all is even seen as subtly reinforcing the false notion that you are separate from the truth and need to do anything to get somewhere else. "What does not change even when samadhi arises and passes" is pointed to again and again. The concerns of gross and subtle body are dealt with only briefly as springboards for surrendering completely, in the moment, to nonduality that is always fully present. As a diehard syncretic Tao Bum, I say all these ways are right to some degree. No one is smart enough to always be wrong. "The Way" can't be systemized and our evolution thrives on experimentation and dialogue between perspectives. It's really a blessing to live in a time when we have access to so many. From here there are finer subtleties, more detailed brushwork, like the one Ian touched on between using mantra to enter emptiness vs. areas of the body itself. My experience is that mantra is a much easier entrance to tasting deep, formless emptiness. Through my daily mantra meditations, emptiness has spilled into my life in a global way. Then, from my brief experimentations so far with opening LTT into emptiness, I find that it's much more challenging to navigate regions of the body into a state of emptiness. And I also sense that there is a different kind of power here. Targeting a specific region, say the LTT, probably leads to more acute transformation in that region. Would always keeping all of our meditations body-centered prevent a fuller depth of emptiness from penetrating our cultivation? This relates to what I found myself arguing with Scott Sonnon about, and also to many of the long, basically zazen only vs. chi kung threads on HT. Can movement meditation as one's only meditation really open one to spiritually transformative depths of emptiness? I seriously doubt it. But maybe this is a new experiment, a new form of alchemy that will lead to it's own wisdom tradition. Every path has it's strengths and unique hurdles anyway (although some more severe than others). While my suspicion is that a big hurdle in movement-only meditation will be in truly tasting emptiness distinct from exercises and the endorphin release. Is this fundamentally different than advanced Buddhist meditators gradually misidentifying zazen as the true source of their flow? Not sure. Every path has it's limitations and it's dark night I suppose. Would keeping all of our meditations formless prevent a deeper integration of emptiness into our bodies and into our lives?. Yes. I believe so. But then waitaminute! What is formless meditation? Is it even possible? Is body-centered vs. formless even a legitimate distinction? From a third person, exterior perspective we are human beings inhabiting gross bodies. Any experience we have that can be remembered, interpreted or described, is, not entirely "out of body", not really formless and not actually empty. Navigating the jhanas all probably shows up in our brain waves for example. This is likely why mysticism remains an esoteric science. An inner, secret science that can't be proved externally, only validated internally. Have an experience of God and strict materialists will find the area of your brain that lights up and tell you this is the cause. Hmmm, alright, so is the cause of my perceiving the scientist that conducts this study also the area of my brain that lights up when I see him? The grin of irony on the mystic philosopher though is that 3rd person, exterior perspectives always occur in the imagination of a 1st person perspective. And the deeper grin on the enlightened mystic is the realization that 1st person perspective is the imagination of One Awareness. Yet still, no matter how deeply I personally realize the truth of my Identity-as-Empty-Awareness, I am stuck having to interpret this absolute awareness through the filter of how myself as a single, conditioned human being, experiences "it" in an apparently separate, physiological body and worse, I am left to describe it through the filters of a personality and an intrinsicly dualistic language. Sean, I have no meditation experience but I am a reasonably intelligent person. What is this emptiness you are talking about? Oh, that is easy! It's an opening. But it's not an it. Or an opening. Uhhh... It feels like returning home. But a home I never left. Yup. My mind becomes clear and pure. But even when it's not. Dammit. It's space! Yes. It's space. And also what is in the space. grrr. It's a container with no container! FUCKIT! *hanging head* I'm sorry buddy, I can't help but sound like a fool. GARggghh... From our first person perspective when we try to take a third person perspective on our own phenomena and then attempt to communicate it, our emptiness doesn't sound very empty. Because, on the gross level, we can only be transformed by emptiness, we can never "attain" emptiness. There is nothing to attain. Form is Emptiness. It's space. And also what is in the space. So obvious it's ignored. IMO, skillful means involves baptizing our gross selves again and again and again and again and again in this everpresent obviousness until "it" becomes our center of gravity. The irony being that, ultimately, it always was. No other center of gravity was ever possible, even for a single instant. Form is Emptiness. Emptiness is Form. ---The Heart Sutra In shikantaza my mind is given complete freedom to wander. It flits and glides from object to object to object. Eventually, even through this flitting and gliding, my non-seeking, non-grasping attitude becomes a portal to emptiness. In mantra, before I know it, my mind leaves the mantra and clings to a dark cloud below my heart. I don't resist the clinging to return stubbornly to the mantra, I allow the clinging while I return my focus to my mantra. The dark cloud opens up. In LTT meditation, my mind wanders around the feelings of my belly, pierces into my gut, hangs out at my lower back for a few minutes. Then I get lost in thought for a moment. I notice. I allow the thoughts to be. And I return my awareness to my LTT. The thoughts are brought into and dissolved in the emptiness opening up. Emptiness happens in spite of my chosen focus or lack of focus. It's mysterious. And it dissolves hard distinctions between my chosen entry point. Regardless of my focus, my most pressing "irrelevant" material is going to come up and distract me from it. And this pressing material will be allowed and included in the return to my chosen focus, subtly being transformed in the process, or it will continue to show up in different forms, distracting me from further depth. I think this is really what Bodri is getting at when he says that shooting for emptiness takes care of all the alchemy. Because my own personal shit is going to come up in this process, and so genuine alchemy has to occur in order for your emptiness to progress. If a fool would persist in his folly, he would become wise. --- William Blake Is our choice of meditative focus then completely arbitrary? The question is a meditation on skillfull means. From a nondual perspective, awareness does not belong to our little selves. Everything we perceive is seen by One Eye. So what even really decides what we focus on through our life? In my view there is clearly an element of Grace involved in enlightenment. Enlightenment is not the result of anything. Enlightenment is not caused. If it were caused it would be something the little self can achieve and earn. Just another notch off our to do lists. But a thermostat is still said to control the temperature of a room even if it's a mysterious hand that moves the dial. While it's clear from a study of metaphysics (and even neuroscience) that ego is no "prime mover", we are still left no choice but to choose, and to do our best to choose wisely. And so I believe that making distinctions between various "entrances" to emptiness is important. And interesting. And I'm curious how each differs, however subtly. For instance, what kinds of temperaments are suited more for practices that emphasize certain types of focus, certain types of movement or stillness and ill suited for others. Which kinds of practices might be more suited for beginners, intermediate, and advanced students in general. What kinds of entrances are better suited for feminine or masculine essenced students? Lot's of questions. Questions about questions. On and on. In my own practice I've been exploring three entry points to emptiness lately. The intention in the first angle is to open up an area I am stuck on. It is essentially identical to Eugene Gendlin's Focusing method where one holds the felt sense of an entire problem gently without attempting to let go of it prematurely, or to get lost inside of it. Just hold the whole sense of it and open up into emptiness through it. The problem can be something that comes up in my daily life, an angry or fearful reaction to a co-worker say, or it could be physical, a knot in my neck during a forward bend. The second angle I am working with is basically samyama, and I think of it as baptism in emptiness. The practice is to hold a positive quality I believe is worth manifesting (much like a problem is held in Focusing), and "take it into" emptiness so that my desire is "blessed by emptiness" and becomes a vibration in my being I imagine to be resonating with the universe. The third angle is a meditation that's hard to describe, but it's probably just your basic zazen in which either (or neither) of the first two angles can arise spontaneously, while I place my emphasis a bit more on "just dropping". Sean

Thanks. And nice metaphor, I've been thinking about that. It kind of helps bridge both what Winn is talking about when he says emptiness is the center of the hub, or the root of our being, and what the Buddhists are talking about when they say that emptiness is the metaphysical quality of form. Thanks for the link. I haven't checked it out yet but I saw Winn's posts about it. I love this description! Thanks freeform! I am a candle burning at both ends kind of guy myself. As long as we are not pulling yourself in opposing directions countereffectively, why not include as much useful technology in our Yoga as possible? Seems like what being a Tao Bum is all about. Great idea with the pulsing version of my diagram: http://www.thetaobums.com/images/emptysubtlegrossnondual.swf And thanks for the link/diagram on the MythoSelf, I think I've heard you mention that before, I'll have to check that out, your recommendations have always proved fruitful. Fascinating perspective. Makes perfect sense. It's like Candace Pert's quote, "Your body is your Unconscious Mind." What if you imagine that this is a map of, let's say, the LTT ... gross is your outside structure, muscle, inward to fascia, then opening into the subtle body and how it intersects with the gross (more commonly felt internally than on the surface of our skin), then emptiness (often felt more "concentrated" toward the center of the LTT), then the bindu of nonduality often felt to be at the center but then also everywhere. In a sit with Mark G. once, he said something about this bindu that struck me profoundly. He described it as a purple droplet at the center of emptiness that is so infinitely small and also is the whole manifest universe. The next day in meditation at acupuncture I had an undescribable experience with this bindu that I could futiley try to write about the whole rest of my life and get nowhere ... and also I know that it wasn't even a taste of it ... like the equivalent of looking at a candle that is half a mile away with sunglasses on. This seems logical to me. I think if time is not an obstacle, one can do both, but if you only have 30 minutes a day, start with a more formless emptiness meditation until a taste is gotten, then add/blend in still body meditations, then movement. !! Beautiful! Never heard this, but I dig that term and have promptly given myself permission to use it. Sean

It's quite possible. He seems very armored against something.

We all have our trigger points, and I think they are frequently doorways to our own shadows. Something like Byron Katie's "The Work" process, the "3-2-1 Shadow Work Process" and the "Hoffman Quadrinity Process" are really great practices to open up these areas of ourselves. For me it almost makes my spontaneous negative reactions appear like little presents wrapped in dogshit ... I know if I do the work and dig under the crud that I'll find a great resource that got buried somehow. Second, I agree that gurus, teachers, masters, and coaches should all be held to high standards. And so should students. No one ever talks about how students abuse teachers and yet it's probably more common. This doesn't really apply to Castaneda so much (was he even a teacher?), but just speaking generally, no matter how enlightened a person is, I think it takes incredibly courage to put yourself out there, center stage to bring a message and try to help, and take on the reality that you will be criticized, you will be hated and loved and back again, you will have all of your students fantasies of what enlightenment is projected on to you, you will have to eat more psychic garbage in your life than two thousand humble monks, and in the end you will probably let down and disappoint people as much as you manage to ease their suffering. "The passions of delusion are inexhaustible. I vow to extinguish them all at once." Sean

Ok, well since we are coming out of the Clyman closet, I also purchased his exorbitantly expensive Chi Kung tapes several years ago and practiced it exclusively for a few months. Nothing. Also, his breathing patterns on the video and on the phone (I've spoken to him once on the phone) sound really unhealthy, like he has to really do a lot of work just to inhale. (Could be a physical condition.) Finally, he has a terrible reputation for talking shit about every other teacher, for his students being hyper-aggressive, for being racist and homophobic (in his "Chi Kung Bible" he even makes a flat out homophobic statement). All of this has turned me off to him and his system and I do not think either have anything to offer a serious student. Sean

of a traffic intersection in India. An Indian friend of mine told me this is not atypical. Watching that video made me think of blood cells or something. Very organic. Not something I've seen in America. I can't imagine the kind of patience, good humor driving conditions like this must cultivate, not to mention sharper perception and faster reflexes. It's also an interesting meditation on how versatile individuals are in responding quickly and naturally to situations that are typically thought of as needing more strict, top-down rules enforced. Sean

Peregrino, I'm unfamiliar with this concept of "memetics" but I'm finding it intriguing. From just glancing at it, it seems like it's taking a strong "nurture" stance on desire formation. How does it account for something like sexual desire though? Intuitively I perceive a large portion of human desire as a struggle for an ideal partner, sexual pleasure, virility, etc. Actually, an even richer way of seeing human desire is through the lens of the chakras, each of us always having seven intrinsic desires (safety/food, sex, power, love, etc) and also we move through each one in a somewhat linearl fashion as developmental stages. The "center of gravity" for our desire evolves, ie: from power-fixation to love while still including desire for power in it's healthiest sense. (Same approach can be done with Tan Tiens). Am I misreading Girard's take on desire as an entirely social creation? Sean

Hey, let's go together. I'll shoot for that one in September definitely. Maybe we can drag Trunk out of his cave as well. Also, I was just talking about you today. RedFox is coming down from Oregon through Northern California mid-May ... maybe I'll drive up there and we could have a Tao Bum meet up and get into some trouble. Sean

OMG, I am so buying that DVD set! I can't wait. Sean

I only got a minute here, but I wanted to say that if you look at the image, in my view "up" and "in" are interchangeable. "Up" and/or "In" is the mystic/transcendent, looking for what is Absolute, Unchanging, Still. The "Down" and/or "Out" is the impulse for expression, dancing, love, relationships, business, etc. The nondual is the unspeakable way in which these are not separate. Maybe it's both the bindu seed at the core of emptiness and all of samsara and neither at once. The reason I like the distinction between empty and nondual (and find it crucial even) is to make an important distinction between, let's say, a linear "let's get the fuck out of this horrible mess" hinayana cosmology vs. a living, breathing nondual Tantric one. What do you think? I'm still feeling into a cosmology I resonate with (obviously). More later. Back to work. Sean

Fascinating discussion here. I'm currently coming around the bend for another full circle with Christianity and Catholicism (something you do when you've been raised Catholic and attended 12 years of private Catholic school ) Been perusing Brother David Steindl-Rast, Father Thomas Keating, Father Sean OLaoire, Brother Wayne Teasdale, Father William Menninger. Sean

Sounds like you are in a good place, neimad. *hug* (with firm pats to emphasize the masculine quality of the hug) Sean

I think the latter description is an excellent excellent way to ground yourself in the reality of your body in the world, neimad. Judging by some of your early posts when you first joined The Tao Bums, you seemed a little ungrounded to be honest. When I was young I also dabbled in conspiracy theories and such a bit, and you can get really lost and "out of your body". At some point I kind of had a "reality check" breakdown and tried to do away with "all that new age crap". In retrospect it was probably a good phase for me, and I'm glad I did it while I was young. Seeing how far I could push a common sense, materalist, objective framework. I even latched on to some authoritative sources to help give me clear cut answers since I felt so confused and wanted things to be simpler. The problem with your view though, is that the Western tradition itself goes much much deeper than objective, exoteric descriptions of phenomenon, neimad. And do you see how you are characterizing contemplative mystics now? As if we are buffoons "getting all mystical" and thinking "oooh i'm opening up my energy pathways". As if this is an accurate description of any intelligent, sincere seeker in the mystery. This is exactly what I meant when I said that CST pooh poohs attempts to address the deeper phenomenology of the subtle body. But that's the exact point, neimad (of this thread anyway). First off, attempting to create a completely secular, Euro-American path of self-actualization that does not reference the subtle body, emptiness or nonduality is a lofty goal and one I might support and even dabble in. Like I've said before, it doesn't really matter what you call a phenomenon, as long as it's reality is truly understood and addressed if that is the claim. Of course chi is everywhere, it's the subtle field that shapes the entire gross plane. And I can't imagine any intelligent contemplative insisting everything they engage in refer to the subtle body. "Oh shit, this restaurant doesn't refer to the prana levels of their milkshakes, I'm out". Second, the problem being pointed at in this thread is that CST is: 1) Importing words such as yoga, prasara and qigong 2) Using the words (arguably) much differently than how the culture's these words were imported from use them 3) Creating products that use and are even named with these words 4) Simultaneously saying that that these words are culturally specific and cannot be understood without immersion in that culture (huh?) 5) Simultaneously implying that all of the benefits these words reference are included in CST (how could this be known without first meeting the conditions of #4?) 6) Locking and deleting any attempt to further discuss the subtleties of this matter No one here is claiming this and no one here is attacking anyone. If you really want to judge, ask yourself which forum copies and pastes quotes from blogs and newsletters, strongly criticizes them and then basically flames anyone who so much as asks honest questions and raises alternative perspectives. Then locks and deletes threads. Not news my friend. Warmly, Sean

Again I break, my need dissolving my pride Again I spill, my hurt streaming, streaming wide Again I die, letting all the goodbyes tear open my sky Again I whisper and again I roar Swimming through the dreamy door And again I join what's above with what's below And again I recognize the One behind the show Again I fall, chained to my lies Again I rise, filled with blazing night and newborn cries Again I pump up my will, gunning for the Holy Thrill Again I wake, letting go of both hope and despair No longer seeking something else to wear And again I join what's above with what's below And again I recognize the One appearing as the show Again I reach through the darkness shining wild Again I rock in the cradle of Eternity's child Again I die, releasing all that I took to be mine Again I howl, prowling through forests of palm and pine One hand on a spear, the other on my fear And again I join what's above with what's below And again I recognize the One behind the show Again I gaze from one eye, my broken body aglow Again I drop my sword, watching my blood cut rivers in the snow Again I beat a sweating drum, urging you to leave your mind Again I disappear without leaving anything behind And again I join what's above with what's below And again I recognize the One appearing as the show Again I smile, touching what's always touched me Again I dance in the fire, burning free Again I remember to embrace my wounds Again I rebuild the temple, rising from my ruins And again I join what's above with what's below And again I recognize the One behind the show Again I break and taste the final goodbye Again I ride a wave of everlasting sky Again I fall and forget the Sacred Call And again I remember and again I include it all And again here we are, in the flesh yet unborn Lovers with both the calm and the storm And again I join what's above with what's below And again I recognize the One beyond the show Robert Masters

I'm sold too! Thanks for the great overview, irkk. I was finally motivated to pick up the Yin Yoga book on Friday and did a nice long session, touching on several of the poses for 3-5 minutes each. Really really diggin it. As long as I've been doing Yoga, I never systematically explored taking various asanas into deep stilllness like this. I could really really feel energy flowing back and forth between the meridians of my body and finally opening into emptiness, which I usually associate mostly with seated postures only. Opens up a whole new world. The book itself is really elegant and straightforward. One of those rare balances of not too much or too little. And only like $11. This is a keeper practice for sure. Sean

Damn, Arlovski got knocked out. I thought he was an immortal.

Look at that turn-around time! Speedy Sean. On the ball. Put in a simple request. *BOOM* Done. Three months later.

Hehehe.. total exaggeration. Probably more like 100. I am a wimp.

Voice, that is a very cool practice you created there.

Damn.

Good one Cam. Tough. I would say that enlightenment is the "answer" to the question "Who am I?". The paradox being that the answer is beyond concepts, including the concept that it's beyond concepts. Intellectually, I "grasp" at understanding enlightenment by thinking of it as the ground of awareness that both holds and is what it holds. I think the masculine tendency is to seek the "ground of awareness" side of the equation; at best stillness, emptiness and freedom from that which arises within it's space. Whereas the femine tendency is to identify with the manifesting isness of phenomenon; at best light, flow, and love. I don't know much about "Immortality", particulary how the term was used historically by Taoists. My understanding is that in the transrational sects it was understood as a metaphor for fully identifying with that which does not die. I imagine there were probably some prerational sects trying to create physically immortal bodies though. Bodri is probably, rightly, criticizing the latter. Although it's possible there may be an even more advanced conception of immortality. Sri Aurobindo, for instance, talked about a theoretical stage of enlightenment that only becomes possible at a certain point in actual, physiological evolution. In this stage, Godhead can so totally unite with one's material being, that "God becomes flesh", so to speak. Even then, this doesn't mean that the physical being "lives forever" or is even freed from aging, injury, or sickness. IMO it's pointing to a new possibility of incarnational nonduality, as paradoxical as that might sound or even be. Sean