Apech

With great respect (genuinely) to you and your teacher the idea that existence and change can be described by the interaction of two mutually dependent principles of that which initiates (yang) and that which responds (yin) is a very powerful and useful way of thinking. That is why Yinyang Wuxing theory underpinned Chinese thinking and practice from (probably) at least 3000 BC to the modern era. The yin/yang duality is present in the Yi Jing and the application of the Yi Jing to cosmology allowed the Chinese sages to develop a profound understanding of the process of change and transformation. When this is view is married to Daoism and Alchemy the result is Nei Dan (Internal Alchemy) which is perhaps the most developed and detailed system for personal development and self-realisation. Without understanding yin and yang none of this is possible - how this understanding is communicated of course is another issue - it does not have to be through philosophical study and may be through practice. But the idea of arbitrary labels is misguided as far as I can see.

It's clearly genuine.

I don't believe you.

I find that many people mean cabbage but say cauliflower.

Do you mean the broccoli?

I'm addicted - I constantly need to know if Karl has said anything irrational.

I am questioning.

again today - seems to be becoming a regular thing

My only problem with understanding this concept is that I have no idea what you are talking about.

I've looked at clouds from both sides now From up and down and still somehow It's cloud illusions I recall I really don't know clouds at all

I'm not at an academic level to question what is quoted but my understanding is slightly different. I understood that Wang Bi's Xuanxue school of mysterious or abstruse origin with its interpretation of Lao Tse placing emphasis on the origin of being in non-being paved the way for the easy integration of the Buddhist idea of sunyata (emptiness) into Chinese thought. And so the compatibility rests not so much in Buddhist influence as such but more on the subtlety of Chinese philosophical thought. The emergence then of Nei Dan is the result of a shift in thinking and praxis through the application of Yi Jing principles (i.e. Yinyang Wuxing theory) to cosmology, coupled with Daoist thought on the nature of the Dao and the body and thirdly the practices of Wei Dan alchemy - and most importantly using the terminology of the same as a language to express internal processes. As exemplified by the Cantong qi. Because this is the basis for Nei Dan then the goal of the practice naturally reflects the origin of the ideas. Particularly the elixir/medicine which gives at first health/longevity and finally immortality (whether physical or not). Buddhism of course comes from a completely different culture - that of India. And the Buddha although having a unique perspective did preserve the general idea that existence is a wheel which we wont to get off. So the typical buddhist monk is hardly going to spend his time trying to preserve his ephemeral existence when there is no such goal presented to him linked to liberation. This would not be true though of tantric Buddhism which actually sees the body as a kind of vehicle for energy and thus a cause for liberation in itself. The crucial point is the last one about Xing and Ming. And I think it is a correct observation that many schools of Buddhism more or less exclusively cultivate Xing. However again if you look at vajrayana this is not the case - where settling in mere emptiness is not encourage and seen as an attachment to emptiness. The goal being seen as the union of emptiness and appearance, or emptiness and luminosity and even the union of prana and citta. And also you have ideas like the vajra-body and rainbow body. The point is that most criticisms (like the one of forming yin spirits) may be valid when applied to certain schools and even more so certain practitioners. But in the end its often comparing apples with pears and reaching convenient conclusions which inevitably suit whoever is telling the story.

Surely he is the head of the Jews ...

@Old River You make excellent points. I think also what dogs the religions of the book is that if you are a monotheist - then the natural extension of this is to think in terms of 'one truth', 'one way' and so on. I like the Buddhist analysis which suggest the variation in teachings reflects the variations in the audience.

Padmasambhava (although the first) is part of the mahasiddhi transmission from India to Tibet in the Indian medieval period (roughly 600 - 1300 AD.) By the end of this period Buddhism had ceased to exist in India itself. So the only Buddhism in India today is that which has been reintroduced in the modern era from Tibet, Sri Lanka, Thailand, China and so on. The reasons for Buddhism's decline are probably largely socio-political in that as an institution it failed to maintain the sponsorship of the ruling elites who were either Islamic or 'Hindu'. This period being quite chaotic and warlike it lacked the stable foundations which could maintain monks and monasteries and the rulers preferred more 'aggressive' religious ideas built round those with 'truth' smiting their enemies. But the tantric Buddhism practiced by Guru Rinpoche and others uses the symbolism of chakras (realms), mandalas of deities (like royal courts) and spiritual kingship - even weaponry such as thunderbolt vajras and swords as well as figures such as chakravatins or world rulers which are all drawn from the cultural features of this period. Back on topic: It would be hard to separate the Buddhism and Daoism practiced by the Doaist schools such as Complete Reality and so on which practice NeiDan. Buddhism is highly flexible and adaptive because fundamentally it relies on very profound principles rather than attachment to cultural norms and ritual. (I know you can point to countless cases where this has gone wrong but essentially it still remains true). Daoism is vastly profound and subtle. It takes numerous forms without losing it's nature. Buddhism and Daoism arose in different environments and conditions and so have differences. But the degree to which they are compatible is a tribute to both. Compare the religions of the book - more similar to each other but in a constant state of conflict.

What people forget is that there is still a Liverpudlian enclave in the Northwest of England and that the centre of England is dominated by a post industrial wasteland called Birmingham. Far up in the North is a great ice wall which prevents the Scottish Nationalists from swarming down into Northumbria, thence Mercia and so into the heartland of Wessex. We live in perilous times - may the Goode Lord preserve our souls - for we have fallen into fornication.

Please spare my tambourine - just take the socks and sandals.

What is the 'date of the Israelite slavery in Egypt then? Presumably, by implication in the reign of Ram 2 according to this article. i.e. 1279–1213 BC. Firstly there is no proof that Rameses II was the Biblical pharaoh and although there is evidence of a Hebrew presence in the New Kingdom - this is because they had their own temple - hardly the hallmark of slavery. If this is the case of course the Israelites did not build the pyramids because they were built in the Old Kingdom - for instance the Great Pyramid 2500 BC - that is 1300 years earlier and not 100 years later. This is not Egyptology it is Biblical studies i.e. made up history to fit the Bible. If Dr. Taylor said anything he is being horribly misquoted.

Thank you - that article is nonsense.

(I snipped your post cos it's quite long) While you have a point about dukkha/suffering colouring attitudes - this way of seeing it is almost completely at odds with the teachings of the Buddha himself. Yes he concluded that there is always something unsatisfactory about our experience of existence he was not negative about life in the sense that may have crept in later. In fact the group in society which were his biggest followers and to whom his massage proved attractive was the emerging rich middle classes of agricultural producers, merchants and professional classes. He had a very positive attitude to wealth which he attributed to past good deeds, he even gave advice on personal and business financial management. A third of his path is about conduct (ethics, morals) and he pointed out the business advantages of being an ethical person - and how this actually opens doors and improves personal standing and so on. He did formulate the life of the monk as being the best for liberation. But this again was a pragmatic response to the onerous life of a householder in late Vedic India. He came up with a way to liberate them from their 24/7 commitment to family, ritual and the wider society - giving them time to study and meditate. Like most of his teachings this a skillfull means for providing the people he was teaching their best chance of making it. He wasn't an ascetic - he rejected that way. He was not negative about life - or about people. In fact the very opposite. In the centuries after the Buddha society did not decline into otherworldism - in fact great empires grew out of the changing social environment and Buddhism spread via the silk route traders far and wide. It was only later when various factors such as the emergence of Islam and the growing militant Hindu response that Buddhism lost its influence over Indian culture and slowly declined until it disappeared completely.

Ho ho. Actually because I sit in darkened rooms all day I must be a Paleontologist.

I'm afraid I can't read that - can you translate the relevant part?

I was born in Cambridge - which may explain a lot about me Socialism (or the left wing) has changed unrecognisably since I first encountered it. Now it seems to be all about intersectionalist minority victim culture. Not so in the old days, particularly post war when it was much more about the needs of the many and had a strong element of people working together but with an emphasis on individual responsibility and high standards of behaviour. Now it just seems to be about whining and encouraging people to feel and be weak - in an unpleasant aggressive way. Shame how things have declined.

I wish my dentist would cheer up, he spends all day looking down in the mouth.

... I anticipate full agreement from my American friends who are so upset by the condition of their own country.

Good point.