Zensunni Wanderer

Dudes and Ladies Not that I expect anyone to give a shit either way, but I'm absenting myself. It's already abundantly clear that this place is kind of a circle jerk. Person A: Some dude from east of the Ukraine with a beard and/or robe said something that makes no sense. Let's follow it. Person B: Here's why that makes perfect sense and we need to run with it! Robe/beard guy is so amazing and compassionate. Person C: Wait, that seems suspect to me. A&B: You're a troll, why can't you appreciate how wise and compassionate robe/beard guy is. Person D: Yeah, this is wisdom from ASIA. It must be true, racist. Person E: here's some health advice I'm totally unqualified to give, too. I took six weeks of herbalism and shiatsu at the mall once, so let me diagnose you, person I've never met. Person D: Ad I'll add a cryptic faux-Koan! I generally try to avoid group sex, so I'll leave y'all to it. best wishes.

Daoism has often been ahead of its time. The Taiping Jing, at a time when much of humanity still believed in supernatural qualities influencing human behavior, boldly set out the claim that we're influenced by social and economic factors, claims we now see more and more to be true. The true reality school taught students to avoid superstitious speculation. Laozi warned people to beware reliance on ritual and tradition. And now? It seems like western Daoists (and often Buddhists) are often the ones who often want to bring everything back to sorcery and ghosts and arcane secrets and metaphysical nonsense. what gives?

Totally. I'm really amazed that you're the only person who has said this. Everyone else is sure quick to recommend medicine for something they don't know the cause of. Remind me never to seek medical advice here. "I'm coughing....." "Drink tea made of St.John's wart!" "....up blood, cos I have cancer." "Oh. Go let some Sufi guy rub fingernails on you then."

That's such a non-rebuttal I don't even know how to respond. Fine, he said his TEACHER can magically cure cancer, not that he can. The substance of everything I said still stands. And what, you're an impartial observer? Not buyin it, buddy. And Scotty, if he could cure it 50% of the time, that would still be an amazing claim that would require proof. Sometimes you need the whole story to know what someone's about, but sometimes they make it very clear from the outset.

The auditions to play Cain in Kung Fu are down the hall, bro. We're talking about 9/11.

"Everything is in a context. Santiago (Vajrasattva) may not be the most eloquent poster, but the reason people defend him is because of what he has done and taught for people on this very forum. Personal experience trumps all." I'm sorry, if you claim you can sure cancer, the ability to make people feel warm and fuzzy over the internet doesn't cut it. "Seriously--- you think that a forum like this hasn't had its share of hacks?" Man, I'm not even taking that one--it's just too easy. "You've been here a few days and all I've seen are negative posts and criticisms. Do you have anything positive to contribute?" Yeah, the guy who started this thread seems like a real ray of fuckin' sunshine. That being said, if you think I'm wrong on something, address my actual arguments. Most of my posts haven't been negative, just skeptical--I was resolved to stay away from this argument til I saw the ridiculous "curing cancer" claim. It's really shameful that people are equivocating on that point. I'm not a vindictive or even "negative" person, I'm just not going to fawn over people and kiss their asses and agree that 2+2=5.

"actually you do need explosives. there are several instances of planes crashing into other buildings of similar age and make causing more damage and hotter flames that burned for much longer but those buildings still stand. " There are other cases of large jetliners being surgically rammed into the center of a building that size? When that happen? And of course, if A sometimes causes B, it must always cause B. Nobody has ever gotten lung cancer from smoking because not everybody has. Jet fuel, by the way, burns hot enough to rob steel of about 93% of its strength. Let me ask all you conspiracybuffs a few things......If the government wanted to blow up the twin towers and blame terrorists, why not just use explosives and claim the terrorists used explosives (which had already happened in 1993 and would have been eminently believable)? Why set up a complicated mission that apparently can be uncovered by a few bored college kids with mac books? Why aren't any reputable scientists in the relevant fields on board with the "truth" movement? When we have culprits with means, motive, opportunity, and taped confessions, why am I the naive one for thinking we might have some idea what happened?

Taomeow What is this "western Civilization" you speak of? Why were there rationalist thinkers in philosophers in Ancient Asia if rationalism is just bunk? How does any of this make people debating online about the correct way to perform a home exorcism less crazy? Glad you "woke up" though. Sorry I'm just a slave to the aggressor. Maybe one day I'll be as wise as you!

I have, through the grace of Isis, discovered the ability to cure AIDS with snail shells. I refuse to demonstrate this and as Isis is kinda fickle, it may not always work. I may be able to train you to do it too, basically come to the Himalayas and I'll teach you AIDS-curing shell Yoga at a reasonable rate. What does Isis have to do with the Himalayas? Moving on. Now, you may think it's uncompassionate to claim the power to end so much human suffering and death after a few yoga classes, and refuse to subject this claim to inquiry, but that's just how I roll. I'm super-compassionate, really. Question that and you must just be a troll.

Yeah, and that's fair enough. Nishijima is good at teaching a certain very specific meditative system. All I'm saying is that when he starts saying that this is the same meditation taught by the historical Buddha, the scientifically sound re-alignment of the nervous system, and the only form of True Buddhism, don't be too quick to believe him.

You make very strong assertions and than say you have nothing to prove. In my considerable experience, only hucksters do that. I'm aware that holistic medicine can do certain things; it can also do them under controlled conditions. Your claim that magic men can mystically channel cancer off someone but you'll never bother to prove it, just cos 'God' likes them so much? Different story entirely. If you were a snake-handling Protestant from the Ozarks, nobody would take it seriously, but because it's "Eastern Wisdom" or some such bollocks, you seem to mostly get a pass here. I'm not interested in what snake oil you're selling, just in pointing out that it appears to be snake oil. Peace.

No, it's not my job to go to the Himalayas or Amazon to ascertain every wild ass claim a charlatan makes. It's your job to prove a wild claim. QED.

I have no vested interest in this argument, but when we say that there are fakirs who can magically cure cancer with keratin.....Yeah, I'm a have to call bullshit in absence of rigorous evidence. When people say that god gives them magic powers, I start looking for the kool aid pitcher.

Sorry, I missed the 'non' in your earlier reply. Anyway, yeah, I agree with both your points to some extent. Dogen is a lot to chew on. All the Kamakura reformers (Nichiren, Kukai, Shinran, Dogen) had a lot to say and their followers often feel the need, rightly or wrongly, to simplify it. And since we're at the mercy of translations, there is a certain amount we will miss out on if we can't study (for example) medieval Japanese language and culture in excruciating detail. However, this is also true in Asia. Most Japanese today can't read Dogen's work in its original, any more than the average American could understand Beowulf in its original Anglo-Saxon vernacular. They'll recognize certain characters, but it won't be meaningful. Most Chinese would have difficulty reading the original Chinese version of Mahayana sutras, and most people in Theravada countries can't read Pali. We're all somewhat at the mercy of translation, east or west. At the same time, we do have some pretty good work on Dogen; I'd recommend reading Kim's study of his life and ideas if you want a scholarly take on it. Now, Dogen is not a teacher in the lineage I study with, but I do respect some of the insights he had. And I think it does him a dis-service to claim that he said that Buddhism was just zazen and zazen was just Buddhism. It's a bit more complex than that, even though he does advocate zazen very strongly. Nishijima I think oversimplifies this point, and at the detriment of practice. He also dishonestly downplays several things Dogen was very hard core about, such as the importance of monasticism, the importance of sutras, and the need to observe Buddhist precepts. There have been other Soto teachers in the west, such as Dainin Katagiri, who also put emphasis on shinkantaza but didn't selectively throw out a lot of vital Buddhist concepts. Master Sheng Yen, from China, traced his lineage through Soto and Rinzai, and taught shinkantza along with other methods in the context of a larger, holistic practice of Buddhism.

On it.

This is not about actually looking for truth. This is about people wanting so desperately to find a 9/11 conspiracy that they've been crazily latching onto bad science and worse reasoning for the past 8 years. I find it distasteful for its own sake, but beyond that all these Alex Jones wannabes have been instrumental in making sure that legitimate questions about the Bush administrations use of 9/11 were easy to write off as just more paranoid ranting. Loose change was a fantasy, the makers got their asses handed to them when they debated real scientists, and you don't need explosives to bring down a building if YOU FLY A FUCKING PLANE INTO IT. Are you people completely out to lunch?

Good to meet you all. I'm not a "Daoist" per se. I am a student of Chinese philosophy, language, and culture, and of course Taoism is an extremely important part of that. My personal practice is a combination of Chan and Pure Land Buddhism, though I recognize that Chan has an obvious debt to the teachings of Daoist sages, to the extent that the two traditions have freely borrowed throughout their respective histories in terms of terminology, artistic representation, and practice technique. As far as I'm concerned, the teachings of Laozi and the Taiping Jing draw from the same source of continuous wisdom as the records of Huang Po and Linji and Hanshan. Anyway, if it matters; I'm a youngish white guy married to a Chinese woman. I speak some Chinese badly and am getting to the point I can kind of read some old sutras and Daoist texts. I used to do gung fu and tai ji like every other sinophile out there, but now I don't. My favorite food is burritos and my favorite music is Prince. I work in social services. Looking forward to getting to know you.

Prince I wouldn't consider myself anti-Paul so much as not a big fan of the effect I see him as having had on Christianity. Eisenmann's "James, Brother Of Jesus" did a really good job of detailing some of his early effect, as does some of Crossan's work though Crossan has a pretty obvious agenda. The way Paul basically says 'Love is necessary but not sufficient' is interesting, but most of his writings don't do much for me. Maybe you take more away from Paul than I do, and that's cool, but I don't think martyrdom can be used as the test of a philosophy's veracity. People from many religions have died rather than renounce their beliefs. The early Muslim community, while it was being persecuted by the Meccan pagans, underwent a period of persecution, death, and exile, but I doubt you'd suggest that the Qu'ran is more likely to be true because of this. Buddhist monks died rather than convert to Islam when Islamic invaders reached the subcontinent two generations later, but this does not lend any special respectability to Buddhism. Peace.

By "dumbed down" I mean reduces milenia of Buddhist practice and thought to a very specific definition of Shikantaza based on a very selective reading of Dogen Kigen. And Nishijima's about as sectarian as it gets (says Tibetan Buddhism isn't real Buddhism, etc), so I'm not sure why you'd be into the guy if you want to avoid sectarian politics. And if you don't want politics, I'd also stay away from Nishijima's Dogen Sangha, which in recent years has been semi-infamous for senior students leaving and infighting. I think he's had some interesting and useful ideas, e.g. the middle way between idealism and materialism, and the autonomic nervous system, but he has a bad habit of just pre-emptively declaring his hypthises to be facts.

The Silver Jews- Tanglewood Numbers http://www.imeem.com/artists/silver_jews/a...-numbers-album/

Gudo Nishijima is....How to put this? Sort of a controversial teacher in the Zen world at large. He teaches a very dumbed down version of Soto Zen Buddhism and presents some very controversial theories as authentic Buddhist teachings. I'm not saying he has nothing of value to teach; he does. But I'd advise you take what he says with a grain of salt.

I'm not against syncretism in the sense of finding common threads, but I try to avoid discussions that boil down to "everyone teaches and believes the same thing", which I think is not only facile but disrespectful to the sages in question. When someone makes a definite statement that X is true, we disregard them by trying to insist that they meant Y. Leaving aside that messages are contextual, I think it's something of an anachronism to call Jesus (or the historical Buddha, or anyone) a "Daoist" reflexively. If we're looking for patterns that seem to mirror those of Daoist sages, the Greek and Roman Stoics like Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius seem closer to me than the Jesus we see in the New Testament anyway. If we disregard all the Paulian Christian nonsense about literal ressurection and miracles, or the detestable idea of a god that allows vicarious punishment, then the recorded discourses of Jesus certainly contain some wisdom. And we see glimpses of contemplative wisdom throughout church history, such as among the desert fathers, Meister Eckhart, etc. But I can't just go with Jesus=Daoist without something a little more convincing.

Eh, I like Noah Levine but this book kind of sucks. His primer on Buddhist meditation, Against The Stream, is a much better read.

I find a lot of Chinese folk superstitions untenable, but Westerners who practice "philosophical, not religious" Daoism often leave a bad taste in my mouth. The unspoken assumption seems to often be that "we rational white people can take anything and understand it better than those primitive brown people we appropriated it from" (not that I'm accusing anyone here of holding such a view). I've seen it in Western Buddhist circles a lot, too. Ultimately, it's difficult to define Daoism and the Daoist canon contains some very different philosophical and religious approaches to common problems. Mahayana Buddhism has the concept of 84,000 Dharma Doors; not a one size fits all approach. Perhaps the same could be true, to some extent, with Daoist self-cultivation? Some people will approach through the simple but profound aphorisms of the authors we've come to collectively refer to as Laozi, and some will approach through internal alchemy, and some will draw from both.