doc benway

The "it" is that knows is not other than a deeper knowledge in you. It's good to trust that inner voice. What has worked for me has been to find a connection to a credible teacher and lineage, to slowly cultivate trust in them through seeing positive results of practice, then to devote myself to the fundamental practices over a long period of time, always returning despite the normal ups and downs of life. I find it valuable to have the guidance of "one who has gone before" when exploring such unfamiliar territory and I wouldn't trust that to anonymous posters in an online community. It's worthwhile to take note of the reliance on shamans by indigenous communities when working with entheogens and reliance on gurus when working with meditation in wisdom traditions.

I appreciate your posts regarding rebirth and dependent origination. Early in my exposure to Buddhism, I struggled with the apparent contradiction between the two ideas. Over time, as I developed a deeper understanding of both concepts through practice, I was able to synthesize and reconcile the apparent paradox. Both concepts can peacefully coexist, somewhat like the Two Truths. A valuable lesson I've learned is that when we come across ideas that don't make sense, it is best not to invest too much time in trying to understand. Better to leave them be and focus on the things that ARE working for us. With time and patience, what is unclear will become clear. We tend to focus the majority of our energy and effort on the things that don't make sense rather than cultivating what does. This is a sure recipe for frustration and wasted effort. None of us understands everything and not everything is amenable to intellectual understanding. Some important realizations, much like creativity, come from a deeper place than the rational mind. It reminds me of Chuang Tzu's parable on Ch'ui, the draftsman. It also reminds me of beautiful words from John O'Donohue that I often quote here: "And if you want a point of departure for this new journey of soul, don't choose an intention, don't choose a prayer, don't choose a therapy, and don't choose a spiritual method. Look inwards and discover a point of contradiction within yourself. Stay faithful to the aura and presence of the contradiction. Hold it gently in your embrace and ask it what it wants to teach you."

What is most obvious to me is that we are always right here, right now; and yet most of us spend so much time so far removed from this miraculous and brief experience of life.

I was lucky in both my Daoist and Buddhist experience to have stumbled upon teachers who emphasized practice over theory. An intellectual approach works for some but, like you, I tend to be too much in my head so practice is precisely what I needed.

It's unfortunate you wasted so much of your time doing something that didn't work for you. My experience has been different.

I spent the majority of my life working, striving to achieve goals, immersed in the material world, indulging desires... and got progressively more disillusioned. Good job, good family, lots of stuff, and yet lots of anger, burnout from the job, no matter how many goals I achieved or stuff I accumulated, I'd feel good for a while then back to the same cycle. I engaged deeply in Daoist practices and internal martial arts for well over a decade with little change in that pattern. Then I stumbled into a variant of Buddhism (Yungdrung Bön) and saw through that cycle of wasted time, energy, and frustration. Engaging in Bön Buddhist practice has changed my life for the better. I've rediscovered passion in my work. My family relationships are far more open, meaningful, and satisfying. I'm far MORE engaged in life because I'm not overly attached or dependent on the outcomes, good or bad. Things come and go and it's beautiful to be a part of it all. The more I feel I don't need any of it to make me happy, the fulfilled I feel because it is all there and available to me. It's hard to do justice in words, it sounds a bit contradictory. Buddhism is certainly not a panacea and it's not for everyone. You either get it and feel benefit from the practices or you don't. It's not something to take as a theory or a philosophy. It was never meant to be that. It was meant to be practical advice for people feeling dissatisfaction with their lives. There is no need to believe anything about it at all. If you have interest and are feeling that life is not what you want it to be, engage in personal practice for a time and see if it works for you. If it doesn't improve your life, move on. The teachings on samsara are depressing because they are pointing to patterns in our lives that are dysfunctional and unproductive in terms of leading a meaningful life. That can be depressing to look at. Don't get too bogged down in the theory... put the practices into play and see what happens. Otherwise it's probably better to leave it be and move on.

By request, I've created a new topic to discuss this: Steve A great piece of wisdom from the tradition I follow: The superior practitioner takes full responsibility for everything that occurs in her life - 100%. The mediocre practitioner takes partial responsibility. The inferior practitioner blames everyone but himself. Bindi Full responsibility for abuse suffered, for the devastation to self and family from war, for destruction of home and family from natural disasters? Mudfoot Full responsibility for how I react, over time, to those traumatic events? Steve Yes Best to start working with this under more manageable conditions at first. We tend to jump to extreme examples and challenge this principle as it does seem a bit outrageous at first blush. It takes quite a bit of stability and realization to apply our spiritual skills and learning to such horrific circumstance but yes, even then. The rationale is that no matter what the circumstances, no matter how horrible, no matter if they are totally out of our control, all we can ever do is manage our own response as best we can. We can always try to make the best out of whatever circumstances we find ourselves in. In that sense we are always fully responsible. Bindi Though I wouldn't have questioned statements like "all we can ever do is manage our own response as best we can" and "we can always try to make the best out of whatever circumstances we find ourselves in," I just didn't read your statement in this light. Taking 100% responsibility for everything that occurs in my life makes me think of taking 100% responsibility for any and all situations I'm part of occurring, responsibility for creating all experiences, maybe it does mean this still, or it doesn't? Steve Yes, it does mean precisely that - taking 100% responsibility for everything. This is a very deep teaching from the tradition I follow. It is not easy, it is not something most people ever achieve in their lifetimes, even dedicated practitioners, but that's what it means. That's the way we're asked to engage with our practices and our lives. It's very important to be honest with ourselves about this. In the West, we find it very difficult to look at ourselves as inferior or even mediocre. It's painful and embarrassing. It's not as difficult in the East. If we try to practice at a level we have not reached, we will only be frustrated and fail to make progress. I'm mediocre at best but I'm making progress. The interesting thing is that the more comfortable I become with this, the more liberated I feel - very counter-intuitive. The first statements you quoted above are a good and comfortable place to start. As we start to push a little further from that comfort zone, we can look at how we play some role in nearly everything that happens to us. If we are victim of a natural disaster, how did we get to the place where it occurred? We chose to visit or live there, for example. If we are mugged, it is a place we chose to visit, and so forth. We can always find an example of how little choice we have in a given circumstance but those extreme examples are best approached once we've made some progress with more accessible situations. We start with easy examples and gradually build our "muscles." It's important to not look at this as blaming oneself. It comes from a different culture with different values. This is related to the concept of karma, not the Abrahamic concept of sin and guilt. To take it a step further, these teachings are from the Dzogchen cycles which are intended to bring us to direct realization of non-duality and to integrate that fully into our lives. Following such a non-dual realization, we directly see and feel that we are not separate and discrete individuals but rather manifestations of a continuum, a wholeness, with a profound connection to everything and everyone around us. That's referred to as the awakened heart. We experience ourselves at a much deeper, more pervasive level. In that context, we truly are 100% responsible for absolutely everything that happens and that realization can be as much a part of daily life as driving to work. I'm just a beginner on this path but I've seen and experienced enough to be convinced that there is deep truth here worth pursuing - for me anyway. It is certainly not for everyone. The way I suggest to work with this is a bit light-hearted and playful. Focus on day to day situations in our lives, there are plenty opportunities there. No need to look for extreme examples. They can wait for now. See how it works for you. If it doesn't feel right, let it go. It's only helpful if it feels right and makes some sense. If it creates conflict or bad feelings inside, I think it is best to leave it alone, especially if you don't have an experience guide to help navigate the tricky parts. Bindi I can just see how this might be a useful philosophy to follow, though for myself I find it too broad right now, and unnecessarily challenging. I prefer to deal with dysfunction within myself as I come across it, and maybe when all of that is resolved I might understand the truth of ultimate responsibility, or maybe I will find another truth altogether. Steve I think your priorities are in the right place. I also think your approach is already building a relationship with this idea. One last thing about it, for me it takes the form of a practical instruction more than a philosophy. I think there is a difference there KuroShiro This deserves its own thread please. Can you please copy and paste these last posts to start a new thread? Jox May you share which tradition do you follow?

So it seems you are using the word energy to denote Qi?

What makes mind more substantial than energy?

What good is the most perfect Dharma if it cannot be brought into our lives, no matter what our profession or living circumstances? For me, it is of no value as an abstraction. I see it more as truth than law. I do think it's a 2 way street, we must bring sincerity and devotion but we can't be afraid to integrate it in ways that work for us. I personally don't take things too literally but I do look for lessons in such stories. If someone feels compelled to retreat from the world, that is their prerogative and their karma. It is what they need at that moment in their lives and I respect that. If another chooses to make Dharma a part of their secular life, that is equally legitimate and I respect that the same. The important thing is that we look at ourselves with openness and clarity and do what is in our hearts.

I don't see different types of dharma, rather dharma incorporated into different types of lifestyle. Keeping practice on the cushion can only take us so far.

If they go off to the forest, they are no longer a householder - at that point they are defined as renunciate. I am looking more at practicing and engaging in secular life.

Similarly, the practices of the monastic are not nearly as homogenous or necessarily as conducive to awakening as one might expect. Monastics run the gamut of human personality and proclivity and must adapt practices just like anyone else. The mandatory rituals can take up as much time as a full-time secular job and one's state of mind during such rituals is not a given. While one may think the renunciate has plenty of time to practice, the quality of practice is as critical to growth as quantity and it's painfully clear to all who pay attention that not all renunciates show signs of spiritual awakening and transformation. Streamlining of practices is not always a bad thing, IMO. I am as much a traditionalist as many but have also seen and experienced very favorable results from streamlined, progressive practices as compared to more traditional, ritualistic ones - particularly in Westerners who have no frame of reference for the Eastern paradigms.

This is an accurate description of my life for too many years. For me, two experiences were involved in helping me to wake up (in both a practical sense and a deeper, spiritual sense) and neither had anything to do with the judging mind that loves words like "should be" this or that... This mind is rarely helpful in transformation IME, it tends to simply perpetuate the cycle of negativity and closed-mindedness towards oneself and others. One was a profound personal trauma and the other an existential crisis that occurred in the wake of the Bosnian and Rwandan genocides. Connecting to the Dharma was precisely what helped me to (re)connect with family and career in much healthier and meaningful ways. The Yungdrung Bön tradition has a long history of important and adept lay practitioners, referred to as Ch'öpas - non-monastic spiritual teachers and leaders in Bönpo communities. This was critically important due to the widespread and remote nature of Himalayan communities.

Up from the depths... I know little of Steiner and Anthroposophy but spent this past weekend at an elder care and farming community inspired by Steiner's ideas in the lower Hudson Valley. It was such a lovely place and experience.

I have a different experience. The tradition I embrace is amenable to monastic and secular lifestyles. My teacher left the monastic life, has a wife and child, and lives in the secular world. He travels constantly, works endlessly, and expresses the fruition of the teachings through his behavior . I would offer that every tradition can be satisfactorily adapted to lifestyle. It's a matter of getting some degree of foundation in the basic view and practice and then gradually integrating that into progressively more distracting and challenging circumstances. It is simply (y)our assumptions and expectations that lead to defeatist attitudes towards these traditions. For the most part, they are designed to support the householder every bit as much as the renunciate. It is all a matter of the extremes to which we want to take it. If we embrace the view and practices, they will work for us provided we are karmically connected.

This question of helping others is a very good one. I'll offer some thoughts FWIW. I love how Anthony Demello talks about it, it was an eye opener for me. I also deeply value how Tenzin Wangyal Rinpoche talks about it, he offers a practical strategy to approach it in a way that works for me. Helping others is mostly a way for people to try and feel better about themselves. So many people are so miserable and one way to try and feel better about oneself is trying to help others. The problem is that the help comes from a place of pain and ignorance and it often does more harm than good. We think we know what someone needs and shove it down their throats whether they want it or not. It's a way to feel less bad about ourselves, it's a terrible place from which to offer "help." That doesn't mean that it is bad to help others, it simply needs to come from the right place. I think wanting to help others is a very natural and normal thing but it is corrupted by our ignorance. In the practices I do, helping others is a core component but not until we help ourselves first. If we can get to a place where the majority of the fear, confusion, and ignorance are out in the open and we can liberate that in ourselves, then the help comes from an openness that knows what is needed and it flows effortlessly. At least that's how I approach the issue. I don't despise misguided people who are trying to help, I feel some compassion for them. Coming with efforts to help, no matter how twisted or misguided, is far better than coming with guns and clear and honest intent to harm, IMO. There is a great scene in a book by one of my favorite authors, William S. Burroughs - The Place of Dead Roads, which captures this misguided attempt at being a "nice guy" brilliantly and succinctly. It describes the "sad, poison, nice guy" who walks into a bar and does unimaginable damage, completely oblivious. It's sad and hilarious at the same time.

There are a variety of arm positions one can use with this basic bagua standing posture. I do recommend warming up a bit first and taking it very slowly in terms of building up duration. It really works the core and trunk musculature and, if unfamiliar, you can get pretty sore.

You don't need to include the x and y as along the x-axis each real number is well defined, there are no variables. Along the y-axis, each number is a multiple of i (the square root of -1). You can't simply add -3 + 1 because the 1 is not 1, it is 1 times the square root of -1 which is not defined mathematically.

The x-axis represents the real number component and the y (i) axis represents the imaginary component of the complex number. The points represent complex numbers i represents the square root of -1 which is undefined mathematically but can still be very useful in many branches of math and physics.

The other points would be -1.5 - 2.5i and 2 + 3i

I would recommend when teaching something like this you first clearly define the axes. The standard format is to assign the y-axis to the imaginary component. IMO, the y-axis could should be labeled i for clarity. The red arrow denotes -3+1i or simply -3+i.

One of my favorites comes from baguazhang:

I generally wear kung fu style pants and a t-shirt or sweatshirt. If precipitation is expected I'll add a light waterproof jacket with hood. If cold enough, I add a knit cap and mittens. I practice barefoot unless very cold, then minimalist shoes - no arch support or heel rise and as thin a sole as possible.

I like to paraphrase Peter Fenner - ‘if I didn’t do what I didn’t need to do, I wouldn’t know I didn’t need to do it.’ I think it is misguided to presume we know what others need, particularly in matters of dual and non-dual perspective. We can share our perspective but must come upon it in our own way. In some way, our present perspective is offering what we need at this moment for our growth, be it pleasant or painful.