doc benway

I don't take advantage of it very often, just don't have the time. And I agree, far better to dedicate our time to practice. One good practice is all we need.

Quoted for emphasis, I couldn't agree with you more. We see ourselves far more clearly when we see ourselves through the eyes of others.

Laozi, Lao-tzu, and Lao-tse sound exactly the same. The letters are just approximations of the correct pronunciation. For accuracy and communication, having a standard is quite useful. The communists did a few things right, this was one of them.

The current standard is Laozi and Zhuangzi. Pinyin is the current standard for Romanization of Mandarin. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanization_of_Chinese https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Chinese_transcription_systems

I always considered myself a secular thinker as well and my answer is YES! If you are not opening yourself fully, you are missing out on some wisdom. Wisdom is openness. Wisdom is connecting with a much deeper, more subtle, pervasive essence that is only achieved through profound openness. Not really. I had brief run-ins with spirituality as a youngster, often in the form of entheogens and writers like Castaneda, Osho, and Watts. Then I encountered internal Chinese martial arts and qigong which led to Daoist meditation which opened me up to the full potential of spirituality. That subsequently led to my current study and practice of Yungdrung Bön. Not me, it was a combination of reading and Daoist practices - meditation, martial arts, and qigong. Absolutely, no question about it. Same answer applies to martial arts and qigong. Daoism is a way of living, not simply a philosophy. Intellectual understanding is a faint shadow of the direct, personal experience of the nature of oneself and the connection to the Way. One instant of deep spiritual connection is far more meaningful and valuable than all the intellectual understanding of the Way that I could possibly achieve in a lifetime. Think of it like reading everything there is on Earth about the flavor of a mango - the chemistry, first hand accounts, psychological factors, agricultural data, photos, videos, brain scans of people eating mango, everything you can imagine, .... but never tasting a mango. You have some idea - sweet, pungent, tart, funky... And then one day you actually taste a mango... WOW! No information can prepare you for, or replace, the experience. Yes, I read quite a bit before getting deeply into the meditative practices. It was valuable and interesting but pales in comparison to direct experience. Belief (the acceptance of an idea without personal verification) is not necessary, not in magic, not in scripture, not in anything. Faith (trust in the path reinforced by direct experience) is helpful. Meaning is very important, if there is no meaning, there is no trust, no confidence, no personal connection. Without these, how can we put the principles to use in our lives? Daoism is not "just a description of the nature of things and the nature of how they should be." Daoism is not at all concerned with "should," it is concerned with what is. It is far more than a description, it is a guide to a healthy and meaningful life. It is to discover that our mundane life IS magic without the need for belief or even faith (although faith can help to keep you going when practice is very challenging or tiresome). So please investigate Daoism in whatever form makes sense and is accessible to you. The writings are precious but the experiential practices are priceless! I hope you someday learn that for yourself... Good luck to you on your path.

Sorry if I offend anyone but if you're not willing to invest the time, effort, and cash to study with a master, you're not going to get very far in Daoist meditation... Sadly, masters are few and far between but they are out there. You can certainly cultivate a life based on Daoist values but Daoist meditation is detail oriented and sophisticated and, to my knowledge, it's never been written down in the form of a usable training manual. In fact, most writings about the training methods are intentionally abstruse and cryptic.

Excellent book although I wouldn't recommend it as a training manual.

Not at all. First of all, in general it is usually of little value to try and change a system while we are weak and confused. It is far more effective to change ourselves. Even that does not mean that we do nothing to improve our surroundings but it is far better to look inside first. When we have made the necessary changes in ourselves we will be far more effective in changing the system. In fact, when we change ourselves, those around us can't help but change in response. People frequently misunderstand the instruction to "leave it as it is" (Dzogchen) which is essentially the same as "wu wei" (Daoism). It does not mean to do nothing. It means to make sure that what we are doing comes from the right place, a place of openness, awareness, and clarity; not from a place of frustration, impatience, fear, desire, and anger. When we try to change our environment from that mind, we tend to do more harm than good. The way to do it in these paradigms is to recognize the pain we are experiencing and not act from that pain. Instead, we use our practice to allow those emotions and distortions (fundamental ignorance) to liberate. Once we are in a clear and settled frame of mind, the actions we take will be far more appropriate, balanced, and effective; and they will occur spontaneously and naturally. In Daoism, that would be practicing wu wei (not acting or not interfering) and allowing the natural flow of Dao (the right response, the right action manifests naturally). In Dzogchen, it would be referred to as resting in the nature of mind (recognizing our true nature, overcoming ignorance) and allowing the 3 bodies to arise (whatever is needed in any given situation will arise spontaneously). That's the basic idea as I understand it. A simple example is saving a drowning child. Most of would not need to think about it, the action of saving the child will just happen spontaneously and effortlessly. That is wu wei. Wu wei is not sitting by and watching the child drown. Similarly, another example is engaging in an argument when someone criticizes or contradicts us. When we are not over-identified with the ego, there is nothing to defend. We can accept the criticism with a smile and a thank you rather than escalate. We can do nothing at all and allow the other to have the last word. We have both voiced our opinions and can let it go and move on. That is also wu wei. So much of what we do is reactionary and unhelpful. Imagine if every action we take is that spontaneous, that appropriate. It can be achieved but takes a lot of dedication and skillful practice.

In fact, that is a primary teaching I get from the Heart Sutra - the Two Truths

One way to exercise patience - When I feel impatient, I notice that and let it be just as it is. I feel it fully, not pushing it away or suppressing it, but don't engage with it, don't add to the internal discussion. I simply feel impatient and rest in that feeling. In due time, it's gone. Reflecting on that, I pay attention to what brought it up. What aspect of myself was irritated or stimulated and why was there a need to change what is? Something in me, something I over-identify with, was the source. If I can let that go and see that it is nothing more than a thought, an idea, I do not need to be disturbed. So in the case of postings that are far from reality or come from a new age positive mentality... What in me is bothered by that? The practitioner? The critic? The purist? The fundamentalist? The expert? It is some role in my life that I identify with that gives birth to that irritation. Is it my role to eliminate those posts, that mentality in the world? Is that even possible or necessary? Perhaps, even though I find it foolish, it is supporting and helping someone in a very difficult time in their life and it's all they have access to. Are there other things in the world that are more worthy of my time, attention, and effort? Can I see that the problem is in me and my inability to simply allow it to be as it is? While I certainly do not "need" to tell myself to be patient, I also do not need to punish myself with impatience because the New Age mentality exists. I can let it be and perhaps even offer the New Age person my friendship and support while sharing with them my own views, rather than attacking theirs. Just one approach and the one I play with. It takes a lot of practice but can be very effective.

I see faith and belief as opposites. I don't recall where I first heard this definition, it may have been Watts or Osho. Either way it's the way I use the terms: Belief is accepting something to be true without direct, personal experience. Faith is releasing all belief and trusting that was remains as direct experience is truth. ...something like that

I can feel the little strings!

It's alive and well in the monasteries, even the ladies are now able to partake.

Nor did I mean to imply that you did. I am simply exploring the reasons why that resistance is there, not in others so much, but in me. I've gotten away from trying to understand or influence other too much. I'm mainly interested in what's going on in me as that's the only place I can make changes and grow. I tend to be overly intellectual and in my head so, for me, the spiritual path has been largely away from logic and rational investigation. I do have a great deal of respect, however, for the power of logic and I'm very interested in the various logical fallacies. My interest in them was born right here!

I have no beef with logic. It has its value and its place. I do think that it has limited utility in spiritual development, the Buddhist path of sutra notwithstanding. My sense is that the movement of Daoism was, and is, towards a deeper connection to natural processes. Generally speaking, rational thought and logic have a tendency to create more distance from that natural state. Perhaps that is one reason why there is limited enthusiasm for pursuing logic in a Daoist context. Just my relatively uneducated $.02.

I tend to be in this camp as well. Plenty of wisdom out there (and inside), just need to be ready and open to it.

Where is the separation between the universe and mental gyration?

Interesting stuff - "Buddhism was first identified to be "a barbarian variant of Taoism", and Taoist terminology was used to express Buddhist doctrines in the oldest translations of Buddhist texts,[24] a practice termed "matching the concepts".[26]" I wonder if this could be a source to address the OP? Perhaps they matched Buddhist logic and debate to a Daoist equivalent...

Excellent point, although I don't know that it completely excludes the possibility that Daoist influence on Buddhism contributed to the form Chan/Zen has taken.

One way to look at it is that Zen is Buddhism stripped of all the logic and debate... Koans are designed to confuse and ultimately exhaust the rational mind. Could that be the Daoist influence?

I agree but the thrust of much Daoist thought seems to me to be in the opposite direction. I'd be very interested if you find what you are looking for!

Buddhist geshes are masters of logic and debate. It's a required part of their training. Not Daoism, but this is a great course in Buddhist logic and debate for anyone interested - The Course in Buddhist Reasoning and Debate: An Asian Approach to Analytical Thinking Drawn from Indian and Tibetan Sources by Daniel Perdue

I have not come across anything that fits that bill in my (limited) study of the classics. In looking for Daoist logic, I would look to nature as that seems to be the ultimate source. Is there logic in nature and natural processes? While there are certainly intelligence and organization in nature, I'm not sure one could call it logic. Logic is a unique expression of human intellect and reasoning. Perhaps this is why logic does not appear to figure prominently in Daoist classics. Then again, the vast majority of Daoist literature has yet to be translated to Western languages and my studies of Daoist classics is very limited.

You're doing fine! Welcome I meditate first thing in the am and before bed. No fixed time, I fit it into my schedule as consistently as possible. I do not punish myself when I miss a day or have to cut it short. I think you are setting yourself some very high expectations which may not be sustainable. I know nothing about your experience or method but 2 hours is a long practice time. In general we start with short sessions - a few minutes. Quality is far more important than quantity of practice. Some people spend hours on the cushion and never realize the state of meditation, they might as well have a nap. Meditation requires openness, flexibility, focus, and awareness. These are not only qualities to be sought during practice, but also in our relationship to the practice. I prefer to look at meditation as a choice, not a habit. It is not work and is not a chore, it is a gift and a medicine. A more playful and flexible approach can be valuable for the long run. Also, while time on the cushion is important, applying the practice to our daily activity off of the cushion is arguably even more important. Good luck!