doc benway

I'll respectfully disagree here - the distinction is similar to the important distinction between mind and the nature (essence) of mind. They are not the same. In my unscholarly way, I'd prefer to state that thoughts are a manifestation, or ornament, of the dharmakaya but I would not equate the two. Perhaps one could say they share the same essence?

I play some guitar music written by a famous composer named Carlo Domeniconi. He used the I Ching to inspire his writing. They are very beautiful pieces and have been recorded by a brilliant player, Xuefei Yang. http://www.amazon.com/Si-Four-Seasons-Xuefei-Yang/dp/B000AXWHEY

Thanks for the advice, Karl.

I assume you're referring to my post above? The goals (hope) that the OP is referring to. No, the point I'm making is that goals are good and valuable as long as one feels they are needed. There may come a time when there is no need for goals, when that happens it will be very clear and effortless. What you point out is a a real problem that can occur. It is the result of improper view and training. I see it often in people who are too focused on the intellectual understanding of emptiness and not enough direct experience in meditation. It is one reason why having a good teacher is valuable rather than learning solely from books. The true result of proper practice is quite different from the nihilistic depression you describe.

So much good stuff in this thread! I think goals are natural and necessary in our lives. The masters often speak from the perspective of the natural state, absolute truth, the Dao. They give us a glimpse, a taste of that perspective as a guide, a beacon. When we intellectually grasp it and try to live as if it were truly realized in our life before it is ripe, it doesn't work - just as Rigdzin Trinley warns us. On the other hand, when we truly do have that taste we begin to spontaneously and effortlessly let go of that need, that desire to achieve or avoid; and the goal is already, naturally released. We're already there. If we have to think about whether or not goals are necessary then, in general, I would say yes, we are still living a normal life where goals are a natural and necessary motivating factor. Letting go of hope (goals) before we are ready can lead to confusion and a sense of hopelessness, a lack of support. The long and rigorous training methods that the Daoists and Buddhists practice may be different but I think they take us in a similar direction - they prepare and eventually bring us to the point where we are ready to truly let go. So many of us think we are ready before we are and I think that in and of itself can be a serious obstacle to forward movement. As long as goals are helping us to move our lives in a direction consistent with our core values, they are valuable and necessary. Once we have arrived - we know we are exactly what and where we need to be in life; then the characteristics of hope and fear are naturally and spontaneously liberated. Until we're at that point, I think we should make good use of a tool as valuable as setting and working towards goals.

I think I started taking myself less seriously the first time I opened my mouth to speak and my father's words came out. It was shocking! It was a bit terrifying! And it helped me to see just how conditioned and automated I can be. The other thing that helps is to really pay attention to the thoughts that I dwell on. These thoughts just come into my head and I can narrate a ridiculous story over and over to myself. It happens all the time but I'm usually so caught up in the content that I'm not aware of the process. I just talk to myself over and over, usually about meaningless, petty stuff; often stuff that I know gets me angry and yet I go there far too much. Then I imagine saying that stuff out loud, whether alone or with other people around. And I just laugh at myself. I can be ridiculous and an ass, so can you I imagine but that's for you to say.

I did read carefully. You called your posts egoistic after I referred to them as egocentric. I then pointed out the difference. I appreciate and respect that. Please note the first quote above, that is what I was referring to. I didn't accuse you of saying all beings were foolhardy and presumptuous. I implied that an egocentric mindset is. Just wanted to clarify where I was coming from and I'll let this go now and have that cup of tea.

Thank you for the reply. There is a difference between egoistic (self-serving) and ego-centric (unable to recognize that there are other valid viewpoints than one's own). As you seem to like analogies. Let's say I inherited a concert violin from my father, a soloist with the local symphony, and took lessons and practiced for a few years but was never able to master the instrument. Sure, I could scratch our a tune but nothing like my father and I could never get a chair in the symphony. Is it the fault of the violin? Does that mean that it is not possible that one can make beautiful music with that violin? Meditation didn't suit your proclivities and you did not find anything that was valuable for you there. To generalize that to all other beings is foolhardy and presumptuous. It's like going fishing one day and catching no fish and concluding that fish do not exist, even as others around you are catching them. You are welcome to argue your perspective, and I respect that as you are clearly intelligent, but you're not doing that, you're simply gratuitously negating all other points of view than your own.

This is a very egocentric perspective. There are other perspectives that are equally valid. While cultivation may be valueless masturbation for you, it can be enriching, healing, and transformative for others. I suspect Apech was suggesting that you acknowledge that there are other, equally valid viewpoints among people. There is much more to cultivation than this. Having friends with different values gives us the opportunity learn that there are different, valid perspectives. We can learn from others even if they don't share our views. It gives us the opportunity to change and to grow. Surrounding ourselves with clones is stifling and stagnant. One needs to be very quiet to connect with the subtle truth inside. This can be facilitated by retreat. Once stable, it can and should be brought effectively into one's daily life. Meditation and cultivation are not about abdication from the mind. That may have been your approach but it is not shared by most, certainly not in Buddhist or Daoist traditions. In fact, it is exactly the opposite. Meditation is about transcending ignorance. The result is quite different. Your posts are consistently egocentric. I can't tell if this is your view of the world or simply your way of communicating online. Either way, I suggest it can be very valuable to acknowledge that others can maintain different, yet equally valid perspectives. We can learn a great deal with this opening of our mind.

The Practice of Dzogchen in the Zhang Zhung Tradition of Tibet - John Reynolds The Tibetan Yogas of Dream and Sleep - Tenzin Wangyal Rinpoche The Path to Tranquility: Daily Meditations by the Dalai Lama - His Holiness the Dalai Lama ... and several transcripts from Bön Dzogchen retreats

but proper sowing means to get out of the way of Great Mystery

I've taken a little heat from friends and family, particularly my brother, due to my devotion to my practices. Fortunately, the ones who matter most have been supportive. Ironically my brother was head over heels into an orthodox religion a few years ago and then dropped it completely I suspect he looks at how it affected him and is concerned for me. It hasn't gotten in the way of our relationship as I simply accept his criticism, try my best to put his mind at ease, and leave it at that.

I think the OP is describing a realization of the two truths in Buddhism - relative and absolute truth - an important realization. For many of us on the spiritual path, a core question is who am I? This who takes many different forms and can be many different things simultaneously to ourselves and others. Who we are is basically an amalgam of identities: Mother, son, athlete, martial artist, sculptor, boss, man, woman, homosexual, philanthropist, our name, our race, liar, healer.... the list is endless. In trying to look at who we are it can be very instructive to watch how we react to situations and people. When we feel strong emotion of any type, we can see how that arises through over-identification with one of those roles and the associated expectations we and others have. As we get more adept at seeing that, the over-identification and attachments lessen and the associated challenges and suffering eases. Once that takes place, we no longer define ourselves by these identities and yet we can embrace them and be much more effective in any role because we don't over-identify and because we may develop a connection with the deeper experience of who.

Not to my knowledge although my teacher did say it comes from Shaolin

Shiba Luohan Qigong - 18 Arhat Qigong Trul khor, tsa lung, tummo, 9 breathings of purification all qualify as qigong although the Tibetans generally refer to them as yoga

You will also find deep similarities with Daoist meditation practices.

I share your feelings about Stalker - brilliant, but not for everyone.

Wonderful When to be silent

Nope, not a sensation - more like a knowing. Who are you quoting there? Yes, it is something like that.

There is a different kind of love or perhaps better to say a different experience of love. Very hard to capture this in words. As has been mentioned in other threads recently, there are experiences that cannot be communicated in words. If you have had the experience, you see and feel the truth of it and know what the other is pointing to. If you have not had the experience, you explain it away because there is no frame of reference. I understand your perspective and agree with your words from that point of view. I'm referring to something totally different.

I'll add the spin that, for many, this is judged most by our self but best by others. There is no one who is incapable of saying "I" and yet the experience of I does not require that one accepts that I as the central motivating factor of life. Love exists independent of the thought that labels itself "I" in my experience.

That is a very nice summary of what meditation is not. It puts me in mind of the via negativa of Aquinas.

That and daytime naps are generally the best time for lucidity.

I preferred the 1972 version.

Thanks for clarifying