doc benway

I think that people change, societies change, and hence tradition changes. Traditions become what they are, in part, because they work, they are there for a reason. They withstood the test of time at some point in history. We can learn wonderful lessons from them and they can enrich our lives. It is equally important to recognize when they no longer serve their original purpose and may even be counter-productive. People tend to get stuck out of habit and change can be frightening and painful. One of my favorite stories from the beautiful Anthony Demello goes like this - (for those with a Jesus or God-aversion, substitute your preferred words in the appropriate places) Where’s the Fire? "There was a man who invented the art of making fire. He took his tools and went to a tribe in the north, where it was very cold, bitterly cold. He taught the people there to make fire. The people were very interested. He showed them the uses to which they could put fire: they could cook, could keep themselves warm, etc. They were so grateful that they had learned the art of making fire. But before they could express their gratitude to the man, he disappeared. He wasn’t concerned with getting their recognition or gratitude; he was concerned about their well-being. He went to another tribe, where he again began to show them the value of his invention. People were interested there too, a bit too interested for the peace of mind of their priests, who began to notice that this man was drawing crowds and they were losing their popularity. So they decided to do away with him. They poisoned him, crucified him, put it any way you like. But they were afraid now that the people might turn against them, so they were very wise, even wily. Do you know what they did? They had a portrait of the man made and mounted it on the main altar of the temple. The instruments for making fire were placed in front of the portrait, and the people were taught to revere the portrait and to pay reverence to the instruments of fire, which they dutifully did for centuries. The veneration and the worship went on, but there was no fire. Where’s the fire? Where’s the love? Where’s the freedom? This is what spirituality is all about. Tragically, we tend to lose sight of this, don’t we? This is what Jesus Christ is all about. But we overemphasized the “Lord, Lord,” didn’t we? Where’s the fire? And if worship isn’t leading to the fire, if adoration isn’t leading to love, if the liturgy isn’t leading to a clearer perception of reality, if God isn’t leading to life, of what use is religion except to create more division, more fanaticism, more antagonism? It is not from lack of religion in the ordinary sense of the word that the world is suffering, it is from lack of love, lack of awareness. And love is generated through awareness and through no other way, no other way. Understand the obstructions you are putting in the way of love, freedom, and happiness and they will drop. Turn on the light of awareness and the darkness will disappear." - Anthony DeMello

No time to read so much just now but nice to see you back, deci <3

More folks who think like you....

It takes so many different forms at different times in our lives but what seems to be the core element that must "die", this "something", is ignorance. Ignorance is the fundamental illusion we develop, and continually reinforce, that there is a separate, independent, "me" inside this bag of skin that is distinct from the environment that surrounds "me". It is the error that creates an illusion of solidity out of space and awareness. Ignorance is the idea that the thought which claims the responsibility of thinker and doer is anything more than just another thought. Ignorance is the tendency we have to attach ourselves to an identity based on the roles we play in life. These roles include our profession or job, our relationship to others (father, daughter, wife, friend, etc..), nationality, religion, gender - anything we can (and do) identify with. It is those identities which, when they clash with what is (as opposed to what "should be"), lead to pleasure and pain. We can work our way through each of these identities, which is very difficult and time consuming, or cut it off at the root - the fundamental process of identification, much more subtle and profound. And at some point, we must even realize that the one who seeks to do this is just another illusion, the seeking is the problem, another manifestation of ignorance, and simply rest in that from which all of this manifests. The common theme here is that ignorance seems to be a tendency to create substance out of space, a tendency for collapse rather than expansion, a grasping rather than letting go, an arresting of entropy, which creates something concrete out of emptiness and awareness. It is at the core of our life experience. I don't know that we actually ever let go of anything or that anything dies. It seems more that there is the recognition that even all of this which is ignorance and cause for confusion is still a manifestation of that which we feel we are lacking, that source. As you said, it is always already who and what we are and it is unchanging, uncreated, and unceasing. I think that what we are letting go of, what is dying, is habit. If you roll up a piece of paper for 20 years then let it unroll, what does it do? We have been rolled up in one way or another for countless lifetimes. You can look at that metaphorically but also, in reality, the conditioning gets passed down from generation to generation, its propagated throughout cultures and society. We are quite rolled up. As we allow ourselves to unroll and see that we are that very same paper, whether rolled or not, we sort of transcend the need to distinguish rolled from unrolled and simply rest as we are. Anyway, some random responses to a great thread. I'll probably have a different response tomorrow or in an hour.

I think that is a very personal question. Each of us much search within ourselves for our answer. For me, personally, the behavior of those whose methods and teachings I would follow is important. Not necessarily because unacceptable behavior is an indication that the method is ineffective, rather it is an indication that the individual has failed However, the role of the teacher is, in part, to set an example - to show the students what fruition looks like so that they are able to better recognize it in themselves and become self-sufficient. Without that sort of example to follow, the road becomes that much more challenging. We can find all the information we need in books, videos, internet sites, and so on... The teacher needs to inspire us to integrate that information and transform it into something beautiful. I feel very sorry for all those who were abused and their families. Predators are a part of our lives and it is their nature to prey on the vulnerable. Many of them are drawn to spiritual teachings perhaps in part in an effort to try and tame their demons, but also perhaps knowing that there is opportunity there. We must be ever vigilant.

I've been also following this since his stroke. The Miracle of Mindfulness was my first taste of Buddhism. What a beautiful man and beautiful life! His words and actions have favorably affected the lives of countless people and will continue to do so even when he is no longer breathing.

this thread puts me in mind of the wonderful King Missile song, Jesus Was Way Cool A Buddha version would be way cool

Spiritual music I enjoy - Arvo Pärt - Te Deum and Arbos Gabriel Fauré - Requiem Mass Max Bruch - Kol Nidrei for cello For me any music can be spiritual, these all happen to have some religious overtones... I don't really care whether or not I separate the two.

In my opinion, expectations are a setup for disappointment, aversion, and attachment. There is a difference between expectations and aspirations. I do not need to have an expectation to do things, to want to do things, to be in a relationship. Particularly in relationships, I think they have more negative than positive consequences. An expectation is essentially putting a condition on people and things, making a judgement. Much better to be true to oneself and one's choices and actions without being too concerned with the associated hopes and desires.

I gave up news several years ago. Thinking has its place but we do way more than we need, most of us.

That's the problem... We thing way too much

How certain are we that it ever left? I think this is a really valuable area of inquiry that manitou and others are pointing to. An analogy of this is space. It is difficulty for us to conceptualize "absence" but not only is there empty space but there is full space. While we feel that solid objects "take up" space - the space remains there along with the object that appears to be occupying it. In fact, the "solid object" is that space, it is simply that our sensory apparatus that permits us to see, hear, feel, taste, and so on, defines the energetic content of that space in ways that make it seem to us as solid. It is similar to silence, silence seems to be filled by sound but the silence remains there always, behind the sound, hosting the sound, sound is silence unless there is a tympanic membrane to vibrate connected to neurons that transmit signals to a brain for interpretation. In a similar way, while we are dreaming our life, we are really never separate from that which is the essence of both life and non-life.

What is an example of an Objective Truth?

Quoted in the hope that discussion and debate in these forums could someday exemplify the ideal dwai is pointing out. _/\_

Lately I've been liking Kuntuzangpo - literally translates as all good It's the word the Tibetans use to described the primordially pure nature of mind

Another way of putting this is, how do things exist in the absence of consciousness? Or, in order to avoid the debate about existence vs non-existence, what are things like in the absence of consciousness?

Pretty sad to see spiritual words and concepts hijacked and misused for personal gain. But then again, that is certainly nothing new. Folks who are of the mind to do whatever it takes to "get ahead" will do just that. If they are convinced that practicing compassion and generosity to those less fortunate will help them achieve their goal, that might not be such a bad thing - certainly better than the alternative. Clearly these folks don't understand karma, nor do they understand the relationship between spirituality and material wealth. Like all folks in the business world, they latch onto concepts and buzz-words for as long as they help them achieve their goals. What counts is not what spirituality does for you when you are successful but when you are lost, I hope that their new found "spirituality" is there for them in the end, when all of that material wealth is of no value whatsoever...

I think that wondering "why" is a peculiar characteristic of the movement of human thought being that it is rooted in speech and conceptualization. If thought can answer such questions, even with labels and concepts, it is able to rest in some illusion of security, at least until the next "why" pops up... Clearly this pattern has evolutionary and teleological advantage. I wonder if other sentient beings ask why? I've gotten less attached to focusing on such questions because I suspect that there are things that transcend our ability and tendency to conceptualize, one of which is the very nature of our being and awareness. Rather than look for a conceptual explanation, I rest in a direct connection and in that I find all the answers I need.

Interesting that human is perfect only when completely and utterly helpless. From the perspective of the absolute... does that ever change during our life and death?

All very good points - can't say that I disagree with any of them. Nice to share our unique perspectives with an open mind. Now, feel like talking about Buddhism? JK Edit - PS I wanted to address this: "Now, when someone says that their version of Taoism has very little to do with these texts -- that, in fact, it's better not to have read them -- how do I know that this 'Taoism' is even remotely similar to the 'Taoism' that I enjoy?" I can assure you that it is. Before practicing meditation, I'd given the classics a try. The more accessible extracts of the Zhuangzi made sense and struck a bit of a chord which is one thing that drew me towards Daoist practice. On the other hand, the unabridged Zhuangzi and the Laozi were too dry, abstruse, and boring and I couldn't stick with them. After years of practice, I had direct, experiential insight into the non-conceptual foundation - and the conceptual description was much more accessible. Although I must admit, Zhuangzi remains challenging. So yes, I think the experiential path is a most excellent approach and I'm convinced that this was the path of the sages.

We don't but we may choose to based on our culture, conditioning, and personal experiences. We don't although based on our personal experiences we may choose to. We don't, that said - what definition are you working with? There are experiences that living beings may have which lead them to use words like divine and immortal, unborn and undying, because no other words capture the experience that one is trying to communicate. Those who've not had such an experience may not be able to relate. It doesn't bug me at all, that is your privilege and your own personal interpretation... mine may or may not differ Again, your privilege - that is your personal view and I respect it, but it is limited, just as mine is. Whether or not it bugs you it is an accurate observation that the umbrella of Daoism includes gods, immortals, magic, science, meditation, qigong, neigong, military arts, philosophy, shamanism, sexual practices, exorcism, divination, and more. That's simply a dispassionate, unbiased observation of Daoism as it has been practiced in China for centuries... Not all Daoists practice every aspect of Daoism - meditation, taijiquan, divination, sexual alchemy, qigong, neigong, ba shi, exorcism, religious ceremonies, or the study of Dao De Jing or Zhuangzi. My teacher from Taiwan had no interest whatsoever in the philosophy - none. He even discouraged us from reading about it as he felt it was a complete waste of time - any time 'wasted' in reading was better spent in practice. He taught us that everything we needed to know about philosophy would come naturally from our practice and would be much more valuable and true because it arose out of experience rather than someone else's words. I'm not saying he's correct - it's just his way, probably learned from his teachers. I think that the cultural richness and wide variety of practices and views enhances, rather than detracts. It shows us the enormous beauty and diversity of human thought and activity. No need to be judgmental about it, IMO.

I don't really agree with you here. You (and I) are certainly free to define Taoism in terms of what aspects of it we resonate with, choose to quote and inform our life and actions, but in my view the word Taoism encompasses the entirety. There are many different schools within Daoism but even these incorporate elements far beyond the purely secular and philosophical. We may just have to agree to disagree here. I feel that using a very general term, like Daoism, Buddhism, Judaism, human being, water, refers to a general definition. As you get more and more specific in your definition, that is a personal choice and hence, we create something unique. I actually do like how the atheistic aspect of Daoism allows those who have no interest in religious ritual to use the philosophical elements to inform their lives and choices. I have no objection to it. But I think it's important to distinguish that limited definition from the more general one. And I don't mean to make a judgement here, one is not better than the other, simply different. My own view and practice of Daoism incorporates philosophical, practical (cultivation), martial, and shamanic elements but little in the way of any religious belief, interest, or ritual practices. That is mine - no one else's. Yes, it is Daoism and no, it does not define Daoism for anyone other than me. I respect and support your choice. At the same time, in choosing to emphasize certain aspects and ignore others, you are creating something unique to your choices. It does not encompass all that Daoism implies. I think this thread is full of them. Give me a little time to think of something more obvious, perhaps. The Daoists I know who practice the religious rituals and shamanic rituals (I actually do practice the latter to some degree) do not consider what they are doing as "religious" or "shamanic" as a separate or distinct entity, it is simply a part of the their Daoist view and practice, which incorporates the philosophical and cultivation aspects as well, to whatever degree they choose as individuals. Maybe so but, at least for me, it is very valuable to be aware of the degree to which my choices create my reality. I can learn and grow when I am aware of that. In fact, my exposure to Daoism had nothing to do with Laozi or Zhuangzi. I exposed through the practice of Chinese martial arts and Daoist cultivation and shamanism. In fact, my teacher discouraged reading and studying and emphasized practice above all else. Being the Westerner that I am, I have done some reading anyway but the philosophical parts, the reading, the theory, mean little to me beyond what has grown out of the direct experience of my practices. Again, this is my unique "brand" of Daoism - not right, wrong, better, worse, or comprehensive. Just mine...

There are many hours of recorded talks on his website...

I've quoted John O'Donohue before and it seems relevant 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." PS - he was a Celtic, Christian poet and mystic, and I love listening to him speak - his brogue is simply lovely

My issue was that you claimed Taoism to be an Atheistic philosophy, which it is not. Taoism is far more than a philosophy. Certain individuals choose to extract philosophical concepts form Taoism, often out of context, and I think it's important to recognize that is what is happening. There is also no such thing as Shamanic Taoism or Religious Taoism. There is Taoism and there are individuals and groups who define what that is for them based on their personal, cultural, philosophical, and religious biases. I think that is a valuable distinction to make. If either one of them was half the sage they seem to have been, they knew quite clearly that they are God, looking out through their human eyes in their personal, individual, and transient organic encapsulation, so it wasn't an issue. The problem is, not enough folks have that recognition. That is the source of our struggles. In terms of our relationship with the Great Mystery, the Great Mother, God, Mystery, Dao, Non-duality, Brahman, Buddhamind... whatever, what counts is not how we conceptualize or label it, but that we work towards recognizing, revealing, and integrating it into our lives in ways which lead to balance, harmony, peace, love, and happiness. Yes, I acknowledge that all paths are different, methods, are different, fruition and goals are different, but all of that is our creation. What is beyond that which we create? That is what we are and integration with that is the goal of cultivation.