doc benway

You've never asked me what I practice.

Nice post - very informative. Thanks

You are all winners in my book - after all, you were just trying to help.

I didn't expect you to have the courage to look at this question seriously, alwayson. Thanks for staying true to form, although I'm a bit disappointed, you could have done much better than this... I don't know - please teach me. In a relative sense, all paths are unique. In an absolute sense, is there a path that is not a manifestation of rigpa? You have walked the Christian path and now a Buddhist path, and have you changed? Are you not still the same angry and bitter person, trying to find something to ease your pain but failing? If you want to see truth, stop looking in your books and look more closely at yourself. It takes a lot more courage and patience, but it pays off. PS - I tried to take up Scientology but Tom Cruise never returned me calls, could you give him a message for me? Nice summary Apech.

Actually, I practice a lot more than I read - that's one of the reasons I put my foot in my mouth so often. The other reason is that I'm an ass and need to continue to work towards refining my character. I'd like to respond with a question of my own. Why is it that you claim to be Buddhist but appear to be incapable or unwilling to engage in any compassionate, loving, or supportive speech? Nearly all of your interactions with others on the board are negative, disrespectful, and destructive. I anticipate your typical patronizing or ad hominem response, knock yourself out. Yes, thanks for clarifying that. There are three major classifications of Mahamudra - Sutra, Mantra, and Essence, correct? Nevertheless, shamatha and vipassana are important components for many schools of Mahamudra. Is that not so? A few exerpts from a talk by Thrangu Rinpoche: "There are two main aspects to meditation: tranquillity (or Shamatha) and insight (or Vipashyana) meditation. These terms are used in several spiritual traditions, but mean different things in these traditions. In fact, we could say that any spiritual tradition that has emerged from India will at some point use these terms to describe their practice of meditation. For example, in the Hindu tradition, the terms Shamatha and Vipashyana are used, but they are different from the meditation techniques which are described in the Mahamudra tradition. The reason these same terms are used by different traditions is simply that both Hinduism and the Vajrayana tradition of Buddhism arose in India, and therefore both used Sanskrit words for the types of meditation." "The particular value of the Mahamudra approach to Shamatha and Vipashyana is that it is an approach which is easy to understand, and therefore appropriate to practice in daily life. In essence the basis of all practice of Buddha-dharma is taking hold of your mind, and by doing so, clearing away the problems which afflict your mind, and thereby allowing your good qualities to develop." "We have to begin meditation with tranquillity, or Shamatha meditation. And the reason we have to begin with tranquillity meditation, because normally our mind is not at rest. It is agitated by regret, by misery, by anxiety, and by all kinds of thoughts which disturb us. So, the first thing we need to do, is to calm our mind down, so our mind develops a healthy stability." I'll just let it go at that. Maybe I'm correct, maybe not, the endless arguments here are tiresome.

Thank you for the lesson. _/\_ And I'm very curious - who is your Dzogchen master who doesn't think shamatha or vipassana are useful on the path?

I think that is generally the case. Most insults are an exaggeration offered by someone who is disturbed and taking it out on you. They are generally astute and bitter enough to try and make the barb accurate enough to cause you harm. Hence, they are offering you an unprecedented (well, maybe not in your case... ) opportunity to learn and grow.

No No No, it is only the thought that tells you to write and contemplate; the thought that claims understanding that hopes "everything will continue from there on." Your natural state is still the same and will always continue from there on. Meditation is simply resting in that which is already there and unchanging. I personally think it would be more valuable to write down your moment to moment thoughts and each and every action you take throughout your day off the cushion. Then you will be better able to see that which is preventing you from already being fully engaged in the most profound level of meditation. All movements of thought... better to let them go than reify them. That was it, FWIW. Enjoy your day!

I must be channeling him... perhaps I'm a demon after all.

I'm very impressed that you can read my thoughts. You must be more highly attained than you let on... Have an A-1 day.

Another aspect of sunyata that is worth of deep consideration is the fact that it is very closely related to the non-dual experience. It is not just that things are empty of inherent nature, it is also that they are empty of inherent (read: independent) nature. Meaning: not other = non-dual. Hence sunyata and pratityasamutpada are two faces of the same coin. Similarly, karma is the third side of the same coin which teaches that not only things, but actions are empty of inherent nature, all are arising dependent on other actions. Sunyata teaches us that who we are is empty of independent nature (empty of inherent existence). Pratityasamutpada teaches us that what we are is empty of independent nature (dependent origination). Karma teaches us that where we are is empty of independent nature (interdependence of cause and effect).

floating in the dao awareness is manifest in clear spaciousness

With all due respect and much love to everyone here, this seems like such a silly argument. For those of us who feel that stability in shamatha is of value in supporting more "advanced" practices, we are blessed with the opportunity to practice it and will see its benefits for ourselves - no question about that. And the ready availability of such a powerful approach is a blessing to the world and sorely needed. Imagine if more people were skillful in tranquility and right view. For those of us who do not see value in shamatha and vipassana or have already achieved a high degree of proficiency, there is no need to do it... plenty of reading and studying and other things to do if that's what brings you success. Although, most of the masters recommend a consistent diet of both practices even beyond the first contact with the natural state. The Dzogchen and Mahamudra masters have consistently recommended and applied themselves to achieving shamatha and vipassana as a part of or in preparation to the "practice" of simple and direct being. This is clearly one reason why the advanced practices were secretive. Because they were usually wasted on those without the patience to first achieve skill and stability in tranquility and insight. There may be a rare person who can successfully go straight into the advanced and simplistic practice of direct being but for the majority of us, supporting practices of shamatha and vipassana greatly improve our chances of stabilizing and deepening the experience of, and the life lived from the natural state. And the masters have appropriately warned us not to become too attached to the practices themselves, lest we mistake the trees for the forest, hence the cautionary language that has been quoted out of context to support the argument against those practices. This is because all methods and practices eventually have to be let go - this was Krishnamurti's highly distilled message, it is also a consistent message throughout Buddhism - "the truth is a pathless land", 'once you cross the river you no longer need the canoe', and so on. It seems pretty simple.

Lots of folks have different perspectives on Daoism, both in and outside of China, and it's a beautiful thing that it is a rich enough tradition to offer different things to different people depending on their needs. There are those who focus on it's philosophical attributes, there are those who need the religious identity and support, there are those who use it as a roadmap for connecting with our natural state of being. The latter category is primarily what I am interested in - cultivation. Sadly, Daoism has been seriously affected by the cultural revolution. Everything Daoist in China needs to be viewed with a healthy skepticism. Much has been rebuilt out of the ashes with political and economic motivation by the authorities. Taiwan and the Chinese diaspora arguably maintain less corrupted lineages. My teacher is from Taiwan and practices some of the rituals of religious Daoism but has little interest in philosophy. He considers himself and his students to be "disciples" of the Dao and our primary focus is the cultivation and view. Philosophy for us is something that simply becomes obvious as a consequence of our life experience in association with our practice. Most of the religious ceremonies relate to certain ceremonial functions that involve lineage ancestors. It is important to acknowledge, however, that there is a role for looking into the historical basis for what exists today. While it is not something that interests me much, I do think there is value there.

.... just because Can it? Where and what is awareness? Most of us think we know the answer to that but if you dedicate some time really looking for it, it can be quite elusive.

why, I don't think so! endless shamatha practice has solved that problem

I guess I'm just responding to your earlier post. If everything is simply an exchange of energy and information within my neural network, what is the nature of that neural network? It's a rhetorical question really. I was hoping perhaps that it might point to something that may be worthwhile, like the idea of pratityasamutpada. From a Buddhist perspective, I think that the most important message is that the answer is not in the conceptual realm.

I like that.

Misunderstood perhaps, but definitely not over-rated. It is simply how things are. They are one and the same question.

I agree - too many associations and preconceptions with that word and pop concept. A more accurate word might be rebirth. I don't really believe in belief. Better to try and know or be ok to not know and keep an open mind. The concept of rebirth to me is intimately related to my view of things like my true nature and the nature of things, the nature of life and death, what we are after death and what we are before death. It's closely related to concepts like karma, sunyata, and pratityasamutpada. To the extent that we hold different views on these ideas, we will have different views on rebirth. One thing I find interesting is that I've spoken to a number of folks whose ideas on these various topics are internally inconsistent. That's one of the problems with belief - if I accept the explanation of an authority without personal validation, I risk grasping onto inconsistent and confusing views which I will then identify with and defend, all the while having no idea of what I'm defending.

Karma is a very simple concept and worthy of some attention. Apech, CT, and bubbles seem to have a good handle on it. There is no need to make the leap on faith regarding reincarnation. One can benefit from a study and understanding of the idea of karma without preconceptions, projections, or expectations. If an understanding of karma is useful to you, wonderful! If not, that's fine too. And you can certainly also just ignore it altogether but that doesn't mean it is not at work all around you at every moment.

Daoist writings are full of stories of Immortals. I am also of the mind that these are archetypes, myths, fables, and so forth. Many believe them literally but I see no need. They are just as instructive without resorting to belief. Zhuangzi often deals with the clash between human qualities and the neutrality of nature - the empty boat comes to mind. Most human problems are rooted in psychology, not biology or physiology. Hence Zhuangzi is often inviting us to recognize that the negative (and positive) emotions, hence the source of our troubles in inside of our heads, not in the natural world. I also agree with dawei that the "Immortal" is something we can aspire to in this way. But I also get the sense that Zhuangzi is of the mind that it is not something we will ever fully achieve. Compassion is a whole other issue. I have found, in general, that it is lacking to a large degree in both Zhuangzi and other Daoist classics. I'm hoping that you all with show me otherwise.

So does the neural net exist? If so, is it also simply energy and information?

The boneless ones are even easier -

Tough section. A few thoughts - Chien Wu is listening to Chieh Yu's talk and doesn't understand what is being said. He refuses to believe it because it doesn't make rational sense. Could Zhuangzi be giving us a lesson in how to listen? Maybe even how to listen to him? When we hear something new, if it doesn't fit into our sense of things, we tend to reject rather than open ourselves and investigate and make an effort to learn something new. And in particular with Zhuangzi, he is telling us new things that may not fit our normal expectations so we need to work to understand. When we listen, are we simply listening from the perspective of agreeing and using the speaker to validate and reify our position? Or are we listening to disagree and reject, and again reinforce our own story? Or is there another way of listening, with openness, without expectation or position? This takes work and is difficult. So who is the pale, shy guy with the soft voice who rides dragons and needs no sustenance other than air and water? He wanders beyond the four seasons and can concentrate his spirit to perform miracles. He's a Daoist Immortal it seems. Is this an archetype? A personification of nature itself? Then Lien Shu castigates Chien Wu, pointing out his ignorance. He refers to the "Immortal" as having the ability to solve human quarrels and problems but then asks, why should he bother? This seems to me a lesson in nature's lack of concern for human problems as manitou and rene were discussing in another thread. There is a sufi (I think) saying that goes something like, 'the nature of the rain is the same, yet it grows thorns in the marsh and flowers in the garden.' Similarly, the flood will drown an innocent child and spare a thief...