doc benway

Does anyone know what makes this possible? I'll take a stab at that. First - it's ok to accept multiple "truths" since the universe revels in contradiction and paradox, it's simply the rational mind that abhors it. But that's really beside the point. Second - scientific "fact" is nothing more than a "best current approximation" based on the strongest present theory (ie best predictive value). Belief does not need to enter in at all. Belief is to simply accept an explanation for the unknown. It is stagnant. The questions are always alive. Science gives the opportunity to test that explanation and either accept or reject, wash, rinse, repeat.... Always refining the image further and further until a new one takes it's place due to some new perspective or observation presents itself. It's very alive. Science is simply a tool that makes predictions, tests those predictions against observation, and adjusts the predictive theory accordingly. As our ability to make more accurate observations improves, our theories must adapt. Any rigid, inflexible rules and laws are not really science. Science is flexible and adaptable or it is rapidly obsolete. It is not a sign of weakness that science changes it's theories and predictions, but a sign of strength.

When a pebble falls into a pond, there are ripples, eventually they disperse, and come again. That is Dao... When ripples occur in mind, the ripples are there, and disperse, and return, that is also Dao. Bu Diu, Bu Ding

How certain are you of this? We have many expectations about things that are deeply rooted in us and mostly beyond everyday conscious awareness. Our conditioning is pervasive and can be traced through generations that have preceded us. In fact, we are our conditioning to a large degree. Personally, I would not be so quick to believe that statement. More likely, he was not aware of his expectations and conditioning, IMO. Edited to add a quote from his article, there is no expectation here? The bolding is mine. "Although I considered myself a faithful Christian, I was so more in name than in actual belief. I didn’t begrudge those who wanted to believe that Jesus was more than simply a good man who had suffered at the hands of the world. I sympathized deeply with those who wanted to believe that there was a God somewhere out there who loved us unconditionally. In fact, I envied such people the security that those beliefs no doubt provided. But as a scientist, I simply knew better than to believe them myself."

Lot's of folks have memories of something after coma and near death experiences. Is it heaven? Is it some altered state of consciousness informed and influenced by our conditioning and expectations? I suspect more the latter, but that's just based on my own conditioning and expectations. I think it's much more interesting to look at why there is an expectation of an afterlife and how that effects our daily life.

Most of what I've read has been of little help. Some of what I've read has been an acknowledgement of progress I've made through practice. A few things I've read have really had a profound influence - these latter authors have somehow connected with me and helped me to understand that I need to practice, rather than read. However, they also gave me some guidance regarding what direction to take that practice. The two that had that effect the most are Jiddu Krishnamurti and Anthony Demello. My teacher (meditation and martial arts) has always pushed the practice over reading.

Lot's of folks claim to have visited heaven... This one happens to be a doctor. I think that our ideas of what heaven is influence memories we have of states in which our consciousness was altered. It really doesn't mean much to me.

It's a shame Otis hasn't been around lately to address this, he's a master of playfulness... I'm way too serious most of the time.

Nice, do I have your permission to borrow that sometime?

In my opinion, the Taoist who criticizes Zen hasn't yet had much insight into either ...

I just started reading Ghostwritten by David Mitchell. Interesting so far... He's the guy who wrote Cloud Atlas which was very good.

All good points. It is very subtle and is a skill that can be developed and mastered with practice. It's most definitely not easy and yet it is the simplest thing in the world. A starting point is to observe yourself (your thoughts, feelings, interactions with others, responses, behaviors) as if they were happening to someone else. Just observe. No resistence, no separation (just like taiji), just be with it and pay attention. Another aspect is that it is important to not identify with what is going on: - rather than say to yourself "I am sad" or "I am angry" take the approach "there is sadness there, this is what sadness feels like, it will linger for a bit and eventually will pass" - that sort of thing. There is much more to us than one particular emotion. And from moment to moment that emotion changes. Not identifying is sometimes easy and sometimes very hard. It is not unusual to find oneself in the throes of a particular emotion or reaction and, just like in meditation, it's important to not be hard on yourself and feel like you've failed, but just practice awareness and attention. And with patience it really pays off... I recently listened to some talks by a retired priest turned Celtic spiritual teacher/poet named John O'Donohue. He reinterprets the phrase, "the meek shall inherit the Earth" as "the gentle shall inherit the Earth." This brings a whole new meaning to this phrase - he is reading this as extolling the virtues of sensitivity, subtlety, and gentleness in spiritual matters. And those of us who meditate know just how critical it is to approach the inner landscape with sensitivity, subtlety, and gentleness.

Another approach to change - If you take time to pay attention to things - to really be aware of what is going on inside and around you, over time that very process of becoming aware fosters profound change. You don't have to do anything. No need to desire or intend anything. All you need to do is watch and listen and pay attention. It really works. This is doing by non-doing.

Spend time looking at trees and respectfully asking for their help. Even with expert instruction, it was a tree that taught me how to stand and walk the circle...

If I were to subscribe to a single tradition, I would say it is awareness. I try to pay attention to myself, my behavior, my thoughts, my relationships. I try to see myself not just through my own filter but through the eyes of others. I came to it through a combination of influences - Krishnamurti, Demello, Osho, Watts, Daoist meditation, Acceptance/Commitment Therapy. All traditions contain truth - sometimes very obvious, often buried and subtle. Truth has no religion or tradition. You will find bits and pieces everywhere you look if you are diligent and sensitive.

My guess is that smoking, for most people, is a mindless ritual. A habit, an addiction. It is nothing like true meditation. That said, anything done with complete mindfulness can be a meditation but I doubt that is what is going on with most smokers. It certainly wasn't a part of what I did when I was a smoker...

Joni's version was pretty good too...

I've been listening to some talks by a great speaker named John O'Donohue. Here's a quote I stumbled upon about friendship: “Real friendship or love is not manufactured or achieved by an act of will or intention. Friendship is always an act of recognition.” An act of recognition - I love that! My good friend Jeremy is like that for me. At first our friendship was awkward and tentative. Little by little, we've come to really know each other and recognize ourselves in each other. There are all the qualities we like to think about and talk about in a friend - supportive, dependable, there when I need him, someone to hang out with, train with, share happiness and pain with, and all of that. But what he has really become to me that is extremely valuable and unique is a mirror that reflects back something about myself that I may sometimes overlook or deny, and I to him... And I think that quality of our relationship challenges each of us to know ourself better and therefore to grow further into our potential than we might otherwise have done. That dynamic may also be there to some degree with a lover or a spouse, or a sibling or even a parent, but there's something about a friend that doesn't bring quite so much baggage or context to muddy the waters. I really like how this thread has stimulated me to think about friendship. Thanks for that Aaron and everyone.

And we've got to get ourselves back to the garden...

Styles don't fight, people do. Great style, lazy student, crappy teacher --> good luck... "Watered down" style, great teacher, diligent student = plenty of potential. I think it can be very tough to judge the quality of a teacher, especially if you aren't already familiar with what he/she is teaching. I've been blessed with some great teachers and have crossed paths with a few crappy ones. It wasn't always obvious in the beginning which was which. Furthermore, it is not unusual in a traditional school for the master to teach only the advanced lessons and have senior students teaching the basics. Some of the instructors in a school will be better than others. No one is perfect. My current teacher is the best I've had the privilege to train with, by far. When I joined his school, i barely had a chance to meet him other than a brief introduction, and had no direct training with him at all. Occasionally, he'd gather all the students and allow them to ask any questions they wanted for an hour or two but most of the beginner, basic, and intermediate classes were taught by his senior students. After about 2 years, I got an invitation to his class - advanced Taijiquan. Only after about a year in that class did I really begin to glimpse the depth of his knowledge. When he allowed me, I started practicing meditation with him and sought private instruction in the other internals (Xingyi and Bagua). When he thought I was ready, I jumped into teaching for him. Little by little, I've come to understand his method of teaching and how effective it is. However, it is not the sort of thing where everyone that joins his class becomes an expert. His method of teaching rewards the very few folks who work hard on their own, inside and outside of class, the ones who really dig into it and go above and beyond, the ones who stick around for a long time and get involved in teaching for him and so forth. The only way we really got the maximum benefit from his instruction was to find like minded folks in the class who would come in before class, stay after, meet on off days, and really work the stuff. Repeating the drills over and over, trying to really figure out how to make the stuff work, looking for variations, lots of trial and error. And then asking questions when necessary. He could tell who was working and how hard by the questions. And that guided what he would share with a student... I never saw him happier than when he would stop in on a Sunday when the school was closed to find a few of us hard core students training on our own (once we started teaching, he'd give us a key). His way of teaching (and what he referred to as the "traditional" method) is to show the student the basic movement and then allow them to really explore the possibilities on their own while periodically giving corrections as needed to keep them headed in the right direction. So much of the art cannot be "taught" by the teacher but rather unearthed, developed, and polished through diligent practice and study under proper guidance. I'd follow GrandmasterP's advice. Jump in, see what comes, and over time you'll know if you made the right choice. In the beginning it's hard to go too far wrong with the basics. Any school you spend time in will be better than reading our posts and looking at youtube clips! Good luck!

In that case, you must not have read my earlier post on Song in this thread or perhaps you disagree with it. Do you think that Yin must exist without Yang and Yang without Yin? Only one way to find out the answer - practice, practice, and more practice! Contradiction is healthy, it invites you to investigate further.

I try to listen carefully to the subtle stirrings within and without...

I think true friends are a blessing and a gift. I also think that it is important to recognize that my happiness doesn't depend on others, whether they be friends, lovers, or family. Friendship is only a trap if you attach your happiness to the relationship. It is beautiful to enjoy the camaraderie of friends and equally wonderful to be comfortable completely alone when you (or they) choose.

To the OP - I'm partial to Osho's definition of religion- I will paraphrase: Real religion is a person's private, internal search for their true nature Everything else is politics. If you have a background in Christianity and tend to think of the world in terms of that concept of God, there are two sources I'd highly recommend for a glimpse into "real" religion (as opposed to institutional politics and idolatry) - Anthony Demello (http://www.demellospirituality.com/) - now deceased Jesuit priest and psychologist from India. All of his writings are priceless (especially Awareness) and his CD collection called Wake Up to Life is brilliant. It's about 8 CDs and I've listened through them all multiple times, always learning something new. John O'Donohue (http://www.johnodonohue.com/) - also deceased priest who retired from the clergy in 2000 to teach spirituality in a Celtic framework informed by his love of poetry and nature. I'm currently listening to a set of CDs of his talks called Wisdom from the Celtic World (for the second time). Absolutely beautiful and brilliant stuff. He perfectly reveals the essence of Daoism in the language of Celtic spirituality and Christianity. I never could really see the wisdom in the Christian scriptures until seeing it through the eyes of the these two teachers. I'm not a Christian, mind you (never have been), but I can now hear and see how those scriptures are pointing toward the truth, like the great writings of other traditions. Sadly, most of that is intentionally and effectively obscured by the institutional framework within which it is presented. In fact, the church was so threatened by DeMello's words that the present pope issued this warning to Catholics in his previous job as official censor for the Vatican - http://www.ewtn.com/...ia/cdfdemel.htm

I made no assumptions but I did reach some conclusions based on your earlier comments. Song, Ting Jin, and Fa Jin are names of three important skills used by Taiji players. All three are used offensively and defensively. I still listen when I issue. I am Song at all times. All three require intensive practice and expert instruction to develop. There is no Fa Jin without Ting Jin. There is no Ting Jin without Song Jin. And so on... You can artificially try to dissect out specific concepts in your head but that's not where Taijiquan is practiced. You are too wrapped up in words - to understand requires practice and expert guidance, especially with respect to subtle and complex skills like Ting, Song, and Fa Jin.

I'm not here much anymore (or anywhere else online for that matter) but I do think you bring a sense of maturity, wisdom, and sincerity with you Shanlung. Marblehead, also. And I think Marblehead hit the nail on the head, as usual... So I just would like to say that I hope you continue to spend a bit of time here, Shanlung. Yes, it can be frustrating but if you connect with a few sincere folks and are patient, it can grow into something more rewarding. I've developed some valuable connections here (sadly, most of those folks are quite scarce, but that's ok). And it's good practice to work on letting go of any attachment to the words we put out there and the replies they evoke....