contrivedname!

yea ive heard that story about nicotine and heroine and i think its a bunch of bull, though i havent read any studies its just that i have seen people detoxing heroine and well yeah something that can kill you if you quit cold turkey seems a bit more addicting (at least physically) than something that doesnt. smoking cigarettes to me has no positive benefit, though ceremonial tobbaco can make sense (didnt some tribes mix it w/ ganja?) @pranaman - i thought ayahayusca (sic) was a mix of dmt (indole psychadellic) and a beta carboline to act as an maoi? as for alcohol it can be very useful, and very detrimental (yin/yang, like soo many things in life). being able to depress the cns can actually be very useful in spiritual practice, the problem is the side effects and large potentiality for addiction.

ahh a voice of reason and it looks as tho "diamondpurity" may have taken your advice (dare i call it a teaching )

dont know i aint very computer saavy, though i would guess it is when people shift their ip range, but i dont even know how to find out my ip let alone change it , but i am aware that sean has the ability to do this; i have been reading this forum since around november or so, but didnt decide to join in until feb

no but if you are still, like gossamer (thank you guru gossamer), assuming i am someone i am not feel free to check my and golds ip address', i post at night at work, and sometimes in the day after i get home. it may be a good idea to trust someone for their word sometimes. and once again, if i am making an incorrect inferrance, please correct me

excellent thoughts, i agree @santiago - i'll ask again, do you feel that the essence of god is outside of yourself? what led me to this question is that you posted in another thread a statement that made me think this. plus, if you dont mind, i was wondering about nyingma tradition of tibet which you have been initiated into, if you would like to provide me with information on this i would be grateful.

i asked this in my new post about stoicism and daoism, but figured this title is more general and may get more exposure. i ran into the ddj while i was doing searching a site called librivox where you can download free audio books. i always kind of liked eastern stuff as a child growing up, but i had no idea what ddj was, however i downloaded it because of the chinese name after hearing it once it totally peaked my interest, not only in daoism, but in spirituality in general and philosophy as well (id had some spiritual type experiences before, but barley had any "labels" for them). this is a big community and since i am so new to it i was hoping to get to know a bit more about the folks who post here. peace and love chris

heres one i really like, it is on principia discordia (i think thats what the site is called) anyway this is from memory so bear with me: "an aspiring zen monk met a zen master and asked the master what he should do to attain enlightenment. the zen master told him to go to a specific house at a specific time and to sit down near the balcony by the stair well, and meditate. the monk dutifully did as was told. after a short time some frat kids stepped onto the balcony and threw a bucket of shit over the ledge. it hit the monk on the head whereupon the frat kids noticed him. one asked the other "who is that?" and the other answered "some say that he is a holy man, others say that he is a shit head" upon hearing this the monk attained enlightenment.

thanks for the responses xuesheng - could you explain to me what you mean by daoist meditation i.e. what is involved in your practice of this? im really raw when it comes to 'set' practices, as for my types of meditiation they usually arent planned per se, but the contemplative state sort of seems to arise on its own, spontaneously if you will, currently i am sort of attempting to achieve that state of mind in my normal actions thruout day to day living

uhh hawk, if you are trying to imply that i am gold you are dead wrong. if not sorry for the assumption ahh and lost monk the most bitter and abusive poster that i have encountered here, take santi's advice to gold man, lighten up if you are more curious about my outlook, i post at daoisopen forum under the alias manyisone, i also did some recording for librivox under the name oneinmany, i derived the name for this forum as a type of self sarcasm

quite honestly i am very surprised at how an individual such as gold is heavy has been interpreted and reacted to by a forum on spirituality and also by some of the apparent levels of maturity (i will be the first to admit that i dont know anybody here personally so it is apparent). especially one that has the "Dao" in the title. does ego ever "not exist"? i sure dont think so; it is a tool that can be used to great good or evil (if you enjoy the use of that particular dichotomy). so why all the fuss that gih decided to poke some holes in santiago's ego? hasnt he welcomed criticisms of himself? hasnt he said that he believes santi to be fair and honest and "sells a good product"? those dont sound like the wanton attacks that people seem to like to paint them as. do people shout at madman yu when reading chuang tzu because he says "virtue" has failed? and frankly if i was some wonderful teacher (and i am not, and have no transmissions, or gurus or the like or if youd like to say it different i have countless gurus) i would be appalled at all the people (my students?) who would presume to come in and caress my ego, cause god forbid, someone called me a business man for the fact that, in essence, i run a business doesnt the nyingma tradition of tibet, which you have been initiated into, santi, (according to your statement), discourage "idiot compassion" (trungpa's term, or was that just his idea, please correct me here if i am wrong) and isnt one supposed to actually attempt to eliminate this type of "idiot compassion" or ignorance when they see it? oh but maybe thats what you intended to do by, in caps, and repetitively, thanking someone who creates a topic on "how to properly thank someone", because they posit that, at least for them, thanking can be negative and build up ego. so if a vegetarian posted a thread stating how it isnt "Proper" to eat meat would you end your posts by saying "time to go eat a steak"? however now i am just adding water to a flood (ie fueling an argument) so i suppose i should stop here... i do agree that a business transaction, no matter how much bang for the buck, shouldnt be regaded as free giving, great point gih locking this topic is a horrible idea imo, so we should just reject things that are uncomfortable and push our buttons? so much for learning; has nobody heard of the lotus growing from a swamp? but since gih has welcomed it, i will persue with criticisms of him: while you make good points sir, i believe that you come off as extremely arrogant and combative at times. if you are "bashing" santi for not being open, why do you refuse to be open about you and your past? i know you answered that question, but i think it was a dodge. and santi did give a good piece of advice, you could lighten up a bit (or maybe you behavior is purposefully contrived ) so he did freely give that oh and using a quote from jesus to imply that gold is swine, is just well, not the message jesus had in mind imo, after all didnt he just teach shit to anyone who would listen; i think that is definately implied. and santi, did i miss read you in another post, do you really think the "essence of god" is separate from you it seems like not just one, but both of you are trying to discredit each other to some degree, maybe there is something to the idea that "contention is born from learning" now ill do a bit of my own regurgitation "you can do good w/out thinking about fame, but fame will follow in its wake, fame makes no tryst with gain, yet gain will come all the same, gain makes no tryst with strif, yet strife will certainly ensue, therefore the superior person is very cautious about doing good" -yang chu (from the Liezi, Lionel Giles translation) edit: so much for stopping about three paragraphs ago

i see what your saying, thanks for clarifying. makes sense to me. was your question really seeking an answer though?

not sure i understand what you are saying. if i understand correctly you just said "when people start getting empathic they are paranoid people can read there minds?" the part "they're paranoid people can read there minds?" really doesnt make sense (maybe just to me) in english could you rephrase it possibly? sorry for the misunderstanding, i would just like to be able to answer your question

have not heard of hui-peng, sorry and no i dont have experience with either programming or surgery, my point was that if you are comparing any two vastly different types of practice, surgery and spiritual cultivation or programming and cultivation i think one might be running into the problem of oversimplification. i guess i see surgery and programming as two technical trades that dont have a whole lot to do w/ spiritual cultivation. i see it as being the same kind of concept in that they are analogies taking two things that arent spiritual practice and comparing them to spiritual practice in order to illustrate two diverging points, i agree that programming and surgery are probably a lot different. good point about hui-neng; the exact "teaching" a student may need could be to "enlighten" themselves and to not rely on a teacher

one of my favorite fools said this: "but in case we fail to enlighten ourselves, we have to seek the guidance of the pious and learned ones. On the other hand, those who enlighten themselves need no extraneous help. It is wrong to insist upon the idea that without the advice of the pious and learned we cannot obtain liberation. Why? Because it is by our innate wisdom that we enlighten ourselves, and even the extraneous help and instructions of a pious and learned friend would be of no use if we were deluded by false doctrines and erroneous views. Should we introspect our mind with real Prajna, all erroneous views would be vanquished in a moment, and as soon as we know the Essence of Mind we arrive immediately at the Buddha stage." (hui-neng sixth zen patriarch) Interesting it is that it seems most on here who say "you dont need a teacher" dont hesitate to look to the other side and add that it could be helpful or even necessary for some individuals, but on the other hand you both assert that there is no other side to the equation? so, there is just yin and no yang, or only yang and no yin? give me a break... so the use of one somewhat arbitrary analogy to elucidate your experiential lens (or Idries Shah's) is okay, but someone using the same concept for an "opposing" point of view should be likened to child's play? Re: "When the student is ready the master will appear", personally i dont think that this refers to some single master magically appearing when you are "ready", i think this implies that when you are "ready" you will realize that the real teacher/student is you, not two. or if you prefer, that every thing and situation you encounter you accept as a teacher, as something to learn from. like chokeham drunkpa , said "all situations become guru" (or something to that effect, i think, that quote is from memory), he also said that one needs a guru, quite interesting... @goldisheavy i really enjoy your posts, it seems you put a lot of insight and thought into them, i think i may have just learned a thing or two from them (at least conceptually), but i dont think i am going to do prostrations at you

sure does, ive found sometimes i will think someone is disagreeing w/ me or they will think i with them and then one or the other simply explains it a bit different and we find we were saying the same thing!, just filtered differently thru our experience or intellectual understanding, or maybe even thru both? kind of a tangent, but i think some traditions place too much emphasis on one aspect and then neglect, or even condemn the other, e.g. saying experience is the be all and end all of "enlightenment" (such a loaded word), or on the other hand saying that one must be constantly expanding knowledge in order to "progress"; i would posit that sometimes one "begets" the other (and i do think this can work both ways), what say you?

i agree w/ this, though i agree w/ rabbit and bruce as well. in my opinion opinions ( ), judgements, and differentiations are originally a primitive tool which was developed (lacking better term at the moment) by humans in the early beginnings of human consciousness, basically to like the things that are beneficial and dislike those that arent. for example when experimenting with food sources the earliest types of judgments may have been along the lines of "this plant is good because i can eat it" and on the other hand "this plant is bad because it makes me sick or can kill me". in this regard judgments are useful tools for survival of the species, that can be passed down generationally. where judgments probably started their errant course is in the further development of the human ego, when people not only began to further try to extrapolate effects from causes (ie other than the most basic) but started applying their tool of judgment to social constructions, behaviors, etc. and to create sysytems to describe these things, ie gods, spirits, tao, etc. (im not necessarily saying this is good or bad), which could very well be the beginning of the development of ego as we "know" it today. i guess my point in saying all this is at some point in our evolution, imo, humans began to separate judgment from a very basic prinicple of utility and began to expand it outwards into other areas, eventually ariving at ideas such as right and wrong, good and evil, righteousness and wickedness, etc., the setting up of dichotomies if you will (duality). again, these became a useful tool for humans, but now more in respect to their social interactions also, as opposed simply to survival. hmm, back to my original point, where the tool went errant is when the ego developed to the point where it stopped using this as a tool and it became the lens through which to view reality (and perhaps, on the other hand, it started this way and it was only once ego became more deveolped that the concept of transcendence arose). phew, well thats some of my long winded thoughts on this subject

havent read this so i cannot comment on it directly, though i agree, any practice which uses another for your benefit w/out also benefiting them is just plain wrong. if the system suggests that in this practice the female should also give her energy to the male (yin on yang and yang on yin) then this would seem to be a balanced practice

what crops are you trying to tend? mine seem to grow as they please; undesired weed and insects alike, whom am i to say they are not alike? continue with the crops...? my thoughts exactly, though sometimes i find complication illuminates simplicity, uhh errr

hello all, i actually stumbled upon this forum a couple of months ago, when a member here, gossamer (hope shit works out for ya), started posting in another daoism forum that i post in called daoisopen.com (or dao is insane if you prefer ) i live in california i ran across the dao de jing a few years ago when i started to become interested in spiritual endeavors. it was the first major work of any tradition that i read (yes even before really had much exposure to christianity or bible, besides a little bit when i was younger and the obvious societal conditioning that goes w/ said tradition, had never actually read the bible, only heard quoted) and when i read it i had no idea of any history, lineages (still kind of an odd concept in some ways to me), or any of the actual practices (qi gong, tai ji, etc.) and i suppose you could say that i still have that level of understanding of these things. i am also very interested in buddhism, particularly zen and tibetan, though again, am quite unfamiliar with the actual structured practices per se, though really i am interested in learning about most traditions, i just seem to bend in the direction of those stated more. there are many posts and topics here which i have found quite interesting and have finally decided to jump on in and add my input. i have also noticed that lienshan has been posting his "mawangdui b" translations here as well, good luck to you sir! (kinda doubt you'll read this, but maybe)

echo...

i find myself agreeing w/ a lot of what you are saying. i think that the various spiritual paths are like guidelines, but not set in stone, i.e. i think the "enlightened" masters hoped by giving their example of how they achieved this always elusive, enigmatic state, that others may be able to learn from their experience and thus produce their own experience of enlightenment. a good saying is "dont mistake the finger pointing at the moon for the moon" personally, a historical, possibly legendary figure, i like on this subject is hui-neng, who says things like "whether sutra chanting will enlighten one or not depends on the mind", "for straight-forward behavior the practice of dhyana may be dispensed with", or in one story he lauds the individual who has "realized the essence of mind" yet has nothing to do with the four noble truths. my point is that imo a true master isnt one who simply relays a set of timeworn instructions, s/he is one who helps an individual return to (or realize if you will) their basic nature. ps i dont think those are direct quotes, just from me memory interesting that we were both posting about that school at the same time... edit: hmm interesting scripting, if you reply to a subject you were the last post on it simply adds it to your previous post

i can relate with this, or at least the topic header. it seems to be a little trick of the ego when your consciousness begins expanding, your ego seems to want to asert itself even more overtly ergo paranoia. Paranoia is a very solid grounded feeling in a sense. it is one of egos most frantic attempts to maintain its ground and has a very insane feeling-quality to it, especially if you arent used to such an overt display of it! however, in my experience i have found that while "disturbing" and even "frightening" these experiences are extremely useful in the scope of a spiritual practice. i like to think of ego as a self-dismantling tool, i.e. when it tries to assert itself the hardest, its illusion and ridiculousness become the most overt and hence the perfect opportunity to for a spiritual practioner to "cut thru" it, i.e. redirct the energy surrounding it. paranoia has also a very awake, alert, and focused quality as well. this state can also be used in connexion w/ "great liberation through hearing in the bardo", bardo to my knowledge, meaning the intermediary state between birth and death. in this instance meaning between the birth and death of newly arising/subsiding paranoia. to hear, meaning to precieve the middle ground of these fluctuations where the energy is "luminous" as the texts speak of it, that is, the center of yin/yang where dichotomies are no longer polar but the same basic energy of now, which seemingly manifests itself in different forms (preception-impulse) thru your ego projections. to put it differently, "this" can be a "that" and "that" can be "this", "that" is born because of there being a "this"; cut away the dualism, and return the basic. anything i post is always from MY understaning (hope i made that clear) and hence can be disregarded, ridiculed, or whatever is your fancy. it may be that i am blowing a bunch of hot air, especially since i have no master or lineage of which to relate.