forestofclarity

I've heard a number of debates whether these things are "created," or "uncovered," but either way the practice would be the same. Interesting point about sporty people reinforcing the machine-body feeling--- I suppose from a Taoist point of view, we could say that your intention (and until we reach wu wei, we probably always have one) is going to impact your practice one way or another. If I am following what he's saying, the yi would also shape the qi. I think this is why he is advocated the "relaxed" as opposed to "focused" approach. It may be that a focused intention would introduce contractions into the LDT that you don't want. Lately, I have been practicing sinking, so when I relax in standing, my awareness goes to my feet!

Well, Xing and Ming is a tangential point, and one I am not taking issue with. I would not say that cultivating the Ming aspects are unimportant--- if I did, I certainly would not be spending all this time on Taoist practice! When I first starting getting into this stuff, some one remarked that if you have a mind issue, talk to a Buddhist. If you have a health/body issue, talk to a Taoist. Of course, both paths include both, but I have found that as presented in the modern West in my personal experience, Buddhism has lost a great deal of Ming knowledge, and what is still available is difficult to obtain. On the other hand, most available Taoism I have had contact with has lost a great deal of Xing knowledge and tends to revolve around martial arts/healing (Damo being a notable exception to this!). After consulting the book, it is clear that Damo is a Ming to Xing person, and I am more of a Xing to Ming person. However, the point I was taking issue with was a reification of the mind--- using object-language to refer to what is objectless. I guess I was wondering whether this is an intentional strategic choice, whether it is a lack of understanding, or whether I was missing something. It probably doesn't really matter to me since I am working Ming issues and he appears to know his Ming well. I don't mean to undermine him or insult him if he is your or anyone else's teacher-- again, I don't really have much exposure to his stuff. TBH, I was just hoping to start a discussion because it is how I learn, and I was a bit disappointed no one was discussing this video that I thought was pretty informative. I appreciate the chance to work out some thought on this.

@Creation That's a good point--- as practice instructions, it makes sense. But I think it comes at a cost. Perhaps it is a provisional teaching later abandoned, but I found that refining the mind was extremely difficult. Of course, that difficulty may be due in part to too much focus on xing and not enough on ming. Nevertheless, such reification of the mind can lead to issues--- or at least it did for me. @anshino23 I appreciate Damo's knowledge--- I have listened to some of his talks and read some of his book. However, I see on this point I will have to respectfully disagree. Of course, I am coming from a Buddhist background, so naturally my propensity is toward Taoist teachings that are complementary with Buddhism. For example, Liu Yiming's commentary on Awakening to Reality (trans. Pregadio): Liu Yiming here is referencing the Platform Sutra of Hui Neng. This is important because of the difference between Hui Neng and his Shen Xiu in the famous "poem combat" --- Damo's view seems along Shen Xiu's line as opposed to Hui Neng. This ties Taoism into the mind-essence teachings of Chan. To paraphrase Mazu, "ordinary mind is the way." The Korean master Chinul puts it very clearly (trans. Buswell): From a Chan point of view, the fundamental nature is always here. It is not a "higher mind," it is the very essence of this mind right now. The trouble is that we fail to recognize it, or having recognized it, fail to sustain in (which in my mind, is where the Ming practices of Taoism come in. Chinul calls this sudden realization, gradual cultivation). And it must be so-- for otherwise, if the fundamental nature had to be cultivated or developed, it would be transitory and not fundamental. Of course, my knowledge is quite limited, both of the practices and of Damo's outlook generally. Again, I see much value in what he is teaching and am glad to accept the information he is offering. Appendix: The famous poems (at least how I recall them): Shen Xiu: Our body is the Bodhi-treeAnd our mind a mirror bright.Carefully we clean them hour by hourAnd let no dust alight. Hui Neng: There is no Bodhi-treeNor stand of a mirror bright.Since everything is emptinessWhere can dust alight?

I listened to this video yesterday. I found most of what he had to say interesting. However, there is something that I didn't like about it-- how he spatializes the mind @ 21:00 min. In this case, I don't agree that the mind has a location (i.e. it centers in the brain, and returns there when we have a thought). Rather, based on my (limited) experience over a long period of Buddhist meditation, location arises in the mind. It is more of a matter of habit where we typically center our attention. If you think about, it makes sense. If you look at a cup, the cup doesn't appear at the eye, where science says the light strikes. It appears like three or four feet in front of the eye. That's because it is not the eye that is projecting all of this, it is the mind. In this case, I think what he has done is built a habit of centering on the dan tian, and then relaxing into it. I imagine that many people when they are relaxed do not necessarily automatically sink into the dan tian unless they have already built a habit of it via qigong or some other exercise. If it were the case, I would expect many people would report dan tian-types of experience. On the other hand, people who intentionally place the mind in the dan tian do report many of the similar instances that he describes--- it happens a lot in Zen for example. Actually, what he says makes sense as to how Zen practitioners are able to generate quite a bit of internal power since they may spend quite a bit of time submerged at the dan tian, relaxed and concentrated. However, when I practiced Zen, this focus was let go at a certain point. Also, IIRC, when I practiced in Chicago, there was a lot of intentional dan tian placement. This is the only place I've practiced where people could do what I would call "spooky sh*t" that didn't make rational sense. Dwai still practices there, so he probably has better knowledge. Of course, there are instances where the center kind of dissolves and the whole panorama of experience merges together. I think many of his points are well-taken, but I decided I would discharge my thoughts.

Not to be the wet blanket, but trying a DIY approach based on online posts sounds like a really bad idea. If you want to do this stuff, you should find a teacher and establish a daily practice.

Can you provide a summary of the meditation? It is not clear to me.

I would add this as well: things are impermanent. That means naturally, things will dissolve naturally so long as we are not tightening on them. From a meditation perspective, there are at least two approaches to blockages--- 1) powering through them; 2) relaxing and dissolving. I find that 1) inevitably leads to problems. In the long run, 2) is a much better approach in my experience, although it may be more difficult to find. Before I was able to learn to relax the mind (an ongoing process, I assure you), I had to spend some time learning to relax the body (also an ongoing process). This is where some of the physical arts come in--- yoga, tai chi, etc. Of course, you will also find the two approaches there: some yoga teachers focus on stretching and holding, others on relaxing. If you learn to relax the body, you will eventually create a nice container for your meditation practice.

If I were to look at it again, I would definitely want to learn it from a teacher.

I was looking for something Taoist to read in my large collection of Buddhist books the other day. As it turns out, I have very few Taoist books, and most of them are boring academic treatments or obtuse Thomas Cleary translations. What is (are) your favorite Taoist book(s)?

I’ve been unable to penetrate the I Ching it even in English! 😂

I don't think it is the case that people with high intelligence are necessarily in a better position. I have spent a lot of time with very smart people at some very top level institutions. Many of them were stuck in their heads. Many of them were stuck to the surface of things. Most of them probably suffered from some degree of depression. I would say any "internal art," whether tai chi or meditation, would enhance your mental functioning for a few reasons if performed correctly. One is increasing basic concentration. If you can be present or focus for a practice period, you will build your concentration. A second is spending less time is distraction mode. If you practice tai chi for an hour instead of surfing the internet, you will be affected differently (for a Western take, see https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/07/is-google-making-us-stupid/306868/). Third, I think it increases your efficiency. I can say from experience that meditation has helped me in my work life because I don't get distracted by irrelevancies--- I can separate how to think about something from how I feel about something. Many people cannot and end up making bad decisions. However, I doubt that practice alone can make up for one's potential, which is probably determined by your genetics, upbringing, karma, etc.

What I find interesting is the difference between the two translations. The Westernized translation, per Moeller, deals with very Western concepts--- the unchanging, soul-like "I" (a word that does not appear in the Chinese); the insightful moment of recollection (as opposed to forgetting); the doubting of what is real, the subjective POV, etc. The Western version is more about a transcendent soul that rises above the changes, whereas the Chinese version is more about leaning into the changes and immersing yourself into what is currently arising. My first go around with tai chi/qigong reflected more of this Westernized mentality. I can see this in the questions I asked: how do I make this happen? How do I accomplish this? How do I direct the changes that I want? I am driving the chariot and whipping the horses in this example. But now I can see this may be an error. It seems the better attitude is not asking how to direct the changes, but to let go of the resistances to change. Things are already empty and impermanent, and letting go will allow them to do their thing, or return to the source. It is less a matter of gaining (like an insight) and more of a matter of losing (opening, relaxing, sinking). Letting go of tension/blockages/etc. so changes can happen. Becoming the empty space at the center of the wheel so the spokes can balance of their own accord.

I have downloaded Seven Taoist Masters on my kindle and I am waiting for the Nei Yeh. In the meantime, I got Daoism Explained by Hans-Georg Moeller. I have been listening to it on my bike ride. Very interesting. Check out the butterfly story: Translation by Giles (i.e. Westernized): Once upon a time, I, Zhuangzi, dreamt I was a butterfly, fluttering hither and thither, to all intents and purposes a butterfly. I was conscious only of following my fancies as a butterfly, and was unconscious of my individuality as a man. Suddenly, I awaked, and there I lay, myself again. Now I do not know whether I was then a man dreaming I was a butterfly, or whether I am now a butterfly, dreaming I am a man. Between a man and butterfly there is necessarily a barrier. The transition is called Metempsychosis. (Giles 1926: 47; Moeller 2006: 44) Translation by Moeller (based on ancient Chinese commentary): Once Zhuang Zhou dreamt – and then he was a butterfly, a fluttering butterfly, self-content and in accord with its intentions. The butterfly did not know about Zhou. Suddenly it awoke – and then it was fully and completely Zhou. One does not know whether there is a Zhou becoming a butterfly in a dream or whether there is a butterfly becoming a Zhou in a dream. There is a Zhou and there is a butterfly, so there is necessarily a distinction between them. This is called: the changing of things. (Moeller 2006: 48)

We don't often THINK (or FEEL) it is a posture thing, that is why it is useful to have some one else check you. But to each their own.

It could be bad alignment, or it could be you just need to toughen them up. Hard to say. Do you have a teacher nearby who can check your posture?

As it happens, I have it and the Cleary translation. I haven't looked at them in some years, but last I did, I could not really make heads or tails of it.

Did you check it out?

Taoist Meditation. It starts simple and eventually leads to dissolving. It was released every few days, so it is not meant to be watched all the way through at once, or quickly.

I was afraid it would sound jerky. I was just saying that because it was a point of confusion for me previously. Do I block thoughts? Do I let go? Depends. My problem, and it might just be me, was trying to integrate across practice traditions. In other words, I was stuck on the unity and ignoring the diversity. Sort of an overall issue for me.

I have heard some Dzogchen teachers report that non-doing practices, by themselves, will cause deep releases of bodily and energetic blockages. However, I not found that to be the case in my practice. I find myself thinking of the old dichotomy that we go to Buddhism for help with the mind, and Taoism for help with the body (with the case being that Buddhism starts with the mind, but eventually encompasses the body, and vice versa). Have you found your resting/relaxing/non-doing type practices sufficient in themselves to deal with "conventional" problems such as bodily problems, mood problems, etc.? I assume CT based on your post, that you jsut let these things come. However, I know Steve has a past history with Taoist practices, and may be practicing trul khor. Personally, I have found the need to alternate resting practices (i.e. Mahamudra) with intentional practices (qigong, tai chi, etc.). I have further found that the Taoist practices are healing my body and enhancing my mood in a way that Buddhist practices were not able. I wanted to get your thoughts (and the thoughts of anyone else) if you're willing to share.

It depends on the point of view. In some traditions, it does appear that thought is an enemy because it obscures or covers up the truth. In Samkhya for example, stilling the mind may be considered to be quite important. In other traditions, the issue is not the thought, but the confusion and attachment that attends thought. One seldom becomes fixated on the digestion, but we often become fixated on our thoughts. I think that is the case from for Bon Dzogchen teaching, but not necessarily all Dzogchen nor all Mahamudra or non-Tibetan traditions. Not to nit-pick, but if people are receiving differing instructions, it may be important to know so they do not try conflicting directions.

That's not entirely the case. Buddhism does have training precepts, but the goal is to align one's behavior to meet skillful ends-- in this case, the end of suffering. In other words, if you don't want to suffer, you can follow the precepts and the eight fold path. There are segments within Buddhism that would advocate a combination of cultivated and naturally arising virtue-- you will find this in Mahamudra for example.

Re: trance and clarity--- I had a similar experience when I was practicing zazen. I was able to cultivate a very tranquil, dark, peaceful inner state. I later stumbled on a Tibetan text that described the state perfectly--- as a state of ignorance! Cultivating such states were said to be the key to rebirth as an animal. I think it is not unlike the Taoist criticism of "ghost Zen." I think my teacher was not up to the task of recognizing and guiding me in the proper direction. Having said that, I think zazen is a very advanced practice, even if most are not really capable of it. What I do depends on what is going on in life. Sometimes, meditation is just a matter of "checking in" if I'm busy and things are flowing quickly. Other times, it may be more about deepening when I get sick of the red dust of the world. Some days it may be more analytic, others less so. One thing I've learned is that meditation is best without expectations, especially expectations of gain. There is a saying that for some people, realization comes all at once, like a sudden thunderstorm. For others, it is like walking into a fog and slowly getting wet. Either way, you end up soaked.

The one doesn't necessarily exclude the other. If you tap into a living lineage, you have a tradition that has been experientially verified by hundreds, thousands, or even tens of thousands of practitioners that have come before you. Newer programs simply haven't been widely tested or verified. But at the end of the day, no program has a very high success rate. If they did, we'd have news reports of people skating off into the noosphere is mass numbers.

Roger, don't worry about it. As you say, things pop up when they need to. Speaking of which, I've been listening to Swami on Mandukya Upanishad. Does Vedanta have any specific dream/deep sleep induction techniques? Or is it just a matter of increasing daytime awareness which naturally leads to dream/sleep awareness?