forestofclarity

Is this a Goenka retreat? If so, its a lot of hard work, but you'll get some good concentration going. They tend to have a narrow view of things, but they tend to be good people. A Goenka retreat was my 1st retreat.

I suppose this is the problem with goal oriented thinking. We often imagine a goal, and get frustrated when we don't get to this imagined goal. So is the problem in you, or in this imagined goal? I say through out the imagined goal, keep practicing.

In my opinion, this is one of the three marks of Buddhism: 1. Shit happens = anatta = no self 2. Everything changes = anicca = impermanence 3. Life sucks = dukkha = unsatisfactoriness/suffering

Maybe not the same thing? People nowadays take the immediate mirroring awareness to be the ultimate principle. This is why Xuansha said to people, 'Tell me, does it still exist in remote uninhabited places deep in the mountains?' ---Foyan, Instant Zen

Reveals his hunger The light within shows all things Reveals contentment

I wonder if there are any more thoughts on the various translations and which one is recommended.

Karma?

Luck7, Please send me all your meaningless bits of paper called money. Also, sell off you meaningless personal objects and send the money to me. Thanks! If everything is meaningless, then what is the knowing?

Quite right. What is the Tao but about changes, and adapting? There is a time for teaching, and a time for solitude. The idea of a long-term, intimate teacher-student relationship seems to be based more on kung fu movies than reality. In the past, monks often wandered from teacher to teacher to prevent attachment. In china, there is the hermitage tradition where people spend time in the mountains alone, sometimes with a teacher, sometimes without. In the Buddha's day, monks would gather for retreats during the monsoon season and often disperse after.

I always find it odd how people on this forum are so obsessed about the supposed flavor of their truth. "Taoist truth for me," some say. Others, "Only Buddhist truth." A lot of people claim they want some sort of enlightenment, then place all these conditions on it. I only want it if it makes me healthy and strong, if it comes from Buddhist scripture, if it lets me do get women, or feel blissed ut, or whatever. It reminds me of a starving man, wandering through the desert, parched and drying, who is offered water and beans. "No thanks," he says, "I think I'll wait for the filet mignon."

True or not? What's your subjective belief? Awareness Cartoon

Cow, A few clarifications. By off the deep end, I mean more of a "lost in theory" sort of way, rather than a crazy sort of way. Also, it was sort of a tongue-in-cheek jab at the Mahayanists around here who in particular (in my opinion) tend to fall into the heavy theory camp. There is a (sometimes good-natured) rivalry between the two schools. What I like about Buddhism generally is its relative, practical approach. Outside some of the core teachings, anything you say is conditional. Different people fall into abuse for different reasons. It may be the nature of the schools involved (Tibetan guru worship leading to various abuses, such as the Osel Tendzin abuses); the culture (see the whole Shugden fiasco); personalities (various Zen teachers having sex with their students, dying of alcoholism, etc.). What would I say to the person? Depends on the person. Many people simply need to learn the lesson themselves. Others may be persuaded to check out different schools. Others I might talk about how Buddhism is the Middle Way, who knows?

1. They are attached to a particular point of view regarding physique. The body is going to get sick, grow old, and eventually die. 2. They don't leave room for individuality. Everyone is different. 3. They reject religious viewpoint because its "religious." Some things have been around because they have truth in them. 4. They like to show-off their fancy achievements. Or, they think its important to have some sort of material power. 5. They think qi cultivation is the only way to go. There is more than one way to get to nowhere. 6. They think they can dance. 7. They are withdrawn, unemotional, or quiet. A lot of people try to act how they think "enlightened" should be, instead of how they are. 8. They are obsessed with cleanliness and order. Oh my God! Who touched my socks? 9. They give everyone a trophy. What ever happened to suffering as part of the path? 10. They have lots of rules. What's good for one system may not be good for another. A Zen master may outpour their emotions, while a Theravada monk might be very controlled. Inside, they may both be unattached.

Mahayana Buddhists often go off the deep end. Metaphysics, theory, etc etc. Theravadans tend to be more grounded. I also think its good to have both. I fear that people here often get confused with particular Buddhist practitioners and Buddhism generally.

Most of the Taoists I've run across seem to take independent reality as a granted. Now the Buddhists and Advaitists are a different animal. Some may even argue, as in this article that the brain, which is a perception itself, cannot be the cause of our perceptions. It would put it in a sort of unmoved mover paradox. Personally, I find myself tending to agree with the Hume-Berkeley line: there's no way to prove anything exists apart from our perceptions. But does it really matter? If the fundamental nature of reality consists of quantum particles (as in physics), information bits (as in the Matrix), Mind (as in Berkeley), or little tiny noodley appendages (as a Pastafarian might propose), would it matter? I think it may if the Buddhist/Advaitist model is right. The underlying question then becomes, does mind create matter, or does matter create mind?

Well, the boundary analysis may lead one to a realization of emptiness, but what has this to with life / death? Death may be very empty, but also very real.

Actually, the world already ended in 1999.

Granted. You win due to your magical singing voice. You become a minor celebrity, people paste youTube videos of you, saying "Can you believe this?" You get a minor record deal. You never make it big, and are doomed to appear in Old Navy commercials, Dancing with the Stars, and various reality shows where you compete with other "stars." You agree to constantly do these things, because, well, "You're going to make it big." I wish I could clap my hands and everything would be well.

I think GIH has come to the very heart of the spiritual debate. Is awareness generated from the body, as the physicalist may say, or in some way independent of it? If I were a physicalist, I would say no. I would say that alive means oxygen/nutrients are flowing into the brain and the brain is creating a sense of being. Once that supply is cut off, the awareness shuts off like a light switch. Now, I might not be able to draw a boundary between a lighted room and a dark room, but it is clear when the light is on and when the light is off. The same goes for Zeno's paradox where you cannot travel across the room because first you would have to travel 1/2, but before that, 1/2 of that, etc. Just because you can draw an infinite number of points doesn't mean you can't walk across the room. How would you respond to such an argument, GIH?

Zhuo, Good story. Sounds like you really have gotten a lot out of NEW and Reiki.

Zhuo, Just out of curiousity: what method did you find the most effective (if any?)?

Granted. I lock all of you away in a padded asylum because I care so much for you all I don't want any of you to get hurt. You spend the rest of your lives safe, but board, comforted only by a video screen on me making kissy sounds at all of you. I wish I had the power to change the atomic structure of things with my mind.

Granted. The thread restarts and proves so addicting that you spend all your times coming up with clever ways to corrupt people's wishes. It comes as no surprise when you are unable to eat, sleep, or otherwise maintain your home. I wish every weekend was a three day weekend.

Religion in my mind usually had two key components: ritualized practice and accepting certain things on faith. By faith, I mean on a basis on other than direct experience. By this definition, both Buddhism and Taoism may have a religious component. But I would expect that most so-called mystic practitioners shy away from the faith side of things. Even pure Theravada Buddhism would have some religious tones: there are rituals, chantings suttas, etc. and also a faith in the Buddhist path. Without some degree of faith, then one is unlikely to even begin practice. I'm not sure what spiritual means, either. I suppose I would consider myself a spiritual person, but all of my cultivation is more of a psychological or even a physical characteristic. I don't see spirits, hear the voice of god, etc. although I have had altered states of consciousness. Maybe a better term for some of us would be psycho-philosophers.