forestofclarity

Resources related to Mahayana and Zen Buddhism. Feel free to recommend your own resources to be added. The resources here are made by members in their individual capacity and is not an endorsement by TheDaoBums. bradley: The Diamond Sutra was the first thing Buddhist I ever read (maybe six or seven years ago), and it instantly changed my perspective on everything. Also, I think I have read that Hui neng was, and continues to be, somewhat controversial... Link I also learned a lot reading through the prajñā­pāramitā sutras. Here is a translation of the 10,000 line one that I liked: https://84000.co/translation/toh11 Finally, one sutra that I continually go back to, and think about a lot, is a short Heap of Jewels sutra: https://84000.co/translation/toh118 The following interchange has stuck in my mind:

We have a prior thread on Zifagong, with references to both Flying Phoenix and Kunlun. I'm not an expert, but ZFG type practices seems to "toss open the system," so to speak, which might toss in a monkey wrench while you're establishing a healthy body-mind via Flying Phoenix. ZFG can also arise spontaneously, without any special type practices.

I've been listening to Rob Coons on the MCO. I like his approach since it seems well grounded in texts. His issue seems to be with forcible intention, which is not what BW is going for and I think she explicitly mentions this. Her approach seems to be grounded in Dao Yin as opposed to Neidan. One interesting thing about her overall approach is her general emphasis on non-fixation and dissolution of the self, which would put her in a different camp than other popular camps. I suppose some people may wish to argue that Dao Yin is false or harmful, but if so, I wonder if would have survived so long and had so many adherents. It seems more that Dao Yin uses post-heaven methods for post-heaven gains. Of course, a lot of popular neidan also strikes me as post-heaven cultivation, despite assurances that it is not.

My initial impression is that she seems to be coming from a Western Magical Tradition POV (which is confirmed by her background), but I found this to be an interesting presentation. Curious about other's thoughts if anyone has familiarity.

This is one of the reasons some schools encourage learning from multiple teachers once one has a solid grounding and is familiar with the key points. I think the general call for systematic purity is ironic given that Daoism and Tantric Buddhism are so obviously syncretic systems. Of course, one does not want to be a spiritual dilettante either and I assume that, given limited time and resources, most people will settle into their home system. But even then, one can continue to collect endless teachings. And of course, different means may conflict with one another creating. I've been listening to some videos about the wordless book of heaven--- which is essentially the teachings expressed from heaven to any given person. It is wordless because it cannot be fully captured--- the Dao that can be Dao'ed is not the true Dao and all.

Sure, like this guy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nan_Huai-Chin Definitely not serious! Or this person: LIN ZHAOEN Or this book: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Secret_of_the_Golden_Flower

I can give you some limited impressions from what I've seen through this site. When Kunlun was introduced here, the emphasis was on flashy experiences which attracted a lot of attention. There was even a movie trailer where the person was supposedly zapping women and making them scream. A lot of people initially found value in the practice, but there were a lot of weird things going on with the personalities involves and most if not all of the Bums moved on. Kunlun seems to have come from Sifu Jenny Lamb, who as far as I know gave up teaching and practices primarily Pure Land Buddhism and may have been taken without acknowledgment. The Kunlun System seems to be cobbled together rather than a tradition that has been passed down. S-M caught some people's attention. As far as I can tell, I think some Bums got heavily involved and it became their home practice. This practice seemed to be more centered and grounded, and the people practicing it seemed that way as well. Ya Mu stated AFAIK that he received his teaching in a lineaged way and I think he is or was a full time healer. There is a video on his site and his movements don't seem grounded nor his body connected, so I didn't really look any further because those are things I look for in a physical qigong type practice. There was some discussion on pros/cons some time back: Having said that, I have not practiced EITHER system and have no personal experience at all. Also, this all happened over a decade ago and people will likely have changed from that point.

If I had to guess, if you asked either Damo or Nathan Brine about it, they would advise choosing one or the other. But the actual answer would be to ask the teacher IMO.

Also, our distorted mental habits that keep pulling us away into other things, and often interferes in various ways. Tseng Lao-weng quote is interesting because this seems like a different approach than the narrower views often bandied about.

So I listened to Robert Coons wax on this, and he states that there are 4 major types of MCOs: 1. Dao Yin, usually involving a lot of intention, breathing, visualization. 2. Qigong, with less intention. 3. Neidan, with no intention. 4. Martial arts, which ends up opening it with postures/movement.

I thought you were a Chunyi Lin person, Kati? Here is some discussion with the Chunyi Lin method:

Well, I think from both a Vedic/Tantric point of view and a Daoist point of view, the subtle body is composed of substances. For instance, you have tanmatras which are subtle elements that are the underlying makeup of physical elements. You also have citta for mind stuff, and prana for a less subtle form of energy. I think Daoists have a similar POV based on past conversations here. But then I thought better of it.

I wonder if bones count as a dan tian for people who do bone condensing practices.

People either have experienced the subtle body or they haven't. If you have first hand experience of it, it is undeniable. If you haven't, it sounds inconceivable because it conflicts with the teachings of modern scientific materialism (which is actually based on incomplete Newtonian physics and is on its way out). It is sort of like trying to explain color to someone who has never seen any.

Mod note: Split off Discussion about whether MCO is Real

This is what caught my attention also. Many Daoist qigong/martial artists I've learned from have taught to focus on keeping within the body periphery, which can be an issue if the boundary is open. I don't know if this is just an initial position that is later sublated or not. Which is another issue I see in a lot of Daoist-flavored teaching. It appears to me in many cases the "you" increases and the personality becomes quite strong leading to conflict and aggression (and even physical fights that students always seem "forced" into). At least for male teachers with martial arts backgrounds, which is probably 90% of my exposure. Just speculating, but I think because it is often a Ming to Xing path, there are often issues related around money, ego, and power. This seems to be less so with Xing to Ming or dual cultivation schools, but I don't have enough data points there. Of course, Buddhist schools often have issues around power and sex, so it is certainly not a sure thing.

This is interesting, and not the first time I've heard this either: Rob Coons wrote: Which would back up Sahaja's point.

Welcome!

There are a lot of views, that's for sure. I've learned a number of MCO methods from different schools. Some say their method/teachings/results is the one true method, some don't. I've never found such views convincing personally, but that's just my opinion. I ran into the same thing with Christian churches and Buddhist schools--- it just seems like propaganda to me. Benebell has cited her sources about halfway through here, some of which are inaccessible to me because they are in Chinese. One of her sources, Huang Yuanji uses the terms differently for different levels IIRC. I find her version interesting because, like the Ge Guolong book translated by Mathias Daly (also a Huang Yuanji teaching), she picks up on certain things that many Daoists have not that correlate to Buddhist Tantra. https://benebellwen.com/2025/09/07/a-taoist-secret-to-cultivating-personal-power/

Sorry to hear that and thanks for sharing.

Resources related to Mahamudra and Dzogchen. Feel free to recommend your own resources to be added. The resources here are made by members in their individual capacity and is not an endorsement by TheDaoBums. ForestofClarity: Dzogchen and Mahamudra is best learned in person from a teacher of a lineage. Here are some lineaged teachers I have found valuable. Feel free to share others. Mingyur Rinpoche holds lineages in both Mahamudra and Dzogchen, generally teaching Mahamudra first. He makes everything simple and easy. https://vajrayana.tergar.org Tsoknyi Rinpoche is a very precise, down to earth teacher. Pointing out must be taken live. Familiar with Mahamudra, but mostly teaches Dzogchen. https://tsoknyirinpoche.org Lama Lena is traditionally trained, but very modern. Very popular. Mostly Dzogchen. https://lamalenateachings.com/start-here/ James Low teaches from a more modern, psychological angle and is based in Europe. Dzogchen. https://simplybeing.co.uk I haven't met Tenzin Wangyal, but he has a good reputation. Bon presentation: https://ligmincha.org/tenzin-wangyal-rinpoche/ Books (if you must): http://www.rangjung.com Dzogchen: it is usually best not the read about Dzogchen, but very commonly recommended: Crystal and the Way of Light Mahamudra: Anything by Khenchen Thrangu Rinpoche Clarifying the Natural State: a classic practical guide to Mahamudra Crystal Clear: commentary by KTR Anything by Khenpo Tsultrim Gyamtso Rinpoche Progressive Stages of Meditation on Emptiness Anything by the Khenpo Rinpoches: https://www.padmasambhava.org/category/books-by-the-khenpo-rinpoches idiot_stimpy: Lama Dawai Gocha, a Nyingma Dzogchen Yogi from New Mexico USA.Host free online Dzogchen sessions twice daily. Link to online sessions - https://www.meditationonline.org/https://www.youtube.com/@JoinMeditationOnline

It is an interesting question. My initial experiences with the subtle body had no priming at all and it wasn't until later I discovered it fit along with traditional (Shaivite) Tantric descriptions. With dan tians, I had some basic priming but I was shocked at how real they've felt when I received a boost from a tai chi master. As with all things, it is probably a mixture. Physical reality, in the traditions I follow, is like a collective or shared dream. So I think the basic structures and probably the three dan tians are a part of the consensual dream. So it is not like a personal dream and it is not the independent, physical world modern Westerners take it to be. However, this shared dream is also impacted and shaped by our "own" minds. In Tibetan Buddhism, different chakras have different associations with the colors and elements depending on the tradition, like Wallis says --- I think these are somewhat installed. But working with the Bon model, I worked with it for a while, suspended it, and then started it again after unrelated meditative work and I was surprised at how well my current experiences fit the model --- especially when I had doubts and didn't fully agree with it. But who knows? I like to keep the conceptual net loose to see what can develop.

- Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche, Vajra Heart Revisited

Like this thread, but open to all traditions. Self Liberation Through Seeing with Naked Awareness, trans John Myrdhin Reynolds As for this sparkling awareness, which is called "mind," Even though one says that it exists, it does not actually exist. (On the other hand) as a source, it is the origin of the diversity of all the bliss of Nirvana and all of the sorrow of Samsara. And as for it’s being something desirable; it is cherished alike in the Eleven Vehicles. With respect to its having a name, the various names that are applied to it are inconceivable (in their numbers). Some call it "the nature of the mind" or "mind itself." Some Tirthikas call it by the name Atman or "the Self." The Sravakas call it the doctrine of Anatman or "the absence of a self." The Chittamatrins call it by the name Chitta or "the Mind." Some call it the Prajnaparamita or "the Perfection of Wisdom." Some call it the name Tathagata-garbha or "the embryo of Buddhahood." Some call it by the name Mahamudra or "the Great Symbol." Some call it by the name "the Unique Sphere." Some call it by the name Dharmadhatu or "the dimension of Reality." Some call it by the name Alaya or "the basis of everything." And some simply call it by the name "ordinary awareness."

Mod Note: Chakra/Dan Tian discussion split off into new topic