forestofsouls

Ramana didn't prescribe neti-neti for focusing on third place (3rd person) instead of first place (1st person). Saying that everything is dependent on circumstances is, in fact, a universal. Other universals include impermanence, interdependence, the failure of external things to satisfy. You don't have to be a Hindu, Buddhist, Christian, or Jew or closely examine everything and see impermanence. The truth knows no culture, no religion--- it just is. There is no Hindu awareness, Christian awareness, or Buddhist awareness. Awareness just is. What is different is the content-- specific thoughts, feelings, etc. When we talk of categorical or aboslute, we are using mental constructs. Is the bird categorical or absolute? The sky? Space?

I feel the Taobums just let out a much needed fart!

Of course, this would indicate that Advaita is culturally dependent and therefore not based on human universals. Master Sheng Yen talks about the difference between Buddhism and Buddhadharma. Buddhism arises in a certain socio-cultural context. Buddhadharma is the way things are, independent of time, place, and culture. I would think the same goes for knowledge of Self, Tao, etc. A lot of people subscribe to Ramana Maharshi's techniques--- there is no indication that one had to know Vedanta in order to understand him. In fact, he instructed that the quickest way to realization was to practice self-enquiry, not study Vedanta. As a counterpoint, I might suggest that studying Vedanta is like reading a menu, rather than tasting the meal.

Dwai, Check out the Path of Sri Ramana Part One for a critique of these techniques. Sri Sadhu Om suggests that we might stop at the I am... Mikaelz, Actually, there is a funny Buddhist story about Brahman in Buddhism. It is said that Brahman in a past life was the greatest cultivator int he universe. When the universe collapsed, he died. Due to his merit, he was the first one born in this universe. At first, he was lonely, so he started to wish there were other beings. Then the second being appeared, and the third. From this, Brahman made the mistake that he is the creator. I would be careful about comparing and contrasting different end states, i.e. enlightenment unless you are VERY far along the path. These theoretical arguments usually come apart in the light of serious, ongoing practice.

These days, when I pick up a book, I'm torn. On the one hand, I want to learn a slightly different angle. On the other, I know the true way is to examine what's going on, here and now, and not getting lost in dialogue. Nevertheless, for books: Path of Sri Ramana Part One.

Nice post. This always strikes me as odd. People who sell spirituality, especially the spiritual powers sideshow part of it, should not be surprised when they attract people who are in it for the spiritual powers. It suggests to me a basic ignorance of fundamental human mechanics--- i.e. the inside view of how the mind operates. I've noticed this, too. Chan and Zen also. I.e., spiritual materialism. This seems to strike to the heart of the problem I have seen in many Western practitioners (to include myself). Many Taoists seem to be looking for power, many Buddhists for psychological fulfillment. I do disagree with the ease, often promoted by the neo-advaitists. A usual practice for beginners new to relaxation is to have them tense the muscle in order to release it. How can one understand non-being, non-self, non-practice without first realizing being, self, and practice? Maybe one in a million can do that. In nature, there is a season for everything. I've noticed often overlooked components of Sri Ramana's teaching: 1) The need for concentration. To quote Sri Sadhu Om: "it would be wise ... to gain the power of one-pointedness by practising self-attention instead from the very beginning." 2) Self-enquiry is the jnana part of the path. There is also a part two, the path of bhakti and self-surrender. I think these are like yang and yin methods-- complementary and balancing to each other.

Nooo!!! What about the Germinal Vesicle thread? Just kidding. Everyone has their reasons for what they do.

Classic propaganda. Same sort of stuff I used to see around apocalyptic, fundamentalist Christians. Likely the same individual is also against MCOs, Buddhism, and anything other than what he believes/teaches. I also think he is a coward. If he means Kunlun, he should say Kunlun. If he means Sifu Wong, he should say so.

Dwai, This is true in Buddhist based meditation practice as well. I can tell you how I approach it--- but keep in mind, it is from more of a Buddhist than a Taoist perspective. What works for me is making peace with whatever arises. Usually, there is a subtle physical and/or mental tension that arises with these things. See if you can relax and smooth out the tension. Shinzen Young always says that suffering = pain x resistance. Often, it is the resistance that causes so much of the trouble. As to alien thoughts, others probably will have varying perspectives on this (and whether they represent other entities), but in my view, all thoughts are alien. If you trace them back, they arise out of nothing and return to nothing. Because they occur in sigh/sound space only I can see, I call them "my thoughts." When I practice, I simply try to let them go--- like drops of rain or snow. They arise and pass. Let them. It's only when you get caught up in a struggle with them that they become a problem. I've noticed in the long run, ALL my inner chatter quiets down.

Dwai and I studied at the same time. I moved, and studied with another former student of Master Liao's who had a completely different take on the forms. I think in order to really master Tai Chi, especially as taught by Master Liao, you really need to put in the time. mjjbecker wrote a good article about this on this site. I came to a point in my life where I had to make some tough practice decisions, and unfortunately, I couldn't continue to give Tai Chi the attention necessary. I can say this: both Master Liao and Dwai and I's teacher have juice. But I think it takes a long time to develop it.

KAP 1 is actually fairly well organized and the practices fit into one another very nicely. Before I started, reading the syllabus made it look like a mess. In fact, the only reason I signed on was due to my intuition. Having taken most of it, the practices are coherent. Each is like a thread that weaves into a larger whole.

Anapana.

If the point is allow the chatter to arise and fall away, then yes.

I have it sitting around in several boxes in the house. Bodri appears to be very knowledgeable, but intuitively, I don't trust him.

Do you seriously think that you can have a chance at resolving the great matter of birth and death when you cannot resolve the small problem of suffering ordinary existence? Monasteries are for wimps.

I used to think this. In fact, I have only recently come to change my mind. Taoism is not a materialistic science dedicated solely to manipulating energy. No, it is much deeper than that. Taoist dualism, the way I am understanding it, is a relative thing. From the perspective of heaven, there is no duality. From the perspective of earth, there are 10,000 things. I find that Buddhists often tend to neglect the physio-energetic side of things, except perhaps the Vajrayana. This is where Taoism is useful. The human being doesn't simply consist of mind and matter, but of shen, chi, and jing.

The Tao that can be limited is not the eternal Tao. This is like mistaking the false mind for the true mind. I've learned personally from Taoists who teach drawing in energy--- Masters Tseng Chen and Master Waysun Liao for starters.

This is not he germinal vesicle, but I thought it might be of interest. From Taoist Yoga, Charles Luk: Q: Can you please give us the exact location of the original cavity of the spirit? A: It is (in the centre of) the brain behind the spot between the two eyes. Lao Tsu called it 'the gateway to heaven and earth'; hence he urged people to concentrate on the centre in order to realise the oneness (of all things). In this centre is a pearl the size of a grain of rice, which is the centre between heaven and earth in the human body (i.e. the microcosm); it is the cavity of prenatal vitality. To know where it lies is not enough, for it does not include the wonderous light of (essential) nature which is symbolised by a circle which Confucius calls virtuous perfection (jen); the Book of Changes calls it the ultimateless (wu chi), the Buddha perfect knowledge (yuan ming); and the Taoists the elixir of immortality or spiritual light; which all point to the prenatal One True Vitality." Knowing the locations of these things doesn't help.

Sounds like thinking in circles to me. Sort of like trying to pull yourself up by your ankles.

If you go it alone, I would check out the works of Robert Bruce. It saved me a lot of wasted effort. If you want to learn from a teacher non-locally, there's always KAP. Santiago teaches the MCO.

I read a little Golden Flower today, and it referred to the "dark pass" in the head. I wonder if this has anything to do with it. It seems clear that the square inch refers to the third eye or upper dan tien. I started to read the Shurangama Sutra (it kept coming up, and I can take a hint). It certainly clears up the splendor/center of emptiness. In the beginning of the SS, the Buddha is clearing up all sorts of misconceptions about the nature of the mind. If this is the germinal vesicle, it indeed has no form or image. But it has no location either...

From allan's blog. http://atouchofancientszhouyi.blogspot.com...minal%20vesicle