Aaron

Thank you for your advice, but if I thought it needed to be a private message, I would've sent it as one. With that in mind, I'm not opposed to people advising me if they think I've done something wrong, but In this case I think it was appropriate as a comment in the thread, since the issue arises from his derision of others and inability to allow people to have a discussion about things without taking it horrendously off-topic. I'll be honest, I don't think you're an immortal or master, but you at least have the decency to leave people alone and relegate your discussion to the topic at hand, which is commendable. That's not to say I haven't talked about something off-topic, but I try to stay within the general avenue of the topic when I can. We all have issues after all, so I accept that I am not perfect, nor will I ever be, but then again, perhaps the perfection lies in accepting that I am what I am. Aaron

Actually it's very very easy. There are only a small number of people that have problems with being able to enter a hypnotic state and those people tend to also be skeptics and lack trust. This is another common misconception about hypnosis and one of the reasons it's taken so long for the medical community to see it's practical use. Today hypnosis is being used for pain management worldwide in cancer clinics, for surgery in lieu of anesthesia, and also for chronic pain. The bias towards hypnosis stems mostly from the idiots who go on stage and use it as a parlor trick. In fact there are several institutions and schools that teach hypnosis as a method for personal development as well. Now if you're wondering why they aren't using it more often now, even though nearly all clinical evidence proves it's effective, ask yourself who benefits from keeping people in the dark? Well the pharmaceutical companies of course, who's going to buy tylenol if they know they can just sit and remove the pain equally well without taking any pills at all? Aaron

Hmm... I just think it's funny that nothing you teach or believe can actually be proven, hence the reason you never apply quotes to your mismatched ideas. I also think if 99.99% of the people on this board think your full of it they may be right. I think the only one you're fooling into believing you know anything about any of these topics, is yourself. First, no religion espoused abstaining from sex, in fact Buddha NEVER said one should not practice sex, the addition of abstinence for monks came centuries after Buddha had died, when they needed to ensure that monks would provide for the monastic community alone, i.e. not provide for a family and the monastery at the same time. People who study sociology understand this and it's the reason many religions have this prohibition for their members, it ensures that the members will not have divided loyalties, so the success of the institution is improved. I guarantee that at the point this rule was instituted in Buddhism they most likely had issues with the monks having families that they were providing for, that prevented them from providing for the religious institution as well, because the institution was feeling threatened they created this rule without any real basis for it's institution. The same thing happened a few centuries later in Christianity. See you have all these ideas, yet none are founded on evidence, only hyperbole. You are young and you know everything. You fail to understand that everything you've read, most of the people responding to your delusional comments read when you were still learning to add 1+1. Of course you are special, so you have insight that none of us could have. So in your mind, a decade or two of practice and understanding can't amount to the one or two years you've spent learning about this in books. Your problem is that you are so self-involved you fail to believe that anyone else could have any contribution to your own understanding, because they lack your intellect. The problem is that you've never really exhibited a greater degree of intellect, nor any real understanding on any of the topics, just a misinterpreted intellectual rationalization. I get so tired of the so called masters and immortals on this board that can't back up their comments other than using metaphysics as evidence. You will never be able to learn anything until you give up your own vaulted narcissistic opinion of yourself. Why the hell do you have to be special? Do you have such a low opinion of yourself that you have to create this self-image that you are something more than you actually are. Lastly, you present yourself on this board, not as someone who has developed the wisdom of a master, but as a young child who just learned about dinosaurs and knows everything there is to know about them. I could tell you something about dinosaurs, even something that's been proven, but because you have thought about it and come up with your own realization, it doesn't matter, because you are special and no one else can ever understand it the way you do. If you don't open yourself up to the notion that you could be wrong, that others have something to offer, then you'll never be able to learn anything more than what you've chosen to have learned. Before one becomes enlightened, they shit, eat, drink, and work, after enlightenment they shit, eat, drink, and work. You fail to understand this concept. The escape from duality does not occur in this life. Find me one person who has become enlightened that no longer eats, drinks, or defecates. When you can do that, then I'll start to listen to your nonsense. Also with your obsession with sex, I highly doubt that you've escaped the attachment to sex. What we know from studying the zealots that are obsessed with sex is that more often than not, they suffer from hyper-sexuality and their attacks on sex have to do with an inner guilt for their own perceived weakness. This is why I asked how you are doing with your abstinence from masturbation, because the way you obsess about it, I highly doubt you've been able to abstain from it. Aaron edit-In response to your question regarding my own abstinence, at one time I went a year without having sex of any kind. I then realized how utterly absurd it was, that there was absolutely nothing wrong with sex, that it was a natural act and began to masturbate to my heart's content. If I feel like masturbating today I do. If I want to have sex with someone else, I do. I understand that my body is evolved to procreate and that's the reason it's a pleasurably experience. Why must one deny themselves something that's pleasurable? Religious institutions have a prohibition against sex because they understand the easiest way to control others is to control their most basic desires. Do a little studying and you'll find that out as well.

I just spent two weeks with a toothache and this is the method I used to deal with it, it has to do with self-hypnosis. Find a comfortable place to sit and close your eyes. Breathe in very slowly til your lungs are full, once you feel them catch, breath out slowly. Continue doing this for a minute or so. Once you feel comfortable breathing slowly, begin to count back from 20, very slowly. Each time you count back you'll begin to feel a little bit more tired. By the time you reach one you'll feel completely relaxed. Now imagine that your pain is a ball of dark shadow. Each time you breath in you will breath in bright light and each time you breath out you'll breath out dark shadow. With every breath in you breath in relaxation and peace, you'll feel your anxiety wash away, with every breath out you'll feel anxiety and pain leave you. Keep doing this and while you do it think to yourself on each breath inward, "I am breathing in peace and relaxation." Every time you breath out, think to yourself, "I am breathing out pain and anxiety". Continue to do this until you feel no more pain, then count from one to five. With each number you'll feel more awake, when you reach five you'll be fully awake. Anyways, that's a very simplified description of the process. If you're really interested in an induction and you have access to a tape recorder I can help you out with one. You just need to record the induction and listen to it yourself. Of course this is not medical advice and should not be considered medical advice. If your doctor has given you a course of treatment, then you should continue that treatment or seek the advice of another doctor, before choosing an alternative to that treatment. This is just a homeopathic method for dealing with pain that you can use while receiving treatment. Aaron

Well then you have no idea what samsara is. When you become thirsty let us know and I'm sure someone can point you in the right direction. You've obviously misunderstood most of what you've learned or decided to reinterpret it as your ego-self desires. How are you doing with your sexual abstinence? When you can give up a masturbation habit and stop thinking of sex altogether, you'll be close to understanding samsara. Good luck on your journey and don't get carpal tunnel, it's a bitch. Aaron

A thirsty man does not distinguish between bottled water and tap water, nor does he say, "this water looks to clear!" Or, "this water is murky like the river!" Rather he drinks what he can and is thankful for it. You would think, as thirsty as you seem to be, that you would be less picky about what you drink. Aaron

We're reading the same book. I hate philosophical debate, so I didn't enter this conversation earlier. Anyways the first passage is a simple lesson in transience. Everything passes. Speaking about the necessity for support is a bit more difficult in western society, but it might be akin to the writer can't write without pen and paper, nor the musician play music without an instrument. If one is going to succeed in their chosen profession they need the tools to perform those jobs. In the same way the longevity that these ancient creatures experienced wasn't due to their being special, but their ability to take advantage of what the world had to offer in a mutually beneficial way. Your second passage is a lesson in objectification, applying value to something dependent on our experience. In the end the lamb is a lamb, the bird a bird, nothing changes that. A lamb is neither good, nor bad, and neither is the bird. They just are. If you want to apply a value to them, fine, but it doesn't change what they actually are. Aaron

Heh... this is nothing compared to what happened in China. Schools fought all the time, sometimes quite violently. What made you think Taoism was any different than any other religion? Someone's got to be right, right? Aaron

I thought it might be interesting to examine the historical implications of warfare as it relates to ancient religions many consider to be pacifistic in nature. The notion escaped me for the most part until I did some digging and found numerous accounts of warfare being supported by these same religious institution. If it had been a passing notion, one or two incidents, I would've thought that this was just a random occurrence, but what I found instead was a pathology of religion, if not overtly, covertly supporting violence for the sake of their own nation or religion. My examination is meant to be impartial, but at times it's very hard to be impartial when one hears some of the things that have occurred and been sanctioned by the monastic and religious hierarchy. Perhaps starting with the most recent account in modern history would be a good start and to do that we need to go to Sri Lanka where the state, which calls itself a Buddhist nation is committing genocide against the indigenous Tamil minority that has been seeking independence. Atrocities abound, entire towns laid to waste, children and women raped and killed, all sanctioned by the Theravada Buddhists Church that backs the country. Now to be honest, they're not advocating the rape and murder of innocents, but at the same time they're not speaking out against it either, rather they are supporting the regime full well knowing what is happening, all because they fear that the Tamil might gain control over the nation and banish Buddhism. This is something that's occurring in the here and now, yet most people will never hear about it, and Buddhists refuse to address it, yet it is happening, and the war has yet to end, even though concessions could be made to end it, if one side had compassion for the other. If this seems like an isolated incident, it isn't, Shaku Soen, a well known Zen Master and the teacher of D. T. Suzuki, was one of the first to advocate war as a form of Zen training. In Zen Holy War, Josh Baron examines this relationship, perhaps the most chilling quote from the book comes from Soen himself when he says, "I wished to inspire our valiant soldiers with the ennobling thoughts of the Buddha, so as to enable them to die on the battlefield with confidence that the task in which they are engaged is great and noble. I wish to convince them.... that this war is not a mere slaughter of their fellow-beings, but that they are combating an evil." Baron goes on to say that, "From Soen's point of view, since everything was one essence, war and peace were identical. Everything reflected the glory of Buddha, including war. And since the Buddha's main purpose was to subjugate evil, and since the enemy of Japan was inherently evil, war against evil was the essence of Buddhism. "In the present hostilities," Soen wrote, "into which Japan has entered with great reluctance, she pursues no egotistic purpose, but seeks the subjugation of evils hostile to civilization, peace and enlightenment." (Japan's invasion of Russia was entirely self-serving and hardly reluctant.). To Soen, war was " an inevitable step toward the final realization of enlightenment."" Baron uses the research of Brian Victoria for much of his discussion regarding the Zen complicity in the war effort, amongst the most disturbing of Victoria's findings were the comments made by Sawaki Kodo, one of the great Soto Zen patriarchs of this century. Kodo said that he and his comrades "gorged ourselves on killing people." Victoria includes a later quote from 1942 where Kodo wrote, "It is just to punish those who disturb the public order. Whether one kills or does not kill, the precept forbidding killing [is preserved]. It is the precept forbidding killing that wields the sword. It is the precept that throws the bomb." Victoria continues to examine Kodo's explanation, in which Kodo essentially states that if one kills in a state of Zen or no-mind, then that act comes from a state of enlightenment. He wasn't the only one, in fact many of the Zen Masters at the time stated the same thing, and why wouldn't they? If they had not supported the war effort their temples would've most certainly been shut down, the monks sent back to the lay practice or other monasteries that did support the war. The most reprehensible of this support was to come in during what has become known as the Rape of Nanking. During the capture of Nanking on December 13th, 1937, the Japanese raped, killed, and tortured over 350,000 Chinese. It's still considered one of the most brutal acts of war ever perpetrated by man. Nazi officers present during the invasion actually left the battlefield, unable to watch the brutality. The horrors didn't end on one day though, the Japanese continued to kill the Chinese populace indiscriminately, and the Buddhist religious officiated much of it, watching and condoning the actions, even supporting the state held sentiment that the Chinese were lesser human beings, even less so than dogs and cats. To put this in perspective, more people died in Nanking, raped, tortured, and killed, than Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined, all under the auspice of the Buddhist monks and Masters. Afterward they used Chinese children as target practice, there are even accounts of boys being lined up to be used for bayonet practice, and officers beheading Chinese men in order to demonstrate the "proper way to behead a man." I could go on, but I don't think many of us would have the stomach for much more, suffice it to say that it took nearly 50 years before the Zen temples were willing to admit their complicity and also the nature of their acts. Hopefully it's a lesson well learned. Before you say, "well that was just the Zen Buddhists!" It might be wise to look further into the past, back to the 17th century, when we find out exactly how the Gelug-pa sect came to rule under the Fifth Dalai Lama. Derek Maher, in an article, explains that the Fifth Dalai Lama praised the Khoshut Mongol ruler, Gushri Khan, in part because the Khan eliminated and supressed the other Buddhist sects in Tibet, helping his own sect come to power. Although not as brutal as what Japanese did during the first half of the 20th century, it's no less disturbing. I could stop there, but there is much more to address, enough to fill volumes in fact, the Ch' ang Buddhist support and aid of the Maoist government during the Korean War is another modern example, as is the Theravada Buddhist Temples support against the Muslim insurgency in Southern Thailand. The similarities between the two different factions is eerily common, both groups provided lodging for the military, and it wasn't uncommon for the monks to participate in active military duty. To the best of my knowledge the Buddhists in both countries still support these actions to this day, under the auspice of compassion. This shouldn't eliminate other religions from their own complicity, of course, I have chosen to use the Buddhist traditions as an example, because for many of us, Buddhism seems to be completely antithetical to the concepts of war. Taoism has a long and bloody history as well, in fact it had less compulsions about waging war than the Ch'ang Buddhists seemed to have. Both historically supported war, particularly against oppressive rulers, but oftentimes supporting oppressive rulers when it seemed fit. The Hindu, another religion most consider to be peace loving, is not without it's own bloody history, with numerous conflicts arising over the last 2,000 years, many of them quite bloody. Even today it's not uncommon for one to hear of a riot occurring in which the Hindus attack the Muslims or visa versa. I didn't write this to point fingers at any one religion, in fact I left out the Christian, Muslim, Jewish, and other Eastern Religions, because we are all to familiar as it is with their own bloody histories, rather I wrote this in the attempt to make people aware of the complicity of religion in warfare, how a supposedly righteous and pure ideology can turn evil and sour, if that religion comes under attack by others. We should never forget that religions are abstract concepts, nor that ideas alone are not worth the loss of human life. So long as we value the religion itself over the value of another's life, this will continue. So long as we turn a blind eye to the capacity of man's evil, even under the supervision of the "righteous" we will continue to perpetrate evil acts in the name of compassion. Aaron

You may be right, my only point was that it's important to be aware of the complicity so that this can be avoided. Aaron

I'm receiving a warning from google that their are advertisements on Taobums from a site that is known to distribute malware. The site is taylortarver.com. I currently can't visit many of the threads because the advertisement is present there, well I could, but I don't want to take the chance. Just wanted to give you guys a heads up. Aaron

Hi Sean, It was happening on the http://www.thetaobums.com/index.php?/topic/23309-does-anyone-else-struggle-with-their-sanity/ thread. Aaron

Some clarifications here, In Taoism, at least if one pays attention to the Tao Te Ching, in order for pleasure to exist, there must be pain. That doesn't mean that as soon as someone feels pleasure, someone else in the universe experienced pain. It's really talking about our view of reality and how we objectify things. A thing is simply a thing, an action an action, it's our decision to place a value on it that makes it valuable or worthless. So ice cream is yummy, but when we decide that ice cream is yummy then we're also presenting the opportunity for it to be yucky in someone else's opinion as well. Now before I go any further I should also point out that there is nothing wrong with judging ice cream as yummy or yucky, rather the problem comes from placing value on it. Ice cream can be tasty, but it should be no more valuable to you than milk or rice. I'm sure that might confuse some people, but it's essentially what Lao Tzu was saying in the Tao Te Ching. Aaron

But Scotty, who made that decision? Nothing that's happened in this thread has violated the terms of service, simply because it is in the General Discussion section. If you want the discussion to focus solely on the Taoist perspective, then maybe you should take it over to the Taoist Discussion section. On the other hand, if you're not open to discussing varying opinions and ideas in relation to your own, then you're going to limit your own opportunity for growth. Criticism is essential to everyone's growth, whether it's criticism of teachings or practices or one's individual capacities, simply because without it, we can't get an honest appraisal of our understanding and practice. Aaron

You're reacting to something that's not there. She just made a statement regarding her own practice and said that you might gain some insight from it without any of the perceived dangers found in your own. Lighten up there Scotty. Aaron

Well this could have several meanings in an analogical way. I would assume that this may have to do with the idea that God exists within everything, that he is even fear and doubt. Remember the Hermetic's view of God wasn't like the Christian view, but akin to the Hindu, in which God or Shiva didn't just inhabit everything, but it was everything. So God is even fear and doubt, God is even death and life, God is unfathomable and the only part we know is what we can ascribe to it on this Earth. Without understanding the original author's ideas regarding hermeticism, what I would have to conclude is that light is the illumination of the soul, enlightenment so to speak, and darkness is again, fear, doubt, those negative emotions that exist within us. Unlike many traditions, the hermetics didn't believe that once you became enlightened you became perfect, but rather that flaws were a persistent condition of the human being. Aaron

Hmm... I don't care for any of those shows. This is the grass is greener complex it seems. Of course we do have gorgeous weather in Florida, that's one thing that's nice about here. Aaron

I think this is another cop out, the fact is people say "authentic" to remove blame from the religion and institution itself. The religion/god/philosophy/practice/etc. is perfect, but the people imperfect, so don't blame the religion, blame the person. If the highest authorities, the supposedly "enlightened" leaders support it and the monks follow that support, how can we not blame the institution? This has already been mentioned, I'm just reiterating it in response to this post. Aaron

I thought this might be a nice topic. I've gotten into Martial Arts movies over the last few months watching one or two a night, some have been horribly corny, others really great. I thought I'd share my top five and add a poll just to see what others thought. 1. Bruce Lee- I know what some of you are saying, "how cliche." Well go ahead and say that, but the truth is, no martial artist on the face of the Earth has been more responsible for bringing martial arts to western society than Bruce Lee has. Bruce Lee was born in San Francisco in 1940, his father was Chinese, his mother half-Chinese and half-caucasian. He was a phenomenal martial artist, who understand showmanship and style. Remarkably fast, he was trained in Wushu by Ip Man, but after a year into his training, the other students found out his mother was half-caucasian and refused to train with him, because of the Chinese unwritten ban on teaching martial arts to foreigners. Ip Man continued to train Bruce in private though. This would be a recurring theme in Lee's life, his mixed heritage coming back to haunt him time and time again. Today most people don't know about it, they only know he was a phenomenal martial artist, but in reality he was a fighter in every aspect of his life, being one of the first Chinese to teach martial arts to westerners, even after being told to stop by the Chinese community. His filmography is well known, but sometimes the myths and reality get mixed up, regardless, Bruce Lee is the most famous and perhaps the most talented Martial Arts actor of all time. 2. Donnie Yen- Why Donnie Yen as number two? I'm not entirely sure, but I think it has something to do with Donnie's attitude and the way he portrays his characters. Yen genuinely seems to be a nice guy and that comes out in his performances. It doesn't hurt that he is probably the fastest Martial Artist in China right now, some say even quicker than Bruce Lee was. He's proficient in numerous styles, but he's most known for bringing Wushu to the masses, studying under Ip Chun, the son of Ip Man, Bruce Lee's Master, in order to play the part of Ip Man in the movie of the same name. Yen was born in Hong Kong in 1963, but moved to Boston when he was eleven. He learned martial arts from his mother, Bow-yin Mark, who is a Fu-style Wudangquan Grandmaster. (Wudangquan is the Taoist style of Kung Fu from the Wu Dang Monasteries). He's turning 50 this year, so he's not a spring chicken anymore, but it doesn't seem to be slowing him down, he's the highest paid actor (not just action star) in China. Oh yeah, he's also a classically trained musician (taught by his mother again.) 3. Michelle Yeoh- What the heck? Michelle Yeoh? Really? Yes really. Not only is she a phenomenal martial artist, Yeoh is also a very talented actress, even being nominated for an Oscar for her role in "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon". Having sprung to stardom overnight in the west, after her role in the James Bond movie "Tomorrow Never Dies", Yeoh was actually an accomplished and respected actress in the Hong Kong film industry for nearly a decade prior. With a fluid style and remarkable form, she is definitely a top-notch martial artist. Now before you go thinking I added her to the number three position to appease the feminists among us, that's not why at all, rather it's because she is such a phenomenal actress, with remarkable skill as a martial artist. She has a lengthy filmography that backs up these statements and my choice. Definitely worthy of number three in my opinion. 4. Jet Li- Oh Jet, where art thou? Well apparently nearly everywhere these days. Aside from Jackie Chan, Jet's one of the most bankable martial arts actors in Hollywood. He's another quick martial artist, known for his lightning speed. Although his acting suffered a bit early in his career, he has blossomed into a magnificent performer, with several powerful roles. A few that come to mind are "Fearless" and "Hero". I think it would be hard creating a top five list without including Jet Li... don't you? 5. Jackie Chan- Okay, Jackie's not the best actor in the world, but he's damn fun to watch. With a charismatic personality and skill as a martial artist honed in Chinese Opera, he's certainly one of the most entertaining actors out there. Will he ever win an Oscar? Probably not, but he makes you laugh. He has skill as a martial artist too, remember he's been practicing in the Chinese Opera since childhood. He's also helped to popularize Martial Arts worldwide for the last two decades. Ask any child who the best martial artist in the world is and most likely they'll say Jackie Chan (okay, some will say Bruce Lee, but still). Even though he's not the best actor, he's worthy of the number five spot. Honorable mentions- Sammo Hung, Andy Lau, and Tony Jaa. Anyways, those are my top five... pretty standard I know. I wouldn't mind hearing your choices though. Lots of great actors to choose from, especially if you don't mind watching subtitles. Aaron

Just watched an Andy Lau movie tonight, Savior of the Soul... man that guy is good with a sword. I'm surprised how many movies he's in... If you haven't seen Shaolin, he's in that and it's well worth watching. Certainly a great martial artist, surprised he didn't receive any votes yet. Aaron

Come live in even a small town in America and I'm sure you'll appreciate Sweden more. Still your track record is pretty good compared to most. Also I just got done watching "The Girl With the Dragon Tatoo"... you just don't get tv shows that good here either. Aaron

I'm so glad to see you back Barb. Cyber-hug. I was thinking about you the other day as well. I'm sorry to hear about your break-up, I know it couldn't have been easy, but I hope the best is in store for you. You'll always have friends here, but you know that. I also hope that life treats you well, because you deserve to be treated well. I'm sure I speak for many of the people here when I say you are always with us, but you you were still gone for far too long. Aaron

Umm... I would think you could just say, "this is how we define it legally." And that would be enough. Isn't that exactly what the courts do? So you can have the legal definition and the religious definition, but the legal definition, if we're following the constitution, should not be influenced by the religions. Does that solve the problem or is it that you don't want things to change? Aaron

You can be AWARE of the now, without consciously acknowledging it and in fact this is achieved in zazen and empty mind type meditation. The issue is, as you said, the mind has to have something to reference in order to be able to make a decision, yet obviously there is a part of us that decides an action before we consciously make that decision. The distinction I make between now and immediate is that now refers to the present, immediate refers to consciously being aware of what is occurring around you currently, rather than focusing on the distant past or future. If one can do that, then they are effecting the now. Aaron

It's kind of interesting and something that's been discussed recently, but what we're beginning to understand is that we're never consciously in the "now", everything that we do is in response to something that's already happened. Studies have shown that even before we think about responding to something our body is already sending nerve impulses in response to our action, so apparently there is a part of us that is aware of the now, which is why I say consciously. That isn't to say that we can't be in the now, in fact with meditation it is possible. I'm not sure if the differentiation between past and present is all that important, but some people think it is. Perhaps the best thing we can do is to be consciously aware of the immediate? Aaron