Aaron

Hello K, For me this notion of pride and humility is all about perception. Pride can be seen as arrogance, a notion that you are better than someone else, especially when it's pride in a belief system, for instance Buddhism, Taoism, or Christianity. I think why most religions and philosophies advocate humility is because it is founded on the principle that we are no better (or worse) than anyone else. It allows us to have a dialogue, rather than a debate and argument. Does that mean pride is wrong? No, it just means it's perceived as being wrong. Humility isn't necessarily good either, it's all about perception. The key to understanding the teachings of any "good" philosophy is understanding that at the root there is no right or wrong, there are just ideas that one can choose to follow or not. Aaron

Hello Bluefront, When I say "It", I mean literally everything in existence, what we see and don't see. The dualistic view is that the world is made of matter and consciousness, but I don't think that's so, I think our consciousness is as much a part of "It" as we are. The problem is that we have developed this idea of separateness that is founded upon our consciousness, that somehow our thoughts are not a part of the physical world, that we are drivers within vehicles, but in fact we are the vehicles and the vehicles are "It". I've actually gone into great detail in another thread regarding this, so I wont bore people again, suffice it to say that consciousness isn't the entirety of our being, there was a "It" before we became we. The trick for me is getting back in touch with the "It" that I am and you are and everything else is. When I can do that, then I am working in harmony with the world, rather than against it. Aaron edit- You're right though, I didn't need to apologize, I needed to not be cranky. That's part of "It", the part that we "cultivate".

Actually I'm proposing non-duality, there is only one. I'm not sure how you read that I was proposing otherwise. Now correct me if I'm wrong, but the definition of the Universe is essentially everything, so your little innards and such are actually "the universe" or at least pieces of the universe, hence the universe is literally in you.Also what you said actually didn't make sense to me, but as long as it makes sense to you, that's cool. What I actually said is that there is no separate self, so I'm not sure where you're getting your ideas from, but perhaps you need to look at what I actually wrote. There is only "It". You are "It". I am "It". Everything is "It". I hope that helps to clarify things. Sorry if I sound a bit cranky, just got back from work and I had to ride the bus for two and half hours and walk two miles in the pouring rain. Hopefully I'll have my car on Monday and I wont have to worry about this. Aaron

You could ask, who was quoting who? Aaron

Hello Folks, I'll be working long hours in the weeks to come. I'll still be checking in now and again, but I wont be on as much as I was. If you have issues with the Tao Teh Ching forum please send me a message and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. If it's an emergency you can contact one of the site moderators and I'm sure they'll be happy to help. Aaron

It's only a glib answer if you don't understand the totality of it, in fact it's exactly what Liezi explained. Divinity isn't necessarily "God", but rather the entirety of everything. In my mind I am everything and I am me. When I die, what becomes of me? Do I waste away and cease to be? If so does that mean that I cease to exist? Perhaps the I that is made up of my thoughts and ideas, but the parts that make up this body merely transform and go on. The universe is connected to everything and we are a part of that universe. Part of understanding that "I am the divine and the divine is me" is understanding that God is in me and I am in God. I am in the Universe and the Universe is in me, how does that contradict anything that Taoism teaches? I think the problem people have is that they look at themselves and consider themselves to be simply the ego self that they have learned to be, not realizing that we are much more than that. I've explained this before and I'll do it again, briefly this time. As human beings we have tiny bacteria that resides within our stomach and digestive tract. This bacteria helps us to digest food, in fact it's required in order for us to do this. We look at these bacteria and we say, we are not this bacteria, but in fact we are. We are our hair, toe nails, bile, and tears. And just as there is bacteria in our stomach, we reside within the body of the universe, and whether we believe it or not, we are a necessary part, just as the many species on this world are. Are we necessary for the existence of the Universe to continue, no, but the truth is, even in death we continue, perhaps not as humans, but as energy and matter that transforms and continues to be a part of the universe. Who am I really? Well I am the alpha and omega, the beginning and the end. I am the sky and the earth, the water in the ocean and the tree in the valley. I am the spirit and the body, the infinite and finite. I am more than just the ideas that allow me to understand that I am here, I am the body given birth and awakened, to question and know that in this breath I breathe I am more than simply one man, but everything that exists. It's only when I can see this that everything you've said really makes sense. If that's glib, then I don't know what else to say. Aaron

To get back to meaning, I think this is definitely talking about introspection. How else can one know without traveling, see without looking, and work without doing? As an aside this was, at one time, one of my favorite chapters. Aaron

Hello Vaj, I'm done. I think everyone here can see my point but you. It's either ignorance or stubbornness, either way I'm not wasting any more time. I think that if you experienced what you claim to have experienced, then you would exemplify that in your actions, rather than get indignant when people actually prove to you that what you're doing is contrary to what Buddha taught. No hard feelings, but this is just wasted time. Aaron

Hello Vaj, But I'm not advocating that people give up traditions, I'm just saying that they're not for me. I think if it's something you're interested in, then fine. Also Vaj, your fear is unfounded, as I said before, if it's the truth, then anyone who hears it will know it as such. You're not giving your own faith enough credit. I think that you're mistaken about how deep I have gone. To put it bluntly I have suffered more than you could ever imagine and yet it never broke me, rather I have learned the nature of suffering and have moved past it. Do I still suffer? Yes. I had a migraine a couple weeks ago. Does my school of Zen make people feel good? Well if people feel good about rigorously examining their lives then sure. If they feel good about examining the nature of who they really are, dark parts and all, then yes it's a feel good Zen. My school of Zen requires practice, not just sitting. My school of Zen requires that you actually act ethically, not just practice ethics via word of mouth. My version of Zen requires you to practice compassion to all who suffer, not just those you wish to. I think the problem with my version of Zen is that it requires one to do more than just talk about it, so not many people are interested. It's much easier to talk about the virtues of Mahayana or Theravada at a coffee shop than it is to actually practice. Of course my school isn't exclusively Zen either, it's also a bit of Taoism and Hinduism. My school is based on what I've learned and what I've experienced. I practice what I practice because I feel the need, not because it's required or because it's cool, because believe me, no one has ever said, "oh you're a Buddhist, cool." I'm going to leave you with a few questions, actually these are questions for anyone who's claiming to be a Buddhist. When was the last time you meditated? When was the last time you showed compassion for another, actually did something to ease someone's suffering? When was the last time you did something more than just talk about Buddhism? If it's been more than a day for any of these, then I'd suggest you get busy. You can't bear fruit without first planting seeds. You can't harvest fruit without going out into the field. You can't enjoy the fruit unless it is prepared properly. Aaron

I don't know many Zen Buddhists that are astonished when I say it's not all about sitting. I think today most genuine practitioners understand the need for practice and cultivation in all areas of one's life. Aaron

Hello Vaj, "People like Twinner"... really? Twinner's form of Zen? Jeesh... if you didn't seem self-righteous, arrogant, and condescending before, you've come through loud and clear this time. I think it's hilarious how you and other Westerners see yourselves as the carriers of the Eastern flame, when all you do is quote from texts. Aaron edit- Also I represent a very tiny minority of Zen Buddhists. Most try to convince me of the necessity of the Four Noble Truths, the Eightfold Path and Sutras, especially the Heart Sutra. I have to remind them that there's no need to worry, there's nothing here to save, so let me be.

Hi Simple Jack, Unfortunately I am taking this point of view from people who have reached a high level in Zen. They all agree that nothingness is a misinterpretation and that a closer examination will find that emptiness is a better explanation for the phenomena I am speaking of. Also, I never advocated abandoning the Sutras, I just say don't accept them as fact, they're just words on paper attributed to a man that no can actually prove really existed, that's all. So you read them, take them with a grain of salt and use what you can and discard what you can't use. So when I read about dieties, heavens and hells, I discard that and focus on the parts I believe actually are attributed to reality, rather than superstition. Anyways, I'm not even sure where you got this idea that I told people not to read the sutras. edit- Also the idea of emptiness stems from Taoism and the unnameable, i.e. the void that is empty, but inexhaustible. So even though it is empty, it is the wellspring from which all things are given life, children, thoughts, birds, rocks, etc. Now my own experience is that saying it is nothing isn't so, because there is something, only it is without substance or form, it's like trying to imagine that you're holding something, but there's nothing there. You think that something might be there, you feel that there might be something, but really all you can bring away from it is an empty hand, there is nothing to grasp or hold onto. If you've experienced it, then you know what I'm talking about. Aaron Also I'm almost certain Alan Watts reached a higher level of enlightenment than anyone you or I know, but if it makes you feel better to discount him that's fine, but from my understanding he was close friends with many high ranking Zen masters who considered him to be a gift to the west. Feel free to disparage and criticize if you feel it's needed, because of course we know from first hand experience the level of his awareness. (That was sarcasm... in other words read his books then make judgments.)

Intelligence does not matter, it's wisdom that matters. Aaron

Yes, but that's not Western culture so much as it is religion. I don't think the majority of people (at least non-christians) believe that children are sinners, I know I don't. I think you're pushing one segment of the society's beliefs on everyone, which is not accurate. In regards to mental illness, I agree, but in many cultures schizophrenia is seen as a gift. Mental illness is stigmatized here, but it is also stigmatized in many eastern countries, China and Japan for instance. So rather than go on forever I'll just state my point, which is this, in general mental illness is related to stress, when a person experiences a great amount of stress, then they are more likely to suffer from mental illness. This is what they're finding in Japan and other Asian countries like China, so perhaps the key to mental health is really stress management, rather than blaming cultures and such? Aaron edit- A little bit about bipolar, the diagnosis for many mental illnesses are set up in such a way that if someone really wants to diagnose someone, they can. Bipolar is perhaps one of the worst of these. You're moody, suffering from bouts of depression, and irritable, well it's not that you lost your job, obviously you are bipolar. Lets get you on medicine that will earn the pharmaceutical companies and psychologists LOTS of money. End of rant.

Of course you're right in that regard. I was thinking ethnocentric from the perspective that most practitioners are either Indian, Chinese, or South East Asian. Westerners make up a very small minority. I try not to determine someone else's level of enlightenment anymore. I might discuss what they were aware of, but to me enlightenment is relative, as you have proven here. Again it's all relative. What you determine to be enlightened, doesn't have to be what I determine it to be. I do, however, view Socrates as enlightened. I would agree with you that wisdom and experience are paramount, but in the end it's the recognition of the true nature of phenomena that defines enlightenment. In other words, you can be wise and experienced and not be enlightened. Hehehe... I would have to agree with you there too. I was trying to make a point, that if one could see all enlightened individuals as being Buddhas, then they must also agree that enlightenment could be achieved through various different religious and philosophical schools. I think everyone should be free to be whatever they want to be. They shouldn't have to worry about labels. I respect people based on their behavior, not their religious or spiritual background. I'm not fond of traditional Mahayana or Therevada Buddhism, but I am fond of Zen. The reason I have issues with Mahayana and Therevada is their emphasis on right and wrong and subsequently the use of guilt to keep people in line. I really believe that guilt in this sense is the product of superstition, rather than a healthy impulse. Aynways, thanks for your replies Gold. Aaron

Hmm... I didn't think they were the same subject... talk about perception. Aaron edit- My understanding is that Gold's topic is about level of enlightenment, mine is about who is enlightened. Closely related, but subtly different.

Yep... that's exactly why I like it so much. Aaron

Hehehe... that's because they're all Buddhist! Aaron

Actually most Zen Buddhists will say that emptiness is without form. It's not nothingness, but rather the absence of everything. In that sense it isn't even seeing through thought, but rather ceasing thought, to reach a state of stillness where there is nothing at all, not even silence. You are right though, the traditional view of emptiness and the Zen view are different. Also Zen isn't as concerned with doctrine and scripture either, but rather practice, which is perhaps why they tend to be more pragmatic when it comes to instruction. To each his own. Aaron

Ahh... yes! You are absolutely right. I think the point I was trying to make wasn't that "all is achieved through sitting" that's nonsense, we've all heard the story about the monk and the clay tablet. My point was that I achieved a greater understanding of the world. In fact when I had my greatest "realization" it wasn't meditating, but rather laying on my bed reading a book. What I think now is that when we are aware of who we are and our connection to others, that ultimately we will be able to behave in a way that allows us to work in harmony with others. In my own life I find that when I am paying attention to what others are saying and doing and what I myself am saying and doing, that things are much more harmonious. It's very hard to interact with the world without emotions, desires, thoughts, etc. I don't necessarily think we are supposed to interact with the world in that way, rather meditation is a tool that allows us to understand those interactions more clearly. I think many people have this odd perception of detachment being some kind of Vulcan like state of mind, when that's not entirely what it is (imo), rather detachment is the ability to understand that those things that are around you are impermanent, so you can still enjoy coffee, baseball, flowers, and poetry, it's just you realize the actual nature of those things and by understanding this you are able to accept them for what they actually are. At least that's my own experience. Aaron

Hello Dan, I understand what you're saying and I don't disagree with you, you just came across as abrasive. I'm an advocate of emptiness myself, so kudos there and I hope life is treating you well. aaron

You still don't get it Vaj. How are you behaving? What does Buddha himself say about your behavior? I am checkable, if I'm wrong I will more often than not come around to admit it. If someone proposes something to me, even if I don't agree with it and might argue at first, if it's reasonable I examine it. My opinion on many things, including dependent origination have changed drastically because of conversations I have had with other people. My point is simply this, do what you believe is right. Treat others, including their beliefs with respect, and they will more often than not respect you, but when you say, "You are wrong and I am right" then what you will more often than not experience is opposition and derision. After years of arguing on this site, you seem to miss this very simple point. I still love you man and I'm not saying you don't know what you know or what you know is wrong, but rather that you shouldn't be so harsh when it comes to others beliefs. I'm sure Buddha believed that he was right and that everyone else was wrong, but he clearly understood that going about with that sort of attitude wasn't going to win him any brownie points, so he urged his followers to behave as they knew they should, and that the clearest way to understand this was by looking at how other people behaved and make their judgement based on that. Between here and enlightenment, there is a long trip, while we are traveling, isn't it in our best interest to behave in a way that makes us a joy to be around? Aaron

What do you mean by lost? Were you lost? When was it that you decided you were no longer lost? Am I lost if I am someplace where I can't recognize what is around me? What if I'm within my home, but I have a blindfold on? No one is lost, so no one needs to be found. We are all right here, it is only knowing what is right here that is important. Can one who becomes enlightened be arrogant and proud? Well yes, because those characteristics are relative to the person who is witnessing them. It is our own intention that deems the worth of our action. If we intend to do good works and act compassionately to our fellows, then even if that act is not received in kindness, we have still done good. Yet if we act with arrogance and pride, and know in our hearts that it is arrogance and pride that cause us to act, then even if that act is received in kindness, we have done ill. There are no fetters that hold us bound, there is only the perception of fetters. There is no sentient and non-sentient, only the perception of such. The truth that resounds within us, is not a truth that can be told, but one that is experienced when has seen who they were from the very beginning. When one sees this then one can not help but act with kindness and compassion, to appreciate ethical behavior for what it is, and move not against his fellow man, but in harmony. Aaron

I love the topic of perfection, I've actually started one at some point. All I will say is that if one is "truly" enlightened then they should understand that everything is perfect and that no one can be perfect. This simply means that although we are all as we should be, that we cannot behave in a way that suits everyone all the time, thus perfection cannot be achieved through one's perception of another, but rather it is achieved through breathing in and out and doing what you do. With that said, we should endeavor to treat others ethically and compassionately, to allow others to be what they wish to be as much as we can and worry, not so much about others, but about what we ourselves are doing. Aaron

Right now I'm reading "Zen for Americans" by Soyen Shaku translated by D.T. Suzuki. I really like how Shaku explains things in plain and simple language, even when he is explaining Buddhist terminology. Very good book. Aaron edit- I only read a chapter a day, which is why it takes me so long to complete a book.