Harmonious Emptiness

I guess Lao Tzu speaks in riddles a bit, Chuang Tzu obviously a lot. Maybe some alchemical literature could be considered riddles in some way, until you know what the terms mean. There is some Taoist poetry and songs too, though I don't know they would be so much like the Koans or Zen poems. Some of the Tai Chi classics, also I Ching stories are like riddles. Hmmm. Is this where the word ridiculous comes from!!? I guess the Koans do ridicule the person in a way. They sort of humble the person who thinks they have this big knowledge, cause them to bring it down a notch and know without knowing. So, humble, humiliate, riddle, ridicule.. What do you think you know? Oh yeah?!! Now what do you know?! Hmpfh

Taoists did play a major role in counseling emperors many centuries ago. I agree Taoists would be a great benefit in the political science arena, urban planning, and pretty much every area of healing, teaching, economics. Anything that has a "science" or "arts" after it has been of interest in Taoist literature in some degree.

yeah, my attempt didn't work too good either http://www.thetaobums.com/index.php?/topic/20878-taoism-anarchism/ This is also a great book of Taoist political philosophical teachings: Being written by Taoist sages, it is more than just political philosophies but also speaks about Tao, change, humanity, meditation, wisdom, etc...

I think hardships also show us how closely related our thoughts and feelings are to manifestations, reminding people to stay mindful of the fact that our lives start in the heart-mind and change from the heart-mind. Like if you allow a small child to play at the edge of the ocean, you might think you are doing it a favour by allowing it to do whatever it thinks it wants, but really you're letting it think it is safe to do so which will not help, even though the child might not understand the lesson for a while. So we still get chastised by higher powers or forces, imo, to direct us deeper to the source of our activity and events in our lives. It can be inhumanly harsh, even making others suffer sometimes, but I think harmony is the lesson. When we are in disharmony with higher powers and forces, they correct us, like we learn to sail with waves or we get capsized. It seems like a mostly automatic process and merciful from time to time.

@ Xabir See this though from the quotations: "This all-ground, not a mere nihilistic and void nothingness, is self-luminous cognizance that occurs unceasingly." "The nonarising essence of the mind itself is dharmakaya, its unobstruced expression is sambhogakaya, and its function manifesting in any way whatsoever is nirmanakaya. These three kayas are again spontaneously present as an indivisible identity." I'm starting to abandon the possibility that Buddhism was talking about God in the sense of "The Great Spirit", though it does seem to match up more closely with the Sufi experience which I can't speak of from any first hand experience. I feel that God is more personal than these Buddhist concepts, though these concepts might describe Him in so many ways, I don't think they can be him, though he can be them... not asking for agreement or opinions about that, just putting that out there.. Funny once I got about as close as I could get, I realized "no, that's not the one." Never was an impulse buyer. Either way, I think one can still be Buddhist and, say, Jewish at the same time. If we exist, God exists. If you would rather say we don't exist, go ahead. You can only be half right though..

This reminded me of something a bit more controversial that the Abbot(ess) at a dojo near me said during the introductory session. She asked "has anyone read this guy, an American guy, he had his students and he would basically grade them: "ok, you've reached here, so you're at that level, and you reached here so you're at that level.." Nobody knew who she was talking about. Then she said "well, it's not like that. We're not going to give you any grades or levels. We don't do that." I guess it was a bit of Soto influence on this Rinzai lineage. Sure, these levels exist in Sutras, but following them too closely can be a big problem for real progress, too, especially for the inexperienced who want to get ahead too quickly.

Some say looking at the nose is more an expression just to mean lower your gaze without closing your eyes, so that you're not looking around if you need to keep your eyes open to stay concentrated. I think for most Taoist meditation, closed is better so you can feel internal energy better, whereas gazing at the floor is more for Zen meditation, though I'm not sure either are 100% exclusively on or the other. I recommend Daniel Reid's book for getting into retention. His suggested practices start at the laymen level, where most people are. I think it depends on what you're doing it for as well. Some people practice retention for months at a time without a clear practice with a talented teacher.. this, I think, is dangerous, rather pointless, and unnecessary for most people, especially younger men. Some people stop producing the hormones that they were trying to enhance by doing so. If you practice retention with a partner in real life, you can practice it in dreams too. In fact the only Taoist practices I've heard of that speak about retention would do so with a consort, and this relieves much of the discomfort.

Sums it up nicely I think..

Well, I'm just showing the similarities observable when one has an open minded approach to a notion of "God." And, yes, Shakyamuni Buddha was a manifestation of nirmanikaya, but that occurance is a function of dharmakaya, thus also sambhogakaya.. I can see how that was not stated clearly. "Ahh, see you're inadvertently subsuming "dharmakaya" as a ground of being once again. The way you're positing it is similar to "Brahman" of Advaita Vedanta. Dharmakaya is not a ground of being where things manifest from; it is talking about emptiness/D.O. Refer back to my previous posts in this thread." But the way this teacher explains it, dharmakaya is essentially the beginning or "ground" whence the rest all happens. He actually says it rather directly. Maybe there is an ultimate where there isn't even dharmakaya, but that is not really of much concern, save for more nihilistic understandings, at least by my estimation.

Personally, the path is a means of autonomy. Why have our views and goals directed by a circle of greed that merely devours everything? Getting swept up in that cycle is about as easy as getting hit by a car. The path keeps us from chasing every ball we see on the other side of the road. Awareness of gods vs. awareness of dogs. We are merely at the crossroad and we can catch a ride in any direction. I guess the most important thing is to know which direction is which before we jump in.

Some more excerpts from "Lamp of Mahamudra" by Tsele Natsok Rangdrol (b.1608) will follow. Note the similarities to how I am describing "God." It seems almost like Christianity presented these ideas in a way that would make sense to the ancient Hebrews and their paternalistic culture. These are all from the chapter entitled "View": "Your natural essence... ultimately.. has not true existence. Thus, it is a great emptiness free from the limitations of arising, dwelling, and ceasing - the unconditioned dharmadhatu. Since the beginning it is a nature in which the three kayas are spontaneously present, and it is known as the "ground mahamudra of the essential nature of things." The Guhyagarbha Tantra teaches: "This mind-essence devoid of ground and root Is the basis of all phenomena." This essence is not something that exists within the mind-stream of just one individual person or just one buddha. It is the actual basis of all that appears and exists, the whole of samsara and nirvana. .... This nature present as a neutral and undetermined ground, neither realized nor not realized, is known as the "all-ground," "alaya," because it forms the basis for both samasara and nirvana. This all-ground, not a mere nihilistic and void nothingness, is self-luminous cognizance that occurs unceasingly. That cognizance, called "all-ground consciousness," is like a mirror and its brightness. .... The exact nature of this original state or mode of being is totally free in being inseparable appearance and emptiness and vividly clear in being the unity of luminosity and emptiness. It is utterly open being all-pervasive primordial freedom and completely even in being unconditioned spontaneous presence. This is the main body of the view, the natural state as it is, primordially self-existing and originally present as the essence of all of samsara and nirvana. There is no other separate piece or fragment of a view than this. To see the inherent falsity in dualistic fixation through understanding this primordial condition is called "realizing the view" .. In actuality, all of appearance and existence, samsara and nirvana, is the display of the three kayas. Your own mind as well has the nature of the three kayas and itself is not apart from ultimate dharmadatu ("dharmadatu: "the nature of phenomena" beyond arising, dwelling, and ceasing"). .. The nonarising essence of the mind itself is dharmakaya, its unobstruced expression is sambhogakaya, and its function manifesting in any way whatsoever is nirmanakaya. These three kayas are again spontaneously present as an indivisible identity. To recognize and settle on this natural state is called perfectly realizing the faultless and correct view." (end quote) So, again, in correlations, it's as though "The Great Spirit" is dharmakaya; all angels, other gods, and buddhas (including Jesus) are sambhogakaya; and The Tao is nirmanakaya. To see the inseparability of these, ourselves, and existence, is, perhaps, true "non-duality." So the correlations here with the other mystical traditions appears, to me, to be separated merely by their explanatory details, of which Buddhism is perhaps the most detailed in its literal and logical directions.

Sounds a bit like drawing shen in through the upper dan tien, though with a strong visual accompaniment to the experience. I think for some people, these visuals are brushed off when they have experience having to brush off halucinations, while others get more drawn towards them, but that is just my personal theory, and maybe approach. I tend to brush off the visuals as I've had to build a sense of halucination vs. reality in the past. Doesn't mean the visuals don't represent something, but they can also lead to divergent efforts at times. This could be something more particular as well, like opening the 3rd eye which others would be able to speak more about here. For drawing Shen in through the upper dan tien, if that is what is happening, then you don't want to get to caught up and emotionally charged with the experience as that will burn off more energy than is being stored. The Shen can turn into Chi, and then the Chi into Jing (lots of topics on these if you search this website), but to do so requires great stillness. Think, "allowing, responding, and following" let the energy in and let it do what it does, and only assist in the way you would with water or smoke, gently guiding it (such as during MCO or after to the dan tien). The energy will go where it needs to go if you allow it to, so the effort is non-effort. Sounds like you're going to enjoy this place !

Which I think leaves plenty of room towards this overarching consciousness-emptiness flux which is "The Great Spirit".

Seriously? You post this as refutation, as if I think God or Dharmakaya can be seen and otherwise it is non-existent? Seriously, give people some credit man. Read that chapter, it merely refutes the idea that Dharmakaya can be seen. No one sees God (short of the odd illusion, which might be the Buddhakaya), they just know that He is in everything, and know that things follow His (of course I use the term His loosely) order. edit: for your first response, I might not be able to get to it until after the New Year, but I know there are scriptural passages that talk about Consciousness as being like a ground, though maybe it changes, it is still always there, just as the Buddha Mind exists the same in all arising Buddhas

I think I found a major scriptural point where confusion is arising here. What I've been saying is that I view God in the same way as that Black Elk quote I posted on page 3, and that I think these are the same as The Dharmakaya, since, just as a someone in Samadhi does not think "I am this enlightened being in Samadhi" God, The One Spirit, does not think in this fashion either. I think the Sutra which is causing some people are taking issue with this is the following, which depicts Brahma thinking in a way which even an enlightened human being does not. If someone who has merged with (I think I've adequately defended that description now) Dharmakaya does not have such egotistical thinking, it is erroneous to assume the One Spirit (which is consciousness, and that there's scriptural!) would be somehow less intelligent. Duh!! Essentially, I'm not talking about Brahma, or any old men in beards up in the sky.. not at all. But I am talking about a consciousness (maybe someone else would like to find a quote about how Dharmakaya is consciousness, and everything is consciousness. I know I've seen it, if not quoted it.) Peace y'all. "5. 'On this, brethren, the one who was first reborn thinks thus to himself: "I am Brahmâ, the Great Brahmâ, the Supreme One, the Mighty, the All-seeing, the Ruler, the Lord of all, the Maker, the Creator, the Chief of all, appointing to each his place, the Ancient of days, the Father of all that are and are to be{1}. These other beings are of my creation. And why is that so? A while ago I thought, 'Would that they might come!' And on my mental aspiration, behold the beings came." 'And those beings themselves, too, think thus: "This must be Brahmâ, the Great Brahmâ, the Supreme, the Mighty, the All-seeing, the Ruler, the Lord of all, the Maker, the Creator, the Chief of all, appointing to each his place, the Ancient of days, the Father of all that are {p. 32} and are to be, And we must have been created by him. And why? Because, as we see, it was he who was here first, and we came after that." 6. 'On this, brethren, the one who first came into existence there is of longer life, and more glorious, and more powerful than those who appeared after him. And it might well be, brethren, that some being on his falling from that state, should come hither. And having come hither he might go forth from the household life into the homeless state, And having thus become a recluse he, by reason of ardour of exertion of application of earnestness of careful thought, reaches up to such rapture of heart that, rapt in heart, he calls to mind his last dwelling-place, but not the previous ones. He says to himself: "That illustrious Brahmâ, the Great Brahmâ, the Supreme One, the Mighty, the All-seeing, the Ruler, the Lord of all, the Maker, the Creator, the Chief of all, appointing to each his place, the Ancient of days, the Father of all that are and are to be, he by whom we were created, he is stedfast immutable eternal, of a nature that knows no change, and he will remain so for ever and ever. But we who were created by him have come hither as being impermanent mutable limited in duration of life." http://sacred-texts.com/bud/dob/dob-01tx.htm (edited out a footnote from text)

Hey all, If possible, can we try to tie the posts in with the original concept?... Xabir, I'm interested to hear what is your stance, if you hold to a particular view, in regards to the OP....?

Sorry, I don't really see the point of arguing over such a minor semantic liberty as to say ever-present vs. always true, always the ultimate truth... You had another post in response to this clarification as well.. But like I said, I'm not here for sport, nor to waste my time, so I don't really care to to discuss it all too much further.

After attempting to chastise me for saying the same thing... Really?.. What a waste of time..

Voila: http://www.daoistcenter.org/teachers.pdf awesome resources at daoistcenter.org

Something that helped me immensely were 2 stretches (as with all stretches, don't overdo it and hurt yourself): 1: lie on your back, hug your knees into your chest. Hold for 30 seconds. This stretches the lower back. Don't force it. You may feel a bit odd when you stand up, but the 2nd stretch should fix it. 2: grab a door frame with right hand about waist high, palm facing to the right, and lean back to stretch the sides, hips, and lower back. Hold for 30 seconds. Then do the same with the left hand. A lot of lower back pain can be caused by imbalanced muscles on the left and right sides and hips which puts everything out of alignment due imbalanced tension on the two sides of the back. These stretches are meant to put the two sides at an even tension. The stretch at the door frame can stretch right down to your butt. I still do this if I'm lifting a lot of things, but not much otherwise, and managed to cure what was (correctly or incorrectly) diagnosed as sciatica. Either way, it was painful and came back when I lifted heavy things. 2 trips to a massage therapist and these stretches twice a day.. no more problem..

Hi K, Well, I guess as your acquaintance would approve, I am slightly honoured that you would ask me for my opinion on this and consider that it might be worth consideration. I suppose that might be what he means in that we might be honoured to be chosen to help someone out of their situation, like honorary therapists for that person. Of course, we don't need to be honoured when someone uses us as a stepping stone, unless that is part of your practice for one reason or another. Even if it were part of a Boddhisatva training, we would still be helping that person by showing them that they can't get through life stepping on everybody and they'd best chill and come back when they've collected themselves. Accepting an actual request is not the same thing. "I find it's often the case that spiritual practitioners are the first to play the "it's all yours" card and point at things like projection without full understanding." lol. This reminds of how I used to never get sick but it seemed like I would still carry colds around from other people and give them to people. I didn't know I had them, and I didn't seem to be sick, but they were there nonetheless and people with less resistance seemed to get them from me. I could be wrong, but it seemed to happen. So some people have managed to beat all the symptoms away, but they still carry the anger and so they spit it on people without even realizing what is lurking underneath them, thinking they have totally quashed it by just blocking the symptoms, but really sometimes just build up even stronger bacterias of anger which effects others very quickly. At least if we show the symptoms we can get over them, turn away when we sneeze, and deal with the issue before it affects other people. It's my opinion that we can't really help resonating with our environment. I think the trick is to be in tune, but in harmony rather than the exact frequency. So we don't really change our note, we just alter it slightly to help the other person find "the pocket" of harmonic pitch ("pocket" is a rhythm term, but useful here). Then we can get others to resonate better; get them to resonate more in harmony and in tune if we change only enough to let them in. I guess this works with rhythm too, slowing down a bit to get everyone on the train, so to speak. So it might come upon us to help someone out of their anger, which is not necessarily bad depending on how the opportunity is availed to us. I'm finding that most people who have negative emotions, it still comes down to desire. Few people can separate desire from effort, like if they have no desire they're afraid they'll have no work ethic or diligence or energy, which is not necessarily true at all. If I'm angry or frustrated, say I'm disrupted during meditation and my nerves get hot, it usually helps me to remember that the frustration is a desire, a desire for peace or quiet or space or time. It's another desire and if I can let it go, the frustration or anger goes with it. So cooling people's anger can have a lot with getting them to let go of some unnecessary desire, if you can find what it is and make them forget about it. Contentment, happiness, and energy can co-emerge, usually...

Looking for the right place to put this. Marblehead, I'm pretty sure this is your stripe: Easy Going Feller, by Paul Lawrence Dunbar Ther' ain't no use in all this strife, An' hurryin', pell-mell, right thro' life. I don't believe in goin' too fast To see what kind o' road you've passed. It ain't no mortal kind o' good, 'N' I would n't hurry ef I could. I like to jest go joggin' 'long, To limber up my soul with song; To stop awhile 'n' chat the men, 'N' drink some cider now an' then. Do' want no boss a-standin' by To see me work; I allus try To do my dooty right straight up, An' earn what fills my plate an' cup. An' ez fur boss, I'll be my own, I like to jest be let alone, To plough my strip an' tend my bees, An' do jest like I doggoned please. My head's all right, an' my heart's meller, But I'm a easy-goin' feller.

@Jetsun I read a story of a Qi Gong healer who once cried for this warrior type guy since the patient's suppression of his sadness resulted in a large tumor. After a number of sessions the patient was healed very rapidly. A similar case might be seen near the end of Story of the Weeping Camel (thanks Drew!) where these shamanic musicians play and sing to help the camel release it's emotional blocks. I guess resonating with the person can help them release something they might need to release, but this would have to be done intentionally rather than just getting someone else to be angry for a moment and expecting it to cure us. Though, if other people are angry it allows us to be angry and then we might get it over with, which we probably know subconsciously. Still there must be deeper reasons they need to deal with if people get angry too easily, like a misguided grudge.

Well, sure, there is no absolute present, present is just the accumulation of the past, and the future is no more independent. I was never much for games. I prefer creative harmony. Does it not seem sort of zombie-like to have to say everything exactly the same way so that people cannot miss the point? Seems a bit Orwellian new-speak, rather than intelligent dialogue to me.

I notice in the description of the above book: "Without being alarmist, he offers dietary tips for protecting yourself against the dangers of modern life, including neutralizing damage from water fluoridation." Any tips on this one?