konchog uma

friend you read way faster than me. i read at about the same speed i would talk, maybe slower, i can't speed read and i don't know any other way to read. So after an hour i had finished the first chapter hahaha! I'm a little ways through the book and just wanted to post and say it's very well written, very helpful, and has introduced me to some things i have never seen anywhere else, and which work for me. I am not far into it, and don't want to give any examples cause i don't really like to teach what i don't know, but i recommend it I definitely have gotten benefit from reading what i have read so far, and look forward to finishing it. Thanks Damo (if you read this )!

it depends on what kind of meditation. If you are working with earth energy, best not to be on the 34th floor, but then again, there is still earth energy up there. Its just not like being in the basement, or better yet, outside in the grass if you are working with just emptiness sitting, i don't think it matters what floor you're on. There is no floor! if you are working with any particular kind of energy, best to do it in a place rich with that energy! Conversely, if you find yourself in a location with particular energy, work with that energy! if you are on the 3rd floor but you want to tap into some energy, just gather cosmic energy like star energy in the form of subtle matter or cosmic particlewaves... you can just intend to absorb the cosmic energy that is always flooding the environment, and your energy body will soak it up instead of letting it pass through you. So that is another way to work with energy no matter where you are in the world.

from Victor Mair's "Wandering on the Way: Taoist Tales and Parables" "I have heard from Confucius," said Master Timid Magpie, inquiring of Master Tall Tree, "that the sage does not involve himself in worldly affairs. He does not go after gain, nor does he avoid harm. He does not take pleasure in seeking, nor does he get bogged down in formalistic ways. He speaks without saying anything; he says something without speaking. Instead, he wan- ders beyond the dust of the mundane world. Confucius thinks this is a vague description of the sage, but I think that it is the working of the wondrous Way. What do you think of it, my master?" "Even the Yellow Emperor would be perplexed by hearing these things" said Master Tall Tree. "How is Hillock capable of understanding them? It seems that you, too, are overly hasty in forming an estimate. You're counting your chickens before they're hatched, drooling over roast owl at the sight of a crossbow pellet. "Let me say a few careless words to you and you listen carelessly, all right? The sage can lean against the sun and moon and tuck the universe under his arm because he melds things into a whole, Sets aside obfuscation, And is indifferent to baseness and honor. The mass of men are all hustle-bustle The sage is slow and simple. He combines myriad years Into a single purity. Thus does he treat the myriad things, And thereby gathers them together. "How do I know that love of life is not a delusion? How do I know that fear of death is not like being a homeless waif who does not know the way home? When the state of Chin first got Pretty Li, the daughter of the border warden of Ai, she wept till her robe was soaked with tears . But after she arrived at the king's residence, shared his fine bed, and could eat the tender meats of his table, she regretted that she had ever wept . How do I know that the dead may not regret their former lust for life? "Someone who dreams of drinking wine at a cheerful ban- quet may wake up crying the next morning. Someone who dreams of crying may go off the next morning to enjoy the sport of the hunt. When we are in the midst of a dream, we do not know it's a dream. Sometimes we may even try to interpret our dreams while we are dreaming, but then we awake and realize it was a dream. Only after one is greatly awakened does one realize that it was all a great dream, while the fool thinks that he is awake and presumptuously aware. "My excellent lord!" "Oh, thou humble shepherd!" How perverse they are! Both Confucius and you are dreaming, and I too am dreaming when I say that you are dreaming . This sort of lan- guage may be called enigmatic, but after myriad generations there may appear a great sage who will know how to explain it and he will appear as though overnight . "Suppose that you and I have a dispute . If you beat me and I lose to you, does that mean you're really right and I'm really wrong? If I beat you and you lose to me, does that mean I'm really right and you're really wrong? Is one of us right and the other wrong? Or are both of us right and both of us wrong? Neither you nor I can know, and others are even more in the dark. Whom shall we have decide the matter? Shall we have someone who agrees with you decide it? Since he agrees with you, how can he decide fairly? Shall we have someone who agrees with me decide it? Since he agrees with me, how can he decide fairly? Shall we have someone who differs with both of us decide it? Since he differs with both of us, how can he make a decision? Shall we have someone who agrees with both of us decide it? Since he agrees with both of us, how can he make a decision? Given that neither you nor I, nor another person, can know how to decide, shall we wait for still another? "Whether the alternating voices of disputation are relative to each other or not, they may be harmonized within the framework of nature and allowed to follow their own effusive elaboration so they may live out their years. What does 'harmo- nized within the framework of nature' mean? I would say, `Right may be not right, so may be not so. If right were really right, then right would be distinct from not right, and there would be no dispute. If so were really so, then so would be distinct from not so and there would be no dispute. Forget how many years there are in a lifespan, forget righteousness . If you ramble in the realm of infinity, you will reside in the realm of infinity ." Penumbra inquired of Shadow, saying, " One moment you move and the next moment you stand still; one moment you're seated and the next moment you get up. Why are you so lacking in constancy? " Shadow said, "Must I depend on something else to be what I am? If so, must what I depend upon in turn depend upon something else to be what it is? Must I depend upon the scales of a snake's belly or the forewings of a cicada? How can I tell why I am what I am? How can I tell why I 'm not what I'm not?" Once upon a time Chuang Chou dreamed that he was a butterfly, a butterfly flitting about happily enjoying himself. He didn't know that he was Chou. Suddenly he awoke and was palpably Chou. He did not know whether he was Chou who had dreamed of being a butterfly or a butterfly dreaming that he was Chou. Now, there must be a difference between Chou and the butterfly. This is called the transformation of things.

Hi fatguyslim, I have whittled my social circle down to a few people for the reasons you mention. Better to have a few real friends than a lot of people who drag you down. I don't think you need a teacher or friends with awesome virtue, since you have the classics to work from. Rectitude, purity, integrity, and virtue are necessary at a stage of personal development, but few people in today's world are at that stage, and even many powerful internalists lack those qualities. But i think if a person develops themselves according to virtue and integrity, they will attract people into their lives who reflect this. Its a law of attraction, so you can count on it. In other words, its enough just to work on oneself from books and let life bring to you who it will. Most often i have found with self-proclaimed daoists, there is a tendency to indulge in lifes pleasures and intoxications, thinking that is dao. And it is! But there are very refined stages of being beyond that, and to access them, i Think that one has to put the tendencies to indulge down, and get serious about their integrity. Some people who get close to serious about integrity will divorce themselves from the world, eschewing society, and online forums like this one, in favor of just being a hermit. There are all kinds of people though, and i hope that since you put out such a sincere beacon, you will get something excellent in response. I have long recognized the need for integrity, but only lately in my development have i really put down those things and attitudes which were keeping me from realizing a robust integrity. So i am no expert in the subject, and all the above jabber is just how it seems from my point of view. Best wishes in your search for "true people" i have found that misguided people are common. And even those who think they are virtuous and say they are virtuous are more common than those who are actually living according to the old way. But the rewards of living a nice clean life with no loose ends more than make up for all the nonsense that ones old friends, habits, and haunts were filling their head with. So its not as hard to walk away from "the dust of the world" as it seems when youre caught up in it. I hope you stay firmly on the path and that teachers and friends avail themselves to you as you cultivate your virtue! Blessings!

belly full of chalk the teacher's so mad at me but no more math class!

From Victor Mair's "Wandering on the Way: Taoist Tales and Parables" Long ago, Yao inquired of Shun, "Wishing to make a punitive attack against Tsung, K'uai, and Hsŭ'ao, I sit on my throne feeling all preoccupied. Why is this so?" "The rulers of these three states," said Shun, "are still living primitively amidst brambles and bushes. Why are you preoc- cupied? Of old, ten suns appeared simultaneously, illuminating the myriad things. How much more should a ruler like yourself, whose virtue excels that of the sun, be able to tolerate other rulers!" Gnaw Gap inquired of Princely Scion, "Do you know wherein all things agree?" "How could I know that?" "Do you know what you don't know?" "How could I know that?" "Well, then, is it possible to know anything at all?" "How could I know that? Nonetheless, I'll try to say some - thing about it. How can we know that what I call knowledge is not really ignorance? How can we know that what I call igno- rance is not really knowledge? But let me try to ask you a few questions. If people sleep in damp places, they develop lumbago or even partial paralysis. But would the same thing happen if a loach did so? If people dwell in trees, they will tremble with vertigo. But would the same thing happen if a gibbon did so? Of these three, which knows the proper place to dwell? People eat meat, deer eat grass, giant centipedes savor snakes, hawks and crows relish mice. Of these four, which knows the proper food to eat? Gibbons go for gibbons, buck mates with doe, loaches cavort with fish. Mao Ch'iang and Hsi Shih were considered by men to be beautiful, but if fish took one look at them they would dive into the depths, if birds saw them they would fly high into the sky, if deer saw them they would run away pell-mell. Of these four, which knows the correct standard of beauty for all under heaven? As I see it, the principle of humaneness and righteous- ness, the paths of right and wrong, are inextricably confused. How would I be able to distinguish among them?" "If you" asked Gnaw Gap, "do not know the difference between benefit and harm, does the ultimate man likewise not know the difference between them?" "The ultimate man is spiritous," said Princely Scion. "If the great marshes were set on fire, he would not feel hot. If the rivers turned to ice, he would not feel cold. If violent thunder split the mountains, he would not be injured. If whirlwinds lashed the seas, he would not be frightened. Such being the case, he rides the clouds, mounts the sun and moon, and wanders beyond the four seas. Since not even life and death have any transforming effect upon him, how much less do benefit and harm?"

just finished a Sifu Matsuo interview with James Gilliland from March 2011 in which Sifu reports that he sleep 2 hrs a day and spends 22hrs meditating (24 if you could lucid dreams) in everything which he did, doing it in a meditative state yikes i highly recommend the interview, even tho i thought that James Gilliland should have let him talk more and talked a little less himself. Oh well. No point being needlessly critical i suppose.

i keep listening to it repeatedly too its interesting how almost everyone thinks they want siddhi powers, and she says "i wish i could turn my sensitivity off" really rare opportunity to understand a tiny bit about the celestial realms, and that brings us one small step closer to resonance with them so very valuable in that way. If we choose to listen and act in accord, the celestial realms and cosmic guidance is always there i have found it goes away if you don't act in accord tho, so in that way almost everyone wants celestial guidance but if they got it, they might not want to follow it! hahhaa don't tell your psychologist that you sold your TV cause the voices in your head told you to, they will commit you to mental institution against your will! keep it to yourself!!! ahhahaa thank you again to Pamela for posting this rare gem

i think what Chuang Tzu is saying about right and wrong being secondary or diminishing the way is interesting. That kind of philosophy has long been taken by fools as an excuse to be immoral, but i think what CT is getting at is a kind of amorality, or something based on spontaneity. It reminds me of the story of the farmboy who broke his leg and his family was sad, then war was declared but since his leg was broke he wasnt drafted, so his family was happy, and the good/bad thing goes on for a while. I don't know a link to the story or who wrote it, but i'm pretty sure its Chinese. ultimately, i like the way the verses build on each other, so that each one can be taken as is, but also, the entire book seems to develop the concepts of 'this' and 'that' being, in the end, expressions of the same thing. As the book goes on, the writers seem to get more wordy.

hahaha i did not edit any of these, except to correct extra spaces and take out page numbers, since i am cutting and pasting from a PDF version of the book i would not do such a thing sir! His translation is just a little different than Legge's in this chapter

"monk listens for sofa deliveryman"

ye olde Victor Mair The knowledge of the ancients attained the ultimate. What was the ultimacy that it attained? They realized that there was a stage before there were things. This is the ultimacy they had attained, the utmost to which nothing can be added. Next, there were those who recognized that there were things, but that there was a stage before which things were distinguished. Next, there were those who recognized that there were distinctions among things, but that there was a stage before there was right and wrong. Now, the manifestation of right and wrong is what diminishes the Way. What causes the diminution is what leads to the creation of preferences. But, after all, are there really diminution and creation? Or are there, after all, really no diminution and cre- ation? That there are diminution and creation may be seen from clansman Chao's playing the lute . That there are no diminution and creation may be seen from clansman Chao's not playing the lute. Chao Wen played the lute, Maestro K'uang beat the rhythm with a stick, and Master Hui commented philosophically be- neath a parasol tree. The knowledge of these three masters was virtually complete, so they practiced it till the end of their lives. However, they believed that they were different from others in what they were fond of and wished to enlighten others about their fondness. Yet, try as they may to enlighten them, others were not to be enlightened. Thus one of them ended his life in muddleheaded discussions of "hard" and "white." And Chao Wen's son carried on his father's career his whole life without any accomplishment. If this can be called accomplishment even I, who am without accomplishment, can be called accomplished. But if this cannot be called accomplishment, neither I nor anything else is accomplished. Therefore, the sage endeavors to get rid of bewildering flamboyance. For this reason, he does not use things himself, but lodges in commonality. This is called "using lucidity." Now I have something to say here. I do not know whether or not what I have to say is of the same category as "this." But, whether it is of the same category or not, like them it is a category, thus in the end it is no different from "that." Nevertheless, let me try to explain myself. There is beginning. There is a time before beginning. There is a time before the time before beginning. There is being. There is nonbeing. There is a stage before nonbeing. There is a stage before the stage before nonbeing. Suddenly there is being and nonbeing. Still, as for being and nonbeing, I do not know which is really being and which is nonbeing. Now I have just said something, but I do not know whether what I have said is really saying something or not. There is nothing under heaven larger than the tip of a downy hair at the end of autumn, but Mount T'ai is small. There is no greater longevity than that of a child who dies in infancy, but Progenitor P'eng died young. Heaven and earth were born together with me and the myriad things are one with me. Since all things are one, how can there be anything to talk about? But since I have already said that all things are one, how can there be nothing to talk about? One and speech makes two, two and one makes three. Continuing on in this fashion, even the cleverest mathematician couldn't keep up, how much less an ordinary person! Therefore, if in proceeding from nonbeing to being we arrive at three, how much farther we shall reach when proceeding from being to being. We need not proceed at all if we understand the mutual dependence of "this" and "that." The Way has never been divided up, speech has never been constant. It's all because of "this" that there are demarcations. Let me explain what I mean by demarcations . There are left and right, discussions and deliberations, analyses and disputes, argu- ments and altercations . These are the eight types of demarcative assertions . The sages set aside without discussion what lies beyond the world. The sages discuss what lies within the world, but do not deliberate upon it . As for annals and other records of the statesmanship of the former kings, the sages deliberate over them but will not dispute about them . Therefore, wherever there is analysis, something is left unanalyzed. Wherever there is dispute, something is left undisputed . You may ask, "How can this be?" The sages embrace all things, but ordinary people dispute over them to show off to each other. Therefore it is said, wherever there is dispute, something is left unseen. The great Way is ineffable, great disputation is speechless, great humaneness is inhumane, great honesty is immodest, and great bravery is not aggressive. The way that displays itself is not the Way. Speech that is disputatious fails to achieve its aims. Humaneness that is constant cannot go around . Honesty that is aloof will not be trusted. Bravery that is aggressive will not succeed. One who does not abandon these five precepts will be more or less headed in the right direction. Therefore, she who knows to stop at what she does not know has attained the ultimate . Who knows the disputation that is without words and the Way that cannot be walked upon? If one can have knowledge of them, this is called the Treasury of Heaven. You may pour into it, but it never fills ; you may dip from it, but it never empties; and you never know where it comes from. This is called the Inner Light.

disputation is proof of not seeing clearly i wish i could remember that all the time, those are words to live by

awesome, thanks!

thank you for the vid link! Thats awesome! Sifu Jenny is amazing

im sorry for saying you sound like a big jerk too sloppy zhang dang my moon square mars ended yesterday, hopefully i can pull my head out of my ass now and have some human feelings big appologies good sir

I'm with Apech, cheer up tulku. What is this "freedom" that you are seeming to blame others from keeping you from? Can you define freedom? Maybe if you stopped blaming others and took responsibility for your own "freedom" you would find that nobody can stand in the way of one who has set their intent on freedom, not even family or lovers. Also, i think there are people who want you to be free, and while you might not be blessed with family that wants this, some people are, and while you might have a hard time finding a lover who cares about your personal freedom, they exist. More reasons to quit looking outside yourself for the reasons you have a hard time feeling free.

i hear you. And i'm glad i retracted it too, that was a silly thing to say. its hard to know what to do with violent impulses, so i think the best think people can do is master themselves. The question of pacifism vs force is kind of a yin yang duality so i guess both are appropriate at different times. Its not an easy situation to see the answer to, i don't think there is a nice simple answer. So everyone just has to act according to their own nature. I was more defending Twinner's right to act according to his own nature than i was taking his side. Darkness and violence are part of the human experience for better or worse. I think its best in the end to accept things as they are, like our animal nature, than to dwell in idealism.

you don't really sound like that, i just had to log back in and say that. your tone and whats between the lines of your point of view are troubling, but before anyone goes and takes me literally, i just wanted to say that i realize that you didn't say anything like that.

i don't think thats what twinner is really saying. Its fucked up, but you said it, not him. ??? people have a right to their own morality sloppy zhang. So even tho the values people instill in their children are arbitrary and subjective, it is still everyone's right to raise them in the manner they feel is best. not to get personal, but you sound like a real jerk in this thread. I see from your other threads you are not a big jerk, but you aren't really making a good point, you sound like you are saying we should all run around like its the wild west and if we don't like the way someone acts or looks at us, shoot them in the face! everyone has a right to act in the way they feel is best, for themselves karmically, and for the world. So i understand if you think violence is a natural expression of human emotion. I think that. But i think that you are taking things a little too far with your devil's advocacy of killing and the right to kill. Some people see things differently. Maybe at least you could be glad that we aren't all the same as you or the world would be a lot more dangerous! Just 2 cents, i am not trying to get personal, i just think your arguments aren't addressing what twinner is trying to say in the first place. A lot of what he says is true IMO, and a lot of it is his sovereign right to think just what he thinks.

that was awesome nuns freak me out tho flashback to catholic school aaaaaa ok im back

contentment is a state of mind, it doesn't have to do with circumstances as much as it has to do with reaction to circumstances. so if a person's life is restricted, they can still have happiness, even bliss. But if they can choose when they see the sky there is still no guarantee of happiness (obviously) and bliss is even more elusive. also, if you ever found yourself in prison sloppy zhang, i think you would find twinner's philosophy "applicable to reality".

as deci says it is not physical. As i understand it it has to do with not letting the mind rest on the physical body, or the energy body, or the spiritual body, that is, jing chi and shen. But instead the mind rests equally on all 3, and in doing so, avoid preoccupations and obsessions with any of them. So when the mind is equally aware yet not "attached" or preoccupied with any of the 3 bodies, physical, energy, consciousness, one has found the mysterious pass. edit: that is something i just read today in "Daoist Nei Gong" by Damo Mitchell so i am by no means an authority, nor have i ever seen the phrase outside the TTC or Daoist Nei Gong.

thanks XieJia! back at you! i think to me they are just extremes, where chaos is central because he is balanced ??? i dont know what Hu and Shu mean tho so i can't be sure what Chuang is trying to say

i'm not sure about that. I think he is commenting on the fact that while it seems vague and nebulous to be detached from the senses, and like deci said, the do-gooder will want to get someone like that back in touch with their senses. But really the person who is not distracted by the input of the senses can attain the mind of emptiness and commune with the source or the way. So it doesnt (to me) have so much to do with death and rebirth just cause he died. He died because those who could not understand the higher way wanted to do him a favor and get him in touch with his senses. So they were well meaning but in the end, chaos was better off by himself without the so-called help of others. It has more to do (to me) with the higher way not being commonly understood by people, and a warning to look out for, as deci called it, the do-gooder. It is a nice warning to accept things as they are without wanting to change them to your own personal specifications too. And an internal metaphor... and, um, more im sure