opendao

Nathan, I like your open approach, so I'd like to say a few words, maybe it'll help you or others. Current Patriarch of Longmen doesn't know. The situation is that Wang can't prove his lineage, while abbots from Laoshan, other Longmen teachers and Chinese Taoist association cannot prove that he has no lineage, because so far nobody could recall any proves or facts. So the situation is open to many speculations... And I doubt anything will change soon comparing to what we've known 15 years ago. Obviously, there are a lot of lay groups of Longmen Pai followers, who have no relation to the official patriarch lineage, so Walker is correct that there is no "layman pope". But honestly the question about Wang Liping's lineage is not very important. What's important to understand, if his methods have relations to Longmen Pai cultivation or not. Walker had a wish to tell something, I think it could be interesting to know for all Wang's followers. Longmenpai's history is presented very strange in English books. Even in Monica Esposito's researches. For now I'd like to highlight one thing: both Qiu Chuji and Wang Changyue were very high level practitioners of Neidan, that's why they got a political power to promote the teaching and make enormous changes. Not in reverse order, as it's usually presented: like Qiu has visited Genghis that's why Quanzhen Dao received power. Just to recall: it was Genghis who asked for advice (personal advice by the way). And after that visit many interesting changes had happened. Wang Changyue's role is almost unknown in the West at all. Interesting, that Wang Changyue was a teacher of Wu Chongxu, the founder of Wu-Liu Pai, and our school keeps connections with many Longmenpai's practitioners and "religious" leaders, in spite of the fact that Wu-Liu is not a religious school at all. I need also to say that differentiation of Daoism into temple and lay lineages has no big sense: Neidan master and teacher can be in any of them, and very often in both of them at the same time.

And what's a point to attach our thoughts to the idea of non-attachment and peace of mind? Btw, Lao Zi says clearly what Dao is. Maybe he was attached to the idea of Dao... But he attained Dao, that's why I think it's better to not attach to something he didn't mean to say

another translation, with more clear sense: The five colors blind a person's eyes; The five musical notes deafen a person's ears; The five flavors ruin a person's taste buds. Horse-racing, hunting and chasing, Drive a person's mind (hsin) to madness. Hard-to-get goods, Hinder a person's actions. Therefore the sage is for the belly, not for the eyes. Therefore he leaves this and chooses that. The meaning is that 5 sensations destroy people's Qi, while sage leaves usual entertainments and practice Dao to fill his belly.

it's your choice what to eat. But understanding it brings very little:

Hiding truth is not a false view... Good food is not in garbage bins. Attacking what is false is the only way to keep the truth. And it's not a philosophy, it's a practical requirement for the inner work. "Lao Zi with a sword dispels cheaters and tricksters":

Thank you Walker for the time spent to answer fallacies made by this blind pseudo-chinese samurai. Obviously Taoist Texts's confusions don't have any excuses, and just are results of a clear intention to fool people. Recently this hero and "myths destroyer" even accused DaoBums moderators who work here for free in all sins. They ask for donations, destroy the forum and don't make millions on ads just because his fucking adequately majesty is not in the directors board: So I have a strong feeling of a paid trolling campaign or some strong mental diseases... Or even both. Who paid him thirty pieces of silver? I really don't care. But obviously this trickster has no any respect to Daoism and Daoist community, spreads misinformation to fool people, and has no any knowledge about Daoist tradition, so there is no good answer what he is doing here...

What is True and Real from Daoist point of view?

sick logic only for those who can't learn by own mistakes. so true. But irony of that is not what you can grasp. 知不知上；不知知病。夫唯病病，是以不病。聖人不病，以其病病，是以不病。 To know and yet (think) we do not know is the highest (attainment); not to know (and yet think) we do know is a disease. It is simply by being pained at (the thought of) having this disease that we are preserved from it. The sage has not the disease. He knows the pain that would be inseparable from it, and therefore he does not have it. (DDJ 71, Legge)

Actually few words about reality and words: while European thinkers twisted own and readers brains by various sophisticate mental constructs, Daoist teachers just directed students to see the reality without words.

I doubt with such altruistic attitude you will hear anything.

About children our malice faceless devil don't know how generations are having misfortune because of the deeds of his ancestors. Well, no surprise. De is not his strong side. "Competition"? Maybe in somebody's wet fantasies only.

it's a good analogy. The internal "substance" of Dao and things is the same, but transformed many times, so the qualities are very different. Also, Dao is transcendent, while things are immanent, theologically speaking. Yes, it's the basis of Daoism and Neidan, which is just a later name for the same teaching of Huang Di and Lao Zi. The process could be reversed and it is the only way to "attain Dao".

A few years ago, when I've started reading English forums and books about Daoism, I thought the same way: people are fooled by misinformation, they need to learn classics in the original language, and then they will be able to sort out truth on their own... After that I've seen a lot of professors, researchers, life-long practitioners, lineage holders and gurus of all calibres, who read Classic Chinese, speak Mandarin, write long books about Dao, but who know absolutely nothing about real tradition, as it's still taught "from heart to heart" in China. And then I realized that such people are really those who make 99.9% of information about Daoism in the West today (and last 100 years as well). So I'm not so sure any more if knowledge of Classic language can change anything in general, but I agree that for serious seekers it's the must. But there are a lot of other things... This fact is well known even in the West, but you see, nothing changes: people don't care about truth, they buy books a la Castaneda and they are happy, they don't want to check Wang's credentials at all, because it would destroy their "peace of mind". Their De is low, they can't understand classics even knowing the language, and find differences between texts and real results of fake teachings is also a big challenge for them. It's not new in Chinese history though. However Daoism and its core, Neidan, are still taught in traditional schools as millenniums ago. So who have a destiny, those will find. Others, as many times before, are doomed to follow charlatans and spread false teachings, destroying not only own future, but the future of their children and their students, who are unfortunate to trust them. Will it be different in 21 century? Daoists look at things positive, but understand that we live in the age of decline of all celestial teachings. It explains why Neidan looks more available and wide spread, though the real number of students (and teachers) is going down.

That's Froggy Dao, not spontaneous one

To sum up some hints about Dao that were covered so far: Dao is an unknown source of life for all things. Dao is everywhere. It determines all possible laws of existence. Dao is eternal and its freedom is total. Everything has some aspect of Dao inside. More to think about: Dao can be obtained inside human body, that's how humans can return to Dao. There are 3 possible relations between Dao and humans.

they are not even relatives ))) Does a frog share any quality with Dao? No, then it's not a child. But all things have an aspect of Dao. However they are not aspects of Dao. The difference is simple: if we are Dao, then we have qualities of Dao (no form, everywhere, perfect, unlimited, eternal and so on). If we just have an aspect of Dao, then we have a life inside, that we can use somehow and we have options how to live it. We can even lost it. (if we ARE Dao, how it could be possible?) Subtle word difference (IS and HAS) but it's totally different teaching, philosophy, practice. But I hope you can see that people are very far away from Dao, and are not Dao at all by their qualities. Sort of. At least it's possible to find it there. But if frog is inside me, it doesn't mean I'm a frog and can hibernate, right? According the tradition, we won't return to Dao after death (sorry for bad news). After death, body dies, Po souls are destroyed, Hung souls go to a new attempt to return to Dao. it's important to understand. That's the boundary of human existence. that's true, thanks

I'm only open to discuss living Dao as it is understood by those who attained such Dao. Various rumours and home made theories I'm not really so interesting in, and I see no positive impact on readers, who need to go through long discourses about somebody's illusions and get nothing at the end. It's like listening about sex from 6 years old boy What's a point if there is alive Daoist tradition? But I got your attitude, thanks and good bye.

If you can discuss in a normal way, with support from the Daoist texts and traditional teaching, without personal insults and trolling, without making up concepts out of "common sense", then I'd really love to hear your opinion. The questions about Dao are the most difficult ones... So what text or opinion of a Daoist master can you bring against the simple idea that frogs are not Dao? To help you out, maybe it's good to open Lao Zi and look what is a relationship between Dao and 10000 things?

Take it as one possible answer and apply to the ideas you expressed in your previous posts. Then maybe you'll have more clarity and less contradictions

yes, but your intention was different then your words. It's attributed to Confucius in the text by the author of the text. I know that Ming practice is a source of "don't fight too much". But I also know that "accepting fate" or "be content with fate" has no relation to Daoism. I explained you the meaning, but you skipped it. That's fine. De can be understood through practice, then texts will be clear. even as a joke it has no sense. yes, absolutely. But you're talking about modern meaning, while I'm about the traditional distinction between "good" and "bad". Sages of the past understood things directly, so they left a lot of wisdom modern people cannot know. I agree, you're very ignorant, you proved it countless times, so let's just ignore your arrogant opinion made up just for arguing something you have no idea about. Dao is a source of everything, it can be found everywhere. But what was born out of Dao is not Dao anymore. Humans are not Dao, but they have Dao. If humans are already Dao, then there is no need in Dao as a practice. They have Dao, but they have to "cutivate Dao" and "attain Dao". If they lost Dao, they "don't live long". How it can be possible to cover all such meanings if we understand Dao only as a "way" or principle? Obviously there is something more. Much more.

I agree with you about the nature of this forum and its discussions. Maybe moderators will hear you one day.... Strange though, that I see no your posts here. "If you want to make it good, do it yourself", right? So maybe write something you suggest others to do? Harsh discussions and personal insults are not the worse parts of any "spiritual forums", but the real issue is an unlimited flow of dangerous, wrong and misleading methods out of incompetent seekers, who "just want to share their experience". So for newbies, how to understand what is good and what is bad? By trying everything with a high risk to destroy their health? In Daoist tradition such questions were solved long time ago. Daoist classics criticize false methods and describe in details various signs how to find a true teaching, without revealing real techniques that can harm people. You can disagree with such strict approach. But it's pointless to do if you're looking for Dao. Going back to the topic, the first post is about what I'm talking. It criticises false views and practices. So the circle is locked. "Uroboros" ))

there are many of them. De, for example, is not Dao any more (or yet). Humans, things, creatures, stars... Dao is everywhere, but it has no form. It is nowhere, but give birth to everything. But what was born out of Dao is not Dao anymore.

anybody with a sincere heart can help to reduce confusions about Dao Especially when relying on classic texts and traditional Daoist practice. there is no surprise that Confucius could have opinions, different from Daoist understanding. You quote words attributed to Confucius, skipping the context about filial piety, royal loyalty and other things usual for Confucius's teaching. This is one reason to not accept such words as valuable in understanding of the Daoist tradition. From another side, 命 is not really a fate as something given by Heavens. In Daoist tradition, especially in Neidan texts, Ming is defined as "vitality". Vitality is a real source of fate, that's why "fate" is the usual translation. Few famous quotes: "Ming is Yuan Qi in Kidneys", "My Ming is not in Heaven, but inside of me". Keeping this in mind, the phrase can be read the way, that High De is a result of "being content with Ming". Sure 安 have meanings like "be content with", but also "arrange", "settle" and so on. Then there is no contradiction between the words of Confucius and Daoist understanding of High De, as a results of the practice (Ming Gong - work with Ming) when Ming is full and settled. You see, dustybeijing, how sincere intention can help? Thank you, you helped a lot. no worries, there is a dictionary to help: "function: an activity or purpose natural to or intended for a person or thing" "vector: a quantity (such as velocity) that has size and direction". You're right, with definitions it's more clear. Boiling kettle is not a result of perception, but of the temperature. If you're gone, it's still boiling. Right and wrong, they are as cold and warmth on the thermometer. Interpretations are defined by people, but changes of Qi are real. Even if there is no one to watch them )) almost. Loss of Dao it's called in Daoism.

Few thoughts after reading previous posts: About De: De is not a moral, but a force. If it exists, it affects what's around, and make things, live creatures and actions "virtuous". There is no De of Human and De of Dao. But in humans De can be High and Low. Low De is an innate one. High De is obtained through practice. Any De cannot be evil. Btw, right and wrong, good and bad don't depend on human perception, but solely on the vector of actions: do they lead towards Dao or out of the Dao. To know what is good in every specific situation is a function of De, and an attribute of a sage. Ziran is not "naturalness" of things. It is self sufficiency. "Dao follows Ziran" means that Dao is self sufficient and really free, it doesn't depend on anything. About Dao's "cruelty": "The Tao of heaven is pointed but does no harm. " (zhan 81, tr Gia-fu Feng and Jane English). If something is evil, it's not Dao. Again, it's not a question of subjective perception. It's a vector of results.

"It is clear that if the present-day coarse and rustic practitioners do not obtain the great methods of the Golden Elixir, they will not obtain a long life. They may be able to heal illnesses and bring a dead person to life again, to abstain from cereals and be free from hunger for many years, to summon gods and demons, to be sitting at one moment and then rise up and disappear, to see one thousand miles away, to reveal the rise and fall of what is obscure and hidden, and to know the fortunes and calamities awaiting what has not yet sprouted. All this, however, will be of no advantage to increase the length of their life." (Baopu zi, chapter 14. Translated by Fabrizio Pregadio) So why Daoists were so insisted in searching for methods to prolong life? Why it is so important?