Practical Taoism and Sex

[freeform]

Hey there freeform ~

 

You're not holding back on us, are ya? I'm certain it would benefit a few of us if you would elaborate a bit

on those "detrimental" effects that you allude to. I mean, what are the benefits, iyo, of being tight with people

of 'bad' energy?

 

I can't speak for everyone, but for me, personally it would serve to separate me from reality to try and stay away from 'bad' energy... even making the judgment of 'this is bad, that is good' somehow brings me out of my body and into illusion... I think it's quite a type 9 thing (from the enneagram) to include everything... for me that's the only way to be...

 

This doesn't mean that I wont be damaged by 'bad' or 'good' energy - far from it... but I cant ignore, disown and not be in love with all of it whether good or bad... my greatest compass is my body, and so it's important for me to be guided by the intuition of the body rather than 'do not do that' rules...

 

Sometimes I'll intuitively be drawn to something considered to have a bad energy, and perhaps I'll get burned by it... but I consider that everything that happens to me and in me contains the exact lesson I need in that moment to make the greatest spiritual progress.

 

and thanks for your posts, Yen - you have an excellent eye for detail and thoroughness and can spot a missing piece a mile away, an ability I would love to have.

[Ian]

Hi Ian,

No one is ever ready. And that's why the real system will never comes out publicly. What you see out is not even close.

The wish in this case is not good enough. It's what you bring to the table through your regular meditation practices- that's what matters. I would say the level beyound the first dhyana. But at those levels, no one cares about sex, anyway.

Max

 

Yes. I think we are talking about two altogether different levels of practice. My teacher says the same sort of stuff about sexual cultivation, i.e nobody's ready and you'll end up running a fantasy number if you try.

 

What I'm talking about, which I imagine is different, is a very basic attitude, that if there's the two of you and you're going to be having sex anyway, there is great benefit to be had by the endeavour to make it relaxed and embodied and present, rather than excited and mental and orgasm-oriented, exactly as one might, in some forms of meditation, endeavor to be aware of sensation rather than thought or emotion.

 

That's all. I think such an endeavour can have a deepening and even purifying value. But perhaps this is so basic as to go without saying. I'm sure by cultivation you mean something much more high level.

 

Can you tell us anything more about your teacher(s)?

[Taomeow]

Taomeow ~

 

Just curious, if you've studied any of Master Ni's writings in depth? If yes, which ones, if you don't mind my

asking?

 

With regard to his comment on "the craft", it's clear, from that one passage I quoted, that he believes "wizard-

making" is a "Taoist" tradtion, predating the Tao Te Ching. Would you disagree with that? It is also clear, from

the greater body of his writings, that he has a profound experience and grasp of both Taoist alchemy and magic.

However, it is also clear to me that much of what he says is quite advanced, and way over my head!

 

Yen Hui --

 

I grocery shop next door to a Barns and Noble bookstore, so I'm in the habit of, while at it, checking out the book shelves pertaining to "anything taoist" nearly as often as I buy eggs. Whatever appeared there over the years that I wanted to study in depth, I bought. Every single book I did buy, I did study in depth. Master Ni is represented on those Barns and Noble shelves by a dozen books which I saw many times, held in my hands, flipped through the pages, then stopped doing it, and never bought one of them. Does this count as "studying his writings in depth?" You know the proverb -- "recognize the lion by his claws?" Put it this way -- I saw enough of the claws to be pretty sure they are not a lion's claws, I don't need the whole mane and hide to make that determination.

 

Taoist alchemical arts interest me only pragmatically. I want to study and practice them, and do. What someone thinks "about" them I don't bother my lil' brain with. Master Ni offers plenty opinions and zero instruction. Master Chia, e.g., whose latest Cosmic Healing book was my latest acquisition off those shelves, offers few opinions and plenty instruction, so he's in, and master Ni is out. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you assert he (the latter) has a "profound grasp" of the arts he doesn't practice?.. This kind of grasp is exactly what I call "tao of the mouth." Not my cup of elixir...

[Taomeow]

When it comes to sex and alchemy, Taomeow's cooking metaphor works for me. Being an artist, I've ruined many a painting by not knowing when to stop.

 

 

So I'm not the only one who does that! I'm an amateur artist, not a pro, and largely self-taught (interestingly enough, artisitc abilities kicked in "ziran" when I started practicing taoist arts, I used to have none), and the first couple of years were dedicated largely to figuring out why I do "too much" to every painting and miss the point where it's "complete" by "improving" some more... and ruining it as the final outcome. This inability to stop in time, not noticing that something needs no further improvements, is a disease of civilization, I believe, civilization in general and the American way especially. Everything is always excessive, and everything crucial and essential is lost in the noise of this excess. They write books like that all the time -- huge volumes that are "novels" or "nonfiction" that actually have enough of a story for a nice two-page short story but are blown up to eight hundred pages instead... And magazine articles -- enough story for one paragraph is turned into ten pages of yapping... And lo! politicians talking and talking without saying anything real about anything real AT ALL! And the so-called "news!" Ugh!! So I guess we are accultured, all the time, subtly and not-so-subtly, towards meaningless noisy excess, which is a form of deficiency in disguise... deficiency of straightforward concentrated "real thing," replaced by an excess of artificially overcomplicated, overdone unreal ones.

 

I believe it's true for sex issues as well... our recent "serious offer" thread is a good illustration. Does it make a woman a better lover if she posts her topless pictures on the internet? has a hundred partners, a thousand? A million?.. Well let me tell you... Sex is ruined by "over-sexing" it every bit as much as a soup is ruined by oversalting it. Our current "culture" throwing in everybody's face all that "sexy" non-sex, all that sexy unreality to replace the concentrated reality of the really worthwhile, essential and quintessential sex that is missing... all that porn, all those "revealing" poses and clothes (what they reveal to a competent eye is an unfeeling body and an absentee soul, alas) to compensate for the deficiency of a true ability to feel (the only thing worth having sex-wise and soup-wise and art-wise alike) is sooo saaaad... sorry, got me a-ramblin'...

[Yen Hui]

Does this count as "studying his writings in depth?"

 

The answer to that one is obvious.

 

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you assert he (the latter) has a "profound grasp" of the arts he doesn't practice?

 

Consider yourself corrected. Unfortunately, though, I know longer possess his book on Internal Alchemy, so

cannot reference it for you. If you would'nt mind, though, I'd like to know how you know he's never practiced

either Taoist magic or internal alchemy? Are you basing that on flipping through a few pages of his books at

the bookstand? Or have you actually corresponded with him?

 

This kind of grasp is exactly what I call "tao of the mouth." Not my cup of elixir...

 

Watch it now. You're beginning to slip! I think you meant "blabbermouth".

[Taomeow]

If you would'nt mind, though, I'd like to know how you know he's never practiced either Taoist magic or internal alchemy?

 

I don't know that. I asked you. It was my impression that he didn't because he doesn't sound competent when he talks about these matters. I have studied and practiced it for a number of years, and while far from claiming competence in the arts, I do claim competence in what is or isn't of interest to me personally. That was my only "assumption" -- that master Ni has nothing to offer to me personally for an in-depth study. I never said he has nothing to offer to you!

 

Correspond with him? Why would I want to correspond with someone of no interest to me? I'm dying to correspond with my main teacher but she is so elusive... and not even computer literate.

[Yen Hui]

Edited April 2, 2007 by Yen Hui

[Taomeow]

OK, then why not tell us about her? I'm sure many others reading along would like to know something

about her background and training.

 

She is a descendant of Genghis Khan (who half-converted to taoism upon conquering China), most of her lineage is Tibet-educated and later Russian-educated Buryats from Eastern Siberia; one of her ancestors was the teacher to the Dalai Lama in the early 20th century. (The fact that essentially shaped Tibet's political and spiritual affiliations for decades.) Most people in her lineage who were prominent were killed circa 1937, while some of those who kept things quiet survived. I am not allowed to talk about her in detail. Sorry... So, like with master Ni, I'm talking something I "can't prove," except the difference is I don't "officially claim" a lineage from this teacher and he does claim one from some lineage or other he doesn't care to prove. I dunno... the sheer math when he cites an unbroken lineage of seventy-plus generations seems WAY off... but in case I'm wrong again, can you please refer me to the page (if in existence) where his lineage is spelled out with names and dates? If you can't because HE can't, it's hearsay with no way for anyone to know whether it's true. Maybe it's true. Or maybe he made it up. Unless he can show who his teacher was and who his teacher's teacher was and so on, it's better not to claim lineage at all.

 

My taijiquan/qigong teacher is the 19th generation in his lineage -- a documented one. This I can prove, because he can and his teacher can and his teacher's teacher can, and trace it all the way back to Chang San Feng. It's a big deal to some, no big deal to others. I'm still as good as I'm good, and no better, lineage or no lineage... So is master Ni. So are you, my friend.

[Wayfarer64]

Hi all-

 

This liniage thing has become over-stated for me. I agree with the half of TaoMeow's take on it as being rather empty in some cases. I have no respect for royalty either for that matter. Many woderful people I have known were born out of wedlock and many great teachers have sprung up without liniage to help them.

 

Authenticity has much to value, but so does adaptive change and new ideas from time to time. Many long-held beliefs can be mistaken. That being said, I do revere the ancients and immortals of many stripes, from the Taoists long before Lao Tzu to Shakespear or even Bob Dylan- I continue to learn from those who have shown the way...Truth can be listened for and its' ring is audible, from many sources.

 

By the way, I recently read that there are more people on the earth today that can trace their ancestry back to Ghengis Khan than any other source. Which makes a whole lot of sense as he spent a lot of time and effort begetting.

 

I will spend some time in trying to find out something about master Ni as well, he sounds interesting to me. But a grain of salt will also be at hand as usual in my questing.

 

Thanks to all of you for all the info!

 

Namaste

[Taomeow]

Hi all-

By the way, I recently read that there are more people on the earth today that can trace their ancestry back to Ghengis Khan than any other source. Which makes a whole lot of sense as he spent a lot of time and effort begetting.

Namaste

 

'tis true, but there's another reason for that. It is specifically the peoples influenced by Genghis Khan's endeavours who never lost the tradition of familial record-keeping and have often viewed it as the single most important thing to do with one's own history. They never forgot their lineage and never lost track of where they're coming from, regardless of whether they were royalty or peasants, literate record-keepers or illiterate oral transmitters, legitimate heirs or out-of-wedlock illegitimate offspring. That's how they still know... they never broke the chain of lineage awareness. Matter of fact, with the exception of the culturally European-derived (and currently prevailing elsewhere too) disdain for one's ancestral lineage, all peoples on Earth used to keep accurate track at all times. For instance, in Somalia, as recently as until the devastation of the last war, every tribe taught every child his or her complete familial affiliations (with all uncles, aunts, cousins, second, third, fourth... up to the tenth cousin!) beginning at the age of four. This was considered the most important part of the child's education. By six, they were supposed to know by heart, forever. By the time they were to marry, they were supposed to know who in what neighboring tribe is related to them and how, so as not to marry the wrong person. Beyond the tenth cousin (sic!) they could, but closer, they couldn't.

 

Similarly, Buryats, who kept accurate familial records since before the times of Genghis Khan, used to know exactly who they were and weren't related to throughout history. And, similarly, students of ancient arts and sciences were after "the real thing," the ancient thing. It used to be universally accepted (as I mentioned in some other thread I think) that we're in the period of degradation, deterioration, devolving from a "golden age" (a 100% universal belief till German educators began revising it some 150 years ago), and so in order to gain wisdom, one must seek ancient knowledge, not "innovation and creativity." Most modern people were raised to firmly believe in the latter. I, however, am on the same wavelength as the former. I'm after old, OLD stuff... the older the better. And a "lineage" simply offers some "warranty" of sorts to anyone who is not after innovation and creativity but is after tradition and authenticity instead. A matter of personal preference, is all...

[Ian]

I believe it's true for sex issues as well... our recent "serious offer" thread is a good illustration. Does it make a woman a better lover if she posts her topless pictures on the internet? has a hundred partners, a thousand? A million?.. Well let me tell you... Sex is ruined by "over-sexing" it every bit as much as a soup is ruined by oversalting it. Our current "culture" throwing in everybody's face all that "sexy" non-sex, all that sexy unreality to replace the concentrated reality of the really worthwhile, essential and quintessential sex that is missing... all that porn, all those "revealing" poses and clothes (what they reveal to a competent eye is an unfeeling body and an absentee soul, alas) to compensate for the deficiency of a true ability to feel (the only thing worth having sex-wise and soup-wise and art-wise alike) is sooo saaaad... sorry, got me a-ramblin'...

 

Thank you. I like this.

 

Was chatting with friends lately and they were talking about their lists of celebrities etc. whom they wouldn't mind shagging. And I had to confess to having no such list and a preference for real people. It felt a bit like I was refusing to play the game, after all they knew it was just foolery and meant nothing, but I couldn't join in as I simply can't muster any preferences from, well, images.

[freeform]

It used to be universally accepted (as I mentioned in some other thread I think) that we're in the period of degradation, deterioration, devolving from a "golden age" (a 100% universal belief till German educators began revising it some 150 years ago), and so in order to gain wisdom, one must seek ancient knowledge, not "innovation and creativity." Most modern people were raised to firmly believe in the latter. I, however, am on the same wavelength as the former. I'm after old, OLD stuff... the older the better. And a "lineage" simply offers some "warranty" of sorts to anyone who is not after innovation and creativity but is after tradition and authenticity instead. A matter of personal preference, is all...

 

I'm interested in why you think this, I personally hold an almost opposite view, and so it would be interesting to challenge it and see if it still stands...

 

It's quite a human trait to look back on the good old times, with the rose tinted glasses and all... couldn't this 'golden age' business be a reflection of this tendency on a grander scale?

 

In another post you said that we used to live in a natural way, and that now we dont... ofcourse this puts the word "natural" on shaky ground - how do you define it? For me "natural" means 'as it is in this moment'... so as long as you're in the moment everything is natural... the degradation of one culture, the rise of another etc. it all happens naturally... I mean it could be seen that man adds the 'unnatural' element into the equation, with all the controlling and messing with nature, but in my view humans of every kind are natural and part of nature even if they are scraping coral off the bottom of the sea right now...

 

I believe that if you connect with each moment as deeply as you can, all universal knowledge is available to you... if you stay silent enough, you start to hear the universe, and the universe will tell you and show you the exact thing that will enlighten you the most in that moment...

 

I view the universe as endlessly abundant in every moment -

 

I dont hold the view that it was abundant once, in the good old days, where it shared its wealth with us, and now we live 'unnaturally' so are not graced with this abundance, so we have to grab at every thread that leads us back to that golden age...

[Wayfarer64]

Freeform- I agree with yr basic belief, but I also see some folks as actually not being "natural" or maybe "evolved" is a better way to say it...

 

On the Dharma level of consciousness all is one; but in the Artha level of consciousness there is much division of intent. There are also unhealthy psychologies out there. There are warped minds that refuse to connect to the wider world; some call them sociopaths or psychopaths etc... But the gist is that whatever they do not feel is a part of themselves is alien and to be challanged or fought.

 

When historical figures take these notions into a war-stance we get hell on earth.

 

The feelings of seperatness or pretty universal. They can be as benign as haveing a favorite football team or a sentimental patriotism. But then Nationalism or religious prejudice can also take over some folks' minds and intentions, creating racists,terrorists etc...

 

In politics, which is a very large part of the Artha level - I see things on a historical/political level quite often. People like Bush Sr., Cheney & Rumsfeld were brought into power long ago by President Ford. They have very low levels of Dharma to influence them. They are backward, arrogant and have made the world a much more dangerous place to live. I believe this, many do not.

 

We do not all have Dharma level consciousness. Some are even stuck in the Kharmic levels where sex and physical pleasure amount to their whole sphere of intent. I have known animals with higher levels of consciousness then some people I've known. So in a word there is evil out there - and it refutes the basic claim of oneness that most of us here at the TaoBums would seem to strive for.

 

To clarify this a bit - I am not being PC about multi-culturalism. I think that cultural diversity is a wonderful aspect of our world- but one culture's truth, say holicaust denial from parts of the Islamic community must be refuted if ithey fly in the face of historical fact for instance... Tolerance can in itself become a weapon for ignorance.

 

When it comes to sexual attirudes- to get back to the gist of this thread, some of us do try to bring our sexual behaviors into the Dharma level of our lives. Being aware of the diferent levels of activity and consciousness is just the start.

[fatherpaul]

beyond procreation

sex is the creation of thought

the body is non-sexed except physically.

 

have fun.

[freeform]

Wayfarer,

 

all very good points and I do understand about the different levels of consciousness and different levels of 'separateness'... and I agree there are people who hurt and destroy others, themselves, their loved ones and their environments... what I don't agree with is that any of this is wrong or unnatural... it's just the way it is... and from my POV as soon as we make a judgment - good, bad, natural, unnatural, cruel, asleep etc... we separate ourselves from it and it is part of the universe as much as anything else...

 

don't get me wrong, I'm not saying do nothing about it... but I'm also not saying do something about it... just be still, listen to your heart, stay connected with your body and you will do exactly what you need to do for the best of all concerned...

 

reading that, the first thought that comes to mind is - "we must teach people to connect to their hearts and bodies" - yes, maybe - but only if this impulse comes from the body aligned with the heart, and not solely as an idea in the mind, otherwise with our best intentions we tend to propogate exactly what we want to fight...

 

so let me try and bring it back to sex... Pietro was talking about our natures, for some of us it is more natural to have multiple partners and for some of us none at all... that 'nature' is only evident when the body and heart align... and you cant decide that it's your nature and then forget that alignment, you have to be ready for whatever might cum.

[Yen Hui]

beyond procreation

sex is the creation of thought

 

But from where do thoughts arise? Like movement and stillness, thoughts

come and go. But from where do they come, and to where do they go? If

thoughts make sex, then what is thoughtless sex? How thoughtless of you.

 

If thoughts lead us astray, then they must not be encouraged. In order to

practice internal discipline, and govern the thoughts, one must break the

emotional attachments to them. These attachments are called passions.

To master and overcome passion, the acts which create it must be either

abandoned, or radically curtailed at the very minimum. Sex is the greatest

among these.

 

 

Always passionless, thereby observe the subtle;

ever intent, thereby observe the apparent.

These two come from the same source ...

 

Heaven is easy and Earth is simple. The easy and the simple are qualities

of the flexible mind. Spiritual practice is about being flexible; knowing how

to change and adapt to situations, good and bad alike. The subtle is simple

and innocent; without intent or passion, like our Mother Nature. Natural sex

is modelled after the innocence and passionless simplicity of Mother Earth.

 

If one is able to express sexuality with innocence, or dispassionately, then

it does not cause you to deviate from the Tao. If one can maintain harmony

with the Great Way, there is no pressing need to abandon the practice. But

you are free. The objective is to completely realize the Tao, and whatever is

obstructing the completion or fulfillment of that must be dissolved away, and

broken through. This is basic practice, I would think. Who is complicating it?

[fatherpaul]

thank you yen,

(thoughtless sex?)

 

thought comes from the minds of all people

there is a thought sphere if you will.

thought is a useful tool, but cannot lead one out of ignorance.

the sex act serves the biological imperative of procreation,

once the act is done, thought steps in to make it pleasure,

carnal or divine it is all the same. when you want something, you can be fooled.

this seems simple and clear to me.

[Yen Hui]

when you want something, you can be fooled.

 

True. Thus Lao Tzu says, "always passionless, observe the subtle."

As if saying: "Passion obscures reality, and leads people astray."

[Wayfarer64]

Hi again-

 

Freeform- I do not disagree at all with yr take on it being natural, but i do believe many natural proclivities can be transcended or evolved away from or made more healthy... and to accept the naturalness does not preclude the unhealthyness or malignancy of many aspects of our lives. Disease is also natural, but most of us avoid diseases and detriments to ourown- and the general- wellbeing of our fellow creatures...

 

It is natural for man to want to control the world around us, how we do this takes on a hell of a lot of baggage that needs to be thought through. It is also natural for many of us to scratch our heads in fury or wonder at the actions of our fellow beings. When I see someone recklessly destroy a part of the world I cherish- it is natural for me to want to kick his ass back into the slag-heap of humanity's foibles...

 

It is natural for monkeys to thow their feces at intruders. Lots of natural activities can still piss us off when they happen to us or that/those we love - the same reaction I wrote about as sociopathy is a natural reaction, I just don't accept many such activities as healthy.

 

Passion is pretty tricky, it is desire all juiced up with fullfilled expectation and release of tensions and the warmth of loving etc...It also is natural and can be healthy. But it is potentially dangerous for most of us, because it has so much energy and drive.

[fatherpaul]

True. Thus Lao Tzu says, "always passionless, observe the subtle."

As if saying: "Passion obscures reality, and leads people astray."

yes this is so

 

but i say that this comes after and is not a practice

but merely the normal function of a true human being

[freeform]

Wayfarer,

 

I think we're on the same page and I totaly agree... especially with what you said about 'control'... And I find that avoiding the bad, annoying, crap-throwing monkey is a subtle way of trying to control... and by avoiding that monkey you're avoiding a potential lesson that could possibly move you further down the way...

 

So how do we know whether connecting with the bad will lead us further down the path? Well, we need to stop knowing about it and only letting our bodies lead us to whatever, without even thinking in terms of healthy/harmful...

 

By no means am I saying that that's what I do all the time, but when I do manage it just a little, everything nourishes me, and ofcourse as soon as I try to work out why that monkey crap has just nourished me, I lose it...

[Uncle Fester]

.

Edited September 19, 2021 by darebak

[fatherpaul]

It is pretty clear that most of these authors slinging "Taoist" books are in it for the money. There are no secrets to be found in these books. I mean Ni pretty much regurgitates the same useless stuff repeatedly and Chia started with "secrets" meant for old men who can't get it up.

 

Cleary basically translates texts from his out-of-context perspective and reduces everything to a buddhist influenced version of western psychology.

 

Just look at his commentary on "Secret of The Golden Flower" for proof of that.

 

The ancient Master/Disciple situation is there for a reason. It provides a context. It provides a transmission which is more than the science of practice. All this stuff published here is waaaayy out of context on so many levels.

 

Why even begin discussing how Taoists regard sex when 99% of us have not ever met a true Taoist? Cart before the horse...

 

Ok here comes a rant:

 

We get all pretentious here acting as if we know something about Taoism, from what few books we've read or from what such and such fake master feeds us for a few bucks, typing with self righteousness while stroking our yin-yang pendants...

Aaaand we are all full of crap.

 

Meanwhile real Taoists are quietly opening things up a bit to those who are willing to seek beyond the comfort of their homes and the comfort of their concepts...

 

Can you imagine how ridiculous you would feel if a real Master read some of the crap you've written here on Taobums? Yeesh, my cheeks are getting red just thinking about it!

 

To everyone here, including myself, consider this approach:

 

Put your self righteous and "profound" statements back in your arse, understand that you don't have a damn clue what you are talking about regarding real, ancient Taoism, box up the crappy books, find someone who can prove their ability to teach the real thing and just learn. Shut up and just learn.

 

Otherwise we are just perpetuating a big pseudo-taoist circle jerk.

 

Seriously, there comes a time when the chatter stops and action begins.

If you wanna cut the BS and go for the gusto, study for real in Asia like I am trying to go do in a few months, PM me or even just check the links on SeanDenty's signature.

I am not advertising for anyone here and I don't represent anyone by the way. Just trying to cut to the chase.

 

Feel free to rip me a new one for this post but understand that you are still full of crap no matter how profound your statements appear to be.

 

 

here here

[xenolith]

If you wanna cut the BS and go for the gusto, study for real in Asia like I am trying to go do in a few months...

You need not go to Asia. Then again, maybe you do.

[Yen Hui]

Edited May 21, 2007 by Yen Hui