Are all paths really valid?

[Seeker of Wisdom]

An idea a lot of people have these days is this complete universalism where all paths are valid, 'what's not good for your path is good for my path', nothing can be criticized, there are no universal principles that cultivation must include to be valid cultivation, and so on.

 

Let's illustrate that this is wrong with an extreme example. Human sacrifice. Now, loads of people in history believed that this was the right way to 'please the gods'. If you went back in time to see ancient Aztec priests, and asked them if chucking a freshly decapitated head down a pyramid is good cultivation, they would nod fervently and say 'yes, of course, the gods demand it'.

 

If it is fair to criticize this practice, why isn't it fair to criticize others so long as the arguments are reasonable and not just ad hominems? My critique of AYP (http://thetaobums.com/topic/25632-a-review-of-ayp-from-an-ex-practitioner/) is just one example. You may disagree with my opinion on AYP, but is it ever a good thing to block opposing opinions entirely?

 

In the drive to move away from religious dogma and exclusivism, it seems many of us are also disregarding rigor in establishing the fundamentals of cultivation, and discerning which paths include them and which don't. We are afraid to tell someone that their path is wrong, so we widen the definition of 'cultivation' so far that it becomes practically meaningless.

 

A middle way should be found.

 

My approach is primarily Buddhist. This absolutely doesn't mean I think someone has to be a Buddhist to progress to Buddhahood! Taoism, for example, (excepting those obsessed with chi and the body, which was not the original teaching) leads to the same place but just calls it something different. There are also simply excellent Taoist practices.

 

However, it would be nonsensical to say that Aztec human sacrifice leads anywhere near to Buddhahood, and nonsensical to say that a partially correct path leads all the way.

 

Although there are many valid techniques and we are unique, the Tao is the same for everyone and the obscurations preventing us from realizing it - although unique in detail - are always configurations of common themes, such as clinging to the body, that all unenlightened sentient beings share.

 

Thus, all of the many valid techniques and paths will also share some common themes. The litmus test, as far as I'm concerned, is the presence or lack of five key aspects:

1. Sila.
2. Samadhi.
3. Prajna.
4. Keeps chi in context, and if actively works on it does so safely.
5. Focus kept on realizing Tao to transcend craving/delusion/ill-will and rebirth.

Any path lacking any of these is either deficient, or outright wrong.

 

 

 

 

[Jainarayan]

Some paths are dead ends or veer way off course, such as Aztec human sacrifice. Adi Shankara escaped by the skin of his teeth from some Kāpālikas who misguidedly wanted to sacrifice him to Goddess Kālī. And they all came under the umbrella of Hinduism.

 

But those dead ends and detours may serve a purpose of the jīva working out karma. Maybe they're not meant to be a way to reach God, but for some reason the jīva is deluded into believing it. That is, the reason the Aztecs and Maya ripped out still-beating hearts was because the gods demanded it, as you said. It wasn't for anything remotely akin to reaching the abode of the gods, but to keep the world from being destroyed by capricious and bloodthirsty gods.

 

So, I see a flaw in the comparison of Aztec human sacrifice and Roman Catholicism as ways to reach God. In my opinion any religion whose goal is to achieve enlightenment, release from samsara, see God "face to face", have eternal joy or bliss, is a valid practice for that practitioner. Judaism is right for a Jew; Hinduism is right for a Hindu; Buddhism is right for a Buddhist; and so on. The Aztecs' practices were for an entirely different reason and not a valid path to the gods; actually it wasn't a path at all.

[Thunder_Gooch]

There a billion different goals and a billion different paths...

 

Step one is to clearly define your goal.

 

Step two is to find others that achieved your goal and get instructions on the path they took to get there.

 

If something is valid or not depends on their goals.

Edited July 6, 2013 by More_Pie_Guy

[Jetsun]

Everything is always changing, all the teachings and methodologies of the past may no longer be relevant or needed any more for many people, it is an assumption from the mind that assumes they are.

[deci belle]

Don Juan Matus said that all paths are equal in that they all lead nowhere. That is why one must find the path with heart and traverse it completely. To dabble without true entry is to throw one's life away.

 

One knows it is a path with heart because it strengthens, challenges and enlivens one's life. It requires one to live one's life as a warrior. It develops spontaneously as a result of discipline and precision that spares nothing on account of self-importance.

 

Any other path is a lie. To live as a warrior is to believe in nothing whatsoever and act with controlled folly.

 

A path with heart requires that one act for no reason at all— for the hell of it; without thought of selfish concern for outcomes.

 

Only geared for struggle, tuned for fluidity and unsentimental objectivity and ready to grab the cubic centimeter of chance, the spirit clean and clear in order to flow freely after deciding to act without ever looking back.

 

This is to find and follow a path with heart.

[silent thunder]

I'm one who perceives all paths being valid. They all lead from and to source.

The route they take and my value assessment of that state, is irrelevant, (except to me).

Nothing is invalidated, wasted, lost or missed ever. It's patently impossible, in my perception.

Edited July 8, 2013 by silent thunder

[ChiForce]

Well, I agree with you. The form of the phenomena is multiple. That's the only thing which is universal about it. However, there is a reason why it is called the Dharma Gate. The first step you must take to illuminate the path. This, I am afraid, can't change. Realizing that form is not real and suffering is the result of clinging on to form. Are there any other ways to see and contemplate forms that would open up the Dharma Gate? Probably not.... Seeing forms as real instead? Well, there are billions of people clinging onto forms in this world, I don't see them becoming enlightened by clinging onto forms and to suffering from them.

[Seeker of Wisdom]

I'm not saying other paths wouldn't have worth for different people at different times, just that only paths with shared key characteristics lead all the way.

 

Judaism may be right for a Jew in this life, but Jewish practice doesn't have samadhi or prajna so is limited in how far it can go. That person would hopefully in a later life be ready for a more robust path to really get somewhere.

 

As for different goals - sure, not everyone wants realisation. But it is foolish to not want realisation. It is the highest possible fruit of cultivation, the only one providing liberation from samsara, rebirth, craving, delusion, ill-will.

 

Cultivation done purely for chi or phenomena like OBE's is childish cultivation of no worth at all at the time of death!

 

If I'm offending you, good because you must wake up! You have access to truth people in the past would jump at the chance for, and are squandering it for New Age shit!

[skydog]

.

Edited July 8, 2013 by skydog

[Thunder_Gooch]

We disagree that realization stops rebirth, I've heard of no Buddhist masters proclaim to have broken free of rebirth in recent history. As such it is a worthless path. Having great insight and wisdom into the ultimate nature of reality is fine and dandy, but breaking free of rebirth is the only goal that matters period.

 

There is only one school I know of that publicly claims to have a method to achieve such.

 

 

I'm not saying other paths wouldn't have worth for different people at different times, just that only paths with shared key characteristics lead all the way.

 

Judaism may be right for a Jew in this life, but Jewish practice doesn't have samadhi or prajna so is limited in how far it can go. That person would hopefully in a later life be ready for a more robust path to really get somewhere.

 

As for different goals - sure, not everyone wants realisation. But it is foolish to not want realisation. It is the highest possible fruit of cultivation, the only one providing liberation from samsara, rebirth, craving, delusion, ill-will.

 

Cultivation done purely for chi or phenomena like OBE's is childish cultivation of no worth at all at the time of death!

 

If I'm offending you, good because you must wake up! You have access to truth people in the past would jump at the chance for, and are squandering it for New Age shit!

[ChiForce]

We disagree that realization stops rebirth, I've heard of no Buddhist masters proclaim to have broken free of rebirth in recent history. As such it is a worthless path. Having great insight and wisdom into the ultimate nature of reality is fine and dandy, but breaking free of rebirth is the only goal that matters period.

 

There is only one school I know of that publicly claims to have a method to achieve such.

 

 

Well, according to the Hinayana path, you can delay your rebirths or the next one once you have acquired certain merit and cultivation power. However, it is a wrong view to say that one should aspire to become completely liberated...the reality is that with each of your life time, you are liberated a little. Is it possible to become completely liberated if you are starting your cultivation process at point Zero???

[silent thunder]

I'm not saying other paths wouldn't have worth for different people at different times, just that only paths with shared key characteristics lead all the way.

 

Judaism may be right for a Jew in this life, but Jewish practice doesn't have samadhi or prajna so is limited in how far it can go. That person would hopefully in a later life be ready for a more robust path to really get somewhere.

 

As for different goals - sure, not everyone wants realisation. But it is foolish to not want realisation. It is the highest possible fruit of cultivation, the only one providing liberation from samsara, rebirth, craving, delusion, ill-will.

 

Cultivation done purely for chi or phenomena like OBE's is childish cultivation of no worth at all at the time of death!

 

If I'm offending you, good because you must wake up! You have access to truth people in the past would jump at the chance for, and are squandering it for New Age shit!

To believe that only the old and ancient ways hold truth is to close your eyes to the present moment.

Samadhi is beyond religion or culture. There is nothing which is not Tao.

[Seeker of Wisdom]

We disagree that realization stops rebirth, I've heard of no Buddhist masters proclaim to have broken free of rebirth in recent history. As such it is a worthless path. Having great insight and wisdom into the ultimate nature of reality is fine and dandy, but breaking free of rebirth is the only goal that matters period.

How do you propose to escape being dragged around in rebirth without removing its causes? Show me one TRUE master of any tradition who said that just developing chi is enough to escape rebirth. A true Immortal has Tao realisation, that's a more significant factor than their chi. Chi is a thing of form, so it is impermanent, so it cannot bestow either physical or any other sort of immortality. But realising Tao involves mastery of the alaya consciousness and loss of the causes of rebirth, which causes complete freedom from rebirth.

 

It is not even possible to develop chi to the fullest if there are mental factors limiting it!

 

Someone who doesn't do anything focused on their chi at all could realise Tao; and as a result all the blocks in their chi would dissolve, their kundalini would rise, channels open completely, tan tiens fill, chakras fully open... etc.

 

But without realisation, even if you cultivate chi for eons there will always be a little mental knot screwing up the flow.

 

The reason so few break free is: it's the highest achievement in existence, so of course it's very difficult. Few recognise a valid path, not all of those walk it, not all of those walk it correctly, not all of those try hard... and even for those who try hard, it's a long-term goal.

 

It's very unrealistic to expect surmounting the 3 realms in one life. That would be great of course, but a more realistic (though still ambitious) set of goals I have for this life is: get kundalini raised, master at least first jhana, develop enough prajna to get at least stream-entry.

 

To believe that only the old and ancient ways hold truth is to close your eyes to the present moment.

Samadhi is beyond religion or culture. There is nothing which is not Tao.

Yes, I agree 100%.

 

But, we still need to develop samadhi.

 

And just because everything is Tao, doesn't mean all paths lead to realising Tao. I am surrounded by air, but that doesn't mean that I can breathe through my elbow.

 

How can all paths lead to Tao? Is serial killing a valid path? Eating fondue? Most people barely have an aim for themselves at all and no concept of cultivation or cultivation practices - is that a path to Tao?

 

Everyone will realise Tao eventually because, being reborn again and again, it is inevitable they will eventually wind up on a valid path. But why wait so very long? We have access to valid paths, so let's seek them out and follow them.

 

If in this life I become more ignorant and less virtuous, sure, on the absolute level nothing is lost because it's all Tao anyway, but being practical, that is definitely a step backwards.

Edited July 8, 2013 by Seeker of the Self

[Apech]

An idea a lot of people have these days is this complete universalism where all paths are valid, 'what's not good for your path is good for my path', nothing can be criticized, there are no universal principles that cultivation must include to be valid cultivation, and so on.

 

Let's illustrate that this is wrong with an extreme example. Human sacrifice. Now, loads of people in history believed that this was the right way to 'please the gods'. If you went back in time to see ancient Aztec priests, and asked them if chucking a freshly decapitated head down a pyramid is good cultivation, they would nod fervently and say 'yes, of course, the gods demand it'.

 

<...>

 

It all depends what you mean by valid and what the aims are. I am sure you are right that some people would have said that human sacrifice was done to 'please the gods' but had you been able to ask the seers and priests of that religion they would have said it was a valid form of practice because it worked. Even though it is unacceptable to us in a lot of ways, the only reason that this would have been done was to gather (or steal) energy in some way or another .... with the goal being advanced powers.

 

Even in less blood thirsty ancient cultures the primary goal was effective power and freedom. The kind of ethical grounds that we build in now, such as compassion, love and kindness were not accentuated and at times completely absent. It should be said that this approach was warped and that it warped the practitioners. It made them strange and inhuman in some ways and also ultimately powerless. Because they misunderstood the nature of energy/chi or whichever term you want to use. So I think you are right that you can reject certain 'ways' but not on the grounds that they didn't work.

 

In the rest of your article you go on to define what you understand to be the goal(s) of cultivation. For instance 'clinging to the body' which you reject. I would suggest that you have overlaid a particular Buddhist slant which tends to denigrate the body .... whilst others see it as the vehicle of our development and that chi also is not like gas that you can pump into your tank but something more subtle and profound than that.

[三江源]

.

Edited July 25, 2014 by cat

[Apech]

This is what all the reptilean fantasies are about, isnt it.. this warpage that we can perceive as a human possibility.. that we can 'lose our humanity'... as if being human is a gift and needs to be cultured and treasured otherwise it can be lost. if we dont watch it we 'revert' or 'degrade' to reptilean.. actually people compare humans to monkeys a lot.. but dont fully acknowledge what tremendous bullying cannabalistic strategists monkeys can be.

 

Good point ... yes I think so.

 

In 'human' systems we also see the wisdom aspect i.e. Thoth, Mercury, Hermes, Christ ...and so on taking the main stage and not the power oriented ones ... although they are still present ... in a way you could see Buddha as one of these.

[Jainarayan]

 

You have access to truth people in the past would jump at the chance for, and are squandering it for New Age shit!

 

"Jato mat tato path" - "As there are a number of beliefs, there are a number of ways". - Sri Ramakrishna, February 18, 1836 – August 16, 1886. New Age?

[BaguaKicksAss]

It is fully possible that the Aztecs had a path of enlightenment, we don't know everything about them, we just focus on the gory bits. Also OK so they were a warring nation, much like say Rome back in the day. Sacrifice to the Gods, or killing someone because you are taking over the area. What is the difference?

 

Also, I would say no, not all paths are good for the student. Valid or not who knows. What about the 5 year old child who does make beleive and comes up with their own path throughout childhood... it works well for them. However the adult doing the same, then converting others to it, not so much.

[Ish]

actually people compare humans to monkeys a lot.. but dont fully acknowledge what tremendous bullying cannabalistic strategists monkeys can be.

 

But humans can be like this as well right?

Well the cannabalistic part may be more rare... but bullying and strategic for sure in fact i would say the vast majority of people are capable of these things given circumstance.

[thetaoiseasy]

.

Edited March 24, 2014 by thetaoiseasy

[Seeker of Wisdom]

To clarify, I'm not anti-body or anti-chi, but I think obsessing over these things, treating them as part of your identity when they are just tools we have, is mistaken.

 

Other people may have different goals in their cultivation - I won't say any more about that being wrong, because I was focused on astral projection when I first started, and I want to be a reasonable person while sharing my opinion - but I think we can agree that we can't take any path to get to any goal; and if the aim is Tao then I stick to my '5 factors' as necessary for a path aimed at Tao to be successful.

 

Edited July 8, 2013 by Seeker of the Self

[idiot_stimpy]

Don Juan Matus said that all paths are equal in that they all lead nowhere.

 

Fantastic!

[Apech]

To clarify, I'm not anti-body or anti-chi, but I think obsessing over these things, treating them as part of your identity when they are just tools we have, is mistaken.

 

Other people may have different goals in their cultivation - I won't say any more about that being wrong, because I was focused on astral projection when I first started, and I want to be a reasonable person while sharing my opinion - but I think we can agree that we can't take any path to get to any goal; and if the aim is Tao then I stick to my '5 factors' as necessary for a path aimed at Tao to be successful.

 

 

Why do you use non-Taoist terms for four of your five factors?

[Seeker of Wisdom]

 

Why do you use non-Taoist terms for four of your five factors?

I'm mainly Buddhist, but I include some ideas from Taoism and elsewhere, and I do some Taoist and Hindu (yogic) practices.

Jesus, Confucius, Mohammed, etc, had some great things to say - e.g. "blessed are those that hunger and thirst after righteousness, for they shall be filled" has a lot of meaning that can be practically applied to cultivation, if you think about it.

But I'm not someone who says that 'all paths lead up the mountain', because that just doesn't make sense. Any path based on great virtue, proper shamatha and prajna wisdom leads to the summit. Paths lacking in one or more of these areas can lead partway up, nowhere or backwards.

If I had to choose one tradition only, it would be some form of Buddhism (probably Zen) because to me it's got all the necessary stuff in good detail and (IMHO!) has some key deep ideas that others aren't so clear on.

 

But since I am free to develop my own understanding and blend of practices, I try to take good bits from everywhere.

 

Taoism goes into more detail on chi than anything else, and that's fantastic. Someone wanting to do some work on their chi, or understand and deal with weird chi phenomena going on, would do well to look into Taoism. The idea of jing-chi-shen alone is brilliant.

 

Confucianism is high class indeed when it comes to virtue. Theistic religions have some great points in that regard too. The Sermon on the Mount is excellent stuff, anyone who can really turn the other cheek is very noble in my eyes. Drawing on Confucianism, close to being a Junzi!

 

Hinduism - who can deny the worth of yoga?

 

Hermetics - don't know much about it, but this quote is decent: "As processions passing in the road cannot achieve anything themselves yet still obstruct others, so these men merely process through the universe, led by the pleasures of the body."

 

You get the idea.

Edited July 8, 2013 by Seeker of the Self

[Jainarayan]

The Sermon on the Mount is excellent stuff, anyone who can really turn the other cheek is very noble in my eyes.

 

Have you read The Sermon on the Mount According to Vedanta by Swami Prabhavānanda? I highly recommend it.