Who would you like to see go for Lei Shan Dao training in China?

[DentyDao]

P.S. I'd say it's about time for another round of fart jokes before we start taking ourselves too seriously. I don't know about you, but I'm going to go take a mental pause... and release. Feel the love people.

[sean]

Sean makes some good points. I happen to agree with some of them. What I don't agree with is the idea that the Daoist masters in China some how fail to recognize these simple truths.

 

What they offer is a profound understanding of the reality of the human condition. "The Dao, brought to you by the people who invented the Dao." These people are doing what all the others are doing, better. They coined the phrase, 'Be in the Now' and they invented 'letting go.' Wang Liping can 'non do' circles around your garden variety western guru. He'd have them driving a Benz and eating prime rib and lobster in a fortnight.

 

Spiritual training takes us quicker and more effectively into the deepest level of our true nature. Saying that it's a subconscious rebellion against facing our true nature or some kind of escapism is the real escapism. Anyone who thinks this is some elaborate vanity or ego trip is going to be in for a rude awakening.

To be clear, I am not asserting that your masters are unaware of anything. I don't even claim that my view is something that one that is wise would or should be aware of. It's only the way that currently makes sense for me to formulate my experience in words which is probably based mostly on my own preferences, conditioning, etc.

 

The idea that the Tao was invented by certain people really makes no sense to me. What do human inventions have to do with truth when we ourselves are only an invented thought in the mind of truth?

 

Seen from within a Buddhist perspective (which I am not but let's have fun), I do think there is full blown escapism inherent in any attempt to transcend and liberate ourselves. It's like a new thrilling drug addiction. This is the double bind of the Buddhist path. The cause of suffering is desire. You are free of suffering with the cessation of desire. But there is not a special class of desire that gets a Buddha gold star on the forehead since it's a noble desire for liberation. Who or what wants to be liberated?! Your fucking ego does, that's what. Because your ego is in pain. Because your ego doesn't want to die. And because your ego wants pleasure. And not unlike the drunk sipping his whiskey in the local bar, we wander around trying to get a good buzz off the next big thing to come down the spiritual block. Your ego sees enlightenment as a way to escape pain. And if it can't escape, at least it can use these fancy new practices as a sustainable way to hide out. The desire to cultivate is simply not special. Because your ego is that which desires to cultivate. And your ego is precisely the basis of your whole illusion. This is the red pill that contemplative paths are leading you to either swallow or continue avoiding. Our entire reality is set up to avoid this. There is nothing we can do to escape our ego because our ego is (seemingly paradoxically) an illusion that creates the very desire and impulse to escape from itself. No path can be derived from the truth. Only stunned silence.

 

Sean

[Pietro]

P.S. I'd say it's about time for another round of fart jokes before we start taking ourselves too seriously. I don't know about you, but I'm going to go take a mental pause... and release. Feel the love people.

 

Bloody hell guys. Live those old posts alone. I am in Europe, arrive 6 hours later and only get to smell the farts and not hear the sound, is no fun.

 

Ok, I vote for sending Bill Bodri and Michael Winn. Just to get them in trouble.

 

Pietro, you can stay in my house if you need to.

To get Michael start saying that he teached to David how to set up a business. Please, I think David is doing quite well on his own.

 

Thank you (about the house), appreciated and accepted. Did I not told you, btw, why am I coming. Applide, accepted, I'm now waiting for the electronic passport with the snake logo on it.

[Yoda]

only get to smell the farts and not hear the sound, is no fun.

 

LOL

 

 

I'll second the motion.

 

Yoda

[Cameron]

P.S. I'd say it's about time for another round of fart jokes before we start taking ourselves too seriously. I don't know about you, but I'm going to go take a mental pause... and release. Feel the love people.

 

 

link

[DentyDao]

Seen from within a Buddhist perspective (which I am not but let's have fun), I do think there is full blown escapism inherent in any attempt to transcend and liberate ourselves. It's like a new thrilling drug addiction. This is the double bind of the Buddhist path. The cause of suffering is desire. You are free of suffering with the cessation of desire. But there is not a special class of desire that gets a Buddha gold star on the forehead since it's a noble desire for liberation. Who or what wants to be liberated?! Your fucking ego does, that's what. Because your ego is in pain. Because your ego doesn't want to die. And because your ego wants pleasure. And not unlike the drunk sipping his whiskey in the local bar, we wander around trying to get a good buzz off the next big thing to come down the spiritual block. Your ego sees enlightenment as a way to escape pain. And if it can't escape, at least it can use these fancy new practices as a sustainable way to hide out. The desire to cultivate is simply not special. Because your ego is that which desires to cultivate. And your ego is precisely the basis of your whole illusion. This is the red pill that contemplative paths are leading you to either swallow or continue avoiding. Our entire reality is set up to avoid this. There is nothing we can do to escape our ego because our ego is (seemingly paradoxically) an illusion that creates the very desire and impulse to escape from itself. No path can be derived from the truth. Only stunned silence.

 

Sean

 

Desire is unavoidable. Your understanding of Buddhism is `inaccurate. Perhaps this direct statement will inspire you to untertake a more serious study of Buddhism. You should know what Buddhists really believe before you critic their beliefs. It's good to want liberation, good to want happiness. To think otherwise is insanity. In the great tradition of India, this is referred to as Sattwic ego or egoless ego. It's the act of total surrender, the return to wholeness, oneness. Ironically it is very much in line with many of sentiments, but your idea that the desire to go into 'silence' to 'let go' is not inherent in Daoism is misleading and a contradiction of your own statements. You your self meditate and follow a methodology and use techniques and attend workshops to learn how to deepen the process, so stop playing the Devil's advocate and just admit that you are equaly involved in striving for 'enlightenment' which is just another term for wholeness, aka non-dual equinimity.

 

It's foolhearty to think you have 'arrived' when in truth the journey is far from over. Even enlightened beings understand the illusion of ego remains and there is more to strip away before total equinimity emerges. If this wasn't the case, you would drop this physical body this very instant as you read these words. Carefull, these persuits are indeed noble and those who make light or attempt to guide and teach others with guess work and assumptions may find themselves face to face with the hard light of reality burning such silly notions away. When you go to Adyshanti this Summer, ask his about these things face to face. You might be surprised; that's my feeling.

 

S

[gendao]

Actually, I believe the point of Buddhism (enlightenment, per se) is transcending the paradigm.

 

Happiness and suffering as we know it are a duality.

You cannot have one without the other.

So, if you want to escape one, you must escape both.

This requires transcending this whole paradigm itself.

 

As long as you are stubbornly stuck in that base paradigm (duality), you will seek ego-based happiness and avoid suffering.

But perhaps in the next one, you might seek understanding and peace-of-mind instead. Whereby happiness and suffering then lose their meaning. After all, if you really understand why things are, what is there to be happy or miserable about?

 

It is as Cameron alluded to in post #43...

 

Small advancements are made by refining and mastering your paradigm.

But big advancements require transcending your paradigm.

 

We see this in all arts, sciences and every level of life.

 

When people thought the Earth was flat, I'm sure they had these same debates about whether expeditions would fall off the edges or not. Lots of conflict - and conflicts that could never be solved until that paradigm itself was transcended. And once it was, those false conflicts instantly disappeared.

 

Ah..."enlightenment!"

Edited May 7, 2007 by vortex

[DentyDao]

Happiness and suffering as we know it are a duality.

You cannot have one without the other.

So, if you want to escape one, you must escape both.

This requires transcending the whole paradigm.

 

Daoism is just another 'way' to transend the paradigm. First comes enlightenment and then comes equinimity. You can't skip to the good part, sorry.

 

There is a subtle distinction here, the Buddha advised against 'chasing' happiness. He said the way to 'true happiness' is to eliminate craving for happiness. He didn't say happiness is overrated, quite the opposite actually. The Buddha wants you to be happy, this is very clear. And actually he did say we can have lasting happiness, he said this our natural state.

 

 

 

 

You don't arrive at the end by thinking you can just start there and skip all the work. You can do the work many ways and different means will suit different people, but it's still work either way.

[gendao]

Daoism is just another 'way' to transend the paradigm. First comes enlightenment and then comes equinimity. You can't skip to the good part, sorry.

 

There is a subtle distinction here, the Buddha advised against 'chasing' happiness. He said the way to 'true happiness' is to eliminate craving for happiness. He didn't say happiness is overrated, quite the opposite actually. The Buddha wants you to be happy, this is very clear. And actually he did say we can have lasting happiness, he said this our natural state.

You don't arrive at the end by thinking you can just start there and skip all the work. You can do the work many ways and different means will suit different people, but it's still work either way.

Certainly, I didn't say Taoism skipped anything.

 

And I agree that chasing happiness is clinging to the paradigm, not transcending it.

 

But did Buddha really want us to all be happy, peaceful or what, though? Without reading his actual quotes, original texts or intent, I can't really comment further on this. To me, happiness just seems more of an ego-based rollercoaster emotion. Whereas peace seems to be an intellectual state based upon knowing how everything is somehow fair, just and with reason. But a lot of this is fuzzy semantics, so mileage may vary...

Edited May 7, 2007 by vortex

[DentyDao]

But did Buddha really want us to all be happy, peaceful or what, though? Without reading his actual quotes, original texts or intent, I can't really comment further on this.

 

This is where we are different. I have been formally studying Buddhism for several years under the guidence of a very highly regarded scholar and meditation master. The nice thing about Buddhism is that the Buddha repeated himself over and over and over again. It's not like Christianity where scholars often disagree about what Jesus did and did not say. It's very clear what the Buddha said and what he has not because each teaching was repeated multiple times in very redundent terms to millions of people who later compared notes and confirmed that the teachings were authentic before they were recorded. Many of the masters involved in recording this teaching were enlightened beings who had commited the Buddhas teaching to memory after spending decades with the Buddha and direct teachings from the Buddha.

 

I have also formally taken refuge in a public ceramony with the authorization of my master and the understanding that I had to go through the required formal training and demonstrate to my teachers and fellow sangha members a clear understanding of Buddhist view, history and philosophy. Happiness is part of the program.

 

Buddha wasn't talking about transitory, fleeting happiness that comes from gain, fame and pleasure seeking. He was talkiing about the transedent happiness of enlightenment. The sutras are all there for people to read and they haven't changed for thousands of years.

[gendao]

Buddha wasn't talking about transitory, fleeting happiness that comes from gain, fame and pleasure seeking. He was talkiing about the transedent happiness of enlightenment. The sutras are all there for people to read and they haven't changed for thousands of years.

Points well taken.

 

But here is where we also reach the limitations of language.

 

"Happiness" - as it is commonly understood to unenlightened masses (including myself) - would be a fleeting type coming from some type of personal fulfillment in life. Some sort of emotional high on the rollercoaster of life. A peak that cannot be sustained as it is like a frequency wave - if it were flatlined it wouldn't be a wave anymore.

 

The transcendent feeling gained from enlightenment is obviously something a little different and not experienced by most - so how can we really call it the same word?

 

Well, for general purposes, we can...

 

But if you really want to get technical and make subtle (but key) distinctions, it's probably not quite the same thing. At least I wouldn't just assume so...having not gotten there yet myself.

 

It goes back to mastering your paradigm by refining the dogma, or transcending your paradigm by questioning your assumptions. Where even the smallest re-assumption can create a whole paradigm shift. I mean, when people thought the Earth was flat, they probably didn't notice the almost imperceptibly slight curvature to the horizon. But that slight curvature made all the difference in "the world," didn't it?

 

Therefore, we must remember to acknowledge the limits to the precision of our language and thus dogma and original intent.

 

 

I am not saying you are wrong or right - simply that I personally don't know right now due to limits in linguistic precision and my own lack of enlightenment.

Edited May 7, 2007 by vortex

[sean]

You your self meditate and follow a methodology and use techniques and attend workshops to learn how to deepen the process, so stop playing the Devil's advocate and just admit that you are equaly involved in striving for 'enlightenment' which is just another term for wholeness, aka non-dual equinimity.

Yes, I am engaged in spiritual practice. Very much so. But I see this as just as much of an obstacle to enlightenment as avoiding spiritual practice. Both are forms of resistance to naturalness. I don't think my seeking is special. I don't believe that my striving, my meditation, my Adyashanti satsangs are intrinsically any better or worse than anything else. This is called humility. I do not think I have arrived anywhere. Because I have not given up yet. If I had given up, there would be enlightenment. I is the ego which is the fantasy of lost enlightenment.

 

I don't think you are hearing what I am saying. I am not saying all you have to do is read some Adyashanti and then use advaitic tautologies as an excuse to lay around and avoid meditation. It's much worse than that. What I am saying is that there is nothing, absolutely nothing that YOU can do, to attain enlightenment. Because YOU is an illusion.

 

Did you really think it was going to be so easy as just find a great teacher and work as hard as you possibly can? How many monks in the world have what they believe are the most enlightened teachers in the world and dedicate their entire lives, 10-12 hours a day to an intensity of spiritual practice we can not even imagine in our lifestyles, and yet still they do not experience enlightenment? Tao moves when Tao wants to move. Not when you do the proper sequence of prayers and prostrations. Do you really believe there is a formula for enlightenment? "Here are the steps, just put your nose to the grind and one day it will happen". Protestant American work ethic, that is the ticket.

 

To be clear, I am not even warning against the desire to go to China and study and practice diligently with competent teachers. I am merely addressing the framework in which that desire is held by the mind. The urge to seek, the urge to meditate, the urge to find God is at best an expression of God's decision to move through and flower in human form. The best thing a human can do is nothing. Yet nothing cannot be done. So do what you will.

 

Sean

[DentyDao]

The best thing a human can do is nothing. Yet nothing cannot be done. So do what you will.

 

Sean

 

 

 

Thank for clarifying your position. I think we pretty much agree honestly. My only point would be that, while it is certainly not entirely up to us, we can use our own wisdom and the guidence of those who have more experience to go deeper more effectively, without so much struggle. Obviously having a spiritual practice helps and I think each one of us will believe they have to find the best system for them. The idea that my approach or the approach of David and his teachers is "formulaic" or less realistic is misleading.

 

Part of the idea behind Buddhist and Daoist philosophy is this idea that some things are under our control and that we do have freedom of choice, to a degree; over our selves. And the decisions we make are important and meaningful, to us. Ultimately, what happens is outside of the confines of ego, but The Buddha taught that Liberation is in the palm of YOUR HAND, not some great unknown. It's about self a mastery, wisdom and understanding. Your right, the rest is in God's hands.

[Smile]

I thought non-clinging was the heart of Buddha's teachings.

 

But to come back to the topic of this thread, I believe (note: it's my personal view not directed at anyone):

 

- the whole idea of paying for someone be sent as an observer to validate what David's students were sharing is low class. It shows disrespect for the path and what it has to offer and disrespect for the teacher.

 

-making a documentary about the whole thing will not serve any purpose but will attract lots of half-assed students with wrong intentions.

 

-In the old times every school had a method to separate students who actually have potential and want it really bad, and those who are not ready. Martial art schools, for instance, had really low stances and physically demanding forms for beginners that served the purpose of warding off those who lacked desire, strength of character and will, etc. I believe money is a very important factor here and shows that you're really committed to the teaching and willing to sacrifice your wealth and time, and also give the system a chance. And so, if one is not willing to pay in full for the teachings, it means they don't want it bad enough. "I would be interested to go" is not going to cut it.

 

To conclude what I was saying, I believe what we are doing is disrespectful. Not only to David and his teachers, but to ourselves most of all.

 

 

 

 

 

p.s. Pietro, all your links lead to pages with big sciency words in them that make me confused . Let me know your schedule and stuff- will be nice hang out with you.

[Cameron]

Max,

 

For all intents and purpouses Sean D is Davids representative here. I mean he says he isn't(I think?)But let's be honest, he runs the website for David's students and is an inner circle student of David(Was invited to the special ceremony where Taoists all over China adopted David or something,right?)

 

It was Sean D's idea in the first place(He said we should sponsor Yoda to go) I thought it would be fun..yes fun..as in not some karmically fucking heavy situation where Buddhas and Immortals for the next 10,000 aeons are going to spit on you if you fuck up..but fun.

 

Like Plato's trip to see Master Nan or something, right?

 

Whether everyone gets behind this idea or not I have no attachment to and to be honest could care less. But I think it would be a cool, fun thing to do. The reality is most of us don't have the extra time or extra money to go out of our way for a month to go to China and just believe what some total stranger on an interent discussion board says is the truth.

 

So basically..my view is if we sent someone we all know and trust..whoever that would be..then they came back and tell us if this is for real and it isn't a scam or a repackaged version of "Taoist Alchemy".

 

But no big deal, it's not like it's up to you or me.

 

Hope you have fun in the Denmark class and achieve whatever goal your seeking though

[MatthewQi]

You do not need to travel to china to find what is already right under your nose. Regards, Matt

[DentyDao]

[Cameron]

Oh well, it was a fun idea, even if it was "low class"

[Smile]

Cam,

Not you, just the idea. I still love you man.

[spyrelx]

For my part, I'd just like to say I think those last few posts were a lovely way to end this thread.

 

Max, I agreed with you completely.

 

And, Cameron, I agreed with you as well.

 

And Sean, I thought you were right too (and I also think that was about the nicest, most normal post you've ever written here).

 

Hell, I couldn't even argue with Matthew.

 

I'm not joking, I mean all of this. Thank you all.

[Cameron]

All good

 

So when is the trip to Europe for foundation training?

[Smile]

I dunno yet. I got to be approved first because of keeping company with hoodlums like yourself, etc.

[Cameron]

So does your intuition tell you this is the thing to do? You don't agree with Bodri/Nan that your better off just doing emptiness meditation and letting things go naturally?

 

I read on David's forum that David doesn't think Master Nan is enlightened after meeting him?

 

Not trying to start any drama-seriously-but how do you reconcile being such a big follower of Master Nan and then wanting to train with David after he said that? Ime genuinly interested as I have a hard time with that. For example, I had a pretty good friend and teacher say he thought Adyashanti said something not enlightened after which I basically stopped studying with him. It's not that he doesn't have the right to his own view but this was another guy I was studying with and I have to priorotize(I consider Adya my main teacher).

It's like I wouldn't study BK Frantzis method and HT method together as they basically say the other is inferior.

David said more..he flat out wrote Master Nan is not enlightened or a sage(Xien). Where do these opposing views meet? Or you want to go learn the practice yourself to find out?

[DentyDao]

So does your intuition tell you this is the thing to do? You don't agree with Bodri/Nan that your better off just doing emptiness meditation and letting things go naturally?

 

I read on David's forum that David doesn't think Master Nan is enlightened after meeting him?

 

That's not the version I read. I think David's main critique is that Master Nan's Knowledge of Daoism in a broad sense is some what limited, but that he is a very respectable teacher and so are his teachers in Taiwan.

[Cameron]

I don't want to make an issue out of this. But I am pretty sure David said Master Nan is not enlightened and am pretty sure Max knows what I am talking about as he responded in that thread.

 

Again, no big deal I guess..I don't think anyone is getting karmically fucked for stating there opinions..but was just interested how Max viewed that.

 

It's really not a big deal if people don't want to get into this as niether Master Nan or David are my teachers, was just interested in the overall approach of studying with spiritual teachers who teach diffferent stuff or don't really think the other is "all that".

 

ps. I just reviewed the thread and definetly David said Master Nan is not enlightened. No judgement on my part I don't have a clue as I have never met Master Nan or David and wouldnt' even know the criteria David uses to judge a true "Xian".