Is it as you say, Pat? Does all come from within?

[sunshine]

you see what I mean - in both examples you're led deeper into yourself with feedback from a fellow human being...

 

Yep. This makes complete sense (and shows exactly why I wouldn't make fun of you ) but in that case it is me who has to refer back on the topic of "David" as you said:

 

In fact the one problem I have with David's system is that you anchor yourself to the master to such an extent... or at least that's the impression I got from his essays... What I mean by 'anchor yourself' is when you search for the truth, instead of going to the deepest core of You, you're meant to go to your master... So this becomes an inside - outside sort of game - do you search for the Truth inside or in your master...

 

See. You meet him at a seminar... then you go home and practice... then you meet him again at a seminar and hopefully get corrected... meanwhile one has to option to ask questions on a forum...

 

in how far is that so different from what you yourself "promote" ???

 

I ask this out of curiosity, as I do not yet fully get the point! (and please everybody recognize: to me this thread is not about David...)

 

 

Harry

[Smile]

"Come' on, man. The truth is in yourself. If you go inside and dig deep enough THEN you will know how the proper techniques to address your oponent. If you just dig deep enough inside yourself the truth about Dim Mak will be revealed to you... and if you find some truth drop by and I then tell you if you found it or not... go and look inside"

Actually I can see it happening, but it would take an awfully long time.

[Wayfarer64]

I'm not sure how this became about David again. But since I have been reminded that I do not know enough about him to comment on him in any meaningful way - I shall remain out of that fray this time. I disagree with the analysis of what I may or may not be able to glean from what I have seen and read here and on the foundation site.... Nonetheless I have usually tried to caste my aspersions with a wide net.

 

For me ...It isn't about muddling through the dark to find techniques that will offer some sense of accomplishment, (but little insight into yourself and what is is to be a human being). Refering to any and all techniques that do not enclude deep meditation and the requisit joy of living as a great gift to cherish...

 

For me it is about learning what it is to be you and using that to become the best you that ya can manage moment by moment situation by situation interaction by interaction...The being here now thing-but not as a cliche as a way to attain a freedom from strictures that inhibit our natural growth...

 

I know that sounds like some hippy BS and on some levels it has to be BS !! That is part of its reality in the minds of many, so it takes on the shape those minds give it. I think this is the nature of mind and no matter what we say to each other it is the other mind that does the cognitive work to place it in a frame of reference. Be it Buddhist or Taoist -wiccan you name it. This to me is a big part of the picture... we shape our own realities. A good teacher can open doors and supply breakthroughs. A poor teacher will open doors and leave ya hangin' because they can't see your forest for their trees , as it were.

 

All tools are viable... all of us are able to do what it takes to become ourselves on our path in the Tao. Rid ourselves of the false notions that keep us in the dark first and rid ourselves of the phoney baggage that is forced upon us. In the end if we succeed we will laugh at the notion of being Taoist or Zarothustrian or anything other than whole and part of a larger whole that is in itself a part of ... well you get it - we are not very significant in the big picture are we?

 

Maybe maybe not. It seems to me if we connect to the Tao as we bandy it about here - we will be part of the big picture (in a small way)...

 

So I do think we are on our own for the most part and should be wary of those who claim they got it and we can get it from them -particularly if the getting is at high cost and is very unclear if not often changing in the discriptions of exactly what is being offered.

 

Figure out what it is you need to do, what ya gotta do to get where ya gotta go. There is a path that is yours alone and it can be a doozy walking that razors' edge...

[freeform]

.

Edited December 18, 2019 by freeform

[Wayfarer64]

 

In one of the essays there is a whole thing about secrets and truths - complicated stuff - the point is - the master has some knowledge and it is by revealing this knowledge at appropriate times that the apprentice progresses... So firstly it seems that the knowledge is conceptual (mind-based) and is objective and the master has it and gives it to you...

 

The other way is the master is empty and receptive with no conceptual knowledge, but corrects you and presses the right buttons for you to look deeper inside yourself.

 

Good Teaching seems to me - to be a combination of the two... that both aspects are tools for a teacher to use in order to help the student - Are they mutually exclusive??

[gendao]

Let me just say this. When we develop wisdom, what might appear dogmatic, "Jesus was the son of God" becomes a metaphor for a deeper reality. The idea that we are all potential sons and daugthers of God or Dao is very true. At the same time, we need to be humble enough to except that the idea that eden or the garden or heaven or whatever is not "this" current condition, but also a story that reflects a deeper reality. I believe we have to seek it to find it, and part of what makes it so worth while is the fact that it is so challenging.

 

The issue of Traditional Daoist cultivation vs. western views on the subject, could have and should be a seperate issue. Here to me there are some clear misunderstandings that hopefully will come to light over the years, but again, this is a discussion on a seperate issue.

 

S

Well, I would love a separate thread on this then - the 2 paradigms of Taoism vs Christianity and how they fit together if someone believes in both?

 

I mean, I think Christianity in particular is an inkblot that can be interpreted in many ways to suit your own beliefs - so I am curious what those beliefs actually are for "Taoist Christians" like David. Like, do Taoists really need a personal savior in Jesus? Because that would seem to be one sticking point between the 2 paradigms - whereas various others could be resolved more easily through creative interpretations.

 

Like, I don't think John Chang is remotely an orthodox Christian, if he even still claims to be one. What I recall reading is that he was raised as one but during his adult retreat in the mountains was running around asking if "God" exists until he got a meteor hurled at him! Which made him conclude there might be some vastly higher being, but he had no idea if that was "God" or not. This would seem to paint him more as an agnostic or deist, not necessarily a Christian.

[DentyDao]

Vortex,

 

You have answered your own question. When a master like John Chang prays to God, God actually shows up. So, what was his reaction to this experience. He says he doesn't make judgements or form beliefs around such things. If you read the book you know what happened. An incredibly powerfull being of light desended from the heavens with such force it woke John out of deep meditation and created a large crater in the ground around John's camp in the wilderness. This is the same holy fire and light that Moses, and others, met in his search. God is real, but also beyond our understanding.

 

Anyway, as you know, many would bow down and worship such a being, but John did no such thing. he just stayed with this being for three days and asked many questions, not making a judgements or offering his devotion. Who knows if it was some avatar or what. Even John does not really know. But he does know that something is listening out there and there are forces that we don't understand that guide and watch over.

 

During the course ofthose three days, much wa revealed to John about what it means to be a human being. Some things he has never shared with anyone, not even friends.

 

My point is not to get into a discussion here, but simply to illustrate that what the reality is just IS. Belief or opinion really doesn't enter into it. John Chang is a devoted Christian and goes to church regularly. Does he believe Jesus is the only savior? Probably not, but I don't think even Jesus intended his life to be interprited that way. The ignorance of the massess has nothing to do with reality, but also know that people with very simple beliefs can reach the heaven too. It's really not about having the right politically correct version of the gospell. It's about what is between you and 'your lord' whatever that is to you, period. There's really little to discuss on the matter in my opinion.

[gendao]

My point is not to get into a discussion here, but simply to illustrate that what the reality is just IS. Belief or opinion really doesn't enter into it. John Chang is a devoted Christian and goes to church regularly. Does he believe Jesus is the only savior? Probably not, but I don't think even Jesus intended his life to be interprited that way. The ignorance of the massess has nothing to do with reality, but also know that people with very simple beliefs can reach the heaven too. It's really not about having the right politically correct version of the gospell. It's about what is between you and 'your lord' whatever that is to you, period. There's really little to discuss on the matter in my opinion.

Good point, some of what Jesus said has been interpreted as saying everyone needed him as an exclusive savior...but really those could be interpreted in different ways too.

 

I think John technically fits the definition of agnostic more than Christian, because I think even he agrees that we are not at a high enough level to really KNOW the answers to all those really big questions. And to pretend otherwise is unrealistic.

 

But do we know enough that there's probably some type of higher being(s) that we can pray to? Perhaps.

[Wayfarer64]

Sean, This thread was addressed to me about a topic I brought up in a far less interesting thread. I am again wondering how you and yr pal Vortx have changed it to a thread about Chang/DSV...Please stick to the topic if possible -

 

To Review : It is about the nature of finding one's own path and escewing the middle-man...between ourselves and our own spiritual link to the sacred and holy essence so many here are looking for in whatever form that may take...

 

It is a basic question concerning religious spiritual practice.

 

In the Christian tradition the likes of Martin Luther became disallusioned by going to Rome and being deeply saddened by the use of indugences taken by the church and thus magically granting people that which they sought on whatever spiritual needs they had.

 

I have claimed in other threads that I see those activities to be similar as to the gist of what I see you are promoting. That is where/why we began a seperate discussion, only abstractly related to you and yr teacher. It was done specifically not to be connected to you and yr teacher.

 

And now we are discussing the various methodologies of teachers and the effects these methods have in the transmission of wisdom/knowledge.

 

This thread is not about the nature of Changs' religiosity.

 

Either keep up or start yr own thread on yr own topics of interest.

[DentyDao]

Good point, some of what Jesus said has been interpreted as saying everyone needed him as an exclusive savior...but really those could be interpreted in different ways too.

 

I think John technically fits the definition of agnostic more than Christian, because I think even he agrees that we are not at a high enough level to really KNOW the answers to all those really big questions. And to pretend otherwise is unrealistic.

 

But do we know enough that there's probably some type of higher being(s) that we can pray to? Perhaps.

Why make a judgement. John says he's a Cristian and follows the christian ideal. Who the hell are we to start debating what his beliefs are and are not and what difference would it make?

 

Are we really looking to someone we have only read about and asking these questions? I mean what is the point of that. If we really wanted to know the truth we would go ask John Chang, anything else just speaks about itself. John has said he believes in God with a capital G. I just take him at his word. Who cares about the rest it has no meaning to us and it can't possibly.

 

That's my feeling.

 

 

I have claimed in other threads that I see those activities to be similar as to the gist of what I see you are promoting. That is where/why we began a seperate discussion, only abstractly related to you and yr teacher. It was done specifically not to be connected to you and yr teacher.

Sign up for Mo Pai Training today. Operators are standing by to take your money NOW!

 

Edited May 12, 2007 by seandenty

[gendao]

Why make a judgement. John says he's a Cristian and follows the christian ideal. Who the hell are we to start debating what his beliefs are and are not and what difference would it make?

 

Are we really looking to someone we have only read about and asking these questions? I mean what is the point of that. If we really wanted to know the truth we would go ask John Chang, anything else just speaks about itself. John has said he believes in God with a capital G. I just take him at his word. Who cares about the rest it has no meaning to us and it can't possibly.

Well again, I think we can only be as precise as the language is...

 

Lots of religions believe in some type of "God." Although "God" is an Anglo word that wasn't even in the original Bible. Therefore, "God" has a vague definition to begin with...and simply believing in "God" does not make you a "Christian," either. But if John says he currently still is a Christian and follows the "Christian ideal" - ok. Although I would still be curious as to exactly what his definition of "Christianity" and the "Christian ideal" is. Because that can vary widely - amongst both "Christians" and "non-Christians" alike.

 

And we can't just go ask him now because I believe he has retreated to Borneo?

 

Sorry for the tangent, Wayfarer...

Edited May 12, 2007 by vortex

[Wayfarer64]

Why make a judgement. John says he's a Cristian and follows the christian ideal. Who the hell are we to start debating what his beliefs are and are not and what difference would it make?

 

Are we really looking to someone we have only read about and asking these questions? I mean what is the point of that. If we really wanted to know the truth we would go ask John Chang, anything else just speaks about itself. John has said he believes in God with a capital G. I just take him at his word. Who cares about the rest it has no meaning to us and it can't possibly.

 

That's my feeling.

Sign up for Mo Pai Training today. Operators are standing by to take your money NOW!

 

 

I for one am not amused

your constant inability to refrain from disrupting interesting topics with yr off-topic BS & shilling is just amazing .

you should be ashamed of yourself doing this after disrupting this site so often before

 

If you persist... there will never be peace offered or accepted by me again.

you have once again shown yourself to be untrustworthy.

 

When I get to the truth and expose you...Or more accuratly allow you to expose yourself then you buckle under... you send me a PM pleading for a truce... I accept

 

one day later you are at it again, shilling yr self-serving BS. I repeat... PLEASE_hear the politeness?- start yr own thread about Chang's Christianity or whatever other BS you want... that is not what this one is about.

[DentyDao]

This is a reponse to Vortex's question,

 

Well again, I think we can only be as precise as the language is...

 

Lots of religions believe in some type of "God." Although "God" is an Anglo word that wasn't even in the original Bible. Therefore, "God" has a vague definition to begin with...and simply believing in "God" does not make you a "Christian," either. But if John says he currently still is a Christian and follows the "Christian ideal" - ok. Although I would still be curious as to exactly what his definition of "Christianity" and the "Christian ideal" is. Because that can vary widely - amongst both "Christians" and "non-Christians" alike.

 

And we can't just go ask him now because I believe he has retreated to Borneo?

 

 

You might be right, but again what is the point. These big questions are beyond the scope of a forum. If you what to practice Taoism, start at the beginning and create your Dan. Than you can worry about God and whether Dao comes from within or whatever.

 

The Dao is within is a bit of a misnomer. My Buddhism teacher says this is like reading the Newyork times and claiming you are actually reading the London times. You first would have to go get the London Times. Then you can say you are actually reading it.

 

This is the basic problem of people who think they have already arrived somewhere, thinking they since they are from the Dao that there is no practice and nothing to accomplish. Just be in the moment, right. Who ever can really be in the moment, I mean really still the mind and totally let go at will. They are really immortal. It's just that doing this takes years of cultivation and the right person to guide you there. very few can do it alone.

 

If it is accomplished in this way of just letting go, it's a process that can take decades even with a good master. Or even lifetimes. Human birth is so rare, why wouldn't we seek out a master? even if we decide to go it alone, at least we have the added benifit of having explored a new perspective.

 

Here's what so great about Taoist Cultivation, it's more efficient. Work smarter not harder. But of course, many need to still figure out if they really want to be enlightened at all. I mean this life is pretty amazing sometimes.

 

I think we all realize that Enlightenment is just a word. It was a phrase used by the Buddhas and others before them. It just means know your self. Caste a light on your self or be a light unto your self. Because, after all you are the only 'thing' that you can really truly know. You are the only world expert on you. This does not mean that you don't need a master. Quite the opposite and this is a big mistake in my opinion.

 

The depth of really knowing your self is vaste and deeper than any of us can possibly realize. Therefor is it wise to seek the guidence of a master.

 

A WayFarer into the light and out of the Darkness of ignorance.

 

Some people think they are enlightened or Buddhas already. These ideas need to be skillfully examined. The Buddha said it is pride that says we don't need help from outside ourselves, that WE alone are the only ones qualified to assist ourselves. This is the pride and ignorance of the ego that says WE have arrived and we know it all.

 

It's the idea of the Shen and the Bodhi Mind which are interchangable terms. The dreamer that is dreaming to be you. Your true face. It is only through communion with this source which is OUTSIDE the self that we can escape the fisherman's net that Lao Tzu spoke of.

 

Think on it. It is the same metaphor in Christainity, "For when the will of the host is aligned with the guest, is one with it, then the lord reveals himself." The father and the son and the holy ghost.

 

Actually I think we are all in agreement on many of these points. The only suggestion I would make is to find a good guide. They really help you see things a lot faster and without all the blind alleys. Plus the really high level beings out there are waiting for qualified students to develop the ability to receive higher teachings. I think most of us are too pround to even learn the basics, which requires humbling your self in front of another being besides you and saying okay, you know something I want. Most of us are repulsed by the idea at first. The once we get over the embarresment of realizing how fucked we are, we just get on with the learning.

 

This is the first quality that a master in any tradition or school will look for, the ability to swallow your pride and get past your embarresment and receive the teachings. It's called sincerity or reverence.

 

I for one am not amused

I was staying on topic, I thought. I can promote my school as much as I like whenever I like and who says I have to always be exactly on topic. That's not a rule of this forum.

Edited May 12, 2007 by seandenty

[gendao]

You might be right, but again what is the point. These big questions are beyond the scope of a forum. If you what to practice Taoism, start at the beginning and create your Dan. Than you can worry about God and whether Dao comes from within or whatever.

 

It's the idea of the Shen and the Bodhi Mind which are interchangable terms. The dreamer that is dreaming to be you. Your true face. It is only through communion with this source which is OUTSIDE the self that we can escape the fisherman's net that Lao Tzu spoke of.

I agree. My point is basically that those big questions are not only beyond the scope of this forum, but for most of us mortals at the level that we're at. Hence, the term "agnostic" which basically means "uncertain knowledge." And to believe you know any more than you do is fooling yourself.

 

Interesting idea there. The Dunhuang scrolls contain Ch'an techniques of "viewing the mind" and examining it for shape and color, etc. The point of this exercise (I believe) ironically to get you OUT of your mind into a tri-state of non-thought, non-conceptualizing and not engaging the mind. Basically, an eye cannot see itself. So, if you are told to see your eye, then you must not be using your eye.

[DentyDao]

I agree. My point is basically that those big questions are not only beyond the scope of this forum, but for most of us mortals at the level that we're at. Hence, the term "agnostic" which basically means "uncertain knowledge." And to believe you know any more than you do is fooling yourself.

 

Interesting idea there. The Dunhuang scrolls contain Ch'an techniques of "viewing the mind" and examining it for shape and color, etc. The point of this exercise (I believe) ironically to get you OUT of your mind into a tri-state of non-thought, non-conceptualizing and not engaging the mind. Basically, an eye cannot see itself. So, if you are told to see your eye, then you must not be using your eye.

I do see your points and couldn't agree more basically. I don't know if John Chang is an agnosic or if that would even limit his ability to be a "true" Christian

 

About the Ch'an method, it's the same in Dzogchen and also in Taoism, to enter this nonconceptual state of no-self awareness, is the first step in the process. To then allow yourself to remain perfectly stabalized in this state for about two hours is the first basic accomplishment, as I understand it. Once you can enter this non dual state for four hours at will any day of the week, you are ready to begin formally practicing cultivation. The Dantien has been Created. This takes about three to four years with the proper methods and a qualified teacher.

 

If you have a good teacher and a good method, you actually don't need a master around all the time to succeed. Of course it helps, but the master really comes in later when you progress and start getting closer to Tai Ji or the real joining of ying and yang qi that happens at level four. This is just Lei Shan Dao, there are other methods to join yin and yang with different effects and results; Yang Shen Dao is one; this is also the known as the classic immortal fetus that we read about in the alchemical texts. The goal for both however is the same, liberation.

 

That's it for me today, I have to go study for my real estate exams. By Gents. Oh and do feel free tp pop on over to the foundation forum for your T-shirts and Lei Sahn Dao Videos...

Edited May 12, 2007 by seandenty

[Wayfarer64]

I find that most people are able to humble themselves all to readily... To Parental admonitions when young, influential teachers and most other authority figures through life. In fact, most people are far too humble to even approach the notion that they can impower themselves in life -that is in itself a very American notion for the most part.

 

From what I have experienced, the evident lack of identity outside of ones' role in life is most true in the many Asian cultures in which I have spent a couple years. Individualism is very western and unequivicably American in modern mind-sets....

 

Giving up the self or ego is not an issue in most of Asia, where there is very little evident by and large. People are what they do and in fact exist as individuals mostly in the context of their families. This is changing as it "modernizes".

 

I do not believe in any such levels of beings much less higher or lower levels of beings. I see people as being awake or asleep as conscious beings. Whatever hierarchies are claimed to exist then get catagorized to be offered as commodities by those who know of them but do not have them. These people - use those who are awakened as icons to be used as objects of vereration to then bring other less awake folks to be taken to and venerated for lots of money. This using our fellow men's ignorance for personal gain-is the basis of commerce not spiritual questing. But it is used for it to keep itself going.

 

This is so in almost every system I have seen.

 

Because those who are not awake do not know how to deal with what they see in those who are, they wish to participate in wakefullness or challange it. This is very confusing to everyone. We see there is something we can reach for but know not how. So some do what they know how to do and commoditize the objects of veneration.

 

The funny part is - those who are being venerated couldn't care less - either way what happens happens -they are done with the bother of it all and let the world come to them or ignore tham as it will. Christ let himself be nailed up for instance -the powers that were just couldn't deal with him. That is the saddest of all mainstream enlightenment stories.

 

Unfortunitly, some who are dozing as it were or partially awakened, also have an under-developed sense of compassion and oneness. They think that it is just they, that which they feel to be a seperate personality and themselves alone that awoke. They are merely a vihicle for spirit, but when this knowledge comes to them, some try to take advantage of it by creating sytems whereby they claim that they can share these facits of our common reality.

 

Smoke and mirrors... the more hoops we are made to jump through in a system the more believable it is. Praying five times a day, roseries, sitting sat-sang, retention of jing - are just hoops to jump through.

Sometimes these activities serve to awaken us -more often they serve to dull us into submission to those who would misuse our trust.

Edited May 12, 2007 by Wayfarer64

[DentyDao]

I added one thing about the Dan tien in my last post that you should read. It will help clarify what I was trying to point out. It also showws why the teacher can be such a useful tool.

[gendao]

To then allow yourself to remain perfectly stabalized in this state for about two hours is the first basic accomplishment, as I understand it. Once you can enter this non dual state for four hours at will any day of the week, you are ready to begin formally practicing cultivation.

Pffbtt...no problem!

 

 

Ok seriously, is anyone here near this level of cultivation? Just curious?

[Smile]

Ok seriously, is anyone here near this level of cultivation? Just curious?

Maybe an hour and a half sitting with mind one-pointed.

[DentyDao]

If someone like Max continues this practice well, he will eventually reach the entry point of the first stage, there are many name (Dhyana, Samadhi, etc.). I'm not versed on all the Buddhist terms, not something we discuss in Dzogchen openly, but anyway, the mind will become absorbed in the Shen to a greater degree and he will begin to go so deeply into meditation that the breath and the heart beat stop. This is actual meditation, or at least we can say it's beyond one pointed consentration. Everything else is considered a preperation for this state. It's quite remarkable to think that we can train the mind to let go to this degree.

 

At this stage, some people begin to develop abilities powers, most of it useless. Also it is extremely important to have a master to guide you, as you may well know; thoughout this process, at least in every tradition I have been exposed to. The practitioner will be confronted by many demons/obstecals; personal, imagined, whatever. It's a dangerous process at this level that just illustrates all the more the importance and benifit of having a guide.

 

This is just a higher degree of BE HERE NOW. Which isn't a concept that can be fully apreciated until you understand what this process really entails. It's a true letting go. The body is of course clincally alive even though no machine or device would find a pulse or detectable breath, there are many stories of meditators being buried alive. Some of that have studied with the HT know that Chia's teachers teacher was a yogi who would leave his body for months at a time to go deeply into the Shen and refine the immortal fetus. Sadly the knowledge of those practices do not make up what we now know as the HT.

 

Think about the word ego. It meens the sense that 'I' exist. But who are we really? Are we this body? No. Are we this mind? No. We or 'I' is only a dream. Who is having this dream? The Shen. The true nature of your mind. The Bodhi mind. To really let go or to really be here now is to be one with the Shen and one with your true nature. Who here has reached this state?

 

I want to introduce a little Buddhist philosophy. I'm not enlightened or anything. But this exercise is just to illustrate a point.

 

So this raises the question, what about this body? What about this mind? They are the result of your thinking only, they are the illusion created by grasping. I am my body and I am in control, is just a dream.

 

So how do we get to the real us? Letting go. But, just wanting to let go is not enough. We have to direct the dream. This is the gift of the dreamer. The ability to change the dream.

 

In the whole universe, there is one remote control; that is your thinking. Change your thinking and the whole universe will change. How hard is it to change your thinking? Very, very hard. Like chopping down a mountain with the back of your hand.

 

All Daoist practice is the art of directing the mind to it's source. The master or guru or teacher is at the source, shining the lamp that will point the way. That's all. Nothing fancy or anything to get excited about. But for those souls who are ready to take that journey the master simply provides a road map showing the way. The student in turn must have complete trust and faith in the masters abilities and put his life in the masters hands, not an easy thing to do. That is why the master shows his true nature only to those who are ready and only to those who are willing to let go. Again this goes for all traditions, and even applies whether your master is another human being, or just Dao or God for the truly fortunite ones to have such a grand relationship.

 

This whole thing is not about creating fear and having power. Any master worth the name knows that. But this idea of complete surrender is something that happens way down the line in your practice and development. Very few are really ready to take on such a task. And many who do fail and the ego takes over again. When theis happens and the student has developed some powers, it can spell big trouble for the student. Especially if those powers are missused.

 

You can imagine. One of John Chang's students, not that John is enlightened, was kicked out of the school for winning hundred of thousands of dollars gambling. He was using his gifts to make money which is strictly forbiddon is Mo Pai. I had to take this oath myself and I can tell you they take it very seriously. Or even worse, people get hurt or the student himself gets killed.

 

It's also a good point to make that the masters have no judgements about those who don't wish to be involved in such endeavors. At least the ones who are genuine. A simple life lived well is worth a thousand lives of reckless striving for enlightenment.

 

Anyway, good points on all sides in this discussion. I would say, if you are going for Daoist cultivation, get a teacher. And, if not, just enjoy life. Either way you are bound to have good times and bad and either way you are probably coming back a few more times at least.

 

As the Dali Lama says, just be good.

Edited May 13, 2007 by seandenty

[Cameron]

Wow, pretty interesting post Sean. You say you teach grade school kids? Why not go all the way and get a PhD in Taoist or Buddhist studies? Then you can really teach what you love and are interested in. Imagine teaching Taoism and Buddhism at a major American University by the time your a Professor you'll probably be so hooked up with the Masters in China you could organize special study programs for your students for credit.

 

Spend a semester in China with Wang Liping and Professor Denty!

 

Cam, stuck at home trying to figure out college math.

[Cameron]

I find that most people are able to humble themselves all to readily... To Parental admonitions when young, influential teachers and most other authority figures through life. In fact, most people are far too humble to even approach the notion that they can impower themselves in life -that is in itself a very American notion for the most part.

 

From what I have experienced, the evident lack of identity outside of ones' role in life is most true in the many Asian cultures in which I have spent a couple years. Individualism is very western and unequivicably American in modern mind-sets....

 

Giving up the self or ego is not an issue in most of Asia, where there is very little evident by and large. People are what they do and in fact exist as individuals mostly in the context of their families. This is changing as it "modernizes".

 

I do not believe in any such levels of beings much less higher or lower levels of beings. I see people as being awake or asleep as conscious beings. Whatever hierarchies are claimed to exist then get catagorized to be offered as commodities by those who know of them but do not have them. These people - use those who are awakened as icons to be used as objects of vereration to then bring other less awake folks to be taken to and venerated for lots of money. This using our fellow men's ignorance for personal gain-is the basis of commerce not spiritual questing. But it is used for it to keep itself going.

 

This is so in almost every system I have seen.

 

Because those who are not awake do not know how to deal with what they see in those who are, they wish to participate in wakefullness or challange it. This is very confusing to everyone. We see there is something we can reach for but know not how. So some do what they know how to do and commoditize the objects of veneration.

 

The funny part is - those who are being venerated couldn't care less - either way what happens happens -they are done with the bother of it all and let the world come to them or ignore tham as it will. Christ let himself be nailed up for instance -the powers that were just couldn't deal with him. That is the saddest of all mainstream enlightenment stories.

 

Unfortunitly, some who are dozing as it were or partially awakened, also have an under-developed sense of compassion and oneness. They think that it is just they, that which they feel to be a seperate personality and themselves alone that awoke. They are merely a vihicle for spirit, but when this knowledge comes to them, some try to take advantage of it by creating sytems whereby they claim that they can share these facits of our common reality.

 

Smoke and mirrors... the more hoops we are made to jump through in a system the more believable it is. Praying five times a day, roseries, sitting sat-sang, retention of jing - are just hoops to jump through.

Sometimes these activities serve to awaken us -more often they serve to dull us into submission to those who would misuse our trust.

 

 

Interesting stuff Wayfarer. My teacher Adyashanti says the only real difference between someone like Buddha or Ramana Maharishi and us is they are awake and we(most of us) are asleep. And if you think any of those guys had anything special that you don't have it could take lifetimes to get off that trip.

 

I do agree with Sean D that you probably need a teacher(there might be exceptions of course). An enlightened teacher can give a level of feedback and a recognition of awakeness that would take a long time to get to on your own. Unless your a spiritual genius or something.

[Wayfarer64]

Interesting stuff Wayfarer. My teacher Adyashanti says the only real difference between someone like Buddha or Ramana Maharishi and us is they are awake and we(most of us) are asleep. And if you think any of those guys had anything special that you don't have it could take lifetimes to get off that trip.

 

I do agree with Sean D that you probably need a teacher(there might be exceptions of course). An enlightened teacher can give a level of feedback and a recognition of awakeness that would take a long time to get to on your own. Unless your a spiritual genius or something.

 

Thank you Cam for the in a nut-shell treatment here -and I do agree -We may want ( but I reject the word need here) a good teacher -for ANYTHING you want to know about... learning from others is a wonderful aspect of all growth and an aid.

 

But when it comes to understanding our own sacred natures I believe that it is just the hard and sometimes scary work of sincere introspection that will lead us anywhere and everywhere available. We do not need anything but the sincere will to find-(or awaken to)- our place in this life-time on this planet. What some call--our way in the Tao as it were- and then be/do our best.

 

The rest is all just bells and whistles and gimicks to awaken us.

It has to be within each of us or none of these efforts would make any sense to me.

 

I also think that our animal natures - our body-mind as it were needs to be controlled if any real growth can take place. In that perhaps a good teacheris a big help. As long as teaching is direct and to the point-like an alarm clock-it is time to wake up- you came to me to get awoken and I have a way to do it...Otherwise don;t waste yr time.

Edited May 13, 2007 by Wayfarer64

[Cameron]

There is a quote from Zen Master Dogen that goes something like "To say that I am the master and you are the student is the way of demons". I think what he was trying to say is the truly enlightened have no attachments and therefore no need to be seen as superior or better than the student. One trait I have noticed I am attracted to are spiritual teachers who -moment to moment-are open to learning as much from there students as the student from the teacher. They are not into the "I know more than you" trip.

 

I am always astonished how the Advieta teachers I study with like Adyashanti and Jeanni Zandi can meet a student right at where they are at. Really a true encounter of mind and heart to eachother, and flow with that.

 

I wouldn't presume David Verdesi's "Masters" such as Wang Liping don't have that same childlike innocence and openness.

 

But perhaps they wear the "clothes of tradition" to protect there lineage for a reason. I simply can't speak about things I don't really know and not familiar with.

 

May we all see through the viels of illusion and encounter our true nature in this lifetime(if that's what you want)

 

[Wayfarer64]

 

I wouldn't presume David Verdesi's "Masters" such as Wang Liping don't have that same childlike innocence and openness.

 

But perhaps they wear the "clothes of tradition" to protect there lineage for a reason. I simply can't speak about things I don't really know and not familiar with.

 

May we all see through the viels of illusion and encounter our true nature in this lifetime(if that's what you want)

 

 

Thanks Cam you are right and true in this.

 

I should not judge a teacher by his students, when he probably doesn't realize how those who are using him as their icon of choice may comport themselves in his name. He may not even be aware that he has become the stuff of dreams for so many in cyberspace, due to the efforts of others.

 

I doubt that Jesus would want to take credit for the crusades or Mohammed for the wahabbi's tactics. I doubt that they were the real instigators of the many atrocities done in their name through the centuries. It was those who warped their teachings and created mayhem that are often remembered by history, while the original teachings are not transmitted with any varacity.

 

This is sort of my point. Go to the source. A great teacher can be a great source, but the actual knowledge - or that which becomes part of your consciousness will inevitably be understood and even created within yourself and the recognition of your own truth ringing like a bell in yr heart of hearts... (that may be a bit too florid but hey i'm a poetic kinda guy)...