The Goal

[Arkady Shadursky]

Daoism is a family of faiths and beliefs tied by source texts subject matter and historical association.

 

Thank you. I totally agree and accept.)

 

Absolutely)

 

Thank you very much, now we clearly see what is your approach to the Neidan   

 

Ish, I can attest to the demonstrable results of the school. I was very sick and close to death, hospitalized twice and suffered from a complete body shutdown the 2nd time I was in the hospital. After I began Daogong, within the first week of training my symptoms improved. Every so often I have a bad day, but now I am able to function like a completely normal person and I have only been training for a little over 1 year. No other system has been able to do that for me, not SFQ, not Vajrasattva Qigong, not Yang Style Taiji and not even Buddhist Medical Qigong that I learned from a temple. There is definitely something within this tradition that sets it apart from anything else. Whereas 90% of modern qigong is imbalanced in some way and can only help certain people, Daogong (which is level -1) can benefit anyone. It can benefit anyone because it is totally balanced in all aspects.

 

The above is one of the many examples of the Daoist practice results in our Center. In our work we do not use any faith / religion approaches.

 

---

Best Regards,

Arkady

Edited March 7, 2017 by Arkady Shadursky

[Mudfoot]

Sorry, but you state daoism = neidan.

That is not in the quote you used.

[Taoist Texts]

Thank you very much, now we clearly see what is your approach to the Neidan 

We? How many of you are hiding behind that screen name? 

[Marblehead]

In our work we do not use any faith / religion approaches.

 

I don't either.  But then, I don't even have a "practice".  No strings attached.

[thelerner]

While philosophy and study is good, practice is better.  There is a problem with turning into the worst kind of scholar who doesn't focus on practice and spends too much time on dogmatism and language. 

 

I don't mean to disparage the great masters of the past, but hopefully, they wrote there knowledge and got back to practice.  Didn't spend there time debating and arguing; mostly living there art. 

[Arkady Shadursky]

While philosophy and study is good, practice is better.  There is a problem with turning into the worst kind of scholar who doesn't focus on practice and spends too much time on dogmatism and language. 

 

I don't mean to disparage the great masters of the past, but hopefully, they wrote there knowledge and got back to practice.  Didn't spend there time debating and arguing; mostly living there art. 

What would you say if lets say Lui Dongbin, Zhongli Quan, Zhang Boduan, Wu Chongxu, Liu Huayang and other Patriarchs of the Past would say in their numerous texts that some specific kind of practice you are doing for a long time is wrong?

 

 

Would you say "ah, it all words and papers, my real practice experience is more important"?

Or would you say "Very interesting. I need to research and think about it, probably change my practice."

Or would you say "How good I know that now! I need to search for proper practice! Probably first I need to read that texts..."

 

The question is rhetorical. Not to answer, but to think - for everyone.
---
Best Regards,
Arkady

Edited March 7, 2017 by Arkady Shadursky

[damdao]

 

 

I don't mean to disparage the great masters of the past, but hopefully, they wrote there knowledge and got back to practice.  Didn't spend there time debating and arguing; mostly living there art. 

 

Perhaps that was not the case. Let's not forget the court debates between buddhists and daoists.

Today, in certain circles, it is politically incorrect to debate but this says nothing about its spiritual value or place.

In fact, it sounds more like a fashionable slogan.

 

An analytical attitude is important at the beginning, middle, and even the end of the spiritual path, since for wisdom to fully mature in Buddhahood you need from the outset to enthusiastically investigate the nature of things and to develop this attitude more and more.

It is not sufficient to think “Buddha said so,” or “My Lama said so.” Notice how much reasoning and debate there is in the texts by Nagarjuna, Aryadeva, Chandrakirti, Shantideva, Shantarakshita, and Kamalashila. Analysis and reflection lead to conviction...

 

Dalai Lama, Becoming Enlightened, bold type mine

 

 

[Stosh]

 

What would you say if lets say Lui Dongbin, Zhongli Quan, Zhang Boduan, Wu Chongxu, Liu Huayang and other Patriarchs of the Past would say in their numerous texts that some specific kind of practice you are doing for a long time is wrong?

 

 

Would you say "ah, it all words and papers, my real practice experience is more important"?

Or would you say "Very interesting. I need to research and think about it, probably change my practice."

Or would you say "How good I know that now! I need to search for proper practice! Probably first I need to read that texts..."

 

The question is rhetorical. Not to answer, but to think - for everyone.

---

Best Regards,

Arkady

 

I know what I'd tell 'em ....  "Two words, two simple words in the english language.."

Edited March 7, 2017 by Stosh

[dawei]

What would you say if lets say Lui Dongbin, Zhongli Quan, Zhang Boduan, Wu Chongxu, Liu Huayang and other Patriarchs of the Past would say in their numerous texts that some specific kind of practice you are doing for a long time is wrong?

 

 

Would you say "ah, it all words and papers, my real practice experience is more important"?

Or would you say "Very interesting. I need to research and think about it, probably change my practice."

Or would you say "How good I know that now! I need to search for proper practice! Probably first I need to read that texts..."

 

this question carries an inherent assumption...

 

that their method of practice is something one is interested in or trying to learn.  If one has no interest in their paradigm of mixing Daoism, Buddhism, and Confucianism as a practice, then it is almost moot what they are telling you about what you are practicing.   My observation is that very few at this site are interested in this as an active practice.   My observation is that most follow much earlier/more ancient energetic, magic and/or natural methods.

[Mudfoot]

What would you say if lets say Lui Dongbin, Zhongli Quan, Zhang Boduan, Wu Chongxu, Liu Huayang and other Patriarchs of the Past would say in their numerous texts that some specific kind of practice you are doing for a long time is wrong?

 

 

 

Would you say "ah, it all words and papers, my real practice experience is more important"?

Or would you say "Very interesting. I need to research and think about it, probably change my practice."

Or would you say "How good I know that now! I need to search for proper practice! Probably first I need to read that texts..."

 

The question is rhetorical. Not to answer, but to think - for everyone.

---

Best Regards,

Arkady

There are a few easy answers to this.

 

1) I have already learned from a book. It had glossy pictures, and is written by a daoist master. He has a dvd as well.

 

2) I have invested money and effort in my practice. How do I know it would yield more to change to another method? (These are strong psychological factors)

3) I have read translations of the classics. Evidently, you have to already understand the subject rather well to be able to get anything useful from them.

4) I could try to translate myself. But discussions on the dao bums have taught me that you must understand how expressions were used in specific contexts in specific times to have any chance to succed in translating, so basically I am f****d.

 

So there are a few hindrances on the Way.

Otherwise, it is a great thought.

[[email protected]]

We can try to investigate ourselves but we should understand that human body is a very very complicated thing which we are unable to understand fully from our human point of view. Therefore some things we discover can be only a sequense but not the reason. And in this case a wrong conclusion is probable.

This is one more argument for having a teacher vs training by books or other materials.

Rgrds, Ilya

[thelerner]

 

What would you say if lets say Lui Dongbin, Zhongli Quan, Zhang Boduan, Wu Chongxu, Liu Huayang and other Patriarchs of the Past would say in their numerous texts that some specific kind of practice you are doing for a long time is wrong?

 

 

Would you say "ah, it all words and papers, my real practice experience is more important"?

Or would you say "Very interesting. I need to research and think about it, probably change my practice."

Or would you say "How good I know that now! I need to search for proper practice! Probably first I need to read that texts..."

 

The question is rhetorical. Not to answer, but to think - for everyone.

---

Best Regards,

Arkady

 

Hmnn, what if they said what you are doing is wrong?  I haven't studied those guys, I take it they're all dead and probably being human don't have perfect agreement with each other.  If masters of mussar or H'oppo'no'no said what you're doing is wrong, how strongly would you take it?   Obviously they're acknowledged masters and you're not.  So..

 

While I admire those who follow traditional systems, I do think there are traps in them, ie cultural conditionings and dogmas that work against them.  As an (ex) martial artist I admire those who preserve the old systems, yet to be balanced and to cut out the cultural time wasters, I prefer training with those who've gone deep into tradition systems and found the 'heart' of them and teach from there; sort of the Jeet Kun Do (Bruce Lee's) philosophy. 

 

These are excellent teachers who have read and studied the classics and understand there strengths and limitations.  They don't argue translations in the classics because there aim is not to produce scholars but deep cultivators.  

 

More personally, I'm into keeping it simple these days.  I've got kids, responsibilities.  Going deep can wait.  Long Walks in nature, medium sitting, some energy work, a chant now and then in the shower.  Good enough, for me, right now.  A lazy householder. 

[Arkady Shadursky]

 

Hmnn, what if they said what you are doing is wrong?  I haven't studied those guys, I take it they're all dead and probably being human don't have perfect agreement with each other.  If masters of mussar or H'oppo'no'no said what you're doing is wrong, how strongly would you take it? 

 

Lu Dongbin and Zhongli Quan were writing about the methods which one should follow to attain Dao (http://www.all-dao.com/ghost-immortal.html)

And they also were writing about the methods which will never lead to the Golden Elixir (http://www.thedaobums.com/topic/35815-minor-schools-and-inconsistent-methods-from-zhong-l%C3%BC-chuan-dao-ji/#entry569095)

 

So, if Zhongli and Lu are telling us what are correct methods to attaind Dao and what are side-roads I'd listen to them carefully and take it to the heart. I this case it probably becomes possible to acheive the stages Lu and Zhongli were talking about.

On the other hand if you follow H'oppo'no'no's master methods then you'd acheive the results H'oppo'no'no's master have. That's it. Everyone chooses his/her own way.

---
Best Regards,
Arkady

Edited April 13, 2017 by Arkady Shadursky

[Arkady Shadursky]

My observation is that very few at this site are interested in this as an active practice.   My observation is that most follow much earlier/more ancient energetic, magic and/or natural methods.

 

Dawei, I really happy for those people who are practicing some methods better than Lu Dongbin and Lao Zi have transmitted to us.

However ordinary people should simply follow words of Lao Zi, Lu Dongbing and other Patriarchs. We are doing our best to help with that.

 

P.S. Usually the Masters who have higher level can easily understand the concepts of lower methods. For example if one has understood the Heavenly laws any earthly interpretations like Bagua, Yijing etc. become obvious to him/her. Thus anyone can easily check himself his own level (same for women).

---

Best Regards,

Arkady

Edited April 13, 2017 by Arkady Shadursky

[Stosh]

I thought that Taoism is also a system and practices, practitioners. I hardly believe it is possible to create such texts only based on believes and having no achievements in practice.

Rgrds, Ilya

 I somehow didn't see this earlier, sorry. While I dont really object, I'll defend my more limited view anyway.  

I can write all sorts of fantasy , so I figure others could as well, yeti seekers never find anything so even total failure doesn't exclude the continued pursuit of goals, literature , enthusiasm and dedication. 

 Practitioners are people , and any of the physical things suggested by Daoism could indeed be done by folks who never heard of it , You wouldn't necessarily call the person who for reasons of his own , took a hands off laissez faire approach to governance was a Taoist. Nor would he automatically be considered so if he approached life in a manner which was consistent with his basic nature. So the inclusion really depends on whether he mentally associates with the grouping ,whether he is a poor example or the most adherent. 

Taoism as a system , system of what ? The path is undefined ,,,while an attitude is suggested , pointed at ,or otherwise venerated,   telling folks to be meek isn't really a system of anything IMO. 

[opendao]

Hmnn, what if they said what you are doing is wrong?  I haven't studied those guys, I take it they're all dead and probably being human don't have perfect agreement with each other.  If masters of mussar or H'oppo'no'no said what you're doing is wrong, how strongly would you take it?   Obviously they're acknowledged masters and you're not.  So..

 

While I admire those who follow traditional systems, I do think there are traps in them, ie cultural conditionings and dogmas that work against them.  As an (ex) martial artist I admire those who preserve the old systems, yet to be balanced and to cut out the cultural time wasters, I prefer training with those who've gone deep into tradition systems and found the 'heart' of them and teach from there; sort of the Jeet Kun Do (Bruce Lee's) philosophy. 

 

These are excellent teachers who have read and studied the classics and understand there strengths and limitations.  They don't argue translations in the classics because there aim is not to produce scholars but deep cultivators.  

 

More personally, I'm into keeping it simple these days.  I've got kids, responsibilities.  Going deep can wait.  Long Walks in nature, medium sitting, some energy work, a chant now and then in the shower.  Good enough, for me, right now.  A lazy householder. 

 

There is another side. As example, take Taijiquan practitioners. 99% of them don't understand the art and cannot use it. But there are masters who know, and their abilities are way behind fantasy stories we can read... And they teach texts to their students, because there is something in Taoism that have to be transmitted through texts. And they do argue with no-sense translations and shallow approach of "tai chi" people. Because it's the only way for their students to achieve the goal of Taijiquan. This is a real tradition, not a water-down imitation.

 

It's up to you: limit yourself intentionally or pursuit other goals. I think the main thing is for people to understand that there is a choice. Not everybody wants just chant in a shower ))

 

Western parody on taoism make people weak and without any goal at all...

[thelerner]

hmnn, what are you against chanting or showers?  Try both, if you want I'll give you pointers but I get the feeling it'd fall on deaf ears.  Once a person falls into the 'Only I am practicing the real thing.  Everyone else is living in delusion' learning nose dives. 

 

I've seen many people with the same attitude, study for years, then switching from old real thing, to new real thing.  Not every wants to be a monk or master, let them find there own way.

 

I admire the hardcore, but the elitist who looks down on other arts, and householders.. can become a fundamentalist trapped in dogma.   Who'd probably go further if they kept an open mind. 

[[email protected]]

I somehow didn't see this earlier, sorry. While I dont really object, I'll defend my more limited view anyway.

I can write all sorts of fantasy , so I figure others could as well, yeti seekers never find anything so even total failure doesn't exclude the continued pursuit of goals, literature , enthusiasm and dedication.

Practitioners are people , and any of the physical things suggested by Daoism could indeed be done by folks who never heard of it , You wouldn't necessarily call the person who for reasons of his own , took a hands off laissez faire approach to governance was a Taoist. Nor would he automatically be considered so if he approached life in a manner which was consistent with his basic nature. So the inclusion really depends on whether he mentally associates with the grouping ,whether he is a poor example or the most adherent.

Taoism as a system , system of what ? The path is undefined ,,,while an attitude is suggested , pointed at ,or otherwise venerated, telling folks to be meek isn't really a system of anything IMO.

The level of the author of any text is shown in the text itself. Reading famous Taoist texts like Wu Zhen Pyan for me its easy to feel that it was written by a great master... F.e. if I read some interpretations like Taoist yogha by Lu Kun Yui I start to feel doubts...

Rgrds, Ilya

[opendao]

this question carries an inherent assumption...

 

that their method of practice is something one is interested in or trying to learn.  If one has no interest in their paradigm of mixing Daoism, Buddhism, and Confucianism as a practice, then it is almost moot what they are telling you about what you are practicing.   My observation is that very few at this site are interested in this as an active practice.   My observation is that most follow much earlier/more ancient energetic, magic and/or natural methods.

 

Some people here are really looking for more than simplified modern qigong from muddy sources.

 

And if they are interested in Dao as a goal, with high level results of Shen transformation, then their attitude towards Daoist schools and classics defines clearly the possibility of such high level results.

 

By neglecting later texts, explaining the ancient method more clearly (for modern people), with explanations of unity of various teachings, such students just intentionally limit their possibilities. Their understanding is very low.

[opendao]

hmnn, what are you against chanting or showers?  Try both, if you want I'll give you pointers but I get the feeling it'd fall on deaf ears.  Once a person falls into the 'Only I am practicing the real thing.  Everyone else is living in delusion' learning nose dives. 

 

I've seen many people with the same attitude, study for years, then switching from old real thing, to new real thing.  Not every wants to be a monk or master, let them find there own way.

 

I admire the hardcore, but the elitist who looks down on other arts, and householders.. can become a fundamentalist trapped in dogma.   Who'd probably go further if they kept an open mind. 

 

That's exactly what I told: open dogmatic mind and see another side of the tradition.

If (and only if is strong) you want to pursuit other goals.

[Gerard]

Even Taoism traditional or modern has its limitations dear Arkady.

 

No system is perfect only constant practice and going with the flow is.

 

Everything is constantly changing including you, micro second by microsecond so it makes sense adapting yourself to the constant change, so finding a system that caters for that is a must. Tai Chi 8 h a day, walking meditation for many hours a day (https://mindfulwalking.wordpress.com/2013/01/26/131/), wandering around like some practitioners do (http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/encounter/in-search-of-a-wandering-buddhist-monk/5847926), Baguaquan or the circle of reality as I call it (it returns the practitioner to a Pre-Heaven state).

 

These kind of practices deliver the goods.

 

Beyond Religion. Less talk and more practice!

Edited April 13, 2017 by Gerard

[Marblehead]

Well Gerard, you caused me to have a thought.  That was, I don't always go with the flow.  I'm not a herd animal.  If the flow is going in a direction I don't want to go I will escape one way or another.

[Stosh]

The level of the author of any text is shown in the text itself. Reading famous Taoist texts like Wu Zhen Pyan for me its easy to feel that it was written by a great master... F.e. if I read some interpretations like Taoist yogha by Lu Kun Yui I start to feel doubts...

Rgrds, Ilya

From text I think one can gather an impression,,of Something. But unless you know the subject as it is narrowly defined by a discourse, you cant fairly be certain if they go awry. But lets say the text is perfectly coherent etc. I think you can trust what you have tested, as far as the testing went. But in practice, does the result bear the fruit you expect? If you try pushing the authors buttons ,does he hold up under that pressure, or does he immediately ditch the fancy stuff and bail out, lash out, defend irrationally. If he does those things, at least he shouldnt profess to teach them, but he still may know some good stuff. In the past week I have read some really great stuff, I was stoked, and said to myself , all youthfully enthusiastic, this is Great!

Unfortunately I then read some of the ugliest passages Ive ever seen..same tradition though. I dont know what to make of it.

[[email protected]]

This is the thing - a master with high level of development and a great harmony sense will not write first good texts and then some irrelevant sh..t. smile

If the harmony is developed then everyone who can feel sees that the master is great.

Rgds, Ilya

[Marblehead]

Yeah, consistency is important.  One can write good books but if their personal life is shitty then we must suspect the writer has serious flaws.