non-dualism & the need for practice

[gendao]

Edited May 23, 2008 by vortex

[林愛偉]

Thinking you're doing good no doubt or perhaps your excuse is that you have to make a living.

It all depends on the reasons doesn't it? I mean you could dance on one leg all your life because you just doing what you're told, which is slavery. Some people shut up and sit quietly doing nothing because they think something amazing will happen, which could be seen as faith therefore religion. Others of course are just deluding themselves that their practices will have an outcome which it might if you're trying to have spontaneous orgasms all day long!

No but you're wallowing in opinions, often unfounded and tenuous, and constantly suggesting that Tibetan Buddhism is deviant without any evidence. You claim to follow the true Buddha Dharma but in truth you believe in the words of books just like most religious people i.e. Dogma!

 

Further if you are of the school of thought that sees Buddhism as a philosophy then I might suggest that you haven't got a clue as to what you're talking about. Philosophy equips people with tools to resolve paradoxes it doesn't advocate practice. Methods and practices are simply tools propagated by those that seek control.

Sorry but that sound like semantic rubbish. You either believe the Buddha was enlightened or you don't. If you believe then you're religious if you know then you understand what he was up to.

What like saying prays before going into battle? What shit! Hmm I wonder how many slaves died building the Chines wall? Now fucking pray and do as you're told or get out of the monastery!

Yes we all understand that the Dharma is free but China is where the bastardisation of Tai Chi/Kung Fu came from turning gentle harmony into violent death! We also understand where all this bollox about semen retention and excessive sex with multiple female partners came from, excuse the pun, which the esoteric student of course understands as vampireism. Those things are facts unlike the anti Tibetan Buddhist propaganda you keep spouting such as:

Of course I'm sure you believe such stories because you obviously have no idea what Tibetan Buddhism is about. In fact I very much doubt you have any idea of what any form of Buddhism is about. Perhaps you should learn to think correctly before you stop thinking all together.

 

Anyway I've no doubt you'll keep ignoring the truth while you hide in your pretentious facile delusion of what reality is, so I'm out of here.

 

 

Firstly I am not trying to make you believe me. Things I have spoken of here have been researched by people. Just because it is some "bad" things about Tibetan Buddhism doesn't make all the research "communist", wrong, etc.

 

As for believing in what the Sutras teach, it is a shame that in this age people like you will disregard the Sutras because it is in book form. That is just an example of deviant thought. Another way to discredit the teachings that lead to Buddhahood. It is all too common nowadays...one can't get angry at that

 

Secondly, I make no money from my students of the Buddhadharma. As the Dharma is free to anyone, I don't accept money from my students in exchange for the Buddhadharma.

 

You obviously can not see past the words I have written. What a shame, I thought you were a bit wiser. You can decide how I am, how little I know of anything. That is fine. But one can not deny the outcomes of past causes. If one looks at the outcomes, investigates the causes, they will see how situations manifested.

 

Its very simple. I am not one of those people that jump from method to method, different schools of cultivation thinking they will gain something. I stick with what is taught to me, until I can go no further. That is called dedication, and respect for the teachings. I may know very little about Buddhism indeed. Who knows the All of Buddhism...? The Buddha. I am not a Buddha of any shape or size. No one can claim , truthfully, to know Buddhism. If they did, why aren't they enlightened already?

 

Don't believe what I say. But don't disregard the possibility that what I have said may hold some sort of truth. Research it yourself. Do the work yourself, like I have. And when you get results which are opposite from your own education about things, do not run around screaming its all religious, or all communist propaganda.

 

One thing is for sure...If one hasn't been in the place they are talking about, its best to not talk about the place and its people in an authoritative manner. Lastly, America is the last country who holds any authority on what another country is all about.

 

I wouldn't believe a word any one says about any one, or any place. Like I tell all of my students, both of the Buddha Dharma and of English, INVESTIGATE! RESEARCH for yourself, believe nothing I tell you.

 

So I will leave this thread and the forum, again for a while. And you can sit there at your couch like the couch Buddhist you are, and bad mouth me if you wish. I will take it with consideration and investigate my mind as to the possibility that you are already a realized Buddha and know the causes and conditions of my

"existence" .

 

If any one else wants to bad mouth me, feel free to do so at my email [email protected]

Its always a good show of virtue to stand in front of the crowd screaming your head off, when you can have a decent conversation instead.

 

Peace and Blessings Brother, and All.... lol

 

Lin Ai Wei

Edited May 23, 2008 by 林愛偉

[.broken.]

Humble as ever Ai Wei

 

*bow*

[dao zhen]

Much love to you brother Ai Wei.....

 

*** bow ***

[Eric23]

How sad that this wonderful thread has come to the point where someone who's only been registered for less than a month chases off a member of such great humility and knowledge. Looking forward to Lin's return.

[Guest allan]

Dual cultivation in the East means the cultivation of essence (hsing) and that of life (ming). It has nothing to do with the so-called angelic dual cultivation prescribed in the Hua Hu Ching which recommends sex between teachers and students - a deviant practice frowned upon by upright Daoists and Buddhists in the East.

 

What Lin Ai Wei mentioned about the various transgressions committed by Buddhist monks in Thailand is true and has been reported in the South East Asian news media from time to time. Even Abbots of temples in that country have been defrocked for having sex, with devotees in their own temples or with prostitutes. Lamas are no exception, a number also hunger for sex, money and power preying on the weak and the gullible. Just like what Laozi had indicated in TTC 53, the great way is level and easy, but people love the bypaths.

 

Just as Buddha had taught in the Dhammapada, right thoughts invariably lead to right actions. To know some Dharma, members can learn from Ai Wei. To know something about neidan meditation, members can learn from dao zhen.

 

Together, meditation (for cultivating essence) and Dharma (for cultivating life/virtues) constitutes dual cultivation. Before you disagree, take a good long look at what the ancients, the Zhen Ren and Boddhidharma said.

[rex]

Together, meditation (for cultivating essence) and Dharma (for cultivating life/virtues) constitutes dual cultivation. Before you disagree, take a good long look at what the ancients, the Zhen Ren and Boddhidharma said.

No disagreement, makes perfect sense. It is a shame that Lin left as he has much of value to teach. From this thread it becomes apparent that he also used the term dual cultivation to refer to sexual cultivation and also practiced it:

Lin (Aiwei): sexual activity

[Guest allan]

[Patrick Brown]

[gendao]

[Patrick Brown]

[gendao]

^ Cool, I didn't realize it's the same mythical creature as the Fu Dog.

[Patrick Brown]

^ Cool, I didn't realize it's the same mythical creature as the Fu Dog.

Yes, same as. This Zen text may be of interest: http://www.wwzc.org/translations/lionsRoar.htm

[rex]

Edited May 25, 2008 by rex

[Patrick Brown]

Edited May 25, 2008 by Patrick Brown

[Guest allan]

[Guest allan]

[rex]

Rex,

Does it not appear to you that there is some misunderstanding of words?

Oh ok Allan, yes, thanks.

 

In the quotes you kindly provided ... Can we then jump to the conclusion that he is using dual cultivation in similar terms to sexual cultivation?

I like quotes and yes we can. I introduced the term based on Lin's previous posts where he makes explicit connections with sex and the term dual cultivation. Here's some more quotes from Lin:

 

"The cultivator will inturn utilize the sexual experience and cultivate more dilligently in transforming whatever desire of lust they have into wisdom. That is where dual cultivation will take place..but it will not be based on lust, and will eventually be dropped, depending on the causes and conditions of the situation. This must be thoroughly understood: causes and conditions of the situation."

http://www.thetaobums.com/index.php?s=&amp...ost&p=31555

 

"Dual cultivation is fine if both know what they are doing, and there is no release of sperm, or orgasm for the men."

http://www.thetaobums.com/index.php?s=&amp...ost&p=23174

 

"One of my elder cultivation brothers says "Have sex in good moderation, eat veggies. If you are having sex, dual cultivation is a must, just don't be a master nut cracker. Leave that for the squirrels!""

http://www.thetaobums.com/index.php?s=&amp...ost&p=31906

 

"Sex; moderate and no orgasms unless you are making babies. Anyone can argue with me on it, and I will simply say I don't care. No matter what, if you want your cultivation to soar and develop properly, then no orgasms from any chakra, no wasting our fluids and no orgasm without ejaculation. Dual cultivation is fine, the woman can orgasm if she wants, but eh."

http://www.thetaobums.com/index.php?s=&amp...ost&p=37644

 

But really this insistence on what Lin meant or didn't mean by the use of the term dual cultivation is a bit of a sideline that doesn't detract from the general thesis that Lin used sexual techniques for cultivation.

 

Late edit: now if I've got the wrong end of the stick and don't understand that I don't understand then I apologise to Lin for any misrepresentation of him. I have no further wish to discuss Lin without him being present to clarify.

Edited May 25, 2008 by rex

[.broken.]

It appears the whole argument above revolves around one pivotal point:

 

Whether or not the Buddha wanted Dharma to be instantly accessible.

 

I know not enough about Buddha to possibly comment, but I do have an intuitive feeling that it goes against the eightfold path.

 

It is clear that the 8 fold path is a basic outline of Buddhist teaching. Those who adhere to it cultivate in every aspect of their living. Due to it's nature, even though it is regarded as 'basic' in the sense that it is the foundation - even, ultimately, the aim - it is certainly not 'basic' in the sense that it is easy to pick up.

 

Habitual responses and patterns of thinking which are unfruitful in respect to cultivation need to be unlearned. I take after Christopher Hansard's teaching in calling these 'destructive'.

 

Habitual responses and patterns of thinking that are fruitful in respect of cultivation need to be tended to and nurtured. Let's call these 'constructive'. As such, I feel justified in calling the 8 fold path constructive.

 

As previous posts on this thread have highlighted, the need for practice has its clear advantages. It helps in losing our attachments. We should, therefore, always be mindful that we cultivate in our daily actions right view and intention with right speach, action, livelihood, effort, mindfulness and concentration, outside of our usual energy cultivation practices in a manner that is constructive. Be helpful to others, take actions that keep others in mind, show love where it is needed, and all else that is constructive.

 

Is the purpose of Buddhism not to ease the suffering of all beings? Is Dharma not the teaching that allows this to take place? Is it right, therefore, to restrict the teachings?

 

Restricting Buddhist teachings sounds to me like one is restricting the easing of suffering, no matter how one dresses it up. It is therefore logically, intuitively, and even according to its own teachings, contradictory to restrict Dharma.

 

How this applies to certain schools of Buddhism, I have no idea. I know too little of them to comment. This post, however, is the result of my understanding of Buddhism: using wisdom to impart teachings which ease the suffering of all sentient beings.

 

Yours humbly,

James

Edited May 26, 2008 by .broken.

[Guest allan]