The ultimate goal of Neidan

[snowymountains]

11 minutes ago, Giles said:

 

Grace doesn't happen from anything. It's always there for everyone because that's Its nature (Love/Ānanda).

 

 

Well, it can happen to someone coming from Christianity or a tribal religion if you prefer, because it's largely independent from that.

[snowymountains]

9 minutes ago, Giles said:

 

I'm not here either to defend or to badmouth Christianity. I was brought up in a Christian environment and the version of it that I learned was absolutely invaluable to me. However, on the flipside, I've seen versions of Christianity that have destroyed the children who imbibed it.

 

 

Wasn't grading Christianity with a good/bad label , it was more to point that the alternative comes with its own +s and -s. So not sure the Buddha made a mistake on that one, there's no way to go about it that's devoid of -s.

[Shadow_self]

59 minutes ago, Forestgreen said:

The reformations are historically documented. 

 

Thats not a very convienent point when trying to convince people that everything is public 

[Cobie]

1 hour ago, Giles said:

… the Buddha decided that there should be no written recording made. …

So when/why was the Buddha’s wish overruled?

 

 

Edited September 6 by Cobie

[snowymountains]

1 hour ago, Forestgreen said:

The reformations are historically documented. 

 

The question is if the reforms made the practice return to a more original state, or not. 

(I do belive that what I do differs from what the original buddhist sangha practiced,  but that is my opinion.)

 

Yes the answer is that the reformations aimed to return to the original practice as much as possible.

By shedding practices that were invented hundreds if not thousands of years after the Buddha and going back to their lineage's original practices and textual basis.

 

Imo nothing wrong with practicing what you enjoy. You mention Shaolin, they've been crystal clear on what their lineage is, that Bodhidharma first taught them what they practice, and that they consider Bodhidharma to have a realisation equivalent to the Buddha.

 

That's different from someone to inventing new definitions for what Theravada is, and serving it with plenty of super-duper-secret ketchup on top.

[forestofclarity]

1 hour ago, snowymountains said:

 

Clearly, but they're free to believe they've found the super secret hen that makes the super top secret golden eggs.

I’d say the practices are self secret at their core. A lot of folks guard certain energy practices, but these are supporting and not primary in my opinion. But some people need the esoteric link. The truth reveals itself to whom it will.

[snowymountains]

35 minutes ago, Cobie said:

So when/why was the Buddha’s wish overruled?

 

 

 

The Buddha didn't appoint a successor and made all his teachings available.

 

There were no records kept when he taught.

 

I'm not aware if he was against recording them FYI, it's the first time I hear he was again someone recording his teachings.

[snowymountains]

2 minutes ago, forestofclarity said:

I’d say the practices are self secret at their core. A lot of folks guard certain energy practices, but these are supporting and not primary in my opinion. But some people need the esoteric link. The truth reveals itself to whom it will.

 

For other paths maybe, for Theravada anyone can ask a Bhikkhu if there exist hidden practices, due to precepts they won't lie. The answer will be a no, there aren't secret practices.

[Forestgreen]

48 minutes ago, forestofclarity said:

 certain energy practices, but these are supporting and not primary in my opinion. 

That would be my opinion as well. 

I have energy practices for the beginner and intermediate steps, but now it is mainly about mind/consciousness/awareness. 

 

But the intermediate steps were very useful because they help in shifting what I could be aware of. 

 

And, proper awareness on the right thing makes the energetic process continue on its own. There is no longer any separation.

 

[Giles]

1 hour ago, Cobie said:

So when/why was the Buddha’s wish overruled?

 

 

Apparently, about 2,000 years ago (ca. 100 BC), hundreds of years after the Buddha died, there was already such a huge amount of disagreement about the veracity of the orally-preserved doctrine that the 1st* Fourth Buddhist Council was convened during which the most politically powerful faction committed to writing what they believed to constitute the teachings of the Buddha.

 

* There were two Fourth Councils because they couldn't all even agree on a matter as mundane as their meetups by that point in time.

 

Edited September 6 by Giles

[Forestgreen]

1 hour ago, snowymountains said:

 

For other paths maybe, for Theravada anyone can ask a Bhikkhu if there exist hidden practices, due to precepts they won't lie. The answer will be a no, there aren't secret practices.

If you ask a Bhikkhu trained in a tradition that have no secret practices, because the tradition reformed they away? 

 

And the ketchup should contain chili.

Edited September 6 by Forestgreen
Added stuff.

[forestofclarity]

1 hour ago, snowymountains said:

 

For other paths maybe, for Theravada anyone can ask a Bhikkhu if there exist hidden practices, due to precepts they won't lie. The answer will be a no, there aren't secret practices.

Theravada has Tantric paths, like the borān kammaṭṭhāna. You can see the influence in modern Thai Theravada as well.

[snowymountains]

8 minutes ago, forestofclarity said:

Theravada has Tantric paths, like the borān kammaṭṭhāna. You can see the influence in modern Thai Theravada as well.

 

There's no tantra in Theravada, all religions have heresies and/or small sects

[snowymountains]

17 minutes ago, Forestgreen said:

If you ask a Bhikkhu trained in a tradition that have no secret practices, because the tradition reformed they away? 

 

And the ketchup should contain chili.

 

Is eg a Catholic heresy Catholicism ? No it's not. The same applies for Theravada. That other Bhikkhu won't be doing Theravada

[Taoist Texts]

3 hours ago, Shadow_self said:

Its pretty objective though, so I dont think someone touches that state without some level of transformation, even if it is not stable at first

thats true not sure what you mean by transformation. in my ND there is a new energy in the body with the material physiology remaining the same. There might be or not be behavioral changes like sleep needs, libido decreasing, nutrition etc., but those are not important. Only the new energy is. So the secret is twofold when the white light appears: 1 ppl do not even know that there should be a new energy 2 ppl do not know what does that energy feel like.

 

many qigongers see all kinds of light, but without accompanied by the new energy - it is not neidan, its just a useless light, which is nevertheless a nice qigong accomplishment, to be sure.

[Shadow_self]

47 minutes ago, Taoist Texts said:

thats true not sure what you mean by transformation. in my ND there is a new energy in the body with the material physiology remaining the same. There might be or not be behavioral changes like sleep needs, libido decreasing, nutrition etc., but those are not important. Only the new energy is. So the secret is twofold when the white light appears: 1 ppl do not even know that there should be a new energy 2 ppl do not know what does that energy feel like.

 

many qigongers see all kinds of light, but without accompanied by the new energy - it is not neidan, its just a useless light, which is nevertheless a nice qigong accomplishment, to be sure.

 

I see

 

What I am talking about is related to a change that occurs in the way certain organs of the physical body function

 

It is a marker of  re-awakening a dormant faculty, and becomes very important later on for other practices.

 

The residual effect of touching spirit can indeed leave permanent lasting effects, though I would say that the one im talking about is  not qigong related. 

 

Thats the best I can do really   I think you get the gist of what Im talking about without saying anymore

[Shadow_self]

1 hour ago, Forestgreen said:

If you ask a Bhikkhu trained in a tradition that have no secret practices, because the tradition reformed they away? 

 

Im glad Im not the only person who noticed the glaring problem in such a proposition

[snowymountains]

Well, it was reformed away because those practices were created long after the Buddha and the reform was about practicing as the Buddha taught.

 

I guess anyone can change the rules of tennis, play a different game, even call it a super-duper-secret one. That's fine, it's just not tennis and they won't be participating in tennis events.

[Forestgreen]

1 hour ago, snowymountains said:

 

Is eg a Catholic heresy Catholicism ? No it's not. The same applies for Theravada. That other Bhikkhu won't be doing Theravada

So, in the days before they were reformed away, would borat dude been considered theravada or a heretic? 

Not after, because in a political struggle the winner writes the history, but before?

 

Is theravada orthodoxy defined by practice, or by which scriptures one base ones interpretation of reality on?

I have only read about the interpretative discussions between different buddhist schools, not about differences in practice. 

 

Some of the buddhist alchemical work would fit very well within the frame of dhyana practice and samma sati. Most likely, some practices do not, but those are outside of my direct experience. 

 

I believe that some of the reformed methods no longer use dhyana to the same extant. Didn't the buddha teach dhyana? 

Are dhyana practicing theravada monks heretic?

 

Are theravadin that use the abhidhamma as a support for their practice heretics?

They claim support in the suttas, but agree that many of the ideas are later developments.

 

Will the real theravadin please stand up (and join my shaolin sect, it will be fun!).

 

It's getting complicated, and since I do not identify as a theravada buddhist, it really doesn't matter to me. Just flapping my lips in the wind. 

 

And quite a few of these "secret" practices are not secret, they appear in publicly available material. It is just that few are taught what they mean, and few bother with practicing them.

 

 

[Shadow_self]

2 hours ago, forestofclarity said:

I’d say the practices are self secret at their core. A lot of folks guard certain energy practices, but these are supporting and not primary in my opinion. But some people need the esoteric link. The truth reveals itself to whom it will.

 

I would say consider it to be more of a temporal issue

 

If you understand dependant origination and the arising and passing of things, this relates the the universe too

 

However, this also relates to what awareness orients towards (form or formlessness) 

 

Energy work is the bridge between the two

 

The tantric paths were developed for this aeon because of how conciousness and form are currently intertwined, and how they interact

 

The paths that attempt to use "conciousness based methods" are beyond the vast majortiy  as of right now, unless they have the karma to pick up where they left off in previous incarnations

 

By working from the body backwards, and increasing the efficiency of it, you basically lower the bar in a time when the universe has the bar raised

 

Sorry if thats a bit brief. Im kind of at the line there as to what I can say there

[Giles]

31 minutes ago, snowymountains said:

Well, it was reformed away because those practices were created long after the Buddha and the reform was about practicing as the Buddha taught.

 

 

My guess is that you're probably broadly correct about that because it's certainly not necessary to practice anything potentally dangerous enough to need veiling in secrecy in order to realise enlightenment and liberation from suffering.

 

[snowymountains]

14 minutes ago, Forestgreen said:

So, in the days before they were reformed away, would borat dude been considered theravada or a heretic? 

Not after, because in a political struggle the winner writes the history, but before?

 

Is theravada orthodoxy defined by practice, or by which scriptures one base ones interpretation of reality on?

I have only read about the interpretative discussions between different buddhist schools, not about differences in practice. 

 

Some of the buddhist alchemical work would fit very well within the frame of dhyana practice and samma sati. Most likely, some practices do not, but those are outside of my direct experience. 

 

I believe that some of the reformed methods no longer use dhyana to the same extant. Didn't the buddha teach dhyana? 

Are dhyana practicing theravada monks heretic?

 

Are theravadin that use the abhidhamma as a support for their practice heretics?

They claim support in the suttas, but agree that many of the ideas are later developments.

 

Will the real theravadin please stand up (and join my shaolin sect, it will be fun!).

 

It's getting complicated, and since I do not identify as a theravada buddhist, it really doesn't matter to me. Just flapping my lips in the wind. 

 

And quite a few of these "secret" practices are not secret, they appear in publicly available material. It is just that few are taught what they mean, and few bother with practicing them.

 

 

 

You can adopt relativism to the extent that you can believe there's no real Theravada, so why not call a tiny sect as Theravada, that's fine, up to you to hold that view. It's incorrect but up to you.

 

It's just that it's entirely uncomplicated, practices developed long after the Buddha are not part of their Canon and they practice what has been their canon ever since they wrote it down.

[forestofclarity]

7 hours ago, Taoist Texts said:

i posit that the entire ND process is written in the books.

 

There are many problems with books, but I will list three based on personal experience: 1) books are often written as summaries of a more extensive oral teachings; 2) due to spatial limitations, something always gets left out; but more importantly 3) the difference between a true experience and a false one are extremely difficult to distinguish, as set forth in nearly every spiritual tradition in the world, along with numerous myths and fairy tales. 

 

There are times when everything one has read, experienced, one's intuition, signs, etc. seems to clearly point in one direction, but the teacher, who has actually been there, says "Not quite." At this point, many people will reject the teacher, and go down the wrong path. I think generally, most people, especially modern people, underestimate the power of the delusion and just how deep the conditioning goes. 

 

[Forestgreen]

6 hours ago, snowymountains said:

 

It's just that it's entirely uncomplicated, practices developed long after the Buddha are not part of their Canon and they practice what has been their canon ever since they wrote it down.

Just for arguments sake, I think it always becomes complicated in real life. 

 

How did the first sangha practice? 

We do not know. 

A theravadin would say that the satipatthana sutta is orthodox, describing core samma sati methods. 

 

A theravadin might look at my alchemical process and say that it is a later development. 

 

And I would say that the beginner and intermediate steps of my practice are not found in the suttas (isn't it so that only two or three asanas are mentioned?), but the actual transformational work is clearly outlined in the satipatthana sutta ( I just checked that up). I could easily copy the relevant passage, and name the alchemical process that it describes. 

 

Now, having practiced some and shallowly discussed this with a student of one of the reformed modern vipassana traditions, our understanding of that chapter differed. The difference is outlined in the theravada abhidhamma (I seems to be referring quite a lot to that basket), so both interpretations are correct but on two different levels (basically, the two truths, a concept that aeems to be accepted in buddhist circles).

 

The problem here would be that the suttas are thought to be older, coming directly from the Buddha, while the abhidhamma texts are derived from them. A later  development. One of the three baskets, but a later development and because of that heretic in the view of the reformist? 

 

Thats quite a few theravadin that are not theravadin, because each and any development after the pali cannon becomes problematic in that regard. 

 

The method I use contains a mudra. No visualizations, no weird breathing patterns, just a mudra to aid the shift in awareness. All mudras do that. Are only mudras mentioned in the suttas orthodox enough for a reformed theravadin? 

 

I can totally agree that teachers add stuff, generation by generation, and sooner or later the methods tend to be encumbered with so much bling that attach to them that they lose their edge. 

 

The hard part with a reform is: What to remove? 

What is bling ( causing attachment) and what is development (aiding the spiritual process). 

 

There is a bodywork method in use in my neck of the woods. Developed in the 80-ties and 90-ties, and as the developers got older they started to cement the theoretical base and the practices. No new theory allowed.

 

But it is 2024, we know more about the mechanisms behind bodywork. So practitioners and teachers are leaving the organisation. Newer developments are found to be more useful in clinical practice. 

Isn't it always so?

 

(Sorry, rambling again.)

 

[Taoist Texts]

9 hours ago, forestofclarity said:

There are many problems with books, but I will list three based on personal experience:

thanks, always valuable to see an issue from an outside prospective. my experience has been different though

9 hours ago, forestofclarity said:

At this point, many people will reject the teacher, and go down the wrong path. I think generally, most people, especially modern people, underestimate the power of the delusion

without concrete details hard to tell whats going on and who is deluded;)

11 hours ago, Shadow_self said:

physical body function....It is a marker of  re-awakening a dormant faculty, and becomes very important later on for other practices.

from my POV it is wrong because it is materialism since the physical body is material.