Dr. Morris's Secret Smile & Breathing basic KAP 1 (Giri for the Tao Bumbs : ) )

[findley]

Just, nevermind.

Edited August 16, 2009 by findley

[Sunya]

I would have preferred not to reply to you, everseeking--

 

but you are a fool to associate genuine taoism as anything 'ascetic'.

 

"Hence always rid yourself of desires to observe its secrets,

yet always allow yourself to have desires to observe its manifestations."

 

--here is a 'suck my ass' to you for interjecting and corrupting something you apparantly have only a shallow understanding of. I would say that forcing yourself to sit and cultivate kundalini 6 hours a day is a more thuroughly 'ascetic' practice than cultivating wu-wei.

 

Otherwise, how I behave does not detract from the wisdom of my main points. FOOL . If you cannot see past my contempt for you, and into the meat of the actual points I make, then again: 'suck my ass'.

 

and, still, if you cannot discern between enhancing the bodily being, and cultivating the primal spirit, and continue to call them 'the same way', then again: suck my ass.

 

morris claims (or has claimed,) that enlightenment is a matter of energy-- of kundalini awakening. So, yes, he is teaching a way of enlightenment. beginning with the secret smile, confidence, and love. so, really, suck my ass.

 

 

 

wow. just....wow.

 

hey findley, whats genuine taoism say about being an angry prick?

Edited August 16, 2009 by mikaelz

[markern]

By you standards any practice that does not itself lead very directly to enlightenemnt is a false practice. Only the practice that itself awakens the kundlini, like Tummo maybe I don`t know, or itself provides the breakthrough to enlightenment like vipassana or dzogchen are worthy pracitces. But in order to make those practices work you need other practices first and simultainiously. Without shamatha (concentration meditation) Vipassana does not work at all. Without the preliminary and surrounding meditations any meditation that is designed particulary to arouse the kundalini is not likely to yield any result because of lack of concentration and no ability to penetrate the energetic kosha and because the chakras and elements are probably completly out of sync with each other. If it actualy did succed in raising the kundalini without the preporatory or surrounding practices one would almost certianly be in for an energetic nightmare known as kundlini syndrome.

 

Further more, enlightenment by itslef does not do everything to balance you out and make you a good and functional person. As far as I know all or almost all traditions have some sort of post enlightenment training to make you a well rounded enlightened being and to work on the personality structure and "ego" which does not disapear but is "seen through" and looses its tight grip on you which is something quite different. This type of work is done prior to enlightenemnt to prepare you for the journey and increase your likelyhood of success and to build something good that is also there once you get enlightened and it is done after enlightenement. Zen does this in numerous ways, Tibetan Budhism does it A LOT, the yogic tradition does it a lot, taoism does it. Thonglen, the Dalai Lamas favorite practice is, as far as I understand not at all anenlightenemnet practice but strictly a compassion practice designed. Loving kindness meditation tought by the buddha is not an enlightenemnt practice, balancing your chakras helps but is not per say an enlightenemnt practice.

 

The secret smile does several things as far as I understand. It prepares very well for kundalini by opening your meridians and making them used to carying large amounts of powerfull emotions and bliss. It makes you happy, balanced and emotionaly healthy which is extreemly important in making kundalini pass through without trouble and in having success in gaining enlightenment because emotional stabilty helps a lot. All traditions stress emotional stability. The first trainings in yoga and budhism are about getting your own basic shit in order and your basic morality in order and this is done almost exclusively because it is consdired necesary in order to have success on the path. If you are an unloving, imoral headcase with manic depressive tendencies getting enlightened is a long shot. The secret smile as I understand it also aproxiamtes the void state which is also helpfull in making you move towards it.

 

Now go read up on wise speach and the Yamas and Niyamas.

Edited August 16, 2009 by markern

[Mal]

 

[findley]

Maybe that's why (or one reason why,) the Dalai Lama is such a loser-- preaching loving-kindness to earn sympathy with the western world, instead of cultivating buddha-hood.

Considering the absolutely temporal nature of psychological states, I have seen some pretty ugly snapshots of (yes, even,) the dalai lama. Even he has not perfectly embodied the psychological-state of loving kindness.

Because it's impossible. His loving-kindness only exists in relation to it's opposite. A concept virtually everyone fails to understand. You fools who insist that enlightenment is indicated by a plateau at specific psychological states really make me sick.

 

Look, I understand the amplification effect of kundalini.

 

Well.

 

But I am trying to relay the idea that it is a mistake to emphasize certain feelings; to 'lock yourself into yourself,' by intentionally cultivating specific psychological states. (yes, even the good ones.) I am trying to tell you that emphasizing such cultivation is actually a backwards turn from the pursuit of genuine enlightenment.

 

Really, I like my previous metaphor: that cultivating such things as love, confidence, and happiness is like eating cheeto's.

 

 

And, Markern, guess what? I'm too smart to be a buddhist. Please, cram your 'right-speech' 'right-up' your ass. I'll tell you what: buddha wasnt a buddhist. why dont you forget that BS religious literature?

 

 

PS really, I think you would be a fool to believe that what I write into an internet forum was at all truly indicative of my over-all personality. I think that much of my contempt in this world is directed at people like you who would sooner teach 'right-speech' than genuine cultivation.

 

 

I only hesitate on this one point: that because I have not awaken my kundalini and become a super-human energetic circuit, I cannot say whether or not such arousal leads indirectly to enlightenment. I only assume that such is not the case, because mr. morris and 'santiago' are still teaching the cultivation of psychological states. (and further, 'santiago', however willing to promote dr. morris' 'essay', has chosen not to defend it against my assertions. [was I so hot-headed at my first inquiry...])

[TheSongsofDistantEarth]

OK, look, I will try and spell it out to you imbeciles-- because you cannot be expected to be wise on your own:

[/i]

So-- please-- suck my ass !

 

 

Ah! Lovingkindness!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

[Mal]

[Magitek]

Findley, what translation of the Tao Te Ching are you quoting?

 

What translations you read? which is your fave?

[Zhuo Ming-Dao]

Maybe that's why (or one reason why,) the Dalai Lama is such a loser-- preaching loving-kindness to earn sympathy with the western world, instead of cultivating buddha-hood.

Considering the absolutely temporal nature of psychological states, I have seen some pretty ugly snapshots of (yes, even,) the dalai lama. Even he has not perfectly embodied the psychological-state of loving kindness.

Because it's impossible. His loving-kindness only exists in relation to it's opposite. A concept virtually everyone fails to understand. You fools who insist that enlightenment is indicated by a plateau at specific psychological states really make me sick.

 

Just to clarify a point of contention here: The cultivation of loving-kindness is a relative practice that sets up good seeds of karma and softens anger, but does not itself lead directly to enlightenment. It is also not the practice that the Dalai Lama was specifically advocating.

 

The practice that he does above all others is the cultivation of compassion or karuna. This type of compassion is non-emotional and unattached to any specific object. It starts from the Bodhisattva vow to delay your enlightenment until after all other sentient beings have been saved. From there it deepens and permeates your experiential understanding of emptiness and dependent origination. Some practitioners mistake compassion for loving-kindness, but the two are very different things. This type of compassion has no opposite (is not dualistic) because it arises from an apprehension of the true nature of reality and therefore does lead one to enlightenment.

 

 

(I am not saying here that I have anything against practices that do not themselves lead directly to enlightenment, any more than I would discourage someone from doing sit-ups. I am just trying to clear up a misconception here.)

 

PS. Findley, did you really just attack the Dalai Lama?? I know the man might have some flaws, but why don't you just throw in Mother Teresa and Ghandi while you are at it. And please try to make sure you understand the practices that you are attacking before you start falsely flaming famous humanitarians.

Edited August 17, 2009 by Zhuo Ming-Dao

[findley]

I read the penguin classic version, translated by D.C. Lau.

 

I've read many, but this one is my favorite. There was an older penguin version... forgot who wrote it... but it actually reversed the two sections of the book, 'tao' and 'te'... it was pretty shitty all-round. NOT that one.

[Sunya]

And, Markern, guess what? I'm too smart to be a buddhist. Please, cram your 'right-speech' 'right-up' your ass. I'll tell you what: buddha wasnt a buddhist. why dont you forget that BS religious literature?

 

mmm yes Buddha was a Buddhist, this ain't no Catholic Church hid the secret teachings of Jesus type thing.... all of Buddhism is based on the original teachings of the Buddha, who started the religion.. founded monasteries and nunneries and set up teachings in easy to remember formats. He was setting up a foundation for a movement.

 

You are completely correct about one thing Findley, you're too smart to be a Buddhist. that dualistic mind is churnin up a storm over there! until you learn to let go of your thoughts and sense of self, which you are overly attached to, and learn to feel.. you'll never truly amount to anything. so full of anger, pride, and self-grasping...how do you call yourself a spiritual practitioner? is it merely a label for you or do you seriously think you're evolving by acting like such a prick?

[findley]

I thought that 'buddha' had never actually written anything.

 

probably for a reason.

 

...edited profane insult...Moderator

[Mal]

P.S.

Insult Policy Reminder

[everseeking]

Seriously Findley, I'm beginning to think you are a troll.

 

Nothing more.

 

By the way, I don't want to suck anything of yours. And you definitely suffer from your own logic.

 

How many people have you been able to advance spiritually, or in any other way?

 

You just insult people. There is no logical point to your rants. Literally, you lack deductive reasoning.

 

You seem to believe that everyone is doing it wrong, and you know the right way.

 

Findley, lets do this--lets suppose that this enlightenment you speak of, if we were to agree it is a destination, or an end, or a goal.

 

Map it out on a piece of paper. So we have that.

 

Now, consider all the different people who are trying to advance their consciousness, or seek enlightenment, or see the true nature and true self. These seekers are not all the same distance from the place of enlightenment. Some are closer, some, and many may very well be approaching from a path that is 90 or even 180 degrees apart, if you place enlightenment in the center of the page.

 

We all have to start somewhere, from wherever we are. And with methods appropriate for each of us.

 

THERE IS MORE THAN ONE PATH! BUT THE CLOSER TO THE GOAL, THE MORE THEY ARE THE SAME.

 

As for me associating genuine Taoism with asceticism, not even close. I associate YOU with asceticism, as you seem to think that any emotional experience we cling to is contrary to 'the path'. Well, YOU are definitely not the embodiment of genuine Taoism. But I would not be surprised if you told that you think you are.

 

You aren't an authority on reaching enlightenment. You may be well versed in text, but to quote a few past cultivators--

 

"The Tao that can be named is not the true Tao."

 

Also,

 

"Even truth is to be relinquished, to say nothing of untruth"

 

Without direct experience, what good are your words?

 

I hope you find a good teacher, and maybe a psychologist--And I hope you are able to free yourself from your ego, it must be painful to grip so tightly to your preconceptions.

[Mal]

lets do this--lets suppose that this enlightenment you speak of, if we were to agree it is a destination, or an end, or a goal.

 

Map it out on a piece of paper. So we have that.

 

Now, consider all the different people who are trying to advance their consciousness, or seek enlightenment, or see the true nature and true self. These seekers are not all the same distance from the place of enlightenment. Some are closer, some, and many may very well be approaching from a path that is 90 or even 180 degrees apart, if you place enlightenment in the center of the page.

 

We all have to start somewhere, from wherever we are. And with methods appropriate for each of us.

 

THERE IS MORE THAN ONE PATH! BUT THE CLOSER TO THE GOAL, THE MORE THEY ARE THE SAME.

 

Exactly, cool analogy too.

[Mal]

[Vajrasattva]

what a dummy thread ! !

 

I want to know, why is this 'happy' 'lovey' 'orgasmic' smile meditation, which is apparantly and obviously only a direct manipulation of psychological states,

 

-at all an indication of enlightenment??

 

There are deeper concepts, it is my opinion, that are to be regarded for serious aspirants of enlightenment,

 

PS no, I didnt practice secret smile as per morris-- but as per chia. and compared to what I know now, I confidently assert it as a waste of time

 

PS I may be obnoxious, santiago, but my words warrant their merit ! you would do well to address them. Explain yourself, and the practices you promote-- because you are influencing the minds and lives of many others !

 

 

If you can't master this (Dr.Morris's Secret Smile) then what can you expect to master in "deeper concepts" of enilghtenment?

[Vajrasattva]

\

I only hesitate on this one point: that because I have not awaken my kundalini and become a super-human energetic circuit, I cannot say whether or not such arousal leads indirectly to enlightenment. I only assume that such is not the case, because mr. morris and 'santiago' are still teaching the cultivation of psychological states. (and further, 'santiago', however willing to promote dr. morris' 'essay', has chosen not to defend it against my assertions. [was I so hot-headed at my first inquiry...])

 

 

Its simple come see me.

[Magitek]

I read the penguin classic version, translated by D.C. Lau.

 

I've read many, but this one is my favorite. There was an older penguin version... forgot who wrote it... but it actually reversed the two sections of the book, 'tao' and 'te'... it was pretty shitty all-round. NOT that one.

 

I quite like the translation you were quoting. I was reading in the "definate edition" that the book probably got changed somewhat over the years.... So maybe the true Tao Te Ching doesn't exist even in ancient chinese language? But you can rest assured the Secret of The Golden Flowers OK since that was written quit recently and the political bastards haven't had time to latch onto it yet!

[findley]

everseeking--

lets have a contest: first one to enlightenment, WINS! -we'll keep up with eachother on the board; let me know what you think of confidence, 'love', happiness and smiles-- if you ever even manage to arouse your kundalini.

PS at least I dont turn myself into a fool AND hypocrite-- I dont have standards of behavior to conform to. From the sounds of it, you do--

 

Vajrasattva--

that's a loser response, dude. Maybe I'd be wasting my time, taking a trip out to florida to see you and your master? reading a book a day, you should be competent enough to articulate a reasonable reply to a reasonable inquiry onto an internet forum.

 

Magitek--

Yeah, this penguin classic translation is definately my favorite, too.

You know--- it warms my heart. I dont mean to imply that people should listen to me-- but that anyone should pick up an increased interest in the Tao te Ching is just cool. Its not me I want people to see, but just rather the texts that I am bringing into conversation.

I hope you learn as much from the text as I have, man. it changed my life.

 

 

PS vajrasattva, everseeking: you both fail. !

 

edited by Modertor. Insults

[Biff]

EDIT: Removed out of respect for Santi and Glen. Lets keep this thread positive.

Edited August 18, 2009 by Biff

[Vajrasattva]

everseeking--

lets have a contest: first one to enlightenment, WINS! -we'll keep up with eachother on the board; let me know what you think of confidence, 'love', happiness and smiles-- if you ever even manage to arouse your kundalini.

PS at least I dont turn myself into a fool AND hypocrite-- I dont have standards of behavior to conform to. From the sounds of it, you do-- and you suck.

 

Vajrasattva--

that's a loser response, dude. Maybe I'd be wasting my time, taking a trip out to florida to see you and your master? reading a book a day, you should be competent enough to articulate a reasonable reply to a reasonable inquiry onto an internet forum.

 

Magitek--

Yeah, this penguin classic translation is definately my favorite, too.

You know--- it warms my heart. I dont mean to imply that people should listen to me-- but that anyone should pick up an increased interest in the Tao te Ching is just cool. Its not me I want people to see, but just rather the texts that I am bringing into conversation.

I hope you learn as much from the text as I have, man. it changed my life.

PS vajrasattva, everseeking: you both fail. BLOW ME !

 

 

So when are you coming???

[JustARandomPanda]

Speaking only for myself I've found Dr. Morris's Secret Smile to be very helpful. Especially in illuminating areas of myself that need work, letting go, etc.

 

I have found the Confidence phase particularly difficult. I've always known I've lacked in this area but it is quite another thing to experience it so directly without it even being attached to an incident to which I could point to as 'ah-hah, this is why I'm not confident'. Remove the exterior reason or rationalization and I *still* find it difficult to even start up the Confidence phase.

 

I've always known I've been a very timid person but I've always also brought up tons of reasons (external of course) as to why this is so. It was and still is a jarring thing to experience this difficult phase in Secret Smile because it gives me empirical evidence that no matter what the situation would be I would still have this problem.

 

In fact, after weeks of trying and failing to summon up Confidence I've thrown in the towel and replaced it with the feeling of Quiet Satisfaction in a Job Well-Done. Which is not the same thing imo as true Confidence but that's about the best I've been able to do.

 

 

I've learned similar surprising things about certain other phases of Secret Smile similar to the Confidence one.

 

 

I've always lived very much 'in my head' and strongly guided by it so it's not been easy getting in touch with my emotions and never has been. There have been plenty of times when I've been asked what I'm feeling and I literally wouldn't know. But if you asked what I was thinking I could always tell you. Which is odd because women are supposedly more in-touch with emotions than men. I guess there are always exceptions to the rule.

 

 

I would never have had this realization about myself in such a blatant - in-your-face - manner were it not for this particular exercise. It's a different thing to experience this block v. intuiting it intellectually. I can no longer blame anyone else or anything else for this lack inside me.

 

 

Even if I never reach enlightenment I would still say that for people like me - the ones who tend to be clueless many times about their emotional states - will find Secret Smile very helpful. In such a case....trying to not consider emotion will toss gasoline on the fire of what we already have. It would be far too easy to mistake such 'deadened' inability to feel with Effortless Equanimity - and it would be the wrong conclusion.

 

Until one like myself who lives in their head walks the path of emotion true judgment as to what is good for achieving enlightenment will not be attainable.

[Dreamingawake]

 

edit: I just couldn't resist

Edited August 17, 2009 by Dreamingawake

[markern]

Findley, everyone her understands perfectly well that there is a huge different between a "dualistic" emotion and the nondualistic enlightened state. Having spent time here for a few years I can tell you with absolute certianity that for the regular bums (some newbies and passers by might be something else) that is like 2 pluss 2 and so your weird ranting about this is completly misplaced and just a fantasy in your head. Numerous threads of late that go in depth on enlightenement, budhism vs vedanta and taoism shoudl have made that abundantly clear.

 

On the other hand YOU do not understand non-attatchement att all and you do not understand the relationship between a non-dual unerstanding and a dual self and the cultivation of that self. The way you are talking you should follow up un it and start doing Dzogchen in the traffic. The point as Santiago has said is to live in both mandalas (and do it well) and for that one also works on dualistic emotions and most certainly on dualistic practicalities. This does not at all hinder either mindfulness in daily life nor the possibility or speed with which one reaches enlightenment. A good example of that is Daniel Ingram which has done it realy fast and would find what you are saying completly ridiculous. Read his blook you realy need to learn this:

 

http://web.mac.com/danielmingram/iWeb/Dani...he%20Blook.html

 

You should also read Shinzen Young. He explains a lot of the things you are confused about very, very clearly. The what is equanimity article should be important for you, so should the meditation:escaping into life article be and these also, Purpose and Method of Vipassana Meditation, Meditation and the Self, Meditation and Pleasure, Meditation and Emptying the Mind. His book on the science of enlightenment is probably better but haven`t gotten that far. A wise heart (about budhist pshycology) by jack Kornfield and a path with heart and after the extacy the laundry by hte same author is will also help you sort things out.