Taoist Texts

The Dao Bums
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    3,931

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    19

Posts posted by Taoist Texts

  3. Posted

    4 hours ago, Cobie said:

    :lol: I guess the teacher,

    well luckily whom Master Wang had was not just any old teacher. Them were several  invisible teachers.

    Quote

    On the wedding day, the old wizards who had taught
    Wang Liping naturally came to offer felicitations, but
    they didn't show themselves, for fear of starding the
    crowd. Only Wang Liping could see them. 

     

    • Thanks 1
    • Wow 1

  4. Posted · Edited by Taoist Texts
    glossed jing

    Quote

    Why do you think Wang LiPing has a wife and a son?

    excellent question. Who better to answer it than the maestro himself?!

    Quote

     

    When Wang Liping returned to the ordinary world in obedience to his teacher's directions,

    he wanted to marry and have a family like ordinary people. 

    1996 Thomas Cleary. Da Dao Xing (in Chinese)

     

    now a question. who has ordinary people's wants? hint: not a taoist. but wait! could he be an ordinary man  with daring ambitions  to bootstrap himself out of abject poverty by riding the qigong craze tsunami of the 80ies? why yes Virginia, he could!

    Quote

    Sometimes Qigong energetics teachers would give classes nearby, and Master Wang would attend, paying the fees out of his meager salary .

    Thats how Master Wang learned his trade. But why there is not a single mention of  jing in his first book? Simple: because jing (as a sexual term) was not a part the qigong craze repertoire. Such jing came into vogue in the 90ies, with the neidan craze. (well actually same qigong masquerading as neidan). Since then jing is all both the neidaneers and the qigongers chatter about, 30 years and still going strong. still hilarious. 

     

    • Like 1

  6. Posted

    17 hours ago, Mark Foote said:

    I ask for examples of:

     

    The art work of early Buddhism shows what early Buddhism and the Buddha was like.  He is not depicted but represented by a pair and sandals, or an empty cushion and so on.  He is surrounded by dancing and singing, by nature spirits including voluptuous female nature spirits, and naga serpents.

    here you are. they are voluptuous all right

    undefined

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aniconism_in_Buddhism

     

    However, in 1990, the notion of aniconism in Buddhism was challenged by Susan Huntington, initiating a vigorous debate among specialists that still continues.[5] She sees many early scenes claimed to be aniconic as in fact not depicting scenes from the life of the Buddha, but worship of cetiya (relics) or re-enactments by devotees at the places where these scenes occurred. Thus the image of the empty throne shows an actual relic-throne at Bodh Gaya or elsewhere. She points out that there is only one indirect reference for a specific aniconic doctrine in Buddhism to be found, and that pertaining to only one sect.[6]

     

    so the notion of early Buddhist aniconism is outdated

     

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 2

  7. Posted · Edited by Taoist Texts

    7 hours ago, DreamBliss said:

    Anyone familiar with the book I mentioned, or Eric Peppin?

    yes many are, all over the web. please understand that all miracle-makers and miracle-teachers are disgusting frauds. This one takes the cake though.

    https://www.wweek.com/portland/article-10512-eric-the-enlightened.html

     

    Quote

    Eric Pepin is a digusting, manipulative pig. ESP and meditation have been around for centuries. Many people claim there are multiple dimensions and that astral projection exists. So what if he can do any of these things. His teachings don't just enlighten people, he believes he can take the place of psychologists for people who need SERIOUS therapy. I lost one of my best friends to this cult. She sat ALONE "meditating", recalling past childhood abuse, and crying hysterically for weekds on end. He claimed this was necessary for her healing. She wasn't actually diagnosed with bipolar disorder until years into her involvement with this cult. She is on medication and I haven't heard from her. I can only hope she has left this behind. What sickens me isn't just the people who are involved with this, but the ones who attempt to influence others. I had to be very firm in telling my friend to stop trying to teach my children Eric Pepins beliefs. She went on to attempt to suck her cousin and neice into it. Eric Pepin preys on people who are lonely or going through emotional turmoil.

    https://www.oregonlive.com/hillsboroargus/2008/03/socalled_psychic_files_suit_ag.html

    https://forum.culteducation.com/read.php?5,33575,92547

    On 5/24/2024 at 7:59 PM, DreamBliss said:

    I'm very tired, on every level. I am weary of my life and the seemingly concrete box of an experience of reality I am locked into. I want to know if the things in this book I am reading are true. I don't know how to ask that in Eric Peppin's Discord. Any advice?

    you need to calm down otherwise you will hurt yourself.

  8. Posted

    1 hour ago, snowymountains said:

    Air and electromagnetic waves are not a solid.

    The tree is, hence the reality check here is for solids.

    oh so there are at least two different reality tests, hope they do not clash or anything. hey if i never ever have a chance to try walking through that tree for myself - is it real for me?

    23 minutes ago, Apech said:

    why can’t you walk through the wall in your dream- do you have repressed wall traumas?

    hell yeah! i blame not enough padding in my kindergarten.  on the positive side  naked in public dreams stopped. almost.

    On 5/26/2024 at 2:12 AM, Nungali said:

    The disco up the end of the river    ^ 

    from the river to the sea...

    • Haha 1

  9. Posted

    you guys are so funny with this 'walk through the tree a reality test' business.;) i can walk through air - is air unreal? a radio-wave goes right through the tree - is the tree unreal? i cannot walk through a wall in my dream - is the wall real? hehe;)

    • Haha 1

  11. Posted

    1 hour ago, Apech said:

    skandha idea as true - I know for instance that the tree in my yard 

    skandha does not refer to physical objects. it is a concept defined as: a part of a human mind ( a collection of thoughts)  plus the object which causes them . skandha is like a reflection in a mirror plus the reflected object. but the object on its own is not a skandha. the tree is not a skandha. the thoughts about the tree is not a skandha

    thats why skandha is impermanent. when the object is gone or thoughts change the skandha disintegrates.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skandha

    1 hour ago, Apech said:

    But my question is - where does that reality come from?  Why is the tree real?

    real is an undefined meaningless bad word. it does not compute. until it is defined, i assume that by 'real' it is meant material. and the tree is material because it is a part of  the material world. the world is material meaning the world is 'existing'.  immaterial things do not exist. so again to answer the question: for no reason at all our material world exists forever, and the tree is a part thereof. thats why the tree is 'real'.

     

    these are just my modest musings aloud not directed at anyone in particular;)

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1

  12. Posted

    1 hour ago, forestofemptiness said:

     

    Sat/asat is usually used in the way we use "real" and "unreal" in my experience. 

    well its close but not really, in reality (hehe) it is being-non-being or substantial-not substantial

    https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/questions/28342/what-exactly-is-sat-asat

    which makes sense. if something is not real then how come we even talk about it?

    6 hours ago, johndoe2012 said:

    Apparently not only westerners

    yeah the guy is marketing himself to the western audience, hence the translation into english. apart from his lame arrogance

    Quote

     Thay needs to make this new translation of the Heart Sutra because the patriarch who originally compiled the Heart Sutra was not sufficiently skilful enough with his use of language

    and apart from calumniating the author of the Heart Sutra

    Quote

    Avalokiteśvara (meaning "the lord who looks down", IPA: /ˌʌvəloʊkɪˈteɪʃvərə/[1]), also known as Lokeśvara ("Lord of the World") and Chenrezig (in Tibetan), is a tenth-level bodhisattva associated with great compassion (mahakaruṇā). He is often associated with Amitabha Buddha.[2] Avalokiteśvara has numerous manifestations and is depicted in various forms and styles. In some texts, he is even considered to be the source of all Hindu deities (such as Vishnu, Shiva, Saraswati, Brahma, etc).[3]

    it is not even clear what does he try to say

  13. Posted

    7 hours ago, Apech said:

    Where does its reality come from? 

    interestingly in buddhism there is no 'reality', not even a word for such. there are several dichotomies which are close like 'rupa-arupa' but 'real-unreal' is not a buddhist or indian ph. nomenclature

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality_in_Buddhism

    7 hours ago, Apech said:

    if we see, touch, experience a tree - it is real.  Indisputably real. 

    in our regular state of mind yes. However if we are progressing in jhana then at some point objects will appear to us as arupa, formless and sunya, empty. Its just an aberration of our perception brought about by long sitting. It is a sign of a progress but does not mean much otherwise.

    7 hours ago, Apech said:

    Where does its reality come from? 

    per the above, now we can answer this: our world is material, 'real' if you will.  Real to a normal mind, empty to a partially trained mind. But otherwise, objectively there is no real-unreal distinction.

     

    Quote

     

     the Heart sutra, ...states that the five skandhas (along with the five senses, the mind, and the four noble truths) are said to be "empty" (sunya):

    Form is emptiness, emptiness is form
    Emptiness is not separate from form, form is not separate from emptiness
    Whatever is form is emptiness, whatever is emptiness is form.[45][note 2][note 3]

    Note the bolded: in a typical western fashion the western commenter sees 'empty' but does not see 'form' here.  This western selective blindness is perennially amusing.

  14. Posted

    6 hours ago, Apech said:

    but I think this is unlikely

    yes me too

    6 hours ago, Apech said:

    the Buddha was the Tathagata - 'thus gone one' and so it was an artistic device to show that although he was present ... he was also beyond 'self' and thus shown as a void.

    my guess is that he was always represented both in human form and in a symbolic form. It was the modern scholars who, under a false theory of progress, ascribed the symbolic form to the early stage and the human form to the later stage. Also, quite naturally, the early human likenesses of a budding religion were much fewer in number and few are preserved due to older age.

  16. Posted

    1 hour ago, Apech said:

    Well it is said that the goal of Theravada is becoming an Arhat and the goal of Mahayana Buddhism is to become a Buddha.  And in the case of Vajrayana to become a Buddha in one life time.

    well of course. And both of Arhat and Buddha are basically the same thing which both mean the attainment of nirvana:

    Quote

    In Theravada Buddhism, the Buddha himself is first identified as an arhat

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arhat#In_Theravāda_Buddhism

    The Mahīśāsaka and the Theravada regarded arhats and buddhas as being similar to one another. The 5th century Theravadin commentator Buddhaghosa regarded arhats as having completed the path to enlightenment.[note 4] According to Bhikkhu Bodhi, the Pāli Canon portrays the Buddha declaring himself to be an arahant.[32][note 5] According to Bhikkhu Bodhi, nirvāṇa is "the ultimate goal", and one who has attained nirvana has attained arhatship:[note 6] Bhikkhu Bodhi writes, "The defining mark of an arahant is the attainment of nirvāṇa in this present life."[32]

    and nirvana is of course the buddhist paradise

    Quote

     

    the view of primitive Buddhism was that nirvana was a positive reality, a kind of immortal state (amrta) similar to the godly abode of svarga found in the Edicts of Ashoka.[58]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_(Buddhism)#As_a_metaphysical_reality_or_transcendent_consciousness

     

     

     

    1 hour ago, Apech said:

    As far as I know the only one of these which has an alchemical process is Vajrayana.

    alchemy is inherent in all the other schools. once we define what the alchemy is then we will see that it was there the whole time;)

    • Like 3

  17. Posted · Edited by Taoist Texts

    6 hours ago, Apech said:

    Is the creation of an immortal soul a goal of Buddhism?  

    Yes it is absolutely. What else could be the goal? Of course there are gradations like a better rebirth on earth, a rebirth on a heaven, a final rebirth in the pure land paradise (which is the final nirvana). But they all hinge on constructing a soul, which is like a boat, can fish by the shore, can cross the Atlantic.

    Quote

    If so what type of Buddhism since it is not really a monolith?

    All and every type. We (the buddhists hehe) are really closing ranks on that point;). Do you know a specific type of buddhist which has something else for an end goal?

    36 minutes ago, snowymountains said:

    the question of whether the end goal is the same between the two paths.

    cool. if so let me bask in satisfaction of having answered it above and repeating it here: yes the goal is the same.

    • Like 1

  22. Posted · Edited by Taoist Texts

    2 hours ago, snowymountains said:

    insight the final stage is where the meditator is able to concentrate on that which has no beginning, no duration and no end, aka Nibbana, which bears no similarities at all to an MCO process.

     .......so the question is, is the end goal

    i heard the end goal of buddhism is to escape suffering of birth, aging, illness, dying; 

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duḥkha#Early_Buddhism

    how a concentration or insight on anything prevents any of that?

    It does not. Which means that you are mistaken or do not know what is the end goal of Daoism and Buddhism. In reality, both of them have the same goal: creation of an immortal soul which is impervious to suffering.

    • Like 2

  23. Posted

    6 hours ago, Cobie said:

     

    Now that’s what I call a strange religion.

    oh it is par for the course.

    6 hours ago, Cobie said:

     

    Anybody care to explain the story?

    This is a simple cosmological myth whereas Horus is the god of light, sun, moon, yang and Seth is the god of storms, deserts, yin. All the mutual exchange of semen and body parts are just an interplay of energy between the yin and yang. Eventually they reconcile to rule together over Egypt. The end. 

    The two gods are often represented in the construct known as the sma-ta-wy - in which the sedge and papyrus, symbols of the reconciled gods, are entwined and knotted about the windpipe and lungs that symbolize the united Egypt.

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1

  25. Posted

    2 hours ago, Cobie said:

    “religio is derived from religare: re (again) + ligare (bind or connect)”

    exactly. same as yoga

    8 hours ago, Taomeow said:

    Am I to be offended or flattered? ;) 

    totally flattered because gnosticism is the most elitist and the only feminist one of all the christianities out there

    8 hours ago, silent thunder said:

    impregnating of Mary ......Mary seemed to lack the ability to give consent to the process, due to the deliverance of the Angelic message that she had 'been chosen' by god.  Was Mary allowed to say no?

    sorry to bear even more disturbing tidings. but... in that day and age all women were impregnated without their consent given that the marriage was decided by the parents 

    • Like 1