Taoist Texts

you may wanna start by asking yourself "how do i know my goal is a real thing" and "if it is, what good will come out of it eventually"

Probably Charles Luke omitted it and did not transl it. It is a part of the 16th chapter. https://comter.xoom.it/b/mingzhi/16.htm you can use AI or Google transl on it, they work quite well

Apparently there was no such thing as hinayana in the real buddhism. Apparently hinayana meaning 'early buddhism' is only used in the west. Jonathan Silk has argued that the term "Hinayana" was used to refer to whomever one wanted to criticize on any given occasion, and did not refer to any definite grouping of Buddhists.[20] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinayana

well i am not really free to do so because for me words actually have meaning and also i understand the historical developments but thank you very much for your kind permission.

not it can not. Because the exact words: 'The Buddha-nature' are not used there. Thats why the pure mind is not The Buddha-nature. And thats why the chinese buddhism which actually invented The Buddha-nature contradicts Theravada on this point. The absolute contradiction between a pure mind and The Buddha-nature is emphasized in the well known 6th patriarch's gatha. to sum it up, the pure mind is samsara. The buddha-nature is nirvana. Shen-hsiu presents the following verse which Hung-jen characterizes as incomplete in understanding. The body is the bodhi tree, The mind is like a clear mirror. At all times we must strive to polish it, And must not let the dust collect. *** 2) Hui-neng offers the following alternative verse: Bodhi originally has no tree, The mirror(-like mind) has no stand. Buddha-nature (emptiness/oneness) is always clean and pure; Where is there room for dust (to alight)? https://pages.uoregon.edu/munno/OregonCourses/REL444S05/HuinengVerse.htm

eh in my memory i dont even have what i had for breakfast good quote. indeed it does hint at the buddha nature. however strictly speaking the 'unborn' here is a place or a state - the nirvana, not the buddha nature which is a thing.

if only you would follow your incisive statement by a "because..." and a quote...but you did not...(sigh)

because the concept of Buddha nature was first invented in china a 1000 years after the the historic Buddha. It was not in, and is actually counter to Theravada https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddha-nature

yes, exactly

sure. here you go

originally it is a Buddhist term : jīnshēn Buddha's gilded image; also used as a characteristic of buddhas and bodhisattvas . From there it was borrowed into the religious taoism to describe the celestial beings; and from there into late neidan as a synonym of the pure yang body. An example of the neidan usage: That was then. By now, in modern neidaneering parlance, it does not mean anything except crazy talk.

that must feel soo pleasant to order other humans as to what they can or cannot say.

Yes i understand. Lets see if you do;) Your question has nothing to do with your quote from Wang Zhe. He talks about 五行 which Eskildsen and you misunderstood as 5 elements. But Wang meant Now your question is about a different chinese word: the De 德 (singular) which is also translated as the virtue in english. You seem to be very confused on what the De is. Despite you changed the subject a couple of times from the original 'secret ming method in the beginning', i am happy to discuss your new topic of “先天德“ it does not make sense by definition. Pre-heaven means something inborn independently of cultivation and existing before any cultivation. thats why it is called pre- (before) 先。 If you did i did not see it. maybe you post it again? Now lets see what an authoritative author says about "preheaven Virtue" which in chinese would be “先天德“. Oh wait we can not. Because it is not widely used in those it seems. Do you have a quote for this exact term “先天德“ so we know that it is a real thing and not a modern fiction?

Dr. E. is an abbreviation for Doctor Eskildsen. He mistranslated the passage you quoted. Based on his incorrect translation you mistakenly claim that there is a '5 element method'. There is not. There is a '5 virtues method', which has nothing to do with neidan. I proved it in my previous post above. Therefore your misunderstanding of taoism and neidan comes from a wrong translation by Dr. E. Please (if you wish) let me know if I am clear enough for you to understand what i just said in this post. Thank you;)

apparently you are asking what exactly IS the 5 elements method. Since you used the magic word (and also because this is so hilarious) here it is: there is no 5 elements method here. What Dr E. renders as 5 elements is......(drum roll....) ....5 moral conducts (rim shot). wǔ-xíng 1) five elements (metal, wood, water, fire, earth) 2) five constant virtues (benevolence, righteousness, propriety, knowledge, faith) 问曰。如何是五行之法。 诀曰。第一先须持戒。清静。忍辱。慈悲。实善。断除十恶。行方便。救度一切众生。忠君王。孝敬父母师资。此是修行之法。 See? Thats the method. Asked and answered.

hehe thanks for this. In general Eskildsen is brilliant, love him, but he fumbled the ball in this passage. He made a naive mistake which can happen to any one who is not in the tradition. But i am an insider so i will explain it to you. It is very easy to ascertain that he made a mistake, wenyan is not necessary. As you see, the original has two different chars: 法 and 功。 Our Doctor friend renders them with the same one word: method. I hope you see how it might be not quite correct.

well since we are having such a pleasant chat i will let you in on a secret: there is just one method. anyone who teaches you that there are many methods is an ignorant cheat. Hehe if you mean me personally then perhaps we let me be the judge of that. Question mark. As an aside this logic always had me scratching my head. If somebody does not understand words on paper in black and white what makes him think that he will understand words coming out of somebody else's mouth?

I red the original while you did not. and no it does not say anything of what you imply;). In fact the text says the direct opposite of what you imply. If the text said what you imply you would quote the text instead of quoting a western academic who is not a part of the tradition. Again I quote the text Please understand that i am not arguing with you personally. I wish to thank you for lending me your post which I use to refute the falsity of the modern fraudulent teachers with their hackneyed 'secret Ming method first' fraud. everybody is welcome to his opinion. However everybody would be well advised to: A] not to refer to texts which do not endorse the said opinion under a pretense that they do B] give a thought as to why everybody does not have any achievements over many many years;) (present company of course excluded)

well, you see, nowhere in your quote Eskildsen or Wang state that in fact the very first line of the quoted text directly refutes that claim. Instead Wang states the direct opposite of that claim In fact, the idea of 'beginning with Ming' comes from a source directly opposite to the Northern lineage: from the Southern one. It was first notably voiced by Zhang Bo-duan 《悟真篇》自序中谓：“先以修命之术顺其所欲，渐次导之于道。" but even that phrase does not mean 'to begin with Ming'. Despite being misunderstood to mean that;)

Did he now? Do you have a quote? but, but... how do we know that they lost it?

Are you saying that Wang Zhe and his disciples were mistaken in their practice?

there is no 'nature' there. 'nature' us a western concept. to transl 自然 as 'nature' is wrong. 自然 is 自 self/from 然 so/it. 自然 means something that happens from-it-self. on its own. spontaneously. thats where this spontaneity comes from.

here;) https://ctext.org/zhuangzi/ens?searchu=spontaneity no;)

well good luck. please let us know when you make it true.