Zen Pig

The Dao Bums
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Zen Pig

  • Rank
    Dao Bum
  1. False lineage narrative with “Mooji”

    yes, I have written about this in the past. I do think that many of these "bad guru's" might have started out with a real awakening experience or several, and started to teach with good intent. It seems to be human nature to let this kind of thing go to our heads, and we change due to the desire for power. I am sure the same thing would have happened to me, if I had chosen to walk down that road. like the old saying goes, "Man's got to know his limitations"
  2. I am fascinated at our human ability to create a belief system, or a guru who we worship. I am reminded of the 4 century BC statesman Demosthenes who said: "A Man is his own easiest dupe- For What he wishes to be true, He generally believes to be true". Back in the day, more than 20 years ago, when Eckhart Tolle wrote "The power of Now", which I read, and it did make a big impression on me to the extent that i dropped my original soto Zen, and started looking into the whole promise of "awakening" in the western fake neo-Advaita movement for about two years, until I started to see the manitic ego involved in it. I even use to listen to Mooji, until I got that itch on the back of my head that told me, "something is off about this guy". The last time I even looked at him was about a year or more ago, when I locked on one of his "satsangs" and he had this very young man, or teen who had laid his head on Mooji's lab during the entire "teaching'. Right then, I knew something was very wrong. Now I find this news, and to be honest, have not fact checked it, so it might just be someone trying to lamblast Mooji, but from what i have seen, it does have a ring of validity to it. Would be interested to know if anyone else got caught up in this time period. cheers. and Happy Friday.
  3. Buddhist Practices vs Taoist Practices

    Then what creates Mind?
  4. actually i have an undergraduate in physical chemistry, and retired from our local state university about a year ago............. so I have no problem with science. scientific methodology is a process of asking "what is it that we can know"?? this originates from the ancient Greeks who also asked the question, "can we ever know something for sure" or epistemology. This is the very reason in western science we say something is a "theory" instead of a "scientific fact" which is something that media, and non scientific true believers say. The purpose of saying that something is a theory, goes back to the original idea or question, "can we really know anything for sure"...... so a theory says. "This is what we know so far from observation, and reproduction in a laboratory environment, so we think this is the way this process goes, unless we get additional information that contradicts our results" This is the way scientific methodology was designed to work. But now days, we get folks who might have taken a science class in junior high or high school, forgot most of it, but have a fundamentalist "true believer" faith in science. So if one does there due diligence and questions long held ideas, they are accused of being "unscientific" where the reality of scientific investigation is to question everything. The late great MIT philosophy professor Huston Smith coined the term, "scientism" or the religious belief in science.
  5. Could be. I tend to agree in certain aspects of this comment. or maybe there is an "absolute subjective" truth. i personally think that a real "truth" would transcend both our subjective and objective scrutiny. but just my not knowing suggest that it might be deeper than we think it is
  6. just an example of using symbolic logic in the day to day world. and also, the subjective understanding of a tautology. Also, the "idea derive from that logic that declares that one apple has to be equal to another apple" is a direct result of attempting to use a tautology in the real world, so it comes from the equivalence inherent in the tautology. I'm not saying an apple has to equal another apple, the tautology construct is. In the day to day world, symbolic logic is a very rough road map at best. Mostly I am saying that the idea of a "Objective" truth is questionable. (of course if I said that "there is no objective truth", then this would be a kind of Russell's Paradox, where by I would be stating an objective truth as proof that there was no objective truth) LOL
  7. OK, this gets a bit weird, but a tautology is a logical truth, so to speak, like the statement A = A, which is intuitively true. by that, I mean if one takes the statement that A does not = A, that would be intuitively false. but if we look at these two statements, there is no real way to determine which statement is actually true or false. it is all a conditioned intuitively knowing, which is not objective. Lastly, If I say, A=A, which on the surface seems true, in the so called "real world", we cannot find any examples of this "truth". Such as replacing the symbolic A with an apple . so if i then say that Apple = Apple, while at first glance, seems to be an objective truth, is in fact not true, like we thought it was. after all, how can one apple ever equal another apple. one might be more red, one might taste a bit different, one might have a bruise on it........ and on and on. Even if one compares identical twins saying that Twin -= Twin, that also does not wash, as even identical twins have different finger prints. so in the day to day world, a tautology is just a subjective truth like everything else.
  8. Buddhist Practices vs Taoist Practices

    wow. yes, don't know how to respond to this. I am just a traveler, without a destination. so I have no idea if the road ends or goes on forever, maybe the monks are right, maybe not, maybe a little..
  9. good that you sussed this out by yourself. See the western origins to the search for what is true, or Epistemology. It is interesting that the origin of western rational "sciences' is developed on a foundation of the "three distinctions", and by the way, this description is a shit translation of the original Greek text. "The Greek word episteme is the root of the English word Epistemology. This philosophical term is commonly associated with the inquiry for truth and knowledge. Greek philosophers seeded the study, and from this cultivation of thought stems the growth of many sciences. The meaning of the word has three distinctions. First, epistemology can be the quest for true and scientific knowledge as opposed to opinion or belief. Secondly, reality is an organized body of thought. Lastly, sometimes referred to as the “first philosophy” epistemology is the understanding of the divine. Restated, epistemology has three focuses, a practical application, an applied science, and a theological approach.
  10. Buddhist Practices vs Taoist Practices

    yes, very true in my limited experience. thanks for the link
  11. Buddhist Practices vs Taoist Practices

    wow. don't know who these "advanced mediators" are, but from my experience, meditation, is a bridge to both the physical body,(focus breath work, hiking in the hills, etc) the earth, and everything unfolding in this moment. nothing is left out. don't go into a "mindless trance" just see thoughts as part of the whole, so thoughts are not good or bad, or no more or less important than this suchness of unfolding. very simple. nothing special. Folks who work meditation to "bless out" or become disconnected from this amazing life seem to have issues with fear, and avoidance, I think the cute neo non duality word is "spiritual bypassing" I call it fear to be alive.
  12. Lust and demons?

    Wow. thank god that I am an ordinary person. dodged a bullet on that one. Buddha died, Lao Tzu died. Jesus Died. The idea that someone who does not fuck is special, is such hubris. maybe special as in short bus special. LOL. Good luck with all that.
  13. The Complete System

    short of what? we are all going to die. just like we were all born. if i worried about the "time i have left", I would probably be a depressed, despondent person. I could drop dead right now. writing this............ (wait for it)............ Ok, good for now, so far. Forgot who made this analogy, think it was the late Hippie Berkeley philosopher Allen Watts, (who probably stole it from some zen dude), but it goes something like: "We don't judge the quality of a dance from how long it last, and we don't judge a song for how long it plays, (because in that case , Iron Butterfly's In the godadavida would be the best song in the last 50 years) LOL. If i try to live as long as I could, I would miss out on living, because I would be doing so because I was fearful of death, and hence fearful of living, but that's just me. not trying to tell anyone what to do. just my two cents.
  14. good points about how words make life changes to others. kind of amazing how words can be powerful. But my original point of deciding what is real and unreal is dependent on our conditioned upbringing. Many people define "unreal" as "Have no mass and take up no space", which we "Know" is true and makes sense, but If I told someone 150 years ago, that "waves" that are everywhere, travel in the vacuum of space, and have no mass or take up no volume are "real" they would laugh in my face and think I was insane. Of course now days, we all "Know" that these waves are real because we are taught that they are real. If i were to ask 100 people on the street, in today's "modern" world, "how does the wireless internet travel through empty space to our phones"? ...... I will be optimistic and say that only 99 out of the 100 would not have a clue. most would just say, "because we are taught that they do". I could even walk up to 100 people in the street and ask, "can you prove to me that the earth is not flat".......... how many could? not by saying, "this is what everyone is taught", but really show me that the earth is round using simple plane geometry like the Greeks did 3000 years ago. The point that I am probably not making very well, is how we think we "know" something, when we were really just conditioned to accept or believe something. how weird is that? thanks for the great comment.
  15. Not throwing stones in my own glass house here, but I see more and more how conditioned we are by our social upbringing. I have discussed this before in a charming story of how Robert Thurman's Tibetan teacher told him that he did not need to meditate so much because as a pre-programmed westerner, he could never drop his conditioned world view in order to become enlightened. bet that was a real knee slapper for him. I see so many spiritual seekers, and so called "awakened or enlightened" folks who still hold the boolean "all or nothing" , "yes or no", "real, or unreal, world views. If something is not real, like a dream, we call it Illusion, or that it really does not exist. If something is Real, (like my tv remote or smart phone) LOL, then we say that "this is real, material, we can all see it and discuss it". But when I was younger, and had dreams where I did not know I was dreaming, I could sit with a group of people at a table, and we agreed that we were all there, maybe eating food, that I could taste, feel, and that world was as "real" as this world, until I awoke, and saw that it was now, "unreal" or "Just a dream". So my mind was and is preconditioned to believe all or nothing, real/unreal, right/wrong. Can something be both real and unreal at the same time? do the terms "real, unreal" make any sense? for that matter, do the terms, "right/wrong", good/bad make sense as a mental label.? I have seen very bad people do good things, and vice versa. I have seen dreams that I "knew" were real at the time, but then upon awaking, "Knew" that they were unreal. Maybe just letting go of these ideas and beliefs, and just viewing the universe, life, everything as it unfolds without making a mental label for them. doubt we can let go completely, but maybe a little at a time. who knows?