freeform

Completely agree.

There’s also an interesting perspective that I’ve heard from high level Daoist healers. That medicine is a form of self cultivation. That by treating a person and adjusting the path of their Ming, the healer creates internal transformation in herself. I don’t understand the mechanisms around this, but it’s what I’ve been told.

Zhuangzi influence. Just because I strongly defend a position I believe to be true doesn’t mean that I think of love ‘as a four letter word’ as Dwai put it. I think kindness (the ‘action’ aspect of love) should be a given! This isn’t something to be cultivated for some spiritual aim. This is just basic human decency. It’s quite obviously there already as a basic instinct and should be nurtured as a matter of course! I think it’s the natural state of someone when they aren’t burdened, tired or confused. But according to my teachers and my experience of mine and other aspirant’s paths it is not the primordial state. Thinking that it is and focusing on it past a certain point causes issues. Sometimes major, life threatening issues. That’s the reason I’m making my point and defending it. The qualities that should be cultivated at all times (and aren’t necessarily easy or ‘natural’ for most people) are these: Humour - Zhuangzi Humility - Laozi and not taking things too seriously...

I can’t imagine anything better than catching the sunrise in a mountain valley in Colorado!

That - and we have gun laws here

I’ve seen research on the benefits of bright light in the morning. Light is the ‘reset’ switch for your circadian rhythms. Here’s a link with a very simplified explanation (although a quick search will bring up decent peer reviewed papers that you may or may not be bothered to read through) What interested me was that the major circadian rhythms are stimulated by light entering the eyes, but the actual process is controlled by the liver (which releases relevant hormones and stuff). This is what keeps the internal clock ticking. In Daoism the liver and the eyes are intimately connected. For some reason people come to me for advice when they’re depressed or chronically ill and tired. My advice for all of them - that has worked dramatically well 7 times out of 10 - is to take a brisk 15 minute walk (outdoors) at sunrise - whilst making sure that they get to bed at an hour that gives them between 8 and 9 hrs of sleep (no more and no less). Very basic advice, but has been completely life changing for a few people. It’s funny - people go looking for spiritual practices, when all they really want is to feel ok. And the three most obvious tenets for that are - sleep well, eat well and exercise well... (and get out in nature regularly)

I have a three year old niece who loves to come over and feed my cat. However, she thinks the cat’s normal food is too boring - so she mixes dry food with water, adds a dollop of his raw meat, adds anything that we, the humans, have been eating - whether it’s cake or stew... or coffee. She sits there lovingly mashing and mixing this delightful meal. The cat - in it’s wisdom, shows some discernment. It runs out to the garden and doesn’t come back until my niece is gone

Disobedience will not be tolerated!! Interesting! Does the Path of Cause aim for enlightenment in one lifetime or is the idea to develop enough merit over many lifetimes?

Can you tell us much about the three ‘vehicles’ of Nei Dan? Lower (earthly?) Vehicle - working with energy and the ‘substances’... Middle (human?) Vehicle - working directly with consciousness... Highest (heavenly) Vehicle - working with I’m not even sure what... I believe these descriptions come from Liu Yi Ming - but maybe there’s older sources. I find this interesting. They represent very different ‘systems’ of development - it may be a good topic for this post.

At least it got you invoking Jesus!

Explains the pompous self entitlement 👍🏼 I’ve still not seen evidence that imitating the virtues is a means to enlightenment from your quotes or from your links. Did anyone else see it? Despite what Aetherious thinks, I’m interested in seeing all views, whether I agree with them or not. I don’t feel the need to hide away from anyone. If I disagree I will state my reasons as clearly as I can.

I don't think they are. I just think of them that way.

.

1 - I’m very much against the type of thinking that says one lineage is basically the same as another... It doesn’t matter if they seem similar to you. They are different. We must treat them differently. Context is key. 2 - We can all agree that we’re not Mahayana experts. 3 - My leap of logic is not nearly as disastrous as you equating Theravada to Wahhabism. Oh dear. 4 - It’s complete speculation that Lao Tzu followed Confusian taboos... firstly they came about around the same time (arguably) so I doubt there was such an all pervading ‘Confucian culture’. But moreover, Taoists are very much anti-Confucian - they’re not afraid of breaking Confucian taboos. 5 - You’ve kindly included Hindu discourse that points to love. It’s interesting, and I’ve no issue with it at all. But Hinduism is not Daoism or Buddhism and in my opinion shouldn’t be mixed or presented as such. Context is key. 6 - This discussion is yet again running out of juice - If you have something interesting to show us then please go ahead. No point in constantly ‘reacting’ to what I say. It’s all rather simple - I say that in the ‘inner door’, traditions of Daoism and of Buddhism (specifically lineages for spiritual aspirants - not laypeople), Divine Love is not considered the fundamental ground of reality. Show us some evidence (whether textual or even experiential) and we can consider it. I’m also saying that contrived love and compassion will not only not bring about enlightenment, but it may well create other issues for the spiritual cultivator. Of course compassion and love are some byproducts of cultivation. But they’re not the cause. And neither are they the base fabric of reality. Go ahead and disagree constructively. But stop scrambling to try and poke holes in what I say - it’s pointless and only brings out the worst tendencies in you.

Steve has a very nice and kind way of stating his case... I’m a bit harsh and cutting in my expression 😬 - and one reason I tried to stay away from posting on this thread... I often think of people who’re seriously dedicated to these arts as kind of like Olympic athletes. Do any athletes get to that level with no coaches or trainers? What about the ‘naturally gifted’ ones? Of course if it’s just an interest or a minor hobby, then it’s fine to ‘try things out’... just don’t expect to get that far, and don’t confuse what you’re doing with what the ‘olympic athletes’ are doing. It’s common sense really.

No I’m not saying that at all. I’ve noticed you frequently use the idea that there exist other perspectives to ‘balance’ the argument at hand. I’m saying that of course there are other views but not all views are equally valid. For example, I think it would be wrong of me to say that ‘well your understanding is unique to you coz Mipham Rinpoche or Sogyal Rinpoche represent a different equally valid aspect of Tibetan Buddhism!’ Both of them were endorsed by the Dalai Llama and both of them created extremely abusive sex cults. But it doesn’t mean that Tibetan Buddhism is part spiritual practice part sex cult. Both perspectives don’t carry equal weight. So it’s a case of discernment - you must choose who you trust carefully. And just because someone else has a different opinion doesn’t mean that their opinion is as valid. (Without even mentioning the different teachers I’ve trained with - whose validity you can only guess at...) The Pali Canon, the oldest and most complete teachings of the historical Buddha state that cultivating love and compassion etc will not lead one to enlightenment. Quite explicit. Why would it say that so explicitly? Was the Buddha wrong and the modern interpretations correct? Was there a mistake in translation or something? The other side of the equation - well we’re not exactly sure (as none of us are experts - and we have no scriptures to quote), but it seems that maybe in Mahayana Buddhism it’s assumed that cultivating love and compassion will bring you enlightenment... It’s just not an equally weighted opposition... (and it still doesn’t say that Divine Love is the fundamental truth of reality) Not to mention that there may well be a political reason for this change in interpretations of Buddha’s teachings. Afterall - generous donations to the temple are also seen as paths to enlightenment... On the other hand, Dwai’s argument - that in Hindu traditions Divine Love is the foundation of existence... that seems to be spot on. Clearly many venerated Hindu figures have claimed it so. It’s also been my experience of a Hindu guru. Pretty sound argument. But Dwai’s argument that the Daoists have some cultural or linguistic fault that obscured this ‘obvious truth’... I don’t think I need to point out the ridiculousness of this position. His other argument - that because the Dao De Jing doesn’t explicitly warn against ‘Divine Love’, is proof that Divine Love therefore must be the foundation of existence... The DDJ also doesn’t tell you not to worship Satan... Hope you’re not reaching for the nearest sacrificial goat there mate!

True... along with the Pali Canon... which as far as I understand is the earliest and most complete Buddhist scripture... the others being the more modern Tibetan and Chinese canons. Maybe you could post some text from the Mahayana tradition that talks about cultivating positive states like bliss and love leads to enlightenment - I’d be interested to read that. Of course there are other views in ‘the entirety of Buddhism’... But not all views are equally valid. That’s very important. Theres also the question of teachings for the general public and teachings for spiritual cultivators. And these are often quite different - even from the same teacher. I’m not sure whether an online course would be revealing inner door practices but I doubt it as they can be dangerous.

That’s the main area of disagreement. My teachers say that emulating the virtues creates more layers of distortion that move you further from Yuan Shen and create unintended consequences in the world. However - for the general population (not spiritual cultivators) it’s not only perfectly fine, but is of great benefit. I believe that’s why many teachers will teach this.

Yes - that’s a good find. I believe the Pali texts are the oldest and most closely associated to the Buddha’s actual teachings? ...that practice [namely, the mere cultivation of love and so forth, according to the fourfold instructions] is conducive not to turning away, nor to dispassion, nor to quieting, nor to cessation, nor to direct knowledge, nor to enlightenment, nor to nirvana, but only to rebirth in the world of Brahma. That mirrors the classical Daoist view. And so does what you say... that kindness and compassion are qualities of a highly realised being. And I’m certainly not contradicting that! It’s one of the Virtues (De) in Daoism. But it’s important to note that this is not ‘being in a state of divine love’ - it’s talking about the actions of a Zhen Ren (Sage) (which is actually a relatively ‘low’ level attainment - not enlightened and not immortal - is that the same as ‘Brahma’?). But the sage acts virtuously not from any state of Love or Kindness or Wisdom - he acts from stillness, it’s just his actions invariably have these virtuous characteristics. That’s the nature of De. This is Wei Wu Wei - kindness without ‘trying to be kind’... As you say - these are characteristics of a highly realised being - not the focus of practice and neither does it say that Divine Love is the fundamental nature of your ‘true self’. These are new age interpretations. Which may have its root in Hindu forms of cultivation. Dwai would be best placed to talk about that.

You’ve mentioned many Hindu masters, Dwai. Maybe you can include some quotes about ‘divine love’ or other positive feelings and emotions being the fundamental nature of your ‘true self’ - that might help the OP. Aetherous - yes the Buddhist teachers I came across in the West tend to focus on Loving Kindness and related subjects. Although I’m not well versed in Buddhist scripture, there may well be something there about Divine Love being the true self... (Can you find such a quote?) For years I personally assumed that love is a rather special and fundamental aspect of human consciousness. However, as I was introduced to high level, venerated Buddhist teachers (mostly in Myanmar and Thailand but also (surprisingly) in the West) - they went to great lengths to stress that divine love is a stage to go through. Not the destination. Admittedly these teachers don’t teach in public - with some of them I had to go through various introductions (up the ranks of seniority) and had to go through a number of gruelling (and slightly strange) tests before I could even meet them in person... And then had to consume certain ‘pills’ while doing solitary meditation before I was allowed to meditate with them. But I’m glad I persevered - the inner transformations I experienced were nothing short of spectacular. I believe they also set in motion a series of events that brought me to my Daoist teachers who’s levels of attainment I thought were only fairytales. So when all these guys (and ‘girls’, incidentally) tell me something - the same thing, I listen. When Daoist scriptures clearly support that perspective, I take notice. When I’ve met several casualty cases where this advice was not heeded, then I’m compelled to share it with others... But when someone on the Internet who admittedly amalgamates all sorts of practices and traditions tells me something that contradicts them... well I just take it with a pinch of salt - wouldn't you?

And I would rephrase that as ‘you cannot get to Yuan Shen without going through ‘Big Love’ and ‘Bliss’’. Stillness is not ‘void’. That’s crucial. Indian systems... I’m not that familiar with to be honest, although I did have a Balinese Hindu teacher for a couple of years - he definitely talked a lot about the ‘Big Love’. As did almost all teachers on the new age side of cultivation. But in the Daoist and Buddhist lineages I’ve come across, this was specifically warned against as a trap. With strong emphasis and by several high level teachers. The Daoist classics also never mention that Big Love (or whatever way you’d like to call it) is the aim of practice or that it’s even a small part of Yuan Shen or your original self. Maybe you’ve got it right and they’ve all had it wrong - that’s true. But I’ll take my chances with recognised lineages with many living masters of great attainment - over what’s gone through the new age meat-grinder. It’s also not something I’d bother re-iterating here if it wasn’t potentially dangerous.

Sorry I still don’t understand what you’re saying. I personally find this ‘stream of consciousness’ poetic type writing really unhelpful when discussing specific things... It’s a great way of getting mental detritus out of your head though! Like the ‘morning pages’ practice that writers do. Just not so great for actual communication.

What I mean is that there’s a certain stage a cultivator hits where they first start to enter these states in meditation and then fully reside in a state of love and bliss. With the new age amalagamation of ideas and practices, it became common to believe that this is the ‘fundamental nature of being’. You’ve arrived. In classical Daoism (northern sect Longmen as well as Shangqing lineages) and in ‘inner door’ Buddhist lineages this is considered a major trap. You got close (ish), but sadly not to your ‘original spirit’. And now you’ve been drawn in and got stuck. The normal rebuttal is ‘but you don’t understand this is a very special universal Love and Bliss - not ‘personal’ emotions or feelings. Once the lense of the ‘self’ is cleared this is what shines forth.’ It’s certainly a more popular idea... it’s like the idea of ‘heaven’... it sells very well and is the basis of almost all new age and modern ‘spiritual’ systems. Actually the original traditions all call the aspirant to go past this to stillness - the basis of Yuan Shen (Original Spirit) which is completely still and neutral - not coloured by love or bliss or anything else... it manifests as enlightenment. Attachment to this Big Love state causes the dark night of the soul when confronted with the still neutrality of Yuan Shen.

Yes sadly very common. And unfortunately they do have a point. In China these arts also tend to be a numbers game... a teacher will normally have many hundreds of ‘outer door students’... He or she might give a basic instructions that is missing some of the ‘keys’ to make it work - then they look for the students that get the necessary results by themselves... these students are then invited to be ‘inner door students’... Some teachers ‘brag’ that as much as 10% of their students manage to activate their Dan Tien (early milestone)... they don’t really care about the rest. Westerners almost never make up the 10% (although they’re often presented with plaques and certificates etc... because they attract more wealthy westerners to join.) Other parts of Asia... particularly with an ‘official’ introduction... high level teachers will ‘test’ your level of development before deciding whether to teach you or not. One of the tests is sitting in perfect meditation for 3+ hrs in a non conducive environment (back of a hot and busy restaurant kitchen for example).

That is spiritual cultivation. Although, as we’ve discussed previously, ‘love’ and ‘bliss’ are still (much deeper) layers that must be shed.