Adam West

Pietro! I find celibacy profoundly useful, invigorating and powerful for opening awareness or glimpsing Buddha Nature or developing Shen etc. By celibacy, here I mean non-ejaculation. I see sex, romance and human contact and connection as a beautiful thing also. However, I have never been able to master celibacy in a romantic relationship. That is, I can't have sex without eventually having to allow orgasm. This is because without orgasm I become increasingly sensitive to sexual stimulation, and thus, sex becomes all about avoiding orgasm, which it is not. So my question is, what practices do you use to achieve your sexual mastery? That is, control of orgasm. And does it result in the famed full body orgasms and samadhi etc. Sex that is satisfying to yourself and her while not ejaculating? Years of celibacy have proved beyond doubt to me that celibacy combined with emptiness meditation is the most powerful method of spiritual, emotional, intellectual and physical practice available to humanity; however, intuitively, sex and the romantic dimensions of human experience seem just as useful in its own way. So, how to combine? Can you recomend a complete system? Lineage? Master? Details? Many thanks! In kind regards, Adam.

Hi Pie Guy! You wrote: "I don't want to slander anyone watch a video on robert peng's site the chopstick demo, use windows movie maker to view it frame by frame, then go to youtube and watch how such a similar magic trick is preformed, see if you notice any similarities. Draw your own conclusions." I take it you don't think Robert Peng can legitimately do those things? In kind regards, Adam.

Yeah, there is a question over his authenticity in my mind. I've got his biography, but I can't get beyond the first few chapters. It feels all wrong to me. Contrived. No ring of truth. Perhaps there is some truth to the view that he is a manufactured stooge for the government. I don't know. But I haven't seen any evidence to support his realized reputation so far. And some to support its falsity. In kind regards, Adam.

Wow, durkhrod chogori! That's a seriously interesting proposal! It is true what the other poster stated though, insofar as what are your motivations? For it is very easy to romanticize the wandering hermit / monk life. It may end up being far more challenging trying to find and satisfy basic needs for food, clothing and shelter leaving you even less time to practice. However, if you do spend more time living in monasteries than aimlessly roaming the countryside, you may have mostly all day, every day, to practice. But then that is true now, for we can practice while at work etc. Often, we wish we could just leave our easy lifestyles because they are so full of distractions. This is because they ARE so easy, and as a result, we have so much spare time to be distracted, but as such, not enough time to practice and meditate. Perhaps it would be just easier if we lived a sparse lifestyle here in the west were we just work four days a week and practice meditation for the rest of the time when we are not eating, sleeping, showering etc. That would entail minimal or no computer, no tv, no socializing etc. And having the discipline to actually say NO is the hardest part. Actually sitting down and practicing is the hardest part of all. And just as hard on retreat too, where there is no distractions to stop us. I have known people who went on retreat and spent most of their time bush walking and doing everything but sitting and meditation. It is the mind that is the source of our suffering, and we take that very mind with us where ever we go, so suffering literally, as you know, is unavoidable if we merely change our environmental circumstances. And our mind can be worked on regardless of our circumstances. So the question is, could you give up the western lifestyle and still live amidst the western world, still working and practicing amidst temptation? I wonder myself. In kind regards, Adam.

I agree with Scotty - Shikantaza - easiest, the hardest and the most fruitful! See below original post slightly edited in form for ease of reading. Shikantaza I think it would be useful to elaborate on just sitting. In Shikantaza, we sit in a comfortable erect posture. Then we allow our awareness to be in its natural state - Zen Mind, Original Face, and realize this to be our ordinary everyday mind as it is. What exactly this means is we 'allow' our mind to just be aware in an entirely uncontrived manner. This can be surprisingly difficult for the beginner because most people are unconscious of subtle tensions and "efforts to do, to suppress or not do" something with their mind which are deeply habitual - thinking, analyzing, fantasizing etc. If we can 'just sit' and just be aware of what is, focusing on nothing in particular and allowing our minds to rest, let go and just be aware and rest as THAT - as-we-are - we will notice a sense of awareness opening up, of brightness, of peace and ease. If allowed further, we will notice energy and bliss at some deeper dimension of awareness as Being itself. Taken further we get an increasing, yet subtle sense of infinity and loss of identification with the separate self arising from sensory stimuli. Implicit to this discussion is a distinction between awareness and mind. I am defining awareness as our basic fundamental nature - the Tao itself. Mind in this context, is defined as cognitive activities or functions arising out of the brain and possibly astral levels of being. Mind may be considered a tool like the body. The body rests and just sits there; the mind rests and just sits there unengaged. Awareness as the fundamental nature of 'you' sees both the mind and the body, but is neither mind nor body, nor is it dependent on mind and body for its existence and function. Awareness is prior to mind and body. Awareness is essential and unchanging; mind and body are epiphenomena existing in awareness. The simple meditation practice of Shikantaza is this: Just sit and be aware. The key then is to just be aware with no effort to be aware - no doing, just be natural awareness as it is. If you find yourself trying to be natural awareness as it is, then that is contrived and you have engaged the mind. Simply LET GO, relax, and be aware of what is, but of nothing in particular. In letting go and naturally being aware of what is you will find that natural still point. Allow the mind to ease off and open up. This can be practiced at all time during the day. Just be naturally aware, openly at ease, and spontaneously engaging - whether sitting or otherwise. This is true vipassana. Uncontrived. To see the natural state of reality as it is. We should allow ourselves to notice mind throughout this period of sitting, as with other particulars that arise; as mind is part of reality, and not to be rejected, as rejection is an act of mind, not awareness. Rejection is based on the false premises of mind. In so doing we will notice when we find ourselves having fallen into doing in which we 'try' to be open and relaxed, when this happens we are no longer in an uncontrived state of natural abiding. The whole process requires concentration; that is, being brightly aware of what is. Concentration in this sense simply means being naturally aware and not being distracted by having our attention divided by activities of mind. As concentration wanes, awareness may become dull and one my space out, or more often, one's thoughts will re-assert themselves and we will go off on a tangent of thought. When we notice this we allow the stream of thought to drop by letting go again of the activities of mind, and just rest brightly aware of what is. So, it really is simple, just sit and be aware. A further point. Do not concentrate on sensory stimuli in particular, as that is contrived, it is effort of mind to do something. See this subtle distinction. Awareness is brightly aware as its natural state, there is not effort - no doing. Just be aware of what is - environment and awareness itself - no artificial distinction between external and internal - just the continuum of awareness. This, however, does not mean we are practicing awareness of awareness, that again is a contrived condition, a use of mind to focus on awareness. In such a case we would be privileging one object of awareness over another, and that is a use of mind. Rather, we are just being aware, just sitting. Discrimination in terms of intention, demarcation, effort, judgment are all discursive faculties of mind. Awareness operates entirely through direct knowing or clearly apprehending the nature of what is - it simply sees it for itself. No recourse to the inferential faculties of mind. So, Shikantaza or Dzogchen practice is simple on the surface, but there is much subtly and depth to it. Just sitting does not give it explanatory justice. A final point on the body. Since the body is peripheral to awareness, it does not matter if the eyes are open or closed. Traditionally, they are open. There are merits and problems with both options. My recommendation is conclude this question by what feels natural to you. We do not wish to maintain unnatural, contrived states of body and mind in our practice. Awareness is the practice... drop all else. In kind regards, Adam.

Hey guys! I spent a good five years of so in my late teens and early twenties seriously considering ordination as a monk or priest - very seriously. I am a universalist, so I have no particular attachment or aversion to one tradition or another. Over time, however, I realized if awakening is our path, then there is no greater means to that awakening than life itself. Of course, this entails great discipline. But discipline is evolves organically through the insight of practice - and this evolution is exponential due to the challenging and transformational force of life itself. Furthermore, I would suggest for the most part, life is the journey or exploration of Being, awakening is that realization to Being or direct apprehension of life, thus, rejection of life through artificial isolation is antithetical to that realization, and follows from the absence of said direct apprehension. In other words, 99% of human motivation to reject the totality of life experience is a denial of life, or coping mechanism, in an effort to avoid suffering and find some utopian peace, satisfaction and completeness. It is an act of a suffering mind that does not see its true nature - that does not see the true nature of life. Not always of course. Some times our insight has progressed that we see through the absurdity of contemporary society, or we awaken and wish only live in stillness and simple being. Mostly though, we are simply seeking to avoid suffering. However, even in retreat we suffer. Because suffering is not dependent on our environment. Rather it follows from a mind that does not see clearly. And you can't escape your mind - not for ever. It follows you where ever you go, especially into retreat where there is even less distractions to occupy it. In kind regards, Adam.

Hey brother and others on this thread! Durkhrod, there are many traditional practices that could be rightly called vipissana, I was wondering what exactly do you practice, and why / how do you find it beneficial? Thanks mate! In kind regards, Adam.

H Vaj! Could you elaborate on your understanding of Ilmu Kebatinan training? What is it exactly? What is its short and long term goals? How does it achieve them - practice wise i.e. breath work, mantra, dan tien etc? How does it differ from gtummo? And in what context do you teach it part of a larger system of practice? Do you teach that as well? I am very interested in Sufi practices, how does this relate? Many thanks! In kind regards, Adam.

Looking at meta-analyses of intelligence studies, I don't believe you will find any clear or compelling support for a correlation between intelligence and religious belief. You will find one for education and religious belief, as education gives one more opportunity to be exposed to non-religious beliefs, thus, you see a substitution. Not that one belief-set is more correct than the other, rather, exposure (through education or social support groups) is merely opportunity to aquire and internalize belief. I believe you will find a correlation between a low tolerance for uncertainty and strong religious and scientific belief structures. Further more, intelligence is more acurately represented as an indigenious range that we are born with (say between 100 and 120 IQ), and education and enviromental factors will effect the end result, which is plastic according to said factors. Most interestingly to me, many will notice that cognitive perfance is enhanced through cultivation practice (I speculate the development of the nervous system follows from such cultivation) or is diminished through lifestyle factors, particuarly through constant waste of one's personal energy - social, sexual etc. In any case, the point to take away from this is humans are far more complex than modern (as opposesd to post-moden) models like to represent. As we progress in our practice one personally realizes you you can't actually model infinity.

Yeah, I've seen it. It's really quite good. Gives a good glimpse into the lives of genuine hermits. I wrote to the producer-director-commentator to ask him if he would teach me the traditional method of meditative cultivation the hermits speak of and recommend that apparently generates heat when practiced correctly, but unfortunately he didn't write back . Definitely worth a look! In kind regards, Adam.

Hello there brother durkhrod chogori! I hope you have long since sorted your employment issues. What's the latest? It occurs to me, perhaps you'd like to post over on DharmaOverground, just google it. That goes for many others here too. There are some very high level practitioners there, some of which claim Arahat status, and who defend it quite well too. The quality of discussion is of the highest order and very polite too, considering there is a lot room for controversy and disagreement. I hope to see you there some time!! In kind regards, Adam.

Consider AYP yogani. Yogic Tantra.

Hi all! I believe the below link has been posted before on Bums, however, perhaps not in this thread; and some key players from this thread may not have read it yet. I have not had a chance to read all of it yet, as I am busy with school. I was struck by it however, and have been in contact with the translator, who seems to be a Longmen initiate. http://hk.geocities.com/akrishi0/goflower/eng/index.htm I wonder if any of the interested parties in this thread might like to read it and comment on it according to the ongoing themes of this thread - practice method, effectiveness, lived experience in working with the method and the metaphysical model assumed in its presentation? I for one would be most interested to hear peoples thoughts on it! In kind regards, Adam.

No, it was dao zhen my brother!

Hi Limitless Sky! I'm sure many of us would be interested in your knowledge and insights. Why don't you two correspond publicly on the forum? Maybe even start a new thread? I look forward to hearing your views on the golden flower, particularly from a practice stand point. Would you start by stating what is your background training and experience with the Golden Flower and what is your present understanding of its aims and primary practice method? Many thanks! In kind regards, Adam.

I would suggest the heart of the matter is making contact with the Tao, or if you prefer, Buddha Nature, true nature, Pure Awareness etc. It is the mind trapped, for the most part, in a sense of separate self or identity that responds with the grosser mental and emotional states. This is mostly unconscious, is very difficult for most people to overcome, try as they may. Misery-suffering is more or less unavoidable over the long run without constant contact with deeper levels of Being or Awareness. Even if congnitive stratergies are employed, over time, one will, through chronic lack of need gratification at the personality level, increasingly respond to our environment from stress, anxiety and anger etc. Of course with the successful application of congitive stergies, one will settle and calm the mind, enabling it to see through its sense of separate self and directly perceive, if only vaguely, one's true nature. Cognitive stratergies in congunction with effective meditation is the most effective key. If you are not experiencing a vague, yet increasingly deep, clear and profound state of peace, bliss, inner power and ineffible majesty every day through direct realization of Tao, then you will perpetually be subject to chronic disatisfation and the stress of a life that relies on cercumstance for gratification. Such environmental dependence is a no-win situation - and by definition, impossible to achieve. Tao is only where one can realize deep, lasting and true happiness and satisfaction. Via a dualistic metaphor, meditation allows one to directly plug into 'Life', which is nothing other than Intelligent Infinity, and the one and only source of happiness. From the non-dual, to realize what you are is to realize your natural state which is necessarily beyond description, but intrinsically is something infinitely beyond what humans would call non-dependent happiness and joy. So, the answer is learn to meditate two or more times a day in such a way that you find real and direct contact with your true nature. Then you will know a joy and peace profound that is unshakable even as circumstance-phenonemna must unendningly change from moment to moment around and within us; to expect otherwise is setting yourself up for failure. Realize the Tao... In kind regards, Adam.

Hello April and JJ! Thank you for your continuing effort to dialogue with Taobums, a community of sincere seekers and practitioners of humanity's traditional self-(realization)actualization methods. JJ, I wonder if you would comment on how you came to the conclusion of the specific breath ratio that is made use of in the backwards-flow method (BFM)? As I understand it, the (BFM) is reverse abdominal breathing, which is known to be a very powerful kundalini-Chi-Alchemal practice and sublimation-transformational method found in traditional Taoism, Indian Yoga and Tibetan Tantra etc. However, the method does come with minor variations across schools and traditions i.e. such as no gap or pause in the breath cycle (often known as connected or circular breathing - no pause between either the inhalation or the exhalation); or inclusive of a said pause at either end of the breath cycle and so on. May I ask what is your thinking on the 4 count breath (in and out, and the pause at both ends of exhalation and inhalation)? Is this the optimal variation, if so why? Would you speculate as to what would be the physical correlate following a change in breath ratio, say no pause at either end of the exhalation or inhalation? Do you think such a change would weaken or strengthen the process of neurological stimulation/activation and kundalini arousal? It is these kinds of technical details that have been debated for generations amongst adepts and schools. Thanks so much for you insight!! In kind regards, Adam. * Edited for spelling.

Hi there InnerSpace Cadet! I have practiced Silent Illumination on and off over the years. I find it a very effective practice. It is simultaneous Shamatha-Vipassana, with the body that sits as the object - one concentrates on the body as a whole and is simultaneously aware of the body and sitting. However, I don't find the body an attractive object of meditation. I prefer the mind itself, which is more like Mahamudra; or Advaita awareness of awareness. One gently notices and sustains awareness of mind as object of meditation and insight. Leading to consciousness of the subtle mind and very subtle mind - leading to Tao or the unconditioned. Good stuff indeed. This will take us all the way. Nothing else needed. All else is something you have added to yourself; and an interesting and entertaining distraction! Hope this helps! In kind regards, Adam.

It sounds like you may have a urinary tract infection. Lots of masturbation can do that. I suggest going to a western medical doctor. You may need antibiotics. Yes, antibiotics are problematic, but... In kind regards, Adam.

Hi Dan, What relation does Chok's mentalphysics have with Ding Le Mei's Mentalphysics? http://www.mentalphysics.net/index.html Many thanks! In kind regards, Adam.

So, based on that letter exchange, without giving anything away, what is your conclusion? Is David a fraud, is he full of BS, is he legit, does he accurately represent himself and Wang etc? What say you? In kind regards, Adam.

If we insist in making artificial demarcations, for discussions sake, then we can say enlightenment does not make us objectively perfect, it merely dissolves the sense of separate self, leaving all our baggage to be worked through over time. I believe we can find countless real life accounts to support this, assuming we can charitably accept any said individual has realized the non-dual. Further, I would postulate enlightenment is progressive and in stages; insofar as, the shift into the non-dual is instant, but the realization of the infinite is by definition without end and progressive. Being and Becoming exist simultaneously; both temporally and atemporally. Obviously classical logic is inadequate to describe these relationships. However, non-classical does just fine. It may be that no being on this planet or indeed this plane of existence has EVER achieve ABSOLUTE enlightenment. That is where the confusion is found. Theoretically, assuming a particular metaphysics, if an absolute and exhaustively enlightened being existed physically present, before us, then yes, she may be perfect in every sense by definition, due to her absolute and COMPLETE enlightenment or realization of ALL that she is. Hence, he would be without limitation and attribute, yet able to embody all attributes, for this is the Dao. However, it may be that no such being has ever existed in this realm of manifestation. We may simply be too low on the scale of evolution to find any amongst us. We may all intuitively perceive this is possible and fundamental to our true nature, however, sensing our potential and realizing or actualizing it are two different things. All evidence seems to supports this thesis. In kind regards, Adam.

Yes, it's clear there are no perfect beings "known" on this planet. Perfection, like a true straight line is a logical or theoretical entity; a description and prescription that does not exist outside the world of ideas as a manifest object or principle exhaustively embodied. However, simultaneously we may posit all things singular or as the non-dual whole are indeed perfectly what they are; yet, indeed, that would be yet another philosophical construct existing only in the conceptual realm. Things just are what they are, neither perfect nor imperfect, labeled or not by man. Certainly humans are naively idealistic creatures... In kind regards, Adam.

Hi R.W. Smith, Can you provide more information on this Brisbane Master Liao you are referring to? Website, contact information, history, lineage etc? He sounds interersting. Many thanks! In kind regards, Adam.

Hey Matt, They all seem very interesting indeed. Sounds like some great reading time. However, having spent my academic training in philosophy in some of these very areas, I occasionally remind myself that aside from their entertainment value, intellectual satisfaction and curiosity, and use in supporting the "view" in the early stages of practice, there is little value spending our time this way. They are all just concepts. Just representations of reality. Man made. Contingent truths, not necessary. Artificial constructs. And for all of us, distractions from looking directly into reality as it is. It is clear to me, if I am to attain realization I must eventually let go of my little intellectual games and habits - dropping the conceptual mind except where truly useful and consistent with my global realization - and as Zen masters have done in the past after they attained realization, throw away all books and models, for it is NOT like this... If we sit for long enough, eventually we will realize it directly for ourselves. Then, if so inclined, we can write a book and let others know what we have seen. I will enjoy that book and then throw that one away too for it is not like that. In kind regards, Adam.