Aaron

It used to be a spirituality.

I wouldn't classify Tao Bums as either a religion or cult, but rather a society. There's a difference, since there is no direct influence of any one religion upon the masses here. We're free to choose our own beliefs, even if some people might try to push us in one direction or another.

In regards to the topic, I'm finding more and more each day that the three main methods religions use to control people are sexuality, morality, and spirituality. If you can dictate a man or woman's beliefs about these three things, then you can invariably lead them down whatever road you choose. Just look at the young men that come here and post about their struggles with sex. If we live in such a progressive and spiritually free culture, then why do so many young men grow up feeling so guilty about a perfectly natural function?

Aaron

Although for many, Buddhism is a religion,...for others, including Buddha, it is irreligious.

 

On morality, a Buddhist said:

"Morality can only be imposed from without when we are asleep. It can only be pseudo, false, a façade, it cannot become your real being…morality is bound to be nothing but a deep suppression. You cannot do anything while asleep; you can only suppress. And through morality, you will become false. You will not be a person, but simply a "persona"—just a pseudo-entity. . . . Only a dishonest person can be moral."

 

In my opinion, spiritual people are not moral. A spiritual person strives to follow spirit without hesitation,...a religionist can not do that,...they follow hesitation without spirit (as John Davies said).

I would say for most followers Buddhism is a religion and for the very small minority it's irreligious. I like the deep suppression comment, because I think it really hits home on the effects of enforced morality, the suppression of the natural self.

Aaron

Part of the reason we made religions is people feel compelled to get together and say a few words at life events like weddings and funerals and it can be great to get together for community and support for people at this time. Recently I went to a calling hours after an elderly friend's son passed away. A very nice Christian lady sat with my friend and talked to him about 1/2 hr about memories of his son and went on about how they loved him and would really love for him to come to church more. And while she was very kind and supportive, it seemed kind of vampire-y. Have had it happen in my own experience too, something bad happens and probably well meaning friends seem to see it as an opportunity to suck you in. I wonder how many really buy into it or if they're in it for the support and sense of community. Even when I was a kid Christianity did not make sense, still doesn't, just can't do it. Nature is my religion, not a hypothetical being worshipped in a madmade building, out walking in the woods or by large bodies of water is where I feel spiritual and return to harmony.

 

(started to fix my typo, but left it, think it's better this way).

Well that's great that you're able to feel a spiritual connection to the world around you, most people these days aren't. I think you're validating a lot of my own arguments, in particular I agree with you view that religious people tend to use misfortune and loss as an excuse to recruit others to their belief system. I don't think it's intentionally evil or sinister, but they certainly see it as an opportunity, sort of like a lawyer who follows the ambulance.

Aaron

Hello Folks,

Thanks for all the responses. I'd like to address a few that I feel hit on the meat of the argument, the first is the idea of community. In my opinion the strength of religion lies in the community. When I first left church the one thing I missed most, wasn't the sermons or the prayer and closeness with God, but rather communion with the other members of that church. It was hard to leave something I felt so much a part of, but after time I did get over it and found myself stronger for it. That's not to say that I wouldn't love the idea of going back to a church (and I have on occasion), but it's never to pray or hear the sermon, rather it's for the closeness of community.

See, religions feed on one of the deeper issues many people feel, loneliness. On one level it allows you to feel a closeness to others, but on another it allows you to feel closeness to God/Allah/Buddha or whomever. This isn't intentionally evil or sinister, it just is. The problem is that religions oftentimes use that closeness to manipulate the thoughts and beliefs of its people, in other words "one nation under God" and also creating moral dogmas others are supposed to adhere to.

My problem with most religions, whether it's Buddhism, Taoism, Christianity, or Islam, is that each believes that one needs to follow a strict moral code in order to achieve purity/salvation/enlightenment and in posing this code, it actually prevents people from awakening their true spiritual self, because that self is not free to be what it is, but what it is defined to be.

Anyways, I could go on, but I'll leave it there for now.

Aaron

I was thinking about this earlier today, in particular how spirituality is slowly changed when it comes into contact with religion, in other words, the natural spiritual impulses we are born with are molded and shaped to fit within a spiritual paradigm, which essentially perverts and distorts those natural experiences and convinces us that what we are experiencing is a spiritual process, but in really it is nothing more than religious dogma.

Part of this idea has to do with the a belief that we need religion. One argument you could make is that we need religion in order to fulfill some deep desire for security within us. My belief is that we don't need religion to do this, that left to our own devices we will develop a spiritual awareness of the world on our own. In essence there is no need for dogma or ideology to push us in the right direction, rather we will naturally follow the spiritual process within us that is there from birth. Much like a stream follows the valley to the river, then the river to the ocean.

What I believe happens is that invariably we are told what the ocean is before we ever have a chance to reach it, and by doing this we are distorting the spiritual experience that is inherent within us and creating another experience, which is not spiritual, but rather intellectual, that creates a new path by damming those areas of spiritual inquiry, forcing us on a route chosen by an individual river. So the natural path through our own valley of spiritual awareness is never allowed to occur, and instead we are taken on a journey created and dictated for us by the beliefs, ideologies, and moral dogma of a particular religious or philosophical school.

Because this often happens when we are still very young, most are unaware that it is even occurring or we might even come to believe that spirituality is not an innate quality, but rather one that must be taught, because of this erroneous belief we therefore never return to that unadulterated level of spirituality that we begin with.

An example I used of this alteration was the belief of self. We teach children at an early age to identify parts of themselves as being separate from themselves, but at some point, if you grab a child's hand and ask what it is, they will think, this is me, but we correct them and say, no this is your hand. This is in essence the first step to our separation from our innate spirituality, because invariably we begin to view ourselves as separate from the reality around us and in feeling this separation we begin to have an natural need to return to the state of oneness we were born with.

Rather than continue, I will leave the rest open to discussion. My main purpose for this thread is to discuss how other people feel about spirituality and its relationship to religion, whether there is an actual need for religious inquiry or whether one can meet their spiritual needs without a religious or spiritual (or cultural) identity. I look forward to hearing other people's ideas.

Aaron

This is an excerpt from an article by Chris Moody at "The Ticket". It's about the republican's response to Obama urging states to require students to stay in school until they're eighteen or graduate...

"WASHINGTON -- High school dropouts, do not fear. The Republican Party will protect you from Barack Obama's efforts to keep you at your desk.

At his third State of the Union Address Tuesday night, the president challenged all states to ban children from dropping out of high school before they turn 18. "Tonight," Obama bellowed, "I am proposing that every state--every state--requires that all students stay in high school until they graduate or turn 18."

Obama wasn't proposing a new federal program, but his use of the bully pulpit to tell local jurisdictions how to run their school districts was enough to make some Republicans, already sensitive to the increasing role of the federal government in education over the past few years, bristle.

"That's none of his business!" said Utah Republican Sen. Mike Lee while speaking to reporters after the speech. "He's not a principal! He's not a public school teacher! He's not a governor, he's not a mayor. These are matters for state and local government."

Standing in Statuary Hall outside the House chamber, Lee, a senator whose rise to prominence was propelled by the tea party, went on to say that there was plenty in Obama's speech that made him want to scream, but he held his tongue.

"I did not want to be Joe Wilson!" Lee said. Meanwhile, Joe Wilson, who shouted "You Lie!" during a presidential address in 2009, was standing directly behind him, about three feet away..."

Oh gosh... that has got to be the funniest thing I've read in the news in years. You can read the rest of the story here!

Aaron

Real quick, is the true man something someone can become or something we are supposed to aspire to? For me this is much like the idea of "Christlike" in Christianity or "Buddha" in Buddhism. It just doesn't seem to be something someone can attain, or at best could only attain temporarily. I think the fact that "the True Man of old" is the way that it's described seems to infer that there were no more True Men alive at that time, Chuang Tzu included. I'd be interested in hearing other people's opinions.

Aaron

What is curious to me is that with this particular law, people are actually reading it and drawing the words to their logical conclusions and are rightly horrified at the size and scope of what is covered as compared to what it was meant to address...

 

 

It is no different than things like Obamacare. The concept of 'death panels' mocked, but if you follow the law and its effects to logical conclusion its plain as day sitting right there, just like its plain as day that SOPA can have all kinds of other consequences aside from "making sure foreigners dont pirate Americans' intellectual property." Berwick loving that algorithm the NSA uses to determine age vs usefullness and then assign a monetary value of how much the public can afford to care for you. (HHS being another one of those government entities that gets to set rules on their whim and ignore congress, just like the EPA.)

 

We're being told these things are good for us, when you can just go and inform yourself and find out

 

 

And then people wonder when the economy is garbage, just about the only way to win is not to play...

 

Demand accountability from lawmakers. Demand results and reviews and if results dont happen, scrap the person or law. Of course we all would like to avoid having riots and collapse of society - that doesnt mean anyone who doesnt want that simply "supports the status quo"...

Joeblast,

Obamacare was a smoke screen, it really didn't implement or change anything, in fact you might call it a myth. In regards to demanding accountability from lawmakers, hell yeah, and the President and Supreme Court Justices as well, but of course we both know that isn't going to happen, ever. The system is "fixed" and that means it will never be fixed.

Aaron

Hello Encephalon,

Nice post. I appreciated much of what was said by the original author. A point that I particularly found interesting was his assertion that weare avoiding energy dependence because of the massive amounts of money made by military contractors because of our involvement in foreign affairs.

My personal opinion is that we shouldn't have any interest or involvement in what the rest of the world does, but rather worry about our domestic policy. The cold war is long gone, and our naive belief that one power would take over and rule the world if we didn't stand to defend it, is (I pray) over as well.

As far as the position of president, I think it's very different today than it was intended to be back in the 18th century.

Aaron

So i had been abstaining from any type of orgasm for about a week into yesterday morning when suddenly i started getting a random nocturnal emission. Interestingly during my dream i could tell that i was about to have one. I think me reacting to it actually made it want to release itself more.

 

The issue is that during the emission i actually tried to hold it in but it kept going as i was forcefully trying to hold it mid-ejaculation. (i was barely awake but knew i did not want my jing to spill and i believe not all of it fully came out) After, I knew that i had done the wrong thing by trying to unnaturally hold it in and then throughout the whole day i had a weird feeling in my abdominal/kidney area. This morning i woke up with an erection and also a strange feeling in my testicles, kinda like it still wants to fully finish the emission i guess?

 

Now my question is should i just get myself to ejaculate again naturally and then start over the abstaining process or should i just not even bother as this is a "minor" injury? (Im not really sure if i actually injured my ejaculatory system or not, so now im just confused if i should do something about it or just let it be)

 

I suspect i can do some sort of qiqong meditation to make the feeling in my testicles go away or it may even go away over time, although i am wondering if it is because im still sexually "charged" because i did not fully ejaculate or because i just messed up my ejaculatory system through that act.

 

 

P.s. I am pretty much new here so hello to all and thank you for those whose reply to this!

Hello Tom,

I'm sorry I took so long to get to this post, this is normally the type of question I answer quickly. One thing which I think is important to address, is why are you abstaining from sex? Also how long do you plan to abstain?

That aside, nocturnal emissions are quite common when people give up masturbation or normal sexual relations. The body has a way of cleansing itself of fluids on its own, so if you decide to give it up one way, then it invariably finds a way to do it some other way.

Now an interesting study that supports this idea is that in cultures where masturbation is discouraged and seldom practiced, we find a much higher rate of people having nocturnal emissions. Of course one can say, "Oh sex is bad and whenever you have an orgasm, you're losing a bit more jing", but of course my question is, then why does nearly everyone on the planet either masturbate frequently or experience nocturnal emissions? I think, especially when you're young, that it's healthy spiritually, physically, and emotionally to masturbate and have sex, as you grow older the desire to do these things recedes. I really despise those people who teach young men and women that they need to be ashamed of sex or that somehow sex is wrong or bad, those people are really just plain evil, no other way to say it. More often than not, the people giving these lectures, are the same ones that go out to visit the prostitutes (seriously) or something else considered deviant. If you don't believe me, just look at all the scandals involving holy men of most religions, not just Catholics, but Buddhists, Muslims, and Hindu's as well.

Aaron

Those worried about the SOPA bill should seriously check out the Fascism thread I started. This is just another cog in the machine towards total censorship and government control. The internet is their biggest threat and they know it. When you hear that it's not patriotic or honest to oppose it, then you'll start to understand what's really going on here.

Aaron

The same thing can happen in the states. If the government decides that a project (whether private or public) helps to develop the area, they can require you to sell your property. At least in certain states. Now they don't enforce it anymore, because there was a big row awhile back when they did try to, but to the best of my knowledge, the laws have never been changed or removed, simply not mentioned or enforced, as many laws are.

Well the quote you replied to of Dorian Black's, i believe he was stating that a taoist sage transmutes his sexual energy so he does not waste his ejaculatory fluids and helps him grow spiritually.

 

So it doesn't mean he feels guilty for masturbating, its that he wants to use it to better himself which, obviously, are not the same like you have already stated.

Well I would go so far as to state that I don't think retaining sexual fluids helps to retain spiritual (chi/qi) energy. From what I understand, the actual practice of semen retention is one of the highest forms of qigong and most (good/knowledgeable) teachers frown upon students practicing it, because it can actually do much more harm than good (kidney infection/bladder infection/urinary tract infection/etc.), which leads me to believe that we have, either a large number of grandmasters of Qigong on this board, or a lot of people who are jumping the gun (or maybe trying to shoot blanks) that are attempting to practice forms that are well beyond their understanding yet. Just my two cents... now back to the characteristics of the sage.

Of course if you enjoy retaining jing more than having sex, then go for it, but I've yet to see any evidence that retention actually does any more good then just meditating for awhile each day.

Aaron

So you don't believe in transmutating sexual energy?

I have no opinion on transmuting sexual energy, my opinion is in regards to abstinence, which again and again we find is harmful to a person's physical, emotional, and spiritual well being. As Jetsun pointed out, there is a big difference between saying, I'm going to take a few weeks/months and be abstinent in order to cultivate my jing, and saying, sex is harmful and I need to abstain because every time I ejaculate I die a little bit. Well I'll tell you what, at least I'll have a good time before I die.

This whole idea that sex is bad or a spiritually negative experience is founded upon the notion of guilt. One should not feel guilty about sex, especially masturbation, it's the most natural thing a person can do. If we weren't meant to masturbate, I think our body would've evolved some kind of defense against it, but it hasn't, instead it seems like it's one of the universal experiences that links everyone together, think about it, at least 95% of all men (according to the last statistics I've read) have masturbated. Those cultures that masturbate less, tend to have a much greater incident of nocturnal emissions, which tends to lead one to believe that regular releases of sexual fluids and the accompanying pleasure involved is not only healthy, but something the body needs.

Again this denouncement of the sexual act and the subsequent delusional attempts to make it appear to be harmful, either spiritually (it makes Jesus cry), physically (you'll get hair on your palms), or emotionally (it causes you to have difficulty in forming relationships with girls), is all bunk. Yes overdoing it can cause harm, but if you're overdoing it, then you most likely have some kind of sexual hangup causing you to overdo it and addressing that is much more healthy than total abstinence (which in most cases will only exacerbate the problem).

So, the sage masturbates and has sex, and you know what, he has no guilt about doing it.

Aaron

Wow this topic came back out of the blue... well compassion and suffering is always important to talk about.

Nice quotes guys... thanks.

Aaron

A Taoist Sage....

1.does not ejaculate or waste his energy in another way.

2.uses all of his free time to cultivate his vibration.

 

that's all!

It's really hard for me to believe that people still believe in this kind of bullshit in the 21st century. Oh well, takes all kinds I guess.

Aaron

edit- Masturbation is good, fun, and healthy. It reduces the chances of prostate cancer, depression, and can help you sleep... plus many other wonderful things. Sex, well do I really need to tell you all the benefits there?

Oh yeah, if you have feelings of guilt about having sex, or are told that it's bad and you need to stop doing it, just keep in mind that this is the oldest trick in the book that religions use to control their followers... after all, control the most basic instincts of a person and you control them, whether it be Buddhism, Christianity, or in this case, apparently, religious Taoism.

Aaron

Praise without merit is harmful. I've seen these studies before, saying "good job" is behavioral training, much like giving a treat to a dog when it's done something we want it to repeat. Yes it trains them to do the trick, but do they really want to do the trick? For a long time now I've been an advocate of honesty when it comes to teaching children. When they do something wrong, you tell them honestly what they did wrong. When they do something right you tell them that they did it right. You can still say "good job", but it should be a rare occurrence and actually be a "good job". In other words don't say "good job" when a child finishes their plate, unless you want chubby kids.

Aaron

Being somewhat fed up with the whole 11:11 thing, and really detesting the hype of 2012, I've grown weary of all the pseudo-knowledge about numbers. Especially the "hidden meaning" that lies in randomly occuring numbers.

 

Yet I find myself constantly looking at them.

 

For a couple of weeks now, while looking at my digital clock on my phone, pc or other places, identical numbers keep popping up. Or rather, pairs of identical numbers. It's mostly time-related. Being on Norwegian time (being military time) it goes soemthing like this:

13:13, 21:21, 18:18, 10:10, and so on.

 

So anyone in for an explanation;

a) Chance?

the observer effect? (i.e. when wanting a Porsche, you see Porsches all around)

c) Unconscious editing out of all the instances that does not correspond to these occurences?

d) The universe is trying to tell me something?

 

Psedo-science is not science, but pseudo-explanation is still an explanation.

I think you're experiencing synchronicity. It can't be explained, and mathematically is highly unlikely, but it does happen, and as Steve and others have said, it's a mystery and that's part of the fun. Also keep in mind that you have an internal clock that's very accurate, you could be unconsciously looking at the clock when there are double digits.

I don't think it's a harbinger of doom, if that's what you're worried about, just a very random phenomena that's occurring to you. After reading a book about demon possession and hauntings that stated 3:33 was the minute of the devil, I woke up about once or twice a week at 3:33am and seemed to notice the time on the clock as well. Was I being followed by supernatural forces, leaving this as my warning to beware? Highly unlikely, more likely that I was just hyper-aware when that time popped up.

No worries, it will pass. I think most likely at 11:11 or 12:12 or maybe 04:04? Who knows.

Aaron

Maybe have the straps on the bench, rather than the bag? You could have them attached underneath. It could still double as a stand for a laptop. I'm not sure how heavy it would be to carry a laptop and this bench at the same time... you might want to weigh the two together. Another thing to keep in mind... NO CLOTH or padding (or make sure you can remove it) if it's going to be used as a laptop bench, simply because cloth may cause the laptop to overheat.

"Why is the good man the teacher of bad men?"

 

What is the distinction between a Good man and a Bad man?

Excellent point... what is the distinction between "eh" and "oh"?

Really, though, my question is why does Lao Tzu say that? I'm really interested in the answer, rather than the riddles.

Aaron

Hello folks,

Something I've been thinking a lot about lately is the idea of applying the characteristics of the sage as it's described in the TAOIST texts, to my own life. I think that Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu went to great lengths to discuss these characteristics, but as an individual I tend to focus more on their thoughts about the mystery, chi, and Tao, rather than the practical advice they gave. My goal is to start a dialogue with others in an effort to understand how others view these characteristics and what they may be. In doing so I intend to put aside cultural and philosophical bias so that I can get down to the meat of the matter. Rather than start this topic with my own thoughts pertaining to these notions, I would rather hear what others have to say about it.

Some areas I'd like to discuss in particular are:

How does a sage manage to be first by being last?

Why is the good man the teacher of bad men?

How does one practice the three jewels and exactly how can we define them in the English language according to our own cultural subtext?

I'm sure there are other things that might be beneficial to discuss, but I thought this might be a good start.

I look forward to your ideas and thoughts,

Aaron

Please dont confuse yourself - i did not say i have mastered compassion - what i wrote is a direct refutation of your belief that it has to be realized before one can effectively practice Tonglen.

 

Compassion is the natural outflow of one who sustains mindful attention of the Noble eight-fold path. There is no need to disguise this fundamental truth to make Buddhism appear more profound by spinning statements which states one has to realize 'form/emptiness' before compassion can be established - this is not the case. Also, its not a refuge.

 

I really hope you would discontinue trying to market your own interpretation and brand of Buddhism. You seem to be constantly encouraging others to operate from the absolute level, when in truth, Buddhism and the Noble 8-fold path is meant to guide practitioners towards seeing the inseparability of the relative and absolute - that one should remain always grounded in the realities of everyday living and discover the way towards finding peace and happiness in this reality, instead of loosing oneself in the clouds trying to create a separate, more perfect one - the Buddha never taught this.

 

The absolute is already contained in the relative. By living according to the fundamental truth as laid out clearly and simply in the Noble 8-fold path, gradually Right View will ensure that both relative and absolute can co-emerge in harmony. This puts an end to conflict in speech, in thoughts and in body - this is the truth of the cessation of afflictive conditions.

 

The practice of living as best as one can guided by the Noble 8-fold path is Tonglen. And how does one realize the result of living accordingly? One of the more noticeable traits is that one begins to think, feel and act in a more compassionate manner, gradually leaning more and more towards altruistic intentions, until finally it can be said that one has attained to the fruition of absoute bodhicitta, where others can also begin to taste the fruits of one's endeavor. If others cant testify to enjoying the fruits, then bodhicitta becomes meaningless and empty - mere words which does not aid practice at all, and also perpetuates ignorance and delusion.

 

 

(edit) The Noble Eightfold Path here: http://www.thebigvie...htfoldpath.html

Amen brother... ahem... I mean excellent post.

Aaron

Whoa!! First,...everything that is transient is illusory. Second,...Heart-Mind, can, and can only, be experienced beyond the skandhas. Heart-Mind is directly conscious of the Present,...the skandhas and the six senses are only, and can only, be aware of the past. A Tathagata is consciousness of the Present.

 

The Heart Mind,...which is a level above Heart Center, cannot be penetrated by that of the skandhas.

 

You're not grasping what is being pointed to,...for example:

 

Sogyal Rinpoche tells us that the practice of Tonglen depends upon our ability to awaken within ourselves the reality of compassion. Just as we cannot perform the Unity Breath until we can feel Love, we cannot practice Tonglen until we truly can feel compassion.

 

Ok,...so all these folks advocating Tonglen practice to realize compassion, are putting the cart before the horse, like the human-centric put "i think" before the I am. Tonglen practice can only be understood after compassion.

 

So,...how does one acquire or uncover compassion? Buddhism is quite specific.

 

"The whole of the Bodhicharyvatara is deared toward prajna, the direct realization of emptiness, absolute bodhichitta, without which the true practice of compassion is impossible." The Way of the Bodhisattva

"Buddhist teachings on compassion are grounded in the direct realization of Emptiness; without which, compassion is impossible." Robert Thurman

 

In other words,...without the direct understanding of Dependent Origination, any attempt to act compassionately is useless,...and only reflects egoic concepts, all of which are founded on sustaining ego.

 

 

"A wise man, recognizing that the world is but an illusion, does not act as if it is real"...Buddha

I'm sorry... I don't know why I argue with you about this, since you already know the answer. Please forgive me... retreating to the corner now.

Aaron

If there isn't,...(that is, no difference between the skandhas and the Heart-mind) why did Buddha, over and over, stress the difference. Because the Heart-Mind cannot be understood through the 6 Senses.

The Buddha made those distinctions because people could not fathom the lack of distinction. There was something that could be told and then there is only what is. I speak of what is, not what can be described. When one reaches a state of heart-mind, and of course you obviously have, they understand that skandhas, the senses, thought, mind, self, ego, is all transient (notice I said transient and not illusory), the the only thing that exists forever is the middle place, non-duality, whatever you want to call it. I like to call it the stillness, because from the stillness comes movement that creates all things. That which is still exists forever, those things created from stillness, which are moving, are transient and will eventually cease to be.

So skandas and the heart-mind are the same, because without skandhas we cannot experience heart-mind. Heart-mind only allows us to experience a portion of the actuality of the universe, it doesn't grant us immortality or freedom from our transient state of existence. It's sort of like getting a peek at what we will become.

Aaron