Cheshire Cat

Saying "we experience" is really like saying, "we human" in which human is meant as a verb.

Yes, but where is this business of independence from experience?

Your question assumes we exist independent of experience.

It doesn't matter if we consider ourselves empty, full, illusory, rainbow-colored.

We experience. It's a fact.

Can you say "I don't experience at all"?

You may even say that to experience is an illusion, that we are the experience.

Still, you perceive things and have experience.

And more. You use this experience to describe reality in a specific way.

Is it the experience that experiences itself? It doesn't matter because

the question remains untouched

We experience it because it is real,

or it is real because we experience it?

Assuming that we are the experience:

The experience experiences itself because it is real,

or it is real because experience experiences itself?

In the second case, it's relevant that experience experiences itself in different ways, in contradictory ways also... to make up a coherent reality. That's why atheists live in a world without spirituality and it is coherent, complete and funny, they know why things work in a certain way... and spiritual seekers live in a world of spiritual being and this same world is coherent, complete and funny, they know why things work in a certain way.

Who lives the right reality?

What is real in all of this?

Your question assumes we exist independent of experience.

No, it doesn't.

In both cases, we experience.

An ancient said:

"There is a true person of no rank in the mass of human flesh, always coming and going trough the door of our senses. Those who have not witnessed it, look".

This assumes that there is something behind. I don't know, sincerely.

Now, what I have is a question:

We experience it because it is real,

or it is real because we experience it?

Buddhists practice to stop suffering (dukkha).

Taoists practice for a long happy life and for spiritual immortality.

But there is point when one becomes a wayfarer.

From that point on. he practices for the same reasons that keep universe in motion.

Horse stance we love you!

No one knows how far you could go with this practice alone!

Have you seen this?

I think of Falun Dafa as this kind of experiment.. but on a longer frame of time.

I see what you mean (I think:-)). My idea of Taoism is that it deals with the transformations (including the changes to and from emptiness and within fullness) and how a person might understand these and 'make use of them' from their perspective as a person. I'm not saying either is better - although at present I do personally think Taoism is better if you're a person.

It is said that the Dao has thousands of gates.

And if we think of daoism as the way to reach the Dao (the way to reach the Way), then we hardly find something that is not the way.

Thanks for that. It seems very buddhist to me. I was under the impression that Dao was, well, not that:-)

Sorry, I'm ignorant and I can't see differences between the two.

Let me quote Lao-Tzu, chapter 48

In the pursuit of learning, every day something is acquired.

In the pursuit of Tao, every day something is dropped.

http://earlywomenmas.../tao/ch_48.html

I'm not sure we can say for all of Taoism that the mind must NOT be transformed, only emptied. Studying the TTC for instance can be transformative.

Yes, you are right.

I speak from a certain point of view which is not commonly shared.

"Emptied, not transformed".

Can you give an example?

Sure.

Look at this video.

The flock is the mind, the empty sky is the Dao.

You can change the shape as much as you want (developing compassion, transforming emotions and so forth), but the only way to have pure clear sky is to kill every single bird.

Just want to point out : Dual cultivation of the mind and the physical body , transforming them into some kind of everlasting things , i.e. " 性命雙修 ", is one of the basic principles of Taoism .

The mind is to be emptied, not transformed.

You have to give up your consciousness to attain the Dao...

The body is transformed during the process (jing-Qi-Shen-Void-Tao)

the Tao itself is evolving, and the shape and state of things are part of that evolution.

I think that the idea of evolution is darwinian stuff.

Tao is about changing. Evolving is relative.

Taoist criticism on Zen's way is simple : Without other force's help , how can a trivial ,karma- tormented mind change itself and turn into a geat Mind?

Spiritual cultivation is not about transforming one's mind.

You cannot change the Unreal and make it Real. You cannot make rice from boiling sands (I feel so wise when I write this )

Cultivation is about letting go of the limited mind so that the real mind of the Dao can reveal itself naturally.

The concept of transformation emphasized in daoism does not refer to the mind, but to the body.

Thank you

Edit: double post

Why should a daoist criticizes someone for doing wrong??

Of course, daoist cultivation coexists with C'han cultivation methods.

Which one is superior since the buddhist themselves talk about "attaining the Dao" ?

I would recommend everything from Alex Allman and Boddhi Avinasha. In B. Avinasha book The Tantric Path to Higher Consciousness - Jewel in the Lotus has described one particular breathing that helped me a lot.

I've read that Boddhi Avinasha was a sannyasin of Osho.

Osho's approach to tantric sex does not emphasize any need for semen retention. Is this book on the same lines?

Apparently there are two paths for mastering the bedchamber.

The qi-manipulating stuff, nourishing-the-brain-like and ejaculation control.

About this matter, Mantak Chia offers the most complete set of traditional technique. Some works, other does not.

It is wise to be extremely careful with this stuff.

It is useful for reducing the ejaculations to a minimum, but it appears to be impossible to keep a total celibacy relying on this.

In Wile's Art of the bedchamber you will find the primitive sources for Mantak Chia's techniques.

The other path requires a lot of meditation, merits and the highest skill. Check tibetan karmamudra.

Hi,

Sometimes I use sleep deprivation as a tool in two situations:

-when I meditate a lot, my mind can be very still and quiet like an immense ocean without a wave... but if I sleep, I could partially loss this state. So I reduce the sleep-time to a minimum.

-when my stomach is full because of a substantial dinner, there is a chance of leakage during the sleep-time. In this situation, I sleep for 3-4 hours and only when I'm really really tired.

1. Since I'm a teenager with a high sex drive it seems like my energy may be alot harder to control.

This is stuff that you need to work with.

I suggest you to learn to keep a celibate state for a period of -at least- 3 months before beginning cultivation.

A taoist healer will probably suggests you to keep your sexual energy because you are too young to dissipate.

2. Since I'm black my oppictal bone in the back of head sticks out litte bit farther

Qi routes may change from person to person even based on cultural conditions... so the little tip here is to investigate your own feelings and sensations to see if something is correct or not for you.

I hope that doesn't sound too unhelpful.

To help you with this, I will take that image of the Zen monk as my new avatar on this forum

I consider meditation to be a "all body experience" and not just an altered state of counsciouness.

While you still the mind, qi is cultivated.

While you cultivate qi, stillness is cultivated.

If one cultivates a still mind without transforming the body... well, it is not a daoist idea.

In buddhist term, this would be practicing vipassana wiyhout samatha.

So, no wonder if I consider positions as "enhancement" and not the meditation itself.

In your experience, which one is to be considered as the most effective position for practicing "sitting and forgetting" ?

While in zhang zhuang, the meditation is better, but I cannot hold for long sessions... kunlun 1 looks like a more physically sustainable practice of zhang zhuang... Opinions? Experience? Thank you :-)

A mantra could have a double purpose:

1- to still the mind with his rithmic elements (try Om Coca-Cola Om Coca-cola Pepsi Hum to believe)

A real master could help you with this by temporary stilling your mind for you with the power of his internal mantralization (Sufi master usually did this)

2- to invoke certain supernatural powers related to that particular mantra (this is why sometimes you hear people saying that a particular mantra could be dangerous. etc..).

I believe that from a taoist perspective there is nothing wrong.

From the human perspective, there is nothing wrong in owning pets.

Although, there are different kind of pets: dogs are suited for living with humans as companions, they haven't a natural habitat as the wolves. They aren't wild animals and they have to struggle a bit to live in the wild... where the Tao will probably kill them in a short time.

All the other animals (except sheep, etc...) are naturally wild and can perfectly live in a natural environment. When they live in your home, they die a little bit: home-cats for example, are condemned to never grow... they are children until the time of death and you are their mother.

Compassionate sages usually prefer to cuts bond between civilized men and wild animals because wild beasts have more power than pets.