kundakiss

Is 'UniChi' means the universal Chi......???

Hehe, well initially I used the word "Unity" and merged it with "Chi". But 'Universal Chi' sounds just as good!! =P

Much UniCHI to you as well...

 

But if you ask me i will tell you the more we verbalize the Tao, the farther we go from it.

In a sense yes. In a sense no =)

if you go talk to a samkhya person they will tell you that buddhism is not a complete philosophy since it is nihilistic. There are lot of very useful and practical insights to be got from all darshanas. And you are mistaken in that during buddha's time there were no masters with attainment.

 

The buddh's way is not the only way...so while a spoilt brat of a prince might have had different needs from that of say a poor man's kid, that doesnt mean the other ways were wrong...

Before replying to the previous post, I had to google "Samkhya" so I can tell you that my knowledge of it is very superficial. I am not a Buddhist either . You slightly missed my point. "I said Gautama had them, we have Buddha." (Meaning them PLUS Buddha). Whether there were others who were enlightened back then doesn't matter. All I meant is, as time passes, verbal expression/explanation of Tao or Truth continues to become clearer. So I still stand by my point, but I agree with you too! Other ways are not wrong, no such thing really. I like the Jeet Kune Do mentality. "Take what is useful, discard what is not, and add what is your own." I don't follow any specific teaching, or system, but I do use a lot of their techniques (From Zen to Microcosmic Orbit, to Bhakti, to Kriya Yoga, etc).

Much UniCHI to you!

kundakiss

I'll see your OMG and raise you one LOLZ.

Great thread title.

Funny you say it like that, I just learned to play poker 3 days ago

And thank you!

@Eugene

 

Many questions. In the hope that your interest is genuine, I'll answer. But for further clarifications, if needed, I'd rather do it in private. The heat is on, and I haven't really got time to handle that with ..elegance.. for the next week or two. I hope that's ok.

 

(You too will be a tao master in just a few posts!)

 

These are all my opinions, since there is no such thing as an objective truth in this world. In case you disagree, I'd love to hear your views.

 

Let's begin.

 

Knowledge is what we normally refer to as knowledge. It's about stuff. Computational. Wisdom expresses itself as a certain attitude towards that knowledge of stuff. It could be thought of as a ethical or philosophical appraisal of said knowledge. Unlike knowledge, wisdom is not something you can learn. But you can attain it, by not drowning in knowledge, to speak metaphorically. By taking position from beyond the world of words, and looking at the knowledge discriminately - in the light of love or tao or God or whatever you like to call it. It's the moral dimension added to the world in a way.

 

Now, this definition could of course be refined, and perhaps even redefined, but for now I think that sums up my very few thoughts on the matter.

 

So, you call someone wise, if he's wiser than you. And you call someone extremely knowledgeable if he knows extremely much more than you. And you differentiate between those two according to your own definitions. Not mine.

 

So it's not about the amount one speaks, nor about the clarity. The easiest way to explain it, is that wisdom shines. Like that karate guy in the second Matrix movie. It resonates. Rings true. But I guess you'd have to believe in a higher dimension of sorts to accept that. Otherwise, I don't know if it's even interesting to talk about this, since we live in a post-modern, slightly nihilistic western society (I do at least, do you?), and words are of no real value.

 

(Here I'm off on a tangent:)

 

Like "enlightenment", for example. Today you here everything but the truth when this word is uttered. I see hysterical attempts to redefine or even reject the reality of this concept, and to me, and probably to numerous others who find no solace in this world, and/or have attained the goal of enlightenment, this is very disheartening. I can't really see why many people are so hellbent on throwing God to the dogs. I think of it as demonic.

 

(And now, I'll return to your questions..)

 

TTC is glorious.

 

S. is an ordinary human being. So is Gautama and Jesus. But not Buddha and Christ. Sadly, the words Buddha and Christ don't encapsulate the truth they see plainly in every part of creation. It's like the word Tao. But for some of us it is painfully clear when somebody is "stepping aside" when they're speaking; when they are speaking without speaking. S. is not. My problem, which strangely enough seems to be more of other people's problem, is that I don't remember anymore how difficult it can be to perceive this. But why should I lie about what I think? I'm not here to please anyone. So I'll let it be.

 

When Buddha says "I am just like you." and when Jesus (who I love beyond words) says "You are my brother.." it is the divine truth. But since nobody has the guts to believe them, they are very different.

 

The use of the word "message vehicle".. To me it seems very wrong to reduce a human being to the words he says. It's just a title, a word, a tenure; I know. But I think it sometimes reveals a regrettable view of reality. God lives in every man. Don't you fucking deny that.

 

(I hope you're not offended by me using the word … …. …man (! Did you think I was about to say another word?), instead of saying "man, woman, child, animal, plant etc." or something along those lines (Ah, striking preemptively is really tedious!))

 

Do you see now that I could just as well agree with you; yes, they're all message vehicles. And do you see why I do not?

 

Now, I don't like that you still believe that I judge a message based on "who" is saying it. I believe I explained clearly that I don't in an earlier message, and I believe I consolidated my position a minute ago. Would you please try to understand now? Or do I have to call YOU pathetic too?

 

(Tangent-time!)

 

lol. You know, I called the act pathetic, the insinuation (best word I could think of), not the person. Nobody chose to notice, but you can see it clearly if you look at it again. Please do.

 

(..and I'm back)

 

The actor-debacle.. Yes. In the sense that he is aware of the fact that he has experienced something amazing, but not enlightenment, and he knows it, but still pretends.. He must know, because only the grandest of fools would not sense the lie in his own words. And S. is intelligent.

 

He pretends to know the mind of God, and speaks from this position of authority, fooling thousands - soon to be millions - into the proverbial muddy waters.

 

But yes. We are all actors. Quite often unknowingly. But that is only true until the moment we realize that we are actually not.

 

Also, we are not human beings, when you add the word organic. Not by a long shot.

 

Lastly. By now, you must have realized that my words are my own. They are not yours, and they never should be.

 

So, Eugene (lovely name!), if you personally find S. helpful, I won't keep you from him. What is helpful or not can of course only be decided upon after you've ..decided.

 

Peace and good luck! /Daniel

 

(I might have missed or misunderstood a question or two, or you may not have understood what I mean. If so, let me know. Preferrably via pm)

Ok. Thanks a lot for the reply. My questions were genuine in the sense that I wanted to better understand your mental process in order to avoid loss in translation or transferral, which would lead to mindless arguing.

I had to understand more what you meant by "actor" for example before disagreeing or agreeing with you. Now that I do, I partially agree. I would not consider Sadhguru to be enlightened. He is in that intermediate zone that MOST spiritual teachers find themselves in. It is of the astral planes, and is often very misleading, and can lead one astray in their belief of having attained the final goal of realization. HOWEVER, Sadhguru seems to me to be genuine in his INTENT (which is what matters) to help the world evolve to higher consciousness. It is not about what you do. It's about WHY you do it. Christians might behave just like the yoga master, but are they doing it for the same reason, and from the same heart? Ahh. So, I find Sadhguru to still be captured by his personality to an extent, however, he genuinely wants to clarify and help people to the best of his own ability. In terms of Karma, I doubt he's creating much negative for himself. (Unless he abuses his authority, and imposes on others. But I do not know this.) That is the impression I get of him. And clearly he speaks from some level of experience (wisdom) and not book-smarts. So he's not your average joe pretending. Simply misguided perhaps in truly assessing his own level of consciousness. But that is not for us to judge, because that is all PART of the human experience. So, live and let live. Welcome all human expression, for the universe likes to play with itself in many diverse ways. But it can never lose, so one must find peace in that.

I already had answers to my own questions, so it wasn't genuine answer seeking in general, but specifically YOUR answer seeking .

As for my point of view on objective truth (lol the irony of that sentence) - it is the one that encompasses all relative points of view. So it is non-dualistic. But it is a state of silence, so it's not something that could be expressed. You can get to objective understanding when you have no personal agenda to protect. Similar to what you said about Jesus or Buddha, they step aside. So my subjective point of view may disagree with yours, but my objective understanding leads me to appreciate and accept yours equally... because it is guided by YOUR human experience, which relatively stands somewhere else, and I can't judge or criticize that. Subjectivity is personal attachment, objectivity is seen when one lets that go. Then "good", "bad", "right", "wrong" are mere perspectives, and now you see beyond them. Do you agree? Also, objective truth can be attributed to universal principles and natural laws. Such as cause and effect, law of attraction, consciousness, polarities, etc. Agree?

Anyway, I wasn't here to argue. Simply to understand more about where you're coming from.

Peace!!

Eugene

Hey, SereneBlue (ill fitting name?),

 

Do you mean the "ENTIRE point" in general? Not really. In this video, though, he mostly seems to focus (it feels wrong to use that word when talking about this rambling joker) on how wrong it is of people to ask certain questions. And that is served along with some extreme meandering, redefining, avoidance, incongruous rhetorics, blanket statements (99%), straw man-arguments (thought is not real), stupid ideas (e.g. "live totally", "more real than real", his insane definition of lying) and sleazy, pampering and/or offensive jokes etc.

 

His answer to the question seems to be to "live/live totally", which is, to use his own words, bull.

 

You use the word enlightened in a strange way. When I know about a spiritual concept or two, I don't call that being enlightened. Also, there are in reality no degress of knowing. And why do you all of a sudden call him a "message delivery vehicle" and "medium"? He's a man. An ordinary human being. He's no more of a mirage than you are, so using such pseudo-religious/-philosophical terms is just silly.

 

So.. An actor. We seem to agree. Yes? Yes? Isn't it so? (sic.) The fact that he doesn't know what he's talking about really shows. And for people who know even less, I think he's harmful. We'll never know if he's harmful, in case you were about to write something angry.

 

Your insinuation that I would judge a persons ideas based on his role in society or by his spiritual stature is just pathetic. If we're communicating on that level, I'd say that I wouldn't want to have my heart transplant done by someone who pretended to be a surgeon.

 

But, to make it 100% clear: If this pretend-surgeon pulled it off, I would be the last to complain. Sadhguru doesn't pull it off. Calling him an actor was an intentionally provocative way of saying that. I could have been more direct, but that wouldn't have had any effect. Now at least someone will be careful and watch out for the yeast/leaven of this man. That is all.

 

Lastly, to answer your question of what it is who's doing the judging: Nothing. What you perceive as judging is an illusion, and there's nothing (or rather nobody, if I may tweak your wording slightly) doing it. What did you expect me to say? Of course, someBODY would say it's the ego or the brain or even "I" doing the "judging". That would be correct too, I guess, but not from my point of view. Would you like to argue or talk calmly about that now? If so, I'd rather do it someplace else. Feel free to pm me.

Hey Boy, Tao Master. I like your post. I'd like to hear some more or your insight if you don't mind. I'd like to know how you differentiate between knowledge and wisdom? How does one tell if someone is wise, or extremely knowledgeable? Is it the amount that one speaks? The clarity of one's explanation? If that's the case, would it make Lao Tzu completely un-wise and even un-intelligent, since it seems like he only beats around the bush in Tao Teh Ching?

So you say Sadhguru is an ordinary human being. But as opposed to what? Buddha said "I am just like you". Jesus said "You are my brothers, and you can do all that I can and more." So I don't understand what you mean. Can you please explain? So he is not a message vehicle? Isn't anyone who transfers a message becomes a message vehicle? If I keep proclaiming that love heals, does that not make me a messenger of love's power? And if a dying sick man or Buddha both said "love heals", does the meaning or truth of that message change? So is it the messenger that's important, or the message? To you, specifically, I mean.

You say he's an actor. In what sense do you mean that? Aren't we all actors on some level? Doctors, lawyers, accountants, Christians, Taoists, garbage-men, plumbers... are we not all simply playing roles inside this world? Under these identities we are just human beings. Organic. Are we not? Then sadhguru fits well with his message, since he is nothing but an ordinary human being. No?

Finally, you said Sadhguru doesn't pull it off.. :S. But... you are on a thread that someone created and called it "YouTube Vid that Hit Home"... I'm especially confused now. You mean he doesn't pull it off for YOU? Or in general? If the latter, can you please explain?

Peace to you:)

Eugene

oodjee....

Welcome aboard to the TTB. I am convinced that you have learned the purest philosophy of a guru and a enlightened wise one. We need more members like you to engage in our conversations for enlightenment.

 

BTW You have my highest regard too.....

Thank you for your warm welcome ChiDragon

The Buddha had the samhkya, vedanta and jaina teachers to learn from. So not all of hs "realization" came out of "nothing"

No no, I know. He surely had guides of different kinds. But something like Samkhya is not a complete philosophy, since it's atheistic and dualistic in nature (it addresses only a certain level of understanding), and a lot of other teachings were probably quite distorted due to human ignorance, and mostly the blind leading the blind. So my answer would still remain. These days, verbalization in the mind comes first and much clearer, and then is followed by experience when the truth has been realized. Gautama had teachers to learn from, but we have Buddha to learn from , as well as many other masters who have explained to us The Way since then.

Here are the true Chinese Taoists. They had labeled themselves as a Taoist by their attires.

 

A Young Martial Arts Taoist

 

A Elder Taoist with a fan in his hand

Ok, so you still want to focus on someone who is still in "role" play.. All active spiritual identifications are simply stepping stones to higher realizations. At some point, they are abandoned. But yes, in that case, I suppose you can go ahead and dress up, and sincerely follow all the teachings and principles, and lead a specific "lifestyle", and then yes, you could label yourself as Taoist. I guess I was speaking for those who would at least enter into a transcendent state in their lives. In which case, labels would only bind them in their progress, because the higher the consciousness, the more organic one becomes. Just a being. An animal. A divine creature. No name. No identity. Nothing. Freedom is the only thing that is sought, and rules and traditions don't really complement it.

But see, these transcendent beings, would also be seen as master initiate monks, or gurus, in the outside world. Except people may mistaken them for Buddhists, Taoists, Yogis, whatever. The essence of Taoism is not about clothing or lifestyle, my friend. It's about who you are. Those people in those Taoist clothes in your pictures would still revere and recognize the high attainment of a non-Taoist, because he would still embody all Taoist principles, by default. Basically, beings in a permanent state of higher consciousness cannot be categorized.. they can even contradict themselves depending on the situation.

Anyway, I always advise people to let their personal experience be their guide. Not a mental idea or belief they hold on to. Feel life. Don't think it. From my experience, the above is the only personal answer than can come out.

Peace.

Eugene

I would have to say that no one knows, in that when you know, you don't exist; and when you know you have gained nothing by the experience and it becomes obvious that everyone is so endowed, even though they don't know it… it is a wonderful hopelessness!!

 

But there is something to it, that must be pointed out. First of all, anyone who has died to self-existence is utterly full of it. And it would do well to not leak a word of it to anyone for a long time …at least 5 to 10 years or more like 20. It took the buddha five years, before he was able to start teaching others, but I could be wrong. Not all illuminates are teachers— ever.

 

Secondly, there is an aspect of entry into the inconceivable that grows.

 

Gradual practice after sudden enlightenment is the organic fruition into the mystery of living awareness of selfless evolution.

 

Enlightenment itself is only an entry-level situation in which one has only just begun~ and one's potential is essentially unusable.

 

Taoist alchemy calls the period after completion of the elixir "incubation", so it is obviously a period of subtle concentration where you don't do anything but wait… whoopie. haha!!

A wonderful hopelessness indeed. It is extremely paradoxical, isn't it. That singularity is the birth of paradox in a sense. Where free-will and destiny co-exist. Hmm, I would disagree about not being able to talk about it however. We cannot compare present times to the times of the Buddha, because Buddha had absolutely no teachings to rely upon, or very little. His understanding had to come purely from his own insight, and after that, wording the inexpressible might have still not been an easy task afterwards. These days, people reach a high level of awareness by contemplating already existing teachings, and extracting their own meaning from them. This allows for verbalization much quicker I think.

Also, you don't have to teach with words necessarily. Some masters transform you simply with their presence and point of reference which reflects your own true self. And if you are teaching, it does not necessarily have to be from an "enlightened master is teaching you, so listen up" place, but simply giving insightful advice as common man. When one is in Love within, advice and service come naturally and flawlessly. Life guides your purpose from then on. Not all pursue the position of teacher however, some simply enjoy residing in their perpetual bliss. I don't call enlightened beings teachers though =P. As one guru said, "a teacher informs, a master transforms". A teacher gives information, a master gives experience .

You say right after Enlightenment, one's potential is essentially unusable. It depends potential for what? Guiding a few seekers to self realization? Totally doable. Transforming the world with a single thought? Probably not =P. Surely there are levels of enlightenment, but even in the first one, you could benefit millions. I would use someone like Eckhart Tolle as a good example. I think he resides in his fourth chakra. Physical harmony has been attained, but divine wisdom, divine love, or full awakening, not yet. But he has nonetheless been able to help millions. All you need is fearlessness, and you can be unstoppable in your endeavours.

Thanks for your reply!!!

kundakiss

Meditation definitely plays a huge role. It is a pretty known fact that as one progresses in consciousness, one begins to sleep less each day. There is also a saying that it is not the body that goes to rest, but the soul ("it needs to stretch out its legs from being confined to that body" kind of thing). It's too simply put, but yes, I find this accurate in my experience. If your consciousness is always expanded on the other hand, and you do all activities effortlessly, then you never waste much energy. Fully realized beings are able to never sleep, or very little. Since one trait of enlightenment is basically a conscious deep sleep state. So their body just "lies down" if needed =).

Other reasons do not separate from meditation but fall underneath it. Example: The amount of sleep you get depends on your daily mental attitude. If you have a lot of will power, and are basically a go-getter all the time, then you probably sleep much less than people who are more passive in life. Tweaking your mental attitude and forcing yourself to become more of a winner in life would decrease sleep. Cause mind affects body. But such things are natural occurrences through meditation. So my personal suggestion is to just start there. Everything else will follow!

Hope this helps at all!

Peace,

Eugene

Now doesn't that sound fishy. Get your troll masks on. Although, I don't know if Tao Bums troll or not. I'm sure some do. An enlightened troll, that would be a sight!!

I joined this forum just yesterday, and I've read through quite a few posts thus far. And it seems like posts (as well as life) usually fall into 3 categories. "I don't know", I think I know", and "I know". The latter usually doesn't post though =P. It is said that the fool and the wise are twins, simply standing on opposite sides of the spectrum of wisdom. Both equally receptive to personal experience without judgement or preconception. The one in the middle however, caught between the two, forever lives in the mind, a world of personal perception. Mark Twain said "I don't let school get in the way of my education." Implying that this external information that only has a home inside the brain could only interfere with one's own understanding and wisdom. Said wisdom is only extracted from direct contact with reality. But how does one get there? One of the most recognized quotes to martial artists and spiritual seekers: "Don't think! Feeeeeeel! It is like a finger pointing to the moon. Don't concentrate on the finger, or you will miss all that heavenly glooory!"

That finger are your thoughts, that constantly interpret the eternal present experience. Focusing on the thoughts, is focusing on a mere idea, instead of the actual thing. " A surrealist painter Rene Magritte, brilliantly demonstrated this idea through one of his paintings. "Ceci n'est pas une pipe" (This is not a pipe) was the caption under a drawing of a smoking pipe. It is true. It is not a pipe. Just a drawing of a pipe. Thoughts are merely personal drawings of one's actual experience. Getting lost in these drawings is what is referred to as "Maya" in Hindu scripture. Illusion.

I read a post recently that asked. How do you know if you're a Taoist? What qualities do you have to have? If you think you're a Taoist, why do you think so? These questions are for that realm of the mind. For that outer world of relativity that needs to categorize and label, in order to avoid complete abstraction. Experience is that. Pure abstractness. Pure spontaneity. It lives in that Eternal NOW, of which the Ego knows nothing about.

That's why it's fishy when someone says "Yes, I've reached Enlightenment". Since it goes in exact opposition to Enlightenment . The idea of Enlightenment exists only FOR the ego, since ego is synonymous with "ignorance". But the ego dies during Full Realization. Which means you can only be viewed as Enlightened to the outside world. Not to yourself. And you can only be seen as a Taoist master to the outside world. Because these concepts become void in pure experience.

This post is simply me thinking out-loud. But now that I've joined this forum, I thought I might share some of my thoughts.

Thank you for reading.

Peace

kundakiss

Image of Magritte's painting: http://www.library.yale.edu/librarynews/ceci-n-est-pas-une-pipe.jpg

I accidentally created another reply, how do I delete this post?

Just joined this forum yesterday. =P

1 .What are the qualities of a Taoist....???

2. What is the first quality to be expected in a Taoist...???

3. If you want to be a Taoist, what do you need to do to become one...???

4. If you think that you are a Taoist now, what makes you think that you are one...???

5. Since you have thought that you are a Taoist, did you follow all the principles or have you ever violated any of these principles....???

 

You may respond by answering anyone of the question.

The definition of Taoist exists only in the external world to create a sense of relativity. That's how labels and mental constructions came to exist. If you attach yourself to thinking of yourself or others as Taoists or anything else, then you do not directly connect to reality with your being and experience, but go through your mental process. It is the habit of the mind to ask such questions, because it can only rely on perceptions. The personality develops a spiritual ego through this self identification, and abides there. It is stuck. It is the worst type of ego in my opinion. It is the one that THINKS it knows, and therefore closes all doors to criticism.

A Taoist master cannot, in any way, identify himself to any mental construction, including Taoism. He is outside of the mind. He cannot be anything other than that - being. Only others will identify him as a Taoist. But he has turned inwards. So he does not care. Of even further, he has merged both inner and outer, and has become completely transparent. At which point, forget about trying to figure him out.

Hope this helps.

Peace

Eugene

Shouldn't the disclaimer be that the above advice pertains more to a persons method of cultivation and/or goals? Psychological traits arise from the chakra points, and working with those states, and eventually with the energy centers themselves is worth develing into - at least if your goal is to work up from the chakras and learn more about oneself. Have you ever had a chakra balancing? Now that is an amazing sense of peace.

I partially agree with Kev. Focusing and delving into chakras is a search for trivial knowledge. I agree that it may give you some insight into who you are, but you have to be willing to let go of what you learned and pursue the universal truths. It is trivial because it is relative, and is described in so many variations throughout the systems that the search becomes never-ending. And unless personal experience can guide in discernment, all that would result is extra confusion. I advise people to stick to universal truths. Such as understanding of love, humility, law of attraction, cause and effect, etc. All the rest will work itself out if the universal principles are understood and followed. The whole point is to let go of external knowledge and live in wisdom. A too educated mind might find it harder to progress, ironically, due to constant personal projected opinions.

Also, as far as chakras go, It's not about having all of them open, but in which one your consciousness resides. You could have all of them open, and still function in a state of insecurity and confusion if your awareness is still in the "red" chakra. Awareness rising is directly proportional to level of insight from contemplation, and detachment. So focus on these, everything else falls into place.

People make spiritual progress out to be so complicated, yet it is actually all pretty straight forward and simple. An illiterate farmer can attain enlightenment just as well as anyone else. It's not about the books, but about insight into your own experience.

Have I ever had a chakra balancing? Nope. But I can get to that deep sense of peace you refer to. So does it matter if I know about chakras or not? :b The end result is the same.

Peace

Eugene

PS. But... paths differ tremendously sometimes among seekers. I may stand by the fact that universal principles apply to everyone, and they should be understood, however since the path is linear, certain steps have to be undertaken before attaining higher levels. If study of chakras serves this purpose for someone, then by all means =). Who am I to say it's trivial!

Haha, oh I see! =)

Your name is Eugene THAT MEANS THE PROPHECY IS COMPLETE!!!

 

Hehe, could you please explain what you mean by that "prophecy" meaning? Where does it mean that? Is it from "Hey Arnold"? Yeah, when I tell people my name is Eugene, they usually make a "Hey, Arnold" reference . My real name is Yevgeniy or Evgeniy though. My parents are Russian. 'Eugene' is the English version.

PS. Nice avatar. I love Avatar. =)

Hello, my name is Eugene.

I have begun my spiritual lifestyle in a conscious manner approximately 3 years ago. I started with Zen meditation, proceeded to Mantak Chia's techniques, other Daoist teachings, then started experimenting on my own. Finally, I have developed my own practices which strongly resemble a system known as Kriya Yoga. Two months ago I started learning Taijiquan on my own, and my meditation experience surely helped in my progress. I believe in the Daoist mentality vs. Shaolin. "Start from internal, then move to external." In the past 3 years, I think I've accumulated roughly around 4000hrs of meditation. Last year, sometimes it was 6 hours a day. I only mention this, cause I only recently calculated it, and thought it was a fun fact.

Most teachings would tell you that quick progress often starts due to extreme inner turmoil and chaos in one's life, creating ripe conditions for higher understanding. I hit a low bottom in 2009, and I thank life for it (only in retrospect ). Since then I have been blessed with numerous guides to help me. Some to kill my Ego, others to create a point of reference of True Self.

My advice to anyone would be:

* Trust your own body and spirit, it serves as the best guide.

* Don't reprimand yourself for your errors, present or past. Learn to let go.

* Contemplate A LOT, to extract meaning by combining what you've learned from books with personal experience.

* Help and give to others. Service plays a huge role in spiritual evolution.

* Finally, if wisdom is yet to be found, imitate those who you revere. "I'm bothered by these negative thoughts. What would Master do? He will not bother. So I will not bother." Period. Just do it. Don't get stuck in the place of reasoning, just because you doubt your own potential. Don't doubt. Just do it =)

* Be thankful for obstacles, they guide you, and keep you from stagnating in your growth process.

* Don't take anything too seriously. Especially your practices. Play around with them. Tweak everything if you feel like it. The more light-hearted and playful your attitude, the quicker the progress.

My thoughts on techniques:

* Concentration is vital for successful meditation. Train this first.

* Microcosmic orbit HAS to be opened to pull consciousness out of your Ego.

* Sexual energy is probably the biggest key. Practice Big Draw. Etc. Experiment. For the first 3 months however AFTER successful Microcosmic Orbit and Big Draw, try to restrain from ejaculating.

* Prayer is useful to a certain point in your progress.

* Bhakti Yoga is extremely powerful as well. Contemplate on Love. Feel Love. Be Love. Learn to love to love (appreciate, accept). It will purify you.

** VISUALIZE. The spirit conceives. The mind creates. The body experiences. Visualize your greatest image of yourself in life and in meditation(ex: Pure emptiness, light, pure love, etc), then tell your body to feel it. Literally. Meditation (Dhyana, absorption) starts from here.

* Powers, abilities, resulting from higher consciousness will only bind you. Forget them. They pale in comparison to the final goal of your spiritual evolution.

Peace to you Tao Bums

Eugene