Ah, it's the same old...

[Hern Heng]

[steve]

Very good, Taoists are not so emotionally and spiritually handicapped that they concern themselves with those useless, ridiculous, Buddhist questions that the original poster spewed.

If you are referring to "Who am I?" and so on, from Buddy's original post - that line of questioning is the central method in Advaita Vedanta - a part of Hinduism actually, not Buddhism. Buddhism arose from Hinduism but took the inquiry in a different direction for the most part.

 

Furthermore, anyone with any real interest in true spirituality and awakening must face those very questions at some point in their development... That is the point where a teacher or guru is no longer of any value. These are questions only the individual can answer through persistent investigation. These questions completely took me over after practicing Dao cultivation for about 3 years. In fact, I put my practice on hold for a while. Once I dealt with these questions satisfactorily, I got back to the cultivation regimen but it took a while and a lot of work.

 

Camus wrote that whether or not to commit suicide is the only true philosophical question. I believe that "Who am I?" is the only true spiritual/philosophical question because "I" ask all the other questions, including - should I commit suicide?

Edited February 15, 2008 by xuesheng

[steve]

So I took a break and now it's this dao zhan guy pimping his shit or....whomever the next one will be.

.............

............

It sounds as if you expected something to change - why?

[SFJane]

I think Buddy represents a healthy skepticism that I wish more people would levy against the things they espouse and believe in

 

it is kind of telling some of the reactions to his opinions on the matter

 

 

skepticism is part and parcel to critical thinking and analysis

 

critical thinking and analysis of one's self and reality is I feel necessary to make serious headway in apprehending that whimsical notion of Truth

 

 

as for the questions

 

what value is there is knowing *who first started it* ?

 

does it matter what tradition is asking those questions and when they supposedly went down on record as being Askers of Those Questions?

 

what matters is the questions themselves for they are timeless formulas for self realization

 

there are several inquiries into self and nature of self that can be deeply penetrating and enlightening

 

the questions I posed myself that mattered most was

 

who am I?

what am I?

what do I want?

why am I here?

do I have a real reason to live or anything worth living for?

 

in the process of answering those questions I found myself

 

in the process of finding myself I gained a new question one that I privately ask the soul of most people I meet without words. I look for ways through body mind and heart that people answer that question

 

the question that I found, after the fact to matter a great deal is

 

do you love yourself unconditionally and unambiguously?

 

for I found that some people can not answer that question

 

some people truthfully answer No

 

some people say yes, and when I dig deeper, I find that it is a conditional love, like a computer programming statement

 

I love myself IF Then

 

If this and that is lined up Then I love myself

 

I love myself, but.

 

After I understood myself, unwittingly I began asking that question with dead seriousness while looking people straight in the eye and found that that question disturbs people sometimes deeply

 

I have made grown men and women cry asking them that one question

 

After I ask people that question, anyone that can not truthfully answer yes has difficulty looking me in the eye

 

these questions , the inquiries into self and spirit are far more important than displays of or allegations or claims of various siddhi

 

why siddhi should indicate spiritual mastery or level of enlightenment or what it is supposed to indicate eludes me

 

when I was younger, I was addicted to the traps of psychic ability and power and it never helped me in the slightest

 

the question to me came down to, which is more important, developing shock and awe power to....shock and awe people

 

or

 

finding myself and a reason to exist

 

I chose the latter and in the final analysis, it made all the difference

[AugustLeo]

.

[greenchild]

,,,

Edited October 23, 2008 by greenchild

[Mal]

[Starjumper]

If you are referring to "Who am I?" and so on, from Buddy's original post - that line of questioning is the central method in Advaita Vedanta - a part of Hinduism actually, not Buddhism. Buddhism arose from Hinduism but took the inquiry in a different direction for the most part.

 

Furthermore, anyone with any real interest in true spirituality and awakening must face those very questions at some point in their development... That is the point where a teacher or guru is no longer of any value. These are questions only the individual can answer through persistent investigation. These questions completely took me over after practicing Dao cultivation for about 3 years. In fact, I put my practice on hold for a while. Once I dealt with these questions satisfactorily, I got back to the cultivation regimen but it took a while and a lot of work.

 

Camus wrote that whether or not to commit suicide is the only true philosophical question. I believe that "Who am I?" is the only true spiritual/philosophical question because "I" ask all the other questions, including - should I commit suicide?

 

 

You are correct and i will expand on this, but my comments were aimed primarily at the original poster, who asked the question. I think Cat said it very well:

It's a game geeky adolescents play, this using Zen questions as a power trip, when it suits them.

 

It's a mock - intellectual version of "I know I am, but what are you?"

 

It appeals to those that need to be reductive and sit in a cul - de - sac to feel safe.

 

My comment about it being for the spiritually and mentally handicapped were aimed at the original poster, who demonstrates these handicaps frequently.

 

I realize that there are some here who have difficulty with reading comprehension and nit pic at pieces of posts, again like the original poster, and so I apologize in advance for not writing with lots of little paragraphs and short sentences. I hope the others will be able to bear with me to the end

 

Now, this type of self examination and self introspection we are speaking of is useful and it is part of any good path, I think. The important point to make is that in most Taoist systems they don't use emotional psychoanalysis. Keep in mind I'm speaking of generalities here. In many Taoist systems if you tell the master you have some steenking little emotional problem you'll probably get a response like, "I know about it already, I had the same thing too, just keep practicing" The general belief, which is supported by TCM, is that if a person has a healthy body and energy system then the emotional health will naturally follow, so they focus on the body. Most Taoists don't display much in the way of emotional problems.

 

On the other hand many Buddhist systems link up really well with psychoanalysis and addressing emotional problems, primarily in the West, and the psychoanalystical and emotionally handicapped types tend to flock to it like flies attracted to a pile of dung. They go on and on about their pathetic emotional responses and what Buddha or this or that sutra says about the way one should behave. They do not recognize the connection between the health of the body and the health of the emotions.

 

I know there are many American Buddhist who are fine examples of emotional stability. The point I am making is that a person who has emotional problems, like the original poster, will gravitate to Buddhism for it's psychoanalytic aspect and to the fundamentalist sects that have adopted a band aid approach to solutions of same. Zen is not one of the fundamentalist sects. These emotionally weak people will likely not get the point of the Taoist methods and they won't see the point. This is why I said that the above questions are Buddhist/for the spiritually handicapped and are not Taoist.

 

In the final analysis the type of self introspection of the "who am I" type arises naturally when a person has achieved greater clarity and they are working on Te, which is the Taoist way, to let things happen naturally in their own time, with out 'bossing' it around (particularly with the emotions) People are not TOLD that they must do this as part of the path, it is ALLOWED to happen. Or they can be told it is the thing to do while they still lack clarity, like the original poster, but then it will be little more than a circle jerk type of mind game, which is why I said it would be useless. Keep it in context, OK? I think the original poster has singled me out because he is jealous that I learned an extensive nei kung system from an advanced master while he, who claims to know nei kung and to be a teacher of it tells people to use mind games instead of nei kung, all the while telling people that I don't have the goods. ROFL.

 

Just remember there is a function to investigating the mind with those questions. If one were to investigate Dhyana/Chan/Zen, sincerely, they would come to understand the function of those questions.

Knocking Buddhism, knocks Daoism, knocks Islam, knocks Catholocism, knocks Judaism, knocks....etc, etc, etc.

 

Please see above comments

Edited February 16, 2008 by Starjumper7

[steve]

 

Forums are fun!

I love you all!

[mat black]

 

Forums are fun!

I love you all!

 

haha, humour and sincerity - smooth

 

This rest thread makes me realise that forum dynamics can be interesting for want of a better word.

For me, I couldn't care less about arguing or trying to defend an opinion, especially on an internet forum. Some people seem to enjoy pushing views and opinions - sweet that's one of the beauties of a forum like this.

I just wonder if people communicate differently through this medium than they would face to face. Like, would members here actually swear in each others face and the like if they were speaking in person?

 

Maybe when we write something on this or any other forum, we could imagine that to each person that reads it, we are looking each other in the eyes.

Anonimity is a bit of an illusion 'coz really, there is a karmic flow going on here. In any case, "when you understand that an act done to another is an act done to yourself, you have percieved a great truth"

- Hua Hu Ching.

 

just some musings

Edited February 16, 2008 by mat black

[林愛偉]

Though any "path" can be a "spiritual band-aid" it is the cultivator them self who unfortunately represents the "path" in today's society. It is good that many "paths" can form to what people's minds are, yet it only seems that way.

People really form their minds to what they assume the "paths" are, and then shape their perspective around it. Methods of both Daoism and Buddhism are simply that...Methods. The minds who cultivate them make up the ceremony, and due to their minds these two methods are seen as two/too different. It is the mind, not the method.

 

Seems you are placing yourself on a "Daoist" hilltop, overlooking Buddhism as though it is inferior to Daoism. Brother, there is no such thing. Do you know what thing I am talking about?

 

Peace and Blessings,

Lin

 

 

You are correct and i will expand on this, but my comments were aimed primarily at the original poster, who asked the question. I think Cat said it very well:

It's a game geeky adolescents play, this using Zen questions as a power trip, when it suits them.

 

It's a mock - intellectual version of "I know I am, but what are you?"

 

It appeals to those that need to be reductive and sit in a cul - de - sac to feel safe.

 

My comment about it being for the spiritually and mentally handicapped were aimed at the original poster, who demonstrates these handicaps frequently.

 

I realize that there are some here who have difficulty with reading comprehension and nit pic at pieces of posts, again like the original poster, and so I apologize in advance for not writing with lots of little paragraphs and short sentences. I hope the others will be able to bear with me to the end

 

Now, this type of self examination and self introspection we are speaking of is useful and it is part of any good path, I think. The important point to make is that in most Taoist systems they don't use emotional psychoanalysis. Keep in mind I'm speaking of generalities here. In many Taoist systems if you tell the master you have some steenking little emotional problem you'll probably get a response like, "I know about it already, I had the same thing too, just keep practicing" The general belief, which is supported by TCM, is that if a person has a healthy body and energy system then the emotional health will naturally follow, so they focus on the body. Most Taoists don't display much in the way of emotional problems.

 

On the other hand many Buddhist systems link up really well with psychoanalysis and addressing emotional problems, primarily in the West, and the psychoanalystical and emotionally handicapped types tend to flock to it like flies attracted to a pile of dung. They go on and on about their pathetic emotional responses and what Buddha or this or that sutra says about the way one should behave. They do not recognize the connection between the health of the body and the health of the emotions.

 

I know there are many American Buddhist who are fine examples of emotional stability. The point I am making is that a person who has emotional problems, like the original poster, will gravitate to Buddhism for it's psychoanalytic aspect and to the fundamentalist sects that have adopted a band aid approach to solutions of same. Zen is not one of the fundamentalist sects. These emotionally weak people will likely not get the point of the Taoist methods and they won't see the point. This is why I said that the above questions are Buddhist/for the spiritually handicapped and are not Taoist.

 

In the final analysis the type of self introspection of the "who am I" type arises naturally when a person has achieved greater clarity and they are working on Te, which is the Taoist way, to let things happen naturally in their own time, with out 'bossing' it around (particularly with the emotions) People are not TOLD that they must do this as part of the path, it is ALLOWED to happen. Or they can be told it is the thing to do while they still lack clarity, like the original poster, but then it will be little more than a circle jerk type of mind game, which is why I said it would be useless. Keep it in context, OK? I think the original poster has singled me out because he is jealous that I learned an extensive nei kung system from an advanced master while he, who claims to know nei kung and to be a teacher of it tells people to use mind games instead of nei kung, all the while telling people that I don't have the goods. ROFL.

Please see above comments

Edited February 16, 2008 by 林愛偉

[宁]

i never felt a "I" inside me, or outside me, since i was a child

 

this is why the question seems ridiculous...

 

who am I? what I? show me your I !!!

 

[dao zhen]

There is no I...............

 

There is no other................

 

Sail upon the wind & jump into the gourd.........

 

Jump out of the existence region and come into the nonexistence region..........

 

Returning to the time before my birth and death............

 

My heart is extending so far into infinitude that it can accomodate all..............

[Taomeow]

I used to think that people who deny selfhood, individuality, personal responsibility are on an escapist trip running away from the harsh reality of who they know very well they are underneath all the denial. I now believe that while many of them are indeed victims of self-identity theft, some of them are also puppets manipulated by for-profit strings. It's easier to send to war, to slavery, to cold-blooded mass extermination of life on earth a population that has been brainwashed sufficiently to believe that nobody really exists and therefore nobody really matters and you can do anything to anybody with impunity, since they are "illusions" to begin with. Which is why I don't simply "disagree" with such ideas -- I feel that they are purposefully and meticulously dehumanizing towards an agenda of cheapening human blood, human suffering, human aliveness for someone's profit.

 

Who am I? I know it because I remember, it's that simple. I was born a little girl, a live, feeling human being, and until and unless I disown her, pretend she never happened, never mattered, was never real, I will never lose track of who I am. That little girl grew up cutting off all the strings they've been relentlessly trying to equip her with so as to make her into yet another puppet. I love her and I'm proud of what she did so as not to let them.

[宁]

ok so i have to rectify

 

i dont feel a particular i exists by itself. it is a mixt/up conglomerate that we call i

 

for me, the i appears and is sustained by work. it is when you align all your tendencies into one single force

 

it is also gurdjieff's view

[Cameron]

I used to think that people who deny selfhood, individuality, personal responsibility are on an escapist trip running away from the harsh reality of who they know very well they are underneath all the denial. I now believe that while many of them are indeed victims of self-identity theft, some of them are also puppets manipulated by for-profit strings. It's easier to send to war, to slavery, to cold-blooded mass extermination of life on earth a population that has been brainwashed sufficiently to believe that nobody really exists and therefore nobody really matters and you can do anything to anybody with impunity, since they are "illusions" to begin with. Which is why I don't simply "disagree" with such ideas -- I feel that they are purposefully and meticulously dehumanizing towards an agenda of cheapening human blood, human suffering, human aliveness for someone's profit.

 

Who am I? I know it because I remember, it's that simple. I was born a little girl, a live, feeling human being, and until and unless I disown her, pretend she never happened, never mattered, was never real, I will never lose track of who I am. That little girl grew up cutting off all the strings they've been relentlessly trying to equip her with so as to make her into yet another puppet. I love her and I'm proud of what she did so as not to let them.

 

 

Interesting view. I had a slight urge to respond on the Buddhist no self position in some way but will let your words sink in instead.

[Pero]

Interesting view. I had a slight urge to respond on the Buddhist no self position in some way but will let your words sink in instead.

 

What she is describing is not Buddhist view.

[mYTHmAKER]

I used to think that people who deny selfhood, individuality, personal responsibility are on an escapist trip It's easier to send to war, to slavery, to cold-blooded mass extermination of life on earth a population that has been brainwashed sufficiently to believe that nobody really exists and therefore nobody really matters and you can do anything to anybody with impunity, since they are "illusions" to begin with. Which is why I don't simply "disagree" with such ideas -- I feel that they are purposefully and meticulously dehumanizing towards an agenda of cheapening human blood, human suffering, human aliveness for someone's profit.

 

Who am I? I know it because I remember, it's that simple. I was born a little girl, a live, feeling human being, and until and unless I disown her, pretend she never happened, never mattered, was never real, I will never lose track of who I am. That little girl grew up cutting off all the strings they've been relentlessly trying to equip her with so as to make her into yet another puppet. I love her and I'm proud of what she did so as not to let them.

 

In the army there are only troops not people as it is easier to kill what you don't relate to.

It is a dehumanizer.

The question - Who am I - has the opposite affect. One realizes they exist as part of the whole,

and are no different than others. How could you chose to hurt your brother or sister.

You still retain a record - memory - of your individuality.

Most, I would guess all, people feel the same inside today as they did as a child. I know I do.

My body changes but I remain the same.

[witch]

I will add my two cents. From a witch point of view, or I should say my witch point of view, since having two witches in a room means three religious beliefs, everything is fundamentally astrological. On an astrological chart there are twelve houses, and each house is a realm.

 

1.) House of self

2.) House of the body, money, nature and the material world

3.) House of communication, language, local movement, school

4.) House of home, emotion, heart's needs (and witchcraft)

5.) House of self expression, fun, children

6.) House of daily work, food, health

7.) House of the other, partner, spouse, enemy

8.) House of sex, other people's money, the occult, secrets, birth and death

9.) House of foreign lands, travel, college, law and philosophy

10.) House of career, power, social status and life's work

11.) House of friends, society, the Internet and chi (house of air)

12.) House of dissolution, dreams, confinement, the Jungian collective unconscious

 

Between each house there is a doorway, the "cusp" of the following house. Four of the doorways are considered very important--the ascendent (or rising sign), the descendant, the midheaven and the nadir. These are sensitive points on a chart. I get the feeling that many posters here are trying very hard to reach the point right before the ascendant or descendant, they want to wander in that realm and never reach the doorway. The 12th house is loss of self, and if a person wanders outward there can be a complete dissolution of the self, and then there is never the crossing into the first house with rebirth. The cycle is ended.

 

Likewise I think some here want to wander in the sixth house and achieve perfect neverending health. They want to hoard all of their vitality and never give it to someone else and live forever, with a body that is always young.

 

In a way, and this analogy will make people angry with me, it reminds me of Paris Hilton who wants so much to be right before the midheaven, at the point of fame without crossing over and grasping power and doing something useful with her life, fame for its own sake.

 

I think for some rare people, pursuing these various courses is the right path for balance. My religion is based on astrological balance and pursuing the point of the north node. If a person's north node fell on one of these spots, then it would be a very good thing for them to strive for. But most people's north nodes fall into one of the houses, and for some people the path to balance is their career or having fun or travelling the world. Each person's path is different. There are twelve houses where a person's north node can fall, and twelve signs it can be, determining the flavor. Then there are the angles with the planets and the whole rest of the chart, so really I think a person has to work things out for themselves.

 

[seadog]

There is no I...............

 

There is no other................

 

Sail upon the wind & jump into the gourd.........

 

Jump out of the existence region and come into the nonexistence region..........

 

Returning to the time before my birth and death............

 

My heart is extending so far into infinitude that it can accomodate all..............

 

Ah now thats the way.

[steve]

I just wonder if people communicate differently through this medium than they would face to face. Like, would members here actually swear in each others face and the like if they were speaking in person?

 

Maybe when we write something on this or any other forum, we could imagine that to each person that reads it, we are looking each other in the eyes.

Anonimity is a bit of an illusion 'coz really, there is a karmic flow going on here. In any case, "when you understand that an act done to another is an act done to yourself, you have percieved a great truth"

- Hua Hu Ching.

 

just some musings

What would it be like if our entire membership could remain mindful of these words?

I am committed to this attitude from this moment forward!

Edited February 16, 2008 by xuesheng

[Cameron]

What she is describing is not Buddhist view.

 

 

Yes, I realize that, thank you.

 

I was going to say something about the Buddhist view she basically doesn't like. But am really more in just observing and learning from others mode at the moment.

[Pero]

Yes, I realize that, thank you.

 

Any time.

 

But am really more in just observing and learning from others mode at the moment.

 

Good for you, I wish I could put myself more in that mode...

[Starjumper]

Though any "path" can be a "spiritual band-aid" it is the cultivator them self who unfortunately represents the "path" in today's society. It is good that many "paths" can form to what people's minds are, yet it only seems that way.

People really form their minds to what they assume the "paths" are, and then shape their perspective around it. Methods of both Daoism and Buddhism are simply that...Methods. The minds who cultivate them make up the ceremony, and due to their minds these two methods are seen as two/too different. It is the mind, not the method.

 

Seems you are placing yourself on a "Daoist" hilltop, overlooking Buddhism as though it is inferior to Daoism. Brother, there is no such thing. Do you know what thing I am talking about?

 

Peace and Blessings,

Lin

 

Yes I do, but you missed the point of what I was saying, and I won't repeat myself.

Edited February 17, 2008 by Starjumper7

[Cameron]

 

-in response to pero's post.