Weather Magick

[Walker]

On 2/22/2020 at 2:43 AM, silent thunder said:

Everyone can point the way.  Everyone has the wisdom of their path.

 

Well, I disagree with the first sentence, generally speaking. I don't think there are very many people on earth who can "point the way," although I will say that almost everybody does have quite a bit of wisdom, some an awful lot. But there is a gulf between most people's worldly wisdom and, for instance, what Laozi or Shakyamuni or other great sages pointed to. 

 

As for the second sentence, yes, I agree.

 

The point I have been trying to make is that "the wisdom of their path" is not the same as "the wisdom of the Daoist path."

 

Sure were are all "in/of the Dao." But that universal truism in and of itself does not bless us all with innate knowledge of what is passed down in Daoism. I brought up Wang Liping because it seemed likely to me that if you have taken his classes, you would have heard things from him that more than 99 percent of humans don't know anything about.

 

Quote

I have no 'large commitment' to Master Wang.  Only two people, my wife and son have elicited large commitments from me.  The rest are incidentals, straw dogs.

 

I was referring to the financial commitment. My understanding is that his classes cost a few thousand US dollars to attend, a sum that counts as quite a commitment for all but the very wealthy. I did not use this word to imply a commitment or a bond like marriage or parenthood. 

 

Quote

Funny that you rather dismissively mention giving large sums of money to street folks... as if this were a moronic passtime.  Count me an idiot then... and I'll wear the badge of happy grinning cucumber sage as charged.

 

I was not being dismissive. I was being serious. I wanted to know if you think that any old person in LA could teach you the things that Wang Liping is privy to. I mentioned skid row because of the poverty, and I was wondering why not just give the money to a beggar if, in the end, everybody has access to the same knowledge and wisdom just by virtue of being alive. 

 

Quote

I paid Earl the Pearl more in money in tuition than I did to Wang and this was back in the mid 90's on a stage actor's budget...   

 

... I offered him in return what I could authentically, lunches and some cash... and he shared with me a mountain of wisdom and experience that for me, an actor/philosopher fresh out of college used to great effect.  I mentioned to my gal several times that Earl did not seem 'merely human'.

 

An interesting story, and surely he is/was an interesting man. 

 

But, relating to my question about skid row, from this I glean two things. 1, Whatever his wisdom and wit, Earl probably did not understand the inner teachings of Wang's branch of Dragon Gate Daoism. 2, In fact, even though he might have been homeless, there was nothing random about your happening to give lots of money to Earl. He, like Wang, received a unique education (I'm guessing he had a PhD if he used to be a professor, and it sounds like he was a student of life in general). In Earl's case that education filled him with "pearls of wisdom" that you valued.

 

I glean from this that even though you advocate that everybody is as close to "source" as anybody else, you also recognize that different individuals may possess unique knowledge that other do not possess.

 

Quote

I honestly bristle a bit at your tone and while I see no need to justify to you nor anyone where and why I spend my money and attention.  I reply for the sake of politeness and the curiosity of others.  It's as simple as this.  My attention flows where there is gravity for my awareness. 

 

Well, I did not bring up Wang to try and compel you to justify where and why you spend money, but I can see how it might have looked like that. My point, generally, is that different people on earth possess different types of knowledge.

 

As this relates to Daoism in specific, my point is that teachers who passed through thorough discipleships with masters tend to be taught knowledge and trained in practices that are far beyond the scope of most of humanity's knowledge and experience.

 

This is one reason I believe it can be important to be discerning about who is and who is not a qualified Daoist teacher... this type of questioning is probably not merely a question of "insecurity," as you said before that it might be. 

Edited February 25, 2020 by Walker

[Walker]

On 2/23/2020 at 7:26 PM, Vajra Fist said:

The way weather magic works as the op practices it is by commanding some low level spirits to alter things within the range of their abilities. It's not a siddhi. It's also an exchange, although what you're giving away in return for bragging rights I wouldn't like to say.

 

It certainly can be a siddhi though when you reach a high level in practice. But by then you wouldn't need the elaborate rituals or garb. I'd also imagine that very few people have, or are able to reach that level.

 

This is a short but potentially important post for Daoists to consider. 

 

A story shows up several times in the various writings of the Wu-Liu school (伍柳派) of Daoist inner alchemy that discuss a master considered to have been highly accomplished. When, during a drought, villagers approached this immortal and begged for succor, he merely pointed at the sky and it darkened and produced rain. 

 

On the other hand, there is another important Daoist "weather magician," Bai Yuchan (白玉蟾), who was even better known as an adept of inner alchemy. Interestingly, I do not believe that he eschewed with ritual despite being extremely highly accomplished in neidan (by Ma Danyang's account, Bai Yuchan was one of Wang Chongyang's three immortal teachers--note, by the way, that none of them appeared as disembodied voices, but in the flesh). In fact, despite his evident predilection for wandering around looking like a filthy bum, there is written record of Bai being tapped to lead a huge ritual quite late in life.

 

I have not read them but I believe some of Bai Yuchan's writings on weather magic still exist (his voluminous poetry and some other writings are still around, too). It would be interesting to see whether these texts involve commanding low level spirits, or are built on a practitioner's own abilities, on the basis of inner alchemy training. I have heard in conversation that the latter is the case, but that's an open question to me. 

Edited February 25, 2020 by Walker

[silent thunder]

7 hours ago, Walker said:

 

Well, I disagree with the first sentence, generally speaking. I don't think there are very many people on earth who can "point the way," although I will say that almost everybody does have quite a bit of wisdom, some an awful lot. But there is a gulf between most people's worldly wisdom and, for instance, what Laozi or Shakyamuni or other great sages pointed to. 

 

As for the second sentence, yes, I agree.

 

The point I have been trying to make is that "the wisdom of their path" is not the same as "the wisdom of the Daoist path."

 

Sure were are all "in/of the Dao." But that universal truism in and of itself does not bless us all with innate knowledge of what is passed down in Daoism. I brought up Wang Liping because it seemed likely to me that if you have taken his classes, you would have heard things from him that more than 99 percent of humans don't know anything about.

 

 

I was referring to the financial commitment. My understanding is that his classes cost a few thousand US dollars to attend, a sum that counts as quite a commitment for all but the very wealthy. I did not use this word to imply a commitment or a bond like marriage or parenthood. 

 

 

I was not being dismissive. I was being serious. I wanted to know if you think that any old person in LA could teach you the things that Wang Liping is privy to. I mentioned skid row because of the poverty, and I was wondering why not just give the money to a beggar if, in the end, everybody has access to the same knowledge and wisdom just by virtue of being alive. 

 

 

An interesting story, and surely he is/was an interesting man. 

 

But, relating to my question about skid row, from this I glean two things. 1, Whatever his wisdom and wit, Earl probably did not understand the inner teachings of Wang's branch of Dragon Gate Daoism. 2, In fact, even though he might have been homeless, there was nothing random about your happening to give lots of money to Earl. He, like Wang, received a unique education (I'm guessing he had a PhD if he used to be a professor, and it sounds like he was a student of life in general). In Earl's case that education filled him with "pearls of wisdom" that you valued.

 

I glean from this that even though you advocate that everybody is as close to "source" as anybody else, you also recognize that different individuals may possess unique knowledge that other do not possess.

 

 

Well, I did not bring up Wang to try and compel you to justify where and why you spend money, but I can see how it might have looked like that. My point, generally, is that different people on earth possess different types of knowledge.

 

As this relates to Daoism in specific, my point is that teachers who passed through thorough discipleships with masters tend to be taught knowledge and trained in practices that are far beyond the scope of most of humanity's knowledge and experience.

 

This is one reason I believe it can be important to be discerning about who is and who is not a qualified Daoist teacher... this type of questioning is probably not merely a question of "insecurity," as you said before that it might be. 

I appreciate your clarifications.

We don't see things very similarly, which is wonderful.

Variety and adaptability seems one of the great strengths of our species.

 

now... about that weather magick...

[flowing hands]

 

"Those that know of the Dao are just a few

those that think they know are many

 

Therefore I wear simple clothing and hold my treasure in my heart.

By holding my treasure in my heart, I am at one with the Dao."                (Lei Erh Xian Shi,  Dao De Jing)

[liminal_luke]

That video of Lord Josh Allen is hilarious.  The outfit and persona is absurdly ideal for a Daoist master who wishes to remain incognito.  It´s so flamboyant and "out there" -- so contrary to commonly held notions of how a Daoist master should behave -- that it´s the perfect disguise.  No serious person would ever suspect LJA´s spiritual mastery.  They´d take one look at the glamour and the glitz and keep right on going.  Meanwhile, LJA is free to work his wizardry in blessed peace and isolation. 

[Vajra Fist]

.

Edited February 26, 2020 by Vajra Fist

[manitou]

On 2/22/2020 at 10:18 AM, liminal_luke said:

 

That´s beautiful.  To my mind, your story with Marblehead exactly parallels the teaching parable Earl Grey presented: you responded to seeming conflict with crazy wisdom positivity, totally upsetting the usual pattern of escalating blah blah blah hostility.

 

I could make the point that there´s lots of conflict here by assembling a book of war quotes, but it´s also true that the conflict is in my own mind.  So much of how we react to things is us -- not the external world.  There´s lots of beautiful interaction here and whether or not I focus on the beauty or the beastliness is up to me.

 

 

I agree - the conflict is in our minds.  And it's also an exact mirror of the conflict within us that needs resolving.  Such an incredible interaction between what our psyche needs and how it goes about recreating situation after situation until we  finally 'get it'.

 

 

 

 

Edited February 27, 2020 by manitou

[steve]

On 2/25/2020 at 2:52 AM, Walker said:

 

Well, I disagree with the first sentence, generally speaking. I don't think there are very many people on earth who can "point the way," although I will say that almost everybody does have quite a bit of wisdom, some an awful lot. But there is a gulf between most people's worldly wisdom and, for instance, what Laozi or Shakyamuni or other great sages pointed to. 

 

I’ll be a bit presumptuous and elaborate on Thunder’s point. The reason that anyone can point the way is that pointing out occurs in us, not in the one doing the pointing. No one can cause us to see, no matter what Jeff and his crew suggest, that’s on us as practitioners. What we need to make that leap can vary widely and can be literally anything... a wack on the back of the head, a beautiful sunset, a tree, a sutra, a teacher, or the death of a loved one. The wisdom of the wise ones is valuable but not necessarily what anyone needs at any given time to grow. At least that’s how I interpret ST’s comment and I thin it’s a particularly valuable point.

 

[senseless virtue]

10 hours ago, steve said:

I’ll be a bit presumptuous and elaborate on Thunder’s point. The reason that anyone can point the way is that pointing out occurs in us, not in the one doing the pointing. No one can cause us to see, no matter what Jeff and his crew suggest, that’s on us as practitioners. What we need to make that leap can vary widely and can be literally anything... a wack on the back of the head, a beautiful sunset, a tree, a sutra, a teacher, or the death of a loved one. The wisdom of the wise ones is valuable but not necessarily what anyone needs at any given time to grow. At least that’s how I interpret ST’s comment and I thin it’s a particularly valuable point.

 

While I find a good point being touched upon in your and silent thunder's writing, I think it's highly disingenuous to conflate working with energy and spirits (per the controversy of this topic) with simple mind purification and realizing the universal wisdom of non-self.

 

Wisdom is working on your self-perception and getting back to the source, yes? It's basically formless and doesn't necessarily require much else than tuning into the spacious awareness ("letting go") to train it in optimal manner.

 

I have in contrast understood that working with and manipulating energies and spirits follows many types of conditions and entanglements that require care and context sensitivity. These are not universally accessible practices to neophytes, but require a good deal of prior information and training in order to keep it safe and competent. Why? Because this isn't the simple and safe world of self-perception anymore where the only willful individual and conditioned factor is you. The problem with universal wisdom is that it doesn't usually include discernment which is the practical and relative wisdom we need in everyday life.

 

It isn't needful to look much further for evidence than this forum and the countless cries of help by people who have gotten burned by some botched internal practice. The energetic channels of human body have specific functions and it's dangerous to cross currents. Spirits have personalities and willfulness that you might not anticipate. What else is there to say than that Daoist arts generally require a valid initiation in order to give proper discernment at the very least?

Edited February 28, 2020 by virtue

[steve]

 

 

9 hours ago, virtue said:

 

While I find a good point being touched upon in your and silent thunder's writing, I think it's highly disingenuous to conflate working with energy and spirits (per the controversy of this topic) with simple mind purification and realizing the universal wisdom of non-self.

I will have to simply disagree with this point.

Working with energy and spirits is no different than working with one's own mind.

There is nothing simple about mind purification or realizing universal wisdom, other than from a theoretical perspective.

 

9 hours ago, virtue said:

 

Wisdom is working on your self-perception and getting back to the source, yes? It's basically formless and doesn't necessarily require much else than tuning into the spacious awareness ("letting go") to train it in optimal manner.

You make it sound quite easy. I wonder how deeply your experience runs in such a practice?

It can be full of form (eg tantric practices and internal alchemy) or formless (dzogchen, keeping the one, sitting and forgetting).

 

9 hours ago, virtue said:

 

I have in contrast understood that working with and manipulating energies and spirits follows many types of conditions and entanglements that require care and context sensitivity. These are not universally accessible practices to neophytes, but require a good deal of prior information and training in order to keep it safe and competent. Why? Because this isn't the simple and safe world of self-perception anymore where the only willful individual and conditioned factor is you. The problem with universal wisdom is that it doesn't usually include discernment which is the practical and relative wisdom we need in everyday life.

I'll again disagree. One of the core foundations of the practice of universal wisdom is the wisdom of discernment. It's one of the five wisdoms of Buddhism and Bön. People who do not practice with universal wisdom often have inaccurate assumptions and projections about it. There's nothing simple or safe about investigating the depths of one's mind, particularly when working in the context of the mind being all of creation and experience.

 

9 hours ago, virtue said:

 

It isn't needful to look much further for evidence than this forum and the countless cries of help by people who have gotten burned by some botched internal practice. The energetic channels of human body have specific functions and it's dangerous to cross currents. Spirits have personalities and willfulness that you might not anticipate. What else is there to say than that Daoist arts generally require a valid initiation in order to give proper discernment at the very least?

This is also why a practice like dzogchen was passed down in a highly discriminatory fashion for millenia. Initiation was taken very seriously and one master selected one pupil to teach in his lifetime, no more. While I respect those who follow other paths, the path of universal wisdom does not sit alongside other paths in a safe and shielded fashion. It encompasses and sublimates all other paths without exception when practiced skillfully.

 

[Walker]

21 hours ago, steve said:

 

I’ll be a bit presumptuous and elaborate on Thunder’s point. The reason that anyone can point the way is that pointing out occurs in us, not in the one doing the pointing. No one can cause us to see, no matter what Jeff and his crew suggest, that’s on us as practitioners. What we need to make that leap can vary widely and can be literally anything... a wack on the back of the head, a beautiful sunset, a tree, a sutra, a teacher, or the death of a loved one. The wisdom of the wise ones is valuable but not necessarily what anyone needs at any given time to grow. At least that’s how I interpret ST’s comment and I thin it’s a particularly valuable point.

 

I feel that and I generally agree with ST's point in terms of the "source." But the tradition of Daoism is not itself the Dao. It is full of highly complex and even technical teachings. Touching/glimpsing "source," imo, is no more a guarantee that you will gain any understanding of an inner-door Daoist meditation or magic teaching than it is a guarantee that you will know how to operate a Boeing 737.

 

The spirit of what you say below is precisely what has caused me to harp on this point so tenaciously:

 

2 hours ago, steve said:

This is also why a practice like dzogchen was passed down in a highly discriminatory fashion for millenia. Initiation was taken very seriously and one master selected one pupil to teach in his lifetime, no more. While I respect those who follow other paths, the path of universal wisdom does not sit alongside other paths in a safe and shielded fashion. It encompasses and sublimates all other paths without exception when practiced skillfully.

 

(I understand you or another might reply, "but now Dzogchen teachings are quite open, the days of one-master-one-disciple have passed," to which I can only say: true indeed, but that does not mean people can understand these teachings without actually being taught them by a qualified guide. Moreover, we see plenty give themselves labels formally reserved for initiates without actually even being familiar with what is "open source" in these traditions, to say nothing of what still remains a secret...)

Edited February 28, 2020 by Walker

[steve]

It's always a bit dicey to mix absolute and relative perspectives and often leads to conflicts and misunderstandings here.

I appreciate the posts of both virtue and walker.

My response was more to the aspect of this thread that relates to personal identity and how we express that rather than technicalities of specific practices.

[Walker]

I appreciate that some people like the name Daoist and I don't think we need an e-pogrom to eliminate all casual usage of that label. But, since few visitors to this site may have any other chance to hear a more traditional viewpoint about these things, I feel pulled to share what I have been taught, especially when in conversation with people who have moved far beyond "I am a Daoist because I resonate with Benjamin Hoff's books" to realms that include, explicitly or implicitly, "I am a teacher or religious personage." I would think the same approach might be called for with, for instance, terms like "Dzogchenpa." 

[flowing hands]

2 hours ago, steve said:

I will have to simply disagree with this point.

Working with energy and spirits is no different than working with one's own mind.

There is nothing simple about mind purification or realizing universal wisdom, other than from a theoretical perspective.

 

 

I'm sorry to say this is your lack of real experience. Working with the mind very often involves mind conversations of ones own making. Working with spirits involves a physical experience which can lead to mental communication only after some years of physical presence  being possessed at certain levels by a spirit. This is why it is so important to go through the process laid out by thousands of years of experience and tradition in these matters. When an Immortal master comes to you and they are willing to teach you they will come physically only. As you grow in experience and practice so they will gradually communicate with you mentally. And you will know the difference between 'mind games', ie talking to yourself  and them saying something to you.

[senseless virtue]

@steve There is a technical nuance in my post that reflects my own learning: dichotomy between training the mind (open awareness, non-self) and energy/body (dhyana trance absorptions) separately.

 

I understand and respect the point you are making and it's not wrong in the absolute sense, but it doesn't address the fact that it's entirely possible and the usual case as far as I can see that these trainings happen quite in a separate fashion. This is my experience which is testified by my friends and teachers who have different types of results to show for and relate to depending on the practices they have undertaken.

 

Anyway, I don't want to get sidetracked to the discussion of universal wisdom because it wasn't the point I was making. I am concerned with having the good skills and discernment developed and so far I haven't read any convincing argument why this could or should happen on its own without any initiation, unless there is a very fortunate karmic disposition for that.

 

Quote

I will have to simply disagree with this point.

 

We can agree to disagree.

 

Quote

Working with energy and spirits is no different than working with one's own mind.

 

True if you have a dzogchen or absolute mind only perspective. Other views are usually not as integrating, but suppose gradients and stages of development.

 

Quote

There is nothing simple about mind purification or realizing universal wisdom, other than from a theoretical perspective.

 

Practice is simple, but everyone's karmic entanglements are complicated. There is no separation between practice and theory in my experience. If there was a discrepancy, then how could I not easily feel lost for not knowing how to verify or compare my development?

 

Quote

I'll again disagree. One of the core foundations of the practice of universal wisdom is the wisdom of discernment.

 

My experience is that the relative wisdom much depends on actively applying compassion in practice and cannot be completely substituted with meditation even when done in atiyoga style unless already practicing with a very high degree of proficiency. Not sure if this answers anything or adds to the conversation though.

 

EDIT: I need to add that my issue was how many people apply their incompletely familiarized universal wisdom and non-self where they stumble into a disconnect with the relative world and its affairs. I believe this was addressed by freeform in another discussion involving the development of virtues in the Daoist and esoteric Theravada training. My wording here was quite challenging and I apologize for my lack of clarity.

 

Quote

There's nothing simple or safe about investigating the depths of one's mind, particularly when working in the context of the mind being all of creation and experience.

 

My experience is that atiyoga is very simple, safe, and effective. I have managed to get all kinds of adverse effects from both tantric and qigong exercises, but the nature of wisdom isn't conductive to causing harm because it's just facing what we already have within us.

 

Then if it's not simple and safe, then how can we again condone self-initiation? Are all these yogis actually wanting accomplishments or primarily to fool around and experiment what may go wrong?

 

Quote

This is also why a practice like dzogchen was passed down in a highly discriminatory fashion for millenia. Initiation was taken very seriously and one master selected one pupil to teach in his lifetime, no more. While I respect those who follow other paths, the path of universal wisdom does not sit alongside other paths in a safe and shielded fashion. It encompasses and sublimates all other paths without exception when practiced skillfully.

 

My emphasis added. I think we can all agree that universal wisdom is the most supreme skill to grasp and develop, but isn't it then the toughest challenge anyone can undertake? What guarantees that good skill is developed in this lifetime when trying to accomplish it alone?

Edited February 28, 2020 by virtue

[manitou]

This discussion reminds me of the place in the DDJ where it says that the Way is very wide, but sometimes people get caught up in the side routes.

[ilumairen]

55 minutes ago, flowing hands said:

 

I'm sorry to say this is your lack of real experience. Working with the mind very often involves mind conversations of ones own making. Working with spirits involves a physical experience which can lead to mental communication only after some years of physical presence  being possessed at certain levels by a spirit. This is why it is so important to go through the process laid out by thousands of years of experience and tradition in these matters. When an Immortal master comes to you and they are willing to teach you they will come physically only. As you grow in experience and practice so they will gradually communicate with you mentally. And you will know the difference between 'mind games', ie talking to yourself  and them saying something to you.

 

It could also be said what you present is due to lack of experience in what he refers to..

 

And the rest is simple presumption..

[ilumairen]

 

3 hours ago, steve said:

I'll again disagree. One of the core foundations of the practice of universal wisdom is the wisdom of discernment. It's one of the five wisdoms of Buddhism and Bön. People who do not practice with universal wisdom often have inaccurate assumptions and projections about it.

 

This was worthy of highlighting imo, and may be a meeting point for what Steve and Walker are presenting..

 

[liminal_luke]

The quality of discernment is a might torrent flowing from universal wisdom into all sorts of relative world endeavors, including working with spirits and weather magick.  Through deep work on oneself, everything else becomes possible.  Most people try to go about things backwards: focusing on making changes "out there" while ignoring their own minds.  This doesn´t work, unfortunately.

[ilumairen]

 

 

2 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

Through deep work on oneself, everything else becomes possible.  Most people try to go about things backwards: focusing on making changes "out there" while ignoring their own minds.  This doesn´t work, unfortunately.

 

Except when it becomes catalyst to realization.. but again, as you suggest, this is where "things" are turned inward. 

[flowing hands]

54 minutes ago, ilumairen said:

 

It could also be said what you present is due to lack of experience in what he refers to..

 

And the rest is simple presumption..

 

No not all; the term 'plastic shamans' refers to people who play mind games, think they are communicating with spirits but are not. An Immortal master knows this so they will always present themselves physically first, never the other way round, only if they are not pure and their intentions are dishonorable and harmful. Which would not be a 'realised' person like an Immortal, but a earthly bound dirty spirit.

[ilumairen]

5 minutes ago, flowing hands said:

 

No not all; the term 'plastic shamans' refers to people who play mind games, think they are communicating with spirits but are not. An Immortal master knows this so they will always present themselves physically first, never the other way round, only if they are not pure and their intentions are dishonorable and harmful. Which would not be a 'realised' person like an Immortal, but a earthly bound dirty spirit.

 

I was referring to your understanding of his path - nothing more. 

 

Apologies for any confusion. 

[flowing hands]

1 hour ago, manitou said:

This discussion reminds me of the place in the DDJ where it says that the Way is very wide, but sometimes people get caught up in the side routes.

 

Do you mean this:

If people had just a little sense, they would walk on the Main road

But people love to be sidetracked

When people are sidetracked, they love splendid clothes, fine jewels and material possessions..............

[liminal_luke]

Love of splendid clothes, fine jewels and material possessions can be a sidetrack.  So can judgment of those things...

[manitou]

1 hour ago, flowing hands said:

 

Do you mean this:

If people had just a little sense, they would walk on the Main road

But people love to be sidetracked

When people are sidetracked, they love splendid clothes, fine jewels and material possessions..............

 

 

That's the one.