September 10, 2006 at 2:26 pm #17833
Best quote on this topic, by Indian mystic Meher Baba:
Question: Is it important to be vegetarian in order to be spiritual?
“What comes out of your mouth is far more important than what goes into it.”
my note: vegetarianism (and reincarnation theory) in HInduism is fairly late development, not mentioned in the early Vedas.
I personally don’t believe its wise to mix diet and religion. You can always take the tantric Buddhist position – which would probably incude the Dalai Lama – that by eating the animal with love and acceptance, you transform its karma, and let it take a ride on your own journey of transformation, possibly taking its essence higher than if it was left uneaten.
I am beginning to get a more clear picture of you. A serious seeker, one willing to leave no stone unturned, but one who accepts the sometimes rigid structures offered by Mahayan Buddhism. (see my notes under Practice section on true and false self). It also sounds like you have the fervor of a recent convert, but I could be wrong. Saturn returns are very tricky, as we try to find our new earth.
Does your embrace of Mahayana include acceptance of the Chan Buddhist notions of Hell, and the hell-realms that non-believers are karmically cast into? I’ve run into Complete Perfection taoists who accepted these beliefs, and I think it unfortunately ended up driving their practice of alchemy. FEar of going to hell, if they didn’t practice. Hope you don’t fall into that one. Tight kidneys are tough on alchemical process.
I don’t think you really answered Alexander’s clear post on the nature of shadow mind and the danger of suppressing a part of oneself as “false”. And you dance around other questions about the root and the blossom being one – that sounds great, but practically speaking is irrelevant to someone who is physically only experiencing the blossoming of thoughts and feelings here in this plane in this body.
It’s easy to reply that once you are totally enlightened you will be free from any such false self, but that begs the question and put the cart before the horse. Rather than thinking of thoughts and feelings as false karma, I think most people prefer to see them as expression which can be directed in directions that are false or true to an underlying soul.
Again, your sect of Mahayana subscribes to an essential soul theory, but puts it far away in another plane, after one has achieved the tenth level of Bodisattva/Immortal. There is a distant parallel in theory, but the practice and methodology of attaining it are completely different. Unless you become a Chan Buddhisti practicing what is essentially re-packaged Taoist alchemy, which i suspect will end up being your path for at least a while, if your teacher Hu’s website is an indication of his teachings.
I am not sure why you interpret my teachings on Fusion to be Atlantean rather than where I got them, from Mantak Chia’s teacher One Cloud. I dont’ introduce any Atlantean methods until Greatest kan & li.
But the gist of the alchemical approach is to harnass the chi in the negative emotions and thoughts and use its power to cultivate – not to toss emotions and thoughts off as bad karma and as useless obstacles that somehow just “happened” out of the necessity of being a human.
I just find it totally strange that EVERY human being seems to have such “bad” karma as to be forced to have emotions and thoughts.
I think you will get much further by cultivating the original innocent feelings that arise from incarnating into a body, and to cultivate those without the predjudice of fear, which converts those original feelings into reactive feelings.
Does that make “fear” false? Not at all – our first and most basic reflex as an infant is “fear of falling”, i.e. being dropped. Perfectly functional, nothing false about it. What makes it false is allowing that fear to be made chronic or to be manipulated by others for their own ends that do not serve the whole. That is not a pre-natal vs. post-natal distinction as you suggest – it is a distinction that arises within the post-natal.
Smiling to True Fear,
MichaelSeptember 10, 2006 at 2:57 pm #17834
it seems that is quite like what was i was trying to say in my posts below, that the rejection of fear as false could only arise out of the post-natal consciousness, whereas the the “true” expression of pre-natal IS those “innocent feelings” of the life into which it flows, which are only made “false” by a post-natal reactionary divisiveness/constriction.
is this close to what you are suggesting?
-christopherSeptember 10, 2006 at 2:58 pm #17836
p.s. somehow the quote i was responding to got cut out of my post — it was this:
“That is not a pre-natal vs. post-natal distinction as you suggest – it is a distinction that arises within the post-natal.”September 10, 2006 at 3:09 pm #17838
I am a Wudang Daoist. I use many Buddhist ideas and advocate a variation of sitting in forgetfulness as characterized by the Japanese Soto Zen school in a meditation called shikantaza.
I take what’s effective from Mahayana Buddhism, Raja Yoga, Tibetan Tantra, Japanese Zen, Chinese Ch’an, etc. and put it all together. I think all lead to the same oneness.
I just don’t see why animals NEED to be killed? Can you give me a good reason why we need to kill them instead of surviving on vegetation?
>>I’ve run into Complete Perfection taoists who accepted these beliefs, and I think it unfortunately ended up driving their practice of alchemy. FEar of going to hell, if they didn’t practice. Hope you don’t fall into that one. Tight kidneys are tough on alchemical process.<>I don’t think you really answered Alexander’s clear post on the nature of shadow mind and the danger of suppressing a part of oneself as “false”.<>Rather than thinking of thoughts and feelings as false karma, I think most people prefer to see them as expression which can be directed in directions that are false or true to an underlying soul.<> Unless you become a Chan Buddhisti practicing what is essentially re-packaged Taoist alchemy, which i suspect will end up being your path for at least a while, if your teacher Hu’s website is an indication of his teachings.<>I am not sure why you interpret my teachings on Fusion to be Atlantean rather than where I got them, from Mantak Chia’s teacher One Cloud. I dont’ introduce any Atlantean methods until Greatest kan & li.<>But the gist of the alchemical approach is to harnass the chi in the negative emotions and thoughts and use its power to cultivate – not to toss emotions and thoughts off as bad karma and as useless obstacles that somehow just “happened” out of the necessity of being a human.<>I just find it totally strange that EVERY human being seems to have such “bad” karma as to be forced to have emotions and thoughts.<>I think you will get much further by cultivating the original innocent feelings that arise from incarnating into a body, and to cultivate those without the predjudice of fear, which converts those original feelings into reactive feelings.<<
*I have never seen a "scared" Zen practioner before. Many scientific studies show that they are tremendously happy.
You see Michael, I take the best from other paths and integrate them into a path. Not a good path, not a bad path, just a path. One that leads me to the root. I am still a Daoist, I try to follow nature to the best I can. I search for my original nature.
Good luck on your alchemical journey,
FajinSeptember 10, 2006 at 3:11 pm #17840September 11, 2006 at 3:16 am #17842
Max, I think that it is wonderful that you were able to attune and receive information about eating that affected you so beneficially. But what you get and what another gets isn’t going to necessarily jive and I think you understand why.
I am convinced at this point that we are all operating very differently from each other, having to go through whatever growth is appropriate in the moment, and that any “rule following” is at least a distraction if not a downright roadblock. The very energy of asserting a rule (and I am not saying that YOU are doing this now) is quite fear-filled and uncomfortable. It closes down the heart. If we were truly sensitive to what we were focussing on when we promoted rules we would immediately back off from doing so. Rule-making originates from the fear that if I do not control myself (or other potentially dangerous people or things) something bad will happen, probably to me. There is no trust in this stance. Again, this is meant as a general statement and not directed at you in particular.
The question, “Why do we need to kill animals to survive?” comes from a mind that is already fixed in judgment about what is right and what is wrong. An alternative way of approaching the matter would be to ask, “What do I really want to do and what is healthy for me right now?
Personally, I feel that we will leave eating behind altogether, step by step as is appropriate for each of us.
As Emelgee would say:
‘Fruit and stuff,’
AlexanderSeptember 12, 2006 at 3:23 am #17844
This society is run by certain rules, and as much as you can point around at someone’s “judgment about what is right and what is wrong” if I come to your house and cook someone very close to you, even a pet, that hidden set of rules will come to play in your life really fast. I mean how do you personally separate who is worth living or be killed and by what standards? Having 5 shen? Fur? Becoming emotionally attached?
-Max, I really don’t understand this passage or your questions. What do you mean when you say “point around at someone’s judgment” and talk about coming to my house to cook someone close to me? What hidden set of rules?
I think we decide what to do based on what we want to do and need to do which is based on who we are at the time. I feel both compassion and judgment in your message. My comments about judgment were based on how it feels to judge and be judged for what we do. It doesn’t have a healthy feeling to it. The energy is negative when we make someone wrong. Society’s rule making policies are all messed up and based on attitudes of victimization rather than responsibility. You disagree with this?-
AASeptember 13, 2006 at 4:17 am #17846
To keep this conversation focused on the subject, what methods or standards do you use to justify eating certain beings or not eating them?
-I don’t like the word “justify.” It is a “right and wrong” term and, imo, doesn’t apply. Principles are different than morals. I eat what feels right for me and that includes some meat. (I was a veg in my twenties for about six years. It didn’t work well for me then.) To me we are all in a long learning process and the judgments get in the way. I vote to simply accept what others are doing, as well as myself, and to be honest with myself about how I feel about doing what I am doing. I have long-range goals I am working toward.-
If I voice my opinion not to eat at McDonalds, would it be meant to be an advice or a judgment on what is right and what is wrong?
-If you voice your opinion that others “should” not eat at McDonald’s that is clearly a judgment of both them and McD’s. One may have strong feelings on an issue and that would imply that there is an emotional charge there for them. So then it becomes a matter of clearing the issue one has rather than trying to get others to do what would make one feel better. But if you are not charged up about the injustice or wrongness and can accept it then you have a clear energy channel through which to be able to suggest to them that it night be better if they saw things differently. See what I mean?-
The fact is, Alexander, that everything you know- what is beneficial for you or not, either came from your parents, people close to you, books etc or your personal experiences. It is a fact of life that we share information with each other- and your either accept it or not. My advice on not eating meat to help someone progress faster on a spiritual path falls under the same category.
-To be honest, I am not sure that we can be sure that much of the time about what is really good for another. This is iffy territory. I think: advice as a loving suggestion is fine. But that feels entirely different than having an issue and wanting others to change.
We are here on this forum to share and experience for the purpose of our mutual completion. But a problem we have been running into a lot here has been the “I’m right and you’re wrong” issue. This is going to keep coming up for us until we clear the charge we each have over this and come to resolution with each other. Talking things over is great! Getting into arguments is hell, energetically. The difference in how one feels from the other is profoundly different. It is our job as conscious beings to see the oneness of it all among us not to stay stuck in the differences for the sake of self-defense. A lot of patience and compassion, both of which we are alll learning, is called for. I can’t tell ya how much I gotten from having these conversations in that respect.
OK. Thanks and blessings, Alexander-
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.