Spiritual Forums

Home


Donate!


Articles


CHAT!


Shop


 
Welcome to Spiritual Forums!.

We created this community for people from all backgrounds to discuss Spiritual, Paranormal, Metaphysical, Philosophical, Supernatural, and Esoteric subjects. From Astral Projection to Zen, all topics are welcome. We hope you enjoy your visits.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which gives you limited access to most discussions and articles. By joining our free community you will be able to post messages, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos, and gain access to our Chat Rooms, Registration is fast, simple, and free, so please, join our community today! !

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, check our FAQs before contacting support. Please read our forum rules, since they are enforced by our volunteer staff. This will help you avoid any infractions and issues.

Go Back   Spiritual Forums > Religions & Faiths > Taoism

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 04-06-2021, 07:18 AM
Guillaume Guillaume is offline
Ascender
Join Date: May 2021
Location: Europe
Posts: 908
  Guillaume's Avatar
Oh yes I agree with you both. But do you practice this?
If you see the yin organs, there is - to me - a big surprise. It's including the heart, and believe me, not hearing your heart anymore is quite puzzling, I read after that it was the desired effect, but still ...

It's surprising because in the common language, having an empty heart is not something you want, usually.
'Vider son coeur' in French ('Emptying one's heart') means expressing all the bad things we keep within us.
But I was light-hearted, so that didn't have a huge effect (but it did, the only thing I had on my heart came out naturally, this is the magic of life!)
I don't know what the other yin organs hold.

Shedding light on the heart to be light-hearted, , I love this one!
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 04-06-2021, 01:02 PM
Legrand
Posts: n/a
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by django
Wouldn’t one’s ‘Original Spirit’ or ‘Higher Self’ be the doer?

Yes Django, but the Original Spirit and the Higher Self in not out There far away. It is just behind our awareness, always there.

From this pure clarity, when it pays attention to this 3D world, the world appears like a movie we watch and unfolds itself. We are not this illusion point anymore that believes that it is separate from the rest of the world.

Antoine
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 04-06-2021, 01:20 PM
django django is offline
Master
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 1,485
  django's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Legrand
Yes Django, but the Original Spirit and the Higher Self in not out There far away. It is just behind our awareness, always there.

From this pure clarity, when it pays attention to this 3D world, the world appears like a movie we watch and unfolds itself. We are not this illusion point anymore that believes that it is separate from the rest of the world.

Antoine

Yes agreed the Original Spirit is always there, I never thought it out there far away though, I find that consciousness in my central channel. I don’t think my Original Spirit ever stopped paying attention to this 3D world either, it’s just that I never could hear it clearly, until my cup was empty, and God knows my cup had been very full
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 21-08-2021, 12:26 AM
deci belle deci belle is offline
Newbie ;)
Join Date: Aug 2021
Posts: 5
 
This light is not visible, it is mind. The mind is aware, miraculously aware. The light of the mind is not created. It is not attributable. This is the meaning of selflessness. Not created, awareness simply the awake quality of mind, not self, there is no attributability to being or not-being. No being, no self. Therefore selflessness, in this sense, is not a moral parameter in which the nonpsychological (spiritual) can be considered. Such spiritual nature is one's true identity, that being selflessly aware, whether one knows it (and uses it according to reality directly) or not (therefore using ignorance of the real to deal with delusion directly). Either way, the light is one. Karmic or enlightening activity is dependent on the refinement of one's seeing. The light is itself seeing. In karmic terms, action is thought derivative of the personality identified as an absolute self. In spiritually adaptive terms, enlightening activity is simply seeing in accord with reality, depending on the potential inherent in the situation itself. Therefore, the person (in such people) isn't acting relative to the person, but relative to the potential inherent in the situation itself.

As for the "secret", the psychological apparatus of the being that is going to die is the nexus of self-refining practice, since one's habituation to its sphere of activity is the limiting factor in availing oneself of the wholeness of mind alone, that is, one's affinity to the naturally transcendent spiritual function of the expression of enlightening being. Refining practice is simply forgetting to use mind to reify the person by such habit-awareness. Just this is properly to be considered "turning the light around." In so doing, which is a matter of seeing alone (without employing habit-consciousness reifying the idiosyncrasies of the psychological pattern-awareness perpetuating the illusion of the personal self), one eventually stops using the light to reify this false self and slowly "becomes" the light.

This is not really woo-woo at all. Following the light of creation unawares and acting in accord with its psychological momentum (karma) results in perpetuating one's bondage to the habit-consciousness of human consensus of all time. Should one reverse the light and shine it on its source, one gradually comes to enter its inconceivable (nonoriginated) unity.

The Secret of the Golden Flower is an ancient document unveiling the proper use of the very essence of awareness to deal directly with the essence of reality without intermediary. How? Essence is the nature of reality; it is also the essence of delusion. Essentially, reality and delusion are not different. It is simply a matter of seeing. To the degree one sees in terms of unity, there is relatively no (absolute) personal self to posit situational (karmic) result vis-a-vis the personality, because energy relative to the person was not existent. This is the real power of not using thought relative to self-reification to adapt to situational potential. Reality and delusion even look the same. Reality is one; there is only one mind, not two.

The document used by Jung and others not only misses the thrust of the authentic transmission of the teaching, it is a very poor iteration used by various "altered-consciousness" cults in China, and subsequently, it seems, in the West as well.

Add to that, the fact that the European literati had heretofore almost no grasp of authentic transcendent knowledge in terms of even western tradition, much less an utterly foreign world view long established through bodies of ancient wisdom imbedded in the Kashmiri, Tibetan and the northern and southern Chinese spiritual canons and lineages.

Even so, as Thomas Cleary admits in his translation of the Secret of the Golden Flower (T'ai chin hua tsung chih) ISBN 0-06-250193-3, we are utterly indebted to Richard Wilhelm's German translation first published in 1929 (and quickly followed by the English volume) both with extensive commentary by C.G.Jung. Unfortunately for Jung, he did not know that the text was of very poor quality.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 21-08-2021, 11:30 AM
Legrand
Posts: n/a
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by deci belle
Unfortunately for Jung, he did not know that the text was of very poor quality.

Nice to read you Deci Belle and welcome to Spiritual Forum.

Antoine
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 22-08-2021, 06:42 AM
Guillaume Guillaume is offline
Ascender
Join Date: May 2021
Location: Europe
Posts: 908
  Guillaume's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by deci belle
Even so, as Thomas Cleary admits in his translation of the Secret of the Golden Flower (T'ai chin hua tsung chih) ISBN 0-06-250193-3, we are utterly indebted to Richard Wilhelm's German translation first published in 1929 (and quickly followed by the English volume) both with extensive commentary by C.G.Jung. Unfortunately for Jung, he did not know that the text was of very poor quality.

But maybe Jung's work was about demonstrating that there existed something beyond the individual mind.
By that, he demonstrated that transcendence was not a hypothesis, but something real from which we can get information.

Then, I don't know how much Jung knew about that document. But to me it's like putting a reference in a paper or book, even if he didn't fully understand things there, there was enough to make a statement in a demonstration.


As for the document itself, it got "popular" in the West because of that, but there is probably better ones to access all of the knowing.
Not to mention that everything will be unveiled progressively to the one who just sits and meditate without expectations.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 24-08-2021, 01:43 AM
deci belle deci belle is offline
Newbie ;)
Join Date: Aug 2021
Posts: 5
 
Merciii, Antoine❤︎

Hi Guillaume~ appreciate your response! Please bear with mine, I speak to a great audience even should it be a solitary one.

It's not obvious to me that you may be a student of Jung's work(?), but Jung's over-arching body of work in the field of psychological methodology led him to be of the mind that he may have had single-handedly discovered the field of "deep psychology." Of course, he was only a few thousand years late on that account.

The reason Thomas Cleary acknowledges a profound gratitude to Jung is that his commentary (by his well-earned celebrity) brought this ancient material to a massive range of scholarship, not to mention a genuine spiritual hunger that was ripe for such elucidation, regardless of its provenance. The point (in terms of Cleary's expression of gratitude), is that there are so many thousands of such transmissions, treatises and manuals in the combined ancient Chinese buddhist and taoist canons, that it would have never been possible to stumble upon one such as significant as The Secret of the Golden Flower, much less have it brought to the attention of so many anonymous and influential students, scholars and spiritual explorers in the West, had it not been for the notoriety and genuine insight that Jung brought to the subject matter, however biased it may have been and still is.

As for proposing that demonstrating the existence of something beyond the individual mind was the thrust of Jung's work… he made no figurative or allusive insinuations in that regard in his entire career, nor did he have any such direct experience himself as a basis for doing so. His sphere of study and influence was the collective consensual human consciousness of all time in terms of the various culturally historical, mythological and psychologically analytical premises he had developed and was in the process of building upon. What he was building his system of inquiry upon is what is alluded to in the ancient buddhist term "Storehouse Consciousness." Specifically, taoism summarizes the extent of this field of study (in terms of the person) as the psychological apparatus of the being that is going to die.

Jung himself was very reticent about subscribing to a bonafide entry into the western projections of popular notions pertaining to Asian mysticism. Even Jung lacked the temerity to insist on what you call the basis for demonstrating even a pedantic treatment into the (then) psychologically stereotypical popularization of Asian mysticism, much less anything so profound as realizing the source of all authentic teaching oneself.

Even this is not beyond your own mind, in that it's you; you're not it.

Why harp on Jung's demonstrating anything relative to the ****** document? The OP is relevant to the AUTHENTIC transmission of the document itself, in terms of turning the light around. Just this is precisely what I am writing about. I wish to clarify for those so qualified to enter upon this notion of "turning the light around" Let us not dwell on a spurious and shallow off-topic debate such as whatever might be relevant to Mr. Jung's circumstantially historical brush with a profound spiritual teaching. How about just forgetting Jung in terms of the topic of this thread? I only mentioned it to introduce the document to our readers (in the first place) in terms of its historical place in the West, and (secondly) to further inform those interested in the authentic transmission of its transcendent teaching. Are you with me? If so, do endeavor to obtain a copy of The Secret of the Golden Flower (ISBN above).

Let's forget Jung— the real SECRET is not historical, it is perpetually nonoriginated in terms of the transcendent nature of your own mind right now. The secret of the Golden Flower teaching is relevant to recognizing one's incrementally spontaneously insightful awakening to, prolonged nurturance of and its endless development by the inherent nonpsychological (spiritual) capacity of mind which you are calling something beyond mind. It's your own mind right now, you just don't know it. It's alright though, because there is nothing you can do about it other than arrive at the practice of subtle self-refining activity which slowly devolves the karmic habit-energy which perpetuates the idea that you exist as a separate individual knower, thinker and liver of life. Reality has no such pattern. It is up to you to realize (actualize) this truth beyond the zazen seat.

Just this is the universal jumping-off point of all saints, sages, wizards, buddhas and all prior illuminates of all times and places. Mind itself is the real teacher.

There is no beyond the "individual" mind. Why? Mind is one. There is no other mind. What you are calling beyond the individual mind is not beyond it. It IS already Suchness by virtue of your cavernous skull and your pointy nose. No one is beyond this. No one is different in this regard. This is the truth. Just this much is already entry into inconceivability. All told, it is as easy as turning over your hand. But one must realize this for oneself, alone.

We are inconceivable beings, and it is possible to discover this for yourself in reality. As for
Quote:
everything will be unveiled progressively to the one who just sits and meditate without expectations
, this is all very well and good, but why not put the formalities of such entry-level reformative and potentially renunciatory activities out where they belong (in private practice) and address the reality of the teaching in an audaciously direct way by adapting impersonally to the spiritual potential inherent in everyday ordinary situations?

Turning the light around is not a matter of "just sitting." Formal meditation regimens are fine for beginners who are happy to "just sit" in quiet isolation. The authentic teaching of turning the light around is to be carried out in public, without anybody knowing.

Formal quiet zazen practice is just reformative practice for real practice, I'm afraid. Don't stop, but don't think it's the well-spring of reality. It's not. It is a viable touch-stone for some people (even me).

No one can fault you for writing what I quoted in terms of the small realization relative to a personal method of comfort. Yet those with the will to enlightenment have to be audacious. I'm sure it is possible to ascribe a couple of the two most profound dictums of transcendent "methodology" as pertains to quietly "just sitting" void of anticipatory consciousness relative to the person, but it would be terribly short-sighted to insist on such self-satisfaction. One of the sayings is attributed to the last patriarch of Chan, who said, "Activating the mind without dwelling on its contents exhausts the entire buddhist canon in one sentence."

This is to be carried out in all times and places, not just the zazen cushion.

The directive which is the eye of the Golden Flower teaching (and is NOT found in the Richard Wilhelm translation) is, "See through phenomena without denying their characteristics."

In terms of Taoist spiritual alchemy, the heir of the Golden Flower teaching, "seeing through phenomena without denying its characteristics" is mastering the Science of Life, which can be taught. This is the relative realm of yang. "Activating the mind without dwelling on its contents" is mastering the Science of Essence, which cannot be taught. Why? It is already your own mind right now, which is the realm of karmic evolution (Creation) as well as the Absolute, the solitary experience of nonorigination. This is the absolute realm of yin.

Both in terms of actual enlightening practice beyond formal meditation and one's personal experience of one's Absolute nonoriginated nature, such is fulfilling the teaching of "turning the light around." The light to be "turned around" is one singularity. Followed along by creative duality, one treads the path of birth and death; in turning this very same light of creation around, one shines this light on its source, and enters its spiritual (nonpsycholgical) functionality in terms of nonorigination on the spot in broad daylight. Wouldn't that be wonderful?
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 24-08-2021, 07:09 AM
Guillaume Guillaume is offline
Ascender
Join Date: May 2021
Location: Europe
Posts: 908
  Guillaume's Avatar
Welcome deci_belle.

You need to go deeper, that's all I can say.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 24-08-2021, 08:16 PM
FallingLeaves FallingLeaves is online now
Master
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 6,336
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by deci belle
This light is not visible, it is mind.

any more I think saying what things are (naming them) just clutters up life. Much easier to jsut live with what exists than bear that yoke. But then of course you don't have the pleasure of discourse with others...

But I am amazed at how much you can learn about the world, simply by looking in at yourself. There is some truth to the idea you can travel about very little, and yet know quite a lot.

as far as light... ever been in a cave and they shut out all the lights but you can still see your hand? It appears there is a faint light, made out of the darkness. Maybe even the light that impinges so strongly on our consciousness is as bogus as everything else about this place

I bought the book now. If I like it maybe I will have something to say that is actually on-topic...
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 25-08-2021, 10:49 AM
Legrand
Posts: n/a
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by FallingLeaves
I bought the book now. If I like it maybe I will have something to say that is actually on-topic...

I am curious from what author? I like the version of the secret of the Golden Flower by Thomas Cleary. He corrects in it some of the translation from the version Jung always had near his bed.

"When one uses this technique (returning the Light) for the first time, one has the impression of a non-being in the being. But once the work is done, when you have a body beyond the body, you have the impression of a being in the non-being."

Chapter III Paragraph 2

Antoine
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c) Spiritual Forums