apophatic mysticism

This is back room.
the old blank page is now: here back (this is “blank2)
Internet posts section is here: inetpst.html

Deleted material, including old C&D file is here: Delete

This is the copy page: copy.html

This is the rough draft of current work: Blank3

8/11/03:

from Saraha:

"When the ecstacy of awareness is within you all by itself, all
tendencies to give it concrete shape are made to become like the open
sky."

8/11 healing:

I am reflecting on the subtext of the recent discussion of whether or not suffering is an illusion. The subtext concerns the possible effects of believing that another person's suffering is an illusion. If you think suffering is an illusion, you will probably still provide whatever you can to relieve another's suffering. (Including showing them tools that can be used to avoid further suffering.)

The question I have is: will your beliefs that there is no real suffering be detected by the person you are helping? And if you are completely present to the other person, and therefore your beliefs are noticed, will that make them feel (rightly or wrongly) that you do not appreciate what is happening to them? Or that you think they are not seeing things the way they should? (your way)

I like Carl Roger's "unconditional positive regard." He did not assume that there is anything fundamentally wrong with anyone, and because of this belief did not transmit any judgment. It was simply: "You say that you have something troubling you. I will give you my complete nonjudgmental attention, listening with all my heart. From this listening I give, you may be given the courage to look within yourself and see what you find. You may find a creative power hidden there, that may seem small, but can grow big. From this growth you can find your own healing formula using a model you yourself create. You have and will find in your heart the answers that best suit your own life."

Needless to say, Rogers did not present any world-view (or metaphysical paradigm) to the person he was helping. Everything the client believed was taken to be the valid truth from their own world view, a view which Roger's believed would transform as needed without his direction. He trusted the ability of others to create their own healing reality.

8/2: Scott's new edit:

At the roots of daoism: the shaman

"The Shenren … rides upon the cloudy vapours, harnessing a flying dragon, and wanders beyond the four seas." Zhuangzi 1

The definition of "shaman" Jordan Paper uses (The Spirits are Drunk: State University of New York Press 1995) is "a social functionary who, with the help of guardian spirits, attains ecstasy to create a rapport with the supernatural world on behalf of his [or her] group members" (Hultkrantz quoted on page 52). It seems however, that all the examples of spirit journeys from the Zhuangzi and Chu Ci show a "shaman" who is not a "social functionary." He is a reclusive individualist. The Daoist Master (Daoist adept?) (as a Xian ? or ? or Shenren ) is almost an "asocial" shaman - more of a mystic than a shaman. In fact, I know of no examples of a social functionary who ascends to the heavens/netherworld in the ancient literature. There were mediums (eg. the "Shi" - impersonator of the dead and the Wu -- exorcist/medium/liturgist) but no actual shamans.

As revealed in the Xin Shu chapters of the Guanzi, the shaman/medium/mystic houses a spirit-like energy within the heartmind (in the chest) and becomes like a spirit: achieving a healthy body, superior ability, and omniscience. These mystics identified the essence of Guishen - ghosts and spirits – as something universal. They called it numerous things: energy (Qi), essence (Jing), spirit (Shen), the One (Yi), Nature/Heaven (Tian), or simply Dao. Ghosts and spirits are powerful and efficacious because they are refined, not because they are supernatural, and we as humans can realize and manifest this spiritual quality if we undertake a self-cultivation practice as described in these texts. If successful we will become a sage, and be capable of anything, including ruling the world.

The mediumism of the Shang and early Zhou dynasty’s rituals (as revealed in the the existence of the Impersonator of the Dead Ancestor [Shi]) was most likely the precursor to this type of self-cultivation. The authors of the Xin Shu texts and the other Daoist texts elaborated on the ritual fasting done by the early mediums, including quieting the heartmind of its distractions and sitting still. In the Zhuangzi many of these mystics experienced disembodiment and they ascended to a celestial domain, (much like the shamanic experience of other cultures). That it was described so similarly to the spirit journey of the shamans, it is probable that shamanism did exist in ancient China.

The early Daoists consisted of these shaman-mystics and scholar-knights (Shi ?) who associated with them: those who were struck by the profundity of their teacher/master’s wisdom and enlightenment. Many of these Shi worked out a cosmology based on the mystical experience and developed a new approach to rulership and governance. Hence, many of the early Daoists were philosophers as well as mystics.

Scott Barnwell

8/1 To empty the mind of any idea of what the divinity is, allows one to more freely and effectively interact with it.

7/27 Zhuang Zi's central motif is learning to embrace "not knowing." He wrote a knowledgeable book on this subject. The reason he did so is that in order to embrace not knowing, we need to know why we don't need to know.

7/23: There is a mystical "marker," a destinct discernable experience of the mystical state, a conscious awareness of "being unified."

7/23 Has been put on "this and that"

"Here we pray God that we might be free of God." Meister Eckhart

An apophatic view of this world assumes that we can't know anything for sure beyond direct conscious experience. We cannot even be sure there is anything beyond our individual experience. Therefore the apophatic mystic does not employ words to establish the purported existence of any independently existing reality. In theological terms, she does not "reify" anything.

The apophatic uses words only to describe and to then enhance experience. Words that would be used to describe anything that cannot be directly experienced, are useless to the apophatic. To the apophatic "divinity" is an experienced divinity, not an independent entity whose nature can be ascertained and defined, but not experineced, by humans.

For the apophatic, all words used to describe "reality" are simply metaphors. They describe experiences of something that cannot be known to independently exist. Words help us convey to one another what we are experiencing, or to propose a phenomenon which we could potentially be experiencing.

To say the divinity is viscerally experienced, is not to claim that there is an independent human body, nor is it to claim there is an independently existing divinity. "Viscerally experienced" is simply a metaphor used to describe and communicate the feeling of an experience. To communicate the idea that something is "viscerally experienced" is to communicate an experience, not to claim the independent reality of the human body.

To claim that the divinity is "beyond visceral and mental experience," is to claim nothing that is meaningful to an apophatic. (Such a claim is meaningful for a fundamentalist.)

In the darkness of knowing nothing for sure, the apophatic experiences the radiant manifestation of the divine experience; it is a quite ordinary experience to her.

Okay

Okay, let us use the term "God" for awhile. Can we agree to not define it by attributing to it anything that we cannot experience first hand? I will provisionally define this word as the most compelling aspect of my perceptual field, a dynamic that I can get a visceral sense of, one that allows me to be content despite any circumstance, that allows me the serenity to relax whenever I wish.

There are many paths to "enlightenment," which I define as realizing
what is actually going on, and then finding the way to be satisfied
with what is going on no matter what happens next.

One can perceive the 'unity of opposites' and at the same time experience and respond to differences. A paradox: Trying to get out of a burning building by making an effort that costs the loss of one's realization of the 'unity of opposites' (and the inner tranqullity thus obtained) will likely hinder one's ability to get out.

7/13

no, this is perfect, I will put it up this week, I like it very much. Thank you Scott. Please send the name of the Jordan Paper book and publisher so I can give a proper reference.

I like your post on the BBC too.

A beginning essay on the "unitive experience":

"unification' experiences are seconds or minutes of psycho/visceral rapture during which the individual loses all awarness of being separate from the field of perception.

A more common, and potentially endlessly enduring state is "unity within differentiation". Here one senses and engages the remarkable feedback system which is operating between one's own nexus of awareness and the field of perception. (the field is everything one is aware of, inside and outside the skin.)

You might say you feel "tucked" in the field of perception rather than opposing it. You know nothing can "go wrong" because everything that happens feels right. You perform with optimum efficacy no matter what happens, until you die, and maybe even afterward, who knows?

Raymond

Hi Raymond

RE: Cultivating mystical efficacy with drugs and other devices : I posted the same reply at the BBC site, with the addition of "emotional barriers" - I hope U don't mind.

I wrote this today:

-- The definition of “shaman” Jordan Paper uses is "a social functionary who, with the help of guardian spirits, attains ecstasy to create a rapport with the supernatural world on behalf of his [or her] group members” (Hultkrantz quoted on page 52). It seems however, that all the examples of spirit journeys from the Zhuangzi and Chu Ci show a "shaman" who is not a "social functionary." He is a reclusive individualist. The Daoist Master (as a Xian ? or ?) is almost an "asocial" shaman - more of a mystic than a shaman. In fact, I know of no examples of a social functionary who ascends to the heavens/netherworld in the ancient literature. There were mediums (eg. the "Shi" - impersonator of the dead) but no shamans.

– As revealed in the Xin Shu chapters of the Guanzi, the shaman/medium/mystic houses a spirit-like energy within the heartmind (in the chest) and becomes like a spirit: achieving a healthy body, superior ability, and omniscience. These mystics identified the essence of Guishen - ghosts and spirits – as something universal. They called it numerous things: energy (Qi), essence (Jing), spirit (Shen), the One (Yi), Nature/Heaven (Tian), or simply Dao. Ghosts and spirits are powerful and efficacious because they are refined, not because they are supernatural, and we as humans can realize and manifest this spiritual quality if we undertake a self-cultivation practice as described in these texts. If successful we will become a sage, and be capable of anything, including ruling the world.

-- The mediumism of the Shang and early Zhou dynasty’s rituals (as revealed in the the existence of the Impersonator of the Dead Ancestor [Shi]) was most likely the precursor to this type of self-cultivation. The authors of the Xin Shu texts and the other Daoist texts elaborated on the ritual fasting done by the early mediums, including quieting the heartmind of its distractions and sitting still. In the Zhuangzi many of these mystics experienced disembodiment and they ascended to a celestial domain, much like the shaman’s experience. That it was described so similarly to the spirit journey of the shamans, it is probable that shamanism did exist in ancient China.

I suppose U could call it shamanic/mediumistic background of Daoism, or something like that. I notice I never mentioned the "Wu" - diviner/exorcist/magician/medium, nor the Fang Shi. They probably fit into the picture as well somehow. I wondered if something should be said about not all Daoists were mystics, I wrote this little bit just quickly. But if U think its perfect . . . . . ;-)

-- The early Daoists consisted of these mystics and scholar-knights (Shi ?) who associated with them: those who were struck by the profundity of their teacher/master’s wisdom and enlightenment. Many of these Shi worked out a cosmology based on the mystical experience and developed a new approach to rulership and governance. Hence, many of the early Daoists were philosophers as well as mystics.

reference u wanted:
The Spirits are Drunk: Comparative Approaches to Chinese Religion by Jordan Paper. State University of New York Press 1995.

7/11 added inetpst.html

7/9/03

This one got applause from "Happy Wanderer"

Zhuang Zi said that the most effective disposition was to be in both the undifferentiated state (wu) and the differentiated state (you) simultaneously. He calls this "liang xing" (the double walk). You might see how someone who was effective in an emergency uses both of these modes simultaneously, observing (guan) the entire situation in its wholeness (pu = uncarved block) and yet picking out certain key details where a concentrated response is needed. raymond

Even before the myth of Adam and Eve there have existed two clearly differing streams of religious beliefs. One of these traditions believes that "God" created a perfect world, and then humans or angels messed it up. The other tradition believes that the world is fine the way it is, the believer simply needs to find out how to best work with it. Most mystics appear to fall into the latter category.

The following is an example of the latter tradition, the one that makes it the personal responsibility of the mystic to embrace and to find fulfillment in the world as it is right now:

7/7

De and wu wei: creative power

Letting go of all of those things you think you need to have happen, and watching yourself give it all up, watching yourself gently slip into that magical place, the tiny slot that exists at the fulcrum of every situation. From this nearly invisible place a subtle power is summoned and wields itself effortlessly. The daoists call this hair thin space the "trigger of the dao." An unimaginable power arises at the trigger and brings everything to fruition.

7/6 1/2/03

The fact that formidable power is obtained from kindness is a very basic spiritual law. When you encounter someone who presents himself/herself as an advanced student of a particular spiritual lineage, and the person has not realized kindness obtains power, you can reasonably doubt the value of the tradition the student represents.

7/6/03 added this to "this and that"

Is evil a plausible notion?

I think it is worth reflecting on why some folks believe that the idea of "good and evil" is plausible. Indeed all of us probably carry this mistaken burden at some deeper level of awareness.

The belief of dual moral order is often called manichaeanism. There has probably been a "manichaean" moral sense of the world ever since humans became conscious beings. The religious term "manichaean" comes from the name of an ancient sect founded by a fellow named Mani. Mani started a religion which was primarily based on the idea of good and evil.

Manichaeanism is good for people who need to construct what they mistakenly believe is a "rational" order for the world they experience. People who join manichaean sects are likely to be folks who have endured immense spiritual suffering. They need to find a rational reason for this suffering. If they thought that they might be responsible for their continued suffering, the discovery of that information would make them suffer more. Hence, they "don't go there."

These folks do not realize that spiritual suffering and spiritual contentment are spiritual conditions which can be placed entirely under the control of the individual. They mistakenly think that if they are held responsible for their spiritual suffering, then they will/should be blamed for their suffering. They confuse "blame" and "sin" with responsibility. They need to see evil in the world, for they see no other acceptable reason for the suffering they endure. They are too spiritually weak to take responsibility for their condition.

Incidentally, it does not make sense to blame these people for not taking responsibility for their suffering, for they do not realize that it is possible to continually generate contentment no matter what happens.

The need these folks have to continue to blame outside forces for what is happening to them is another reason why they are fond of the concept of "evil." Evil is an especially handy word to have at your disposal if you want to condemn another person. It very handily excuses any obligation to be kind to people you don't like.

The world will never be cured of manichaeanism. But individuals who want to find what the mystics of many different religious traditions call "sovereign contentment," need to seek the cure for this spiritual disease.

7/5/03 added this to the "this and that" section:

What is a mystic?

Everyone more or less has mystical ability. Perhaps it is useful to call someone a mystic when their mystical ability can be reliably summoned whenever it is needed.

This mystic is a person who has a clear visceral sense of the mystical dynamic, what Tibetan mystics have called "the wish-fulfilling jewel." This subtle dynamic is ubiquitous in the flow of the world we inhabit. The dynamic is analogous to a fulcrum. Holding to the fulcrum, by a keen inner sense of its continual presence, the mystic summons what appear to be spontaneous positive transformations within the complex inter-dependencies of any situation. Such changes obtain fruition; the mystic, as Zhuang Zi says, "brings a springtime from every situation."

The mystic's seemingly effortless summoning of fruition is sometimes called grace. Daoists call the dynamic fulcurm the trigger of the dao.

6/27 added this to the website section "this and that":

Theoretical history of apophaticism

In their experience of being conscious of this world of phenomena, the apophatic mystics found through empirical exploration, that one particular type of experience of theirs was profound. The experience was extremely rich, comforting, and often joyous. They noted that what seemed to be in several aspects similar to this experience, had been identified by the term "God" by other experimenters. (This "God" was said to have created all experience everywhere.)

The apophatics experimented further and discovered something quite useful about their data. The singular experience could be greatly enhanced by not identifying it is as anything specific, neither God, nor atheism, nor anything else. In other words, by forgetting "this or that," whatever it was manifested itself with the most compelling power.

6/25

My friend Peter hates the first line (welcome etc), and wants to add the part in red to the last paragraph

Love springs from an empty vessel

"The living God is right here now. Dismiss your ideas of God and her presence
will become viscerally manifest." Carla Ansantina

Welcome pilgrim, you have arrived at level seven, the final door; there's no further work for you to do after stepping over this threshold. The realm you cross into here is the place of complete doubt. No one here has any ideas, any worries, or any fears. For there is no chance that we could figure out what to do with such concerns if we had them.

Because we now know virtually nothing, we must leave everything that would need to be done up to the gods, although we don't know if there are still any of these around. We know only love now, after a lot of painful work we are completely free of all other imperatives, we realize how easy perfect love can be.

6/20

A mystic is someone who viscerally experiences divine presense. "Divinity" can be variously defined, in both theistic and non-theistic paradigms.

Hi James

I agree with what I think is your implication regarding those who believe that we are "entitled to infinite growth and expansion." This is what the Manicheans believed, and they claimed that this entitlement had been lost through the mischief of certain "evil" angels.

I am more sympathetic with the mystical philosophers Lao Zi and Zhuang Zi, who believed that contentment is something we can get right now when we realize (through a natural mystical process) that we already have enough to be content.

Raymond

6/15 added "the shattering process" to the "This an dthat" file

Added to restatement file: Some apophatics petition a personal god, but without dogmatically believing (or denying) that such an entity exists. The choise of using the idea of a god is pragmatic. Petioning a visualized god increases the emotional intensity of meditation. With increased intensity the mystical process is greatly accelerated.

June not 5, 13th Friday

Love springs from an empty vessel

"The living God is right here now. Dismiss your ideas of God and her presence
will become viscerally manifest." Carla Ansantina

Welcome pilgrim, you have arrived at level seven, the final door; there's no further work for you to do after stepping over this threshold. The realm you cross into here is the place of complete doubt. No one here has any ideas, any worries, or any fears. For there is no chance that we could figure out what to do with such concerns if we had them.

Because we now know virtually nothing, we must leave everything that would need to be done up to the gods, although we don't know if there are still any of these around. We know only love now, completely free of all other imperatives, we realize how easy perfect love can be.

6/11

I very much agree with you that science has to be taken with certain grains
> of salt. The desire to "make it all work" or to "explain the world" is very
> powerful in these avowedly non-religious people. Part of the trick with
> reading these kind of papers is tracking down the caveat. Somewhere along
> the way they have to (the good ones anyway) make it clear that they're only
> speculating and to what degree they're speculating.

To notice a deeper current in the one you are engaging, is to summons the manifestation of this current. This is how the "listening" of Carl Rogers therapy worked.

Clarity and the recognition of actuality which clarity reveals, results in "ci," a feeling of positive regard for every being, whether you are helping it or destroying it.

As the famous cosmologist Sir Martin Rees said one day here in San Francisco, "It is important to describe things clearly, but not to try to describe them more clearly than what you actually understand."

June 8: I will try to get you to expand this, but I won't put all my money on you doing it:

I very much agree with you that science has to be taken with certain grains of salt. The desire to "make it all work" or to "explain the world" is very
powerful in these avowedly non-religious people. Part of the trick with
reading these kind of papers is tracking down the caveat. Somewhere along the way they have to (the good ones anyway) make it clear that they're only
speculating and to what degree they're speculating.

6/8 Put on "This and that page"

 Who captivates my interest?

Whenever I put aside my pre-judgments and am able to look intimately within another being, I invariably see mirrors of myself. I recognize myself, my deepest motives and aspirations, my joys and fears, within each of these others. On these rare occasions there is no one who does not captivate my interest. In these uncanny moments there is no creature I dislike.

6/8 this may be repetition: Another factor that results in sovereign contentment is having the confidence that the practitioner will be able to optimize whatever cards are dealt to him. He will accomplish this by continually collaborating with circumstances, rather than directly opposing them.

6/7: the idea of authority/authenticity seems to be a primary question, perhaps it should be on the C&D page? something like this:

How would I know that?

Authenticity is one of the fundamental questions raised by the idea of spirituality. "Am I on the true spiritual path." The sage Zhuang Zi had an answer for this question, and all other questions that attempted to define what is real. He said, "How could I know that?" Which is to say there is no plausible way to certify an external authority who would be able to deem what is "real."

Each individual is apparently on her/his own. This is a daunting situation, but it is also an exhilarating opportunity.

Link: workdaothree: how would I know that? Wu wu hu zhi zhi?

another link could be something like this post I wrote on tao speaks: here

6/6 I think I will do a page on internet posts, like this one:

Hi
I am also a bit uncomfortable with the word perfect, unless used allegorically, as in "To perfect oneself requires the realization that one is already perfect."
I like the word "optimal" better. Optimal indicates for me that I am content with my present direction and rate of growth.
Being content may include faith and doubt, belief and disbelief, courage and fear, etc. "Zhi zu" says Laozi, "know that you already have enough to be content." For me that is optimal.
Needless to say I am often not at an optimal degree: moving ahead and yet fully satisfied with the moment.

4 1/2 There is little or no plausible evidence that there is anything fundamentally wrong with conventional values, such as money, power, status, etc. But some folks find that these things just don't "get it," they want more. These people are not any better than anyone else; they are harder to please, in fact they are arguably "spoiled." They think of themselves as lucky.

June 4: Prayers expressing unconditional gratitude, and prayers of petition, two approaches to prayer that would seem to be logically incompatable.

June 4: Mike: There's a typo in the second sentence. I made the incorrect letter a capital

"...intimately present and thuR reponsive to the field."

Secondly, please don't say intimately present twice in back to back
sentences, it's poor syntax and it makes my psychosis act up (a funny thing
to say... and also true).

In the second paragraph, there be a grammatical error in the following
sentence which I offered a possible correction with a capital letter.

"The emotions are modulated because of A wider field of awareness"

A redundant criticism I have is that of the redundancy in the use of the
phrase, "wider field" in the second paragraph One reason I think you have this recurring
problem is that you're writing like you speak. Unfortunately, that doesn't
always work out. In speach, using redundant terms is less of an annoyance
and in cases of obscure information, a comfort. In literature, the rules are
different as the sensory input is different.

As a whole, I liked where you were going with the second paragraph but I had
a hard time following it. I didn't end up with a complete sense that I knew
what you were talking about.

June 3: add to sovereign contentment: Zi le arises from collaboration with the surrounding field of phenomena. This collaboration occurs by the practitioner simply being intimately present and thur reponsive to the field. The ability to be intimately present to the field is cultivated by the practice of "visceral presence."

"Controlling" emotions: The mystical mind does not consciously control emotions. Emotions are allowed to arise naturally. The emotions are modulated because of wider field of awareness. The input from the wider field attenuates the responce to the specfic input from the emotional event. Awareness of the wider field informs consciousness that the situtation it is in is not as bad as it would think it was, if the entire conscious mind were focused on the untoward event alone. This entire perspective-gaining process is carried on mostly at the sub-conscious level.

June 2 1/2 For the "odds and ends" page. Or is it "This and that"?:

Can you move briskly ahead and yet be fully arrived wherever you are?

Zhuang Zi's conclusions prefigured Wittgenstein and Hume by about 2000 years: Wittgenstein demonstrated that nothing philosophy said could definitely be called 'truth.' Hume's radical empiricism demonstrated that anything might change a moment from now, why there could even the possibility that philosophy might be able to posit some 'truth!'

June 2 Mike: I again went over the section you are working on and added a few changes, these are pointed out in red.

june 1 1/2 there are those who have no problem saying they intend to embody the dao (ti dao) but at the same time would mock someone who wants "to become one with God." The mocker thinks that the dao is an actuality, and that God is a myth. But both God and Dao are equally implausible as reified entities. They are both merely metaphors for a process; both "embodying dao" and "becoming one with God" are indices of a particular mode of consciousness.

June 1st: this from a message I posted on "Community:"
Yes, I have some thoughts on this. My proposition is that the individual who forgets the thought of having any fundamental purpose, and simply explores the way she or he can be as content with life as possible, will be the one who contributes the most (perceived) benefit to both herself/himself and the community. (I think this is one of my rare succinctly written comments regarding a fundamental aspect of apophaticism and Lao/Zhuang daoism.)

From an email conversation with Mike:

Even "guilt" is useful, if applied as an emotional fuel for further transmutation of the wish-fulfilling jewel, in the alchemical furnace of the soul. I am doing some of this "guilty as a fuel" work with a number of recent events. It sure beats worrying and ruminating all day and night.

Guilty brings up the topic of ethics again, and how little reliable meaning there is in the word "ethical". Lao-Zhuang makes an important distinction between shen: good at it; and bu shan: not good at it. These are effective terms. But Lao-Zhuang finds the following to be implausible terms: jian: ignoble; xiang: noble. Hence Lao-Zhuang presents the only coherent ethical paradigm ever published. They should have received a Nobel prize for this insight, but that would require that the prize givers understand the discovery.

May 30: added this to the dao section: The strategic value of humility

Repeating Pavlov's dog studies, some scientists decided to reward the test animals intermittently, the animals were rewarded with food every 3rd or 4th time. These animals actually learned the task more quickly, the emotional tension of not knowing what to expect facilitated the creation of certain neurological pathways. A likely spot in the brain for this phenomenon to occur would be in the amygdala (spell) .

Emotions play a strong role in memory, hence the use of a device making up a funny connection between two things a person wants to remember. This information is useful for the practioner who wants to make significant behavior changes in the psyche.

May 29 Mike wrote: I think it points to the value of realizing our manner of perceiving the world - in static slices constantly being presented as 'now'. In lieu of knowing where we fall in the grand confluence, we can simply take stock at any given moment of what we are and what our immediate environment is. Basing our decisions on this realistic information, we make choices we can look back on with confidence and closure... at least that's been my experience

May 28, not it is really the 28th, I don't know where my head was out on the date below, any weys, here's a link to include: Kalavela: http://www.sacred-texts.com/neu/kveng/

I have done my first round of re-editing to here: EDIT POINT

May 28: Mike, what do you think about adding this to intro section, (its up there now and on the "live page", how does it look?:

This writer's belief system

I believe there is a singular dynamic embedded in the natural world of phenomena which surrounds us. And if we intimately engage this dynamic we will feel secure and content no matter what happens to us.

There is a Chinese expression: Qing jing wei tian xia zheng: "With clarity and inner serenity everything under heaven falls into place"

Apart from this I have no beliefs, which also means I have no disbeliefs. Well maybe one: I believe that your beliefs and disbeliefs are probably as plausible as mine.

may 18th: moved the notes here so that if we want to print out the current version we don't have to start with all these notes

May 18th this could go at the end of the "C and D" page, is now provisionally there:

Those so-called words "Truth" and "Reality"

Zhuang Zi, the ancient Chinese mystical philosopher, begins his famous book with two chapters whose purpose is to explain why one can know nothing for sure about "reality." He tells us "bu yi ding,"(link) which translates "things are not fixed." This statement is his philosophical position, but much more importantly it is the basis of his mysticism, the basis of his mystical flexibility and creative power ("de"). This "anti-knowledge" realization produces his mystical approach toward both existence and the everyday life of each moment: "Bu zhi:"(link) "I don't know." Which is to say, "I don't know anything for sure now and certainly don't know what may happen next."

In my opinion this is the way I best approach a written discussion of apophatic mysticism. I know I exist. But exactly what I am is quite uncertain. And even: if anything other than my perceptual field exists, is also uncertain. Therefore everything I say about my perceptual field is nothing more than metaphor. When I say how things are, I am always speaking metaphorically about something I can not directly experience. Because my world is metaphoric, it is extremely plastic. I may tell you how "it is" today, but this is only metaphor, I am actually only telling you how it seems, "how I am experiencing it today."

And so in this essay when I tell you how something "is," please keep in mind that I mean no doctrinal truth. Neither "scientific" nor "theological" not "philosopical truth" is being claimed. I may appear to speak as if something is "true," but this way of speaking is only to save the writing from the encumberence of continuals "in my opinion," "as I experience it," "seems to be," etc. Please fill in these three qualifications whenever you see me appear to say I am speaking of some kind of fixed knowledge, remember Zhuang Zi's "bu yi ding."

Another reminder may be appropriate here with reference to the term "I" indicating me the apparent writer: this work is the thought of many other people as well, most directly my editors, and indirectly, but no less important, the mystics of a tradition whose birth is lost long ago in the darkness of human time and perhaps pre-human time.

May 17 notes: Got down past Cultivating Mysticism with Systematic and Comprehensive Guidance and Surrender these also need a lot more rework and so plenty for you to do. I am so unhappy with some of these on the current webpage that I may begin to replace them there, but that does not mean the editing is done, I will continually put in your changes, after arguing about some of them of course. :-()

May 16 Notes to Mike: My proposal for the time being, for the secion on contentment on the "concepts and definitions" section, is to include only an introduction to the difficult-to-explain concept of sovereign contentment.

Also to be considered, adding a cultivating stillness/undifferentiated thought, to the concepts and definitions section.

Here's something we might use with the "bimodal mind" or the "double walk" (ZZ)
Huston Smith: "Well they do, in two ways, Australian aborigines. One is that they distinguish between our everyday experience and what they call the dreaming. The dreaming is another level of experience, in which they participate in the life of their ancestors, and indeed the creation of the world, in I suppose we might call it a trance-like state, but that doesn't quite do it, because even in the midst of their ordinary life, half of their mind, you might say, is still on or in this dreaming state."

Future projects: a schematic page with circles showing the relationship of the two modes of mentation. Add Bryant's Waterfowl poem to the Zile page (the ad) Add to truth and reality: all my beliefs are provisional. I believe for the moment I am writing this, a moment later I may not. Fixed beliefs are unnecessary and most often impede the engagement of the spiritual dynamic, the zi ran.

There are not mystics and non-mystics, there is a mystical spectrum.

intense undifferentiated presence, focused presence, relaxed undifferentiated mode, alert surrender.

undifferentiated presence to every perception, both outside and inside the skin.

Dangers of practice: psychic disorganization, relationship destruction: one party sees a whole new paradigm of reality and can no longer relate to the other party, and because this first party is new to the process, she/he can see no way to continue.

End of future projects section

May 15

I suggest you make this into a short essay for the web site:"G'day materess:" saved this piece that Mike wrote at the end of this edit page,

I received some very kind remarks from Koshari about the web site. see:
http://groups.msn.com/ComeTogetherCommunity/ancientwisdomnewmillenium.msnw
look for the general discussion section.

I deleted this part of your message, very nasty of me. tidying up things for our dear visitors.

"The third reason for the mystic's perpetual contentment is that exterior
forces react to the mystic's behavior by altering their responces in ways
that resonate with her intentions."

This brought back to mind our long ago discussions on systems theory and
feedback loops, both positive and negative. Humberto Maturana would say,
where does the outside end and the inside begin? There's a distinction but
then there isn't.

yeah, Mike, maybe you are correct on this piece of pragmatic theology. maybe they would not turn.

¡Cómo es hermoso! gut und böse!

Needs to be added to the section on contentment: The third reason for the mystic's perpetual contentment is that exterior forces react to the mystic's behavior by altering their responces in ways that resonate with her intentions. The adept does not generate his own contenment entirely from resources he has "within his skin." In terms of self-generated contentment, the adept's psyche is the catalyst. The contentment is generated from an interaction between internal and external forces. The spiritual attitude of the psyche causes a reconfiguration of these internal and external actors, and the effectiveness of this reconfiguration is the cause of the adept's resulting feeling of contentment.

also add: sovereign contentment is something that arises spontaneously when the adept has sufficiently shifted the preponderance of her psychic activity to the apophatic side. It results from a transformation of both rational and non-rational mentation. Retrospectively, one can see some of the rational mentation that contributes to sovereign contentment. 1,2,3, etc. But there is most importantly a non-rational apophatic transformation in the psyche. This is often called realization, and is sensed viscerally. spell? also add: the jewel is in this immediate "bad" moment and can be seen and appreciated here. But also: the jewel is often bested cultivated when further refined in such a "bad" moment as this. Also add May 17th this following if it is not already there: Another source of her contentment is that she has grown to trust her ability to receive what ever the moment brings and respond effectively to what are perceived as the "gains" and "loses" contained within this moment. May 18th Another reason for contentment and equanimity is that trhe mystic has learned that she is fully present to the moment she can trust that she will effectively respond to whatever it brings. The mystic catalyses the generation of zi le, but the contentment comes about from what is produced in the interactive field, not from inside the skin of the mystic.

alchemy: internally cook the "negative" feelings. Use your own imagery, putting them on a flame, using them for fuel for a flame. etc, etc. This cooking, carried out over a protracted period of time, creates the "wish-fulfilling gem". The wish-fulfilling gem (Tibetan Buddhist) is the same thing as zile, self-generated contentment. Internal alchemy cultivation increases one's ability to fully inhabit the immediate world. This immediacy gives birth to the wish-fulfilling jewel (sovereign contentment)

from above:

Another factor that results in sovereign contentment is having the confidence that the practitioner will be able to optimize whatever cards are dealt to him. He will accomplish this by continually collaborating with circumstances, rather than directly opposing them.

"And hast thou slain the Jabberwock?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!"
¡¡¡He chortled in his joy!!!

I have done my first round of re-editing to here: EDIT POINT

G'day materess saved this piece that Mike wrote at the end of this edit page,
The questions you ponder and pose are interesting and indeed thorny. Firstly, I'm always one to qualify my knowledge and opinions as not being Taoist since I've given up trying to figure out what that term means. Plus, some people get real touchy when you talk about things being Taoist or not.

All that being said, I think I get where you're coming from... how can methodologies be reconciled with the obvious fluctuating nature of reality? My opinion is that the methadologies are just as flexible as every other element in the picture. A healthy spiritual practice will stretch and grow to meet the situation as a plant follows the light. Not all plants manage, and so with spiritual systems.

My response says nothing, though, as to determing a healthy flexible methadology from a stagnant one, that is a question far stickier than intended here.

In cosomology, there'd be nothing what so ever to say about the universe, expanding or otherwise, without the standards and methods that come from the many disciplines formulating this science of the universe.

Again I must reiterate, the key is living in the ever still/changing present. Habits or practices that prove benenficial for the present moment are worthwhile.

"What is beyond the universe is beyond our ability to know."
-someone

"Only by our flaws do we move forward"
-someone else
Mike

the following has nothing directly to do with the page, something I posted on an internet board:

The question of identity is one of many which is taken up in the cultivation of "Great Doubt" by Zen practioners. In this practice one learns to provisionally doubt everything and through this method one finds "actuality".

Imo if we will empty ourselves of the deeply rooted psychic structures that we have carefully built around oursevles in order to prove ourselves "worthy," we have a chance to discover our true worth. (True worth: our sacred and immutible parity with all beings)

This is scary stuff for those of us who had been put down as children and have worked hard proving to the world that we are worthwhile. One best approach such precious children carefully, affirming their value before pointing out their needless crutches. Lao Zi: "What you would take down must first be affirmed as high."

I have too often violated this "anti-putdown" wisdom when posting on internet message boards.

hereTaoist Tom
I think these are excellent questions:
"Yes, but how is this any different from the ordinary human mind's illusion of peace?
That is to say, can the ordinary human being be free, happy and content if they say it is so?
And if one is indeed, free, happy, and content, need one seek any further "spirituality?"
These questions beg another fundamental question: Who decides what is authentic spirituality? My opinion:
One of the most daunting and delightful aspects of being human is that I am potentially autonomous in deciding the purpose of my being. To paraphrase Lao Zi, "I don't have to go out the doors (doors of my individual conscious awareness) to realize the world."
In my case I have decided my purpose is to follow the self-arising inclinations of my being. So far I am following what seems to be a natural desire for contentment, which in its most radical form seems to be "zile", a self-generated contentment that is refractory to any negative impingment by external circumstances and events.
But someone else may decide simple contentment is a very unseemly goal to take as the fundamental purpose of a human life. They may set their own purpose as one that goes beyond the world we now know, to some realm beyond the death of an individual's awareness. Who am I to tell this person that their purpose is vain? If I dared such an opinion Zhuang Zi would laugh at me and say "How could you know that?"
Raymond

zipper hl6&555
home