deci belle

The last line above comes from something I've written. ed note: typo 1st line and last line

Good. Open nonreification for its substance, clear calm for its function, it is an unexcelled, subtle way to reality. Few people in the world know this and fewer still cultivate it. If one's insight into potential in everyday ordinary situations is insufficient, one cannot use its power to transcend into reality. Those who are familiar with the writings of prior illuminates, in understanding their principles, they intuitively recognize them and inwardly comprehend them, then when they apply them they are naturally transcendent in the realm of reality without leaving the homeland of delusion. The "mysterious pass" is the critical initiatory experience by which people transcend the ordinary world. "In the Complete Reality (Quanzhen) practice of seeking and opening the mysterious pass is one of the strongest signs of Chan Buddhist affinity within this school of Taoism." —from Thomas Cleary's introduction to The Book of Balance and Harmony, ISBN 0-86547-363-3 The mysterious pass is no location. It is the door to all wonders; beyond the person, yet none other than one's very self: for anyone who can see this way, all doubts can be settled and one can leap directly to the shore of the Tao, where the silent island wades in a sea of jewels. ed note: typo in last sentence

Yes abrakamowse, and summarizing enlightening activity in a word is an effective entry for those with enough accrued potential through long gradual practice of gathering it and by preserving the fundamental basis in the course of everyday ordinary situations. Then it is necessary to penetrate further into the mystery of selfless accord by virtue of ordinary delusional realms. This is because effortless action means that subtle spontaneous response is nonpsychological (spiritual) in terms of virtuous accord in reality. This is why it is properly not the person, nor by the person's effort. Wu-wei is the quality of perceptive practice not by the person but only through the auspices of the person. Why? Through a long process of impersonal intent, such is the natural result. One's unbending intent is an invocation by open sincerity beckoning the real by inner emptiness. We beckon spontaneous accord in reality by invoking the Virtue of the Receptive as our inmost being. The Way spontaneously alights where emptiness (selfless accord) is stabilized. Thus, resting in the highest good by sincere open intent, we watch over the incipient upwelling of the breath of awareness much like a cat watches the opening of a mouse-hole in total concentration, ever vigilant for the spontaneous arising of true potential. Clarifying the purpose of prior illuminates' intent by the use of the word wu-wei means the reality represented by the word is in terms of impersonal subtle adaption without relying on one's own power. Effortless action is what has to be evaluated in certain and precise terms based on real experience. Enlightening response not relying on one's own power requires that one see potential in the first place because potential is properly inherent in the situation itself, not the person. Subtle spiritual adaption based on reception of potential (by seeing alone) is what is "effortless." Spontaneous action based on such effortlessness is naturally without personal bias or inclination. Only this can be properly termed "selfless accord in reality." This is where "neither seeking honor nor avoiding ignominy" really comes to the fore. Not because of the ordinary convention of "selflessness", but because such concern is actually nonexistent in reality. It is in such attitudinal audacity that one's enlightening function awakens and rises to the occasion of actually intending open sincerity and virtuous receptivity of potential and actually seeing reality in terms of selfless response in the first place. We must always strive to move beyond the zero point of the transcendent meaning of the words of all prior illuminates and actually apply the power of wu-wei in terms of "taking the forward step and accepting your (enlightening) function with hands open, sharing yourself freely." ed note: spell "abrakamowse" correctly in 1st paragraph

Understood, Blackhawk. It's true and I apologize for the difficulty in reading my posts, especially for a non-native english speaker. The real problem (on my side) in talking about ineffable reality is that it is inconceivability itself. I was silent about it for 15 years; now I've been writing about it for 15 years. The nature of inconceivability in terms of Mind is that immediate knowledge without inside or outside is completely whole. Undifferentiated unity is utterly empty as well. The space of true emptiness has no space. The true void has no such void. Even absence is absent from reality. I'm not referring to sudden enlightenment, but, as abrakamowse implicated above, since the absolute and enlightening activity in terms of delusion cannot be separate, I am forced to elucidate wordless authentic teaching within the constraints of words. This means that I need to somehow express immediate all-at-once knowledge without leaving the ultimate freedom of no outside or inside. If I do, then the living expression of reality turns into dead words. That is the challenge for me. The problem on your side is that the natural affinity with ineffable reality isn't able to resonate within you to the degree that is necessary for you to recognize within yourself that you already know without a word. There is nothing either of us can do except to sincerely intend an open wonder in terms of one's inherent potential. Hope is unnecessary and counter-productive. That means it is an obstacle to realization. It is already your own mind right now. Enlightenment is already fully intact. The mystery isn't in the unseen Absolute. The mystery is in the scene before you. It's not that Creation is other than it is, it is just that our perspective in terms of personality-consciousness is evidence of habit-energy not only in ourselves, but in an ageless universal human consensus that is literally as old as sin. Self-referencing thought (much like hope and fear) obscures the point of illumination which is unborn awareness itself. Self-referencing thought sustains the illusion of self/other (the necessary element for functional being), to the exclusion of selfless awareness. Selfless awareness isn't some other mind, exclusive of ego-conscious habit energy. It's just that ego-function (psychological habit-energy) excludes one's enlightening function from its purveyance. Both functions are valid; yet ego-consciousness must be at the service of spiritual (nonpsychological) consciousness. Self-refinement is the long process of restoring the proper relationship between ego-function and enlightening function. Both functions must co-exist in real terms much like teeth and lips without harming each other. True practice is the practice of reversal, whereby the obscured (impersonal real knowledge) is eventually recognized in terms of non-differentiation, by the diminution of the recalcitrant (habitually self-referencing conscious knowledge). The work of self-refinement is a long and gradual path which is in seamless accord with the sudden all-at-once. They are a continuum. There are no two minds. Mind is one. Even those who practice lucid dreaming know that in transitioning between lucid and ordinary consciousness, there is no break. The transition between the two is seamless. Gradual and sudden are undifferentiated, just as reality has no differentiation between delusion and enlightenment. It is not a matter of the two being all mixed up— THEY ARE THE SAME …and empty as well. Don't stoop to believing such is the case. It is necessary to actually see it in real life. The buddhist teaching device of "sameness within difference" is a provisional teaching. Take the forward step in expressing the truth that undifferentiated reality IS you. It's not you seeing it. The seeing is itself who you are. Awareness is selfless. When seeing is impersonal, there are no personal distinctions: this is selfless accord in reality. It's just how it is, and no one knows why. ❤︎ ed note: change "reverting" to "restoring" in 5th paragraph; add "they are the same…" in penultimate paragraph

Yes, yes!! …and someone else wrote: Well, at least you now know how I feel when I try to read Dogen sometimes! Oh, dear… Self-reflection clouds natural impersonal awareness in terms of an objective realization of ordinary situations. It is possible to assess situations and respond spontaneously to the very conditions dictated by temporal affairs by cultivating the habit of non-interference. It is not a matter of imaginary separateness, but rather resting readily in the perspective of nonspeculative nonavoidance. Neither avoiding nor defining the inevitable nor speculating on outcomes is the closest one can come to a practical accord. A preliminary aspect is the ploy to gain detachment from internal and external bedevilments in order to save energy, but eventually it becomes the process of taking over creation and stealing its potential. Further still, it is the means by which enlightening beings carry out tasks and fulfill accomplishments in secret. It just comes back to using the world for self-refinement instead of using it in terms of pattern-based self-gratification. In terms of self-refinement, we develop the habit of not seeing situations as arenas for speculation. When we have nothing even potentially invested, we develop real autonomy— which is beyond the self-referencing sensual detachment of the lower vehicles of formative moralities of renunciatory provisional teaching. When we refuse to invest ourselves in terms of potential, we gain that potential— it is unsaid. The rule is in not using what is seen, and in using what is not seen. Not-using is not having attachment, however subtle, to objects, situations or outcomes; using is in not-using potential. It works as one, because temporal and absolute are one. As above, so below. We see potential by not speculating on inert temporal manifestations; we steal it simply in not-seeing it relative to the person. It is the way it is for no reason. No one knows why or how enlightenment and delusion are actually one in the same. Only those who see reality by a long process of simply forgetting to perpetuate self-reifying habit energies ever-cloying one's life eventually come to realize absorption in complete reality's potential instead of perpetuating karmic momentum when observing the same from the perspective of the personality. So by not speculating on temporal manifestations, and refusing to entertain intellectual ramifications relative to self and other, we realize absorption just by virtue of seeing— this how to use its potential. It is not in the sense-organ, nor in the object; it is mind alone. Now when we then relegate potential to nonpsychological awareness, we don't even say what could possibly be by discursive discriminatory thought relative to a self. Not doing so is what seals potential away from intellectualism after absorption (seeing). No one knows the strategy of not-knowing. What those who steal potential know, is that potential is not an inevitability (in that what could not be other than "all things are just as they are"), yet, in terms of inconceivability, to the degree we absorb potential in the course of ordinary everyday affairs, we enter the mystery. If inevitability is just responding to affairs without speculation on outcomes is selfless adaption, what else could possibly be construed as enlightening activity? The prior few paragraphs are an admission of the sequential aspect of acting in accord with the time in reality. There is before, and there is after: they must not be mixed up. Ok, so it's crazy; but that is the secret to taking over creation, stealing potential, and seeing through phenomena without negating appearances. It all depends on selfless awareness. Practice is what practice does, that is, our habitual perception is gradually influenced to have no habitual, reflexive connection to gratifying or avoiding sensually speculative concerns; "neither courting honor nor avoiding ignominy." By sensual, I mean anything perceivable by any avenue of perception— this isn't just a matter of sex, drugs, money, power, personal or professional influence or cravings of any sort. It is much more subtle, and pervasive. It is the means by which to transcend one's conditioned awareness of self-illusion and enter the inconceivable mystery of the Way by seeing your nature in action long before actually seeing its essence in terms of sudden realization. In fact, enlightening activity isn't dependent on the sudden at all. Rather, the sudden is the result of having turned the light of awareness around in terms of seeing independently of the person, and sustaining its influence in one's life for a long long time. This means turning the light of awareness around to shine on its source. This is direct activation of enlightening being in the midst of ordinary affairs unbeknownst to anyone. When we don't use ordinary conditioned awareness to follow ordinary conditioned affairs, then the light of awareness is turned around automatically with no effort involved at all. Its activation is in what you don't see and its arrival is in realizing what has been aglow all along. ed note: typo 2nd paragraph; change "reality" to "realization" in 3rd paragraph; typo 6th paragraph

Just ask your death. Ask it anything you want. Really. Don't be self-conscious about it. After all, it's YOUR death.

Again quoting the line from the 6th chapter of Lao Tzu's Tao te Ching: In terms of awareness being the nature of human being, the door of the mysterious female is called the root of heaven and earth because the two things (the heaven and the earth of people's substantial and functional being) bifurcate at the aperture of the mysterious female. This aperture has no location, yet people can avail themselves of its properties by seeing the point where the physical, psychological and nonpsychological elements of the being that is going to die do not adhere, by a long process of spiritually refining abstraction. It is a long process which gradually obviates the person's habitual psychological patterns and tendencies allowing that which is the point of incipience of one's Celestial nature to shine unobscured by habit energies. "Continuously there as such, use of it is unforced." After all, it is one's own mind right now. Immediate acquiescence in its enlightening qualities is simply the aspect of one's own inconceivable nature operating without resistance in the midst of everyday ordinary delusional existence. In other words, one does not do this. How is that? Such a one is expressive of inherent unity being the nature of creation (karmic evolution) whether one knows it or not. If one is ignorant of one's inconceivable nature, well, then it follows that such a one would not be able to use it without force. Isn't effort (force) the way of ordinary existence by the "sweat of one's brow?" This is due to relying on one's own power by being unaware of the celestial nature of one's inherent being. So, in using it by force or without force, it is the same root. So the immaterial aperture of the mysterious female is actually common knowledge even by the ignorant. Yet the ignorant only see the earth and do not see the heaven therein. Therefore, only availing themselves of the (psychological) creative aspect of karmic rounds of birth and death and leaving out the primordial (nonpsychological), the complete reality of natural unity is separate by virtue of people's quality of awareness alone. The root of heaven and earth of humanity is not only the nature of karmic existence by ignorance, it is the nature of enlightenment. Continuously there as such, use of it is unforced. That is to say, since it is already completely manifest as one's own mind right now, there is no manipulation relative to perceptive attributes nor is reifying discriminatory consciousness relative to self and other active. This is the meaning of "…its use is not forced." Naturally, all things are just as they are in terms of the real by one's immediate knowledge void of habitual intellectual (rational) self-referencing. Just this itself constitutes enlightening activity. As such, enlightening qualities referenced by the term mysterious female, are naturally without bias nor inclination relative to the person— again, being the very working definition of enlightening activity. This is the meaning of "it is not done by the person", in that "the person" (in terms of the spiritual adept) is indicative of the "inert" agent facilitating one's inherent enlightening function. How is that any different than "use of it is unforced?" One simply sees through phenomena without denying their characteristics and employs Mind without dwelling on its contents. This is the natural activation and function of one's inherently selfless Dharma-eye. In all authentic teaching, the term selfless has no moral value. It simply references the fact that selfless response isn't relative to motivation by virtue of the person (ego-consciousness). Enlightening activity is a nonpsychological operation relative to the very potential inherent in all situations in which one finds oneself. The meaning of "use of it is unforced" and "not relying on one's own power" is one. ed note: add "aspect" in 2nd line of 2nd paragraph; modify last line of penultimate paragraph; add bulk of last paragraph

I thought I might post this again (if I hadn't already) for those whose interest might be suitably inclined. This short treatise brings to light a profound key to taoist alchemic spiritual practice mentioned in their ancient esoteric manuals as well as in Laotze’s Tao de Ching, which touches on various points of commonly accessed tenets of Chan (Zen) buddhism, Quantzhen (Complete Reality) taoism and Toltec (Nagual) shamanism. Some aspects of the description are in ancient taoist prose, which cannot be avoided, simply because the knowledge is embedded. Whatever insight transmitted throughout the ages by virtue of the knowledge itself has never implied any kind of rational meaning in any philosophical or intellectual sense; yet who hasn't heard the term knowledge is power? This selfsame Power, therefore, is the very nature of awake. For those who have not yet seen to refine vitality into energy; refine energy into spirit; refine spirit into openness, and then to go through the double pass and subsequently empty out clear open insight, there may still be doubts as to where to find the mysterious pass spoken of in the ancient classics of the various authentic schools of spiritual alchemy. Vaguely in the space where thought and desire coalesce in one’s innermost being, is an aperture, a nexus of cosmic proportion, that, without having form of itself, rests in perpetuity in precedence over Creation. This recondite aspect of Mind is accessible to humanity by virtue of its essential nature. Uncreated, comprising one’s real body of awareness, yet having no inside or outside, the very homeland of nothing whatsoever has been identified by ancient taoists as the aperture of the Valley Spirit; the abode of the Mysterious Female. This “homeland of nothing whatsoever” not a thing. It cannot be discovered by focusing one’s awareness on any part of the physical body. Yet it is only by virtue of having a body that one’s innate potential is accessible to consciousness. The subtle spiritual operation therein is one's innate inconceivability. When potential arises, it can be recognized by subtle awareness accessed by prior gradual clarification of habit energy. Before a single thought, there is balance; yet afterwards, when one's feelings are not yet aroused, therein is harmony. It is possible to spend one’s days resting here in the highest good while in the midst of ordinary situations, able to adapt to all manner of conditional ramifications without going along with the creative’s karmic momentum (habit energy). An alchemic classic states that the “aperture” is between the heart and genitals~ this refers to intellectual and emotional consciousness, the matrix and operational seat of conditioned self-consciousness. Self-conscious psychological awareness is self-reifying consciousness symptomatic of chronic psychosis through instinctual and conditioned pattern-awareness by the psychological apparatus of the being that is going to die in the guise of the personality. Authentic gradual self-refinement results in the dissolution of that which constitutes habit energy's perpetuation of the mistaken upholding of the personality as the true self. Arriving at the ultimate breakthrough revealing the essence of one's real nature, and after the maturation and stabilization of real experience, the personality can forthrightly assume its function in assisting the intent of one's inherent enlightening function. The psychological apparatus of the being that is going to die and the enlightening activity of all prior illuminates are not different. The purpose of the two things (functions) is one, which does not rely on reason or talking. In refining vitality into energy, feelings are forgotten. Refining energy into spirit, thoughts are forgotten. The spirit is the house of fire and water, the medicines. Spirit is the will. Joining the two medicines, the elixir is formed, and the mysterious pass appears within nothing whatsoever. It’s not a matter of doing (energy work); arriving at the pivot of awareness, the incipience of reality, is as easy as turning over your hand. After all, it’s already your own mind right now. When the elixir is refined in the mysterious pass it turns into the gold pill, symbolic of nonpsychological awareness, forever incorruptible. It's not that it is just now incorruptible, it is that in seeing your own mind right now as it really is, you see perpetual incorruptibility is the unborn basis, being your own nature. Realization is just the prior knowledge of open selflessness. Once you see it, set right away to refine it. After the embryonic immortal is formed, one must seal it and incubate it until the accomplishment is solidified. Then it is possible to set up the cauldron and furnace once again, in order to initiate advanced operation. When one surpasses this, even one’s use of inner vision is left behind. As one succeeds in avoiding damage to the refined elixir by maintaining strictness in incubating the embryo, an immortal takes its place in terms of one’s inherent spiritual enlightening function in the midst of everyday ordinary situations unbeknownst to anyone. When one can then sublimate oneself physically and spiritually, one then steps over eternity, shatters space and becomes the same as the tao in reality, able to accept the world in its totality and work directly with its essence without intermediary; unitary sameness comprising karma and enlightenment as one’s spiritual basis. Buddhism calls this Suchness; the taoist term is Complete Reality. The names refer to that which is neither ordinary nor holy; neither karmic nor absolute in nature. Just this is one's own mind right now, before the first thought. Then it is possible to follow in the steps of prior illuminates to fully access non-resistant open clarity expressing the Virtue of the Receptive. Such virtue is non-resistant as is in terms of knowledge, nonpsychologically aware. There's nothing to know. Awake, one adapts as is to what is without arrangements. The mysterious pass, existing even now before all time, is the aperture of nonorigination— the Causless gives birth to ordinary people and immortals alike. In this regard it is not limited to the absolute, but is the perennial gateway of potential aware energy in the living minds and bodies of all beings individually. Using this mysterious pass unconsciously is the norm for ordinary people. Continuous as such, self-refinement is the endless task of seeing the Mysterious Pass for oneself and learning to use its potential without limit in accordance with the timing and guidance of situational karmic evolution. This is how one dispenses with reliance on one's own power. The spiritual power of situationally expressed potential is inherent in the situation itself, not dependent on things, self or other. For those who have refined the elixir of immortality by penetrating the mysterious pass, it is possible to actualize non-doing and develop the response-body. One learns to use this aperture of nonoriginated potential to match reality in everyday ordinary affairs. If one knows this aperture yet cannot use it— it is the same as not knowing. Wu-wei is not a state of self-psychological differentiation as opposed to delusional conditionality— it is a spiritual function of crucial importance in the lives of ignoramuses and potential illuminates alike, transcending discriminatory psychologies. Called non-doing, wu-wei is Great Sameness in action. Unborn and undying movement and stillness without having fallen into the sphere of the creative is by virtue of one’s own selfless awareness. It’s not the person. Seeing reality is selflessly aware knowledge of situational potential. Immediate non-discursive knowledge is what is referred to as seeing. Actualizing potential in response to situations is the work of spiritual adepts. As one experiences functionally non-reifying awareness in the midst of situational evolution, its (situational) potential is perceived naturally. Therefore authentic practice is such that it is imperative that you work on this basis of truly seeing reality as is, by not acting on its potential in terms of the creative; only in terms of its essence. Don't throw this (potential) away once you get it (by acting on it). All that is necessary is for one to see it. In seeing, all spiritual principle is attained. Taoism says, "the mechanism is in the eyes." Do you believe seeing is accomplished with the physical eyes? Knowledge is immediate; not requiring deliberation. Do you believe seeing depends on the senses or the organ? Also, authentic practice has nothing to do with quiet sitting meditation. Formal meditation is meant to help those with psychological blockage gain insight into recognizing reality. Formalities are remedial, reformative. Authentic practice is reality itself: reality has no pattern. Observing the stillness of psychological (conditioned) consciousness temporarily void of its habitual patterns and mistaking this psychological state for the shining mind is the number one sickness of beginners— no matter how many decades they have been seduced by the cushion. Mistaking the human mentality for the shining mind is the number one sickness of beginners engaged in exercising formal sitting meditation. Observing where thoughts originate and feelings secrete is getting close to the immaterial aperture with no location (Mysterious Female). It is not the body; it is only accessed by virtue of having a body. It is the critical juncture where all the elements combine to form the “completely real human being with no status.” By seeing this aperture, it is possible to arrive at a body outside the body. People have mistakenly come to believe that “human being” is a noun, a self-referential identity, whereas in reality, it is the innate spiritual capacity of true Complete Reality by which the totality of one’s inherent potential is only rarely fulfilled by those with the audacity to realize the will to actualize enlightenment universally by gradually dispensing with habitually self-reifying psychological pattern-consciousness. ed note: fix double-space between 3rd and 4th paragraphs; add a few lines to paragraph 8

From a PM: So, in Lao-Tzu's saying what does the word FEMALE signify?” As a teaching aid, for yourself (for myself, when it is an obscure passage) and for other readers, when referring to passages such as the one above from the 6th chapter of the Tao te Ching, do remember to mention where you found it! I will just say three things for now about the Mysterious Female: 1. I have a thread by that title on this forum. 2. Creation, the absolute, and all one's awareness faculties (both psychological and nonpsychological being fully actualized at this point of living breath of nonoriginated potential) do not adhere in the Mysterious Female's perpetually incipient upwelling. 3. The name "mysterious" represents inconceivable movement and "female" represents inconceivable stillness. The Mysterious Female is not a thing, yet therein is a point of abstraction. Therein is inconceivable substance and function. The Mysterious Female is the door to all wonders. "Female" implies openness. One penetrates the openness of the Mysterious Female oneself by one's own sincere openness. Therefore open sincerity is the single most important attribute one can bring to one's spiritual endeavor. Open sincerity is one's inherent bright virtue implied by hiding one's light through the innocent and natural human expression of humility. Why? Because knowledge of the nature of the Mysterious Female is itself dark. Darkness, is the name of the fourth hexagram (also known as Innocence) found in the I Ching (Book of Changes). The I Ching is really a prehistoric sourcebook pre-dating the 5000 year recorded history of China; it is a glossary of types of time, and a code-book for wizards, saints, sages and buddhas. The hexagrams were only derived by Fu Hsi at the dawn of China's cultural roots. The order of the I Ching hexagrams, and their lines were only set up as we have come to know them at the beginning of the Zhou Dynasty, roughly 1100 BCE. The material I have just noted is simply stated in the Tao te Ching and further elucidated in the alchemic scriptures such as the Book of Balance and Harmony that you are studying. I understand that you are only seeking to clarify terms you are unsure about, but there is no way to get to the bottom of these terms as they are references to the inconceivable nature of awareness; your own spiritual (nonoriginated) true identity. As long as you apply yourself diligently with openness and sincerity both during and after reading the words, and furthermore, without activating undue intellectualism, the real will gradually and subtly come to your aid. It is not a matter of "understanding", unless such understanding is inconceivable understanding, and such understanding is wordless; that is, beyond the ken of rational faculties. So if you sense that it is you (the person) who is "understanding", that isn't it. The conundrum is that Inconceivability isn't relative to the person, yet it isn't other than the person either. Here again, please refer to the book and page(s) when presenting the material you want help with. I don't have to refer to any documents to respond here because this quote is the basic alchemic model of primordial deconstruction entering the creative using the symbology of the I Ching trigrams. Earth does the same (using this model) to mate with Heaven to produce Fire. The symbology is only an aid to illustrate the concepts of the primordially derivative nature of alchemic Fire and Water, being the medicines used in the spiritual alchemy teaching of Complete Reality taoism. Such symbology, in general terms, is a device used in order to talk about alchemic principles used in various aspects of self-refining process. They are only teaching aids for the perceptive student. It is up to the student to discover the reality behind the words. The devices of the various authentic schools of true teaching have all been left behind by prior illuminates to keep the knowledge alive. In this type of study, one must always look to taking the image of the symbol and moving it beyond the zero-point of what is implied by the textual context. When one has gained a modicum of personal accord in terms of experience and application afforded by one's own resonant symbiotic (karmic/absolute) accord in reality, then questions and responses can move beyond the literal and theoretic. Just be aware of this as you study. Make notes of your questions and search out references in the documents themselves. That way you can refer to your own experience by way of the technical terms, as I do in describing the application of enlightening activity using the terms of taoism, buddhism, and Nahual shamanism. I encourage you to assuage your doubts, and I don't blame you for asking, but it is absolutely necessary for you to submerge yourself in the material without having the benefit of intellectual crutches. Why? Reality is itself the realm of no thing, whereas the psychological apparatus of the being that is going to die is a tool. As such, the rational faculties are simply the wrong tool to use in penetrating the mysteries of the essence of perceptive awareness (the spiritual). Spiritual alchemy is like studying for a pilot's license. Only as you yourself eventually begin to hover in stillness without psychological mentally conceptual support, can you begin to see the real on its terms and accord with it fluidly without relying on self-reifying deliberations. As is relevant in all of this material, its beneficial effect actualized simply enough by absorbing the relational attributes comprising the symbology without employing intellectualized meaning per se, is the best way to further your familiarity with the effect of the teachings' purpose which is already embedded. This means that all authentic teaching is itself talismanic, in that it is to be used as a gauge to assess the relativity of one's own spiritual accord in reality, since the entire field of endeavor is none other than your own mind right now. Be patient. Just remember that I am no smarter nor more clever that you yourself, yet I have never had even one person to ask myself— then as now. Most real taoist monks and nuns in traditional Chinese cultural settings (in China) even now DO NOT KNOW THAT THIS SUBJECT MATTER IS EVEN A TOPIC. Such is its rarity to even hear of in any context outside of the heavily veiled written ancient scriptural documents of the classic Quanzhen (Complete Reality) taoist canon. It's hard at first, but strive to trust yourself in looking back on the essential guidance I have given you in our initial dialog. Refer to these first talks regularly. There is much information to be gleaned. Hard-copy the long PM thread and study it for years, if it comes to that. Ultimately, you will eventually have distilled it down to a few essential points. Give this time— at least 3~5 years for the formative aspect of coming to terms with the technical symbology (if that's your thing). In the olden days, even rote meditation (silent sitting) practice, which was only allowed under strict supervision by experienced teachers, was never entered into by students until after years of disciplined theoretic study of the ancient classics of buddhism and taoism. In closing, open sincerity is the basis of true wonder. True wonder has no knowledge or reference; only by such accord in reality is the real to be seen as one's Unborn Mind. This does not require study, per se, being one's own mind, yet rushing ahead without proper discipline and insight only serves to "muddy the waters." Furthermore, the power of insight is only as effective as one's naturally developed ability to apply it in everyday ordinary situations. You are very young. I am glad you are applying your energy to this for now. I expect your interest to taper off before possibly once again resuming this range of study as you gain experience and maturity in the coming years. Spiritual study is itself the mind of true wonder. As above so below; in working with essence, one arrives as essence. I know I haven't really helped you, but this is the way it is. This is why it is said: see essence on your own, then seek a teacher ❤︎ ed note: add "and" in 2nd paragraph; add "The I Ching is… …roughly 1100 BCE" in 4th; typo, 5th; add "…is itself talismanic, in that it is to be used as a gauge to assess the…" 12th paragraph

Some, maybe even most people can benefit from the right psychotropics taken at the right time in the right frame of mind, during the right period of one's serendipitous path of preliminary psychological de-constructivism but it is by no means necessary. We're lucky in this age, because it's relatively easy to try various drugs' effectiveness for initial entry into spiritual self-refinement— but perhaps it is too easy. Ultimately, it is a dead-end. Literally. Terrence McKenna, anyone? Brilliant, but dead. For all the good it does, the toll it takes on the psychological apparatus and the physical body is tremendous. So don't fool yourselves. It's like the spiritual quest itself in that regard, which is exemplified by an admonition in the Art of War stating that war is a serious drain on a country, and it is best to be fast and clumsy (in gaining the insight that drugs provide, like flashes in a night battle, of the lay of one's own psychological terrain). But ultimately, one must proceed alone, in the dark and without any artificial aid other than the grace one is fortunate enough to receive. The process has no shortcuts. It is crucial to neither lag behind or rush ahead in accomplishing the purpose of self-refinement itself, which only then with subsequent advance practice, results in a spontaneous event called seeing one's nature. What is the purpose of self-refinement? It is to refine away the errant human mentality. That is, the mind that thinks there is a person "progressing", "improving", and being "spiritual." Furthermore, in terms of the instantaneous realization one's nature— it does not confer buddhahood. Buddhahood is the working definition of "permanent stabilization of enlightening accord in reality." Sudden enlightenment is "planting the seed of buddhahood in the homeland of nothing whatsoever." Buddha said that nothing whatsoever is gained by complete perfect realization. "You" just see what has been aglow all along. It's you, but you're not it. There is no thing. Mind is selfless. There is no self. it's just the way it is, and no one knows why. So realize that at every stage, further refining practice is necessary. The first trip is short, in that the path resulting in sudden realization of the nature of your own mind as it is at this very moment is finite. The second trip is long, in that subsequent advance enlightening practice is endless. So in experiencing sudden enlightenment, it is selflessly awake experience. Nothing whatsoever is to be known. Why? There's no being. Awake, isn't the person that knows, or realizes that there is nothing to know. It's just your own mind right now that knows; that already knows. Deliberately employing drugs to sunder one's conditional illusion of absolute identity may be a fast-track, or may perhaps only be a diversion for most people from authentic practice. It's like, do you go to a sexy art-school (drugs) or do you just get in the trenches and do the work (self-refinement). Eventually, you will have to do the work. If you don't, you'll never come to see real potential, gather it in sufficiency over a long period of time and then subsequently, through no fault of your own, see essence and then return, to subsequently LEARN TO APPLY IT IN ORDINARY SITUATIONS. Does anyone know how ego invades such well-meant forays into bliss-inducing and supposed ego-sundering pill-popping? Well, it does and it's called spiritual materialism. It's a psychological mindset that convinces the individual that consuming such things is a thing in and of itself and that such things actually effect one's (false) identity by "improving" and "progressing" it, during which all this time these very thoughts of personal progress are defeating the true purpose of self refinement in the first stages, which is, for beginners, is to realize that ego-consciousness is only a wonderfully brilliant and truly mysterious function, not one's true identity; that enlightened consciousness, permanent or otherwise, is ALSO a function, in terms of human being; and that clinging to either aspects of human awareness is as delusional as the other. From personal experience, taking psychotropics for a "reason" reeks of spiritual materialism, relative to ego-aggradisement. But then again, you never know. As for permanent enlightenment, enlightenment just is. It has never moved. The point of spiritual accomplishment is in its subsequent application. Enlightenment is not a thing. An ancient admonishment for those with spiritual ambitions is to "see essence on your own, then seek a teacher." Moksha has a very good perspective on this aspect, as well as on that of suffering or affliction. Gautama buddha himself said that suffering was the very impetus for seeking liberation. Liberation from what? Liberation is not being subject to habit-consciousness. Open awareness is what, I believe flume was referring to when she commented on being permanently awake. I'm assuming her's was an attempt at levity. The truth is, stabilization of open consciousness is 24/7, and attaining such stability of awareness is a total immersion in enlightening potential. Sleep? You can sleep when you're dead, and you can dream when you're deluded. There are no dreams for the enlightened. The sleeping dreamworld is 24/7 for the most of us right now.. Moksha wrote: Don't forget, people, that awakening isn't a thing unto itself. Actually applying enlightenment to conditions is where refined psychological awareness has reverted to its original supportive role in effecting one's nonpsychological potential (enlightening activity) in the midst of delusional (karmic) evolution unbeknownst to anyone. There are no two minds. Mind is one. The two functions are seamless in terms of subtle spiritual adaption to conditions. ed note: add "when she commented on" in 7th paragraph; add last three sentences

The Conditions of a Solitary Bird these are the words of San Juan de la Cruz in his "Sayings of Light and Love" and quoted in "Tales of Power" by Carlos Castaneda. I definitely have difficulty with the "sings very softly" part~ heehee!! ed note: add last line

I lament having to admonish an adult male. It is suuuuch a drain, and an insult to this thread. I was awake last night wondering how I might entice mr Origins into contributing authentically~ but I'm just not the mothering type.

Dear Origins, this ain't my first rodeo~ The fact that I want you to address the OP shouldn't be an issue of obstinate pride on your part. You seem to be too much in a hurry to actually spell words correctly or even make sense. Let me quote just the last half of your last sentence: Pray tell, what is this all about? You know as well as I do that this much is nonsense (simply because your concern for your own content is on par with your concern for the OP's content. You don't want to respond to the OP because the little boy doesn't want to do the work. Instead of maintaining your tack of "picking and choosing", as if you were in a smorgasbord, only taking the easy way, it should be apparent that addressing the OP is the task at hand whether you like it or not. You have the wherewithal to do so. You have proven this in just the last bits of snarky response above. Please grow up, dear. Perhaps the issue has a lot more to do with a cultural prejudice fomented and stemming back 500 years on the part of England, the Netherlands and what became Germany on account of the strength of the Spanish Empire, which at the time, was a considerable adversary in terms of colonial expansion and and the pre-eminent economic powerhouse in terms of establishing and plying international trade. There is a current and fashionably thin volume called The Tree of Hate, which explores the continued prejudice against anything rooted in Spanish veracity. I hope your perspective and obstinacy toward a Spanish man of knowledge isn't a product of an ancient cultural war that would be best to put to rest.

You did not refer to any quote, dear. Please refer to the OP, which is the poem, not THAT, which is still unstated on your part. Join the process, don't just play from the sidelines.

Thank you for the contribution and follow-up, mr Origins~ yes it is pretty cool, after all, and you are too, but… How much did all that have in context with the OP? Free-wheeling through what you thought you read isn't cool.. However good your points may be, you completely misunderstand the context of "get rid of", so going off on tangents in terms of the aspects of conditioned perception illustrated by the conceptual aid you employed as the "lens", goes far afield. I can't believe you actually studied the poem to have come up with your long responses relative to someone else who also missed the point of the OP. Please make note: the issue is not a question of a quality of perceptive breadth, or a need for a compensatory action, it is the evidence of The StarGuitarist's failure to grasp the point of the 500 year old and famously conveyed message— or else he was too much in a hurry to actually articulate anything at all relevant to the topic, hence the graphic throw-away. It is essentially a cheap post. He's whining. WTF. TheStarGuitarist posted a cartoon that laments an ever present condition being loneliness. The Solitary Bird is a Master Class on the benefits of aloneness. Actually, it is a consice treatise which cuts through to the marrow on how to live one's life audaciously, in terms of accessing one's inherent potential. Obviously, in complaining about such an existential affliction, one can easily deduce that the author of the post didn't get the point of the poem in the first place, and that the complaint is obviously a priori, a persistent object of aversion. Therefore, it is beyond obvious that most people are of the mind to get rid of such afflictions. I did not bring up the idea of getting rid of even the object of aversion. I said to get rid of the source of the aversion— which is, the TheStarGuitarist's perspective based on habit-patterned conditioned awareness. Therefore loneliness, or even working with such affliction per se, has nothing to do with the content of the subject of this thread. This thread is about the message embedded in the poem, which is a study on enlightening activity. Please keep comments on-topic and avoid drifting off on unrelated tangents. Nothing on this thread pertains to therapeutic technique(s) nor those who need fixing. The subject is the OP. TheStarGuitarist's post is utterly off-topic in terms of the thrust of the teaching employed by San Juan de la Cruz in his The Solitary Bird because the post's content shows a complete ignorance of the obvious enlightening, uplifting, inspirational and self-empowering knowledge embedded in its few short lines. The purpose of the thread is to extoll the obvious enlightening, uplifting, inspirational and self-empowering knowledge embedded in its few short lines, and to provide a venue for relevant commentary on the specifics introduced in the poem. You did not even attempt that much, hence the expression of my displeasure in your off-topic post. The source of the off-topic lament is the cartoon's insinuation by way of the the self-importance of ego-consciousness masquerading as melancholy, or existential self-consciousness. THIS is what is to be gotten rid of. There is no need to employ a lens— one must completely forget to come up with such garbage in the first place, non? Whereas the ignorant are, for the most part, barely cognizant of the sources of such affliction in their conditioned self-conscious awareness— they only want the affliction to stay "under the radar" and are incapable of addressing the root issues involved in attaining conscious enlightening liberation. The deluded are such by virtue of their penchant for habitually responding only to the seeds of ever-recurring growths of habit-energies cloying the psychological apparatus of the being that is going to die. To be liberated, as such, would be as if stripped of one's imaginary role in life, which is attachment to appearances and following thoughts relative to ego-consciousness unawares. That's karmic bondage. Otherwise what is the point of SELF realization? To be stripped bare of such habits. Yes! Again, let's not use this thread as a point of departure relative to therapeutic fixes for the deluded. This is not a provisional teaching. Do you know? What's my point? There is such a thing as advance practice beyond the reach of most people on a grand scale. You did not address any aspect of that in your posts. There is nothing lacking in the way of life of a solitary bird. Period. That which is advocated in the lines of The Solitary Bird is for those who do not lament existential process. That would be those who have awakened to inherent enlightening being. Why? Because existential process is where reality is found. The Solitary Bird is for those who carry on without bothering about such trifles as lamenting that which is, ie: existential process. That which is worthy of minimization and refinement until it dies out completely is the conditioned human mentality that obscures the innate enlightening function of selfless spiritual adaption to WHAT IS. A lens of any manufacture or design that can render reality in terms of the viewer's perspective, regardless of its angle of view is a provisional adjunct. Why? Because ultimately, there is no inside or outside— no viewer or viewed; beyond self and other, where would there be a lens to employ? For the initiated, this is not a metaphor. What is left when one succeeds in the (never ending) process of self-refinement (in terms of sudden enlightenment when one's spiritual potential is released for the first time) is the nonoriginated mind-ground void of self. This is the absolute. Advance practice for those who have subsequently awakened to their innate enlightening potential relative to endless self-refinement, is impersonally harmonizing the all-at-once Absolute with the incremental quality of conditioned karmic evolution, ie: the Creative. Ultimately these two are not different (for buddhas). Harmonizing the light of awareness to delusional self-consciousness is a thing (not really). It's buddhahood. Actually, in terms of buddhahood's application, it is called the "middle way" or, the Supreme Vehicle of Buddhas (Buddhism did not invent this. I'm just using buddhist terminology.) So even though the "middle way" has its place in terms of provisional teaching, as does your contribution— ultimately, enlightening practice (selfless spiritual adaption) is not a personal endeavor relatively based on even conventional ideals. There is no "technique" employed, simply due to the fact that one does not do it. In other words, one does not rely on one's own power. Such potential is inherent in the situation itself. It's not the person. So there is absolutely nothing cool about it. I want you to reflect on this fact. It's NOT cool. Why? What this is, is everyday ordinary entry into inconceivability by having realized inherent enlightening being's impersonal potential as one's spiritual function in terms of adapting to endless karmic cycles of birth and death without being subject to the laws of (karmic) creation. There is no other creation. Creation, karma, eternity, endless cycles of yin and yang are all different names for the same delusional quality of existence. Those who are deluded within delusion are buddhas. Those who experience realization upon realization are the deluded. You might not understand that. If not, please feel free to PM me. We all have our part to work out in this seamless continuum. The process of clarifying the foundation of perceptive qualities may very well include aspects of your contribution to this thread, but your point of address relative to "getting rid of…" is perhaps irrelevant (to this thread) because the comment implying there is something to get rid of (the affliction — and more to the point, the implied complaint in the first place) has no basis in fact with the point of the OP. Let's raise our game, mr Origins! Presence is automatic impersonal adaption to what is, not off-topic interjections of pet theories, however relevant they may be, or actually are, to applications of general enlightening practice. Why? Because, for the initiated, the first four conditions epressed in the OP address fundamentals for practicing the Science of Essence, not the dual aspect of the Science of Life, which is only addressed in the last condition (singing softly). Both sciences of essence and life are specific to taoist spiritual alchemy, not unrelated to profound penetration of the teaching embedded in The Conditions of a Solitary Bird. All such study of works by prior illuminates are conducive to talismanic receptivity. This means that only those who can look back, as such, and see the sign-posts in reverse, as it were, are on the dusty path of authentic entry and penetration into the mystery. What's so cool about that? It's not cool, mr Origins, unless you see the reality, and you don't . You should see that reality isn't a matter of technique; it's just real, nothing more, nothing less. At any rate, the point you wished to address had more to do with a quality of perception which would be well to pursue in appropriate contexts and not much at all to do with the subject of this thread which is The Conditions of a Solitary Bird. Please try to keep comments limited to: a thorough understanding of who said what, what was said, and most importantly, please strive to employ contextual adherence with the actual topic, however well intentioned and well expressed they may otherwise be. Please feel free to address the OP as soon as you want to, but please keep your content on-topic. Please read and reflect on the poem itself. I welcome your good points and skillfully written content in the future— really!!❤︎ ed note: typo paragraph 9

Ajai! I'm so glad you stepped in and covered that pesky 4th condition with such lovely diction— and that your athlete friend benefitted from seeing the poem. We can thank mr San Juan de la Cruz! I had already written a few paragraphs on the 4th condition and wasn't satisfied with where it was going, so I just stopped writing and deleted it all. But I like how you expressed it much better. Yes~ as I mentioned in the OP, I don't do the sings softly part so well yet… heehee *❤︎* Perhaps the 5th condition is an admonishment to "rein it in". In other words, to practice circumspection in all this "flying to the highest point", "going it alone", keeping one's head in the clouds (beak to the skies), and maintaining and encompassing a planetary perspective (audaciously obviating myopic, selfish world-views), so as to maintain a balance and moderation in all things, in terms of both psychological and nonpsychological (spiritual) fields of awareness and application. Also, mr Cruz probably had benefactors and hierarchical superiors to acknowledge, no doubt, so the last line might be a reminder to himself and the reader of the necessity and advantages that humility enables in the grand scheme of things. ed note: add 2nd sentence about St. John of the Cross; add "with" in 3rd line; add last two paragraphs re: 5th condition

Merciiiii, ajai— yes, I have been a fan of this poem for many years. Once, I wrote the poem over and over by hand, just so I would better remember the solitary bird's five conditions~ but that was a long time ago. I'm glad I posted it here on this occasion. mr Guitarist~ you aren't the one who wears a trench-coat are you? heehee!! —just kidding mon ami. And what are your favorite amps and effects? But more to the point of this thread… The conditions of a solitary bird are five: The first, that it flies to the highest point; The second, that it does not suffer for company, not even of its own kind; The third, that it aims its beak to the skies; The fourth, that it does not have a definite color; The fifth, that it sings very softly. This poem by San Juan de la Cruz (15th century, I believe) isn't a lament, nor does it allude to self-reifying existential issues specifically, especially those that would pertain to general malaise or else a shallow-minded, undisciplined or nonchalant approach to living one's life. A saint wrote these lines, after all. The man is radiating a perspective of audacity and un-compromised temerity with a sense of expression grounded in profound sensitivity. This is spiritual, enlightening prose, not a pity-party. As far as the concern for "getting rid" of something or, in the case of the cartoon, a perpetually recurring state of what amounts to an ever-looming melancholy …well, this is just the whole point of Saint John of the Cross' poem for a touch-stone of solitude in an authentic foundation for one's life. Melancholy is something ego hides behind. It's one of ego's many disguises. Melancholy is just a cynically disguised mode of self-importance. Get rid of THAT, and the more positive attributes of a healthy psychology are naturally more accessible! As for the first condition of a solitary bird, why fly at all, if one is not willing to fly to the highest point. If only just for the hell of it? In not suffering for company, this is de rigueur for anyone, ANYONE, with the audacity to do what is necessary to accomplish ANYTHING worthy of one's responsibility to one's own living potential. If one isn't willing to cut the social-media umbilical cord, one will never know what could have been realized by one's efforts in terms of self-actualization. If others aren't curious enough or otherwise willing to expend even relative effort to know or understand what you are willing to give up to accomplish anything worthy of note— those people aren't worthy of your attention anyway. As for not suffering the company of one's own kind, well that directly addresses the fourth condition of a solitary bird, which is that such a one does not have a definite color. In that case, what, pray tell, would be one's own kind, hmmmm? The answer, of course, is that one does not have one's own kind. We are inconceivable beings, after all. To tell the truth, I have always had a problem with San Juan's third condition, because I've not actually stopped to note how it could be different than the first condition, which is that one flies to the highest point. Let's see …perhaps it is just that one's unbending intent must be always subtly concentrated on having the tendency, the proclivity, the inclination and the wonder to always look higher— without harboring vestiges of opportunistic or grim striving simply to reach the highest point one is aware of in an acquisitive, mercenary or spiritually materialistic fashion. Rather, one's perspective is optimally to be planetary; encompassing and resting on a sensitive acquiescence and grace in virtuous receptivity. This receptive perspective is a result of open sincerity, of just resting in sincere openness as a matter of course. In that the solitary bird aims its beak to he skies, it obviously doesn't refer to a manic neurosis that some people suffer in terms of blind careerist ambitions, because San Juan de la Cruz seems to have been a profound contemplative as evidenced by the obvious beauty and sensitivity borne by the writing style and deeply considerate content his published works have exhibited for some five hundred years. Up until now, having just written this, I had never assumed what the third condition might be referring to, and now I do! ed note: tweak penultimate paragraph

I will follow up quickly to confirm that just this type of psychologically relational aspect is exhibited appropriately in ordinary enlightening BDSM scenes as well, simply because one's adaption to conditioned circumstances is the natural course regardless of situational characteristics. Quoting the last sentence of the commentary: "Preordained" is a relative term alluding to prior illumination of the psychological apparatus of the being that is going to die. Where the the rational function of conscious knowledge is subject to gradual refinement by concentration and insight, one's "prior illumination" is inversely effective to the degree one has dispensed with pattern-consciousness in meeting the demands of everyday ordinary situations. In other words, as one's gradual self-refinement results in less pattern-consciousness arising as psychological impacts (in the face of karmic stimulus), to that degree, conscious knowledge is subsumed as real illumination (objective, impersonal knowledge of accord in reality), which must naturally be "prior" to be an actualized functionality in terms of spiritually adaptive enlightening activity. The preceding paragraph is a long-winded description of psychological (rational) activity and nonpsychological (spiritual) efficacy transforming in seamless accord due to gradual practice entering reality. The reason accord is seamless is because mind is one. Delusion and enlightenment are the same mind. Delusion is all there is to work with in terms of Creation. There is no other mind. There is no other enlightenment. Enlightenment is seeing reality without habitual psychological reference to the person. Self-reifying consciousness sees the same reality, but its perspective is delusional, and therefore karmically bound to the being that sees the person as "having" absolute identity, in terms of individual conscious projections. It's not that individual conscious projection doesn't exist, if that's what the person is habituated to. If a person doesn't know that there is no such person in reality (in terms of absolute nature), karma is the result and delusion is the norm. Enlightening being's function perceiving essence (potential) void of personal identity, obviously isn't the person, whereas the psychological apparatus is the person's conditioned function. Both functions are accessible and naturally balanced without habitual pattern-consciousness in those who have recognized the basic sanity all beings are born with. Self-refinement is the endless gradual path recognizing and actualizing inherent enlightening qualities by virtue of the sane energy people are born with. As such, entry into inconceivable reality is fathomless; mystery upon mystery. ed note: typo; add quote and following three paragraphs

Bondage, Discipline, Dominance, Submission, Sadism, Masochism. Six empty names, yet even those who don't dare to explore them are already entangled in their traces. Unknowing, they practice every aspect; going along without a thought of the end of their actions. How is it different for those who see through such phenomena without denying phenomenal characteristics while in their midst? How is it different for those who imagine rejection and abhorrence of the thought of exploring such phenomena? Willing victims; reluctant predators… it's mutual accord by subtle adaption. Who would understand consent without first acknowledging wonder? Presence of independent means and natural urgency guide one’s healthy and effective gratification of intent in the course of situational evolution. Serving the integrity of one’s subtle potential underlies the timing and rate of advance and withdrawal in mutual exchanges of personality dynamics. The consensual repose of dominance toward the submissive is the device employed by independent means and natural urgency to effect the balance of one’s intent in meeting the measure of power inherent in creative cycles. So in harmonizing integral mutual situational potential, dominance is expressed in accord with submissive intent by adaptivity to the creative. Situational dynamics of advance and withdrawal influencing the timing and rates of exchange defining the situation decide the balance of potency and decline throughout the natural cycle of its transformative exigencies. It is possible by mutual accord in reality that the submissive exacts its release if virtuously exerted dominance absorbs their factors of potential.

I wouldn't dare to try to fool anyone. ❤︎ ed note: delete 1st sentence

The OP concluded with: The whole premise for this thread is in these lines. The following is a line by line commentary of the seminal text: Presence of independent means and natural urgency guide one’s healthy and effective gratification of intent in the course of situational evolution. The first line seems to me to be clearly self-evident. This is the very picture of sane activity in the course of everyday ordinary intercourse. Serving the integrity of one’s subtle potential underlies the timing and rate of advance and withdrawal in mutual exchanges of personality dynamics. The second line gets a bit deeper in that one's rational function must naturally be preordained in terms of its adherence to the integrity of one's subtle potential. It is, actually, but due to conditioning, this means the individual must become subtly aware of potential, a priori, in order to respond appropriately in terms of seeing situational timing objectively, without bias or inclination, in advancing and withdrawing attention according to relationship dynamics. Serving the integrity of (one's) potential has nothing to do with personal gratification. One doesn't own potential. Potential is not relative to the person. It is one's very situational milieu of being. Yet potential is not beholden to either the creative nor the absolute, as potential is the working essence of their non-differentiation. Gratification of mutual exchanges in terms of personality dynamics, per se, is relative to the situational potential based on reality, not the person. "The person" is relative to self and other, which is properly a variable expression of potential (karmic, if you will), and is therefore not beyond the created aspect. Potential is not created. Potential is the essence of the primal organization before the dichotomy of the two things (duality) before they fall into the creative sphere, yet comprising the the sphere of reality, which is neither creation nor absolute. This introduces the buddhist and taoist terms, Suchness and Complete Reality. The consensual repose of dominance toward the submissive is the device employed by independent means and natural urgency to effect the balance of one’s intent in meeting the measure of power inherent in creative cycles. This line illustrates one's enlightening function inherent in one's created dual nature in terms of relative situational rank. In terms of the person, this is called Sameness within Differentiation. Relative difference is not absolute. In terms of potential, relative difference simply is— it has no intrinsic value outside of conventional modes of karmic activity. Enlightening response operates transcendentally beyond convention (not that anyone might notice). The balance of one's intent is what drives enlightening activity, which is the sane energy you were born with. Just this is impersonal accord with reality. Again, this is not a reference to personal gratification. Consensual repose of dominance toward the submissive is simply the representation of undifferentiated flux, ever-adjusting and spontaneously balancing in pure equipoise. Consensual repose being the device employed by independent means and natural urgency is selflessly adaptive response in mutual accord. The measure of power inherent in creative cycles refers to being able to see reality, that is, potential, which is the essence of creation transcendently inherent in endless karmic cycles of birth and death. So in harmonizing integral mutual situational potential, dominance is expressed in accord with submissive intent by adaptivity to the creative. This line recaps the aspect of one's inherent enlightening function in terms of impersonal subtle spiritual adaption to karmic evolution. This is "meeting creation with potential" without relying on one's personal power. "One's personal power" refers to psychologically reified pattern-consciousness projecting desire, craving, aggression, and in general, a tendency to assume ascendancy over others as a matter of course. Situational dynamics of advance and withdrawal influencing the timing and rates of exchange defining the situation decide the balance of potency and decline throughout the natural cycle of its transformative exigencies. This is "finding out what happened in the end." As per one's selfless adaptivity meeting the creative in terms of its karmic momentum by virtue of advancing illumination in the beginning of yang and withdrawing its potential in the yin convergence, whereby the full expression of each created cycle is allowed to flourish and decline naturally without compulsive behavior (on one's part) influencing outcomes. Otherwise, how would one find out what happened in terms of potential? It is possible by mutual accord in reality that the submissive exacts its release if virtuously exerted dominance absorbs their factors of potential. In transcending endless cycles of yin and yang, unrefined potential is absorbed as a matter of course without effort or coercion. How would one even begin to do so? Doing so is the norm for karmically bound psychological momentum (action in thought, deed and unconscious adherence to creation) by ordinary people's pattern-consciousness. It is by not conceiving self-referencing (relative) adherence to creation that one accords with the real while in the midst of conditioned karmic momentum. The submissive, in this context, is created situationally karmic (conditioned) energy in its naturally responsive accord with real knowledge (knowledge of potential), in which dominance (nonpsychological awareness), is advanced, in terms of gradual practice. As I have said often enough, seeing is itself the transformative agency. Seeing is itself "advancing" the fire in terms of the alchemic operation. Spiritual alchemy is not accomplished in any strict sense of doing. When adepts see potential, they see it as essence. Essence is the nature of karmic energy; not difference. Ordinary people see karma as differentiated energy, which is why ordinary people are subject to birth and death. In seeing karma as essence, one does not go along with creation and transcends its rounds of birth and death. Ordinary people see energy, whereas alchemists see potential. Seeing potential "frees" it from its situational karmic matrix, in that enlightening beings don't do anything with potential— much less karmic energy. This goes back to the beginning of this section, where "one's (refined) rational function (conscious knowledge) must naturally be preordained in terms of its adherence to the integrity of one's subtle potential" (real knowledge). ed note: add line below quoted text; typo 3rd paragraph; radically change last paragraph

The lovely Mlle. Poison Ivy of the Cramps ed note: add the 3rd image

S'body wrote: Oh yes, people are quite capable of making anything a lifestyle! Just so you know, It is actually very possible that I probably haven't even had sex since before your birth. After having the kinds of spiritual (nonpsychological) experience(s) that I have, a sexual identity is so insignificant to me that I just tend to connect directly with people without (my) sexuality being a barrier (to me). Not that there isn't more or less sexual tension on account of its interpersonally relative potential (at the cusp of falling into the creative sphere) to host ridiculously pathetic decades-long situational "relationship" scenarios. Ok, well those two are Scorpios… haha. No one is spared, not even buddhas. People are relentless. I like sexuality, I just don't pursue it for grasping when standard procedure entertains all manner of subterfuge. Wouldn't it be lovely if we could just be natural? But Noo00oo···········!!!! hahahahhahaha!! My domain is whatever is apropos. As far as its origins go (pertaining to my own kink), it was just a long gradual process. People had long assumed as such in certain social proximities, and that never did pose any problems for me as far as I was concerned. What really "helped" was my years-long obsession with the Cramps, an insanely unrepentant and un-inhibited music act of thirty years' duration, originally spawned in the mid 70s NYC punk scene with a decidedly quirky Rockabilly bent. Their first EP was actually recorded at the Sun studio in Memphis, where Sam Phillips had recorded Elvis' first hits with Scotty Moore and Bill Black. Sun Records is the birthplace of Rock and Roll, whose Mystery Train rode the two tracks of negro Blues and white Country music right through the Grand ole Opry while tearing up polite Southern Culture forever. Back in those days, the unsightly violence of drumming required that drummers actually be behind the curtain while performing with bands onstage for proper genteel society. Sick!! At any rate, The Cramps is all it took to affect my deviant sensibilities in the end. Some of their song titles include: What's Inside a Girl, Queen of Pain, Devil Behind that Bush, Hot Pearl Snatch, How Far Can Too Far Go, Can Your Pussy Do the Dog?, Like a Bad Girl Should, Wet Nightmare, etc. Poison Ivy, the guitarist for the band, which was a veritable gang of juvenile delinquents unto itself, modeled herself after her femme heroes, the strippers of the 40s, 50s and 60s. I only discovered the Cramps after seeing a black and white picture of Ivy with her big Gretsch electric guitar on stage and obviously playing it for real while wearing a micro-mini sequin skirt with bangles for a top, outrageous hair and little pointy boots. I had to find out who that was. So yeah, I came out on account of the Cramps❤︎❤︎ I am the organized place of BDSM service. I don't go anywhere, it comes and goes with me~ heehee!! Oh, the good way to find out about it (in the conventional sense with all the fetish and stylistic protocols) are the various events happening in any urban center with a healthy Leather scene. But that isn't my scene. I'm glad it's there, because the various accoutrement would not be so easily accessible nor so high in quality (if that is one's prerogative). Of course, online is the sensible recourse, if the outrè scene is too much to bear. I never bothered with that, as my scene is all that's going to matter to my client when this dom's train rolls over her coals. hahahahhahhaaaaa!!! So, to answer the question, the scene, such as it is, isn't "out there" somewhere, it's an absolute presence, as opposed to whatever "intimate" generally denotes. Of course, it's that too, especially afterwards. The aftermath of any scene is très important. In other news, as in most of my writing, which is to make accessible (relatively speaking), what is necessary to express the native presence of being in the midst of scattered conditional psychologies at variance, is to make the point that the created aspect, as such, is a veritable dead-end and that one ought to look into the potential of abiding in the essence of creation itself, instead. Instead of what? Instead of following the creative's self-reified relative tangential spinoffs belying the personality's identity issues, which are ultimately able to be dispensed with, in terms of their habitual expression. One cannot be other that who they are becoming. It's just the way it is, in that people are self and otherwise identified as the person's personality. It is also just the way it is, in that one's essential nature is uncreated, selfless awareness. The work of clarifying the relative to allow the expression of the absolute is called the self-refinement of enlightening qualities. Such enlightening qualities are innate. Clarifying the relative conditional aspect of Mind to allow its primordial essential nature to radiate spontaneously is the point of authentic teaching, in that there are no two minds. The totality of reality is undifferentiated unified awareness. Such is the quality of Awake. It's not a thing. There is no thing. Creation and enlightenment are not different in terms of essence. The worldly illusion simply isn't a problem to solve, nor is it something to somehow excise for the sake of "progress." I'm sorry, but shallow social movements and extremist political activism is a sham~ too bad the followers of power-playing social engineers don't know it. It is muuuch more effective (and difficult) for one to do the work of self-refinement. Why are the angry disillusioned in denial so many, and the prior illumined evidently so few? It is because many are the collectively lazy and so few are the inconceivably audacious. In terms of functioning as a dominatrix, I am using the basic power-transfer I mentioned in the thread's OP to access its therapeutic benefit for those whose personality-type can afford to rest. It's a method to facilitate the resetting of one's particular habit-pattern of psychological imbalance. The protocols are fundamentally important and have developed over millennia— social cast-offs and fringe-cults didn't invent it~ some just tend to over-identify as parodies of themselves per their fringe-lifestyle's demands; some more and some less. I don't identify with or project as a proponent of BDSM. It is just a potential beneficially effective tool (in the right hands), that I have long-approached before gradually and naturally finding a fit for its expression in my practice which is expressed as organic service. No one knows. It's a subtle thing I have come to own. Being a dom is not dependent on one's wardrobe, equipment, or even the sub/client. Its capacity is in confidence, one's own, without peer. It is a naturalness no one needs to know. My initial post was made to point out that even "normal" people exhibit these "egregious" propensities unconsciously. I have two warnings from the moderator Forestluv about being a troll(?), "gas-lighter" and a provocateur and two other things he dreamed up on account of my dismissive response to his brutal off-topic pirating of a thread I started which he justified by his claim of being a meditation expert of 20 years. Yawn. So there is a bit of that kind of sneaky reverse-sensationalism in my delivery used to cut through people's preconceptions about certain subjects. Paradox is actually one of the most characteristic elements of the ancient taoist teaching methods. Those who are familiar with the writing of Chuang Tzu will know what I'm talking about. Oh yes (getting back to BDSM), I have seen those "suction tables" too. OMG!! hahaa~ I'm very primitive in my appliction of bondage and discipline. I worked on location my whole still/motion-photography career, so my approach is minimalistic. I use a couple of 13 foot tall Rocky Mountain Beefy Baby grip/lighting stands and light-weight inter-connecting aluminum tubes from my days in fashion photography, to suspend arms, legs and such protuberant extremities (or that which I want protuberant), but I don't employ full-body suspension (unless the client has the infrastructure to support it). I use specific types of rope with weight ratings for that purpose. I bring my own collection of hemp, silk and synthetic ropes, pulleys, whips, canes, cuffs, gags, plugs, feather boas, nipple-clips, etc. Actually, the "restraint" part is up to the client— per their need to feel restricted. I'm happy working with their cooperative approach to the "discipline" aspect. As a whole, it's all a negotiable continuum— the limit of the limitless (an ancient taoist term), is the space within which I am wont to take my prisoners to town. I hope you will find a way to introduce yourself in a safe and sane manner to the potential that BDSM has to offer without going off on some dubious tangent~ but, hey, the adventure doesn't start until you fcuk up, non? Take care, mon ami. Be innocently curious and don't be afraid to wander in that general direction. You seem to have a proficient and freely expressed vocabulary in describing the scenarios you would consider. How wonderful! Do maintain a degree of circumspection in your exploration and be honest with whoever you would like to know about your interest in kink, as you have afforded me. It really isn't about sex, per se. And that's a refreshing aspect to explore about the various aspects of BDSM. ed note: add "Ok, well those two are Scorpios… haha" in 2nd paragraph; add "…of thirty years' duration, originally spawned…" in 3rd paragraph; tweak 4th and 5th paragraphs; add "belying" in 6th

4mm hemp; use 1 ounce to control the tongue, and the whole body follows along willingly. ed note: add ";…"