How do I discover the truth for myself? What is compassion?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Barry Richman,
Berkeley, California
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dear Peter Ralston,
Here are two questions:
1. You have said you facilitate others discovering truth for themselves. However, if there is such a thing as delusion, or whatever word we might use to express a false experience as the truth, how can I distinguish between delusion and truth? (In the case of physical experience, it seems relatively simple. If I am certain I can fly through the air like a bird, I might easily persuade myself otherwise by jumping off a cliff. On the other hand, that might just be a rapidly terminated experience of flying. Ontologically, I have trouble coming up with a good test. Especially since we know that in contemplation intensives, for example, we generate some very compelling delusions to avoid whatever it is wants avoiding. So how about a little guidance in distinguishing truth from delusion.)

2. Does compassion have a place in your teaching? If so what is its place? If not, why not? Without making the slightest claim that I'm capable of it, I'll define compassion as an authentic caring for every other thing than myself that exists. Maybe myself too.
Barry


Barry,
1. Discerning between true and false is never an easy task, especially when we look for absolutes. One significant obstacle, however, is to stand behind the argument that we do not or cannot know the truth, and so make no movement in any direction at all. This, I believe, is a mistake. It is useful to make the distinction of "direction" and move in the direction of what's true as far as is discernible.
Call an apple an apple. If you're lying about something, stop. If you can speak more honestly, do. Admit when something is just a belief rather than actual experience. Practices such as these move us so far from where we would otherwise be, the question of absolute truth can become a silly abstraction. Regarding absolutes, we need to understand that we do not know what they are, and yet we must still remain open to the possibility of experiencing what they are.

In considering what is true, one danger is familiarity. We have so much background and dogma built up, upon which assumptions abound, that we reflexively call something true simply because it is familiar and has been accepted as true. (For example, it is widely accepted that the use of muscular strength is the only way to physical power, but Cheng Hsin contradicts that notion.)

Looking to our feelings to distinguish "true" may or may not be an accurate test either. It all depends on what bases the feeling. Rationality, common sense, perceptive sensitivity, can all be useful to create a starting point to discern true from false. But they can also fail us. We must continually investigate, digging up assumptions. Separating from personal bias, value or threat is always a good idea and usually furthers our efforts to make distinctions in what is true and what is not. If none of this works to clarify what's true, then I guess the question must remain open.

On the other hand, in some cases it's not a matter of something being "true" or "not true," it is a matter ofmaking a decision or taking a stand.

Lastly, sometimes the truth is simply "I don't know." This is not a defect or sign of disrepair, it is the truth.

2. Regarding your question about compassion:
I think the place to start is your definition. It may be an "ideal" or ultimate description of compassion, but it might be too selfless and too absolute for being a useful distinction. If, on the other hand, compassion shows up as a genuine commitment to another's welfare or growth (perhaps"empowerment") then to answer your question, yes. Notice how the word "commitment" implies action, not merely a wish or feelings of empathy. Without action, the sentiment of compassion is rather useless to others, isn't it? Can it be called compassion when one sits by and merely desires good things for others or simply feels sad when others fail to make realwhat's empowering for them? Am I suggesting that we make the personal growth of every other being our business, or be arrogant enough to think we know what's good for others? Not really. But when appropriate or requested, perhaps a practical compassion is to take action in relation to another'sempowerment. This is a constant principle within the Cheng Hsin work.

Peter Ralston

Attend a Seminar
More Info

Mastery and Ego

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

Glenn Smith 

Auckland, New Zealand 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

Hi Peter, 

Something I have been intrigued by in the last few months is the apparent contradiction I feel between being brutally honest and wanting to be good at certain things. The latest Cheng Hsin newsletter has brought it up again for me - by the way I laughed out loud when you talked about being a master egg poacher. 

To be brutally honest, what set me off on a conscious path of personal growth 4 years ago was a frustration at wanting to be able to attract and bring beautiful women into my life at will. I wanted to feel powerful. I wanted the ego boost that "skill" would bring me. I wanted to ensure I wouldn't be alone. I was frustrated at thinking most other people had things that I didn't. All the usual stuff, which I am sure you have seen umpteen times before.

Now for my agony: how does one reconcile pursuing mastery or even simply up skilling when the motivation for that appears to come from the ego?

For example -- let's say you Peter had events in your childhood that forced you to one day as a teenager say I want to be a black belt and more, but the motivation came from wanting to be respected and to fill a void you felt inside. Or say for your world title -- I understand the motivation for that was to get the respect needed to have people take notice when you wanted to teach what you had discovered for yourself -- but let's say you wanted the title for egotistical reasons. You may have wanted it to feel important and thought it would bring you self esteem etc. It seems to me at this stage, the place a person is coming from is important, not just the pursuit of mastery but the reasons the pursuit is taking place. Because for now anything I want to be good at has a lot of ego attached to it for me. Even pursuing what is real has ego motivation behind it for me at times. Although other times there is genuine curiosity. 

Have I explained that clearly enough? Let me know if I could expand.

Glenn 

Glenn, 

Obtaining mastery in some area doesn't mean that the whole person is changed. Usually the whole person is at least influenced, since it requires a large shift in so many ways. Someone can become very adept or masterful at something (playing the horn, a martial art, billiards), but this doesn't mean that ego has gone at all, or that they have fundamentally changed as a person. If the mastery is about mastering some aspect of themselves, for example, becoming conscious of what emotions are and mastering them so that they are no longer an unconscious force that runs daily life (which they always are) then some very central aspect of that person will no longer be the same and therefore they will be as if a different 

person. 

The motives for achieving mastery aren't all that important as far as I can tell, since the original motive, or at least the outlook and perspective one has to begin with, is likely to change as you progress. When it doesn't, people usually quit. What seems to have to happen is your "goal" or motive for achieving mastery has to change as you grow. The perceived reality you are working with will change and so the original goal becomes obsolete within the new reality. Often people get bogged down in some fixed perspective and seem to plateau, they don't appear to be progressing any longer in mind or body. This is when most people who were serious to begin with will quit. Those that go on, find a way to make a breakthrough, and then recreate their goals to match what is now apparent. 

I guess the short version is, it just doesn't matter. Just master it. If you want to overcome the ego, you need to master the ego. Mastering something else may change the ego somewhat, and alter your presentation and self-concept, but not as much as you might think. The change is rather superficial, unless you master your self and that is very hard. In any case, the experience of mastery is worth it no matter what is achieved. No matter how you cut it, it's about your experience of self and life. 

Strangely, my motivation for doing the world tournament had little to do with fame and such, since for some reason I was already quite sure of my abilities and understanding. I didn't need to prove it to anyone, it was already so for me. But I did want others to recognize it, and didn't mind getting some acknowledgment for myself. We should be clear that an achievement doesn't mean all that much about the person doing it. It only means they can do it. What the person's motives are, etc., will determine in their mind what it is they have achieved. It is self-referential. No matter what someone does, their experience of it will make it what it is for them -- they can't get outside themselves. So achievement doesn't really change anything. It only makes a point, demonstrates some ability or understanding. 

Since mastery requires that a person surrender his or her personal bias in some matter, it also requires a significant change in the person. They can no longer have things their way, their opinions don't matter, how they want things to be is irrelevant, etc. They must get what is true in some area, and surrender to that. It can be simple or complex, superficial or deep, but the direction is the same. That's why we call it mastery -- a "true" understanding, or "real" relationship is established with some aspect of life, and this can be demonstrated. 

The main thing you should hear is this: No matter what your beginning motives, in order to stay on track you will need to change them as you continue down the road toward mastery. They must reflect each new level of your newly evolving understanding. As far as I can tell, this isn't a daily thing, more like every few years or so. After significant progress has been made, a new relationship to your pursuit will confront you. At this point you may lose interest, or feel like you can't get any better, or you stop caring about that pursuit anymore, or find your motive is no longer applicable -- like you see the pursuit isn't going to work for what you wanted. Such things will either stop you (as it does most people) or you will change the

purpose for your pursuit. 

I suspect this is a bit more of a reply than you expected, but I intend to use it in the next newsletter since I think others would also benefit. 

Hope this helps some.

Peter 

Attend a Seminar
More Info

Enlightenment and Internal Martial Arts

~~~~~~~~ 

Jan Bloem 

Holland 

~~~~~~~~

Dear Peter Ralston, 

In the world of the internal martial arts I see people being busy trying to reach some kind of spiritual enlightenment. I have the impression that most of this group of people skip some very important developmental stages.

I think when you want to reach the stage of internal power and enlightenment, you have to work through three stages: You must confront yourself with 'animal like instincts'. You must fight. After that you come to a stage of reflection (human). And after that there is the stage of confronting yourself with concepts like 'emptiness'. I think when you start at the last stage, you will never reach the full monty. Because of one reason or the other, most people are not willing to go through the three stages, but start direct at where they should end.

Do you agree with this?

Jan 

Jan, 

I do respect the sentiment that much too much "spiritual" fantasizing takes place within certain spheres of internal martial arts. "Consciousness" work and martial work are not the same, nor do they necessarily find each other. Studying the internal martial arts DOES NOT lead to spiritual awakening. 

In the physical world and in the world of mind, structure exists and process occurs. Here we can speak of stages or processes, but when it comes to Consciousness itself, no such process can be defined. It is true that certain things cannot be bypassed, but it is not a linear process as you indicate (one and then another). Insight and breakthrough occur when they do. This may be related to intention, or readiness, or openness, or perhaps grace, but it does not occur as a cause and effect that can be produced by following a formula or set of rules. As is the case with all such matters, people are prone to think of "reality" as if it is some way (and it isn't really), and more to the point, that we, with our incredibly limited awareness, know or can imagine what this might be (we can't). I think the most important aspect in such things is honesty, and getting past the fantasies that surround all such work, regardless of where one 

starts or what their interests. 

I do agree, however, that the basic primal nature of being human should not be overlooked or bypassed. It is more than likely exactly where we need to look if a grounded understanding of our own being is the goal. 

One more thing, "emptiness" is not a concept. Certainly we would start with the concept -- our discussion right now is conceptual. But this can be done without any direct experience. A real experience of such matters is a real experience of such matters, the concept is unimportant. Absolutes such as Emptiness or Nothing are beyond concept. We may play around or even seriously consider ideas about such matters but the idea in no way can match the experience. 

I hope this is helpful. Thanks for bringing it up for us to look at. 

Peter 

Attend a Seminar
More Info

Incorporating Cheng Hsin Principles into daily life

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Nick Favicchio
Plattsburgh, New York
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Peter,
Since I became interested in Cheng Hsin and started to incorporate its ideas and principles into my life, one problem has always troubled me. I've long tried to keep the five principles in mind,
incorporate them into all aspects of life, to feel and experience their reality... it has always felt "right" or where I wanted to be. Yet without fail, when I feel most into these things, I feel like I've abandoned
something else, other ideas, ways of thinking, of being, the paradigms that usually govern my life despite the fact that they do not bring me to where I'd like to be. I can't chalk this up to fear of change... I feel like I'm losing myself. Am I afraid to not exist? This doesn't feel true either. I've worked on this for so long and I don't feel like I've picked up any traction... its always been there. I move closer to "being" and something draws me back, it slips away. Any thoughts or ideas are appreciated.
Nick Favicchio

Nick,
People rarely appreciate the power of the five principles. I have said that if you really took on completely being in the principles 24 hours a day for two or three weeks, your reality would appear drastically different! Likely you'd be overwhelmed by it all. I can appreciate your challenge. Perhaps what you've abandoned isn't really worth hanging onto, but it is familiar, and more importantly it is "you" -- or what you have learned to identify with as key aspects of yourself. Don't underestimate the fear of not existing, it may not come as you imagine and it is not just an idea. You may not be afraid of the idea, yet when the familiar begins to be threatened, notice you all slip back into it. The mind is stronger than your mere thinking, or your cognized desires and ideas. Try not being in the familiar for longer than usual, see what happens. Perhaps over time the new way of being will become increasingly familiar and you can begin to identify yourself with that. Still something will be missing, something your self-mind holds is very important. Can you discover what that is?
Good luck,
Peter

Attend a Seminar
More Info

Mastery and Life

~~~~~~~~~~~~
James Beale
Bristol, England
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hello Peter,
I was watching a program last night which was criticizing the growing number of c-list celebrities in Britain who are famous for being famous. Kind of an easy shot to take, I know, but these people (big
brother contestants, glamour models and so on) were presented in contrast to some people who had reached the top of their profession. Most of these were in the entertainment industry, some were sports men and women.
It made me think of something you said (or wrote in the anthology, I think) about mastering things.
The gist of it was, I think, that it asked when was the reader going to choose to master something, and really, what else was there to do? I can see in some of the people I know a drive to be the best at various things, but I have never been really interested in achieving mastery of anything. I have always wanted to be pretty good, and that's enough. In fact, I have said before that my biggest complaint with life is that it takes too long to get good at anything. But this leaves me now with the impression that I am missing something. I am trying to work out what it is that makes the difference.
Of course there are countless people who attempt to be the best and fail, and I am not wondering how to become good at something. I am wondering what it is that creates that drive. You said the best
way to get good at something is to be obsessed by it, but you also said that an alternative was to be extremely disciplined. So obsession is not something which discipline instills, but something else. I think perhaps I would like to avoid being the best at a thing which would invite jealousy and competition. I know I can work hard at things when I am motivated to do so. I don't think obsession is of the same nature as inspiration. I would like to know what you think.
James

James,
Sounds like you are afraid of something. You say you want to avoid jealously and competition. Sounds good on the surface. Who wants those things? But what are you afraid of? Perhaps that is a place to investigate, or master. You could master egg poaching for all it matters. The point is to do something for yourself and also beyond yourself, something that draws your relationship to life out into its true nature. What it is hardly matters. And if you "master" something, of course it's possible that others may be jealous or compete, but you don't have to evoke either. You could master your own mind, perhaps starting with this thing you are afraid of.
When I said be disciplined or get obsessed, I meant that when you are obsessed with something,
whole heartedly into it, curious about it, pursuing it with the burning desire or single-minded intent to get to the truth of it, a sort of natural discipline arises. It isn't really discipline, since there is no application of a discipline, but what needs to get done gets done as a result of the obsession to know or achieve or discover. If you lack the motivation of obsession, but still want to achieving mastery, or want to know the truth of some matter, or want to pursue any new course of action that is not already occurring for you, then you must apply a disciplined application of regular inquiry or practice. Discipline is pursuing a possibility outside of what already befalls you. Either discipline or obsession can move you forward in some pursuit. Just remember, the pursuit itself should be rewarding, not just the final goal. So go poach an egg.
Good luck.
Peter

Attend a Seminar
More Info

Where is the Master made a student?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Michael Renovich
Devon, England
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dear Peter,
My first query pertains to the relationship between the student and teacher within yourself:
In your position, how do you manage to preserve "beginners mind?" Where is the place "you" are humbled? Is there really nothing worth learning from Eastern arts and Healing techniques that you implied were really nothing more than just made up by somebody? (Spring Newsletter). Could you not benefit from a living teacher or contemporary or tradition? Or does direct experience itself eventually become the teacher?
Secondly:
I am aware of the view that tradition is merely a representation, static, not the dynamic force, the
source. However traditions, arts, techniques help reveal that source. No matter how unique, isn't that the same thing Cheng Hsin does? Or would Cheng Hsin translate as simply direct experience? Even so
there are techniques of Cheng Hsin involved in eliciting this experience. Wouldn't that technically make it a tradition (only less traditional)?
Michael

Michael,
It's hard to answer easily. But I'll start by saying that I have no problem being humbled by the very art and source of Cheng Hsin. Simply contemplating reality is humbling, and I have no problem finding"beginner's" mind all over the place. Is there something yet to learn? Yes. But what I learn will likely not come from Eastern arts or any of the traditions. Of course, I do learn from others, and this is usually in the form of free thinking and creative people discovering for themselves something that they share. I have studied many traditions for over four decades, and more than that, I have investigated what is true beyond and independent of any hearsay. I've also trained hard for decades to achieve a mastery in the things I've discovered and to prove or disprove for myself -- in an experiential way beyond mere opinion or belief -- what is true about other people's contributions, including the traditions.
I am always glad to have someone understand what I understand and experience what I experience. But in essentially every case, this only occurs as a function of teaching them.
All "arts and traditions" are only -- and will always and only be -- made up by somebody. This is simply so. Where else would they come from? A stone won't do it and the trees don't care. We might think that some such invention is somehow produced by nature itself, or by a divine source. But regardless of the inspiration or intent of a system of beliefs, it is only what some human or humans have invented.
You do lean closer to my situation, however, when you ask if direct experience becomes the teacher. It is and always has been. There is no substitute for a skillful facilitator to help in attaining insight, or
understanding principles, mastering techniques, or even having enlightenment experiences. But the facilitator can't do it for you in any case. It always comes down to one's own experience. And to tell you the truth I find no one that I am interested in studying with, or who has anything to share that truly interests me. The good news is that, at this point in my life and studies, it is unnecessary. I learn and grow simply through my own work, which is immense and continues to impress me. The commitment of Cheng Hsin is not to any belief or hearsay, but to a direct and clear consciousness of the truth. This is plenty to keep anyone busy.
Peter

Attend a Seminar
More Info

Personal Growth and Fear

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mike Thomas
Nottingham, England
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hi Peter,
Firstly, thanks for the fantastic week-long camp in Wales. As a result of the Cheng Hsin Body-Being work I've realized that the t'ai chi I've been practicing has been far from functional, although I deluded myself for long enough that it was. Now I'm at the difficult cross-roads of starting again from scratch. Any pointers on incorporating the Body-Being into the practice of the 24 step form? Also, realizing that the t'ai chi I'm being taught is not the functional art you've exposed me to, where does that place my instructor who I value as a person?
The overwhelming thing I brought back with me from Wales is a new commitment to the truth of the matter and a willingness to stop lying to myself, but I know that this can lead to conflict with those whoare used to seeing me as the old 'untruthful' self. So, a hard call but I thank you for helping me make it.
Something else I'd welcome your insight on: in my meditation practice for the last few months I've felt fear rising again and again, or rather already being present then me noticing it. I felt it too during the week in Wales, fear of not getting things 'right', of getting hurt or hurting others and anything else really. I simply try to bring mindfulness to this without getting caught up in it, but I'd like to know what your approach is to fear. When fighting, did or do you ever feel it?
A final word: it's a real testament that everyone I've met so far that's been committed to the Cheng Hsin work has been both open to learn and to helping others like myself who were exposed to the work for the first time.
Cheers,
Mike Thomas

Mike,
This is how growth goes. Learning, and letting go of what was learned before, moving in the direction of the truth. The Cheng Hsin t'ai chi set is designed with the principles in mind and is meant to be done as a means of incorporating the body-being material. In other words, the set is a training for the body-being work, without which it's pretty useless.
If your teacher is a person worth knowing, then respect him. But this doesn't mean he knows what he's doing or he may just be doing something else that in itself is useful to people but isn't this art, nor functional. Maybe he would be open to learning more. That would make him an even better instructor.
I don't feel fear fighting, by then it's too late. I sometimes felt it before, but not during. Fear is worth studying, but it takes some work. In simple, don't resist it. Allow it to be without letting it take over. We have techniques that help minimize our reactions, as well as work that assists in understanding what fear actually is, but that is stuff best done in person. You could make real progress with it in the ECW this fall, and make huge progress with more than fear in the ENB (ontology workshop at the beginning of the month-long). Come and study.
Good luck,
Peter

Attend a Seminar
More Info