Lataif

Please: (1) I'm looking for info about a psycho-energetic technique that, when directed at a mental, emotive, or somatic state, dissolves entanglement of the personality with that state. (2) The technique might be associated with the color black. (3) Anyone recognise such a technique in any tradition (?) Thanks . . .

(1) I think it's more likely to be some kind of Deity Yoga . . . in which an aspect of the deity is associated with "cutting through" attachment -- with a sword, for example. (2) Or in Taoism, I understand that there are some techniques that "dissolve" obstructions in the Chi meridians . . .

Please: (1) For some reason . . . I seem not to have already come across any discussion of this obvious topic. (2) And when I experiment with it even a little bit . . . it gets very intense very quick. (3) In fact, it's the most intense energetic experience that I can generate intentionally. (4) So what do people here say about it (?) (5) Is there some known practice for directing Chi into the 3rd eye . . . and what does it propose to do (?) Thanks again . . .

Please: (1) It doesn't seem an exaggeration to me to say that traditional Qigong is obsessed with the idea that there is a limited amount of sexual JIng and that it must therefore be used sparingly. (2) But what's the evidence for this (?) (3) It's demonstrable in physiological terms that the body replaces any used JIng. (4) In fact, it probably increases both the supply AND the capacity to replenish Jing based on the usage rate. (5) This seems to me a case of traditional teaching either not understanding that process . . . or having some other agenda to promote.

How does Qigong understand the Upper Dantian (?) Since consciousness, mental activity, the nervous system, and emotions are apparently considered to all be part of "Shen" and to be centered in the Middle Dantian . . . what's the nature of the Upper Dantian (?) I'm inclined to do the Western division of things that centers consciousness, mental activity, and the nervous system in the Head Center . . . but that's apparently not what Qigong does. So what then is the Upper Dantian all about in QiGong (?)

Please: Anyone come across any mention anywhere of "black chi" (?) Or maybe . . . "dark chi" (?) Thanks . . .

Please: (1) Here is a diagram of spiritual alchemy process as proposed by 20th century teacher. (2) It is said to demonstrate how denser food energy (768) is transformed into higher spiritual energy (12) by impact of intermediate air energy (192). (3) Does anyone recognize any similar diagram in Buddhism or Daoism (?) Thanks.

Please: (1) Anyone feel confident to guesstimate how common QiGong is in Chinese expatriate communites (?) (2) I suppose it differs by country and social class. (3) But say in America, if you're talking to a person of Chinese descent -- what are chances that they do some QiGong in the family (?) (4) 10% (?) 33% (?) 50% (?) Thanks.

The emphasis is in traditional writings. Michael Winn, as you say, considers the supply of all Chi to be virtually unlimited . . .

Mantak Chia has an entire book devoted to improving eyesight thru QiGong. But sorry . . . I can't help but observe that photos of Chia show him wearing glasses. So that's not too encouraging. I've tried his system and couldn't verify any improvement. This was disappointing, because I had previously had some reason to think that bad eyesight was NOT a structural (physical) issue . . . but a patterned, learned behavior issue. I had come to that provisional conclusion after several times noticing that my eyesight would get blurred during times of extreme stress. That suggested that it could be altered by intention . .. . Can anyone speak to this . . . (?)

It seems to me that there are (at least) 2 different sets of terminology being used by posters here. Let's see if I can differentiate them. Michael Winn (for example) . . . characterizes "Qigong" as external movement practice (Tai Chi, Brocade, Animals, etc). Everything else is "NeiGong" internal practice (Smile, MCO, Fusion, etc). But Yang, Jwing-Ming (for example) . . . characterizes them ALL as "Qigong" . . . with two subsets: "WaiDan" being the external . . . and "NeiDan" being the internal. Have I got that right (?) Which is more common (?) And are there yet others (?)

Net content of this comment: zero. Thanks for nothing.

Yes. It's my primary practice. My username is the key concept in that tradition . . .

Please: (1) I appreciate how members here are willing to share their perspective. (2) Here's another topic I'm exploring at length. (3) Daoism apparently relates Yin/Yang to Feminine/Masculine. (4) That has never worked for me . . . from a Sufi perspective. (5) Sufism emphasizes the non-duality of Unity and Multiplicity. (6) It seems that Daoism might have an equivalent, if you interpret this way: Wuji (container in the Taijitu symbol) = Unity Yin/Yang (contents in the Taijitu symbol) = Multiplicity (7) And Sufism understands: Unity (and its corresponding dynamic of Unification) = Masculinity Multiplicity (and its corresponding dynamic of Differentiation) = Femininity (8) So then, there would be this interpretation of Daoism: Wuji (container in the Taijitu symbol) = Masculinity Yin/Yang (contents in the Taijitu symbol) = Femininity (9) This accords with my personal experience of Masculinity and Femininity. (10) Does this resonate with anyone else (?) (11) I might be able to provide specific experiential example . . .

I posted before about this book. It's the best "direct method" text I've seen from the Daoist tradition . . .

(1) A recurring type of comment in this forum is: "You can't learn from books" . . . "You need a teacher" . . . and "Details can't be discussed here". (2) Basically: some knowledge is dangerous for people and should only be shared/explored in context of teacher/student relationship. (3) Really (?) (4) What's the rationale for such a conclusion (?) (5) Does the Dao care if 999,999 people go crazy trying a practice . . . as long as the millionth person succeeds with it (?) (6) BTW: If beginning in the 1960s, the thousands of years of Chinese secrets hadn't been revealed to the West (including you and me) . . . they'd have been lost. (7) My opinion: There are more realized Taoists in the West today than in China. (8) And how about: centuries of Judo training in Japan . . . and within a couple of generations of training, the Dutch were kicking the ass of the Japanese (?)

I notice that many people seem to think that "Yin" and "Yang" are simple and obvious to understand. But I spent years practicing QiGong without being able to make consistent sense of them -- it wasn't simple or obvious to me. I've now come to an interpretation of them that seems to work for me . . . and even has the approval of my QiGong teacher. So here it is, in case anyone else might find it helpful . . . *** (1) Everything that appears in reality is a process. (2) The nature of every process is unique, but all processes follow a similar general pattern: appearance==>arising==>declining==>disappearance. (3) Or you can think of processes as having a life arc: birth==>growth==>decline==>death. (5) So basically there are two phases to each process: arising and declining. (6) The first meaning of "Yang" refers to the arising phase of a process. (7) The first meaning of "Yin" refers to the declining phase of a process. (8) But processes do not exist in isolation. (9) Every process interacts with multiple other processes -- affecting them or being affected by them. (10) This leads to the second meaning of "Yin" and "Yang". (11) If the Yang phase of a process (A) is made LONGER or STRONGER by interaction with process (B) . . . then process (B) can be said to have a Yang affect on process (A). (12) If the Yang phase of a process (A) is made SHORTER or WEAKER by interaction with process (B) . . . then process B can be said to have a Yin affect on process (A). *** (13) Examples (selective aspects): -- The process of writing this post is now in its Yin phase -- as it's almost complete (from temporal perspective). -- Which in turn is interacting with the process of my day -- which is also in its Yin phase (9:00pm). -- Which in turn is interacting with the process of my life -- the phase of which is unknown (probably Yin). -- Which in turn is interacting with the process of this planet (phase unknown). -- Which in turn is interacting with the process of the universe (phase unknown). If I were to put a gun to my head and pull the trigger: -- the bullet process would probably have a Yin affect on the process of my head -- likewise, the process of my head would have a Yin affect on the process of the bullet (which would otherwise continue Yang across the room) *** (14) Everything is in process . . . either short or long. (15) Every process has a Yang phase (short or long) and a Yin phase (short or long). (16) All processes interact and affect one another . . . to greater or lesser degree . . . in either of two ways (Yang or Yin). (17) Daoism/QiGong includes cultivating as good an understanding as possible of: -- processes -- their potential and actual patterns and phases -- their potential and actual interactions

Please; (1) Does anyone know whether Paul Crompton, British teacher of Tai Chi, is still living (?) (2) He started learning Tia Chi in 1968 . . . so today he'd be in his 70s at least . . . Thanks . . .

Please: (1) I keep having these intense moments of immense wonder and gratitude lately. (2) The amount of authentic spirituality available to us with the internet today is truly staggering. (3) I'm old enough to remember the mid 1960s . . . when there was just Krishnamurti . . . Yogananda . . . Gurdjieff . . . and that was about it. (4) No Daoists. No Tibetans. No Sufis. No Advaitists. No Zenists. (5) You had to travel (time and money) to meet people and get a chance to compare and contrast methods for your specific needs. (6) What then took a year to figure out . . . follow up on . . . and check out . . . you can now do in a week. (7) Do the corresponding numbers: it's like living 52 lives in this one. (8) It's like living . . . 52 incarnations. (9) We're getting it done better and faster than any generation in the history of this planet. (10) It's overwhelming to consider . . .

(1) A quote only (?) (2) (LOL) This is a slam dunk. (3) From "The Secret of the Golden Flower" (Cleary translation): "If you can look back again and again into the source of mind, whatever you are doing, not sticking to any image of person or self at all, then this is 'turning the light around wherever you are.' This is the finest practice." (4) There you go . . . and good luck.

Please: (1) Doesn't Life really make you wonder sometimes (?) (2) It's alternatingly awesome (for what you find) . . . and disconcerting (for what you might have missed). (3) I came across a reference to "The Secret of the Golden Flower" (translation by Cleary) a few weeks ago in some author that I trusted. So I ordered it from the library and then it sat around beneath a pile of other books that I was making my way through. (4) The book eventually came due for return and I still had half a dozen of the other books unread . . . so I considered giving it a pass after all. (6) But then it had happened that a day came free for me and for some reason I chose it next for my full attention . . . *** (7) Wow,. (8) Although I've studied QiGong for some time . . . I haven't read any classic Daoist literature at all. (9) "The Secret of the Golden Flower" has been a great experience. (10) I'm particularly struck by: the multiple shocks of recognition, across space and time (so to speak), of what was being talked about the memorable figurative language in which the experiences were expressed (11) The best example of the latter is probably "turning the light around" . . . as a concise summary of spiritual practice. *** (12) So some additional help with this from members here, please: How many are familiar with this text (?) How do you rate/place it among other classics of Daoist literature (?) Thanks very much (!)

(1) Thanks for recommendations. (2) I'm definitely going to read more by Cleary -- he makes the difference. (3) Half of the value of this "Golden Flower" edition is in his explanatory notes. (4) The text is also interesting for a reason that I don't recall Cleary mentioning. (5) It's obvious (to me . . .) that the text was like the notes of some student taken during teaching sessions. (6) The topics range far and wide . . . from one tradition to another . . . as if someone were answering questions from students with all kinds of backgrounds (or all kinds of curiosity). (7) It's a valuable insight into a teaching situation -- but can be a little confusing to someone who doesn't already have some idea of what that situation might be like. (8) My understanding is that the Christian gospels are similar in that way. (9) They're originally notes of students working with a teacher in a school . . . and never intended for publication. (10) They make 100% sense only in the context of that teaching situation -- which we don't know anything about . . .

I'm familiar with direct "pointing" from both Advaita Vedanta . . . and Dzogchen Buddhism. Zen (with which I'm also familiar) doesn't actually use it often (despite Mahakasyapa and his flower . . .). This is the first time I've seen it in Daoism. Thanks . . .

Please: (1) I don't really mind not knowing an answer . . . but I hate not even knowing what I'm asking. (2) I've got one of those now -- can anyone try to clarify it for me (?) *** (3) I intuitively feel that something is that case . . . and that there should be a clear, compelling way to state it. (4) But when I try . . . it doesn't even convince me 100%. (5) Here's my best try at it: "The fact that there is a Billboard Top 40 . . . demonstrates that there must be objective qualities in Music to which people respond . . . and that Music is not just a subjective experience". (6) Or in other words: "Why would so many people all agree that there is something worthwhile about piece of Music if they were not all experiencing in common an objective quality of that Music (?)" (7) This seems true to me. (8) But the argument doesn't seem rigorous -- although I'm not sure why. (9) So what do people here think: (a) Is the conclusion in fact, true (?) (b) Does the argument demonstrate it (?) (c) If so, how does it demonstrate it (?) (d) Is there a clearer, more rigorous way to state it (?) Thanks . . .