Michael Sternbach

Yoga can be a valuable addition to your martial arts training as well. Especially, I recommend Lily Chou's The Martial Artist's Book of Yoga. http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1569754721/ref=mp_s_a_1_2?qid=1456664703&sr=8-2π=SY200_QL40&keywords=yoga+for+martial+arts&dpPl=1&dpID=51DVaNS9KUL&ref=plSrch

Jerry A. Johnson and John Loupos are starting their Taiji workout with specific calisthenics. In Aikido, another internal art, it's common practice as well. I think it's beneficial to losen up the body prior to any martial arts training, as you will be performing better and prevent injuries. The question is not what worked for Yang Chengfu, the question is what works for you.

Yes. An accomplished Zen master once said that he is ready to learn a lesson from a seven year old child. Believing that we have found The Truth will keep us from asking further questions. If we are no longer open to answers and perspectives outside the box that define the limitations of our mind, we have stopped growing. Whatever knowledge we may already have, it shouldn't keep us from seeking our truth anew every day. Therefore Lao Dzu teaches that Dao cannot be defined once and for all. Such is the spirit of Daoism. This is what I would call open Dao.

If you look more closely at the impressive transmission lines postulated by virtually all secret societies, commonly reaching back into time immemorial, you invariably find that they in fact had their beginnings in a much more recent time. That does not mean that they are not spiritually connected to strands of occult knowledge of great age, which "accidentally" came eventually to form new systems systems. The emergence of Hellenistic Hermeticism out of the fusion of Babylonian, Egyptian and Greek elements, or the creation of Zen (Chan) from Indian Buddhism mingled with Daoism in China are just two examples. Sorry, there is no evidence for very old, unbroken and unaltered initiating societies anywhere. Every extant "tradition" got revised and regenerated cyclically by way of individualistic out-of-the-box thinkers, inspired by the essence of a tradition rather than by its sooner or later obsolete external form. And when the transmission involves channeling (as already in the case of HPB, than by Bailey and Leadbeater), things become even more opaque and intangible. As I mentioned elsewhere, the nature of channeling is such that the receptive psyche of the medium attunes to fields of information that exist on a subtle/quantum level. Sometimes this kind is valuable information, depending much more on the individual channeller rather than on their supposed source. But even though it usually appears in the form of an ascended master, higher entity, alien, angel etc, it stands to question how personalized these information fields are, especially if we understand "personalized" in the way contemporary psychology looks at this.

And why would it really matter? Aren't you possibly taking this transmission thing a little too literal?

Alright, best you can do then is to focus on capturing the essential principles of the style rather than particular techniques which tend to be modified by each instructor and practitioner anyway. Your manual may actually still be of some interest to the historian or, especially, advanced martial artist who will happen to find it buried in hundreds of years in the Australian desert (buried by a cataclysmic sandstorm sweeping over Australia ). Maybe it will get knows as the Nungalian Bubishi? And be free to come up with your Nungali-ryu, as long as it retains your master's time-honoured principles. I might even want to take a look at it. Perhaps master and pass on some rare historic kata though? I certainly agree with this philosophy, Mr. Lee. Boah, that's way too many videos to watch now, do you have any idea how late it is in my area of the globe? But I will do my best to watch and comment on them later.

Marblehead said: I am, of course, remembering that One was Singularity. Dao gave birth to Singularity. In other words, the De of Dao caused Singularity to exist even though it was only One, undifferentiated. One had to give birth to Two before things really started happening. I fully agree with you. Dao (or whatever equivalent philosophical or cosmological concept you wish to employ - a couple of options here ), alright, Dao started its career as Nothingness or a dimensionless point, Dao, Dao formed the One circle (Wu chi) and, quite instantaneously split itself up into the Two opposite forces, Yin and Yang. These two, through their antagonism, but in ultimate aim, aspire to reunite and renew the One by creating a new circle that is congruent with it, thus the Third). In this state of absolute harmony (and remember that it permeates time and space in a state of timelessness, so it's always there ), either progression is possible (on towards the Ten-Thousand Things), or regression to Wu chi, Pralaya, Chaos, En Soph Aur, Pre-Big Bang quantum vacuum, whatever the heck you want to call it, from where, well, a new Creation will take its place away (retaining more or less of the foregoing cycle). Thus the DDJ presents us with nothing less but a vista of the whole universe both in space and time, bot does so on a very abstract, even mathematical level that allows its translation to probably any kind of emergence out of a state of void, may it be occurring on the level of the cosmos, or of this planet, of biological nature, or even of the human history and human individuality. All in that a nutshell! To say that Lao Dzu was an abstractionist would be an understatement. In this regard, he is close to the Kabbalists, but what both saves from truly being reductionist is their vivid acknowledegment and appraisal of the living nature as the child of Dao that will one day reunite with it. On an individual human level, the lack or presence of the subtlety by which you are able to exist and act in accordance with that eventual reunion (which really transcends time and space, as it were, and is omnipresent) will determine the degree to which you are "in the Dao." It's as simple as this, mates, really.

Yes, excellent, Nungali. Always start with the kihon-waza (I take it your your/your master's style isn't so thoroughly documented as Shotokan, so it will be a really good idea to record it thoroughly). And please be so explicit that, hypothetically, an extraordinarily gifted martial artist could learn your style from scratch with your manual alone. Then you will have done the best job you could have.

That is taking a radical position on the Absolute/Anarchist side (surely Dao nature is anarchistic in important respects). Thanks for having the guts to always be yourself, MH. One of the few rocks in our ever flowing cybernetic Dao river.

(That was a though one, huh? Well, I'll help you then, Earthlings:) Sound waves

Alright, found the article, thanks. Funnily enough, the author expresses that he does not intend to deprive Bailey's writings of any value, he only wants to show that they are not always in accordance with The Secret Doctrine and HPB's writings, respectively. Well, personally, all I can say: I hope they aren't! I really hate to break it to you, but some of The Secret Doctrine is baloney, at least from the perspective of someone who has been updated to the however slight evolution that without a doubt has taken place in science and spirituality since the Victorian age. In direct reversal of this situation, you seem to be thinking of HPB's words as written in golden letters, valid for all times and eternity. Note: This is not to say that there isn't a certain essence that could be distilled out of it. Well, I truly sympathize with you, but believe me, you would be doing Madame Blavatsky a greater service if you do not hesitate to you relate all her teachings to, and compare them with, other sources of metaphysical and scientific insights (especially more contemporary ones). Challenge everything she said. What remains will be the gold nuggets sieved out of her legacy. You must rewrite your holy scriptures every once in a while, especially if you want to keep your following. One thing that I commend Bailey for is that she (or alright, let's say "the Tibetan") stated clearly in the foreword of A Treatise on Cosmic Fire that this trashy book - although in certain terms an update on The Secret Doctrine - is still not the ultimate word on the matter but is meant to serve as a general guide and outline that would be of general validity perhaps until the year 2025. That's when we can expect a yet considerably more evolved version of both Blavatsky's and Bailey's work to emerge. It will have done away with untenable racial theories, and reconcile the seemingly contradictory concepts of the appearance of an avatar on the one hand, and the uplifting of the human individual on the other (just bear in mind AAB's Initiation Human and Solar here). Along with that it will reconcile many other spiritual teachings across all times and cultures. Common,dude, even the Catholic Church is more trendy than your brand of Theosophy. Peace, Michael

I recommend Alan Watt's lectures on the Zen spirit. https://www.youtube.com/user/AlanWattsLectures Then read the Shobogenzo perhaps.

I completely agree that pictures (whether drawings or photos) are invaluable in a martial arts manual - second only to videos. So why not put a few videos out there on Youtube? For all the students and your TDB friends watch and comment on ! Anyway, trying to decipher how to perform a complex MA technique done from a text alone is generally very difficult ("turn 90°" - "Yeah, in what direction, please?" And: "How on earth did the dude suddenly teleport to the other side of the opponent? Etc), so yes, clear pictures should be included in any case - and plenty of them, for that matter. (Showing all the different developments of a technique on its way from A to B in Virgon detail). But there will still be the necessity to explain some further technical details that are not obvious from the pictures ("while you turn front foot ans outwards to a 45° angle until they hurt, exhale sharply with a sound that sounds like a broken pressure cooker"). So it will be surely a lot of work if you want to do it well, but once you're done you will have ascended to a higher level as a martial artist (or at least they should award you the next dan). Oh, and don't forget to offer a copy or two of your hard-won manual on Creatopia or Lulu Press. Good luck - and do keep us posted!

Useful sound absorption

Zen and the art of driving a car.

honeycomb

Link?

Could you give an example of that? Seth emphasizes that much of the psychological contents that create our experience is unconscious although it can be raised into consciousness. And yes, not only what is "below" but also what is "above" our conscious mind can be made conscious. Generally, that is true, but it doesn't have to be (stay) that way. Good observation there. Belief seems to be the one master key. Yes, a common denominator also across magical traditions. Yes, she maintained that Seth as he presented himself was not completely separate from her. I think this is generally the case with channellers. Was she tuning into pure information fields then, some kind of spiritual Internet? Or is Seth a kind of multidimensional individual that Roberts connected to? What about the Archetypes in general - entities like Seth are definitely of an archetypical nature. Our comprehension of these things is very limited, in keeping with our level of spiritual awareness.

Me too. I wasn't aware that Piaget was a major influence on Wilber, but this interests me because Piaget was a close friend of my grandfather's. Of course, the concept that we create our own reality from our thoughts is a basic assumption of the Seth books and is in keeping with other esoteric teachings as well. However, we are talking about an advanced concept which is indeed interpreted in naive and unreflected ways by many a "New Ager." Yes, these people tend to believe that the creation of one's personal reality is happenin on an egoic level. Thus they see themselves as being in total conscious control of their life experiences. This a problematic view, to be sure. Yes. While Seth insists that we all are creating our own reality - and therefore unconsciously all are "shamans" or "magicians" - there is no doubt that some individuals excel at this insofar they are particularly powerful and conscious in this regard. Yes, it's all about having a balanced and integrated view.

It is imo absolutely incorrect to consider "magical thinking" in toto as immature. Pre/trans fallacies certainly exist in this regard, but this is a topic that demands much differentiation. It is true that Jung never clarified whether the archetypes are primitive instinctual energies or transcendent spiritual influences. This is not surprising, because they manifest as both. Perhaps his position is close to the one taken by certain Buddhist schools which consider metaphysical questions as irrelevant? However, many seekers do have such questions, and I would say, for good reasons. This refutes any claims Wilber may be making as to offering a "full" system.

Spoilsport

Patanjali

Immanent

Most of all, there is no mention of a multidimensional spiritual cosmos. A framework that is taken for granted in virtually all the spiritual traditions across the cultures, as well as by Hermeticists, Theosophists, Anthroposophists, Jane Robert's Seth, and so fourth. So Wilber's work is far from universal, at least to the extent that I know it.

What is so amazing is that in the quote above from Practical Theosophy, we read: "The civilized man cannot be guided by fear or superstition, but reason may take hold of him. Theosophy being not only practicable but also reasonable as well as just, its doctrines are destined to be those of the civilized man. They will gradually drive out the time-worn shibboleths of the theologian and the scientist, giving the people of coming centuries a wisdom-religion deeply-based and all-embracing", whereupon the text goes on itself supporting fear and superstition as guiding forces! That not all the Theosophist writers joined in with this outlook is evident from Alice A, Bailey's 1953 book Esoteric Healing, pp. 19 ff., where "the Tibetan" talks about this limited and distorted view of karma: