alchemist

Yes, that is dixian (earth immortal) stage. No, they are creating the right conditions for the Teacher's practice. BR

Hi Demetrios, Ah, BR is for "best regards" It's not my initials. The basic theory is as follows. A man/woman has a limited amount of yuan qi/yuan jing (also ming), which he/she constantly spends on the vital functions. Once the ming is over, he/she dies. Teeth and hair are related to ming, so when ming is filled up again, teeth and hair regrows. BR

Though you asked opendao, I can answer both questions. First of all, no neidan school makes the information like this public. If you really have the contacts in China who can verify this kind of information, they will tell you the same. Generally there are examples of this, but the actual number and (especially) the names and biographies are restricted information. I haven’t seen an example of this in Russia (particularly because I don’t have a habit to watch someone’s teeth), but I have seen one in China, more or less accidentally. So I can confirm that this actually happens. BR

I don’t recommend you to trust the translations of Dao De Jing too much. This text is very hard to translate. That’s right. But what is described there is the last stage (i.e. you need to pass many others first). This practice requires that Xing and Ming are already united. And that is not meditation (while it may look like that), which is practiced when Xing and Ming are divided. I will post it on this forum. BR

I mean, which particular actions one needs to do? If you want to put up a picture (assuming you already have one), you: 1) choose a place on the wall 2) find a nail and a hammer 3) nail the picture using the tools from step 2) to the place from step 1) If you want to achieve something more complex, usually there are more actions and they are harder to perform. Now, what do you need to do if you want to achieve Sarira? BR

How one shall practice what is described in HMJ? Can you tell that? Which steps one needs to perform, in which sequence? BR

There is no difference between the understanding of ‘celestial immortality’ in Wuliupai and other schools of neidan. And ‘a lot of meditation’ is not a right way to achieve it. BR

There are no ‘instructions’ at all there. What is described in neidan texts are general principles. Some texts describe them in a very obscurant way (like most medieval classics), the others are more or less clear (like Wuliu texts), but these are still principles, not methods. However they are often misinterpreted as methods. Neidan texts are written to accompany oral instructions, not to replace them. BR

What is called 'celestial immortality' in our school cannot be achieved by 'a lot of meditation'. I will try to post an appropriate translation a bit later. BR

Of course you can go on trolling in my topics if you do have enough time for that. But if you think you can say something I can't argue, you are wrong. You have too few knowledge and understanding for that. Have you noticed that the word 'practice' is in the square brackets? I.e. the translator has added this word, it is not in the original text.

He does not. A simple question: can you tell what, how and in which circumstances you need to practice from reading HMJ? I suppose you can not. The reason why Wuliu Patriarchs are saying that they name some things openly is that the medieval Patriarchs are way more obscure. So Wuliupai texts are more clear than the medieval neidan classics, but that’s all. There are no methods described there. BR

That depends on what a 'high level' is in your understanding. One does need right methdos to attain a high level in neidan. BR

Zhao Bichen's school is a non-orthodox branch of Wuliupai. Their practice differs from Wuliu methods. Wan Liping has no relation to Wuliu. Wuliuxianzong is Wu Chongxu's text, so yes, it is a good source for studying Wuliu teachings. BR

Ah, just had a good Weekend and now see that the topic was moved into the Pit. That's sad. Ok, it really became too personal. BR

I am quite serious, of course. But nobody gets true methods without becoming a disciple of a true school. That’s simple. BR

In fact, there is a difference. When someone says he doesn’t believe (or not interested) in Daoist immortality, who am I to tell him he is wrong? That’s his choice. And since this topic is located in ‘Taoist discussions’ (a very general definition), some people may think that I thrust my opinion on them (and that actually happens, as you may see), while I am just quoting neidan classics. On the contrary, neidan is a very specific thing, and there ARE true and false ways there. (Like in mathematics: if I say 2x2=4, I am right; if I say 2x2=5, I am wrong.) And more or less that can be argued, since there are recognized authorities. BR

That’s it. If only there were a separate forum for neidan discussions on this board, I would post this text there. That might prevented most of the conflicts and misunderstandings with those who are not interested in Daoist alchemy, since I never meant to dispute with them. But unfortunately there is only ‘Taoist Discussions’, so the misunderstandings like this are unavoidable. BR

Ah, I see. That looks like the main communication problem. Lu Dongbin actually IS one of the most respected Patriarchs. He is also one of the 8 immortals (btw, Zhongli Quan, his teacher who is also mentioned here, too) and generally one of the most known Daoists in China: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lü_Dongbin His disciple Wang Chongyang is a founder of Quanzhen school, the main official Daoist school in China (and Wang’s disciples are also founders of many other schools). So Lu Dongbin is more or less the founder of Daoism as we know it. BR

I think I must argue. First of all, nobody here comes to anyone's house, so this comparison is incorrect. Anyone is free to read or ignore this topic. Second, Lu Dongbin is one of the most famous Daoist Patriarchs, and this is a Daoist forum, isn't it? Third, nobody states there is only one right way to go. Yes, the Patriarchs didn’t spare anyone’s feelings, but if you read their words with attention, even they don’t sate that some other way is ‘bad’. They only indicate that Great Dao (neidan) is not identical to the minor schools. And I also want to add that there is definitely more than one school that still has the methods of neidan. One can go any way he wants, but he result depends on the way he goes. That’s all. BR

Keep on trolling, right? Ok, there is a difference in terminology between different authors and schools. There is no sense in comparing the terms of Lu Dongbin and Wuliupai. And 'pair perfection' and 'inner chambers' are simply different things with also different names. Anything else to say?

One can find anything he wants to find in various translations of Daodejing. BR

I am just retranslating their words. Which you find 'silly'. BR

Your question is unrelated to the topic. If you read the original text, there are no such words as 'qigong' or 'neigong' there. BR

This is an important difference from what is often criticized. That is because you might misunderstand what "stopping the leakage" is. Liu Huayang was a Buddhist monk, so he is totally in his right to use Buddhist sayings. BR

Taoist Texts: have you read that Wu Chongxu is from Dragon Gate lineage? You have. But still you state that he created a school 'from texts'. So you are simply distorting the meaning of what you read. Wu Chongxu used texts, but he also had a proper Daoist lineage.