Taomeow

What sounds Arjuna with his swift arrows? Krishna's Annunaki will.

Compass toward joy! Shake off this weakness of heart and fight, Arjuna!

It still needs some work, thinks the perfect egg, and cracks. Hello kitty... Oops.

Was an open book ever a maw that swallowed your life?.. Oh yes. Once.

If you live at all, zombie, you live and let die. Please die and let live.

Taoist classics hold the view of spontaneous naturalness that is indistinguishable from intent -- a sage does not do anything nor intends anything that is not in accord with tao, everything she intends and everything she does spontaneously aligns and harmonizes with the Way. "A sage comes like the spring, benefiting all beings." You can replace "sage" with "bee" and understand what they mean. I would say we've a long way to go to catch up with animal cultivation, except we're going in the opposite direction...

Tetragrammaton -- is it a sneeze or a yawn? Gesundheit. Good night.

I'd study Taiji Classics for starters. You can find some valuable material here: http://www.scheele.org/lee/classics.html

You mean "any form?" Yes, mainly Chen Laojia, Chen sword, a bit of Xinjia, a bit of taiji fan... The moves aimed to fight off "internal foes" are particularly efficient if you match them to the organs and feelings associated with them. E.g. Anger resides in the Liver, and you can move it out with moves away from the body on the right side originating in that area. Fajin can throw out whatever you want to discard. The inward bound (toward the body) moves can be used to bring in fresh healthy qi from the environment if you intend to replace whatever you release. And so on.

I would add intent to that pattern of motion. Every move. Taiji is a martial art (which sadly many teachers today don't seem to know and some have the gall to deny), but you don't need to do it toward defeating an external enemy. You can designate your own feelings and thoughts, the ones you don't particularly care to maintain, as opponents. And every move must defeat them. You don't do taiji aimlessly, you have it serve you. Taiji, like the mind, is a rather pointless master but an amazingly competent servant. Whatever your intent, taiji is at its service... but this has to be consciously applied to every move. Not easy, but very fruitful.

Thank you, Bodhidharma. To switch hands can theoretically be useful (for an adult engaged in a conscious practice and prepared for the psychological "side effects" -- this should never be done with a child though), but I'm not aware of a complete system using this method and so would go with balancing ones that are more predictable in their long-term effects. How about taiji? Or a good classical qigong routine like Eight Pieces of Brocade or the Five Animal Frolics? By the way, I remember reading somewhere that of all professional groups, the longest-lived and healthiest are music conductors. (Not rock stars, as everyone has probably noticed lately...) I surmise the reason is threefold: 1. a position in control. The single worst enemy of the human (and animal) physical and mental well-being is a sense of helplessness, of having lost or surrendered control to someone else. (Incidentally, cancer patients who argue, disagree, research, and otherwise actively participate in their treatment strategies are three times as likely to survive as those who just "do what the doctor thinks is best.") 2. esthetic immersion -- what they do is about beauty. 3. physical engagement in fairly active motion harmonious with this beauty, the body is actively "doing" it rather than passively receiving it. Not saying you ought to become a conductor (too late for most of us for that I suspect) but the pointers toward bodymind-balancing activities may be considered. Oh, and one more thing about conductors. They are notoriously emotional and they express their emotions. Many are known to have broken their baton to pieces in anger while yelling out curses and insults -- Giuseppe Verdi terrified his musicians with the name he called them when they were faltering: "Pharmacists!!"

Taoists not only believe that animals are capable of self-cultivation, but have a tradition of learning from some of them. One thing animals don't have that we do is an incredibly heavy load of pathological genetic mutations (with the exception of domesticated animals who also have many). Our thinking brain may be one such mutation, since it is the outcome of neoteny -- the reverting of an organism to an earlier, fetal developmental stage in adulthood. A larger brain to body ratio is a fetal characteristic, not an evolutionary advance. In fact it's the opposite -- an evolutionary step back. (Who knows why we had to take it. I tend to believe someone or something made us take this step towards shaping us into something that has nothing to do with "higher" function or purpose and everything to do with... but let me drop this tangent.) Oh, and this just In: turns out our hand is a primitive organ compared to the chimp's. So much for the glory of the opposable thumb. http://news.discovery.com/animals/endangered-species/human-hands-more-primitive-than-chimp-hands-150714.htm Also, none of animals' young are born as helpless and dependent and remain so for as long compared to human babies who are born basically at least a year away from any self-care capabilities (while learning 95% of everything they will ever learn in a lifetime by age 5 --- meaning the earliest developmental experiences are the most crucial shaping ones) -- and yet animals in the primate kingdom take far better care of their young and do it for much longer than modern humans do. And that's why they have a tremendous head-start on us. They learn a direct personal relationship with spacetime itself, something a civilized human is more likely than not to never experience. They have social continuity because of that too, and don't know what it means to feel alienated from your own kind's way of life. They are only unfortunate in that they share this planet with the species that uses weapons of mass destruction on their habitat. But I've a hunch that the smallest, most inconspicuous of them are paying attention... and doing something about it as we speak. "Study the cat, Saihung. Everything you need to learn, she knows already." -- Deng Ming-dao, "The Wandering Taoist"

Yup. There's a taoist exorcist practice of eating demons. If you don't see demons, you are more likely to be eaten by them. If you see them, you can get depressed, scared, or... or feisty, as the case may be. You can try to run and hide. You can freeze in one spot. Or you can get hungry and hunt them down and trap them and cook them in a stew. Or eat them raw. Some people can't stomach raw oysters, e.g.. I'm a big fan though.

It's a shorthand, no more mythical than any term (terms are not processes they label -- none of them) for two distinct types of specialization of human brains that are actually divided into six rather than two major areas of specialization, twice horizontally and once vertically. "Left-right," a crude (as terms go) code for "neocortex-midbrain-lower brain, two hemispheres, nonsymmetrical in function any of it," is the reality of cognitive neuroscience, not a myth. It stands for dominance of some areas of the brain over others -- which, e.g., manifests in hand dominance... of the obvious things. A whole-brainer is ambidextrous -- six ways. A left-brainer may actually be using only 1/6 rather than 1/2 of his brain with any efficiency, and 70% of this 1/6th is busy suppressing the remaining 5/6th at all times, so he actually uses only 30% of 1/6th of his brain...

Good questions. Whatever the authors of the studies that arrived at these conclusion peddle, I'm not selling, of course -- I don't think being depressed and fearful is the only possible, let alone the best, response to even the most depressing, fear-instilling developments in society -- only that it is far more accurate than a head in the sand and a happy happy joy joy behind exposed to whatever may come and bite it. I believe the best approach, always and for all purposes, to adversities one can't control is honesty and courage. This is worth cultivating and using as weapons of self-defense -- skillfully and wisely, this is a kind of gong fu that grows with practice. Yes, Laozi'z political pamphlet, alchemical secret code, a brilliant foray into paleopsychology (sic) and a set of koan-like tools for activating and de-programming a stale complacent mind -- all these and more -- never contained any of the ideation invented and disseminated in the course of new age psy-ops. And all taoist classics to assert that "in the human world, tao has been destroyed." The Wenzi (Wen Tzu), attributed to Laozi and supposedly containing his oral transmissions to his student, is in particular very explicit on this count and far more politically charged -- you may want to give it a read. Yet the conclusions are not defeatist. It's just that you can't put up a fight against a force that is faceless behind faces -- but you don't have to just pretend it's not there and you don't have to allow it to swallow you. We fight... If we can't fight in the material realm, it's not because we give up. It's because we only fight the battles we win, and win them before we begin. Well, that's already Sun Tzu, obviously. So... been reading John Blofeld's "My Journey in Mystic China" and came across this passage: "The demonic souls who invented the atom bomb, poison gas, and germ warfare cannot be controlled by the wisdom of sages. Sages rely on the human conscience in order to influence and improve the human condition, but demons have no conscience." Useful to remember... They don't. But we do. The solution IMO is in non-emulating the demons. Emulating the sages instead. How? Many ways. Monkey see, monkey do. E.g. I try to practice Chapter 15 of TTC every day... the taiji chapter.

There's no reason/logic in making this about me, but since you're catering to my oh so human "it's all about me" design flaws, I don't mind telling you that I'm a scientifically verified whole-brainer, not a left-brainer, not a right-brainer, and not someone who alternates between left-brain and right-brain dominance, but someone who uses linear and nonlinear venues of cognition simultaneously. I can sing and dance an equation of quantum mechanics with such feeling that it will break your heart.

I thought it was ironic, pathetic, disturbing -- any number of things -- rather than "idiotic," but it's also, shockingly enough, pretty accurate. I came across this article when looking for something else, something I'd seen before -- to wit, studies that show that people who are depressed make much more accurate predictions about the future -- by a wide margin, something like 90% more accurate. Tells you something about the world we're currently inhabiting, and tells you something about optimists who inhabit the same world as pessimists yet either fail or refuse to see it with the kind of clarity that allows their less bright eyed bushy tailed peers to actually make sense of it (and therefore successfully notice and accurately extrapolate into the future its developmental trends) instead of living in the la-la land of positive make-believe. Oh, and I don't believe the story about the vinegar tasters. Taoists see things for what they are. We are not in denial. Anyone who read a non-compromised translation of Laozi mindfully, not reading into TTC their own agenda, conditioning, or wishful thinking, would notice that he was not only a "conspiracy theorist" -- he was a conspirator. He was trying to conspire with the ruler to convince him to rule wisely. He was not trying to convince the ruler that however he rules is wise by default. He was not a "whatever," "it's all good" dude. Seriously. Things mattered to him. He was no new ager. And the greatest conspiracy theorist and conspirator was of course Sun Tzu. And all he talks about is, basically, know your vinegar!! Don't fool yourself into believing it's sweet -- this is perilous to the country, the general, the army, the ruler, the people. Know it's sour when it's sour. If you don't, if you operate on the assumption that your positivity is enough to make it sweet, you're done for -- and so is your country. I agree.

Pessimism About the Future May Lead to Longer, Healthier Life, Research Finds Optimistic older adults face greater risk of disabilities and death, study reports Read the journal article Forecasting Life Satisfaction Across Adulthood: Benefits of Seeing a Dark Future? (PDF, 202KB) WASHINGTON—Older people who have low expectations for a satisfying future may be more likely to live longer, healthier lives than those who see brighter days ahead, according to new research published by the American Psychological Association. "Our findings revealed that being overly optimistic in predicting a better future was associated with a greater risk of disability and death within the following decade," said lead author Frieder R. Lang, PhD, of the University of Erlangen-Nuremberg in Germany. "Pessimism about the future may encourage people to live more carefully, taking health and safety precautions." The study was published online in the journal Psychology and Aging®. Lang and colleagues examined data collected from 1993 to 2003 for the national German Socio-Economic Panel, an annual survey of private households consisting of approximately 40,000 people 18 to 96 years old. The researchers divided the data according to age groups: 18 to 39 years old, 40 to 64 years old and 65 years old and above. Through mostly in-person interviews, respondents were asked to rate how satisfied they were with their lives and how satisfied they thought they would be in five years. Five years after the first interview, 43 percent of the oldest group had underestimated their future life satisfaction, 25 percent had predicted accurately and 32 percent had overestimated, according to the study. Based on the average level of change in life satisfaction over time for this group, each increase in overestimating future life satisfaction was related to a 9.5 percent increase in reporting disabilities and a 10 percent increased risk of death, the analysis revealed. Because a darker outlook on the future is often more realistic, older adults’ predictions of their future satisfaction may be more accurate, according to the study. In contrast, the youngest group had the sunniest outlook while the middle-aged adults made the most accurate predictions, but became more pessimistic over time. "Unexpectedly, we also found that stable and good health and income were associated with expecting a greater decline compared with those in poor health or with low incomes," Lang said. "Moreover, we found that higher income was related to a greater risk of disability." The researchers measured the respondents' current and future life satisfaction on a scale of 0 to 10 and determined accuracy in predicting life satisfaction by measuring the difference between anticipated life satisfaction reported in 1993 and actual life satisfaction reported in 1998. They analyzed the data to determine age differences in estimated life satisfaction; accuracy in predicting life satisfaction; age, gender and income differences in the accuracy of predicting life satisfaction; and rates of disability and death reported between 1999 and 2010. Other factors, such as illness, medical treatment or personal losses, may have driven health outcomes, the study said. The findings do not contradict theories that unrealistic optimism about the future can sometimes help people feel better when they are facing inevitable negative outcomes, such as terminal disease, according to the authors. "We argue, though, that the outcomes of optimistic, accurate or pessimistic forecasts may depend on age and available resources," Lang said. "These findings shed new light on how our perspectives can either help or hinder us in taking actions that can help improve our chances of a long healthy life." Article: "Forecasting Life Satisfaction Across Adulthood: Benefits of Seeing a Dark Future?" Frieder R. Lang, PhD, University of Erlangen-Nuremberg and German Institute for Economic Research; David Weiss, PhD, University of Zurich; Denis Gerstorf, PhD, Humboldt-University of Berlin and German Institute for Economic Research; Gert G. Wagner, PhD, German Institute for Economic Research and Max Planck Institute for Human Development; Psychology and Aging, Vol. 28, No. 1.

Ah such sweet repose a storm on the Pacific rewriting the shores

CelibacySeeker, the I Ching is never rude. A sage emulates that.

Oh, I thought it might be the case, but I just had to make this parallel between your "antinarcissistic" practice and the moment of truth in that episode. Should you check it out? -- let's go over the pros and cons. (Sorry for the tangent, OP.) Cons: The show is exceedingly cruel and bloody and, since it was made for HBO (I think -- I don't have cable), there's obligatory nudity and porn-ish (I think -- I have never watched porn) scenes in most episodes, mercifully brief. The pros -- most of the rest isn't "just" cheap entertainment, and the stories (there's many protagonists and many intertwined stories), however fantastic and convoluted, have an unmistakable feel of some recognizable reality, history -- for a reason: R.R. Martin is a history buff, and he derived most of his inspiration for the novel (and consequently the script) from his monumental studies in history, rewriting actual events in a fantastic setting. E.g. the country known in the show as Westeros is pretty much medieval England, and the whole huge conflict is modeled on the actual events unfolding there for decades at one point -- the War of the Roses. In England, it's York vs. Lancaster, in Westeros it's Stark vs. Lannister... and so on. Many of the characters are memorable and quite unexpectedly developed in the long run. Some of the actors are excellent. Super emotional, not boring, pretty addictive once you get into it. So -- you decide if you are up to it.

Let me guess... you got your inspiration for this from the end of the first episode of the new Game of Thrones season? Melisandre taking off her red stone necklace in front of the mirror?..

Very nice, Phoenix, and thank you for the validation. An idea used toward developing courage I sometimes push myself with when undertaking something difficult to the point of being unbearable is, "well, what can anyone or anything do to me if I can endure doing this to myself?"