Taomeow

_/\_ but when I showed the above to a friend who lives in CA but is originally from Taiwan, he responded with a scathing refutation... might share what he had to say if anyone's interested. (We routinely have heated arguments about China, me usually defending it from a Chinese who makes a sharp distinction between "mainlanders" and everyone else.)

@Apech I just put some in my borscht. Wouldn't dream of doing that if it wasn't from my teacher's garden, where everything has tons of qi. I figured, kale is is related to cabbage (a regular borscht ingredient) and is known in the old country as "leaf cabbage" -- though people don't eat it (or at least used to not eat it, it may have changed due to wider exposure to the sins of the world) -- it's grown as feed for ruminating animals. I removed all the stems so hopefully there's not too much left to ruminate on. Keeping my fingers crossed. Hope I don't wind up pouring the whole pot down the toilet.

And nuns pay the price for the practice in the form of the highest incidence of breast cancer of all professional groups. (The lowest is in prostitutes. However the latter get the highest incidence of cervical cancer of all professional groups. Nature does not look kindly on either excess or deficiency.)

I'm not sure I understand what you mean, so I can only clarify my thought -- not for argument's sake, just for clarity's sake. I don't think of "uncreated" as something that has a "beginning," and I think of "beginning" only in terms of co-creation, which is the farthest departure from creationism anyone can undertake. I don't subscribe to any creationist doctrines, and I believe the "uncreated" and the "created" are the ultimate co-creative interaction. So, nothing and no one is a "creator" without a "co-creator," and by the same token nothing and no one is "uncreated" without the "created." Long story.

I've heard a bunch of good things about xinyi, but never practiced it. Never touched hands with a xinyi person either, strangely enough -- maybe I will encounter one someday. Ah yes, "muscular people" are no challenge with enough tuishou, if you don't count the challenge of convincing them to observe the rules of engagement. Some respond to the frustration of "what the hell is going on here" by abandoning them and trying to do "whatever," and then it's about deciding whether you can avoid hurting them to prevent them hurting you, and then your control (a huge part of internal power) is put to the test. And total control is the top level skill, so why do they (sometimes) count on the other party having mastered it, without knowing one way or the other? It's a really stupid idea to try to do "whatever" against an experienced internal arts practitioner of unknown level, because, well, we have reflexes too and only some of us are at the total control level... so don't go grabbing my ankle and exposing your freakin' back of head, neck, spine... you leave me with a split second choice of putting a knee in your face or landing an elbow on your Jade Pillow -- and if you think I am experienced enough to stop myself in time from doing either, how the hell do you know that, I don't know it myself!.. Rules of engagement are there for a reason. I'm very glad that I've added the core strength building routine that is no joke, because I've often felt like an impostor when people assessed my status, after a tuishou practice, as "very strong" -- I know I'm not, get by on whatever skill and technique I have, but don't feel particularly "powerful" at all. It seemed, subjectively, like a different kind of fake from being gym style externally muscular for the appearance of a strong physique: being internally competent but without huge resources to back that up in a pickle. To me, inner power is something rather all-encompassing... a kind of sturdiness that can withstand whatever is thrown at it. Comprised of a patient heart, a courageous and resilient spirit, a nails-digesting stomach, and core muscles developed to back it up physically under any kind of stress, physical or nonphysical. There's never "enough" of any of that if one is honest with oneself, always somewhere to go. Thanks and bows to all the taoist gods and teachers for charting the way.

I learned a couple of "stick" routines in the past, but haven't been practicing them so I don't remember much. There's only so many hours in the day, days in a year... I do some qigong with my students, but for myself, typically I have my hands full with so much taiji to-do that there's no room for qigong except sporadically. Mercifully, in my teacher's opinion, taiji neigong is enough at this point. Whew.

There's always a "next level" in taiji. Much of what @freeform says is what I would also say even a few months ago, but then my teacher got his advanced students to take up pole shaking. Started out as a form (beautiful and looking mighty intimidating :D ) based on what we already practice empty-handed -- an adaptation of Cannon Fist (the second, fast routine of Chen) plus some stuff from taiji weapons (spear, guandao, jian), and after a while got simplified a bit toward working on the individual moves more, the moves aimed at developing internal power to the max. What's "internal power?" No one answer answers this question both directly and correctly (take your pick -- you can give a direct wrong answer or a right answer that is quite like "beating about the bush" .) When you redirect it from the core, everything gets involved -- but "how" is crucial. Part of what internal power is has to do with a pattern of usage. E.g., your arms, which do not participate in generating that power but have to guide and transmit it precisely once it is generated, have to be reasonably strong enough, especially the tendons and the joints. Bulging muscles won't help one bit, and if whatever muscles you have are tempted to "add" to the strength of the move (typically covering up for either a lack of internal power or a lack of expertise in directing and using it), that's, at best, a prescription for tendonitis and pulled muscles. The pole is too damn long and heavy and the ricochet of the high amplitude and high frequency vibration will tear them to shreds in no time if you use your arm strength. But they have to be, like I said, reasonably strong or you will have trouble using them to do what they are supposed to do -- direct, guide and transmit, rapidly change angles and rotate, twist, coil in response to all the inner rotations, twists and coils. And of course the legs have to be strong enough -- well, that's proprietary taiji territory, goes without saying. But what is "internal power"? As usual, a good way taoists found to pinpoint what something is is by starting from what it is not. It is not external muscles, that has been established. But what about internal muscles? The psoas, the most powerful of them all? Aha... you need them for internal power generation, so it's not as simple as "internal power is not muscles," it's more like "part of internal power is internal muscles." What about the pelvic floor muscles, what about your muscular inner organs? Stomach, and in women, the muscle par excellence, the uterus? If someone thinks that "dantien" is something "spiritual and immaterial only," try rotating it in a way that will cause that 7 1/2 foot wooden thing in your hands to come alive and coil and shake like a rubber hose doesn't... like a cobra you've grabbed by the tail. If you think it's "fascia only," you might do it for a minute and then you'll be out of breath and out of steam. If you think it's "internal muscles only," you might think you feel them working but you won't be able to show it, the pole won't shake unless your external structure is cognizant of how to direct the inner strength outward. And so on. To scratch the surface of it...

Another one of those substances surrounded by many myths. In 2019, a NASEM (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine) committee found that the data about how much of it is enough is insufficient to derive an estimate of a daily requirement, and recommended raising it somewhat "just in case." That's because blood and plasma levels of potassium (i.e. where it can be measured) are a poor indicator since most of it is found inside the cells (90%), where it's much more difficult to evaluate. The established recommended daily allowances for all ages are based on the median potassium intakes observed in children and adults. In other words, no one knows if what was established as a recommended intake reflects an adequate amount, a widespread deficiency, or a widespread excess. If you want to go by those guidelines, take a wild guess. That's how they've been established to begin with. (For everything for which they have been established, not just potassium.) Aside from individuals who suffer from hyperkalemia (excessive blood/plasma potassium due to an impairment of the excretion mechanism by a disease or by certain medications), most warnings and cautions spoken of here concern potassium chloride. Potassium gluconate (as well as several other forms -- citrate, asporotate, ascorbate) is way safer. In the old country, when I was a kid, that's what was always prescribed by doctors as a "general tonic" to kids who get sick with, e.g., common colds or strep throat or the flu too often, indicating, indirectly, that the body's defenses are down. I got it dispensed to me in huge horse pills, which I remember well -- there's no way one could swallow them, but mercifully they tasted like chalk, no bitterness, so I chewed them. I suspect (based on vaguely remembered Linus Pauling/Max Gerson/Gilbert Ning Ling etc. literature I knew better long ago) an average diet is grossly deficient. But I'm not the FDA, so don't take my word for it.

-- So, defendant, you have been selling this "Elixir of Eternal Youth," a concoction made with ingredients that haven't been FDA approved to diagnose, treat, manage, or cure any disease, are not described in any peer-reviewed scientific publications, and have never been tested in any double-blind placebo controlled studies. The charges against you are quackery, fraud, and practicing medicine without a license. Have you ever been convicted of these crimes in the past? -- Yes, your honor. In 1432, 1598, 1604, 1820 and 1913.

Yes, this has always interested me too -- do we take those depictions literally, i.e. did they really look like that in the world, or was this a depiction of their deeper nature... spirit, psychological portrait, knowledge of origins... genetic insight... genetic manipulation? Or something quite beyond that... an ability to manipulate flesh at will, and not just in shamanic or early taoist realms where they routinely turn into not only animals but forces of nature and even forces beyond nature -- like in that Zhuangzi story where a shaman ran in fear from a taoist master who showed himself to him as the void -- the shaman could see his true nature and it freaked him out? That pine cone, which is also a big deal in the Vatican -- what's that about? Someone did something to our pineal gland? And two and a half thousand years of worshipping a creator dragon-god, Marduk, later simply referred to as the Lord -- modern monotheists still continue to call their god that though they forgot he was once just the leader of the pack, and a dragon at that -- what's a dragon, it's not any one animal, it's a composite of many, the ultimate heterochimera. Where did they come from -- did nature create them, or nurture? And what did they want with us?

Yes, I'd like to hear the Australian version as presented by your teacher. (But please, if you have to post moving pictures, use the "hide contents" feature -- some people find it undeservedly punitive to have to read anything while something is inescapably spazzing out in their field of vision. The only person I ever blocked on this site merited such unusual attention from me because of his signature that was... well, nevermind what it was, but it was spazzing out uncontrollably under each and every one of his posts.) I know of a few ways a human being can be "really" an animal, or even four animals in taoism, or six if you expand the net to catch the "conception" and "death" animals rather than just the life animals. Probably more, but I only know how to catch six. I am three species and one of them is a tiger if you go with the taoist way to find out -- which is pretty darn accurate and can work things out indirectly for anyone who can't access "dreamtime" directly. But from dreamtime I know it's really a snow leopard.

Ah yes. Mount Elbrus, the highest in Europe. The sunrises there, way above the clouds, were the most beautiful thing I'd ever seen. I don't believe anything live is "being grown and moved." I'm not a creationist. I believe in the taoist concept of co-creation. Mount Elbrus wasn't crumbling in particular due to the trees whose roots held its slopes in a co-creative embrace. Where they had been cleared out, or couldn't grow to begin with, massive roaring rockfalls regularly do a whole lot of damage. In nature, stillness and silence find their own limitations. The trigram for the Mountain is my ming gua. Yes, it's the image of stillness and silence. It's also one of eight, not the only one, that comprise eight of the main venues tao comes into manifestation. So I wouldn't single it out to the detriment of the other seven even though it's my proprietary one.

Methinks philosophers ought to get out more. Whoever wrote this has obviously never been to the deep (far removed from human settlements) parts of the Amazon rainforest. It's absolutely deafening at night with voices of animals, birds, frogs, insects -- and tremendous thunderstorms. The noisiest place I've ever been -- and the growth of everything is second to none.

I had five versions at one point, two of which I gave to people and never saw back (happens to my favorite books all the time -- when I'm eager to share, someone assumes I myself want to go without. Nope. That's not the art of anything. ) The one "for women" I stopped reading after giving it a fair try -- as usual, I found I don't like "popularized" and "reinterpreted" versions of anything and only care for the most pristine ones. I can interpret stuff myself, thank you. And "popularized" usually boils down to "dumbed down." As for the rest, I'm game. Although most of my "art of war" studies are happening in hands-on taiji combat applications these days, and hardly ever get transferred to the head. But I think I would enjoy a quality foray into the subject. Been a while.

Behold this crazy-cool image of Śiva unearthed in Chattisgarh: his body is made up of animals and creatures -- he is Nature! His nose is a lizard; his mustache is two fish, his chin is a crab, his ears are peacocks, and there are many other faces and snakes all over him. The second image is a detail of the face. The third is the nether regions, where the phallus is a tortoise, and the two feet of the tortoise are the testicles. What an insight!!

Edit: maybe for later.

A limitation? A bird in a cage still chirps. Music to deaf ears.

I'd say much less than 10%.

You're very welcome. This refers to "wushi jing nei yin xuanguan" -- "obscure path through fifty areas of conscience" -- i.e. the ability to tell whether one's own actions are right or wrong, to know it internally by having access to these fifty areas.

The term a-nun-na-ke-ne in the Sumerian language, what we pronounce "annunaki," is translated as "the Seed of the Master." This term was used as a compound name for a number of gods varying from 7 to 600, depending on the source and period -- and they were worshipped for two and a half thousand years. When the posterity and collaborators of the original 7 were included, the Seed of the Master referred to the mighty god Ninurta and his pals, all posterity of An (or Anu) and his son Enlil, the God of Influences (in modern times coyly translated as "winds"), and Enki (later Ea to Akkadians), the God of Water, knowledge, creation, mischief and deceit. Apparently the annunaki encountered competition later (in the second millenium B.C.) from the Babylonian "Master gods," called i-gi-gi-ne. It's somewhat unclear who these new Masters were and what their status was, since some sources assert the igigi were masters over the annunaki themselves, while others argue that they were their servants. This is how the annunaki were typically depicted at the time. (The one entry in the middle where someone wrote "Equador" needs further investigation -- the attribution appears to be false, even though the plumed thingies looking very similar are all over the pre-Inca and pre-Maya artifacts of South America I've seen with my own eyes in the museums of Peru, but I wouldn't vouch for this particular one that it's from the same source.) It is interesting to note the repeating details -- wings, a bracelet with a disc on the wrist, the bucket and the pine cone which apparently is dipped into the bucket and then... Well, don't ask me, my take is faaaaar oooooout...

What is really going on in China today is absolutely incredible. https://www.quora.com/How-is-China-able-to-provide-enough-food-to-feed-its-population-of-over-1-billion-people-Do-they-import-food-or-are-they-self-sustainable/answer/Janus-Dongye-Qimeng?ch=1&share=0b50cbf0&srid=h6K&fbclid=IwAR3qIDlgvXD4VG0WenYS_u-YgW5WVVbQcOYq5QOlbYd1ST1eVDHYf8Pl5xA

Zoopharmacognosy!!!

You know what cats are like -- they'll sit in front of an open door waiting for a sign. If an auspicious sign manifests, the cat will come in. If it doesn't, the cat will wander off. Some taoists are like that too. Good to see you.

Yes, I heard all kinds of stories about physical abuse from former students of Catholic schools. We didn't have that -- corporeal punishments were prohibited. We did get more than our fair share of cruelty by other methods though. We're moving closer to the heart of the matter in this thread, inch by inch. I consider the main litmus test of the health or unhealth of any society to be the attitudes toward childhood and the treatment of children, especially very young children. Civilization is about treating them any number of ways as material to shape into something else -- whatever those in power have conditioned a society to demand of its children at any given point. We see quite a few examples of this material being handled with softer hands today than back then. Nowhere near all of it (some is still treated every bit as badly as four thousand years ago and sometimes worse -- I don't think African children of 5 or 6 mining minerals for the cell phones of their peers in the "developed" world or working 18 hours a day at cacao plantations for their luckier peers' chocolate live any better than slave children in Sumer). But, yes, occasionally, for a while this material is handled with some care here and there. At least till the next war, which usually makes it impossible to handle most of it with care even if someone wanted to. Which even in the best of times and places does not change the overall approach -- children are accepted and treated nicely only if they meet a hundred, a thousand different counterintuitive non-instinctual non-physiological requirements every day without showing any signs of psychological distress (something instantly discouraged and then exponentially punished if they don't promptly learn to suck it up and obey.) Like your (Nungali) school's insistence on the shirt being buttoned all the way to the top button so you feel mildly strangled at all times. Just a constant reminder that if they choose to strangle you for real, they can, anytime. Later, of course, the well-trained adult men wear ties serving the same purpose, while women are reminded who their bodies really belong to by an even wider array of part symbolic, part mildly (or occasionally severely) mutilating torture devices throughout their "productive" and "reproductive" years (and, out of habit and not knowing any better, often beyond.)

Mine were slightly different -- they replaced the cane with the grading system, threats and blackmail. But education-as-intimidation approach remained intact.