wandelaar

Questions: - Isn't awareness practise enough? - What does it mean experientially to open up the belly? Talk about chi, chakras, etc. doesn't explain anything to me. I want to know what is actually done when opening up the belly without having to buy into (as yet) unfounded esoteric ideas like chi(s) and chakras.

We are getting too much off topic right now. I will start another topic about your suggestions on meditation:

Just sitting. It helps me getting more relaxed, and letting thoughts and feelings come up and disappear without getting involved. The latter is difficult but it is good training for keeping my cool in enervating circumstances. When you can step back on any moment, you will no longer get sucked into unhealthy automated behaviours. Still working on it.

I have gut feelings and intuitions, and I think they are important as a complement to the workings of the conscious part of my mind. I don't consider them as being sensations of the belly however, but as signals form the unconscious part of my mind. And the mind - in my opinion - is basically located in the brain. And here you mix in theoretical perspectives that force a certain interpretation of your experiences. Those interpreted experiences thus are not beyond thought, they are not simple facts! So whether your interpretation has some factual basis remains to be seen. None of the traditional Taoist arts. But I meditate, do simple chi gong exercises (sometimes), study Lao tzu and Chuang tzu, and am looking for ways to get wu wei into my life.

And the other question?

According to Yang, Jwing-Ming in his book The Dao De Jing: A Qigong Interpretation the term "tian gu" refers to the space between the two lobes of the brain. How old is that meaning?

Then why do you ignore my questions?

I'm not surprised - believers always find a way to avoid considering my sceptical questions. And no - I don't think that understanding the concepts is enough.

No I can't. Can you? And more important - have you been able to verify how often that what you sensed with your belly was correct?

What is unchanging is "the way of nature" (or Tao). This is so because things change, but the manner in which they change doesn't change. Same as for the Laws of Nature that describe the changes that are continually going on in the physical world while the Laws of Nature that describe the changes remain the same.

Interesting analysis!

Sure enough, and I recognize that it does. But the feeling that thinking isn't important also flowers into consciousness, and that goes unrecognised by those who refuse to think about it.

Let me add some extra thinking : The idea that there is such a thing as pure deep experience independent of thinking is simply wrong. Such an experience would lack meaning and cognitive content. What we see in actual fact is that mystical experiences and forms of enlightenment are interpreted according to the spiritual, religious, or ideological perspective of the person having the experience. The reasoning of rideforever is a good example. He supposes that deep experiences are somehow more true or real than shallow ones. But how do we know that? Answer: we don't know it, it's just a dogma that's current in certain spiritual paths. So Bums (and others) who in their spiritual practice claim to go beyond reasoning actually don't go beyond it but only follow an irrational form of thinking with accompanying unprovable suppositions that are hidden from view by refusing to discus the theoretical underpinnings of the path. Nevertheless there clearly are such underpinnings (if only implicit) for otherwise there would not be a specific path to follow. His criticism of my rational approach already shows that the path proposed by rideforever has its own do's an don'ts. So my stance is that as a human being one cannot do without thinking and that followers of spiritual paths that claim to do so are fooling both themselves and others.

Sorry, but I don't think those links are very helpful. Taking Tao as the ultimate foundation of everything (as I do) explains its elusive qualities and rules out the possibility that Tao itself was created. If Tao itself was created than one would have to suppose that there is a super-Tao that created Tao, but that is pure and unhelpful speculation. We don't know what the ultimate foundation of everything (called Tao) is, and we can only experience its results as they manifest in both the physical world and in our inner thoughts, feelings, etc. The original Taoists didn't like theological speculation.

@ LiT I cannot find a respectable source for my warning of the danger of scrying so will have to let it stand as a personal impression. Further - I am expressly not saying that one should ignore the messages that reach one from the unconscious by way of dreams, intuitions, gut feelings, and the like. But one's unconscious already has enough ways of making itself heard. So yes - one should certainly take note of what one's unconscious has to say. But more isn't always better, and one shouldn't "spoil" one's unconscious by showing it too much attention. The latter approach could unnecessarily open Pandora's box.

The exploration of your deeper self may never end exactly because of the interest you show in the beautiful or horrifying images that boil up from the unconscious. In Zen it is advised to ignore them.

Mixing up (dream)images from the unconscious and perceptions from the physical world leading to existential fear, derealization and eventually psychosis.

Do you have a link about that. I looked up "dreamtime" on Wikipedia, but that wasn't very helpful. Yes - the are people (shamans) who devote themselves to living in both worlds at once, and take big risks at that. But I don't know of cultures where everybody lives as a shaman. But I may be wrong, in that case please refer me to some respectable sources.

I hope this project doesn't lead to unhealthy results. Nature (or evolution) has put a barrier between the world of our dreams and the world of our waking live, so there is reason to believe that we are more fit for survival when these worlds are kept apart. When this barrier is systematically removed the result could be utter confusion or worse.

For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioactive_decay

Even Lao tzu and Chuang tzu got angry at (for instance) Confucianism and expressed themselves on the issue in no uncertain terms. They had no problem with being judgemental when they reckoned that the issue deserved it! That's why I dislike the watered down nondual, New Age, and postmodern versions of Taoism. But each time and temperament comes with it's own interpretations, and there is a place here for everybody. Although not without some friction.

@ Stosh You are right: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/price-or-prize

I agree with all your answers except the above one, quantum mechanics isn't only theory. Semiconductors and all equipment that is based on them (such as computers and the internet) wouldn't work if quantum mechanics were just a theory that were no better than for instance classical electrodynamics.

Please post your ideas on being judgemental?