Wondo

I meant a modern classic for Neidan. It is not cryptic. Pretty easy to follow. Others here would agree.

I meant a modern classic for Neidan. It is not cryptic. Pretty easy to follow. Others here would agree.

In re-reading some of Liu Yiming material, it appears that he is not supporting any of the internal work that we would find in many of the classics. For example, in the book a lot of us tend to go to as a good clear guide, Luk’s Taoist Yoga, it would appear that LYM would not advocate any of that, or that he assumes one has already done this?? A little confused about this, not because I don’t understand the material, but because when reading this stuff one tends to be required to know how to look beyond cryptic messages, but LYM sees to be emphatically say ain’t that the methods of working with a “physical” elixir, etc. is not the way to awakening.

Yeah. The Foundations of Internal Alchemy is kind of a laborius read. It is not long, but it is putting all of the pieces together of how Understanding Reality and the parts that are already expected to have occured in previous practice leading up to it all jive together. It is challenging for me because I come from the cultivating the mind first with my years of Zen practice and now interested in the cultivating the body part of it. I know in reality they are not two, but both are necessary in my opinion. You just don't arrive at it some day, you have to keep cultivating it. The Tao is alive, not dead, it moves and so one must also keep moving.

Also, may want to read Cultivating the Tao by LYM trans by F. Pregadio Good read. If you want to see how LYM commented on Zhang Boduan, then read Understanding Reality. Cleary's translation is good and so is F. Pregadio as a compare and contrast. If you get F. Pregadio's translation then his Foundations of Internal Alchemy is a good way to see the missing foundational pieces that is already assumed you have when you start practicing the direction of Understanding Reality.

Thank you for this. I am very familiar with the I Ching. Do my best to work with it everyday.

Thank you. I have been working with SGF lately and that seems to be focusing on the upper Dan and I do not know how this fully fits in with alchemy.

What do you mean that it has everything you need to know? Just to be clear, everything that LYM says, resonates very much so with my practice (coming from a long Zen background and re-embracing Taoist practice, LYM makes the most sense). However, one thing I thought that has been missing was an emphasis on the physical body in Zen practice, so I have really started ramping up my Taiji and QiGong practice (within reason) and this got me started in to doing some internal alchemical practice, but not sure if this is all necessary.

Yeah. That makes sense. I have been practicing Zen for 25 years. I am not a dabbler. I really practice everyday, have been on many long retreats, etc. I noticed that I stumbled across many of the things that are discussed in internal alchemy, but never really got in to it before. But, since I believe that realization of Tao is a complete package, I felt the physical side of things were not quite where they needed to be, so I started working on building that in to my practice. So, in my humble experience, I realize that all of it is necessary. I think LYM is simply warning against not getting attached to the methods, and to recognize the true direction of the practice. For me anyway, they all go together. I know that when I am setting up the foundation, working with energy, etc. that it is just a part of my complete cultivation. When LYM talks about sudden and gradual, that shows up in Zen too. Especially with Huineng and Dogen. Not many people know that the Korean Chinul also talked about this. If we equate it to what Dogen said, practice and englightenment are the same thing. In otherwords, we manifest our Buddha Nature in everything we do especially when we are practicing. Chinul thought that sudden enlightenment happens many times in one's practice and it takes cultivation to make it become realized or matured to a point where it permeates everything you do. Chinul was about sudden englightenment/gradual cultivation. So, for me anyway, my level of understanding is only expanded and matured through cultivation. I believe that it all arrives at the same place.

Oh, okay. Thanks for clarifying. When I was mentioning about severl lifetimes, that was me talking and not necessarily a direct reference to LYM. I enjoy LYM, but not always sure why he throws the baby out with the bathwater. Being a long time practitioner of Zen, I get where LYM is coming from in discussing the empty nature of cultivation, but the physical practices of Neidan are important and I see both as relevant.

Thank you for this. Just curious, why do you refer to them as maniacs?

No, not really. I have been studying Taoism on my own for over 25 years. Most of my formal training is in the Zen tradition. However, through my Taiji teachers and some study I did with Stuart Alve Olson, I have been able to bridge the gap that I was looking for, for many years simply because when I started out my spiritual journey mostly influenced by Taoism, there were no Taoist teachers around, and the literature at that time was spotty, not like today.

I did not know you knew LYM. What do you take from his teachings that may be different than my take on it? It would be interesting to know.

It is a forum, that’s what it is for, to discuss things. Sorry, if I offend. Just trying to have a discussion. Nothing to prove.

I am not sure I would agree with this statement. How so? Buddhist usually get this rap. In fact, it is one of the things Chan tried to rectify since other forms of Buddhism tended to focus on transcending this world. Chan “tries” to overcome this by the “Not-Two” approach. Taoism does not favor formless over form. Taoist are very much about this world and its beauty. The thing to overcome as far as Taoism is concerned is the acquired self which gets all wrapped up in conditioning and so Taoist work toward returning to original nature which is not separate from the Tao. Tao is not formless, so Taoist would not praise it over form. Tao is form and not form at the same time. Laozi in chapter one of DDJ, was trying to point this out. It is not that Tao has no form, it is just that you cannot speak of it because as soon as you do, you miss the mark. Nagarjuna laid all of this out very clearly and one of the reasons why Chan is more closely tied to Huayen Buddhism than other forms of Buddhism. When looked at from this perspective, the Chan form of Buddhism and Taoism are very close in their views and direction, it is just that the path to get there differs (significantly in some cases).

Straight Up!

Sorry, From my humble opinion Descartes had it wrong.

A rather matter of fact statement. How do you know it is real? And, I never said it was not real. But, we have to define what we mean by real. When Buddhism talks about emptiness they are talking about empty of self nature. To say something is real from the perspective of each thing having a separate self nature and abiding self, from the perspective of Buddhist thought is a delusionary perspective. As Sengcan says in his Faith in Mind sutra, “ Changes in the emptiness before us all come from arbitrary views:It is not necessary to seek reality, all that is needed is ending the views.”

The idea of the world being an illusion comes from the notion of emptiness or sunyata in Buddhism. This has to do with the idea that the world as we experience it is not “real” in the sense that the six aggregates of eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body, and mind are also six different layers of consciousness and since these things are temporal and do not last, they are therefore just fleeting glimpses of reality and thus nothing is fixed in reality. But, a deeper aspect to this comes from the notion of Oneness. Many words are used to describe this: Buddha Nature, Tao, Dharma, Buddha Mind, Tahagata, etc. This idea is better understood as “Not-Two” In this Oneness idea, the concept of illusion is explained that everything is One (Not-Two) and so whenever our minds concretize any of this complete reality as a thing, then we see only a part and not the whole (kind of like Gestalt Psychology). And so we go around in life seeing the myriad things and happenings in this world as a multitude of many things happening, but the mind is the thing that is doing that. In the large context of reality, everything is just one complete reality. It is not that when our minds break things down into parts, that this is a bad thing, the dharma is just teaching us to know that it is just the illusory appearance of things as things in a temporal condition. That is how I understand the idea of reality being an illusion. It is not that these things are not temporary real in some sense, it is that we start to believe in their being separate entities that are born, live, then die. In the Buddhist cosmology, this is not how things are. It is rather just one big fluid motion of the Tao, and our meager minds break everything down into its parts because that is how we operate in our day to day experience. Nothing wrong with that, but to have clarity means that we know it is just an appearance of reality, not the pure reality itself. Hope I made sense.

Great info. Sounds like a wonderful experience. I am a teacher in the Korean tradition as well as a clinical social worker and also certified in mindfulness, so all of this is something that really resonates with me. I would love to find out more of what they were doing with the youngsters. I am always looking for ways to introduce mindfulness with students. It sounds like what they were doing was similar to MBCT (Mindfulness Based Cognitive Therapy).

I know this topic is quite old and dusty, but I was looking up some things about Lui Yiming and come upon this thread. I have practied in the Zen tradition for around 25 years. I was originally drawn to Taoism, but 25 years ago, in the U.S., finding a teacher of the Tao was rare, so the next best thing was Zen. I studied with a few teachers and all the while studying Taiji and Qigong. My latest Taiji teacher is Taoist and really rekindled my original interest in Taoism. He is teaching me the philosophy and the internal components of Taiji, but he still strongly emphasizes the martial arts components, which is good. As far as him sharing the Tao, he says it is up to each person to cultivate. So, I continue to read and practice. I have had the fortune of studying with Stuart Alve Olson for a few months and he helped set me straight on a few things. The reason I am replying to this antiquated post is that I wish I was here to comment for fatguyslim about Liu YIming. Yiming believes there is a superiore virtue and inferior virtue. Superior virtue is basically one already being quite achieved in spiritual practice and not in need of much work. The rest of us mere mortals fall in the inferior category. Therefore, we need to practice in order to work on our desires and defilements in order to have the enviornment be just right for total realization of the Tao. In my years of Zen practice going along side of my Taiji practice, I had stumbled upon the senstations of what happens in internal alchemy rather easily. However, when I realized how to practice some elements of internal alchemy, I saw the continued benefit of doing so. Therefore, revisting the writings of Liu Yiming is very refreshing, because I feel comfortable following a direction like this while still doing the internal work that needs to be done. I do not see these two things as separate at all. It is like in the Heart Sutra, where the Bodhisattva knows all about the emptiness of things and the manifestation of that emptiness in form and even in this knowing continues to live in this world to do the work that is necessary. For me, it is the same in internal alchemy. They go hand in hand. Yiming is pointing out that in its ultimate reality, all of the physiological aspects of internal alchemy are empty of any self nature. However, as I see it, as long as we are cultivating along the path, we still have work to do. He is not saying you are nowhere and worthless because you practice from the standpoint of inferior virtue. He is saying that as humanbeings in our after-heaven existence, we must work to get back to our original nature. This does not mean our lives are meaningless or fruitless until we get there or that there is really any difference between here and there. What we must do, however, is work on putting things back together the way they were in our original condition. If you are to become an immortal, it may take several lifetimes to do. However, even if you do not become an immortal right now, you sure can live your live in a very refined way of a cultivator of the Tao. That is no small thing. If you can be at peace with this, then you are well on your way. Just keep practicing everyday, the rest will take care of itself.

Hello All, ihave visited the forum a few times in the past and decided to join. I originally started out my spiritual path heavily influenced by Taoism. That was almost 30years ago and finding a teacher then was way much harder than it lull be today, so I eventually ended up studying Zen with several masters eventually leading me in to the Korean Soen tradition which I have been a part of for almost 20 years and have become a teacher (not a master) in that tradition. I am also certified in mindfulness based interventions which is a lot of the work I do with people these days in the secular world. I have also also studied Taiji and QiGong for about as long as my interest in Taoism started. Recently, due to some old back issues getting worse, I put more focus on my Taiji and QiGong and have had good results which eventually led me back into further exploring Taoism and internal alchemy. I have some questions around this and would like some guidance from forum members. I will post them here in a separate post.

I have noticed the energy for quite some time. When I practice, I use deep abdominal breathing and I feel heat and deep tranquility. Just wondering if I should get involved more deeply in specific alchemical practices or if that is something that I am already covering in my Zuowang type of practice?

Where I would like further guidance. It would seem to me that Soen practice is very much akin to the Daoist practices of Jing Zuo (Clarity and Tranquility) and Zuowang (Sitting in Oblivion), Shou yi (Guarding the One), and baopu (Embracing Simplicity). There are many debates out there of which came first Chan or Daoism? From my limited perspective, I think that both were pointing to the same thing and that Buddhism fell on fertile ground in areas where Daoism was already being practiced. Although later there was competition between the two schools, I think that both schools borrowed from each other along the way and exchanged ideas and practices which later makes it hard to see the difference between the two. However, that being said, there are differences; at least it appears that way at first. Buddhism does not typically deal with things like internal alchemy. But, when you look deeply, it does. For example the 8 Brocades has a Buddhist version which either came from Buddhism or was adopted by the Buddhists from the Daoists. In doing the 8 Brocades from the Buddhist perspective, one usually does abdominal breathing and in Daoism one does it with reverse breathing or embryonic breathing. In my daily practice, I have primarily been sitting Zen for over 25 years. It involves the practice of Hwadu, Kong-ans, and both of these lead to the practice of "Don't Know" mind. In addition to this, I practice the standing version of 8 Brocades as well as several forms of Yang Taiji and some Baguazhang. In those practices I typically use reverse breathing to help with cultivating and circulating Qi. Recently, however, I have also been working with the seated version of 8 Brocades which I use some reverse breathing and abdominal breathing. This includes rousing and rinsing the saliva and focusing on the microcosmic orbit. The point of my question is....is all of this internal alchemy necessary? I have read in books on Clarity and Tranquility and Zuowang where just doing these practices is already brining about some of the alchemical changes that happen in some of the other methods that focus specifically on internal alchemical techniques. For me, reverse breathing is easy. Swallowing the saliva and setting up the cauldron is also an easy, albeit tedious practice. The reason I am asking is that in order for me to keep up my Zen practice and my Taiji and Qi Gong practice, adding in the internal alchemical practices is now requiring more time, of which in practicality, all of this is very hard to fit in to my daily routine. I hope I am being clear with this and any advice would be helpful. Thanks.

Hello and thank you for the warm welcome from everyone so far. I will address some of the questions here about Soen. Soen is the Korean word for Zen. Not a lot of people know about it. However, when the Indian form of Zen (Dhyana) came to China it was called Channa and then called Chan for short. Chan went to Korea long before it went to Japan where it became called Zen as we know it today in our American vernacular. Buddhism came to China in the 2nd Century and then to Korea in the 4th Century and arrived in Japan in the 6th Century. Chan came to China in the 6th Century and Korea in the 7th Century, but did not come to Japan until the 12th Century. Interestingly Daoism (Called Do in Korea) came to Korea in the early part of the 5th Century right after Buddhism arrived 100 years earlier. What is fascinating about it is how much of the original Chinese influence is seen in Korean Buddhism and Korean Zen and the influence of Taoism that still remains. I had studied Japanese Zen for several years before ending up in the Korean lineage. It was only through chance that this happened. I did not seek it out. One thing of importance to note is that when Chan came to Korea, it was before there was a division of schools leaving primarily the the Linji (Rinzai) and Caodong (Soto) schools which became the two prominent schools in Japanese Zen that survive today. Therefore, Soen looks a lot like the Chan that existed before these divisions had occurred. Although in Korea, different mountain practice sites had some variations in teaching styles just as had happened in China. Much to my delight, when encountering Soen was just how much it has stayed connected to some of the early patriarchs of Chan like some of my favorites including Sengcan, Daoxin, Huangbo, Huineng, and Dahui. In particular, Korean Soen was heavily influenced by Dahui which not only used Kong-ans (jp. Koans) but also used the Hwadu (ch. Hua Tou). The Hwadu looks at short phrases in meditation like "What is this?" "What am I?", etc. The answer to this is "Don't Know" The practice of Don't Know is a practice that goes back a ways in Korean Soen. Chinul, a Korean teacher in the 12th Century was big on revising the practice of Dahui and using the Hwadu. Dahui also believed that although Kong-an and Hwadu practice were important, he also believed that the teachings of Confucius and Laozi were just as important. I personally believe that the practice of Hwadu and the practice of Don't Know is a lot like what Zhuangzi taught in IC 6 of the Zhuangzi about sitting and forgetting which obviously parallels the Taoist practice of Zuowang. I hope all of this is helpful and forgive me if I have stated things which may be incorrect. I have shared this with the best of my knowledge of the subject. This brings me to where I would like some guidance if possible. I will post this in a separate post here in this thread so that this one does not end up being too long. Thanks.