Giles

Sorry! 🙏🏻 Was a bit preoccupied with needing to empty the dog and get to the shop before it ran out of organic milk. To clarify: the answer to both your detailed questions is: "Yes", but... I obviously need to qualify that with "as far as I'm able to determine at this point" (because I'm still a student of Taoist Internal Alchemy rather than a lineage holder (in this particular school)). However, that still leaves hanging the question of "what is the goal of Taoist Internal Alchemy?" So, having now (hopefully 🤞🏻🙏🏻) answered your question, I'd appreciate a bit of quid pro quo: So, what is your own answer to the question of what is the goal of Taoist Inner Alchemy?

As far as I can tell, s/he's entirely competent to teach me Taoist Internal Alchemy, as I wouldn't be her/his student otherwise, would I?

Who are "them"?

I've no reason to doubt either that assertion (or my spiritual friend's more colourful assertion).

According to the (Chinese) doctor of TCM who's currently teaching me Taoist Internal Alchemy, the number of people who've attempted to walk that Path is: S/he then made the point that phoenixes and dragons don't actually exist. ⚠️ S/he also mentioned that neidanshu/xianshu's an extremely risky endeavour and there's a much safer alternative. ⚠️

Shhhhh.... 🤫🤐

It would be more accurate to state that all matter is chi/qi. Qi is more than energy because, for example, qi also consists of information.

An excellent question. 👍🏻😊 Unfortunately, this thread has expanded to the extent that I don't have the time to read through it all, so can I ask you if you've yet received a satisfactory answer because, if not, I'll attempt to provide it for you.

Yes. 😊 Also agreed. 😊 I know. 😊 I sense that we're still on the same page here. 👍🏻😊 That's not what I'm seeing. My spiritual friend (a term that I thank you for helping me to refine/define 🙏🏻) , who is formally teaching me a profound and effective method of Taoist Alchemy, has attempted to fit (what appears to me to be their their first-hand direct knowledge of ultimate reality) into an Abrahamic Taoist/Buddhist paradigm. However, this in no way diminishes the value of what is being taught to me for reasons that are quite possibly entirely obvious to you. Hope that makes sense? Namaste. 🙏🏻

🤷🏻‍♂️😊

My guess is that you're probably broadly correct about that because it's certainly not necessary to practice anything potentally dangerous enough to need veiling in secrecy in order to realise enlightenment and liberation from suffering.

Apparently, about 2,000 years ago (ca. 100 BC), hundreds of years after the Buddha died, there was already such a huge amount of disagreement about the veracity of the orally-preserved doctrine that the 1st* Fourth Buddhist Council was convened during which the most politically powerful faction committed to writing what they believed to constitute the teachings of the Buddha. * There were two Fourth Councils because they couldn't all even agree on a matter as mundane as their meetups by that point in time.

I'm not here either to defend or to badmouth Christianity. I was brought up in a Christian environment and the version of it that I learned was absolutely invaluable to me. However, on the flipside, I've seen versions of Christianity that have destroyed the children who imbibed it.

Grace doesn't happen from anything. It's always there for everyone because that's Its nature (Love/Ānanda). Yes. Separate and, albeit merely from my perspective, irrelevant.

Indeed. The Vijñānabhairava tantra makes that very point, albeit in a slightly obscure way.

My opinion it is that is that it may or may appear to work for you as an individual in terms of leading to a glimpse of the ultimate really. However, if it does it will be through the mechanism of Grace rather than by the application of any particular method.

The problem here is that Buddha made the cardinal mistake of leaving the door wide open to the appeals to [his] authority fallacy.

Good luck with finding the answer to that question. Be sure to let me know if you succeed because I spent several years on it myself and, although it was a useful and interesting exercise and I met some fascinating people, I never succeeded in establishing a definitive answer.

Does it really matter? There are as many different versions of "Buddhism" nowadays as there are drops of water in the oceans because the Buddha decided that there should be no written recording made.

A "biggly secret" one... 🤣

Exactly. Whether or not the Abhidharma texts are an accurate representation of the Buddha's original teachings is highly debatable.

Just put him on ignore and move on unless of course: ❓️🤔

Not really. There's a distinct difference between Brahamic religions and Abrahamic religions and, sadly, I've just seen one of my current "teachers" tying themselves into knots by attempting to fit what seems to be an "unimputable" Self-realisation into an Abrahamic framework.

One of my current "teachers" was a kriyaban for about 15 years and his position on this aspect of walking the Path remains unchanged despite having moved on from teaching and practicing kriya yoga exclusively, which is one of several reasons that I really enjoy attending his satsangs.