goldisheavy

This sounds like like a lie to me. I checked thelearner's post. Come here: http://www.quranexplorer.com/Quran/Default.aspx Then check all the citations. Quran Explorer has many translations and they are all excellent, so there is no way to weasel out of it by invoking Arabic obscurantism. Punch in the first reference thelearner provides. Open it in the Quran Explorer. Then cycle through all the English translations. The Quran is clearly talking about the Sun running, no doubt about it. Do this for the rest of the references. So thelearner was bang on and everyone who tries to smear him is a liar and a slanderer. I can't stand lies.

Precisely! Except, what is "other than mind"? What is "qigong itself"? I don't understand how qi gong can be itself and outside mind at the same time. I don't think qi gong is like that at all. Qi gong has specific and down to earth goals which are based on somewhat deluded assumptions. For example there is an assumption that energy is something substantial and that it can be accumulated. There is an assumption that energy must flow through vessels, which are called meridians. In fact energy is neither substantial nor does it require any kind of vessels. It would be OK to creatively admit the existence of vessels as creative and playful, but qigong people don't think of them in that way. They think these vessels actually exist regardless of beliefs, and that perception of these vessels is neither creative nor playful. It's a play of consciousness which isn't acknowledged for what it is -- a play. So the goals of qi gong are improved health, and improved battle prowess and not any kind of fuzzy feelings. Wisdom is not the goal of qi gong either. Qi gong can be used to keep the body warm in the winter and cool in the summer. It has this kind of practical and down the earth application. So when qi gong is taught, I don't think the master who teaches it deceives the student in order to use qi gong as a vehicle for something higher. Exactly. You should also look up a relatively recent medical study that found that fake acupressure (or was it acupuncture?) gave the same beneficial result as the authentic one.

I never said qi gong gives no results. Any sustained application of intent will yield some kind of result. When I said that qi gong is partly bullshit I didn't mean it gives no results. I meant it's unnecessarily narrowly described, it uses a lot of stuff that's presented as just the only one possible form of the truth, etc. I other words, all qi gong materials I've seen promote a subtle delusion on some level. There are ways to get all the same results as in qi gong without the limitations of qi gong. That's accomplishable by anyone who understands the general principles and truths behind phenomenal manifestations and intent in a very broad and deep sense. A dumb yet fastidious and determined person can build a combustion engine based on a schematic. By someone who understands laws of physics at a more general level can build an infinite multitude of engines of which combustion engines are a subclass, and such person can build many different combustion engines instead of just one. Now, some people just want to get from point A to point B. They want a certain effect and really don't give a crap about how things actually work. That's not me and I hope that's not any serious spiritual seeker. So for people with similar aspirations to me out there I gave that warning. It's the difference between following a recipe and being a chef on a metaphysical level. Qi gong is deluded in the sense that when people learn one recipe, they can certainly show amazing results because a tasty recipe is still a tasty recipe, but then they pretend to be a chef, which is a different category of a sentient being with different aspirations from someone who studies qi gong. Qi gong requires absolutely no wisdom. It requires some sensitivity, common sense, and just lots and lots and lots of practice. A dumb but diligent and careful person can be a big success in qi gong. Such person will still be an idiot though.

Who is plagiarizing? I like to quote various sources at times, but I imagine I credit them every time I quote them. Did I forget to credit something somewhere? If yes, I'd like for it to be pointed out to me directly, without ambiguities and hand waving, and I will correct it. I doubt you were referring to me though. Still, I've read your link ralis and I can't find the guilty party. Also, I believe certain teachings are so special and sacred that they belong to all of humanity and need not be credited when quoted. Furthermore, while I take a somewhat negative position on book copying considering how relatively inexpensive most books are, I encourage people to copy certain special and sacred teachings regardless of legal issues and especially if you are poor. Some teachings no man has a right to claim ownership of. Some things belong to all of humanity and the wisest and most excellent spiritual teachings are in that category. And yet from what you describe ralis, I doubt the plagiarized material falls into the category I refer to in the above paragraph.

Taoism doesn't have a specific form, and asking for the most basic one just makes no sense. Taoism can't be summarized briefly unless you already have immense background of wisdom and experience, in which case it can be summarized by drawing on that background. But I'll say something anyway. It's not exactly a summary, but it might be better than nothing: "everything is cyclic; deal with it."

That's a damn fine question. Why not be content with a spiritual path? Why do you need a religion?

Yup. There may be more options within certain strands of Hinduism. Various shamanic belief system, while perhaps not religions, can also probably qualify.

I think this is the order of your personal experience xabir. But you are forgetting something. Some people experience things in a different sequence. Some people first start with an ordinary dualistic experience. Then they are introduced to the teaching of interdependent co-arising and the absence of inherent existence with regard to concrete objects. They ponder this teaching and become convinced that indeed it is so. Through wisdom they are able to perceive all discrete objects as one unbroken play of interdependence. Still, they continue to contemplate emptiness and interdependence. Then these people realize that even the sum total of the current experience exists in total interdependence with regard to the unborn potential of what all else there could be experienced instead of all this. Resting in this wisdom allows people to finally experience the unborn and mysterious luminocity of the I AM which is anchored nowhere and yet ever-present. At this point a person understands that "I am this" is an incomplete and limiting statement and "I am not this" is also an incomplete and limiting statement. As Chuang Tzu puts it, no self, no other is where one can find the hinge of Tao. This is what's called "released through wisdom." There is no way to establish the absence of an agent. Why not? Nothing can be established. And by the way, welcome back. Long time no hear xabir! As usual you make an entry with a War & Peace sized post!

This is a lie. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satanic_Verses http://www.muslimhope.com/ChangesInTheQuran.htm

In this sense we know practically nothing about practically anything. It's not important what Buddha taught. What's important is what people with good reason believe Buddha taught. What did the actual Buddha teach? Who cares? The important thing in Buddhism is not Buddha's person, but his teachings. And what makes the teachings important is not the attribution to Gotama, but their true-to-life quality and logical soundness. If Joe or Bob taught the same teachings, they'd be equally valuable.

Yes. There are two authentic canons of Buddha's teachings. One of them is Pali Canon, of which many texts were translated into English. So you can be rather certain about what Buddha taught for all intents and purposes in this life. http://www.accesstoinsight.org

It depends. They are deceptive in that when qigon is taught, you are often taught to take what arises as a result of practice literally, as if it is actually existing. So you learn good things along with delusion. The good thing you learn is the relationship between intent and phenomena. You learn how to manifest phenomena, and that's both useful and illustrative of the true nature of phenomena when approached contemplatively. The bad thing is that most qigong artists don't teach contemplation. They just say, "Do this until you feel like this, and repeat this 100 times, then do this and that, and you'll feel like that." So they teach you how to manipulate your experience. The good thing is that you learn how to use your intent in practice. The bad thing is that you don't get wiser about phenomena and you still follow things as if they are real. So that's my take on it. It's a combination of bullshit and non-bullshit mixed together. The dogmas of qigong are definitely bullshit. For example, meridians, dan tien, all that is bullshit. It's all optional and mind-made. You can put your energy storage point into any location. It doesn't have to be dan tien. You can even put it outside the body, or even inside some abstract space that doesn't coincide with physical space at all. It doesn't have to be a point. It doesn't have to be any shape. It can be a square or a pyramid or a sphere. The very idea of "storage" is bullshit to begin with. So all the configurations, locations, directions of flows, all that is cultural, conditional and individual. People cannot accept such shifty things as real though, so they try to physicalize them by making these things dogmatically solid, in other words, dan tien is always in the same place in the stomach, etc. This gives things an aura of physicality, solidity and then people can believe in these things given their delusions which expect solidity everywhere. The mind is truly flexible and adaptable, but because people are hung up on solidity they can't take advantage of that flexibility.

http://oaks.nvg.org/zhuangzi4-.html

What happened with the title is open to interpretation. If you believe that spirits have the same status as living beings, then he was deposed by the spirit of his dead master. If you don't believe that spirits have the same status as living beings, there are two options: 1. JC was deluded by his visions in that he took them too seriously and forgot about the empty nature of phenomena, or 2. JC wasn't deluded by his visions at all, he just used the spirit of his dead master as a convenient excuse to break a promise. Now, if you get into the views of his student, it gets worse. His student (the one who is interviewed) believes those spirits are actually demons. He says that right in the interview! Amazing. So if you truly believe that, why would you follow a man who takes advice from demons? How confused must you be? So this Western student comes into internal arts with enormous baggage of his useless religion, and then, he doesn't even act consistently with his own beliefs. I mean, if you really think JC is consorting with demons, why are you still learning from the guy? Why are you chasing him around and working on publishing a book? Talk about cognitive dissonance. Personally I don't believe in any kind of demons, but when I examine other people, I look at their consistency first of all. If the person has slight discrepancies in their view and conduct, that's OK. But if there are blatant discrepancies between various views or between the views and conduct, that person is sick. So what I get from this interview is that JC is basically a xenophobic asshole who used the spirit of his master as a convenient excuse to dump a student. Alternatively JC is deluded by his visions and can't comprehend emptiness, as he takes the content of visions at face value, which is very wrong. A wise person takes nothing at face value, not ordinary appearances and not visionary ones. At the very least, if you decide to dump a student, be a man. Tell him "I am dumping you." Don't dodge the guy, you fucking pussy. Be a fucking man and say things straight. If you're a filthy xenophobe, just act like it and stop making excuses and running away to the bank and whatnot. Tell the guy to get lost. How hard is that? Making age excuses is complete bullshit too. I don't buy the age excuse for one second. So both JC and this student are complete morons. They kind of deserve each other, karmically speaking. They are both internally conflicted and ignorant. And anyone who learns from them is going to need serious psychiatric care later on. I used to be curious about Mo Pai, but this interview has permanently aborted even the last shred of curiosity I had about it. I strongly advise anyone and everyone to stay away from any people involved with Mo Pai.

Xenophobia is a beautiful thing.

I have a lot of strong opinions about: 1. This entire interview, 2. JC, and 3. This so-called "top Western student", 4. Mo Pai, and all of them are very negative. That's why I didn't respond initially. I'll say this though -- it all is a big load of shit. All of it.

Very nice Marble! Where is this from?

This is still very much possible. You need to have a *lot* of survival knowledge to do it well. It would help if someone showed you the ropes before you did it on your own. You'd probably want to do minimal trade for tools like knives and hatchets, unless you enjoy spending countless hours knapping your own flint knives. But yes, it's very much possible. In fact, if you know how to live in the wilderness, you are more or less free of the law. You can squat on practically any land and not get caught, plus there is a ton of land which is uninhabited (whether the land is claimed or not, is irrelevant). For example, vast swaths of Siberia are uninhabited and the Russian government only reaches into those lands in theory but not in practice. The same of true for lots of Alaskan wilderness. There are some downsides, like the cold, but also upsides, because the weather keeps the fools away from the location. Plus, in a place like Alaska there are no poisonous snakes, which helps. I bet it's easier to live in Alaska than it is in say Amazon. You can't really "just" do it, but if you take survival classes, then practice by going out in the wilderness, fist for a weekend, then for a few days at a time, then for a week, then a month and so on, you can do it. Read survival books.

How about any sacred texts that did not rely on human agency to arrive in our world? As for your weak sauce definition, Pali Canon qualifies. Hell, forget Pali Canon. All the teachings I've ever given on this forum qualify as they came directly from the spirit and are unchanged, even this very post.

No, fear mongering happens when they say things like "OJ can cause gout" without any real evidence ("scientists" use statistics as "evidence" in every type of study like this one). That's not necessarily true. Trying to control things too much creates anxiety and it is not whatsoever empowering. It is empowering to drink OJ however much you want, as long as you know your desire to be moderate. Once you can trust your desire to be moderate, you don't have to regulate consumption. The only control that's empowering is creative and artistic control. Control for the sake of survival is a burden, a chore. I welcome real understanding. This garbage is not understanding, it is abuse.

Nice. I agree with most of what Ken says in that sound clip. Here's a bit of evidence to support Ken's assertion: Strong personality indeed.

Nice. I agree with a lot of this.

There is no good or bad food. Anything in moderation is good. Anything that's over the top is bad. A little pepper is good. A lot of pepper can get you a stomach cancer. A little water is good. A lot of water gives you water poisoning. A little fat is good, and a lot just clogs your arteries. The key is to eat some of everything in moderation. Forget all this bullshit about food being good or bad for you. Food is neither good nor bad. Fat is essential too. Ask any survivalist. What will you eat in the wilderness? Fat is the number one thing to eat and to store for future eating. What hurts people is the fact that in modern society we have too much of everything and people can't moderate. The "science" that goes into these studies is highly suspicious too. All these "discoveries" like coffee is good, then coffee is bad, beer is good/bad, it's all nonsense because scientists cannot control for every variable, it is impossible. They try, but they can't. It's impossible to even imagine all the variables that add up to cause a disease. Those two glasses of OJ is just one of a million variables, and unless the scientists are controlling for the other million or two million variables, the study is bullshit. Just use common sense and stop fear mongering.

Mantras can be effective or not effective at all depending on your mindset, attitude, beliefs and intent. Mantras are a tool to focus the mind. Mantras are also a tool to transform the mindset. Religions like to co-opt everything, but really all spiritual tools that actually work are inherently non-religious. Religions are more about organizing society into a social movement with hierarchies, fear and obedience, and all that kind of crap. Spiritual tools are not of primary concern when it comes to religions. If it helps to get people into the fold, so to speak, religions will strut out some spiritual tools. If not, they won't. Religions have a goal to dominate humanity. They really don't care about what actually works and what doesn't. So religions have a very cynical relationship with spirituality -- they use it if it suits their purpose. I strongly recommend against Islam in particular. It's one hell of a nasty religion. I can't really be honest if I don't say that. That said, good luck to you on your spiritual development. As they say, perfect people don't need the help. It's the imperfect ones that need help. I suggest you try things out for yourself and don't take anyone's word for anything, be it anyone on this forum, or your imam. Try things for yourself and do your own analysis afterward. Learn and grow. Don't stay static and dogmatic. Life is change. Be alive.

Very nice! I enjoyed this interview, thanks for posting.