DentyDao

I sing and dance too.

Spyrelx, I don't think I have called anyone stupid or made any personal attacks. This is just a weak defense against your perception that I'm taking a superior position. The reality is I'm just arguing a point and people like you and Pat and a perhaps a few others can't really handle the idea that I know more than you about Daoism. Your just trying to get a few punches in to make your self look good in the eyes of others; and all your really doing is inflating your own ego; and the simple fact remains that, in terms of actual Daoist cultivation, you probably haven't even scratched the surface. Your more concerned about making friends here than having an honest dialog. Michael Winn is a good person, we even chatted on the phone not to long ago. Despite our differences, we still keep in touch once in a blue moon and I enjoy listening to his 'Theories.' He, despite his wrong ideas about Daoist cultivation, is actually doing a lot of good in the world and has done a lot to rescue the Healing Dao from becoming a harmful place. He's added his own flavor and reinvented the system to focus more on mental and spiritual health and backed off of Chia's early claims about immortality and rejuvenation. He's created his own system and taken out or reduced the harmful aspects while shifting the focus to a more practical, realistic level. Calling it Daoism is a bit of a stretch, but it beats putting people in the hospital. I hold no ill will toward Pat or anyone here, but if you want to pretend I'm some kind of sociopath to make your self feel better, go right ahead. I'll just put you on my ignor list Peace, Sean P.S. Anyone want to beat a dead horse? I'm here all week. This popularity contest stuff is truly amusing.

Hey, As a former Healing Tao instructor, I would caution you against this system which is largly an invention of it's creator. You might check out Wong Kiew Kit. He's actually a Buddhist with a Taoist flavor. As an all around system that's widley available, this is a good option and a good place to start. Anyway, check it out and see what you think. Just my two cents. S

For Pat G., I have to say, it takes a lot of creativity to blow something this irrelevant so far out of proportion. I think we need to give each other the benefit of the doubt when we are reading something written on the internet; people's subjective perceptions can color even the most benign statements and turn them in to insults and personal attacks. On the whole, my statements aren't really meant pejoratively. I'm sorry if they are perceived that way, but I can't really control how people take what I say. I do find Pat’s remarks about me completely unfair and I think it’s a simple case of unconscious issues that he has built up. I don’t know the guy personally, but it sounds like he needs to get out a little more often and stop taking himself so seriously. I honestly wish him the best. The poor guy is making himself miserable. Anyway, I’m glad he ‘blocked me’ or whatever; perhaps if he had just done that in the first place, he could have saved himself a lot of grief. For what it's worth, I'll try to be a little more sensitive in posts in the future. I wouldn't want someone who is truly unbalanced to cause harm to their self or others over something I say. Sincerely, Sean Sound advice as usual. I hope that contributions like this will lead more people to begin to accept and explore the 'forgotten side of ourselves' and start believing in the magic and wonder again. S

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=84...hnamurti+videos

There you go spoiling all the fun again. Michael, please lighten up a tad. We all just do the best we can.

Here's part of the documentary from Stanford. Perhaps you can make your own judgements, unless of course you don't feel qualified in which case you can always call Randi and get his opinion. Part one: Part two: Part three:

Who can blame you; that last post of yours doesn't even merit a response other than to suggest some actual research on your part. It was just you kind of rewording some stuff that I said and then like posting it with a few comments cut and pasted from Randi's Amazing website about how Geller is like a cult leader trying to line his pockets by ripping off innocent people. Geller is a humanitarian who raises millions of dollars for the research of childhood disease. Who are you? Now quick, before you lose face, go back to Amazing Randi's website and cut and paste some more sizzling 'evidence' about what a big fake Geller is. And for what? Oh ya, I forgot, you're protecting the innocent from buying into Uri's cult where they will undoubtably brainwashed into buying his merchendise like a bunch of mindless crack junkies. Give me a fucking break! S

It just takes longer

Yawn... Another expert Daoist master. I choose to believe the opinions of credible scientists and you side with a former stage magician with no formal scientific background. Some of the world's best modern illusionists back Geller. You need to check your science; science is changing every day and the more we discover the more we realize how little we know. Because no one takes his dumb ass seriously, except other dumb asses. Most of the 'outing' he does of psychics and the like is comparable to shooting fish in a barrel; It's so fucking obvisous, that it's boring. Just like this conversation...

Yes, Puerto Rico has long been known for its large number of enlightened TV repair men with mustaches.

In my opinion Uri Geller has repeatedly proved that his abilities are real, despite Randi's claims to the contrary. While the majority of Randi's claims are valid, when he has been presented with real so called paranormal abilities, he falls back on the overly complicated 'requirements' of the million dollar challenge, which he has created to give himself a fail-safe. Anyway, I personally think the guy is sick in the head. Just my personal feeling; no offense. If you're interested in judging for your self, check out the research done by the Stanford Research Institute on Uri's website. It was compelling enough to convince some of the top scientists of the day that Uri is 100% genuine: http://www.uri-geller.com/content/research/sria.htm

The man in the video is probably really doing this demo. In China one of David's masters trains military personel to absorb electricity out of a high voltage outlet. It's not yin yang gong. The differences are many; John Chang and others like him use qi generated in their body, not electricity. Also the power generated is far greater. It's interesting to see though. The comment about Amazing Randi is quite true. The guy has had is ass handed to him dozens of times and refuses to give up the cash. S

Sorry for any offense. The concerns about Chia might be worth considering; there are a lot of good teachers out there too. I don't have time to read your posts, but I'm sure your a with-it guy; my comments weren't ment as a personal criticism of you. All the best, S

This is a very important point. Jing is very important and very misunderstood. You can NOT 'save up Jing.' I've read Bill's work and he oversimplifying things when he says that Jing is sexual essence. This is one of the things that turned me away from pursuing Bill's online course. Perhaps he is just simplifying things for his readers; the reality of Jing is a bit of a trade secret among achieved masters. Yes and no. I'm saying that Jing is not sexual energy. Sexual energy/glands certainly has a Jing Aspect, but the two are not synonimous. Cameran, remember this; when you really understand this relationship, you can begin to truly practice. Of course we can. Don't worry about stepping on my toes. You guys are far to polite; it's insulting.

I'm not sure you can really compare the two. Buddhism is a very 'fixed' path with clear definitive teachings that don't really change and evolve. Taoism is the opposite. It has thousands of variants, schools and lineages each with their own ideas and practices; some effective, some not so effective. A perfect illustration of his is the fact that many Taoist traditions incorporated Buddhism, but no Buddhist lineage has ever adopted the teachings of Lao Tzu for example. Of course, Taoists in their various lineages held many of the tenets of Buddhism before Buddhist history. They even had the concept of becoming a Buddha before the historical Buddha came onto the scene. If you're going to compare the two, then I think you need to say which line of the Dao you are comparing to Buddhism. Anyway, I'm gland we have both.

You'll have to wait till next week; my mom flushed my weed and I had to pawn my dice for a dime bag... See you in fantasy land. He he he. Basic intro and training 40,000. For you 30,000. Knowing what's what, priceless. And you think I'm kidding? But you never know immortals do make exceptions and are hard to predict; he just might show up in the States and start lecturing again. He did come here several years ago. I'm afraid we may have missed the boat on that one though. BTW, that's Euros. The U.S. Dollar is shit; thank you George.