liminal_luke

Congratulations on your successful fasting program, Nature Beeing. A slight correction: you`ll get more results if you google intermittent fasting. I`m a big fan of intermittent fasting though I`ll admit it`s not for everyone. Depends who you are, what you`re trying to accomplish with your diet plan, where you are in your life. At the risk of being pelted with tomatoes and other vegan goodies, I`ll mention that I`m not a big fan of the meatless approach. Again, depends who you are and all that. For most of us, some meat (grassfed is best) is the healthier choice.

Some thoughts... The Art of Peace is largely about recognizing our resistance to what is. How can we be at peace if we`re fighting against reality? This doesn`t mean that we can`t work for change, only that any such work will be built upon a foundation of tranquility. Peace is a surprisingly unpopular mindset. It`s always there if we want it, but we keep pushing it away. My two cents... (PS. I disagree with some other posters in this thread, and my first impulse is to write about how wrong they are. Debate can be good, but the impulse to fight -- the addictive pull of conflict -- is not. For now, I`ll resist.)

Ummm....I don`t think it works that way Gendao. If memory serves, Taomeow once talked about the common misconception that the actual substance of semen was jing. (In the interview section I believe, if you want to go look for it.) No doubt, how we deal with our erotic energy influences our jing, but it`s quite a bit more complicated than some retaining enthusiasts would have us believe. No horse semen shots for me, thanks.

Me too, Orion. We`re all a mixture of yin and yang, regardless of gender, and when those qualities merge energetically interesting things happen.

Mandrake, Thank you for your well wishes on my cultivation, and your thoughtful post. It`s true that in the past I`ve encountered homophobic posts. Not so much lately, thankfully. In my opinion, your point about people wanting to puff themselves up and seem more expert than they are is spot-on. There`s a surprising amount of very high level practitioners here willing to share knowledge, but it`s necessary to look carefully among the weeds to find the flowers. That`s my experience anyways. I don`t mind saying that I`m gay because I generally don`t get snagged into online negativity about that subject. Been there, done that. (My track record on other subjects is more spotty.) If a fellow Bum is gay and has questions about how sexuality integrates in with Taoist practice, I`m happy to share my experience.

It`s funny about the bathroom thing. I sometimes go to a Starbucks that has two bathrooms, one for women and one for men. Both bathrooms lock so it`s just one person at a time. There`s been a few times when the men`s bathroom is occupied and the women`s isn`t. So I go into the women`s, lock the door, and use the facilities. It just seems silly to me not to. I`ve noticed that a lot of guys don`t share my approach. Men will stand outside the bathroom waiting for a long time when there`s a perfectly empty, single-person women`s bathroom right there. I don`t get it. Am I some sort of crazy gender rebel? Two notes: (1) I`d never use a women`s bathroom if it was meant for group use; (2) I`m always careful to put the seat down and leave things clean.

There are legitimate questions of medical ethics when it comes to the treatment of gender dysphoria in children... but it`s more fun to talk about who gets to use which bathroom.

Great question. I guess I`d mostly want to know whether the original question of energetic balance within homosexual relationships is purely theoretical or comes out of personal experience. Otherwise, it`s hard to offer a useful answer. I`m gay and have explored many of the paths people talk about here, and I`m balanced enough I guess.

Yes, I can yawn when I want to. Anybody can, I think. You just kind of fake it. Here`s a zapchen video about yawning.

Oh, so many ways. It seems like everything I do by way of spiritual practice is about releasing blocks and "issues." Otherwise, why do it? I`m a big believer in going through the body. All that emotional stuff is exactly mirrored on a bodily level. No, that`s not quite right -- all those emotional blocks are phyical blocks. Maybe I`m just lucky, but I think pretty much everything works. Here are some favorites. Self-massage (acupressure, chi nei tsang, just making little circles wherever there`s soreness or tension) Breathwork Shaking (Kunlun, trauma release exercises, plain old any-which-way shaking and jiggling) Yawning Any sort of Tai Chi warmup, joint mobilization (knee circles, arm circles, hip circles, neck circles, eye circles)

Blackstar, I`m guessing you didn`t vote for Trump. Neither did I. Just listening to him speak, I`m astonished that pretty much anybody did. I`ll bet there`s a bunch more stuff we agree on too. How do you feel about military spending? I`d be happy to cut it down by about 50% and use all that money to plant trees instead. I`m pro-choice when it comes to abortion, and also believe in euthanasia, at least in certain instances. (And, in case your wondering, I hold life sacred -- and no, I don`t see the contradiction.) I could care less who uses what bathroom, and am happy to let someone change their gender back and forth six ways to Sunday and not say a word about it. In other words, I suspect that some of the more right-wing people in the forum can only conclude that I`ve been thoroughly brainwashed by a corrupt government and the "false news" liberal media machine. But about this sociopathy business: I`d be careful with that. Other people are often more complicated than they appear, and making statements about their inner working is a delicate and dangerous business. We`re on safer ground confining our statements about inner psychological states to ourselves. (This doesn`t apply, of course, to Trump; I`m happy to diagnose his mental state.) In general though, it`s hard to know what other people are thinking and feeling. It`s especially difficult to diagnose whole huge groups of them. Personally, I wouldn`t do it.

"a distributor of hugs" --- a wordsmith indeed! Thanks...

Aawww, I dunno. I believe in soulmates. Why look...he`s just getting up now. We`ve been together eight years, none of them easy, all of them worth it.

It`s pretty hard to get around making decisions. We`re naturally going to be in favor of some things, and opposed to others. Much time is spent debating these decisions. Is it OK to watch porn? To charge money for spiritual teachings? To eat meat? Oftentimes how we answer isn`t nearly as important as our grip strength. How tightly do we hold on to our opinions? It`s possible to hold an absolute conviction -- for instance, " I will not watch porn" -- without using megatons of emotional concrete to hold the conviction in place. Usually that`s not what we do though. Usually we tighten around our beliefs -- and that tightening can lead to difficulties. To me, that`s the trap of being staunchly against things, say porn, since we`ve been talking about that. We may have every reason in the world to believe that it`s wrong, but if we constrict around that position our belief will only hurt us. Of course we can also constrict around wanting something, and that`s called addiction. Either way, there`s a loss of freedom.

I`m sure there are lots of ways. One pretty failsafe all-round tension reliever is yawning. Just yawn for a few minutes, maybe five or ten. Let yourself make noises as you do it. Maybe give a little stretch. Afterwards lie down and take a little nap or let your mind just wander for a bit. This is an exercise from something called Zapchen.

In the category of... Least accurate handle: Marblehead Cat you don`t mess with: Taomeow Sweetest policewoman: Kar3n Most likely to recite the constitution by memory: Brian Bum who most inspires me to be my best self: Silent Thunder Best poker player: Ralis Most likely polar bear swim participant and/or Burning Man bartender: Thelerner Lowest temperature: Cold

,,,

Some people say porn depletes jing. I think it`s like buying diamonds at Tiffany`s: if you have to ask, you probably can`t afford it.

Probably smart. Someone else on this site does much the same thing, offering "breadcrumbs" for people to follow but refusing to just "give away" the goods. Something about "it won`t mean much unless you do the research yourself." Oh well...

No doubt these words point toward real expierences that people have had, or are having, or could have in the future. Yet I often wish we`d just cut them out of the discussion altogether. If someone tells me they`re enlightened some part of me goes, ya prove it. Not a very enlightened first reaction, I know. Certainly not one that leads to much useful dialogue. I think a lot of us do this though -- about teachers and schools and fellow bums. We end up debating about people lighting little pieces of paper on fire without a match, when we could be getting on with our spiritual lives. There`s also the person that`s so busy thinking and dreaming about enlightenment, so focused on the nature of that far-away goal, that they neglect to take the next teeny tiny step towards it. Discussion of enlightened states can be a spiritual roadblock, is all I`m saying. YMMV

The problem with anti-Trump spells mostly fall into the be-careful-what-you-ask-for category. My sense from the political discussions on the board is that people who like Trump and those who don`t mostly want the same things: peaceful international relations, basic freedoms, human dignity. We`re remarkably agreed on most things that really matter, and the disagreements center on methodology. What if the witches succeed in casting Trump out only to find him replaced by a Hillary-esque leader who starts another world war? Oops. I think it`s smarter (and more humble) to ask directly for peace and harmony, and let the universe sort out how best to deliver the goods. That said, I wish them well wherever their brooms take them. These are good people.

I watched the video and reacted to it. Nothing mind-blowing though. Definitely got a blast of energy, but could it have just been a placebo effect? Anyway, yes we`re all different.

I`m no lawyer, but that bill is a little confusing to me. If it really means that people who the state proves have "conspired to riot" are guilty, I`m all for it. My concern is that it might be used to discourage Joe Schmo on the street from peacefully protesting. The wording that seems ambiguous to me is in section B: "has reason to know." Everyone knows, or has reason to know, that protests can turn violent. This is true of pretty much all protests. Sometimes it`s even violence instigated by people who have infiltrated a group from "the other side" -- or at least so I`ve heard. There`s a potential for violence, for instance, at Trump rallies. I have reason to know it. But if it`s really intended only to prosecute people who plan violence, I`m all for it. Go Arizona! A. A person commits conspiracy if, with the intent to promote or aid the commission of an offense, such person agrees with one or more persons that at least one of them or another person will engage in conduct constituting the offense and one of the parties commits an overt act in furtherance of the offense, except that an overt act shall not be required if the object of the conspiracy was to commit any felony upon ON the person of another, or to commit an offense under section 13‑1508, or 13‑1704 OR 13‑2903. B. If a person guilty of conspiracy, as defined in subsection A of this section, knows or has reason to know that a person with whom such person conspires to commit an offense has conspired with another person or persons to commit the same offense, such person is guilty of conspiring to commit the offense with such other person or persons, whether or not such person knows their identity.

Of course. Perhaps I misread. Aren`t they talking about making it illegal to participate in a protest that becomes violent, even if the participant himself is not acting violently? Like making it illegal to be at a bar if a fight breaks out? I say sure, lets deal with the people who are actually fighting, swiftly and decisively. Let`s not make it illegal to be drinking a beer when it goes down. Are you saying that we ought to use the law to dissuade potential protesters from attending an event because there`s a chance someone else might be violent?

Political protests are like McDonalds hamburgers. If you delve too deeply into the backstory of that burger, you`re not gonna want to finish your meal. In any case, it`s a lousy way to spend your lunch hour. So yes: I believe you. But is it a crime? For most people involved, I`d say no. The teenager taking your order for minimum wage isn`t committing a crime. The single mom treating her kid to a "happy" meal isn`t committing a crime. Using really bad judgment maybe...I`d buy that. There`s probably a real crime somewhere if we zoom out far enough to get a picture of the actual corporate decision makers at the tippy top, but those people don`t come anywhere near the franchise. Let`s agree that "many of those taking to the streets are little more than children who are being misled." That`s messed up and very sad. It`s also not a crime.