gendao

Ha really? Such as? So, we're all pseudo-homos with pseudo-yang now? Lol...man are things f'd up these days!

Right, well just take a look at big media. The most successful woman is Oprah - whose show revolves around emotional bonding. Meanwhile, her successful male "counterparts" involve a lot of intellectual conflict (shock jocks like Howard Stern and assorted wingnuts like Bill O'Reilly). Of course, these are just generalizations and you do always have some "exceptions" like Ann Coulter or Dr. Phil... As far as being under-opinionated...I think that may often have more to do with differing interests between the genders. Men and women tend to have different interests and are going to be under-opinionated about the ones of less interest. This site is a good example. Clearly, it is male-dominated and so your average woman out there is going to be more "I dunno" when asked about Taoism. But ask her about celebrity gossip and she might have far more opinions! In PU, these types of topics are known as "chick crack." True, but why have these particular things been associated with women? Again, evolution. Since women incubate the child, they have to screen out bad food. Hence, women tend to have better senses of smell and taste than men. They tend to be far pickier eaters, if anyone hasn't noticed. Well, this should theoretically also make them better cooks too - as well as able to enjoy fragrant flowers more. Not to mention they have smaller hands and greater fine manual dexterity. No surprise then that the recent texting champion was a 13-yo girl: Point is, feminism looks down its upturned nose at these activities as "demeaning," but in reality they are simply logical extensions of natural feminine strong suits. Seriously, so many young women today BRAG about how they can't cook! Gee, when was the last time a guy BRAGGED about how he can't change a tire, or can't do ANYTHING, for that matter?

How do we get premission to start our own blogs? Or how do we make entries? It seems I have one now but it's blank and I don't see an entry button?

If you try alternative energy healers, I would recommend finding ones with genuine qi/jing power. They are quite rare, but do exist. Because your standard acupuncturist probably doesn't have this and so their treatments are not going to be very powerful. But cancer is not something you want to f*** around with, btw. You need to hit these hard and fast. Time is of the essence! Not saying yours is cancerous, just saying in general. I've done a bit of casual research on cancer and as far as other alternative treatments, I've heard of a few that were rumored to be effective for some. Basically they entailed: 1) Agaricus Blazei mushroom and controlled doses of selenium 2) Hoxsey's herbal cocktail formula 3) Laetrile (B17), graviola, curcumin 4) Royal Rife's old frequency generator machine 5) DCA (dichloroacetic acid)?

Cool, the middle dan tien would be pretty close to the heart chakra, so there seems to be some congruence here. And what drill? Would you mind linking it here, please?

Interesting, because doesn't TCM say that the heart is the source of intent? As opposed to the "mind" which most of us associate with our heads... I believe using your "heart" or "body awareness" instead of your "head" is the key to transcending one of the basic paradigms in meditation/qigong - whether to use intent or an empty mind. Well, if you use your intent straight from your heart (or wherever in your body), instead of waiting until it gets to your mind first...then you will be using both intent and an empty mind. Wala - paradigm transcended and problem solved.

Pffbtt...no problem! Ok seriously, is anyone here near this level of cultivation? Just curious?

I agree. My point is basically that those big questions are not only beyond the scope of this forum, but for most of us mortals at the level that we're at. Hence, the term "agnostic" which basically means "uncertain knowledge." And to believe you know any more than you do is fooling yourself. Interesting idea there. The Dunhuang scrolls contain Ch'an techniques of "viewing the mind" and examining it for shape and color, etc. The point of this exercise (I believe) ironically to get you OUT of your mind into a tri-state of non-thought, non-conceptualizing and not engaging the mind. Basically, an eye cannot see itself. So, if you are told to see your eye, then you must not be using your eye.

1) Why are men also bigger, stronger and have IQs 4-8 pts higher on average? The answer is in evolution. Sexual dimorphism was the result of gender role specialization and sexual reproduction - which proved more effective than asexual androgny. The proof is that we are all here today as a result of the former, not the latter. Anyhow, in this role specialization, males assumed the roles as protectors and providers and women as nurturinng replicators. So, females chose men for survival value (power), males chose females for replication value (beauty). Therefore, men compete more strongly for power - because our worth depends more upon it. Why are 99% of the self-cultivators on this forum male, and not female? It's not just wealth - but the creative, inventive force of exploration is largely male. We are driven to this from when we were still sperm competing against millions of others for our very survival. Women just don't have that same pressure placed upon them. 2) Footbinding originated from upper-crust Chinese women imitating Western "ballet" dancers in "pointe" shoes. So, it was essentially a Tang Dynasty "boob job" that eventually spread down to lower classes. But, it was started by women and passed down by women in the name of vanity and social-climbing. To blame it on "abuse" by men would be like blaming boob jobs on "abuse" by men. BS. Sorry, but feminist revisionist history and cultural illiteracy really piss me off. As does lack of accountability and scapegoating of men for women's own choices. Did men feed into it after awhile? Sure. But, where does the buck really stop here? 3) We can trade counter-examples all day long. Why is it that "99%" of those who have died in battle were all men? Why is it that "99%" of those drafted for military service have all been men? Why is it that "99%" of garbage workers have all been men? Why is it that "99%" of job fatalities have all been men? You see, there are 2 sides to the coin - and the problem with feminism is that it sees only one. Fact is, you HAVE been brainwashed by feminism to carry this chip on your shoulder against men due to a distorted, 1-sided pereption of events. And I find this typical for women today.

Well again, I think we can only be as precise as the language is... Lots of religions believe in some type of "God." Although "God" is an Anglo word that wasn't even in the original Bible. Therefore, "God" has a vague definition to begin with...and simply believing in "God" does not make you a "Christian," either. But if John says he currently still is a Christian and follows the "Christian ideal" - ok. Although I would still be curious as to exactly what his definition of "Christianity" and the "Christian ideal" is. Because that can vary widely - amongst both "Christians" and "non-Christians" alike. And we can't just go ask him now because I believe he has retreated to Borneo? Sorry for the tangent, Wayfarer...

Good point, some of what Jesus said has been interpreted as saying everyone needed him as an exclusive savior...but really those could be interpreted in different ways too. I think John technically fits the definition of agnostic more than Christian, because I think even he agrees that we are not at a high enough level to really KNOW the answers to all those really big questions. And to pretend otherwise is unrealistic. But do we know enough that there's probably some type of higher being(s) that we can pray to? Perhaps.

Well, I would love a separate thread on this then - the 2 paradigms of Taoism vs Christianity and how they fit together if someone believes in both? I mean, I think Christianity in particular is an inkblot that can be interpreted in many ways to suit your own beliefs - so I am curious what those beliefs actually are for "Taoist Christians" like David. Like, do Taoists really need a personal savior in Jesus? Because that would seem to be one sticking point between the 2 paradigms - whereas various others could be resolved more easily through creative interpretations. Like, I don't think John Chang is remotely an orthodox Christian, if he even still claims to be one. What I recall reading is that he was raised as one but during his adult retreat in the mountains was running around asking if "God" exists until he got a meteor hurled at him! Which made him conclude there might be some vastly higher being, but he had no idea if that was "God" or not. This would seem to paint him more as an agnostic or deist, not necessarily a Christian.

Ha sure...glad you enjoyed it! Taomeow - my mother nor my grandmothers were abused. They were all treated very well, in fact. But that does not insulate me from the misandry I am subject to in this feminized culture. For elaboration on that, please read post #4 here. I hardly think all of that is due to "men's abuse of women transmitted through the umbilical cord before birth." Nice try, though!

Personally, I don't have a problem with this. I don't feel like it's much to ask and certainly no one is stopping anyone from joining your board to argue it there if they so please. And I do enjoy having specific articles or essays linked here just to highlight some particularly good points... In short, I'd rather comply with minimal privacy requests than have you stop linking articles or shut the foundation board down (as with Kosta's old board).

That is very interesting, would be proof-positive that there are many ways to enlightenment. Now, is Wang Liping Christian too? I've been rather shocked to learn that quite a few high-level Chinese masters in Taoism or Taijiquan are actually Christian. Although, I'm curious as to what their definition of Christianity is? Do they really believe Jesus was the "son of god" who died for our sins and is the only way to "salvation?" I mean, from what I read from John Chang's book - he believed that "Heaven" was a white wave and "Hell" a black wave after death - but Hell was only temporary anyways. And if you become enlightened, do you even have to worry about going to "Heave" or Hell," or even need a "savior?" Or if you have a savior, do you need to become enlightened? So, what's the real paradigm here? Or do they simply take it more as a generic deism - and simply pray to "God?" If so, what is their definition of "God?" A "Pan Gu" type creator or the "Tao?" Perhaps this should be its own thread and a question to David - what their interpretation of Christianity is and how does it relate to Taoism? Compare and contrast the 2 paradigms?

Great post, Sean! This quote caught my eye, though. After hearing stories of Wang Liping walking through walls and "daylight ascensions," you're saying that there are Orthodox Christian mystics who make these feats look like child's play? Um, could you elaborate? What exact Christian traditions are these guys practicing and what have they achieved in comparison? And why isn't David discipling under them instead of WLP then?

Well, Bob Cooley did and thus "invented" resistance stretching! After which he used yogic asanas and TCM meridian theory to verify his independent findings. Oops, bad example...or is that a good one? But think about that - you had millions of yoga students following gurus...and yet none of them (I don't think) had figured out that you're supposed to contract, not relax, the muscles being stretched. Why? Because they were following the finger, not the moon. And that very slight, subtle distinction can make all the difference in the world.

Well, like I said, until we reallly transcend that dualistic paradigm via "enlightenment," it's more theoretical than applicable. Kinda like how we still use Newtonian physics for most science and engineering calculations - even though we know relativistic physics is technically more accurate. But for our purposes, Newtonian physics suffices and is far easier to apply. So sure, focus inside...but don't just strictly LIMIT yourself to JUST THAT as some ironclad rule. Or at least that's my opinion...

Well also don't forget - let's not get too stuck in this paradigm of "in me" vs "out of me" or "myself" vs "not myself." If we are ultimately all connected as one, then everything is really "in me." Although until we achieve enlightenment and really unite with everything, our current paradigm is still probably a better approximation for the time being.

What is the "state of Sung?"

I think ideally you want a good balance between self-discovery and experienced guidance. Isn't this true in most disciplines and skills in life? But I would agree with perhaps your sentiment that people may tend to rely upon gurus too much. I've noticed that those who follow the finger instead of the moon never get that far in the end. I think you must still find your own way, with teachers as signposts and teachings as verification.

But many feminists would beg to differ with you about your definition...or claim that EVERYTHING qualifies as "exploitation" of women. Even if it is due to biological differences or the woman's own choice. The reality today is as in Pietro's well-linked post. If anything, women aren't getting exploited nearly as much as men are these days...

Is it possible to separate practice from personality conflicts? I think the former quickly became a convenient proxy to hash out underlying disputes about the latter. That's fine, maybe it was even therapeutic and sorely needed! But, there's no need to confuse apples with oranges, then. In short: Don't claim to be debating apples when you are really debating oranges. This thread really could have been split up into 2: 1) Debating the LSD practice and protocol itself. 2) Airing out personal gripes between various posters in this thread. Anyhow, I guess real life tends to get messier than that...but I'm glad people were able to get some stuff off their chests and reach some sort of conciliation in the end. And hey, let's be honest - who doesn't love watching a trainwreck? Certainly not the >4000 views this flame war got!

Who do you think is the highest-level master in the world today? Wang Liping? An unknown hermit in the mountains of China? Some Indian guru? Just a silly question for a Monday morning...

There is something very odd here. I just borrowed a copy of The Silk Road by Susan Whitfield because there is a short chapter about Tibetan syncretism of Chan Buddhism & Vajrayana Yoga in the Dunhuang scrolls. This includes some specific methodology on meditation and mention of sexual practice. How odd that someone else randomly makes a Dunhuang post today!