dwai

this is a great book - I have a copy as well. The follow stage is beyond ‘the shen guiding the qi’ stage vis looking”. The dao takes over. Movement-stillness happens spontaneously. I found that a good way is to stretch the joints and spinal vertebrae open, suspend the crown point. Aikido is interesting, but deficient as it is practiced today imho. I gave it up after I found my Tai chi teacher. Incidentally so did my aikido teacher.

This stage is to not "flow" the Qi but to Follow the Dao. The flow part can't eschew volition but is the training part of the practice.

When they recognize that which gives them the ability to think, feel, hear, taste, smell, see.

Don’t forget about the sneaky fake qi masters who give people the license to carry (concealed or open will depend on the state you are in of course).

The power of the transfer method is too strong? Do you have a "carry" license?

Interestingly enough, in the system I practice, we use the "indirect method." There is no direct movement of the qi inside the body - but moving qi outside, which moves the qi inside. For example, generating a qi ball and moving it will result in qi moving through the MCO. Of course, the "direct method" is when people use their mind to move the qi through the MCO (or wherever).

I am pretty well versed in sealing the senses in the Daoist meditations I have been taught and per the classical yoga limb of pratyahara (sense-withdrawal). They are suitable for nirvikalpa samadhi and helpful for practitioners of certain mindsets but are not necessary for all.

That which allows knowing to arise is the Truth.

What you say is due to incomprehension of what the classics actually say.

I think the problem is with translating untranslatable into English. When you say "acquired mind," what is it? Is it consciousness or the transactional entity that seems to allow us to operate in this phenomenal world? As opposed to an un-acquired mind? Mind and consciousness are incorrectly superimposed upon each other due to duality. So one cannot understand that the mind is simply reflecting Pure Consciousness. This is called ignorance. This is made worse by the English language, which does not have the syntax to categorize accurately. The "Truth" cannot be different, only different ways to speak it.

Instead of blindly accepting everything that was said, apply your intelligence to understand what was not said.

I agree. I'm just using this as a teachable moment for some of our more belligerent members (not yourself). Given that a certain member is always putting others down by using pedantry, I would like to employ the same tactic. The mind is not acquired. It is a phenomenon that arises with the "entry" into the phenomenon world (birth); it reflects pure consciousness, which can neither be created nor destroyed/dissipated. Whatever appears in mind is a consequence of objects that exist in the collective unconscious (universal mind). The specific conditions of the personality (such as place/culture of birth, religion, family, etc.) will draw specific types of objects into the mind (these are called tendencies/vasanas). Consciousness is spotless; it is unsullied and ever present, and it can neither be acquired nor relinquished. Can space be acquired by a cup? Can clay be acquired by a pot? Or, Can gold be acquired by an ornament? When the appearance in the phenomenal world ends (death), the conditions that give rise to the mind also cease to be, so it disappears. What remains are the latent tendencies that remain in the collective unconscious, called the "causal" body. What I'm saying is that the senses don't need to be sealed, though I understand that it is useful for a certain type of mind. If one employs the intellect in a certain way, it can cut through phenomena while senses are still very much active and functional, right here, right now. And once this is repeated over a period of time (constant practice), there is neither any need to seal the senses, nor any need to do alchemical gymnastics to either produce any elixir, nor birth any fetuses. One is never not the Original Self. The Original Self does not "have" consciousness any more than a cup can "have space". Consciousness IS the very nature of the Original Self.

What is "acquired" consciousness? That in itself is a misunderstanding of epic proportions! There is no "Acquired" consciousness. There is the mind which is reflected consciousness. Consciousness can neither be acquired nor abandoned.

Several straw people have been animated and then summarily executed on this thread. A few are listed below - That all "sensory" perceptions need to stop to operate with innate/primordial consciousness. It reflects a typical lack of understanding of how consciousness and the senses are interrelated. It also reflects a lack of understanding of what the "mind" is and how it works. The "Carrying" and the "transfer method" dichotomy is incorrect. Sometimes we need to carry and sometimes transfer. For example, for daily transactions, we use cash, and we "carry it". When we run out, we "transfer" cash from an ATM and replenish our wallets/purses, etc. For all intends and purposes, in the transactional sense, we carry. The issue vis-a-vis squatting and sitting. It is very obvious to anyone that squatting is better if you've done so from childhood. It keeps your weight under control, and cleanses you from inside out. Sitting is less beneficial and such people will "carry" yucky qi in their lower belly and stink up their auras ()

Awareness recognizes itself as Awareness, and knows that the rational part, emotional part, memory part and thought part - ie the mind is an ephemeral arising in itself. It also recognizes the body as an ephemeral arising in itself. It also recognizes energy as the process of apparent changes in these arisings.

How poignant and poetic is your statement

Glad you don't think I was threatening you with my "admin" privileges. As moderators, we only want to ensure civility in the discussions on the board and that people are not taking each other down, such as lambasting those who don't subscribe to their notions of practice, etc.

Glad to help Good...so are you willing to become a better listener going forward?

To be a good teacher, you have to become a good listener. To be a good listener, you must learn to be silent and attentive. Otherwise, you are simply talking down on others and trying to foist your ideas onto others, irrespective of whether they want to "buy what you're selling."

If anyone thinks there is a way to tell whether someone is “enlightened” by watching a video or even talking to them in person, they are way off base. You can get a sense of someone’s spiritual nature, but not whether they are “enlightened”. You see, i made the distinction between spiritual nature and “enlightenment”. One could be very spiritual, very saintly and yet not have realization of their true nature. They could do miracles even, but not necessarily have any more knowledge of their true nature than a pig rolling in mud and shit. On the other hand, you could have a “crazy” person who was “enlightened” but not recognize it. Why? Because you would not be looking at them with your wisdom eyes.

that’ll be helpful. For you to spout off about someone on a public forum, given that most of us don’t have either the patience or inclination to seek out evidence one way or another, a better way to make sense would be to share sources. You also prefaced your initial diatribe with “it’s just my opinion”, so naturally assumed your personal opinion and not professional. So if someone is bipolar they can’t have insights? Is it your professional and trained observation? Obviously you are very highly credentialed as a psycho-pathologist (maybe some references to papers you’ve published would help). I don’t know who Daniel Ingram is. Maybe it’s just me - never heard of him before. So why should your pointing him out mean anything to me (or others)? Your diatribes come across as flinging feces to me. yes I am. In reaction to your cocksure and combative attitude. I don’t think I’m alone in that assessment. Oh I see, so you are watching out for frank yang? What would you prefer he do? Seek treatment from you?

as opposed to you who is a trained psychotherapist who has met this guy and diagnosed his condition? While I don’t know or care to know about frank yang or Daniel whatshisface, I don’t like your forceful exhortations which seems like flinging feces on someone just because he rubs you the wrong way. who diagnosed his condition?

Frank yang, imho, has had deep insights, but is unstable (or at least based on the video of his I saw which anshino had shared a few years back). It could very well be that he is bipolar, or it could also be because his realization has not stabilized. When realization has not stabilized, “knowledge” and ignorance toggle back and forth, or rather, the sun (knowledge) gets hidden behind clouds (ignorance) that keep arising. Such an individual is considered to be unprepared (akritopasak) - so for the realization to stabilize they need to go do foundational work to purify the mind. His premature proclamation of his “enlightenment” is probably a result of that very instability of realization.

It depends on how you define awareness/consciousness In my tradition, awareness/consciousness IS the basis of knowledge, without it, there is neither intelligence, nor mind, and certainly no knowledge. So to posit that awareness is not enough is entirely wrong. I would instead posit that without awareness nothing is.