dwai

yes

A great composition by the great Druid 'Getafix' BTW, you got some of that special magic potion?

Was the glass ever half full? Or was it ever half empty? What if it was both half full and half empty? And if that glass had a stiff drink of whiskey Then I must admit drinking it was very very risky

Bob, having been there may i suggest you take break from viiting ttb for a Few months. I did the same and now i find the exchanges the the budfha boyz laughable at best, mildly irritating at worst. What was even more interesting was to discover after i returned that some of those who were battling the bb's were now supprting them/"got them" while others who had previously supported them seemed "get what was flawed" in the bb's perspective. What this has taught me is that no one knows everything. There are always those who know what they know, know what they don't know and also don't know what they don't know. With time that which they know might increase slightly, but with maturity knowing what they don't know seems go grow the most. Imho, that is what i see now, now that i use a Fresh perspective into this microcosm of macrosopic ogranisms ( well along with all their microscopic baggage)

wind is the effect of the thoughts floating by

Seth, Have you tried messing with the great VH or Mikz?

That my friend is dependently originated on the quality of Buddhism we get to encounter on this forum

it will just open up avenues for an "official" infestation of what has proven to be a shade of virulent evangelism. If you create a "Buddha Bum" section, TTB will be overrun by proselytizers!

Labels dont have to be names...they can be descriptives. As a rule, the act of cognition also assigns a categorization of the object. Eg., Is it tall, is it short? Is it hard or oft? Etc. We would even categorize as real or imaginary...but always categorize. Why? Thats how the mind functions. We cant escape from this. Even in meditation the act of cognition involves categorization....only thing is we detach from the object.

One of the things I've been learning is the concept of Hng-Ha sounds in Taiji Chuan practice. My teacher also showed us that we could practice each of the 8 energies (Peng, Lu, an, Ji etc) with their names while doing the forms. i.e., Doing ward-off repeatedly, we can use the sound "Peng" (resonating), etc and so on and so forth. Does anyone here have experience doing that? What do you think about this? Please do share.

Interesting video...thanks for shring.

has it really been? How do we know? Also, why do we assume humn sentience is the only one that matters? And if that were indeed to be case, then of course there is the naghing fact of an after the fact theorization, even based on the partial confirmation of certian other agreed upon theories of the materilistic paradigm currently popular (viz., scientific) The entity dwai is only a represenation/ label of someone/ something in your mind. Lets set the beast aside for a bit and consider the beautiful apple. Without describing the apple it is just a label that exists in your mind. Apple only makes sense in context of its description ( the details) when it comes to any phenomenon, if there is an object, there has to be subject. Without one, the object cannot existor rather its existence cannot be verified. And if thee is an object, there has to be labeling and categorization, without which the object cannot be. So the subject categorizes the object as known or unknown. If it is known, then it is mapped against a database of all things known and with labels until it accurately of vaguely matches one. If it is unknown, then too it is mapped against the db until its characteristics can be mathced with an existing label or labels, failing which a nw label is assignd to it.

I didnt want to post on buddhabum topics lest i attract the pests. But it is my exprience that most "buddhists" ponificating on this site neither have the intellectual nor emotional maturity necessary to have the authority to teach anything mundane, let alone spirituality. You arent alone in your disgust on this matter...i empathize, for all its worth

True...however what would acknoledge the existence of such an objective reality? Surely to imply the existence of an objet is also to imply the existence of a subject as well...right? But how possible is it to take in the totality of even your neighborhood, let alone the world or the universe? In order to intake we must break things down to appropriate chunks no? I meant the experience of tao...is it personal or impersonal?

MH, let me opine. How real is the world out there without one to observe it, experience it? Doesn't have to be a man to experience, but sentience is a pre-requisite. Without this sentience, nothing really matters, or does it? and to try to address the second part of your question, then can anything truly be objective? No, because by the very act of observing, we are injecting our personal proclivities, our labels and names to the objects. Since we are going to approach this from a Taoist framework, let me ask you? Is the Tao always impersonal or is the Tao always personal?

Chi can feel like the flow of blood in your body, but charged. It manifests in different people in different ways (and the same person can sense it differently based on time, condition of the body energetics). I feel it varyingly as pressure (condensing into my bones), as heat, as magnetic sensation, as an electric sensation. it feels cool, it feels warm. The prime thing is to feel it and to be able to ramp it up with cultivation. I study in Master Liao's tradition from one of his direct students and we use the tai chi ball quite extensively in working with Chi. So in such a case, the ball (of qi or energy) is localized (like holding between the palms) or expanded, through our bodies (like the body is part of a giant bubble of energy). When working with it in a localized manner, we play with it by aligning it with the three dan tians. Move it up and down, connect with the Sky energy, connect with Earth energy. Bounce it off the earth, shrink it, expand it (depending on what we intend to do with it). The idea is to first sense the flow of qi, then increase the flow of qi and then flow with the universal qi (or Tao). First we move it then it moves us and then it doesn't matter...

Sorry...thinking isn't always in the past and thinking can be faster than the speed of light. Think about any galaxy any number of light years away. Your mind reaches there faster than the light that can travel from there...all you have to do is use your imagination. Also, it seems as though a theory on FTL is being discussed: Paper on FTL

Pov of light would then become pov of observer and everything would be in relation to the observer's velocity. The observer would then seem stationary while everything else swirled around him/her. But doing so reduces a far more intricate dance into a fox trot... I guess we all have our proclivities and one could interpret a mwtaphoric reference to light literally...which seems to be what you are doing. Btw, are you fmiliar with bohm's holographic theory of the universe?

How would light have a pov? Unless of course it too has awareness.... Agreed that motion is always relative but what makes motion motion and nonmotion nonmotion is the observer. As far as masturbation without orgasms go, some would consider that a part of internal alchemy! So you see, lights pov is moot...non sequitur in this as well as all other contexts....

I'm not a big fan of ttb-brand of buddhism, but i must admit that i see your point wrt dissolving not just one pole but the opposite as well...because one is but the infinite extrapolation of the other. Paradoxical though it may seem, the world of advaita is paradoxical. However, wouldn't it be better to balance te opposites rather than dissolve the opposites. When there be perfect balance, there would not be any extremes...I tjik that is also what is taught in buddhism 101? As it is in taoism, hinduism so on and so forth? I cannot omment on christianity or islam since i haven't found the need to look teachings there...

Almost sounds like vajraHridaya or mikaelz...same alaya obsession, same zest for buddhization.... Just sayin' that's all...

Sadhu...sadhu! Tadeko vashisthah shivaha kevaloham The other problem is that certain groups like to browbeat others by conveniently refusing to consider atman beyond the literal meaning

For a very refreshing "insider's" materialistic view of tai chi and fa jin, please read josh waitzkin's excellent book on chess and tai chi titled "the art of learning"....while i don't agree with the pure biomechanics explanation, i do respect the guy...an excellenf chess player and william cc chen's student