dwai

Dear Friends, Thanks for your responses and good vibrations. I will try and work on the advice given here. Best Regards, Dwai

Friends, I've been reading Bruce Frantzis' excellent two volume series on Water Method of Taoist Meditation and find that the Water method seems to be somewhat different from the type of Taoist Tai Chi I am learning. In our system so far, we have focussed on single form practice and the micro-cosmic orbit and moving energy first with Yi and then just go with the flow (without Yi). Per Bruce Frantzis' description, this a Fire Method. But then again there are some aspects of just letting things happen as they happen, without trying to force too much onto the system, which my teacher tells me seems like it is the Water Method (dissolving blockages and the mindstream, etc). Does anyone here follow either pure Fire or Pure Water Method? Any thoughts you would want to share on either or both the techniques? Warnings/Pitfalls and/or advice?

Wikipedia has a good list of Hindu/Vedic Texts -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedas

Hi Creation, I agree with your analysis of BKF's style. I personally find it very appealing and love the "story-teller" way of conveying profound stuff. Also I am a grand-student of Master Liao. I have been studying under his disciple since 2003. All of Master Liao's books are great. My personal favorite is the "Nine Nights with the Taoist Master" - since it too mixes the Story-telling style with conveyance of Taoist teachings in a most brilliant manner.

I study under Master Liao's student. I know at least a couple of others on this board have been/still are students of his school -- Temple Style Tai Chi.

I have tried doing the "Outer" dissolving with some success, but as in the post you quoted, it seems to take a lot of effort to do the dissolving. But when it works it works like a charm. I have a problem with the left side of my body, which is very difficult to shoong. I tried integrating dissolving (based on the books) into my regular practice (eg: dissolving on my one hour train (each way) ride to work and back back then) but it was hard to reconcile the two practices. So now, I have started doing the preparatory work BKF recommends, starting with releasing, and it seems to help. The tenseness in certain spots on my left side, jaw, neck/shoulder along the Gallbladder meridian seems to release automatically. So the trick is to be effortless (as is mentioned in the Tai Chi Classics)...but that is a very hard state to attain...

Get Purva Karma and Pancha Karma treatment after discussion with an Ayurvedic practitioner while in India. Purva Karma is the preparatory treatment following which Pancha Karma is done to flush the body off toxins. This will also open up the nadis. Remember to find an Ayurvedic doctor who also does Marma/Nadi treatments.

As requested by Goldisheavy, I am starting a new thread on why/how I think Yi can be dropped. "The mind leads, the Chi follows" is true only till a certain level of chi awareness is attained and exercises on guiding flow of Chi is done. After that, the intent should be dropped and the Chi allowed to flow as it does. That is the water course way (as I understand it and as I have been told).

I like your concept of aligning mundane Yi into Shen Yi...and the more I think about it, I am inclined to agree that such a thing might indeed be happening. After reaching Silence, and emptiness, the practitioner becomes aware of that which doesn't change and is eternal. Bruce Frantzis' books on Water Meditation have very profound description of this process. In the Yogic world, this realization is the discovery of the aatman (the true Self). After this juncture, it is only a matter of time before aatman realizes it's unity with everything else -- therefore Brahman. P.S. I was going to use the terms Te and Tao, since in the school I study in, Te is not a moral/psycho-ethical construct as is usually understood, but actually the rediscovery of and the completion of the energetic aspect of Tao that is present in all creation. This is analogous with aatman ( te == aatman and tao == brahman) I keep context switching between Yogic/Vedantic and Taoist words because one comes naturally/easily to me (Yogic/Sanskrit/Hindu) and the other is something I greatly in love with (Taoist). I understand that this will possibly cause confusion and even maybe vehement reactions in some readers...

Stig, Yi is the conscious mind/intention that we use to do everyday things. Such as "I need to drink a cup of coffee", or "I need to pick up this pencil from the floor", etc. At a certain point in one's practice, one can drop all props and tools used to do Chi work, such as Yi, the Breath, etc. Then you don't move the Chi, the Chi moves you, spontaneously.

I think the point is that Yi is used as a prop to drive Chi (which is necessary for Chi sensitivity and controlling flow of Chi). Yi is a tool and has to be dropped after sufficient Chi sensitivity and Chi quantity/quality is built up. I think Physical strength is considered secondary to Chi because of the quantum nature of Chi/Jing (sudden dramatic jumps, as opposed to working within a more "normal" range that is possible with Physical strength).

Ego

Mrs Yoda should see a TCM or Ayurvedic practitioner who can tell her what not to eat.

Like I mentioned in my original post -- there was no such thing as Caste. There were Varna and Jati. It was mutated into caste to accomplish the following - a) accomodate for British sensibilities (with their history of the Feudal system and class divide) try and retrofit something they didn't quite understand into a framework that would (when propagated sufficiently long enough) create the grounds for a effective means to divide and rule the Indians (The British were invaders in India after all...) It is very important to not parrot what "historians" with poor knowledge exacerbate (by echoing each other). Varna's role is/was to identify professions. Jaati's role was as a genealogy/anthropological system of nomenclature. That aside, India was and is a very diverse country (the 7th largest by area and 2nd largest by population). Each state in India has it's own language. They have distinct cultural and food habits...it is not unusual that there would be some circumspection involved while people from different backgrounds interact. How do the Hare Krishna's get treated in the West? Why do they get treated differently. That aside, there are people who abused the varna/jaati system. Those were social aberrations, not religious. It is imperative to know and understand the difference. I hope I managed to elucidate this position a little further. This is something who browbeat Hinduism using the "Caste" bogey must read -- http://www.amazon.com/Castes-Mind-Colonial...8509&sr=8-1

Like I said -- it is an invention of the British. Wikipedia isn't always the best source to look at.

You obviously don't know anything about either the "Caste System" or India. First -- Caste was an invention of the British. In India, there are two modes of identifying/categorizing people. a) Varna Jaati Varna -- grouping people by their profession Jaati -- the ethnic group a person belongs to. And India is not "heavily influenced" by the "Caste" system -- India is very much on the way to mindless Westernization...and it is unfortunate, because India is the last bastion of Dharma today. And India's population problem is unfortunately or fortunately the result of Modern Science and lower mortality rate.

feels like an electric, magnetic, fluid pressure inside the body. Strongest in the hands and arms. feels like a tight ball in the lower dan tien feels like a heater radiating heat in the middle dan tien feels like a cool mentholated aftertaste in the upper dan tien feels like a tight string (and sometimes a steel rod impaling) on the crown point feels like fire in the soles of the feet feels like heavy pressure in the legs i'm told i have to make it all one complete thing (each part is connected to every other part -- Tai chi classics)

One current example is Bhutan. It is a Buddhist nation with a King and all that. You might call them backwards and underdeveloped, but they seem to be happy enough with what/how things are. And you aren't juxtaposing your personal beliefs in this analysis/judgment? Your attempts at sounding objective aren't really working -- all that you have mentioned seems subjective to me (not even anecdotal). What is the basis of your claims? Share you sources with us so we can evaluate these claims ourselves. To each his own I guess. How can you consider the tibetan system failed, when it was forcibly ejected and replaced by an insidious and deplorable government (Communists, of all people)! As far as the India imbroglio goes, well those Ram Sena (Ram's Army) are self-appointed morons who are looking to get political visibility out of their activity. Don't think that just because a bunch of goons decide to use the name of a Deity to justify their activities, there is actually even an iota of truth behind it. And the conditions behind and around this situation is more cultural/socio-political than spiritual or religious.

To add a few notes about the Tibet/Buddhism/Fascism allegations by Rallis, with no intention of stoking this fire (of discord on this thread further), but with the intention of putting things in perspective. Most of the World (until the advent of the 18-19th century and the Industrial Revolution) has needed a King/Queen/Ruler to give structure to geographic regions (states, fiefs, Nations, etc). Why would Tibet be any different? You have to understand (Rallis, and those Tibet scholars he is quoting) that you are juxtaposing your Western, Modern/Post-modern ideals and concepts onto a historical period and passing a judgment (it is known as anachronism, in technical terms). The judgement will only make sense to you and your peers, who share the ideas and concepts with you (of Democracy, Western model of Nationhood and ethics that are direct offspring of Christian thought). If you put yourself in the shoes of the rulers of Tibet and the people (who you claimed were suppressed and subdued), you might find that for a yak-herder at 16,000 feet above the ground, your model of nationhood, democracy, etc might make absolutely no sense (even today). The Dalai Lama provided a political and religio-spiritual control system for your simple yak-herder. The Lamas were the bureaucracy and selection into this fold was partly elective (the yak-herder might have chosen to send one of his sons to a monastery to become a lama) and partly predictive (as in reincarnation of this lama or that lama in a common household). The Bureaucracy provided structure, law, order to the society. Where is the case of oppression? Okay, so your yak-herder didn't get to choose his Dalai Lama or any of the other Lamas who wielded positions of power. But the society worked on the model of Dharma, following a valid philosophical guideline (you will find almost all Dharmic societies work on this model). No one telling the masses that if you don't accept so and so as your saviour you will go to hell and burn there for eternity. The society and it's rules ensured that certain value aspects of that philosophical system be implemented irrelevant of whether an individual member understands or follows it. But isn't that the case in the West as well? As for the Buddhist monk treating you like crap before initiating you -- perhaps you were unlucky. Perhaps your attitude was questionable (there's a saying that an empty cup is easy to fill) or perhaps the teacher was testing your passion for the teaching. Eastern teachings and teachers are often that way (that's a way to separate the fluff from the stuff). Admittedly your reading of religion is rooted in those that you have experienced in your native culture. If you are a Westerner with a Christian or Judeao-abrahamic background, what you consider a religion and what a Hindu or Buddhist considers a Dharma are dramatically different.

And that is a proven fact or is it only your opinion? None of the Dharmic traditions claim to be the "ONLY" way -- exclusivism is unique to abrahamic religions.

not true of all religions (especially those which follow Dharma traditions)

To facilitate interfaith harmony, we have to first ensure that there is mutual respect between the faiths. Without this, there can be no harmony. This is hard though...but is what is needed. I will give an example in the case of Interfaith Dialog between Christians, Moslems and Hindus (in the second most populous nation in the world) -- For a Christian or a Moslem to respect the faith of a Hindu: * means having to accept and respect the fact that the Hindu worships his deities in the form of Idols. * means having to refrain from proselytizing, since mutual respect would mean acceptance that the other faith(s) is also a valid way to connect with the divine * mutual respect would imply that some faiths' insistence on their exclusivity would have to be discarded, since if you respect another faith, that would mean you accept it as another valid way to connect with the divine

Qi is cultivated in order to go back to the source. In order to go back to the source, one has to re-discover it within. In order to rediscover this (Te), one has to first learn to feel Qi, store/restore Qi in the Dan tien and eventually reconnect with the Te. The Te then will connect with the Tao. What is there without Qi? Qi animates everthing in this creation.

Isha does not mean Christ in Sanskrit. Isha means Master or Lord. For instance, A God is referred to as "Jagadish" (etymology -- Jagat (World) and Isha (Lord) -- meaning Lord of the World). I read this extrapolation first in a book titled "Jesus was Born in India" first and how there were references to "Isha" (thus Ishamasi or Jesus the Messiah). This is a huge error of translation (can be considered fraudulent at an extreme).

The Maya and Karma Conundrum The link above points to an article I'd written while back, on this matter. Perhaps it will add to this interesting discussion...