fiveelementtao

Yes, I always mean what I say. I have very little tolerance for bullies. You love to fight and you attack peoples' character with frivolous attacks. I have very little tolerance for that. And like most bullies, when confronted and required to follow through, you chicken out. That's not what you suggested. You suggested that teachers pay their students for the honor of teaching. when I encouraged you to do just that... Now, you say you are kidding and that I shouldn't take you literally. You chickened out. taking a friend out for dinner one time is not teaching. Again I challenge you to follow through with your example of paying someone on a regular basis to follow your teachings. Anything else you mention is a friendship relationship not a teacher relationship. You are too smart not to know the difference. If you follow through and pay someone to learn from you, I will be very eager to see the result of that experience. If not, I know you are all talk and someone to ignore...

actually, I take that back. there is ONE relationship among humans where one person gives everything and asks for nothing, that is a Mother. This is an understandable desire. But a mother pampers and shields their children. A teacher strengthens and enables the student to grow. I submit that anyone who wishes their teacher to be their mother is not really looking for enlightenment, but to still stay a child... Anyway, in my experience, (Which I admit is limited) no human can ever take the place of the mother.... To expect that from another person, is impossible and dangerous....

that is not a student teacher relationship. Two guys SHARING info is a two way street. The topic is student teacher relationships. You are talking friends. There is a difference. If you don't know that, you have never been a student. When you went to high school, did your math teacher ask you to teach him about math? GIH, having seen your love for argument. so,I will not engage with you after this post. You twist words. If you read my post carefully, you would have read that friendship is already mutually beneficial. That is the exchange. If someone is your friend AND your teacher, then the exchange is lopsided. That was my point. But I practice everything I write about. How about you? You're kidding me right?... LMFAO Listen GIH, put your money where your mouth is. Since you are such a High master. I DARE you to pay money to students here on Taobums to learn from you. Invite them to your home, cook for them, teach them your wisdom and then pay them. Everything i talk about I have experienced first hand or actively am doing now.... Put up or shut up. You are all talk. If you can get at least one student that you are paying on a regular basis to come to your home after work and be your friend/student. Then you can open your steam hole and brag about it. If the student also comes on here and shares the experience, I will listen. But after that craziness, I am not going to pay you any more attention. You are in your own world, buddy.

I am in Idaho www.SpiritTao.com I am also are available to travel for seminars... Thanks for your interest, Mike

Those teachers are called angels or guides, the rest of us in bodies need to eat and have shelter to survive. Sure, that makes perfect sense, he works all day at a job, comes home and then spends the rest of his time donating his free time to you... Just because you're so special and cute... Anyone who does this is an energy thief. He is seeking ego worship or worse... This is the worst scenario for a student. Money is a way to set BOUNDARIES which protect the student and remind the teacher he/she is there to serve. Without it, I guarantee you the teacher will expect something from you (on HIS terms not yours)... This is unavoidable. If the teacher doesn't realize this, he is not ready to teach and is potentially very dangerous and possibly abusive. Asking a teacher to love you in return for his teaching is asking to be abused... Look, what we're talking about here is an exchange. There are people like Darin mentioned who don't charge money. But, in that case, he demanded a much more expensive payment than money. The priest probably gets some assistance from the catholic church for his needs as well as health insurance etc... (Darin, correct me if I am wrong) at the very least, the Catholic church provides the priest with the office of priest. By helping out in his local church, Darin is giving back to the church which this priest represents who in turn supports the priest. So, the principle is the same. There is always an exchange of energy. Darin, in the instance you mention, if you had gone to that priest and said, "Will you mentor me? I don;t want to pay you and I don't have time for prayer and service, but if you want, when I have some free time, we can hang out and be friends..." I'm willing to bet that priest would have politely declined your generous offer of friendship. even friends have an exchange of energy. They exchange mutual friendship. They are drawn to each other. You can't just walk up to someone and unilaterally decide that they are going to be your friend. In the same way, to expect a teacher to want to be your buddy is childish. Feelings of friendship and gratitude are the byproducts of teacher student relationship, they are not payment. If someone is in a position that they don't need money, if they are a real teacher they will demand that the student sacrifice something. This is a law of learning. Vajrasattva is a good example, in exchange for his help in the healing forum, he asks that people contribute to charity. This is the same principle. The first step to learning is to overcome our selfishness. To expect instruction without ANY sacrifice is nothing short of selfishness.... my advice is focus on the learning and keep your personal feelings out of it.

There are alot of assumptions in this statement. First: the idea that YOUR love and heart are the most valuable thing you can offer. (Yet it is the easiest for you to give). This assumes that the teacher NEEDS your love and mind and friendship etc... In psychological circles, they call this projection. In this instance you seem to be projecting your desires to be loved and known onto your imagined teachers. Well, you were the one to make to comparison between the teacher student relationship and romantic love Again you are using your definition of enlightenment when you don't know what it is... If according to your definition of an enlightened person, a master needs nothing from anyone. How is your friendship or love going to benefit him? You are making the determination that the only thing you will give in return for learning is your friendship. You are making all the rules. This is a very controlling attitude.... As the student you are the one benefitting from the teacher's knowledge and in return you give him... What? Your friendship? He/She can get that anywhere, why is YOUR friendship so valuable that he is willing to give you the secrets of the Universe just to have you as a friend?... I would strongly suggest you look at your assumptions about enlightenment and spiritual teachers. If you don't know what enlightenment is, how can you assume to know what a teacher should or shouldn't require from you in return? or know what is pure and impure?.. I would really suggest looking at what it is you really want. Do you want to learn a spiritual path? (I don't buy into the idea of enlightenment) or do you want a intimate personal relationship? If you want love and frienship, don't look for it in a teacher. If you want to learn, the first thing a REAL teacher will teach you is to get your personal desires out of the way... What I still hear overwhelmingly in your posts is a desire to be loved, and accepted and understood... As opposed to popular viewpoint, IMHO, Enlightnment is NOT human love or bliss. and it requires ruthless discipline and self-investigation... IMHO if you continue seeking this kind of enlightenment, the only kind of teachers you will find are ones who will take advantage of you... My experience only...

This is (IMO) the root of your misconception. Love has an agenda. Again here I hear you wanting a personal relationship. Teaching and learning are similar in that, it is not personal... This is what I meant about wanting emotional security. This is different than wanting to learn. I think if you can make the separation in yourself between the kind of personal Love you are speaking of and the pure desire to learn. Then, money will no longer be an issue. If you think about it, you end up paying a heck of alot more for someone you fall in love with. You pay with your whole heart, but you also want the same in return. As long as you are wanting to give or recieve Love from a teacher, they will always dissapoint and hurt. A teacher doesn't care if you love him or her, they only care if you learn. And if along the way, you pay money to a guy who is con artist and he walks away with your money, he gave you a valuable lesson and you can check that guy off the list and keep looking. But you have kept your heart to yourself and are a little wiser. Well worth the three-fifty.... However, I understand your mistrust of con-artists, There are alot of them masquerading as teachers of enlightnment. Blessings to you, my friend. I sincerely hope you find what you need and want... Mike

Edit. somebody else already said it...

Lonehaven, I salute your humble response to peoples ranting... It indicates to me that you really are trying to figure this issue out. Money symbolizes that the teaching is valuable to YOU. One of the reasons I always charge money now is because I have learned that unless it costs the student something and they feel the loss of whatever they are giving up in exchange for the teaching, the student won't learn it. I have learned the hard way that when I give the teaching away or let a student "trade" for it, they never value it and my time is wasted and the teaching devalued.. And if they don't value it, they do not learn. It is a psychological trait in all humans. The teacher cannot have dedication to you if they do not require some sacrifice on your part. If they do not require this, they are not dedicated to you and you will lose out. The teaching itself must have value or it will not stick. A teacher's job is to represent the teaching not the teacher. This is why your teacher cannot be your friend. As a friend, he or she will reflect their own imperfections. The job of the teacher is to only reflect the teaching to the student. Money is the universal symbol of value in this day and age. At other times, it was service or cows or what have you. The first thing any teacher should teach you is that what they have to teach is valuable and it is greater than they are. Any teacher who claims to BE the teaching is a fraud. Any good teacher will tell you the teaching is greater than they and as such the teaching requires that the student pay the teacher. This is the Universal rule. Any teacher who doesn't understand this is not ready to teach. A teacher takes money because the teaching requires it. Also, if the student doesn't sacrifice something to learn the teaching, both teacher and student are devalueing the teachings NOT the teacher. The teaching cannot accept payment, so the student pays the representation of the teaching which is the teacher. In my experience, if the teacher allows the teaching to be devalued, it will not penetrate. For a real teacher it is not easy to charge for the teachings But the teachings demand to be valued. Without this exchange of energy, you could have the secret of all existence in your hand, but if the teacher devalued it, it is worthless. I have found this to be inescapable. I have tried many times to teach for free and it failed every time. But I also learned it was my ego that prompted me to give the teaching away. So, that is why I say, any teacher who does not charge you, is doing you a disservice because he/she is acting out of their ego and insecurity or worse, they are setting you up for a much more expensive cost. It is... Money is the easiest thing to give. It was not always this way. The old days were much worse.... So, why is it such a big deal to you? If it is so trivial, I would think you would have no problem paying More money....

there are a couple of orally transmitted practices that Max teaches that are not found in the book which some people find necessary. Other than those practices, all three levels are in the book. But, most people say that the personal transmission was very important.

In order to have a valuable discussion, we need to ask you one question... What IS enlightenment in your definition? Let's first look at the assumptions this statement carries with it... 1. people to whom you are looking to for enlightenment are indeed enlightened... 2. Assuming this is someone who has worked hard for many years to achieve "enlightnment" (whatever that is) no longer needs money to survive. 3. Paying for enlightenment is somehow different than paying for anything else you deem valuable. ( if you find it worthy to pay an electrician to fix the wiring in your house, why is not the teacher worthy of money also? Well, that wasn't very sensitive of him, to be sure. I would have been hurt by that statement, too... But it begs the question.. what of his money? Did you owe him money? How much? How long had you not paid him? Did you ever pay him? But also, who said that martial arts and enlightenment always went together? A teacher is not a friend. A teacher must have no personal, emotional agenda. A friend by definition has an agenda. There is a reason why psychiatrists are not allowed to have any personal relationship with a patient. because the therapist must only be concerned with the welfare of the patient. The teacher is the same. If the teacher wants to be your friend, then you will not learn. Plus as a friend your teacher will be more interested in not hurting your feelings than in teaching you what you need to learn. You will both lose in that scenario.... I am talking from experience on both sides of that coin. It never works and both parties end up hurt. How can that be? If you haven't reached enlightenment, how can you presume to know what an enlightened person is thinking and feeling? You question evokes angry responses because what you don't realize is that your question contains tremendous narcisism and self-entitlement. I know you don;t feel that way. But if you ahve ever been a spiritual teacher for any length of time, you would understand the angry responses... That is the truest thing I have read on this forum. I have experienced it myself numerous times. I used to be that "good friend" who taught for free and each time I did it, I was always hurt. Money is the great determiner. it shows who is truly determined to learn. If someone is more willing to spend an extra 5 or 10 bucks on a restaurant meal than on their precious "enlightnment"... What I have learned the most is that the most loving thing I can do is charge money to my students. To explain this would take a very long time. Those who understand need no explanation why this is true... Any teacher who does not charge you money is DOING YOU A HUGE DISSERVICE and their teaching will not stick.... To anyone who thinks that paying your meditation/chi kung/kung fu teacher is somehow beneath you and feel as though you have the right to have someone give to you of their hard work and years of learning for free... Please find a way to be successful at getting through the rest of your life without having to pay money first. (rent, mortgage, food, health care, cars, televisions, stereos, computer, internet, phone entertainment, etc...) If what you truly are seeking is enlightenment, then that is the first thing you should be prepared to pay or work for. If it is not, you are not seeking enlightenment but emotional security. In the past, in the cultures where "enlightenment" was found, teachers and gurus were supported by their communities and had no need to charge money to survive. Nowadays, things don't work that way. And if you want to spend your life in cultivation, the best way to keep your "enlightenment" and have the time to teach is to charge students for your time. That is the reality of the modern world... There is always an exchange of energy. Paying with money is much much less expensive than the old way which was to become the guru's slave...

Yes, you are right. I guess I am just very tired of the new agey "tantric sex" nonsense and was trying to head off the possible deluge of neo-tantric responses. I will now climb off my soapbox... I agree. Although I am not familiar with the particular practice you mention, I also practice retention. My first 6 years of SSTT was celibate. practicing celibacy or retention is very helpful in SSTT. It is necessary if one wants to master it...

Here is a tantric guru speaking about what tantra is in his tradition. He doesn't even understand when a westerner asks him about "tantric sex" at 6:58. The western idea of a sexual technique called "tantric sex" is not even in his vocabulary. Nevertheless, he gives a wonderful explanation of the union of Shiva and Shakti, (yin and Yang)...

That's exactly what I am saying. In India, there are many different types of yoga. Yoga means union. It does not mean stretching. What we call yoga in the West is Hatha Yoga and is only ONE type of yoga. In India a yogi is a mystic, or wizard or someone that seeks to unite with the Infinite and may not ever practice Hatha yoga. Tantric yoga is another type which also has many different subsets. It has to do with using tantras or methods to achieve a particular goal. Tantra is usually connected to magic, power, mysticism. Other types of yoga frown on tantra because it is seen as dangerous. Tantra also does other things that would curl your hair such as performing rituals with dead bodies. For instance, a tantric sexual rite may involve digging up a corpse performing a ritual and having sex on the grave while chanting a mantra etc... For reasons like this many other yogis would badmouth tantrics by saying they were debauched sex-crazed maniacs. Well, when westerners heard that tantrics indulged in sex and drink and drugs, they went to learn "tantric yoga." They went to India seeking to learn tantra and were taught nonsense involving sex. They came back to the West and started promoting "tantric yoga" and "tantric sex" and that is what we have come to believe tantra is. The same is true for yoga. In India when someone wants to study energy work, they seek out a "yogi" and ask to be accepted as a student. The first thing the yogi will teach them is hatha yoga. Which is where the stretching and breathing comes from. This is the forst step top prepare the body and nervous system for the real yoga. That is only the first step. Real yoga is rarely taught even in India, much less to westerners... Well, westerners went to India and asked to learn yoga and were taught Hatha Yoga. After a few years, they came back to the West and started teaching "yoga" not ever knowing that they were only taught the rudimentary beginnings of yoga. And today we have "yoga booty ballet" video tapes, people spending their entire lives bickering over minute differences in stretching postures etc... Real yoga has nothing to do with this. Tantra is in the same category of misunderstood nonsense... the kama sutra is about sexual techniques, not about tantra. Tantra is very serious and potentially very dangerous magical worship of deities. Kama Sutra is about sexual pleasure. If it were a tantra, it would be called Kama Tantra not Kama Sutra. Yes sex has always been strictly regulated. India is a very strict culture. The idea that India is this, hippie-like free society is another misconception in the West.

I've seen GIH in action, so I will only reply once. Looking the word up on wikipedia is not research or experience. Tantra literally means "loom" with the idea that the threads of different techniques are spun on a loom to create a whole and has the practical connotation of spiritual methodology. It comes from two sanskrit roots Tan+ Tra i.e. "method that carries one to infinity" here is the defintion from the online sanskrit dictionary Cologne Digital Sanskrit Lexicon: Search Results 1 tantra n. (Pa1n2. 7-2 , 9 Ka1s3.) a loom , v , 2 , 70 ; the warp RV. x , 71 , 9 AV. x , 7 , 42 TBr. ii Ta1n2d2yaBr. x , 5 S3Br. xiv Kaus3. MBh. i , 806 and 809 ; the leading or principal or essential part , main point , characteristic feature , model , type , system , framework S3Br. xii Ta1n2d2yaBr. xxiii , 19 , 1 La1t2y. Ka1tyS3r. &c. (e.g. %{kulasya@t-} , `" the principal action in keeping up a family i.e. propagation "' MBh. xiii , 48 , 6 ; ifc. `" depending on "' cf. %{Atma-} , %{sva-} , %{para-} , &c.) ; doctrine , rule , theory , scientific work , chapter of such a work (esp. the 1st section of a treatise on astron. VarBr2S. i , 9 ; Para1s3ara's work on astron. , ii , 3 ; vii , 8) MBh. &c. (cf. %{SaSTi-} &c.) ; a class of works teaching magical and mystical formularies (mostly in the form of dialogues between S3iva and Durga1 and said to treat of 5 subjects , 1. the creation , 2. the destruction of the world , 3. the worship of the gods , 4. the attainment of all objects , esp. of 6 superhuman faculties , 5. the 4 modes of union with the supreme spirit by meditation [436,2] ; cf. RTL. pp. 63 , 85 , 184 , 189 , 205ff.) VarBr2S. xvi , 19 Pan5cat. Das3. Katha1s. xxiii , 63 Sarvad. ; a spell HYog. i , 5 Vcar. ; oath or ordeal L. ; N. of a Sa1man (also called `" that of Viru1pa "') A1rshBr. ; an army (cf. %{-trin}) BhP. x , 54 , 15 ; ifc. a row , number , series , troop Ba1lar. ii f. vi ; = %{rAjya-t-} , government Das3. xiii S3is3. ii , 88 ; (%{para@t-} , `" the highest authority "') Subh. ; a means which leads to two or more results , contrivance Hariv. ii , 1 , 31 ; a drug (esp. one of specific faculties) , chief remedy cf. %{-trA7vApa} ; = %{paricchada} L. ; = %{anta} L. ; wealth L. ; a house L. ; happiness W. ; (%{eNa}) instr. ind. so as to be typical or hold good Ka1tyS3r. xvi , xx ; (%{A}) f. for %{-ndrA} Sus3r. ; (%{Is} cf. Pa1n2. 5-4 , 159 Ka1s3. ; %{I} L.) f. = %{-ntI} Gobh. iii , 6 , 7 and BhP. iii , 15 , 8 (v.l. for %{-ntI} ; see also %{vatsatantrI}) ; the wire or string of a lute S3a1n3khS3r. xvii La1t2y. iv , 1 , 2 Kaus3. &c. (%{-tri} R. vi , 28 , 26) ; (fig.) the strings of the heart Hariv. 3210 (v.l.) ; any tubular vessel of the body , sinew , vein Pa1n2. 5-4 , 159 ; the plant %{-trikA} L. ; a girl with peculiar qualities L. ; N. of a river L. ; cf. %{ku-tantrI}. 2 tantra 3 tAntra mf(%{I})n. having wires (%{ta4ntra}) , stringed (a musical instrument) W. ; regulated by a general rule A1pS3r. xiv , 12 , 5 f. ; relating to the Tantras W. ; n. the music of a stringed instrument R. i , 3.

You may have misunderstood my post. tantra is a yogic word. In the modern western world, It has incorrectly been fused with other practices like taoist sexual practices. Taoist sexual practices are different from Tantric practices. Traditional tantric yogic sexual practices (extremely rare) are done maybe once a year on auspicious dates and only under specific ritual situations. The expressed purpose is to call down the energies of specific dieties for worship. The participants are not encouraged to experience sexual pleasure. If they do, the power of the tantra is lost. You would need to be celibate the rest of the time practicing rigourous internal cultivation, mantra etc... According to the wording you used in your original post, is not the same as traditional tantra in the yogic sense of the word.As you correctly stated in your original post, the average run of the mill "tantric" sexual practices that can easily be found on the web have no connection to actual tantra practices. It is a misnomer to call sexual practices tantra. That is my point. The sexual practices you are seeking are not tantra. It is more Taoist. You're best bet is to go the Mantak Chia type of route for personal sexual energy techniques. That's why I asked, are we talking sexual practices OR tantra. They are not the same. Again, I have nothing against sexual practices.

Very persuasive... David Icke, Fox news, out of context sound bites, no facts... I'm convinced...

Are we talking sexual practices or tantric practices? The word Tantra means "technique" and can apply to any energetic technique or ritual. the word tantra is very misunderstood in the West. The whole idea of Tantra meaning sexual practices came about because some westerners have gone to India, learned some pseudo sexual practice and came back to the states and called it "tantra." In it's original context, Tantra almost always refers to Celibate energy cultivation. usually it refers to religious rituals where the practitioner seeks to identify their ego with a particular diety. In these instances, sexual acts are done very infrequently and only for the purpose of calling down a particular diety. tantra is about spiritual power, not sexual liberation.... Tantric masters almost always are celibate. An authentic tantric master would teach you how to fuse the sexual energies within your own body while being celibate for many years. what you're talking about is not really tantra... I'm not saying anything against sexual practices, just being a knitpicky word policeman...

Hi y'all, As far as I know, there are three different element cycles for different purposes. I mostly only hear about 2 of them., the creative and controlling cycles, but there is a third which I've rarely seen talked about known as the "demeaning", "subduing" or "vanquishing" cycle (Wood-Metal-Fire-Water-Earth). I am interested in any understandings people may have of this little talked about element cycle and its purpose/uses. Thanks

Are you trained in any martial art or are you experimenting with your own techniques? It is always best to have a live teacher to train with.... I would seek out live help or you could really mess yourself up.

These are some of my favorite quotes... Just out of curiosity, GIH, Do you smoke marijuana regularly?

??? I was responding to someone else's answer to someone else's question... I didn't bring up the kunlun issue. I also didn't realize that people could own threads... Last time I checked, kunlun IS spontaneous movement. I think I have as much right to follow the flow of a thread as the next person and ask questions that are brought up from within the thread. Things are getting very wierd and pissy around here lately....

Shang Ch'ing is the original Mao Shan, but not all Mao Shan is Shang Ch'ing...

I stand corrected. That is very interesting. did she say if it was Shang Ch'ing?

Well, I have a couple of his books and have read them but I saw that he was very Shaolin oriented in his theories and that made me a little cautious about his stuff. The Shaolin history of Taoism is a little skewed in their favor.... IMO, don't study shaolin from a taoist and don't study Taoism from a buddhist... Thats just my thing. I'm sure that alot of people have had great success with his books. So, I am not trying to say he's good or bad. I'm sure there are many on this forum who have good things to say about him. As I said, I read his books and chose not to follow his advice. When possible, it's always best to learn from a live human as opposed to a book. But in that particular instance.. he himself said he had no idea, "but since it's taoist use taoist breathing" which presupposes that ALL taoist breathing is reverse breathing. This is the kind of mindset that worries me. In that instance, he makes broad judgements based on erroneous presupposition. Now, I'm not even a Xing Yi guy, any xing yi people out there. Does Xing yi use reverse breathing?