Sloppy Zhang

Maybe so. Thanks for your kind words!

Going on it for 6 years now. Mostly just the material from "Opening the Energy Gates Of Your Body", "Relaxing Into Your Being" and "The Great Stillness". I think, even if you just practice that material, you can get very far. In Energy Gates, he says that masters can open their energy gates like you open and close your eyes, and that masters can feel and open/close the energy gates of other people. For me, that has always been the standard that I want to attain. The practice is all laid down it the book, all you have to do is do it. Over the years, I've dabbled with the occasional shiny new toy (usually practices that are higher energy), but in times of panic or crisis, I always fall back on Frantzis' stuff. I recall something that someone said (the Ronnietsu al salaami guy, but I may be mistaken) about choosing a practice "imagine you were going to die tomorrow. What practice would you do? Do that one." If I knew I was going to die tomorrow, I'd do the practices laid out in those books. I also think that Frantzis leaves lots of hints in the writing. Maybe I'm just making that up and seeing what I want to see but that's why I think that the material in those books is very comprehensive. I also think it's pretty typical as far as the whole teaching scheme goes- you know the practice, you just have to do it, and that's why it's so easy to fail, or why it seems like you need to do something more. As far as benefits- better health, clearer mind, sense of inner peace, yadda yadda. It is very much the philosophy of the Tao Te Ching put into practice. Very much so. I have also applied the principles taught in Energy Gates to other physical disciplines like ball sports, marksmanship, and pen spinning skills. People look at me and say I'm a natural or that I catch on quick. I'm just relaxing and going with the flow Pretty much, do the practice, and trust that it will take you into things. Frantzis doesn't promise high energy or super mystical powers. And despite being a person who claims to want to find super high energy magic power granting practices, the only practice I really choose to do is one that doesn't promise any of that (and in fact says if you want that then don't do this practice) silly me!

It all depends on how you define "logic" and "rationality" My economics professor, on the first day, was talking about the inherent assumptions that economics makes, one of which being that people are "rational". I said that different people have different criteria for "rational". He said "and there's the problem". I suck at playing chess, so when I play chess, I play to have fun. When I play against someone who is good at chess, they are baffled by my moves. They say I am not making "rational" decisions with how to move my pieces. I tell them that I am doing exactly what I need to do to accomplish my objective- the problem is that my objective is not his own! So watch out for different "kinds" of "logic" and "rationality", and don't assume that just because you aren't going by a mathematical/textbook model, that you aren't being logical/rational in your own right. No one is "required" to do anything. Having a certificate, being part of a lineage, having the blessing of a teacher to teach, etc, are just one of many ways that people come to decide how they want to interact with a system- practice it, respect it from afar, ignore it, attack it, etc etc etc etc. There is some value to lineage. There is some value to knowing what someone knows, and knowing that that person has been "approved" to teach. If someone was such great friends with their teacher and was such a great student, why does that teacher not contact or acknowledge that person's school for students who wish to learn more? If someone was such great friends with someone that they learned something from, why do they not talk about them publicly or in print? I think these are questions that are raised and answered by having/not having lineages. But again, it's just one facet. I've said time and time again that I'm all about the goods. If you've got it, you've got it. There's no need to hide behind some lineage or a story. If you made it up in your back yard, there's no shame in saying that provided you can do what you say you can do. The thing for me is that I like to include as much information as possible when I am involved with something. If my teacher has the goods, do I care if they made it up in their back yard? No. But if I found out that he's been telling people that he learned it from some monk in the Tibetan mountains... well, I might question why that teacher has been doing that, and that knowledge may augment my impression of the teacher. Does it impact the quality of the teachings and stuff? Mmmm, maybe yes, maybe no, if you believe that honesty is part of development and if you believe that that teaching is supposed to increase your development The point is, rarely ever is one thing the only "nail in the coffin" when it comes to "judging" a teacher or a teaching (for some grim, un-cultivated, judgmental humor) It's an unhappy situation, and there are a lot of different ways to think about it, I guess. I heard once upon a time that it was not considered respectable for martial artists to make money from their teachings. The implication there being that teachings can't be "bought", and that they should only be conferred upon those worthy. So many times teachers had "day jobs", and their students also had "day jobs", but at night, in the privacy of their own homes or wherever they could, they'd practice. But then at the same time, many a martial artist was sponsored by the government to teach soldiers So who's to say what about anything. But these days it's an issue that can go lots of different ways. Because to get really good at, say, martial arts, it really help to go full time. And you are providing a service that people are willing to pay for because they see value in it, so they pay money. And that's the foundation of capitalism, which is the foundation of the society in which we live. So who knows

My opinion is be upfront about it. I reference open source programming and open source technologies all of the time. I know several open source programmers who are phenomenal. Better than probably 99% of the highly paid professionals out there. Know when they got started? Sometime around 15. Way too smart for school. Did it on their own. No accreditation. No college course credit. No income. Just doing what they love to do. You can be a phenomenal performer of your craft or a phenomenal teacher and have no accreditation whatsoever. You may even have the accredited sources coming around trying to tear you down. It makes no difference on your skill. Just be open with what you have or what you don't have. Make the focus upon what you can or you cannot do. There are some places that flat out will not even LOOK at you unless you have the proper accreditation/transcript/GPA/job history (basically, a "lineage"). That sucks and that's a fact and you're just going to have to deal with it. But you know what? The cream rises to the top, and skilled people tend to have a way of getting around those barriers. Some of those 15 year old genuis open source programmers went on to college and got degrees, got into courses, got connections, got "lineages", and went on to great careers. Others went out on their own and made their own careers in their own way. It is what it is. Got a lineage? Sweet, what lineage is it? I'll look it up. What is their standard? Who else have they produced? Don't got a lineage? Sweet, what do you do, and do you do it well? What do you produce? It's just another of the many factors floating around out there.

Here is what I've seen, as someone who takes an academic interest and personal past time of manipulating words (but only for t3h lulz and only to have good, clean fun with friends.... also to get girls talking dirty ), and as someone who has followed Kunlun as a cultivator who is always on the lookout for the best teachers out there (if not for myself, then at least so I can refer them to someone who may be in need of them). The marketing side of Kunlun has done well to "paint" many "pictures" which, if you go back and legalistically look at what is ACTUALLY being said, is not, in and of itself, a lie. I recall on the old website it talked about Max learning from his first teacher who was trained in Wudang. The teacher was a janitor somewhere and helped Max out. Then it said that Max spent the next 15(?) 20(?) X number of years "learning from teachers from Maoshan, Tibet, Siberia, etc etc" (or something to that effect). I do recall thinking "wow, it was pretty cool that a 15 year old was traveling to China, Tibet, Siberia, etc etc, and learning high level secret stuff, he must really be a genius!" But then I started to think about the political climates, the safety aspects, the language barriers.... I was like "how did this work?" Doing some google searches, I turned up the occasional discussion forum where people had those same questions! They weren't sure how a 15 year old was doing this stuff. Then TTB's turned up info on Andrew Lum and Jenny Lamb. I went back and looked more carefully at the wording... No one ever claimed that Max went to these places, only that he learned from teachers who had lineages from those places!!!! But hey, that's not what it sounded like. But is it Max's fault if you misinterpret that to mean that he was a 15 year old third eye fused open genius who was getting initiated into all of the secret things that 85 year old gurus weren't getting? Nope. Anyway, that's what I noticed. I found that interesting. Is it straight up lying? Well, no, not really. Is it intentional misdirection? Well who's to say it's intentional? Does it lead people to get a certain image? Well... yes. Would an honest person go back and change it to be as direct as possible? Hm, who knows...? Personally, I'm all about who's got the goods and who can verify that he's got the goods, which means doing things yourself, and producing students who can also do those things. To that extent, for me, it takes away NOTHING for you to say "I learned from Andrew Lum, who lives in Hawaii (cool place anyway) who does X, Y, and Z. And I learned from Jenny Lamb, who's a super nice person who does X, Y, and Z. And I found that by combining these two practices, you get tremendous effects, and that's what I teach." But, you know, some people want to hear "I learned how to do energetics from Wudang, which helped me energize my body, then I learned super duper Maoshan magic stuff and combined it with the enlightened Kunlun traditions to make a quick-quick path of mega-enlightenment that will produce results quicker than staring at a wall for 85 years." Second story sounds flashy... too flashy. I will ALWAYS go on a search for concrete names and places that can be traced back from the present to the past. I will support such disclosure, unless such disclosure is against the express wishes of the teacher (like John Chang wanting to go away), or will lead to harassment or safety issues on the part of the teacher. And I support people who will come out and tell the names and places that a teacher learned from.

I guess we're moving this, but my response is here.

I'm going to relate my opinion through my experience of looking for a teacher. Even though I have never met this person, and only learned from books, I have found B.K. Frantzis to be incredibly helpful. Now prior to purchasing any books on him, I of course did a shit ton of research. Even after purchasing "Opening The Energy Gates of Your Body" and read some of his fantastic sounding life stories, I did even more research. I turned up a LOT of shit talk. Like, seriously. "He's fat, he can't be doing real martial arts." "He's an asshole who can get away in push hands because he is fat." "He is a glutton. *Insert personal anecdote of Frantzis' gluttony." "He is a braggart. None of those things happened." "He got kicked out by one of his teachers." "None of the Chinese ever taught any white man with such a huge ego any REAL "inner door" practice, only the fake stuff to get him to pay money while they laugh at him behind his back. I know this because I'm a REAL inner door disciple of *insert your favorite teacher*". Yadda yadda yadda. And, you know, in his writing and in video I have seen things that, you know... could have used a little more tact (though I guess for him in his circumstances WERE using tact, but then again, I've never met the man, so how would I know?) The thing is, I also heard a lot of good things. But for me, good things are really useless. When I shop a product on Amazon, I only read the bad reviews. Why? Of course the 5 star reviewers like the product for (most likely) all the reasons I want to buy the product. I want to find out why I DON'T want this product. And I found a lot of pretty good reasons why someone wouldn't want to train with B.K. Frantzis or be associated with him. But you know what? The material in his books and DVD's is phenomenal. At least, in this humble do-it-yourselfer's opinion. I can't wait for a chance to go to a seminar and learn from him in person. As a skeptic, I always held out the possibility that he was just talking a good game. But goddamn... each time I look at something new, it just gets to such finer and finer and finer detail. Even if it's just on the physical/chi level. Even if he DIDN'T know anything about the emotional/spiritual/mental/etc levels, his physical/chi knowledge would be FAR worth the price of admission. But the more he goes on, the more I start to think that he really DOES have some serious higher knowledge. That, or he's just a top notch bullshitter and knows all the right ways to hint at things. But I digress... The point is, I kept practicing Frantzis' material, and keep on looking out for his products, because I saw in them their tremendous quality and help for my life. As we like to say on the internet, "haters gonna hate". Fuck 'em. Do what you do. You don't want students who are going to be put off by a couple of internet rumors. You don't want students who are going to switch loyalties like they switch songs on their iPod. You want students who are committed to learning the material, and who are committed to internalizing it, integrating it in their own lives, mastering it, and then passing it on. Plenty of people don't want to train with a fat, arrogant, self important sonofabitch to learn internal martial arts and meditation. Me? I think he's got the goods. I think he's a person. I'm willing to meet this person because I see extreme value in what this person is teaching, and I wish to learn it, integrate it into my life, master it, and then pass it on. I have no idea what it will be like when I meet him, or how we will get along, or how I react. My plan is to focus on learning as much as I can from this person. And, you know, if someone doesn't want to train with that kind of person, fine. If someone doesn't want to train with a trickster coyote who beefs up the stories surrounding his energetic martial arts prowess, well that's fine with them. If people want to train with someone because they see value in what that person teaches, fine with them. If someone doesn't want to train with someone who repackages what they have learned from China in a cultural framework that is more accessible to the average Westerner, well fine with them. If you want to practice with someone because you see value in what that person teaches, great. Don't expect people to never talk shit about you. Because, well, for one thing, they always will, and for another thing, they always will on the internet. If you've got haters, it means you're out there enough to be recognized. And that is good. It means people are thinking about you. You don't want a bunch of "yes" men. You want people who can think critically. You want that person who can see through the bullshit and be like "you know, I heard X, Y, and Z rumor. But I don't give a flying fuck, because I think you've got the goods." Focus on giving out the goods, and shrug off whatever else comes along.

I'd just like to thank everyone who has stepped forward and presented their experiences, knowledge, and yes, even rumors that they have heard. They all add great knowledge to thetaobums. Not to mention they help build the lore of this forum. "Remember the crazy Kunlun days? They're still happening!" When I'm a prospective student/buyer of a product, I LOVE finding conversations like this. I think all the things, good and bad, have a source, either personal, or with the thing everyone is talking about. There's usually a pretty good reason why everyone has the experiences/opinions they have. And for me, it ALL helps in a decision making process. So I'm hoping that these conversations can stay around (as unedited as possible, hopefully) for new people who come by in the future to possibly pick up the practice.

I'm not saying they don't (am I???). In fact, that's my entire point: They DO have the same potential. The problem is that, despite many of them having a yearning, despite many of them knowing something is "off", they don't know what to do. Or, sometimes, they DO know what to do, except when they perform their little cost benefit analysis, it's not worth it to take the time out to pursue a spiritual path. People are "rational", or at least, taught to think "rationally", or, at least, taught to rationalize their irrational behavior so it at least seems rational Which is why I urge those who can do miraculous things to step forward and do them. Teach to your audience. We live in an area where it's cool to be a skeptic. Where you are judged based on your ability to make the "rational" decision. Even if that rational decision kills you or someone else, hey, no one can fault you, because "any rational person would have done what you did". So a person knows something is wrong. But they will never (usually) "rationally" choose meditation, because what does that do? Nothing. You sit there. Oh, but wait, you can heal scoliosis? Done. You can energize your body to that of a young person? Done. You can cause fires with your hands? Done. You can have sex for hours on end? Done. Get them in the door, get them doing stuff, and oh hey, look, they're getting a better sense of well-being, compassion for their fellow humans, and enlightenment.... whoops. Hell no it doesn't. Oh it's definitely possible. It's what I kept telling non when he was on his "if only I could just be a lonely hermit" kicks. You can definitely do it and be part of society and living with other people. It can even be the better alternative to being alone (depends on the situation though, sometimes you just gotta be away, I think).

Other people tend to be a problem. Because, you know, we're told from the time that we're born to listen to other people. Because, you know, kids don't know what they want. Kids are dumb. Kids don't know what's right for their bodies. Left alone, all they'll do is eat candy and stay up past their bedtime, right? So, you know, "do what I say because I say so, who cares about why, you're too dumb to understand the explanation anyway, and if you don't do what I say, you get punished." So we're taught from a very young age to listen to what others say. We pick up on that as a mechanism for survival. So when a hundred or a thousand or even just one person says "you're weird", we have a VERY strong conditioning which tells us "you're about to be punished". So it's VERY hard to overcome. Even if you KNOW that it's a pointless and stupid rule. And even just getting to the point where you can do what you want to do is an accomplishment in and of itself. But these are just my own crazy theories It's been pretty wild, 'cause I got into this whole cultivation bit when I was 16, still in high school. I'm a senior in college now, and even just in these 6 years, I can see how people are turning out with the life choices they've made (a healthy number of people from my high school came to my university, so it helps that there has been a solid pool of people across many disciplines). And, you know, for a lot of us it's not good

I think those are different classes of people though. Perhaps those who are further down the path (but don't yet realize it)? There is a yearning, I think, in lots of people. Even in high school and college, I've met lots of people who have yearned for that something else. Even just teaching them some basic breathing and relaxation techniques makes them super happy and content. They feel great. They feel thankful that I showed it to them. But then they go back to destructive life behaviors. Often, they KNOW they are going back to destructive life behaviors. Why? "Because that's just how the world works." You treat your body like shit to get your education. You treat your body like shit to get your job. You hang around toxic environments and toxic people so you can keep your social circle, without which you'd be a loser and an outcast. Your body breaks down, your mind breaks down, but you use your social circle and your career to hook you up with whatever drugs you need to block out the pain. Then your body REALLY breaks down. Your mind REALLY breaks down. You get a life intervention, blah blah blah. And then you can tell people "I don't do that shitty stuff now, because I became depressed and tried to kill myself, but now I see that I should be happy and meditate, even if it means not being around certain people or having a certain kind of job." That's okay. But, you know, if you don't do certain things because you want to prevent a breakdown, well you're just "weird", you're "lazy", you are "wasting your potential." I avoided certain things in high school and college because I KNOW for a fact that they would destroy my body. Even still, circumstances force me into positions that are not optimal for mental/emotional/physical/spiritual health, but I deal with them because, you know, I don't have any alternatives. People think I'm crazy and weird for things like, "just sitting." "Hey, what are you doing?" "Just sitting." "That's it? Nothing else?" "Nope." "That's weird." "Sit with me." "Okay." "..." "..." "..." "... This is nice..." "... That's why I do it..." "... Well, off to do some shitty thing." *weeks later" "Hey, how have you been?" "My life is shit, and I don't know why."

For me, it's the same as with John Chang and Mo Pai.... Despite what people SAY they want- health, wellness, a sense of being a full human, living in the present, getting over stress, blah blah blah blah blah- they WANT something miraculous, they want something with "powers", they want something where you encounter spirits, aliens, recover the info of your past lives, where you fly around in lucid dreams, have an immortal body that lets you come back to earth to have hot sex with super models, to be able to shoot fireballs from your hands, to be able to fly through time and space, they WANT something that is different from their normal lives, they want something to give them a reason to change it up, to drop their shitty job, to get out of shitty relationships. Now spiritual people say that's escapism. That they should "accept" and "live in the moment". Really? Accept that you work long hours in a shitty job that you hate? Accept the fact that most people in your life are toxic? Here's what I think: most people are looking for a good enough excuse to drop the shit in their life. But here's the problem: most people don't get a good enough reason not only to convince their friends that they need a life change, but to convince themselves that they need a life change. You know, to quit their job, cash in their retirement money, and go travel to a monastery to meditate. People who have near death experiences can get "weird". They can cash in their retirement money and go become a monk or a nun. They can get into "crazy" spiritual stuff and people will say "well of course, they had a near death experience, that made them re-evaluate their life priorities." But if your co-worker quit coming in to work one day because he "re-prioritized" his life, that'd be "weird". It came out of the blue, for no rhyme or reason. We live in a rational world and are taught to be rational. Having the feeling of needing a change isn't good enough. You have to have a reason, or an event significant enough that people can understand how your sense of rationality got blown away. So here's the thing: if you have a reasonable account of someone shooting fire out of their hands or disappearing into the ether to a world of rainbows, even if you could find ways to discount it, guess what? You've got something to go after. You've got a reason to do something "weird". "Hey, Joe went to Indonesia because he heard of an acupuncture (accepted in the mainstream as "not THAT weird") who could do some weird things with something called "chi", it involved years of meditation and fire. He heard about some researchers who found this man, and he said that he wanted to investigate it for himself, because he wants to heal his bum leg that doctors couldn't ever heal." "Huh. A bit crazy, but I guess if American doctors couldn't fix anything, he'd have to try something else, huh?" So, to me, that's it. People want a reasonable excuse to follow someone. It can't be just "oh I feel that this is what I need to do." That's not good enough criteria for the western analytic rational thought process. But if you hear that some guy giving a seminar twenty minutes away can throw people with his chi?.... Well, I mean, why not go check it out? It's just a couple hundred dollars for a weekend, no biggie........ Take that away, and you're just sitting there doing nothing. You ever try just sitting there doing nothing, staring off into space? People think you are weird. At least if you do some qigong/tai chi movement, people think you're doing tai chi or yoga, which is someone acceptable. But just sit/stand there. Doing nothing. Just sitting. People think you are fucking insane!!! That's why I support real teachers with credible claims coming forward and proving them. I fully support and respect those who want to stay hidden (trust me, I've been there, and it sucks having person after person come after you trying to call you out, and I understand that people don't always want to do that). But for those that are making claims, or can prove claims, seriously, prove it. You will get THOUSANDS of followers. Why? Because you've given them a credibly reason to seek something incredible. "Oh, Jane quit her job to go learn meditation." "Well that's dumb, why'd she do that?" "Well apparently her teacher can use energy to give people multiple orgasms and become enlightened. And three studies done an Oxford, Harvard, and Yale have proven it to work!" "Fuck this job, I'm going to go learn that!" But hey, that's just my crackpot theory...

Whoa now, that's not the coffee shop story I heard! I heard he was just standing in line/standing around, got his coffee, but his hand started to disappear in a spontaneous energetic way. His coffee fell through it, some woman saw his arm and screamed. His hand came back, the mess got cleaned up... and everybody went on with their lives

I like fiveelemnttao's approach to his modern Teutonic shamanism class. From what I can tell, he's been very up front about where it is coming from. He's been very up front about his integrating his knowledge of Chinese systems in the search for a universally applicable system, his meditative experiences, his scholarly research, as well as his "oral traditions" of looking at known mythologies and looking at the practice points illustrated in them. It is up front. It is honest. "Yes. We're talking about stories. But you know what? The stories tell us something. Let's see what we can practice from them." That is good and I fully support that. But it does not seem that Kunlun necessarily follows that path. If knowing the truth about the origin of a story will diminish enthusiasm for the path... then what kind of path is it? If you found out you were practicing something that somebody made up on after an acid trip, would you care? If that method gave you results, would you care? If it healed an ill, would you care? What if you had an ill and wanted it healed? What if you were placing your faith in something based on a message you heard which was in line with what you believed? I consider it disingenuous to present yourself as something you are not. Lies of omission go into that category. Using a variety of carefully nuanced phrases to create an illusion that you KNOW people will believe fall into that category. Some people WANT a lineage. Some people want to get into something bigger. They want to know that their teacher learned from a teacher who learned from a teacher who learned from a series of teachers going all the way back to the Buddha or what-have-you. That is important to some people. Now you can believe whatever you want about that belief, or any other belief, but if you tell people that's what you are, when you aren't, or if you have to start playing semantics games to get out of answering direct questions.... That is not genuine. And if you are doing that to try and motivate people... well, either find what's in your practice that people want which is lacking, or forget about trying to appease the whims of the rest of the population.

I think this kind of issue came out in a thread talking about Carlos Castaneda. Factually his stories are demonstrably false and/or plagiarized. But there are people who perform the practices and get benefit. Does it change the fact that Castaneda attributed things to himself that he never did? No. He still did that. Does it mean the practices are not real and are not useful? No, because there have been people who have done the practices (including but not limited to the original people who got plagiarized), and there are people who are still going through these legitimate practices who are getting benefit. So can a legitimate teaching come from a less than squeaky clean source? I, personally, believe so, yes. Again, I support knowing the facts and the truth, ugly as it may be. It's been known for a while that the marketing side of Kunlun has been a bit at odds with the touted spiritual side. Whether this is a product of someone working on the marketing side, or Max himself... well, I don't know if it's certain. I think it is valuable to know when a story has been stretched or fabricated. Even if it is done for show and the sake of marketing. It happens. People tend to respond to the flashy stuff, and, you know, sometimes before you can keep people you have to first draw them it. This doesn't change the legitimacy of the practice, I don't think. It's sad to hear that people are doing this but, you know... it happens. I think people should be empowered by knowing the truth. If the practice is real and legitimate, then let people do the practice, and let them know full well where it is coming from.

I'm a fan of investigation and knowledge. When I was young, I was duped by someone who seemed to make legitimate claims, but none of the facts lined up upon my investigation. Of course, the party line from the senior teachers and students was "oh just do the practice", "oh it just detracts from your development".... well, really, it was lies! Some stuff had value, and some stuff was trash. So since then, before picking something up I'd investigate it, the people teaching it, and its history. Where it came from. I think that is very valuable. If someone finds a thread that says "oh so-and-so is a fake", and stops there from a single comment from a single thread, well guess what? They ain't doing the proper amount of research or investigation. That's on them. That same person COULD use that comment as a springboard to investigate the person and the system. In this case, it could lead to many threads on this forum where the practice and the history and the results of the practice are discussed. And there have been some very good discussions about that. Not to mention those discussions have sprung into larger discussions about what spirituality is, what it means to be enlightened, what a lineage is, how transmissions work, importance of teachers, etc etc, which are topics that impact MANY areas. Each of the bullet points that Scotty listed are very interesting subjects for research, and very interesting points that will turn up some very interesting topics of conversation. At least, they were interesting to me when I researched them, because at the time, Kunlun very much appealed to me as a potential practice (never picked it up, but it was a strong contender for a good while). There is a reason why those points listed appear as they do, and there is a reason why some people may consider them true, and others may consider them false. My insistence on investigation and corroborating claims has provided me much insight and knowledge regarding people, history, cultural developments, how things grow and change, how things are maintained, etc etc (in martial arts, spirituality, etc). I think it's valuable. And I encourage other people to investigate and ask questions. But yes, it involves lots of work. And it involves personal responsibility for what you think, what you know, what you allow yourself to believe, what you will chose to repeat, how you chose to repeat it, and where you decide to stop on your quest for knowledge.

(If I may expound a bit on Cameron's point) B.K. Frantzis talks a bit about the distinctions between "fire" and "water" paths in his books like "Relaxing Into Your Being". Basically, it's a distinction made between modalities of thought and general philosophy when it comes to problem solving, and isn't a reflection of the content of the system. So, yes, a fire path can have kan and li. So can a water path. But that doesn't mean that they are the same kind of path. Frantzis mentions that water paths are more about relaxing, releasing, and allowing, whereas fire paths are more about getting energy to conform to your intent in more of a proactive way (because, yeah, in water paths the energy conforms to your intent too!) So the example he uses a lot is how to deal with a blockage. In a water path, you'd try to dissolve the blockage, to move energy through it gently, and if the energy doesn't go, you'd release around the area, and if the blockage still doesn't get released, you move on and try another day. You work on other areas. Sometimes working on other areas help relieve the blockage, and sometimes it's just a matter of time before the blockage can release healthily. Basically, "I want to go this way. Oh, there's something in my way. Can I get around it? No? Well, let's try something else." Whereas in a more fire oriented path, if energy doesn't get rid of a blockage, you'd focus more energy into the blockage and vaporize it. You'd keep focusing energy/intent until the problem is solved. Basically, "I want to go this way. Oh, there's something in my way? Well I'm going this way and this blockage isn't going to be here at the end of the day." I think it would be counter productive to try and say there is a "better" or "worse" way of dealing with things. It comes down to the person and the situation. Some people will benefit more from one practice and modality than another. Some situations will call for one modality than another. Another thing, which I think Frantzis mentions but I've seen other people mention it as well, is that this distinction is usually made by the water paths. Fire path people will say "oh well we have kan and li, so we've got water too." Well... yeah. But again, it's not always the content of a system (and really, if your system is universal, then every system that produces results is going to be working with the same thing: the human body, yeah?), it's more about the approach of a system.

The thing is that it's not like the rules exist somewhere as some objective entity that we are all equally subject to. But all too often these people who are "gaming the system" or who are "successful at the system" are people who are benefited by the rules of the system to begin with, and on top of that, they get (put) into positions of power where they can then dictate the rules of the system- where they have absolutely no incentive to come up with rules that would reduce their benefit, in fact, they have all the more reason to make rules that benefit them more. So you've got a system of people benefiting from rules that they make, and then getting in league with other beneficiaries of nice rules making yet MORE rules to benefit them in an ongoing cycle. And that cycle is one that has happened throughout history. There may be some revolution (global or otherwise), and "everybody" will get together to make "new rules" that are "never going to be corrupted or cause problems". Oh, but guess what, somewhere along the line the beneficiaries of those rules are going to find new ways to create more rules to benefit them more. And the cycle goes on and on and on. But does that mean we should just accept that system and stop bitching about it just because we have sour grapes that we didn't get placed in a beneficial position? Hm....

Ain't nothing like talking to two handy old guys. Seriously, they know a bunch of shit about life. When you intimately know the details of how to build things from the bottom up, to literally make something out of nothing and a whole bunch of disparate scraps of wood and metal and concrete... well damn. Ain't that alchemy if I ever heard it.

Join a math or engineering club. Or join a club where all they speak is ancient Greek, and they sit around reading original copies of The Odyssey and talk about it. A lot of easy ways to just feel dumber than somebody. Just go to a place where there will be people who know stuff you don't know. This kind of thing is very different. I doubt Telsa hung around any engineering clubs (after he realized his ideas were lightyears ahead of everybody else!) and I doubt Mark Twain hung around any artsy types (because any self aware writer knows that there are a shit ton of writers who are pretentious assholes). You have to go somewhere that realizes that even though people may FACTUALLY know different things, they all see the same thing. I'm willing to bet that even though Telsa was probably a better engineer than Twain, and even though Twain was probably a better writer than Telsa, that when each of them talked about their work, they both were looking at the same world and reflecting the same thing in their work. But that's just me. Maybe Twain's eyes glazed over as soon as Telsa started talking But somehow I doubt that... So maybe you should start being awesome at something.... For stuff like this, I'd say that if you weren't born into it or inheriting a position, then someone would have to contact you. Basically, you get asked (told?) to join. You don't ask to join. You don't find them, they'll find you. Start being awesome at something. Very awesome at something. As in, "not of this natural world" awesome at something. And do so publicly. I'm sure they'll find you. [edit] Reflecting on this post.... it seems the takeaway is this: if you have to even ask this question, you're already doing something wrong..... Meeting "awesome" people comes about naturally as you follow your own natural path to whatever it is you are doing. People don't do what they do because they are awesome, people are awesome because they do what they do. If you're trying to be awesome for the sake of being awesome... then guess what? You're not being awesome. So instead of trying to be awesome, just do what you do.

It might be similar to the view counts that are on this forum- sometimes in a new thread, it will show 3 responses with 0 views. ??? Well apparently the view counter only refreshes after a certain while. So I guess if one were to... *ahem* adjust things here or there, it may create the illusion of... well, it'd create the illusion of whatever you wanted to create

You know how, when dealing with energetics or bad crap, fiveelementtao (among others, but he, for me, stands out) likes to say "ask yourself why you are manifesting this". When I read this: I thought of that. Which, yeah, is kind of a dick thing to say. But really... why DON'T we say that? This conversation is okay: "Oh, I'm feeling mentally out of it..." "So why are you manifesting that?" "Wow, you're so right, I should work on my mind..." So why not this one: "I'm having financial troubles..." "Why are you manifesting that in your life?" "I'm not sure..." "You should work on behaviors to manifest wealth!" I dunno. It seems to me like we can be all touchy feely in our manifesting when talking about.... well, touchy feely crap. But as soon as we start talking about something like financial destitution, incurable illness, the death of a loved one, etc, we forget the "you are making this in your life" line, and cut straight to the "oh I'm so sorry for you I hope things somehow turn out better for you by some power of divinity/coincidence of the universe etc etc etc etc". But, I mean, if you REALLY thought you manifested stuff like that, then, well, you should stick to your guns. [edit] Not to say that any one particular person or group of people around here thinks a certain way about a certain thing....

Well there are some people out there who actually feel pride in who they are in terms of a country from a "bottom up" (as opposed to "top down"). That's not to say ALL nationalism is like that. That's not to say that someone who is "genuinely" nationalistic can't be exploited just the same as someone who is "manipulated" into being "nationalistic". But since we're cultivators here, I find the distinction on the intent at an individual level to be important. Again, I'm not so hot on this jump that people make of "see each other as different therefore hated". Me and my brother are different. That doesn't mean I hate my brother. Differences can be sources of strength and unity, or sources of divisiveness and antagonism. Dispelling our differences isn't a guarantee to make war go away. Yup.

Right at the top. If science is about finding out what the world/universe is like (through experience and observation), and religion is a system explaining how the world/universe is (without necessarily experiencing/observing it, through depending on how spiritual/mystical the root is, there may be plenty of that as well), then, really, at the very end they should be observing and explaining the same thing. Now the limitations of both need to be clearly understood. Science is about demonstrable, verifiable, repeatable, and to some extent, controllable phenomena. For instance, there are things called "rogue waves" which are huge waves that occur in the ocean, and from the very old days ships have been destroyed by them. Now, nobody believed in these tales of these waves, because the only people who had seen them were survivors of these destructive waves. It wasn't until we had means of recording them to present to others, and means of tracking them, that they became "scientifically verified"- so something can be real, but not be "scientific". In many things, we must wait for the technology to catch up to a point where we can realistically work with something. Now in terms of religion/spirituality/faith, it's tricky because you've got to have the "right view", as it were. Do you believe something because you genuinely feel it to be right, or do you believe it because you WANT it to be right, because you'd be sad if it was found out to not be the case? Religious/spiritual people who are strong in their faith or their convictions in their own experience have nothing to fear from science. If their faith accurately reflects reality, then science will validate those principles. People who fear scientific discoveries, I think, are the people who have invested much in a structure that, realistically, they know to be fragile and false, and they are desperate to maintain their facade for as long as possible.

Exactly. If I can think of a way to cheat people, then I know that other people can think of the same way to cheat them. The problem is that while I know that I myself won't cheat people, I don't know that others will act is such a kind regard. So I protect myself against those types of people, and when I make plans for something, I take the unscrupulous into account. Yes, and I would also say that they are strong motivating factors for success and prosperity. Context is important! Ambition can be good or bad. Hm. Well that ain't exactly my cup of tea. Everyone would be equal if we were all slaves to a machine. You are merely replacing the current governing body, which you now perceive to be corrupt, with another governing body which you think will remain "objective" and therefor "incorruptible". I don't think it will work out in the way that you might want it to. People have to take responsibility for their actions. We can't just blame the current "system", be it run by humans or run by a super advanced AI. We could all create a society where people are equal and aren't judged. But in order to do that, every single person would need to be dedicated to that. Because if just one is not willing to take that responsibility, then they will bring it down by taking advantage of the hard working attitude of others. That is a heavy responsibility, and not everyone is willing to take that on. And I don't think we can reliably force that responsibility on someone to any good end. Oh don't worry about me. Just because I'm critical of an idea, and just because I don't accept some plan of action, doesn't mean that I suddenly forget about it. Context and timing is important. If the time comes when such a plan of action would conceivably work, I'm all for it. But there are some things I just don't think are feasible in the current time, or the foreseeable future (keyword being "foreseeable"- we don't always see what's going to come).