Sloppy Zhang

How often has that worked for you?

So let's say you successfully get to alpha and theta states- how do you turn this into remote viewing? Anyone know about the course? Experiences? Successes? Anyone know the drills?

Most definitely Some stuff I'm interested in and helps a lot. Sometimes I see people going through the same things I've gone through, so we can both be helped by our experiences. Sometimes there's a topic I'm not interested in, but later on it will come up, so I'll come back, find it, and see what everyone has to say. Or not. Overall, it's fun. I've gone through periods where I don't really post too often. Then I'll come back. The I'll go, then come back. Don't force it if you feel this is antagonistic to your goals, stop. Maybe one day it will help you out some more again, without taking any steps back.

I live in the US- and there is STILL no normal! That's the point! If I were to ask you, "non, what's normal for you?" That would be such a broad question that it'd be impossible to answer. Even if I narrowed it down, "non, what's normal eating habits for you?" And you'd probably just give a list of foods you eat the most. But that's not really "normal", it's just a list of your particular habits. It doesn't mean anything. If you take a sandwich to work with you, and you work Mon-Fri, does that mean you are addicted to sandwiches? No, it just means that given your work schedule, you eat sandwiches. Now let's say you quit your job, so you stop eating sandwiches, as you have time to prepare more elaborate foods. Are sandwiches now "abnormal" for you? Not really, they just aren't habitual any more, so don't occur as frequently. Stop trying to be "normal", stop trying to find "normal". Just act as the situation unfolds. No offense, but that kind of reason for practice is not very constructive- it'll just lead to failure and frustration (some of which you tend to hint at in your posts). If you are practicing celibacy, it should be because that's what you feel you need to do. Even if a great woman came along and said, "non, I want you", if you really wanted to practice celibacy, you'd say, "sorry, I don't think that's right for me at the moment." If you are practicing it just because you don't have an alternative..... i don't see good things coming out of that. Sorry. Now this is something that I disagree with. Spiritual development should help you be able to relate to different people better, in my humble opinion and in my experience. Sure, I went through a phase when I was like, "ah, nobody does what I do, ah, I'm so alone, ah, everyone is a horrible person, ah, I can't relate to anyone". And then I thought, well, if I'm practicing a system that reveals actual, universal truth, if I am cultivating an ability to know what is real, if I am working on compassion, if I am working on getting to know myself- then won't that help in meeting others? And do you know what? It did. As soon as I dropped all the crap of "oh no one will ever understand me" or "I'll never be able to connect with anyone", and instead just met people, and enjoyed who THEY were rather than what I wanted them to be, I started to connect much more easily, much more consistently, and much more enjoyably.

Yes, non, perhaps you should begin by learning about the underlying mechanisms that surround things such as obsession, addiction, depression, loneliness, or whatever, rather than focusing on the surface causes (addiction to food, sex, feelings of being ostracized by society, etc etc). I picked up a book on abnormal psychology, and found that a lot of the problems I were dealing with which I thought were just idiosyncratic quirks were really mild forms of OCD. I had never had a problem big enough to ruin my life, nor warrant a trip to a doctor, but I saw that some of the things I was doing were (literally) textbook cases of certain psychological functions. Once I understood that, and I understood the clear steps to fix it, the problems really did resolve themselves. Most of my problems came about because I didn't know what was happening, and I was relying on trial and error, looking in the wrong places, etc etc. So learn the mechanisms, because these things can show up to cause problems in a wide spectrum of areas.

What is normal? What is the standard you are using in order to create such a concept? There are TONS of variations in methods and traditions, and even within those traditions, tons of variations, and even among people, TONS of variation, and even in one person, TONS of variation from day to day (do you eat the same thing every day? What is a "normal" food for you?) Don't get so hung up on concepts of normal, because normal just flat out doesn't exist. However, creation of a "normal" IS a key strategy in marketing, public policy, control of populations/individuals, etc etc. So be careful. EVERYTHING can be addictive!

When looking at cults, it's better to learn and observe behavior, as cults can manifest themselves anywhere, regardless of their religious/spiritual affiliation. That said, even some institutionalized religions border on cult tactics- reliance on a group, having a single leader who is the only one capable of doing anything, insulting members or seeking to otherwise tear them down in order to get them to follow the leader. One could argue that Christianity follows these tactics (only through the Church can one find salvation, only the priest has the tools necessary to instruct and lead people on a spiritual path, people are inherently sinful and weak, so any attempt to do things on your own will just lead you straight to hell, so only path is to follow a priest), but you could also make the argument for other areas as well.

Semen retention is usually a very small part of a much larger system. In fact, in some cases semen retention is not the goal, it is the byproduct of correct practice. So after you have taken practices which allow you to feel and regulate your body (energetically and physically), then when you partake in sex, you can move the energy in places it doesn't normally go. When your awareness changes from just ejaculation, to any number of other things possible during sex, then you don't ejaculate as frequently. Best thing I can suggest for doing this safely and without potentially harmful side effects is to not just practice semen retention alone, but adopt a practice which allows you to feel and value the other energies/sensations which sex can provide, cultivate an awareness and/or control of those, and you'd be surprised how that can lead to a reduce in the frequency of ejaculation, even if you do orgasm.

Awesome suggestions! But unfortunately, that only works if you've got space to grow that stuff. If you're in an apartment, or a house in a really cramped housing area, then you're going to have limited options for how much you can produce on your own

Same reason why in America, being overweight is a sign of lower socioeconomic status- junk food is cheap. Ramen, chips, packs of soda, a package of donuts, fast foods, etc etc- MUCH cheaper than whole foods, organic foods, etc etc. Go to an organic food store, then go look at the prices and compare them to junk food or fast food for an equivalent period of time (food to feed you for one day, one week, two weeks, etc). Junk food is just cheaper. So if you're doing a seminar and want to provide snacks, how do you cut costs? By cheaper food! And that food is probably "junk".

looks in videos that were taken recently. His teacher, looks pretty non-fat. Frantzis is an interesting case in that he's gone through a couple of serious spinal injuries, so maybe his ability to exercise in other conventional ways was diminished, but maybe his change in eating didn't? Not trying to make excuses, or rationalize, and I don't know the man, but just consider that everyone has a history. was known to be a pretty big guy, yet still skilled. What is healthy, what looks healthy, etc etc changes as the times change. In some cultures at some times, fat meant healthy because it means you had access to plenty of food. In modern America, fat means unhealthy because it means you're probably eating unhealthy food and lead a sedentary lifestyle. But even modern days, sumo wrestlers are quite heavy, and I remember growing up kids would say someone is fat like a sumo wrestler. The assumption was "big" and "fat" meant "unhealthy", despite any athletic abilities of a sumo wrestler. (yeah, they aren't qigong, but still healthy and "big"). Personally, I agree with you- though my tolerance for unhealthy food stayed pretty high relatively far even after my start of meditation/qigong, I reached a point where unhealthy food that used to appeal to me started making me sick almost as soon as I started eating it. Sometimes I feel a bit nostalgic for the foods I used to eat, so I'll go and try them- and I learn pretty instantly that it's a bad idea. I can just feel my body go "ugh". But who knows what would happen if I got access to a bunch of quality sumo diet food? Hmmmm.....

Gotcha, thanks. How do you tie this in with stuff like remote viewing? Know anybody who is able to produce anything that's even remotely (hehe) close to consistent results?

Well please do, I am looking forward to what you have to say

Interesting thoughts ralis. Do you mind expanding on that a bit? How does one go about mastering those states?

Yeah, this is the kind of stuff that got me less and less interested in western astrology as I could mostly find it. People would say, "oh well, according to that date, the sun was in aries" or something like that, but then I started to think, "well... was it really?" do astrologers actually keep track of where a constellation actually is and moves to as precession occurs, and at what dates the sun/planet will be where, or do they just go by some old list that might have completely changed by now? Also, thanks for the book suggestion!

Please forgive my ignorance, but what do you mean by "two hours full lotus Yin Xan Fa per day"? What does Yin Xan Fa mean/include?

Yeah, this is the kind of thing I'm wondering about. I don't know how Chinese astrology does the correspondences, but I know that western astrology places things (like the sun, planets, etc) in a constellation (from our perspective, anyway). But overtime, the location of even the constellations change as precession happens. So I'm just wondering if modern astrology keeps up with that, because if we do date correspondences from an older source (such as you were born in X month, you are Y sign, and so on with other planet positions), then they may be incorrect for the present (so now if you're born in X month, you are Z sign, and so on with other planet positions).

Well, in the spirit of asking questions...... I've taken a few courses in astronomy in my time in university, and usually in one of the intro classes someone brings up the topic of the zodiac. One of the things that my professors like to cite for why astrology and stuff is less serious (these days) than modern astronomy, is because many modern astrologers don't take into account the precession of the equinoxes, and stuff like that which actually changes where the stars are in the sky in relation to the earth over long periods of time. So basically, stars and constellations would be in different places hundreds of years ago than they would be today, but someone studying today from an older system who isn't as familiar with the stars (ancient people looked at the stars all the time, so a lot of them already knew about this, and astrologers of the day would factor this in, as the science of astronomy was very closely tied to what they did, but that's a lot less so with astrologers these days) could actually be using correspondents and things that don't exactly work. I'm not as familiar with Chinese astrology as I am with western astrology (yet), so I don't know if the basis for their calculations is the same, but what I'm wondering is- Is modern astrology taking these changes into account, or is it using outdated charts of the stars which correspond to conditions hundreds of years ago, but which might have changed by now?

I recall reading an article somewhere on William Mistele's site, in which he says that the scene in Matthew chapter 14 verse 22-33 (Jesus walks on water) is in fact Jesus attempting to teach siddhis to his disciples. In fact, Peter actually succeeded in walking on the water for a little while, but then got scared when he started thinking over other things (the storm), and lost it. Interesting thoughts. I haven't read the Bible recently, and I certainly haven't read it looking for Jesus leaving clues about siddhis. Maybe he did? In any case, I find Mistele's thoughts to be rather interesting.

Yeah, I remember the crazy Kunlun days.... And it's not that I disagreed with what you were saying, because there IS lot of work involved. I just wasn't sure if you were commenting directly about orb's statement, or about the general situation, which I pretty much agree with you on

I dunno if you knew this but.... I'm fairly certain orb was being sarcastic....

Not speaking for Dawei here... I don't know that it's the individual person that is being impartial, but it's the Tao that is being impartial. "If [the good ones] strive by means of it, they achieve what they strive for. If [the not good ones] avoid [punishment] by means of it [the Way], they manage to avoid it." If you want to use the Tao to move towards something "good" (not quite sure of the actual wording, "good" carries lots of connotations, so don't get too hung up on the value assessment), then the Tao will allow you to achieve something "good." If you want to use the Tao to move towards something "not good" (again, trying to avoid value judgments here, just think of it is varying concepts/goals), then the Tao will allow you to achieve something "not good". So, I dunno that YOU need to be a robot. Just the Tao, the means by which someone can achieve something, is going to be impartial to the person ("good" and "not good") and what their goals are ("good" and "not good"). At least, that's how I'm reading this part of a rather interesting translation I'd be extremely careful with thoughts like this. Many times we are only looking for the things we want (not necessarily a bad thing). And sometimes, when we don't find it, we put it there for us to find. If there's a particular message that you want to be found in the tao te ching, and you don't find it... well, you are going to come up with all sorts of reasons for why it's not there (flawed translations, omitted by original author, supposed to be inferred by the reader, etc etc), and you are going to put it in yourself, justifying all manner of VERY liberal translations (again, not necessarily a bad thing) and other sorts of additions which will conform to what you think "should" be there. So, just be aware of what you're doing as you do it, and where it can lead.

Thanks for filling everything in, Scotty

Huh.

I recall hearing this as well. I don't know about when it changed, when (or whether it's been there the whole time) she started laying out her own practices and all, but from my recollection, Level 1 was Jenny's, but then Max came in and supplemented it by providing levels 2 and 3. So, yeah, interesting to hear these new developments but.... the story keeps on changing, and that's a bit disconcerting.