Creation

Hi daojones. These words apply to me as well. I have been pushing hard in this direction for a long time and only very recently have I felt I've begun to make progress. So I don't have a linear progression laid out, or any techniques that worked for me, just the sense of what was actually important and what was not. Generally, I would say that techniques, in and of themself, are not important. The most important factor for me has been the deep intention and willingness to walk the path. This particular issue is rooted at this very deep level, so accessing that depth is paramount. When you have that deep intention and willingness, then it is just a matter of time. Now, what do I mean by deep? Shallow intention is the intention that most people are aware of, what we use to do our dally tasks. But any time there is a deep longing, deep pull, etc for something this a sign that what is being engaged is a deeper part of us than our ordinary discursive mind. What has really helped me get in touch with this depth within me is contact with people who operate from a very deep level. My two teachers helped me with this, but less because of actual techniques they taught and more by my just being exposed to how they operate. The person who really helped me get connected to this through direct personal guidance was Mila Le. You can find her here: http://solamita.wix.com/welcome I like the advice others have given about being in nature, etc. and something that I utilize is doing physical activity and being as aware as possible while doing so. But in both these cases it is so easy to bob on the surface of our ordinary habits of mind, so accessing the depth is what actually allows these things to be as beneficial as they could be. The biggest difficulty for me has been just how painful it is to face what is inside me, which has but strong constraints on how deep and how fast I can go. Courage and pain tolerance help a lot.

Try re-reading the poems.

I was initially turned on to AYP because of positive reviews from Tao Bums I respected (that was years ago). Upon reading up, I was very very impressed that Yogani seemed to have studied just about every type of Yoga available in the West and synthesized it all together into one system, and that he was openly talking about stuff that so many shied away from (e.g. kundalini, crown overload issues, khecari mudra, vajroli mudra, the need for both meditation and energy cultivation, how other yoga practices could serve as prerequisites to follow the direct path of self inquiry). I never practiced the system myself, but I had respect for it and those who practiced it. So it is very interesting to me to see these criticisms coming out now. I am particularly grateful for Seeker of the Self's review, because it is very rationally presented and does not have heavy feelings of bitterness and resentment attached to it, which generally turn me off to what a person is saying. I am also grateful to Tibetan Ice for pointing out good sources for alternative meditation practices that do not succumb to the same criticisms as AYP DM.

I recall seeing somewhere, on the AYP site or from an AYP practitioner on this forum, the idea that Yogani viewed AYP as an experiment. Honestly, the model is clearly trailblazing: "What happens when you give out very powerful yoga practices for free on the internet and de-emphasize devotion to a 'guru'?" But then the questions arise: Who is entitled to evaluate the results of this experimenter? Who is going to entitled to say "We have drawn such and such a conclusion from this experiment and recommend such and such a modification of the system/model? And this is where apparently things get difficult: Can you ever stop the experiment now that the practices are out there? Will Yogani lets some guy(s) on the internet tell him what the results of his experiment are? Wouldn't that compromise the ongoing experiment? And really, just how much is it really an experiment and how much is it actually it's own group/system that is self propagating and self preserving like any other such group?

Are you un-checking the "remember me" box when you log in? When I do I can log out successfully once, but if I log in again in the same firefox session it gets confused and I can't log out.

Wow, I am shocked and embarrassed that I have never come across this before.

One can see trinities everywhere if one looks. Consequently the religions of the world have many trinities. I think the Christian idea of the trinity developed because of this, as it was not in the Bible, but something that developed over hundreds of years. In Chinese cosmology, there are Heaven-Human-Earth, Jing-Qi-Shen, Yin-Yang-Yuan, and probably more besides. So which one, if any, maps to the Christian trinity? That depends on how you understand the Christian trinity. I have never understood the Holy Spirit as the love between the Father and Son. But interpreting the Father as the completely transcendent aspect of God, the Holy Spirit as the all-pervading energy of God, and the Son as God manifest in human form, I think that there is a very strong correspondence with the Buddhist doctrine of the Three Bodies of the Buddha.

Hello. Shekinah refers to a place of dwelling. It was given mystical meaning because of the idea of the presence of God dwelling in a location such as the Jerusalem temple. So it came to have the meaning of the power or glory of God manifested. As thelearner said, ruach is the Hebrew word for spirit, so Holy Spirit would be ruach hakodesh, and ruach elohim would be Spirit of God. Ruach literally means wind, much like how the Greek word for spirit, pneuma, refers to breath.

Let's see, found another one: http://aymta.org/hom...nal/zqlpt3.html Also, apparently Master Hu's daughters, Hu Yuexian and Hu Lijuan, are teaching around the world, utilizing the jingdonggong system. Centro studi per la salute Hu Yao Zhen, Translation of an Interview

That one was in the interview chenplayer linked to in post 6. This rounds out all the sources of stories of Master Hu I can recall seeing: http://hunyuaninstit...uandhunyuan.pdf I was surprised that the book "Qigong Fever" did not mention Master Hu, given his reputation as the Father of Modern Qigong. It did mention Master Wang and his four other teachers though.

Here is a recollection of Grandmaster Hu by Master Feng fit for a thread about Mo Pai: From: http://kungfuakademi...ng_yi_titok.php

Another from the same blog (which is awesome by the way): http://www.kamakotim...1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1 For the Dzogchen side of things, here is an interesting collection of quotes: http://awakeningtore...s-dzogchen.html

You whole framework of analysis is that of a Taoist. Buddhism does not just have a different method, but a whole different framework, that developed in a very different place. If you are thinking of joining a Buddhist monastery, it would be most useful to understand the Buddhist framework. In fact, anyone seeking to understand the relationship of the two paths would do well to understand both frameworks. Historically, much confusion has been caused by analyzing one in terms of the framework of the other. One summation of the aim of Theravada practice is to eliminate the 10 fetters which are the cause of rebirth in any of the 31 planes of existence. Looking up those will give you a jump start on the Buddhist framework. What exactly will happen to someone who does this is where differences between Theravada and Mahayana crop up, like the Three Buddha Bodies and the Bodhisattva Path (look up those too). A major Buddhist criticism of Taoism is that it only leads to rebirth in a higher realm, which is still characterized by the 3 marks of existence (look that up), not complete transcendence. Although presumably this criticism does not apply to "dual cultivation" paths that were influenced by Buddhism. Also, if you could point me to a source other than Taomeow that speaks of shen->chi->jing being a valid path of cultivation, I would be much obliged. Even B.K. Frantzis' "Water Method" works jing->chi->shen.

Possessing an eternal form is not a goal of Theravada practice because Nirvana is beyond any form. In Taoist terms, cultivation of mind is emphasized, and cultivation of life is not addressed at all. The Three Body doctrine, the Bodhisattva vow, and the idea of skillful means provide justification for pursing alchemical work/"cultivation of life" in Mahayana Buddhism, but all these doctrines are absent in Theravada. Even in Mahayana, the cultivation of mind is always first and foremost. At any rate, what were these monks doing eating a big evening meal. Isn't that against the rules for monks?

It's sad that this fellow will be labeled delusional by his esteemed colleagues. A glance at the comments on the article indicates the refusal to even consider the possibility of the afterlife of those who consider themselves "logical", "scientific", etc. Well, part of what is interesting about this case is that this fellow did not have an expectation about the afterlife. Did you notice how he said words like "angels" didn't even occur to him during the experience, but only when he was trying to write it down? How does he explain how people have different experiences of life? The more I think about it, the more I think that idea that everyone experiences the same thing when they die must be an oversimplification.

I agree that the blast was my own reaction because the first two times I watched the video I felt the same thing and the next two I did not. But I do not think it was a reaction to him pausing; something else was happening in the silence.

At first I figured thelerner was referring to the "Us and them mentality" when he mentioned mind control techniques. But that can also give encouragement, a sense of solidarity, that you are not alone, that not everyone thinks you are a weirdo, etc. So I think it is rather one sided to say any time anyone is encouraging solidarity they are trying to control you, or at least doing the same thing that people who try to control you do, and it is therefore a bad thing to do. I agree that it is good to be mindful of how such things influence you. As for the pauses, has anyone else noticed that that is where much of the magic happens? Mark is in a superconscious state when he gives these talks, so there is a lot of communication happening on subtle levels. For example, around 24-40 seconds in he says, "A person to do so has to have come to grips to some degree with the whole idea of who they are and what they want. 'Cause it's... [long pause]" and then, instead of finishing his sentence, he starts a completely new sentence. During said pause I felt a huge blast of energy in my solar plexus, which is the energy center dealing with "who I am and what I want". So as far as I am concerned, that sentence was finished energetically during the pause.

Yeah, that pretty much sums it up.

Nothing I have tried has worked. For example shielding, prayer, mantra, and various qigong tecniques.

>Get blissed out watching Mark Griffin videos >Entitiy shows up, hungry for an easy meal, as soon as I go to bed >Similar thing happened last time I got blissed out on Mark's energy, and the time before that >fml

Now that I checked, you said you were going to read it, but now you've never heard of it?

You were reading the Sandhinirmocana Sutra right? The author of the above work has a book out on the Third Karmapa's synthesis of second and third turning teachings that looks really good to me: http://www.amazon.co.../dp/1559393181/

Tsongkhapa is highly regarded as a scholar-yogi because he systematized and synthesized all views of sutra and tantra into one system. Every tradition has their highly regarded scholar yogis who created syntheses of the various strands of sutra and tantra. For example Gelugpas have Tsongkhapa, Sakyapas have Gorampa, Kagyupas have the Karmapas, Nyingmapas have Longchenpa. So one issuse is that Tsongkahap has many detractors: other scholar yogis and their followers don't think his conclusions or his synthesis are correct. In modern times, even a Geulg scholar, the multitalented Gendun Chopel, criticised Tsongkhapa's view. The other issue is that from a Rime viewpoint, any of these teachers' material may be skillful for some, and not for others. But the Tshonkhapa and his followers have, to a large extent, not presented themselves this way, but rather as the best, supreme understanding of sutra and tantra. Scholastic Debate is heavily emphasized in Gelug monasteries; monks are trained in why they are right and everyone else is wrong. If they allow that it may be skillful for a person to follow something else, it is understood that that is because that person is of inferior capacity. That is of course, as long as you weren't too doctrinally incorrect. If you were they just might ban your writings. Now of course, this produces the reaction that other sects will present their view as better and Tsongkhapa's view as inferior, as you have experienced. For me personally, it's mainly the air of superiority, self-importance, and criticising other traditions that bugs me about the Gelug tradition. For a good example of this: Really gets what? There are a lot of sectarian polemics in Tibetan Buddhism, and Gelugpas are especially known for this. The idea that the traditions of Milarepa, or of Padmasambhava, or Sakya Pandita would have died out without Tsongkapaha and his Gelug sect just seems like so much polemics to me.

dc9, Since you are interested in bliss rather than enlighenment, it might be a better approach to drop all notions of practices which are for enlightenment, however much bliss they give as side effects. For example, anything involving kundalini. If you just want sexual bliss, there are things geard specifically for that and nothing else. Like Jack Johnston's Key Sound Muliple Orgasm Trigger Protocol: http://multiples.com/

I know that's how it was in India traditionally, but I think Mark is trying to find a new model that gets the same result while being more conducive to the Western mind. I know he is sensitive to the whole "cult" issue that has caused so many problems in Western Sanghas. I have never heard him emphasise surrender to him personally. He often talks about the Siddha Lineage as a whole, and that the Guru is ultimately an eternal spirit or principle, and actually even a place in the crown. Also, I think that in Tibetan Buddhism they do not emphasize devotion to the physical person of the guru quite so much as in the Indian traditions. At least, I get that impression from some Tibetan Buddhist instructions on how to relate to the Lama. There is still surrender, and a need for complete trust, yet recognizing that it's just a person that may be flawed.