Creation

@freeform has mentioned a number of times that the DDJ describes the way of the Shengren - "Sage", whose actions entirely come from De, which does not strictly speaking require alchemy, but that it would be very hard and possibly impossible for someone become a Shengren without alchemy at this time. Moreover, alchemy can take one beyond the stage of Shengren, to the stage of Zhengren, whose actions come entirely from Yuan Shen. Only with alchemy, ie. by cultivating ming to it's highest possible level, can one's Yuan Shen fully express through all levels of being. MCO, YJJ, and dantian work are all part of ming cultivation.

The Pali cannon mentions that projecting a physical double is a siddhi that arises from fourth jhana, and has stories of the Buddha and his chief disciples doing this. Don't have a reference on hand, sorry. The Mahayana sutras, when listing the various siddhis possessed by bodhisattvas on the bhumis, speak of a Bodhisattva's ability to send forth multiple simultaneous emanations, thought the numbers are almost certainly exaggerated. (This is the scriptural basis of Tibetans claiming several people are the reincarnation of the same master). The Surangama Sutra (the primary scriptural basis for esoteric Chan) does describes the path of cultivation in terms of ascending through the dhyanas/jhanas, with each successive dhyana giving access to rebirth in a higher Brahma realm, culminating in 9th dhyana, but emphasizes that only dhyana/jhana with proper insight is liberative. All of this is consistent with the Pali Cannon, though many interpret the Pali Cannon to say this ascent of the dhyanas is not strictly necessary for Arhatship. Dhyana is one of the six perfections, so a bodhisattva would have to do this.

Interested!

No, not necessarily, though it might involve that. It is a process, not a method; there are many methods that can be used. Check out Damo's "Comprehensive Guide to Daoist Nei Gong" and his podcast on the dantian.

A first approximation is that neigong is about filling the dantian with qi and transforming the tissues of the body, and mostly (only?) works with post-heaven qi, whereas alchemy is working with the refining and transforming of substances in the body, such as jing, in particular, pre-heaven substances. MCO means different things depending on what is flowing through it. Post heaven qi circulating in the ren and du channels would fall under neigong. Refined jing or other alchemical substances flowing through the orbit would be alchemy.

I had a similar experience recently, but with acknowledging my faults and generating a resolve to change them. It was as though I couldn't do this without an intense sense of shame, self-blame, and self-criticism activating, which had a really toxic effect on my energy and emotional state.

Do your teachers distinguish between the attainment of an Arhat and a Buddha? Both were said to be free of the cycle of rebirth in early Buddhism, but a Buddha was one who could find the path without a teacher, this took many many more lifetimes to do, and most wouldn't be interested or able anyway. But later schools of Buddhism changed this and encouraged everyone to aspire to Buddhahood, and said Arhats only attained freedom from reincarnation for a really long time and then had to come back and work toward Buddhahood. One of those things I am not hung up about but would ask someone who would know if I could. Is this being embodied or in a celestial realm? There are stories about the famous "Mahavatar Babaji", who has an immortal body that will remain until the Kalki avatar comes.

The central question is "Is there grasping?" One can ask the question "is there a self or not" in a kind of ontological way, like one could ask, is the universe finite or infinite, temporary or eternal, etc. Or one could look into one's direct experience and ask, "What is it that I am calling 'myself' in my experience, what is it that I am calling 'not myself'? Is there suffering or delusion associated to this division within experience?" That has a very different feel to it, takes it out of the realm of speculation and objectification. This investigation complicated by the fact that, just like desire, sense of self plays a function in experience, and trying to stop the division into self or other through effort is as counterproductive as trying to stop desire by effort.

You didn't answer my question A lot of people say the Buddha said a lot of things...

[Puts Buddhist philosophy that on] If there is something beyond the mind (call it spirit or yuan shen or whatever), is it necessarily a "Self"?

A quick Google search revealed different definitions of these terms, that explains the discrepancy. The classification I am familiar with doesn't have anupaya, just the other three.

I don't agree with some aspects of your explanation this classification. Anvopaya is not merely body based methods, but any methods where there is deliberate action. Classically there were three categories of deliberate methods: mantra yoga, laya yoga, and hatha yoga. Sri Lahiri Mahasaya's Kriya Yoga combines the most powerful methods from each of these three categories of yogic action in a particularly streamlined way (for instance mahamudra and khecari mudra are hatha methods). So my questions were about comparing Hindu Anvopaya methods with Daoist ones, if you want to phrase it that way. But that Kashmir Shaivism classification doesn't really suit the variety of paths in Daoism. As for higher paths such as sambhavopaya, I pose this question to you. According to Sri Lahiri Mahasaya's diaries, when he first met his master Babaji, he went into a state unbroken of Nirvikalpa Samadhi for weeks. It was only after this that Sri Babaji initiated him into Kriya. Sri Lahiri's diaries later mention that in order to attain the fullest realization of yoga while maintaining his householder life, he had to train himself to not need sleep, instead spending the night in meditation. My question is, if he has already attained Nirvikalpa Samadhi, why was all this necessary?

Interesting topic. The neigong and alchemy I am learning has pieces that remind me of the Kriya I learned based on Pilgrim's recommendations, but put together in a different way. Yet Sri Yogiraj Lahiri Mahasaya's Kriya has more similarities with Daoism than other Hindu Yoga traditions that I am aware of. For instance, use of spiritual light that appears in the head appears to be ubiquitous on all spiritual paths, Daoism brings this light down into the lower dan tian, which is somewhat unusual. However, Sri Yogiraj's Navi Kriya technique specifically connects the light in ajna to the manipura, which is equivalent to the ming men in Daoist alchemy. Also, the famous Kriya Pranayama technique specifically utilizes upward and downward currents of energy, while most Hindu Yoga systems I am aware of only emphasize bringing energy up. dwai, you are more knowledgeable about Hindu paths than me, what do you think about this? Pilgrim has mentioned oral tradition that Sri Mahavatar Babaji's Kriya has 108 techniques, which Sri Yogiraj simplified for modern householders into six kriyas (though each has multiple parts). The full system of Daoist cultivation is more like Sri Babaji's system in that way, there is a huge list of practices and processes to engage with. I wonder if there are other techniques in Sri Babaji's system which are similar to characteristically Daoist practices. Daoism has a whole process around filling dantian, consolidating jing, and changing the tissues of the body, for instance, which ultimately prepare the body to be able to take in more light (according to my limited, beginner understanding). I wonder if there are analogues of this in the more thorough (i.e. complicated ) Hindu traditions. One thing I have wondered about from my limited experience with Hindu Yoga is why they say rooting your life force in Ajna makes you more calm, indeed dwai you mention just this effect. Rooting the life force in the head sounds like it would make me quite agitated. Perhaps I just didn't find the exact central point (which isn't just a location, but has more subtle components), or it's some aspect of my wiring or a way that I'm blocked.

@freeform thanks for the marvelous reply.

Interesting, is the light seen when doing the very precise om chanting you recently mentioned one of these (qi in the center of the head or shen ming) or something else? In every source I've seen heretofore, jhana (or it's equivalents dhyana and chan) refers to the state rather than the result of staying in the state, this might be confusing to people you interact with. What do your teachers call the state of absorption itself?

Great time to ask you what you mean by first jhana. In a Theravada context, I've heard of absorbing completely into the nimitta (aka shen ming?) so that perception of the body and normal waking mind completely drop away, and that this lasts for many hours if you really do it, but this seems to be more easy and common than what you are describing.

This is how my nonduality teachers describe their experience, except without the siddhis like being in two places it once, or full knowledge of a person's karma (beyond just experiencing people as themself). Do you suppose that someone who had attained what you describe in a past life could awaken to that type of consciousness without the intensive samadhi/jhana work in their current life, and hence not possess those siddhis?

If you can get ahold of his books, they are quite good, and less expensive. I can't speak to the concept of premature hardening, but Damo does teach movement exercises to "mobilize" the qi build at the dantian. Look in to his "Ji Ben Qi Gong" for instance.

Hi 小梦想, The ability to emit electrical qi never had any particular allure to me, it was only when someone explained how this was merely a byproduct of dantian cultivation, and how said dantian cultivation fits into the larger picture of Daoist spiritual alchemy that I became interested training that leads to such an ability. I would be curious to hear your perspective on how the material you teach fits into a larger picture of spiritual development. Best wishes. Edit: Also, on the purely medical side of things, why would faqi be preferable to waiqi liao fa as a treatment?

It doesn't seem quite as epic as that. This is the one that came to my mind:

Hi Michael, I appreciate you sharing about Lorne and David. People with clarity about the different stages the process of non-dual awakening goes through is something I'm always happy to find. If you have any interest, here are some other clear mappings of the process: http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2007/03/thusnesss-six-stages-of-experience.html https://digitalcommons.ciis.edu/conscjournal/vol8/iss8/1/

My nonduality teacher says the exact same thing . I'm realizing that I am only interested in a very particular strain of nonduality teachings, that can be markedly different from what is often put under that term, certainly from the people you describe having experience with. And as you know I'm holding faith that it is compatible with the Daoist training that I'm involved in. And from the other thread, just to keep everything tidy: In traditional Rinzai Zen also it is said that the actual path only begins with awakening (kensho), much as you have said about Daoism. They take the homogeneous blob conception of awakening to be an error (called "Zen stink") and have very specific ways of correcting that error. For whatever it's worth.

In the systems I'm familiar with that emphasize the type of awakening being discussed in this thread, it is considered that "post awakening" practice is just as important as pre awakening practice. The practices done pre and post awakening are often the same practices, pre awakening they are done to facilitate awakening, post-awakening they are done to refine and integrate the awakening. And a highly integrated awakening is considered to have a transformative effect on the body. Tibetan paths are well known for claiming this, but I've recently learned this is also true in traditional Rinzai Zen, per teachings that are usually oral tradition only. If this interests anyone check out the teachings of Meido Moore Roshi, for instance https://www.amazon.com/Hidden-Zen-Practices-Awakening-Realization/dp/1611808464

Ah, this is an excellent point for discussion. So, the "sudden awakening" schools of Buddhism I am familiar with would agree with you on this. I even have seen xabir2005 and his teacher Thusness say this same thing on their blog. So what is the disagreement? What it is that is let go of in this process of dropping conditioning and unfolding clarity. Even in Advaita there is not total agreement on this - there are two schools, Ajatavada and ... the one that's not Ajatavada, don't remember it's name . I'm only familiar with the presentation of arising in Sri Atmananda's Direct Path, not Traditional Vedanta. But the impression I get is that in terms of the difference in unfolding of this clarity, in Ajatavada even the very concept of arising is eventually let go of, whereas in the other school of Advaita it isn't. This is a really subtle thing, so it's not too different. But it seems to me that the clarity of someone with full realization in the Ajatavada school has developed a little further than someone in the other school. If someone had that first awakening to pure consciousness, but no one ever pointed out to them that the clarity can unfold further until subject-object duality has been dropped, they would be very unlikely to ever realize that on their own. The awesomeness of pure consciousness is too convincing. Actually, someone could point that out to them, and they might say, "No way, that sounds totally crazy, how could this limited body-mind which I have realized is not my true self be non-dual be from the infinite pure consciousness that I have realized is my True Self?" if they hadn't already accepted Advaita philosophy as authoritative. Similarly, if no one ever pointed out that even the very subtle remaining sense of something arising could be dropped, that person would be very unlikely to figure it out on their own. Hence the value of both subtle pointers and being open to them. So, as you know, sudden awakening schools of Mahayana Buddhism agree with Advaita that the unfolding of clarity eventually leads to the dropping of duality entirely. In this case it's a bit arbitrary if you call the remaining non-dual experience true self or no self, because there is no longer any separation between self and other. Hence the idea that Advaita and Buddhism are pointing to the same thing from the positive and negative directions, respectively. But it can seem that even in this non-dual clarity, consciousness is still primary to the illusory objects that are ultimately non-dual from it. As far as I can distill down the essence of what xabir2005 and Vajrahridaya were saying, they claim the process of unfolding of clarity and dropping of conditioning can proceed even further so that this very subtle duality implied by the primacy of consciousness to name-and-form is dropped. In this case, calling the remaining non-dual consciousness "true self" makes even less sense, hence the preference for the description as "no-self". Once I understood what they were saying in this way, I was perfectly happy to accept that that was indeed possible. To address @forestofemptiness's concerns, I have no idea if Ramana, Shankara, etc. had realized this or not. I'm not claiming they hadn't. But their writings don't seem to point to it explicitly. Then again, the writings of many great Buddhist masters don't point to it explicitly either. Again, I personally value the guidance of people who can address all these subtle dualistic attachments in detail. But I also value the guidance of of people who powerfully point to initial realization of intrinsic clarity! (And people who powerfully transmit deep samadhi, great moral character, etc.) Simply knowing what is out there is often the first step in moving towards it, hence my posting about it.

For whatever it's worth Vajrahridaya was raised in Muktananda's Siddha Yoga lineage via his mother and was eventually initiated and studied and practiced intensively in it for years, and xabir2005 immersed himself in Ramana and Nisargadatta and their students for years. But that's not working directly in a Vedantic tradition with realization confirmed by a lineage holder, so I guess we'll just have to take their descriptions of their realization at face value then, similar to many Western non-duality teachers who didn't train in a Traditional Vedanta framework. For instance, This is exactly how xabir2005 described the realization he had that he identified with Vedantic realization. I mean exactly. But because he was saying he later went beyond it, it was "You are describing a realization not an experience", "You didn't have your realization confirmed by a lineage holder", "You don't really understand Vedanta" etc etc. Here is a further line of reasoning to consider. Some teachers who are within the Vedantic fold sufficiently broadly defined distinguish two aspects of realization. First, the "permanent shift of perspective from that of a limited mind-body-personality to pure awareness" as dwai puts it. Second, the realization that those limited mind-body-personality experiences are non-dual from pure awareness. For instance, Bhagavan Ramana's two lines "The world is an illusion, Brahman alone is real Brahman is the world" From the perspective of the second realization, only realizing the first is subtly dualistic, even though it is often labeled non-dual because it is "one without a second" as everything other than pure awareness is seen to be an illusion. But if there can be subtly dualistic tendencies even after a major shift in perception confirmed by a lineage holder, could there not also be realization beyond this? Why not multiple layers and types of dualistic view that are let go of in stages, each realization seeming like the Ultimate Truth until you get to the next one? This clarity about subtle details and willingness to say, "as absolute as what I have realized seems, I'm willing to look further" is something I value immensely, whatever label a person puts on their path. That's why I have chosen the teachers that I have. YMMV.