altiora

Actually, there are times I wish people would read and place in the context of what was being discussed, instead of this pseudo-intellectual clap trap with it's "paradigm" this and "paradigm" that. My point was explicitly related to Kunlun, and how I pray Jenny never becomes like that certain other peddler of dubious wares. And with respect to your last sentence, you don't know me, so don't presume anything about what I think. I have very little time for petty oneupmanship.

With the greatest of respect, not one person has stated that "easterners" are somehow immune to false gurus. They do have the benefit of thousands of years of "you should know better". Some of the harshest critics of Sai Baba are Indians themselves, who rightly see through him for what he is. And I know of plenty of Chinese qigong and TCM practitioners who are quite contemptuous of Falun Gong. The point is that just because there are some fake gurus doesn't mean we need to throw the baby out with the bathwater by saying that there is no need for gurus. The point is that in recent times, too many westerners have been seduced by false gurus, because they thought the guru would take from them the burden of responsibility for their spiritual destiny. It just highlights the need to retain our critical faculties and to ensure boundaries with the relationship. A true guru would never suggest otherwise. There are plenty of genuine gurus out there who are quietly going about their business of practicing and teaching, thereby bringing good to other peoples' lives. It's not about spiritual monopolies or control; it's about learning from those who've traveled the path before. If you have a true guru then he or she is not interested in controlling you: he or she just wants to give you independence so you can progress down your own path. A true guru is not interested in spineless unmotivated people, who are afraid of taking responsibility and doing the hard work to elevate their lives.

Thought you said you weren't arrogant?

Being of the Shaivite school, the Kularnava Tantra, Mahayoga Vijnana, Tantraloka, Viveka Chudamani and Shivadrishti detail the characteristics a guru should exhibit and exhort the aspirant pupil to judge the guru by these and ultimately to use their "gut feeling". But not difficult to just do search online to find more accessible documents: http://www.bvml.org/SBBTM/qoabg.htm There's no esoterism involved. It's all just common sense.

I did. I disagree. Or I should say I disagee with Nietzsche (you might like to read a decent biography on him to realise how miserable his miserable 'philosophy" made him). Humility is what made Socrates admit he knew nothing, and made him strive for the truth. I think you'll find that humility is the starting point for every one who actually makes spiritual progress. maybe you could try some humility yourself to see whether it's slavery, rather than citing 19 th century writings. Maybe you'd see the secret that most people find in humility -- it paradoxically leads to freedom. Arrogance isn't mastery, that's for sure.

I think westerners are hugely misinformed about the guru relationship. The guru relationship was never about authoritarianism or control. At the end of the day, the relationship is a contract: the pupil and teacher reach agreement on the relationship; any party can terminate if he or she wants. The ultimate aim of the guru is to lead the pupil on to the path of independence, so that he or she is able guided by the inner Guru. The Indian literature identifies criteria by which the pupil should assess whether the person is a genuine guru; and also criteria by which the guru can assess whether the pupil is genuine. The literature does this because it makes no bones about the fact that there are fake gurus and fake pupils around -- thousands of years ago and as now. The literature is quite explicit about the very nasty fate that fake gurus will endure after life (something the self-proclaimed sifu, lama, and masters, and teachers on this site better just pay note). The leading astray of a person's spiritual development is the most heinous thing one can do to another. Now that there are fake gurus, doesn't mean that there is no role for the guru relationship. Just as there are fake school teachers, one would be stupid to say "therefore we don't need any school teachers, because I'm born perfect you see and we all have our own path, blah blah blah"). Next to a belief in a spiritual existence, the need for the guru is present in one form or the other in all spiritual traditions. If you are sincere, have worked hard, are humble, and have a true desire to learn and study, then your teacher will come -- and not necessarily wearing exotic robes and titles, and certainly not demanding money and sex from you. When the teacher does come, you can't believe your luck, and suddenly all those desires about winning the lottery etc seem like childish daydreams.

I pray that never happens. nothing reeks of debasement of spiritual traditions than the current crop of "flashy" advertisers -- the ones who rake in the money simply by "branding" a particular technique. It's not the responsibility of the teacher to advertise for pupils. All traditions are united on the point that it is for the pupil to come to the teacher, and to come with the correct and steady intention to study and learn. The simple truth is that the overwhelming amount of people who get enthused about particular styles as a result of advertising methods are fickle-minded, flakey and egoistic. Most just look for thrills, get bored and move on; others just add it to their collection of pretty, exotic trinkets, perhaps make a DVD or two to sell to others. No reputable teacher would care to waste his or her time on such persons. Harsh but true.

Without being argumentative, but that is my opinion based on having reviwed and worked with all available materials on the form; and therefore I think I'm more qualified to make a comparative judgment more than those who have not looked at all the same materials. Again, the Inner Smile is a Mantak Chia thing, not that of the lineage teacher of the form.

The best DVD on the form is by Master Cheng Bingsong: http://www.amazon.com/Wu-Ji-Gong/dp/B00134N2MA/ref=pd_vodsm_B00134N2MA I've bought that, along with the Rubbo book. Together they outstrip Michael Winn's version by a country mimile. Not only in production value, but Winn's demonstration is wooden and clumsy. It should be much more flowing and graceful. And contrary to what Winn and others may say, all alchemical forms get their power from combining movement with the correct mental actions. If you don't have the internal side, then you are just waving your arms about. What surprised me about the Rubbo book is actually how preciose the movements needed to ideally be. Something that both Winn and Chen Bingsong don't explain. The other reason I quickly discarded Winn's version is that it is full of Healing Tao "innovations", and also his efforts at promoting the form seem flagrantly aimed at the new age dopes: he calls it "Tai Chi for Enlightenment"; refers to Taoist immortals visiting you when you do it (sorry, think they have better things to do) and all this waffle about cosmic orgasms. Call me dull, but I prefer technical down to earth discussion.

With all due to respect to Michael Winn, I thought the CD audio course was a waste of money. It has very poor audio (it is recorded in mono, which becomes a problem after the first hour), and I was less than impressed with the quality of the information. Donald and Cheryl Rubbo have produced a book on the form -- and run courses -- which in my opinion is far better than Michael Winn's. This is because the Rubbos discuss the internal, mental aspects of the form and their's is closer to the original form. Donald Rubbo and Michael Winn were taught by the same root teacher, but it seems that Winn made some changes.

You are acorrect regarding Nicea: that Council was about the Creed (which became the Nicean Creed) not the Bible. And you are correct about all these people who think Dan Brown et al are reliable historical sources. But to return to the subject matter of this thread, the doctrine of Original Sin has been badly misinterpreted -- both by people in and outside the churches. The Roman Church, and also the Protestant sects, tended to treat Original Sin as some sort of "guilty as charged" verdict, and ignore the fact that Christ came to show the way to overcome the Original Sin. Some Eastern Orthodox thinkers have a bit more of a sophisticated view of the doctrine: to them Original Sin reflects that a lot of our estrangement from God or the Divine is the product of cultural and social conditioning of our predecessors. These writers also view Adam and Eve's eating of the apple as a metaphor that of how our consciousness works: we don't obey God or the Divine, but rather follow our own ego with the result that we do not enjoy God/the Divine's presence constantly in our daily lives. Instead of residing in the Garden of Eden, which is our birthright, we reside in a world in which time and physical objects constrain usthereby preventing us from living as the Children of God. Understood in this way, the Doctrine of Original Sin is very similar to concepts of Maya and igonorance and Self-Remembrance found in many eastern philosophies.

So glad that Jenny is finally getting credit for her practice. Pity that a certain someone didn't credit her in his book.

No it's caused by something called tectonic plates. Not as exciting as illuminati conspiracies. Am I alone in thinking it utterly distasteful that people use this tragedy as a soap box for their demented theories? Do something useful: like donate money, help with local collection efforts and offer some prayers.

I agree with this. Any funny business with the lungs quickly throws the spleen out of hilt. If you have toxic build up, then mobilising the toxins without ensuring that your body's elimination capacity is also strengthened may just move the toxins elsewhere into the body where they can do serious harm. You require therapeutic grade herbs and acupuncture, so please do follow durkhrod's advice and find yourself a good TCM or Ayurvedic practitioner.

stillness with feeling yet nothing is permanent who moved? you or me?

[quote name='Kate' date='25 February 2010 - 07:01 PM'

I think the survey just doesn't stand up when one probes. First, to equate liberalism and atheism with "more intelligent" people just seems like a badly disguised value judgment about what "intelligent" people should think. I think every fanatic -- hypnotised by their own perceived brilliance -- considers that anyone who takes the opposite view to them is less intelligent for that reason. While I'm not really in any political camp (I'm a swing voter), I do recognise that many vocal leftist "liberals" seem to think they are the intellectual and moral elite, and that anyone who disagrees with them needs "education" or else is a bigot. Second, I wouldn't have thought it didn't necessarily matter whether you were x-view or y-view. what's more important is whether you have had engaged in a rigorous thought process to reach that view, and how you respond to alternative arguments. For instance, in my experience many atheists can't articulate why they have come to this view, or rebut any conflicting arguments successfully. To me it's not so much whether or not you believe in god, it's more how did you come to this view, i.e., is it due to prolonged thought? or did you just accept the view of your peers or culture?, and do you just cling to your view despite being confronted with contrary evidence or reconsider your view in light of that evidence?

My experience is the same. I did sense from the past discussion on here that some people seem fixated with the "thrashing about" side of the practice, and disappointed when they didn't get that. I get a fair amount of thrashing about at first, but it seems to me that the biggest energetic "shifts" happen when the body stops moving and the qi movements become internal and more subtle. I'm far more entranced by the internal movements than I am with the thrashing around, since it results in a very distinct change in consciousness.

I think froma Daoist alchemical perspective, Jenny's makes more sense: the heart/middle dan t'ien is the fire/kan, while the kidney/lower dan t'ien is the water/li, and the hands cause them to meet and create the "steam" that nourishes the body and upper dan t'ien (thereby helping to increase one's consciousness). So far as I'm aware, Daoist practices don't focus on the throat. The throat seems to be more important in those systems that revolve around, or are influenced by, the Indian/Tantric chakra system.

Think I can say this for everyone on this thread, thanks so much Mikaelz for your patience and generosity in sharing your learning.

Thanks a really insightful and readable review. It's a pity that people flock to droves for the circus master "teachers"; yet the humble real deal teachers like Jenny only attract a handful. Still I guess it's quality not quantity. Not surprised about Jenny's lack of concern with dating the practice. That seems to be a Western fixation; whereas Chinese just tend to be satisfied with "it's very old" and get on with practicing it. Just two questions if I may ask: 1. Is Jenny's version standing or sitting? 2. Did Jenny say anything about whether the right needs to be above the left? In some other systems (not spontaneous I might observe) the left is said to be yang and facing the earth; the right yin and facing heaven.

Well I have to be honest --I've refrained from commenting until now -- but you seem to be engaged in the "tug of war" over the child, as much as your mother is. And to be really honest, I don't think a lot of this "tell her to butt out or else" advice you've been getting helps at all: it seems to reveal people who haven't a clue how family relationships work, and if you follow you're going to have a very unhappy family. There are two issues here: (1) whether the child should be baptised (2) what spiritual upbringing should the child have. Now they are NOT necessarily linked. I was baptised an Anglican as a child. I no longer adhere to the Anglican faith, but baptism did give me two things (Anglican baptism is pretty much the same as Catholic). First, a sense of community: should I ever feel I need to, the Anglican church is there for me to go as a member. I have a right to attend as a baptised person. Secondly, it created a new relationship between me and my godparents (who are my mothers' best friends). 32 years later, that relationship still continues and we keep in touch. The fact that I was baptised didn't prevent me from exploring other paths. It just ensured that the path of my family and ancestors was open to me should I every want to go down it. And who knows your child might decide that the Catholic Church provides the path for him or her. If that is his or her choice, then you must accept it. Just as you wish you mother would accept your spiritual choices. So given these possible benefits, and to keep your mother happy, I say what has your child to lose in being baptised? It also creates a ceremony that celebrates your child as well. With respect to the upbringing, you don't need to send your child to mass or to sunday school etc. Although, if you are genuinely openminded, then you need to be let your child have the opportunity to attend if he or she wishes. Just as you'd no doubt let your child explore alterative faiths. If I were you, I'd agree to the baptism but get your mother to understand that your child is to be raised as a secular person until he or she is ready to make the choice, and explore spirituality him or herself. That's not to say no exposure to religion, just that there is no attempt to "convert" one way or the other. At the end of the day, it's your choice. But it's your choice "on behalf" of your child. It's not about control or about moulding your child's path in favour of your ego or you mother's ego.

Personally I've decided Oolong is the way to go: has the benefits of both black and green without some of their less desirable effects. I also put matcha power into capusles (yes, how barbaric of me) to get the great nutritional benefits of that tea. The place I get my tea from has a useful summary of the different benefits:https://www.tleaft.co.nz/ (Under'About tea" in the side bar menu).

Agree with most of the posts here. Just avoid this false idea that "detox" is something one does at particular intervals by making use of (largely useless) "health" products for detox. So of thos supplements with Thistle and Dandelion root extract can actually make things worse, through cooling the liver down too much. Your body can do the detoxing quite adequately by itself if you give it an opportunity: fresh food, plenty of water, proper rest and sleeping patterns and moderate exercise. Any "detox" should be part of your everyday life. If you really want to do your body good, then I suggest having one day (preferably when you are not working or stressed) where you just don't eat anything and drink plenty of fluids (preferably water). Our bodies are not made for the quantity of foods we eat daily and weekly and hence all the problems. It wouldn't surprise me if we modern westerners eat more food in one week than out ancestors did in a month. And with refrigeration and preservatives, and the loss of religious observances like fasting, we don't really ever give our digestive and eliminative systems time to relax and completely do their functions. Not that I suggest we go back to the ancestral diet, but it does make you wonder (like most things in life) if we've lost focus on the fact that it is quality not quantity that really matters.