Apech

looking ominous hairy and knuckle dragging ape-man hominids

unsure

small taxi

For relevance to the OP rather than the developing convo. I thought particularly @steve on the internet might like this one:

@C T I did a more slidey version of that involving cotton gloves and a board to slide your hands down. When I did a lot in the day it was quite quick to get up and down. Prostrations were great but I did the statutory 100k and then stopped (being a lazy schmuck).

Assuming you have any friends of course.

Vanilla

These books will explain some of this if you are interested. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Tibetan-Zen-Discovering-Lost-Tradition/dp/1559394463/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=tibetan+zen&qid=1629105800&sr=8-1 https://www.amazon.co.uk/Origins-Yoga-Tantra-Religions-Thirteenth/dp/0521695341/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=origins+of+yoga+and+tantra&qid=1629105872&sr=8-1

roundabout

Daoism is older than Buddhism, especially if you include the shamanic and oracular roots. However Buddhism did have a significant influence on Chinese thought and practice - and so because some Daoist ideas and Neo-Daoist/Confucian ideas are similar to Mahayana philosophy (such as xuanxue school) Buddhism was quite easily assimilated. Tibetan Buddhism is largely an inheritance from Medieval India where the vajrayana had become predominant with the Mahasiddhas - but what is largely ignored is the influence also from China of both yogacara Buddhism and Daoist practices. Very little if anything is based on 'people who nearly died'.

Worth a listen if you have time:

Ourobviously.

I asked first.

There you go again - the body has no awareness of its own???? Define body - what is it - what is it made of - how does it function?

You are strangely dualistic - what do you think the body is?

If body is not just physical body then I agree.

Vast wisdom, old chap, pure and simple.

Hope it's short and mild.

Xing and Ming basically ...and the alchemical work. Anything else, as Gampopa put it a brief rest.

It's not an allure at all. It surprises me somewhat that you don't get this as it is encoded in all the major systems that I am aware of. But people prefer the easy way.

I mean that the idea that the end point of spiritual development is just realising 'consciousness' in some sense or other is not correct.

I find it interesting - and quite amusing - that those 'systems' which claim non-conceptuality end up, in order to elaborate their claims highly conceptualised and disputational around terms. For me these days, only 'systems' which have a great work such as the creation of the diamond body, the immortal foetus etc. have any validity. Unpopular Opinion : Realising consciousness in a neo-advaitan sense is pure garbage. Discuss!

All teachings are conceptual - it is reality itself which is beyond concept. Not disagreeing with you just emphasising a point.