doc benway

Funny, neigong has been mentioned repeatedly in this thread but I guess you didn't notice. Not trying to take anything away from NotVoid, the posts were excellent, but it certainly wasn't the first time that neigong was mentioned.

I appreciate your sincere reply. While we certainly don't need to be warm and fluffy all the time, I'm hoping to appeal to the sincere practitioner in you and others (myself included) to look at this place in a different light. What if we viewed the Buddhist sub-forum here as a Gompa of sorts and treated the space with respect as we (hopefully) treat the teachings? More and more the web is being used for legitimate teachings and empowerments. The potential is limitless as long as we create the right environment. What if we were to treat others here with respect, knowing that they were once our parents or children? At least, those of us who take this stuff seriously and try to live it. The others are free to agree, disagree, believe, disbelieve - it's fine. It's all part of the thig le nyag gcig, no? When folks act like spoiled children, moderators will deal with them appropriately, and sincere practitioners will show some compassion and disengage if necessary. I think this is a better strategy than throwing rocks. I recently returned from a short retreat and went to my neighbor's house to do them a favor. The whole family did nothing but hammer me with questions, knowing that I'd been on retreat, challenging and trying to poke holes in my answers whenever they didn't make sense with their non-Buddhist world view. I think folks feel insecure about their place in the world and whenever someone seems a bit too comfortable or seems to have some answers, they attack them, looking for weaknesses. Then when they find a weakness, they feel better about their own insecurity. It's quite dysfunctional and sad but rather than get angry and feed into the conflict we can practice compassion. Anyway, I may sound fluffy and idealistic and maybe a bit arrogant, and I can live with that. But I am being sincere here. There are a few folks on the forum who are genuine practitioners and some who are quite knowledgeable and I think that we can be better than this. But those who do have the goods need to set the example. Otherwise we'll just keep circling the intellectual drain...

Nice post. The first step in achieving some skill in the neigong you describe is developing Ting Jin (聽勁) or listening/sensing energy. Until we can listen and feel the opponent, we have no hope of reacting and neutralizing, not to mention counter-attacking. The only way to develop ting jin is to first be quiet. You can't hear or feel if you are noisy or distracted. This is why they talk about stillness in movement in taijiquan. First you pay attention to the inside of yourself, then to the environment, and lastly to the opponent. This can only come from quiet and stillness.

I try to appeal for some kindness and restraint and all you can do is be critical of me. I've tried to maintain some hope that this could be a place that is supportive and warm, where we can interact and share and help each other rather than criticize and denigrate one another. I'm beginning to realize that it's not possible on an open forum. Is that all you could see in my post? How would you describe your contributions? Very sad if this is the behavior of someone who has been authorized to offer Dzogchen transmission. It reflects quite poorly on your teachers. I wonder how they would feel reading these posts of yours? Then what is it exactly that you are doing here?

The result depends on many more factors than simply the individual's understanding but that is one important element. For this reason, it is important that a practitioner learn the system from an accomplished master who has realized and integrated the system in her life. When we try to learn in other ways (books, videos, trial and error), it is inevitable that our own expectations, bias, and conditioning color our experience and progress. When we learn from a realized master, we are learning directly from the lineage of the "original system," to whatever degree that still exists.

What do we look like when such a rare and precious teaching stimulates our intellects but fails to touch our hearts? Rails - your generalization does not apply to all Buddhists but far too many. If the teachings don't elicit real compassion and bodhicitta, if they do not create more love in our lives and relationships, if they don't lead to enlightened activity in body, speech, and mind; then they are worthless and we have not fulfilled our samaya. It doesn't matter if we are right or wrong, or if others agree or disagree. What matters is to what degree we treat each other with genuine respect and kindness. Swine will benefit more from kindness than pearls, as will princes. And those who feel that they are above the swine have never known emptiness. Peace

I expected Germany to dominate without Thiago Silva but that game was ridiculous!

I disagree - one skilled in taijiquan can be very effective even while holding her breath. The coordination of breath and movement certainly has great benefits both in training and application but if you've ever practiced competitive pushing hands or tried to use taiji applications in sparring or a fight, sometimes you don't have the luxury of breathing when and how you would like and you make it work anyway.

I agree with Ish - coordinating breath with movement is fairly basic. What I was referring to are more advanced practices like integrating the Yi and Qi. At that point, the breath is simply a natural extension of the movement and vice versa. The intent is on other things, the breath takes care of itself. This is where wu wei comes into play. You can reduce wu wei to saying just don't do anything but that is not accurate. Wu wei figures very prominently in taijiquan training and application. I know that your interpretation, from your reading, of qi chen dan tian relates solely to breathing but that is simply because you've not had the benefit of more advanced instruction. You tend to reduce everything to breathing. While important, there is a lot more going on in taijiquan practice than the breath.

Sorry Chang - we posted simultaneously...

Humility, compassion, and moderation are not inherent in Qigong or Taiji styles. If a humble and compassionate master teaches you, you will learn humility. If an arrogant and selfish master teaches you, you will not. Look to your teacher for teachings! The style is simply how we wiggle our bodies around.

Of course it was. I was somewhat joking but not completely. It is necessary to breath in Taiji form practice and at all other times or we will die. The body knows how to breath. It is not necessary to make breathing into an obsession. We can try to intentionally stop breathing but if we lose consciousness the breathing will resume. At no time do we breath better than when in deep sleep (I'm not talking about sinus problems and sleep apnea here, that is related to the nasopharynx and pharynx). It is not necessary to breath in any one particular way to benefit from Taiji form practice. Different benefits arise from different breathing patterns. Abdominal is good for oxygenation and circulation. Reverse-abdominal is good for martial expression of Jin. It's also not necessary to concentrate on the breathing during Taiji form practice. It has certain benefits but can also be a distraction. If beginners focus too much on their breathing it can be a hindrance to learning due to too much time and effort being wasted on trying to figure out how the breath should coordinate with the movement. At more advanced levels there are other things to concentrate on that offer deep benefits. If you teach someone the body movements in Taiji, Bagua, or Qigong and don't say a word about the breath other than to recommend that they simply breath naturally, they will naturally adopt a slow and deep abdominal breathing pattern which will naturally integrate itself into the body movements. This is because it is our nature to breath in this way. I don't believe that we can really improve on this nature. Thought thinks it knows better, I think it is mistaken. While emphasizing the benefits of abdominal breathing is a good thing, it is not always a good thing in Taiji form practice for people to be too focused on the breath. The Daoist way is simply to practice Wu Wei when it comes to breathing - don't interfere. The breath knows how to breath and the body movements, whether Taiji, Bagua, or Qigong, will allow the breath to become as it should once the distractions of our stress, anxiety, and habitual dysfunctional patterns fall away.

To get back to the OP - Wisdom in Dzogchen is practicing rather than spending time on the internet.

I could get used to that

How did I guess? ... and you will die!

Similarly, we are advised to use the Yi to guide the Qi. Using the Yi to guide the Qi throughout the form becomes an excellent mind/body meditation. In addition, the slower movement results in an excellent exercise that combines isometric, isotonic, and isokinetic elements. And, for Chi Dragon, it allows us to coordinate all of this with slow and deep abdominal breathing! Yay!

I prefer General

From the TTB's thread you reference above, SJ: "...basically the point being underscored is that matter and intelligence are non-dual. For example, it is a special tenet of Dzogchen that even the formless realms are material, i.e., that basically, wherever there is matter, there is consciousness, wherever there is consciousness, there is matter. You can either say that matter is intrinsically conscious or that consciousness is intrinsically embodied. Either way it amounts to the same thing. "Sentient" and "non-sentient" are merely conventional designations based on appearances generated by ignorance.... " Edit - that dharmawheel thread is well worth reading, thanks for that link

thanks

Thanks Anderson and GMP.

Awareness - absolutely Cognition [def. the mental action or process of acquiring knowledge and understanding through thought, experience, and the senses.] - tougher to answer. My first impulse is to say no, to the extent that I am capable of achieving that during calm abiding. In my current practice, I'm not making an effort to acquire knowledge or understanding through thought, experience, or the senses. That said, in the post-meditative period, there certainly is reflection and perhaps enhancement of understanding. Also, there are times that I intentionally bring my meditative equipoise to bear on specific questions, emotions, blocks and so there would be cognition during those activities. There are also other meditative activities I participate in that involve cognitive activity. So yes and no for cognition.

Thanks for that - I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "lower" brain activity, however. Do you keep your eyes open when you meditate? Is there less vision, sound, tactile sensations, and smell? Are there any thoughts, feelings, fleeting images? Are you doing something with intent or focus? Not picking on you, just curious. I think that there may be an enormous variety of activity, inactivity, and experience for us during meditation that when we make claims, recommendations, and dogmatic statements, they may not be applicable across the board. Deep for some may mean a trance state, for others, a state of perfect attentiveness, yet others, absolute focus and control of the Yi through the orbit or at a particular point or points, alteration of time and spatial awareness, etc.. Also, as far as sleep is concerned, there is consciousness during dreams and for those who are skilled at dream and sleep yoga there is lucidity in dreams and consciousness during dreamless sleep as well.

can you share the source of that quote Anderson?

Is it your understanding that objects and awareness are distinct and separate? Is it your position that the dharmata and sugatagarbha are distinct and separate? Please explain thig le nyag gcig.

I think M. Achard is way off in his remarks. He seems to delight in his criticism. Granted, I'm admittedly biased... He makes a number of assumptions that are gratuitous and completely misses TWR's point in my opinion. TWR is not trying to endow "objects" with "a Rigpa" but is rather alluding to the inseparability of objects and awareness. If clarity and space are, in fact, inseparable and all visions are their display, then material existence is not 'other than' pervading rigpa, but is rather inseparable from it - thig le nyag gcig. Furthermore, Lopon Tenzin Namdak has stated basically the same thing in print: "The basic nature pervades all existence equally - rocks, trees, anything."