doc benway

Great comments Barb! I understand why some have pushed for individual (segregated?) forums and yet there is a lot of truth in your words. So glad to see you posting... that's what counts for me.

My questions about John Chang (and all other claims of those having supernatural powers) is: WHO CARES? What difference does it make to my life? What's the point? Isn't life magical enough without spending 40 years training to burn a piece of toilet paper with my mind? :yawn:

Having lived through 1984, Y2K, atomic panic of the 1960's, and a host of other apocalyptic times, I'm not too concerned about 2012. My guess is that there are apocalyptic concerns and predictions in every age and every culture. It's human nature. Our preoccupying and primary driving motive in all things is security. The greatest insecurity is the notion of an apocalypse so it will always be with us.

What you list above as your goals lead me to recommend Taijiquan. And it also happens to be my favorite. That said, all martial arts are good for most of what you are after.

I'm partly in agreement with your first point. Cultivation can create some very useful and meaningful personal insights and "powers" but probably not the sort of thing that can have a direct and physical impact on others from a military or martial perspective. I don't really buy the idea that "siddhis" exist as "a hook" to get people to practice. I think that people do gain a lot from their practice and some of the skills gained can appear as "magical" to the uninitiated or gullible. I also think that much is romanticized and misinterpreted and there is a basic human desire that there is something more than what we experience in our daily life. We really want to believe in the existence or possibility of magic and that is easy to exploit. As far as Rwanda goes, the mass murder was so widespread through all levels of society and occurred so rapidly, there was no chance for any military force to prevent the majority of it. We simply could not have gotten enough people and resources in place quickly enough to stop it by the time it got rolling. Should we have responded differently? Absolutely. Would it have made a dramatic difference? Not a chance. I read an extremely good (and depressing) book on the subject called "We Wish to Inform You That Tomorrow We Will Be Killed With Our Families" by Phillip Gourevitch which addressed that very issue.

Intersting stuff. To my knowledge the Bell inequality brought Einstein's conclusions under challenge way back in the early '60's and remains undisputed. Although to see such an effect with a neutrino would be quite different.

For me, there is no time like 5:00 - 5:30 am for meditation.

It's even easier to understand energy and don't even think about chemistry. This is not about ease of understanding as much as it's about accuracy and applicability. The distinction between potential energy and kinetic energy is critical. The reason is this: Energy is change. It is in motion. It is not static. A chemical compound like ATP or NADHP or glucose has the potential to yield energy. Many other molecules do as well. ATP just happens to be the most commonly used chemical to transport energy from one reaction to another in the cell. You could just as easily say energy in contained in our food and air and leave it at that. Why "break it down further as a chemist" as you said above and describe how that is first converted to ATP? What you are describing is NOT the microcosmic orbit. From the Daoist alchemy perspective, the orbit is a technique used to develop a very specific skill - clarification and refinement of the Yi. Chinese medicine practitioners have developed complex "energetic" theory of the human body. Energy flow through the ren mai and du mai is referred to as the microcosmic orbit. What you are doing is trying to equate this and the concept of Qi with Western biochemical principles. I think there are some very interesting overlaps between the two but to reduce the microcosmic orbit to a biomechanical equation is nonsense, to put it bluntly. Earlier you mentioned that you have been unable to understand or make any sense of the classical writings of Jing, Qi, and Shen. The reason for this is that you do not have any training in Daoist alchemy. It is a very specific, unambiguous system with a multitude of variations. There is one thing that all systems have in common, however, and that is the refinement and development of the Yi - the mind of intent. Different schools go about this in different ways. Some schools use dissolving methods (the so called "water" methods as can be found in Bruce Frantzis' work). Other schools use the microcosmic orbit and other, more advanced techniques (the so called "fire" methods) which is the group that my school comes from. If you want to understand Jing, Qi, and Shen you will need to find an alchemy teacher. It is not biochemistry. It is mental, energetic, and spiritual. Is it possible that chemical changes occur in the body as a consequence of such training? It's certainly possible - to my knowledge no one has documented this and, frankly, it is completely irrelevant to the practice. The Daoist masters did not use test tubes, computers, pens, or paper to reach their insights - they practiced alchemical methods such as the microcosmic orbit (the most basic, foundation practice in the fire methods). Their insights were experiential, not analytical. THere is nothing wrong with biochemistry and analytical thinking but it is NOT alchemy and has little to do with the microcosmic orbit.

FYI... You are biochemically incorrect, Chi Dragon - ATP is Adenosine Triphosphate. It is a stable molecule. It has the potential to create energy by being transformed into ADP, Adenosine Diphosphate, and then ADP can be converted to AMP, Adenosine Monophosphate to yield additional energy. The ATP molecule has the potential to create energy, hence the term potential energy. It is a structure that is physically stable and can transport energy from one area of the cell to another without losing it. That is it's whole purpose. The energy is not in free until the phosphate bond is broken. It is the conversion that is energetic, the chemical change, not the ATP molecule itself. That only has the potential to yield energy. Kali Yuga is exactly correct.

I'm convinced that Guang Ping is the real deal after reading Master Guo's book - The Tai Chi Boxing Chronicle. It does not compromise and is the sort of thing where you really can't learn taijiquan by reading it but if you are studying with a credible master, the book will gradually reinforce and validate the things you discover through your practice. Best book out there on taijiquan, IMO. Good luck with the Yiquan! It is a beautiful and serious art. I've seen some Yiquan guys with very high level skills. The spontaneous practice is a wonderful thing. I really resonate with their philosophical approach particularly when it comes to the way they deal with "energy." Do you practice it with someone in the states now?

Bruce Lee? I have to disagree with you there. He may have raised Western awareness of Kung Fu but martial arts competition before and after Bruce Lee was basically the same. Karate, Tae Kwon Do, Kung Fu tournaments - mostly point fighting, some full contact. Bruce didn't have any major influence on the development of MMA, IMO. I would call Rorion and Royce Gracie the fathers of modern MMA. Rorion basically designed UFC 1 to showcase the Brazilian jiu jutsu that had made his family famous in the Vale Tudo competitions in Brazil. Rorion pitched the idea to a few American producers and UFC1 changed martial arts competition forever. Royce represented so well in the early competitions that BJJ and "no holds barred" competition took off world wide. MMA was coined as a term several years later.

GREAT FILM! If you like Wes Anderson, of course. He's a bit quirky. My favorite Seu Jorge tune and the video hints at how he got the Life Aquatic gig: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwT2iiKeg1g&ob=av2e

Burned down in 2000... http://www.historylink.org/index.cfm?DisplayPage=output.cfm&file_id=9557

There is the aspect of rooting where you are connecting with the earth. There is also the aspect of simply learning to extend out beyond yourself. You can practice the latter no matter how far from the earth you are. When you are skillful you can achieve the former no matter how far from the earth you are. Also, practice extending in other directions - upward, outward, inward. Good stuff

"Nothin' lasts forever not even cold November rain" - whoever wrote this has never lived in Olympia, WA

For convenience - A link to the first lecture: 1.1 - 1.22 http://acaryadeva-nectar.com/The_Yoga_Sutras_byPatanjali_Class_01.mp3 Second lecture: 1.23 - 1.40 http://acaryadeva-nectar.com/The_Yoga_Sutras_by_Patanjali_Class_02.mp3 Third lecture: 1.41 - 1.51 http://acaryadeva-nectar.com/The_Yoga_Sutras_by_Patanjali_Class_03.mp3 Each lecture is about 1 hour long.

Sounds like a good idea - I'm up for it. I'll read the first section over the next day or two and check back ready to discuss. I may read both my book and the online resource. PS - I'd like to suggest that you guys think about listening to the reference I posted at the top. Give the first lecture a try and see if you think it's worthwhile. When I think about his discussion and compare it to what I've read in books and online resources, I think the lectures are pretty good

I'm not familiar with the author but I'll check out the video. Before I do that, I'll share a few thoughts about free will. I'm not sure it exists. There is a thought that holds itself aside and claims the title of "thinker" and by default it also considers itself the "doer." But what is this other than just another thought? So things happen, things are done, and there is a thought that says to us, "I did that" or "I would like to.." or "I am going to...", and so forth. But what is really happening there? There is the thought but does this really "do" anything? There is meaningful neurophysiological research that demonstrates the following. When we "decide" to act, it can be shown that our nerves and muscles begin a preparatory activity before there is any conscious "decision" made. The other way to look at it is to try and understand how you actually "do" things. How do you make things happen? So, for example, how do you scratch your nose? Well, I reach up and scratch. What does that mean? How do you cause your hand to rise? I contract my shoulder muscles. How do you do that? Well, I decide to do it and it happens.... Same thing for breathing and beating your heart (and shining the sun for that matter). We consider certain things voluntary and certain things involuntary but I think it's a trick of the mind. So I think we go through life and there is this big happening, lots of stuff going on, and certain activities are associated with the thought "I did that" or "I'm going to do this" and we feel like "we" are the doers. But who are the doers and are they really different from what's being done? I guess the Vedanta thread may be a good place to take that discussion. And I think that this is a critical point in Daoist philosophy. Wu Wei is when the doer and what's being done are indistinguishable. There is just doing and who is doing? Dao Or maybe not... just a thought, I think I'll go take my medicine now...

I definitely don't think my style is best or superior. Just that there is more to Daoist alchemy than breathing.

My mistake - I thought you were in Hong Kong for some reason...

:lol: I'll tell my Shifu that - he'll get a kick out of it. The truth is that you do not seem to have had any personal instruction in Daoist alchemy by a teacher. You have QiGong experience and try to apply that to what you read about alchemy. It's quite obvious from your misconceptions. If you are interested in Daoist alchemy, you will not be successful with the path you are currently on. You need to find a credible teacher. Unfortunately, that is difficult but since you are in Hong Kong it should be easier for you than most everyone else on the forum. Unless, of course, you act with them like you act with us here - then you're out of luck!

Nope, that's called an erection

Excellent reference. Thanks Dwai!

You are mistaken. You would understand much more clearly if you were to practice Daoist alchemy. You are trying to force your Qi Gong priniciples onto a Daoist alchemical practice. They are different. So do you think that the Dao encompasses all things except Jing, Qi, and Shen? In fact, in some of the alchemical writings and practices you will see: Jing --> Qi --> Shen --> Wu I've seen some calligraphy that also includes Dao to that formula after Wu. You really do need to begin to practice alchemy with a teacher if you hope to understand any of this. Books don't cut it, no matter how old or what language. This is critical to understand. It is like trying to learn Tai Ji Quan from reading the classics if you have never seen Tai Ji Quan. Until you have direct personal experience of the alchemical processes under the guidance of a credible teacher, you really don't have a frame of reference from which to understand.