Siliconvalley1

I only have the video on this subject by the same author. There are a lot of basic things explained but the method itself does not become very clear. Accent of the presenter, the organization of topics - all these contribute to this issue. But have not read the book, which is probably better than the video.

The man might have said some good stuff - not sure, I never liked reading him, but there was evidently a lack of balance with that person. The one book I read was his interpretation of Vijnanabhairava Tantra and it disturbed my tummy. Like Mikaelz pointed out in another thread, there are merits to organized religions and abandoning them totally may deprive one of a lot of traditional wisdom and the systematic way to gain that. Osho was against organized religion - be it Hindu or Buddhist, and his anger at establishment always did not have a reason. A few years before he passed, he was suffering with too many unholy diseases and consulted my guru's teacher, who was also a reputed Ayurvedic physician. From what I hear from my teacher, the man was a walking corpse and radiated a nauseous aura. So whatever his practices were, they did not do him a lot of good towards the end. Most of his first circle students, a few of who are good friends of mine, all left him at some point. Some moved over to other paths and the rest gave a rest to their metaphysical search. And Tantra certainly got blacklisted in India after his advent.

Taoist stretches - as some call them, seem to be good physical exercises. Jeff Primack has a bunch on his program. My earlier Tai chi teacher taught us a bunch too and insisted on them pretty severely. There seem to be a bunch of different such sets used for warm up. When I was doing these religiously, I stopped working out altogether.

That was an honest answer... but yes, you did not reach the pinnacle or see it all before you moved away based on what you "read" and understood as the right way - at the end of the day it is just based on words and supposed logic. But you repeatedly stated earlier that you experienced the "highest" states of these systems and used it as a major argument to put forth your case of why Buddhism is THE way. Never mind .. Buddhism cuts through this, that - yes, using a logic that is acceptable to Buddhists! The theory of dependent origin - which you tout repeatedly, may not make sense to someone else! I never said the Siddhis are important or matter, but just wanted to know whether your practice actually matched your claims. You have given the answer You are now basing all your argument on what you think Buddha said - his concepts, his views. Not that it's wrong, but just pointing out that there is nothing experiential here. And gaining the right view, in many practical traditions, is not loudly advertised or conceptually talked about as the practices and the approach themselves ensure that the right view is attained. This aspect is built into the system and nothing that needs to be separately taken care of. They don't talk, they work

I had a question for Vajrahridaya... You stated earlier that you saw the best of Shaivism - Trika/Kaula or whatever before concluding them to be less useful than Buddhist practices. When the highest state is reached or even approached, the kaula becomes a mahakaula and as a by-product of his realization, various Siddhis manifest. And this highest realization or the bliss of Shiva-Shakti union is not a passing phase or a condition that comes and goes like Samadhi. It is like a spontaneous combustion that is irreversible. If you experienced his state of paraahantaa, then probably you have those Siddhis as well - which can be demonstrated across time and space. Which of those Siddhis can you demonstrate so that there is some backing to your claim that you have actually gotten even closer to the blissful realms you claim you have experienced.

Look who's talking

Yoda undoubtedly ... Mat Black, Hundun (where is he these days?), Xienkula, Spectrum, Trunk, Smile, Scotty, Sunshine, Vajrasattva, Sykkelpump .... who did I miss Oh, Drew H of course Patrick Brown, a one time Spirit Ape (WYG), Buddy, Starjumper ... that's another list, of pretty interesting tao bums..

Anatahkarana (roughly the mind) = manas (lower emotional or instinctive mind - indeterminate thinking) + buddhi (higher discriminative mind - determinate thinking) + ahamkara (the ego component, assertive or affirmative) + chitta (subconscious, memory, stored impressions)

I sent you a pm now ...

Get his book - the 9 palaces qigong...its all in there Scotty, thanks for leading me on to this book! This book is awesome and strangely underrated! But I found it somewhat difficult to read. It would take a while to read, extract practicable information, organize it and formulate some sort of a manual. But it seems it is worth doing all that. Someone mentioned about a video of this form. Is is still available?

Happened to see his level 1 and 2 DVDs today at a friend's place. While I can't comment on the form he teaches (there is no mention of whether its actually a specific "form" of qigong or just a set of exercises picked from various other forms) or how much of chi cant be felt through them, the production of the DVDs is really impressive. Some good tips to do the form, good graphics to illustrate the movements - I am impressed! Many DVDs out in the market would benefit from this kind of production.

Thanks everyone ... Scotty, I just rummaged through my books and I actually have Dr. Baolin Wu's book! I am going to start reading it tonight

Talking of attacks, grooming of personality, expression ... oh yes, you did agree you don't believe in "feel good"... yeah yeah, every one's ignorant ... but wait..if I say something I am personally attacking ...

I feel the same way too - you are pointlessly brining in Hindus - calling them names - expressing false unneeded sympathy, claiming false familiarity with the scriptures or practices to gain the benefit of pushing across your idea of "I tried it all and then moved over because it was bad"... and a bunch of you have been attacking dwai as well - please show some courtesy before you expect the same ... Like I said, some of us have things to do and a "practice" that we practice and not only talk and type. Your debate starts with Buddhist assumptions, is based around what you think a person named Buddha wrote and you even believe tales about deities getting liberated and Maitreya coming back to rescue and all that! To debate with you, I would need to educate you, to bring you to speed, on basics of Samkhya to start with, bits of Vaisheshika and Nyaya as you would then probably understand how to correctly hold a debate - oh boy...that's a lot of work. I am willing to do that...but not immediately...there is a time crunch you know. And don't you think this "are you getting threatened" thing is getting a little repetitive? You should get a new catch phrase Miss the Ron Jeremy days ... And let's give it some time as well In 2003 you were championing the cause of Advaita fiercely (I didn't really read that, I am assuming and already can guess the depth of your familiarity with traditional advaita based on your statements here). You now route for Buddhism and condemn advaita. There is no saying there will be something new in times to come

Great advice! While Full lotus is beneficial, it is certainly not irreplaceable. A cross-legged form named Yonyasana or ardha yonyasana, is more comfortable and can give one the benefits of Full Lotus if the duration of sitting is doubled. A yogic text states, for example, 10 minutes of full lotus would be equivalent to 20 minutes of yonyasana. For women, many yogic traditions don't prescribe full lotus at all but only yonyasana.

I thought you were the one confused with infinite mind streams that exist but dont and stem from one another which exist but don't and which like other paths but still hate and finally prove - based on alllllllll this - that "I am right" - "I alone am" "I "I" "I"...notice that? This is what you've been denying all along but also what you've been working for, toiling away posting for days on this forum.. your efforts are appreciated my friend

Take a break and lighten up man! What you state is just the "Buddhist" viewpoint. There is nothing to prove that alone is right for one or for all! That is "your" view and may be "good" for you. That is not necessarily true for all! A lokayata who never believed in any of this shit would have probably thrown hot soup if he were told all this ...

Unfortunately, some of us have work to do, things to take care of and even something to "practice" - and jeez even sleep! - to refute every thing you write - which is not really that difficult - like I said, we have better things to do. And, neither Shankara or Acharya Gaudapada were trying to "understand" either Buddha or Nagarjuna as that was not the objective of their study. As a matter of intellectually understanding, they certainly did - and so did Sureshvara and Kumarila - to be able to refute their standpoint. Just because you don't follow something, you cannot conclude nobody else did! You have failed to get the same being stated from the other side that you folks don't really understand what Shankara said. You cannot because the understanding cannot come from merely reading stuff - even which is lacking considering not one correct thing you have stated here about Advaita or kevala to be precise - but by "understanding", which requires Shat Sampatti or the six virtues. While I don't claim to possess even one of them, if the way you write is any indication (ignoring the pom pom that I have experienced it all he he) - neither do you. While I agree that the viewpoints of the two philosophies differ - in fact I started my agreement with that statement - you still have not proved why the realization of a Buddhist is superior to that of any one else. The only reason you (or the other quoting lengthy paragraphs with too many italics from a blog or another just screaming from rooftop ) have given are built up on Buddhist concepts and assumptions and thus true only for a Buddhist! There has absolutely been nothing in this entire boatload of verbal diarrhea that objectively proves one to be better than the other. I chose to ignore here this: because X or Y wrote so or "my" experience says so - as there are always two sides to such statements and they never serve our purpose here.

Thanks to all you guys who sent me details through PMs. This really helped get a birdview of the techniques that were taught and the approach. Thanks again

They don't have a DVD, just an e-book right? Was it easy to follow? From what I read, both state the same source for this form of Qigong. But Winn wrote some place that he made some modifications to his form to open the central channel.

Scotty, Are you talking about the Winn version? Yoda and I think Spectrum recommended it a long time ago and I have since then practiced on and off, more like a ritual on specific days. Winn did mention in one of his classes that this Qigong is very good various heart conditions.

Tao Meow had some very insightful things to say in this context. Let me see if I can find them and post them here.

Did any of the practices taught involve reverse breathing? Just curious.

Vortex, did they talk about having more of these seminars, like a regular thing? Seems like a good one to attend.