laughingblade

I've come across a teacher using points at the front of the spine during MCO upward flow instead of the rear as usually taught, and using intention to light them up. I'm wondering does this have any genuine lineage connection? I've only ever come across one hint of a "subterranean" Ren (yes, Ren) flow at the front of the spine.

Is that like cracking when you pull you finger joints? Sitting still or moving? I've got no diagnosis, it's interesting though.

Maybe. I find your approach challenging, and politeness evades me at times. Thanks for engaging. 🙏

Thanks! Nice to be reminded of foundations. Ah, your edit with the added link is great!

It's definitely not central channel. From the bai hui it's down through throat, behind breastplate to chi hai below belly button. Interestingly tongue to roof of mouth is not a feature. From previous experience where I've driven up Du and down Ren with some force - when I was young and spunky and would live forever - the results were harsh to say the least. Not recommended. This current approach is far more gentle and I'm enjoying letting the points 'arise' with light attention. Moments of flow occur naturally. Combining with long breath holds (my other recent thread) is really nice. Yes - thanks for the Damo Mitchell reminder. I should find time to watch that series. A couple of reminders I got from his podcast recently is not to confuse MCO points with acupuncture points, the LDT is deeper in the body than you think, and you need to cultivate LDT before anything else is going to happen.

I don't think he actually has a book with that title. Surprising! I did find it here though: https://www.healing-tao.co.uk/ht_microcosmic_orbit.htm so I guess it's kosher. See, there you go again: "it's a bad method". You _could_ offer some explanation as to why (you think) it's a bad method. Is it the way MC teaches it, is it MCO altogether, is it MCO before you've started building a LDT, are there 'good' MCO methods? All I've seen you do is say practices are bad because they don't let you levitate or set fire to paper, and frankly that comes across as juvenile bluster. Assuming you do some kind of practice then I wonder how you're getting on with it, especially if your marker for progress is (still) to be able to beat up on everybody else?

Well, I've seen your comments on other posts. My impression is that you usually cruise by, ignore the topic, and say that unless the OP or their teachers can do what John Chang did then they are all worthless. Happy to be wrong if I've missed the nuance.

Yeah, I know that. The specific book might be of interest ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ You seem to say that every attainment that isn't setting shit on fire or levitation is false, or of no value. That's false. People can still teach what they know to their level of attainment. Calling themselves guru might be valid, I dunno: personally I think the term is beyond broken. But some probably dead guy across the world who apparently once set stuff on fire but never taught any fly white guy except, allegedly, Jim MacMillan, is hardly any use to anybody. Might as well follow Jesus, he had some cool miracles

Which Mantak Chia book is that? So per my OP it's been suggested to find those spinal points in front of the spine. Like this one every diagram I've seen seems to locate them behind the spine. (I guess this leads to confusion with acupuncture points too, but that's perhaps another discussion). I'm interested to know where that comes from and what difference it makes - subjectively it's different, but why? Are these old diagrams all misinterpreted, is it just a stylistic quirk that they are shown outside? And a blanket "it doesn't work" isn't in any way a helpful comment, cos stuff does happen, even if nothing catches literally on fire. I say those attainments are bullshit because almost nobody can do them. That doesn't mean that people have zero attainment: this is a gradual path like most others, and there are valuable degrees of progress.

Do you know anything about these points along the front of the spine? What do you mean "work"? Just one minute of paying attention and you would know that _something_ arises at those points. Do you mean _I_ don't have the energy? This is your default position to almost anyone as far as I can see, isn't it... but you don't claim attainment for yourself: So who are you to say who has what? I was asking about intention at the points, not about the flow. But I kinda agree, and ime mind must rest before LDT develops and MCO flows spontaneously... which is why I'm investigating what I'm being taught. If you even knew Mantak Chia you would know it's not Mantak Chia. Good to know what people teach before you flip them off. Levitate and burn stuff is imho a bullshit goal of cultivation. Only one guy seems to have demonstrated it, ever, and as far as we know he was never able to teach others. But thanks.

I've come across a teacher using long breath holds, particularly empty holds, as part of the firing process in neidan. I'm wondering does this have any genuine lineage connection? I've certainly only encountered normal or reverse breathing.

Thanks bums. I'd come across the vase breath in tummo from Glenn Mullin & Lama Yeshe and had good results with the syllables, channels and so on. But that's held on a full breath. The only empty hold I've seen until now has been Wim Hoff of course. I'll take it gently according to advice, and note that it is really quite enticing.

If the KAP1 guy is MH then he's considering teaching a KAP2 later in the year.

Hi Manitou! Yes, I remember my weekend in Springfield very well. The S-M energy still kicks in even now when I'm sitting, and I'll occasionally have a go at Ya Mu's Gift of the Tao - the world's scruffiest movement form, yet quite potent. Love your endlessly soulful compassionate posts. Be well. R

It's true you're one of those whose insights i find helpful JB but whose politics I find lacking in humanity. Thanks for joining in. I'm ok with a handful of people taking the piss out of welfare, for the vast benefit those who really need it gain. For a decent education and better opportunity I'd wager even most of those would sooner or later choose to wean themselves. Your plastic island comment is truly of Daily Mail tabloid standard. Serious Q: do you think the rightward tilt comes about as a result of particular practices? I recall all the tough-guy karate wannabe samurai warrior types when I was a kid were militaristic.

Hi my name is Rich, and I'm a leftist. I'm in the UK, so socialism, equality of opportunity, NHS, social care, workers rights etc. It's weird to see good, insightful posts from people in the main forums, who I then see also hold strong right-wing views. I wonder where the development of compassion got left behind. Mind you, I see it IRL as well where seemingly reasonable people with apparently healthy cultivation/meditation practices dive right down the conspiracy rabbit-holes at the earliest opportunity. The result is that I no longer trust peoples' insights, and have to take more care to investigate practice as-it-is instead of taking things on more face value. Rich

So has all been revealed? It doesn't matter too much how many people we meet who say they're enlightened unless they can clearly communicate how others can get there - and point to those who have been successful. Too many so-called teachers are 'natural mystics', or what I call 'truck-wreck enlightened' after accident or illness. Frankly I don't think they have anything to offer us normal types. As for my critical approach I'll cite Adi Shankara , Jnana Yoga and Adwaita Vedanta as authorities on the value of a 'neti neti ' analysis of my experience. And yes, my thanks to you too for engaging.

Ok, I intended to say that if you feel you need a teacher get a live one. Kabir probably says it better than me If you've been working with a live teacher for 30 years, closely, and you're not cooked then I suggest it's not working - you, her, or the both of you. How many of her other disciples are finished, according to whatever definition of enlightenment is in use? How do you rate your chances? I don't equate seeing light/hearing sound with Enlightenment. Enlightenment is not an experience as far as I can tell. I think it's quite possible that enlightenment in terms of these concentration practices is not the same enlightenment as realised through e.g. dry vipassana: however I've never come across anybody who has progressed both Shamatha and vipassana to their ends. I'm also of the view that shaktipat, or initiation, can be of benefit, at least at the outset of one's path. But I don't have a well-defined model of how that works - kundalini blah blah blah, but at some point needs to go beyond the individual body/mind. Atman => Brahman, as it were. I found Salim least convincing when he talked about other people's delusions and ruts. I liked his simplicity (naivety?) with regard to his self-discovered path, but I think he brings an unfortunate outsider psychology to, let's face it, thousands of years of spiritual practice and realisation.

So the Sound Current and Inner Light crop up all over the place. Salim Michael has been an inspiration to me and others, but isn't around any more: get yourself s living teacher if you must have a teacher. In (shamatha) concentration practices there's the idea of a nimitta/sign. often this is an external object - a disk, or candle flame perhaps, but the external sign is just a key to trigger the internal experience of light. The sound current tends to arise when concentration is strong. Then in Vedanta there's a long tradition of light and sound, and nowadays there are a number of groups (cults, sometimes) that hold tight to the idea that you need to be initiated by the guru or an enlightened person into them. Divine Light Mission (Elan Vital), Radha Soami Satsang Beas, and others. I was involved in the 1970's/80's with a similar group where people were realising classical enlightenment quite frequently, and nowadays (without a guru) there are people giving the initiations freely around the world, and once again people are realising enlightenment all over the place, often with little previous meditation experience. The teachings aren't particularly sophisticated or technical, but as I say do seem to be effective if you're after those kind of states. Have a look at http://www.lightandsoundmeditation.com/. Rich

I second both Sifu Matsuo for energy work, and Pa-Auk Sayadaw / Shaila Catherine recommendations above for Jhanas. Sifu Matsuo - this is really nice central channel work. User Trunk OTP has some info on him / Dragon Gate in these forums and his private area. If you have a martial arts background you may well love it. From other sources: I also like the Cobra Breath (example here, use the "Second Cobra Breath technique") too for explicitly bringing chakras into central channel work but not too NewAgey. Kriyas/Pranayama are good anyway for settling down and clearing before the main act. White Skeleton is basic but a nice contrast /balance to all the channel focus. which can feel a little harsh if overdone. I'll add Leigh Brasington as well and his book Right Concentration for Jhanas. Some more hardcore/traditional teachers say nobody in the modern age can achieve Jhanas. Those of us who have done so tend to disagree. Pretty much everybody seems to agree though that a period in retreat with a competent teacher is necessary to gain some ability with Jhanas, and then they can be accessed in an ongoing 1-2 hours/day practice. Leigh is guest on a recent Deconstructing Yourself podcast, which is worth a listen. A lot of practices are kind of one or the other - Jhana practices have not much to do with chakras - completely different traditions I guess. In my experience Zhan Zhuang standing can be a bridging practice helping to open channels and develop strong concentration simultaneously, but in any case it's valuable to do QiGong as well as sitting.

BBC Radio interview here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p052gbnm (fixed ink - thanks rex)

“I Am Not I” By Juan Ramón Jiménez Translated by Robert Bly I am not I. I am this one walking beside me whom I do not see, whom at times I manage to visit, and whom at other times I forget; who remains calm and silent while I talk, and forgives, gently, when I hate, who walks where I am not, who will remain standing when I die.

"To see yourself as attacked is to believe you are a body." -- what if my ideas are attacked? Does that have relevance to the body? "True perception has one law, that you see the Son of God (which is all beings) as not a body." -- perception isn't open to ideas of true or false. Surely it's how sense experience presents. -- All beings (is?) are not a body - that's not even grammatical. This Son of God stuff is... aarggh! "The advanced Teacher of God no longer believes he is a body." -- What's a teacher of God. What's God? What's the point of believing? He either is or isn't. I could never get on with ACIM. Just a bunch of random statements, often not even grammatically correct, let alone conveying any useful insight or practice instruction. Pretty much no two consecutive statements build any kind of momentum. AFAIK it was written by CIA operatives and is IMO an intentional attempt to head-fuck genuine spiritual inquiry. And and and... ISTM we're not a body and not not a body - "we" are an emergent systems thing. Old skool you'd have blind men and an elephant. Nu-skool you've got Systems Theory: check out "The Systems View of Life: A Unifying Vision" by Capra and Luisi. And finally - there's no actual self anyway.

Why all the antagonism towards the Taiwanese? Why not just let them do them, and you do you?