Non

heh... well I provided a couple links to some methods of making non soy tofu using chickpeas, field peas, pigeon peas, black eyed peas. Burmese tofu is made of chickpeas. Gluten free seitan is usually made from flours of of other beans and/or pulses. People can also probably extract the protein (as well as other nutrients) from the starches, discover new coagulants, etc. Of course it's a matter of what's safe and what's not. Yea TVP and all that other soy protein and gluten stuff is blah. They came out with a new product called Peanut Tofu, and sprouted soybean tofu which has less of the isoflavones and antinutrient factors, though I've never tried it. They can also make Hempfu .

haha, no I won't try it just yet.. not enough money. 50 dollars per move!

Taoist Hua Shan Qigong http://www.onehand.com/pages/volumes_51-52.html Not sure if that one is it since it doesn't say Pai, but it's possible.

How would you know if plants really exhibit such emotions as worry and fear, when they're not even really universal? They do have nervous systems, but not like ours, or animals. They do evolve (without a nervous system they couldn't really right?) but how do we know if they exhibit such human like emotions as "worry" and "fear"? And eh.. some mock meats are pretty good. Black bean burgers.. non soy tofu, gluten free seitan. It's just a darn other way of preparing food geez, there's nothing inherently wrong with it. It's just the common mainstream practices of processed foods that we are worried about here.

What does the word pai mean? I know Hua Shan has to do with Mt Hua. "Huashan pai daoshi" refers to a Hua Shan lineage of quanzen daoists (from my interpretation) and not just any one from Mt. Hua. reference: http://www.daoistfoundation.org/huashan.html

Heh reminds me .. he kinda looks like some guy that teaches Hua Shan Qigong which is a sort of esoteric qigong as well. My kung fu school teaches Hua Shan Pai Qigong. Im unsure if this is the same but I think it consists of the same amount of moves which might suggest that it is the same. It's supposedly so secret and esoteric that they charge 50 dollars for each of the movements, which to me is way too much.

To be purely "left handed" is just unecessary in my opinion. The whole idea of "lefthandedness" or "left hand path" is basically the use of techniques that are considered "evil" to many. E.g. the use of sex magick, consuming "intoxicants", practicing unconventional methods, ritual magick, focusing on the material, using the "gut", etc. There need not be a seperation as "left handedness" and "right handedness". IMO the optimal path uses the most useful of both extremes. Yes, the distinction of left handedness and righthandedness seperates a spiritual path, into extremes, and to stick to one extreme is entirely unecessary. What is the real purpose of the lefthanded path? "Coolpoints" because you can do what is considered evil by ignorant peoples, and in fact, in a way disregard and sometimes even disrespect society by doing "all things considered evil and left handed, and none of what's considered good or 'right handed', conventional".\ The left handed path should be more about balance. I mean, really it's just a simple distinction such as 'external' and 'internal', or 'materialistic' and 'non materialistic, selfish and non selfish, intuitive/logical, left brain/right brain, cortical/enteric brain. Why stick to just one? Sticking to just one can be kind of imbalanced if you dont know how to optimize such a one sided path to suit spiritual goals. Then really it just comes down to personal choice.. although it's like your working with the 'black market' or.. like how Robin Hood stole from the rich to give to the poor, only a lot of left handed path people fail to see that, and forget about ethics, desiring only power but not so much balance, or that in the end it's supposed to BE about balance and not being one-sided (ie in the case of those being in the extreme of being purely "right handed"). So why stick to just being 'left handed'? Why only do things which are considered wrong by "society" or "certain doctrines"? To be considered cool, or powerful? To fulfill purely materialistic desires? A person who is balanced I think will prevail over any one sided person. Its like "mastering the evil arts" and "mastering the 'good arts". or, "mastering the internal arts" and "external arts". Why just master one and forget about the other?

I'm not saying it is infallible, though I'm also not saying that it can't be for some people.

Yea it might not be entirely accessible for all people, but again that's an individual thing.

Sure there are shortcomings. I've had them as well. For me it's been a kind of thing that takes Determination. I also know that if I had to survive and veganism was not possible for me at a time of my life or during a certain situation, I'd gladly eat meat and consume animal products, for the time being. If I could also learn to not need to do that, I would. It's alright immortal sister.. its just people make veganism out to be some impossible unrealistic, unnatural, and unfit thing to do, and in the process being offensive. I have much tolerance for people who eat meat, some just can't help it. Though a lot of meat eaters have no tolerance for vegans, to the point of being insulting and offensive.. and even misunderstanding. I try not to push my ideas on others, except for really defending the point I try to make that it isn't impossible, and doesn't make one 'unfit' unbalanced and even sometimes I have to state that it isn't 'unmanly, feminine' and 'weak, cowardly'.

ok. Whatever, we have differing opinions. You seem to think that you know the 'optimal diet' for every human being. I don't think there is one optimal diet for every human being. What's optimal is really an individual thing unless we were all exactly the same. Are you hung up on the fact that when I say technology to you it seems "unnatural"? When I speak of technology, the human body is a technology it's "natural". Food preparation is a "technology", the tools we use, are technology. I don't necessarily mean 'artificial' technologies like we're all used to seeing like the ones only government controlled mainstream media let's us know about, or ones that simply don't work and are harmful, or unbalanced. I'm pretty sure the "vegan" lifestyle and/or one that doesn't harm other animals the ecosystem or oneself is impossible. I also don't think eating meat based diet is the only one optimal diet. Look at the word diet. DIEt. Which is based on 'death'. The natural desire to die. How do you want to die? What's your diet? It's based on the individual. Lol you don't have to pay much attention to the above I just said because it's just a play on words I noticed, I don't know the etymology of the word diet. But my main point is an optimal diet is not universal. Conditionare are different in other places of the universe, and those species living on another planet might have 'optimal diets' for them which are totally different from ours, they might also be at a different stage of evolution. The main principle of a vegan diet is a diet that doesn't necessitate harm in gathering the energy and vitality we need. That's the principle I concern myself with the most, not just "plant foods". Remember vegans also eat fungi, and some still eat yeast, fermented food, microbiological organisms. So what, if we use "technology". We all cook our foods, or prepare them in such a way that we can more easily digest our foods, or for convinience. Its all about optimal assimilation right? Not all vegans that eat mock meats are interested in them because they miss eating meat. They might also want to mimick it's desirable texture, convinient shape and qualities in certain recipes, flavor and smell similar to the meat like quality, etc. You taste and smell the combinations of ingredients in meat, which can also be gotten from other sources, without harm. What might also be considered harmful is a subjective thing as well. So it really comes down to personal choice many times, not a particular belief that it's the one absolute optimum diet for humanity. We all don't have to have the same limitations that one individual does, nor of that opinion. I don't think you really see my point so I'm not going to continue this discussion.

My reasons for being vegan are not even purely ethical and 'spiritual' but more than that. And your example of technology is only one example of a multitude of uses and types of technology we can use. You're still thinking "artificial." Just because one method is 'old' or 'ancient' doesn't make it the wisest choice. I mean, to say that there is only one optimal diet for every individual on Earth isn't correct. People are different. It's my individual choice to choose the diet I choose, and in the best way I can. It all comes down to nutrients, if we can get them no matter in which way, and in a balanced way, without harm, why not? You still seem to think we are incapable of living purely on a vegan diet healthily either because environmental issues or "human incapabilities" which are based on the individual, not all humans, not all the human beings on Earth are incapable. Even if some are incapable, that doesn't always mean that we can't come up with a way either.

So your basically saying that the environment is just not vegan friendly ie scarcity of wild foods, as you say, and climate. I agree... but think about if we could make the environment vegan friendly so that we are able to get all the nutrients we need, all the elements in balance, without having to kill another species. did you think of the technology we have now? We are evolving everyday, heck maybe one day we wont even need to eat. For now I have to though and if I can get all the nutrients I need from a vegan diet, plus all the "elements" of the food in balance, then why do I have to kill another animal? Its not impossible.. like I said we have hands we have feet, we have technology. Maybe if we had a large enough focus in society we can make it a "vegan" friendly world. It is ideal... right now. Doesn't have to be 'plants' what if we could with technology invent something that would give us the ability to produce our own nutrients without having to harm the ecosystem in a natural way.

That, and also could be the comparison of one's complementary features with another complementary features. Ie. light is considered yang, so everything that exhibits light features is also considered yang. IMO I think, the whole elemental theory and yin/yang theory is just a system of thought that might help to conceptually group ideas into categories based on similarity with principles such as 'fire' qualities 'water' qualities, etc. Here's a thought, what if on other planets there are different elements than the earth based elements of fire water earth air, metal, etc.? Same with gender. Animals have different gender roles than the gender concepts and roles of humans. So by grouping things by category into foundational principles might help with energy work and transmutation (especially with regards to sexual for the sexual transmutational practices) it is all really conceptual, not biological, although biology does spring from conception... So one should not forget that it is a conceptual thing, which is cultural, and societal. A World Order.

BIOLOGYOFKUNDALINI.COM how do you practice kundalini? Do you mean KAP techniques?

Well, I think it was tampered with. The whole sexualization of yin and yang theory.

so rather than belieuve sciene, you believe the vegan diet is impossible based on some magical mystical ingredient that would be missing in their diets? There are only bad vegan diets, not all vegan diets are bad. Its people who do the bad ones that make us look bad. Besides that your testosterone doesn't go down as long as you don't eat too much soy and it's way possible to be a soy free gluten free vegan. That whole thing about people thinking that "it's not a REAL MAN'S diet" they have security issues or they just believe the hype. http://ezinearticles.com/?Vegan-Men-Are-Se...&id=2892909 And there are plenty of plant foods that are considered yang and nourish the kidneys. I would think if youre attracting less women on the non soy vegan diet it has to do with women subconsciously notcing that something is different yet they dont even know what it is, and they would rather prefer someone who is more similar ie meat eater than be with someone who is different and to whom their bodies think there is "something missing" about them when it's really nothing more than a misunderstanding and primitive unevolved way of thinking. Like the deer in the headlights kind of primitive thinking.

I think it's totally possible to be a healthy vegan. It might take some work but it can be done. What with all this technology on food. Tofu doesn't have to be made from soy (http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jf0013398 , http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal...&SRETRY=0P), gluten free mock seitan, b12 can be found in nutrient rich soil, can be converted from another form enzymatically, or found fermented food. Vitamin D3 can be found in fungus, DHA from algae, and yes can be converted enzymatically. Creatine, can also be synthesized.. I also read some other berries can contain creatine. Goji berries for testosterone. ' on and on... Yea it might can some agricultural and tecnological expertise but it can be done.

so yin and yang theory has become 'sexist'. Yang is considered masculine (of course in a 'human's' perspective), and yin is considered feminine in a human's perspective... So all that really that yin and yang have to do with is the qualities of masculine and feminine generalizations like light is bright hot is" masculine" is "hard" yang, or dark is dull is cold is is "feminine" is "soft"is yin. etc. who comes up with what is considered "feminine" or "masculine"

Creativity is NOT feminine, it is WHAT IT IS. Geez. Gender roles are not universal! Want to be Taoist? Look at nature and see how what could be considered human gender roles are often times reversed in other animal species. Look at the asexual beings. Furthermore.. not everything falls into the exact definition of 'yin' and 'yang'. Things are just complementary to each other. Light and dark. But one is not considered feminine while another masculine. And light and dark have its own characteristics not necessarily "yin" and "yang."

man I still dont get how people can continue categorizing things as male and female when male and female genders are not universal! yin and yang is though, I think its still more like 1/1=1

That's funny.. in reiki level one they teach you a sitting meditation that is palms facing up and collecting energy into the lower dantian. I've always wondered... what is the best sitting position, left leg over right? That's what I've read in Taoist Yoga because it represents yin embracing yang. But any cross legged position is uneven since one leg is on top of the other and eventually one needs to shift. I dont kow if one is better than the other,each just has it's own purpose. Someone told me... if you want to collect energy into the lower dantian u lay your right palm facing down on your lower dantian and the left palm facing down over the right hand. The dan tian is yin, right hand is yang, and left hand yin. This attracts energy into the left hand which is attracted by the right hand, which is attracted to the yin dantian and the energy collects there.

When I say "guidance" being yin I meant just that, what u meant. You got all caught up in the word "guidance" and it not being "yang" or something. How can anything be either yin or yang? Everything is yin AND yang. If it wasn't, it wouldn't exist.. Again... male/female are yang/yin, but yang/yin are not male/female. I see yin/yang as 1/1=1. Haha. Looking from the yin side, the other side is yang, and vice versa. Looking from the yang side the other is yin. But they are actually in a sense, one and the same when together. When you cut something in half.. right down the middle.. do you always see one peice as having only void while the other half has a peice sticking out to fulfill the void, or is it simply half and half? Is the cup half empty or half full? or both? Is the half empty portion feminine while the half full portion masculine? lol Which is better? Going beyond duality or getting caught up in it ?

lol. Man you and your 'yin and yang' stuff, confusing it with Masculine and Feminine. you still hold onto such concepts as "men = strong, women = weak" I still dont think yin and yang have much to do with masculinity and femininity which are simply based on sex, which is an earthly thing OR of the human condition, which is cultural and societal construct. What if there were 3 genders, and the only way sexuality could work was if those 3 genders came together to procreate. Lol, which is yin and which is yang on that one? As far as I can see, female is yin because she has a hole, male is yang because he has a penis which goes into the hole, and they are complementary (but it really depends on which angle you view it to suggest that one is yang and yin). I mean.. REALLY yin and yang are simply complementary aspects of each other, which means from one angle yang is yin, and the other angle, yin is yang. It is are simply 1/1=1. But yang is NOT male, and yin is NOT female. Male and female and concepts of the human condition. If it was then yin and yang would really just be "masculine/feminine" and such concepts are worldly concepts. Its clear too that u think masculine is stregnth and women is power. Power is somewhat more passive than strength. Women hold a lot of power by simply being born and looking pretty that's for sure. And they dont have to move a damn finger according to this theory.