Simple_Jack

.

.

.

.

.

.

"Also I remember Drew Hempel calling out a couple people on this thread a while ago who's methods included meditation on the dan-tien, which lead to the development of a "chi belly." His source of information that was used to substantiate the cliam that a "big belly" is the result of improper principles of practice, came from Tao & Longevity by Nan Huai Chin; which stated this would lead to said results. The heading of this was "A Big Belly Is Not Tao." I remember it stating that this was a result of chi bloating the lining of the intestines from concentration on the dan-tien. What is the purpose of a "chi-belly?" Sorry it wasn't chi bloating the intestines, but was "Most people tend to sink the chi into the tan-tien naturally and cause the lower abdomen to fill and become convex." He then siad that continued concentration on tan-tien would cause problems for small/large intestines, kidneys, etc. He does not totally dismiss concentration on Tan-tien in that book though.

To answer your question though I don't call myself or refer to myself as "Buddhist." Not as anything. I haven't proven myself according to the standards of what it is to be a Buddhist, therefore I don't call myself "Buddhist."

Yeah, I know I didn't have to hound Scotty, but like I said: His arguments throughout that whole thread were inconsistent. He also reposted this:"Actually, "despiser of Buddhist beliefs" is harmonious with Buddhism. It does not oppose it. There are many here who cling to the belief system of (their preferred brand of) Buddhism, instead of discovering the truth for themselves...or being honest when the beliefs (usually misinterpretations) are plainly proven wrong. So despising Buddhist beliefs is a call to the Buddhist practitioners here to step up their game. I consider many of them to be absolute beginners. It's a demonstration against that which opposes Buddhism...ignorance and falsehood. Laziness. Basically I want to see better Buddhists here, and more respect for the tradition. Funny, huh?" So I thought I'd start to question him since he made bold claims like that. I also in the process wanted to see where his understanding was, since in that thread he cliamed to have already acheived "Buddhist enlightenment which is the first step in some Taoist alchemy schools." What I chose to do reflects on ME as an individual and not on a whole tradition or it's members who post on this board. To say otherwise is a ridiculous claim. If this makes me a "neo-buddhist," then so be it.

Fine, but I've read your experiences in the "Is Pineal Gland Activation more important than Heart Mind Activation? " thread and I have Taoist Yoga by Charles Luk. Both do not describe anything that deals with "essential nature" in Buddhism or in The Classic of Chuang Tzu and the Tao Te Ching.

How am I disrespecting you? I'm really trying to engage in an honest discussion here.

It probably means that you do not know what you're talking about and haven't achieved this "enllightenment that is only the first step in some Taoist Alchemy schools."

Ahhh, I see...Then that means you really must not have any clue whatsoever what you're talking about when it comes to what constitutes "Buddhist enlightenment."

Well if they're "true" like you say, then I don't see why you'd have a problem debating me.

I find this all pretty funny actually. I'm trying to clear up some inconsistencies with Scotty.

This isn't about "how much you suck" or how "awesome Buddhism is." Why do you want to avoid this? Surely you remember that you claimed on that thread that you were "enlightened" and understood what constitutes "Buddhist enlightenment." I'm saying that you don't and therefore want to debate to see how far your understanding really goes.

Right and I'm asking you to start telling me why you can't admit to being wrong about what constitutes "Buddhist enlightenment" and it's principles in general.

You never actually stated what is "misinterpretation" on our part. I myself not too long ago absolutely hated Buddhism, just like the people on this board. It was only through direct experience of D.O and inherent emptiness of the five aggregates and phenomena, that I started to really accept that "Buddhist enlightnement" wasn't bullshit and that it was possible to acheive. You actually dodged in that thread and in this thread on why or how "Buddhist beliefs" are in your words "plainly proven wrong." I seriously will not mind debating you about these claims. EDIT: Spelling

Your arguments weren't backed up. You also got butthurt (lol) when I showed that in Buddhism complete enlightenment also consists of a comepletely transformed body...You really did kind of bring this upon yourself.

The way I see it....All of us "Buddhists" should either be banned from discussion of "Buddhist dogma" or discussing about Buddhism should be restricted to it's own sub-forum. I think that is the only way there can be harmony on this board.

True, he did go over board...but you yourself aren't completely innocent either.

Anapana was practiced during Buddhas time before it had any contact with China. The state of "Xi" or the cessation of external breathing also occurs with Anapana practice. "That is not at all the case with simple anapanasati, in my opinion." Fine, no problem. That is your opinion and you're allowed to have it. I have found through practice of Anapana that these transformations of jing, chi and shen (bliss, clarity, no-thought) have occured.

To be honest: I really don't think anyone should be suspended or banned for what transpired on that thread. People are allowed to disagree, whatevs. It's funny cause I really don't think there is much of a difference (at it's core) between Taoism, Buddhism and Confucianism. It can be historically shown that they all intermingled and influenced each other, since Buddhism's introduction into China. There was a heavy intermingling during the Tang and Sung dyanties. Yet most of the so called "Taoists" on here are somehow ignorant of China's history when it comes to this. The Chinese are more likely to study and apply the prinicples from each of these philosophies, which makes you think why it's not like that here in the West...

Anapana only deals with the external breathing in the beginning. Why exactly is focus on the dan-tien needed if jing, chi, shen are already cultivated with this method, which leads to the gradual opening of the chi channels and other esoteric structures of the body? Also I remember Drew Hempel calling out a couple people on this thread a while ago who's methods included meditation on the dan-tien, which lead to the development of a "chi belly." His source of information that was used to substantiate the cliam that a "big belly" is the result of improper principles of practice, came from Tao & Longevity by Nan Huai Chin; which stated this would lead to said results. The heading of this was "A Big Belly Is Not Tao." I remember it stating that this was a result of chi bloating the lining of the intestines from concentration on the dan-tien. What is the purpose of a "chi-belly?"

Either they have failed to properly teach you what exactly constitutes "Buddhist enlightenment," or you have failed to grasp or retain anything they have taught you. I've read your posts in "Is Pineal gland activation more important than heart mind activation?" I'm sorry to say, but nothing you have posted in that thread constitutes anything approaching egolessness or non-duality as taught in Buddhism. I'd be willing to debate with you if you want?