Daeluin

opendao, your attitude throughout this thread is what is attracting people like GMP to react. He's sensitive and feels that something isn't right and responds, as that is his nature. This is largely why I wanted to see if you had any interest in reflecting on this. It's kinda like a bully who picks a fight with another bully... but then a bunch of grade school boys walk by and get sucked in. Then one start crying and the bully says they should know better. This is what I'm trying to stress with the "Walk Two Roads" business. If you understand the principle by which people are drawn to contend, similar to bugs to a fire, perhaps you can apply it more surgically instead of punching every which way indiscriminately. I think your methods hold power, but would serve you better if you applied them more selectively to your environment, as a lantern directs light. Playing the bully is up to you, but I don't see it making you any friends. And maybe you don't care about that and want to blaze like a bonfire, helping to challenge the beliefs of any who are drawn to your light. But how long can you maintain that for?

Ahahaha. Where I live now I've been asked to help with tending the ducks. There are about 60, of two breeds and they live in 2 separate coops right now. We let them out in the morning and usher them home at night. There's definitely something to the saying "get all your ducks in a row".... if you can manipulate their momentum you can get them to move as a group. They really don't like being apart from the group. But at night they almost put themselves in. They'll split into their two groups on their own and go to their two separate coops, which are in opposite directions. We've had a sick duck who has been kept separate and is now completely ostracized by the other ducks. They seem to know she's no longer part of the flock and behave just like school children: it isn't cool to spend time with the kid who "isn't cool." On the other hand, this duck who hasn't spent much time with the flock the past couple weeks seems to be learning to think on her own a bit more. Hehe. Silly mob mentality.

The tao led me to study with a master of a Shamanic tradition last year. His lectures spoke on very high level truths and resonated deeply with taoism. He spoke that when working with spirits it is important to make alliances, and that any communication and work that needs to be done can happen without letting them inside our bodies, which he stressed as a definite crossing of the line.

Yep, I've studied in depth relationship chart comparisons. It is incredibly revealing. You can overlap the charts and see where the planet of one person is exactly in connection to a planet in the other person's chart - synastry. Or you can calculate the midpoint between person A's sun and person B's sun, then make a "composite" chart using the midpoint - for all the planets. This follows the principle of Qi - what is between two opposing forces - and can be read to see what dynamics are born when these two people act as one dynamic entity. Often certain planets and connections between planets of the composite chart resonate more with person A and other parts resonate more with person B. As they "condition" their relationship, they tend to take ownership in a way that resonates with these patterns. However even a very beautiful synastry and composite chart with a person doesn't mean these two are destined. It depends on how evolved each person is. The tiniest little bit of challenging energy between two people can throw off amazing potential for connection if all they attach to is petty bickering over what is challenging. People need to work on themselves and understand that a relationship doesn't simply mean to lean on another person all the time. But in the study of all this in my relationships, it hasn't really helped. Oh sure it's helped me understand myself better, but it hasn't helped the relationship. Just like dual cultivation of energy - both people need to be on the same page and committed to doing the work. With Astrology, one person tends to know a whole lot more than the other person, and it can easily lead to the other feeling judged. Or one person might read into the astrology a bit too much and see connections that might have potential, and project those onto the relationship rather than letting them be discovered mutually. In the end knowledge gets in the way of true perception. If we're spending time studying how four planets might be aligning in the skies, and studying what others have interpreted about this alignment, this is the lens through which we will experience the alignment. I've completely stopped following everything but the phase of the moon and sun, to better help me directly feel when things are going on. And so that I can learn to navigate the personal challenges they represent more with my intuition, rather than intellectualizations. And I find that I definitely know what stuff is happening in the skies. It's when I feel the most pressured in my life to grow and move forward rather than giving up.

Western Astrology is based on the equinoxes, just like Chinese Astrology - they both study the waxing and waning of Yang and Yin throughout the Solar Year. Only Western Astrology tends to work more from a perspective of what the planets are doing during the Solar Year, while Chinese Astrology more what the Qi is doing. It's very likely that Chinese Astrology goes much deeper into workings with the planets, but I haven't found anything very in-depth published in English. Vedic Astrology on the other hand is based on the planets and the constellations, and keeps track of the procession of the equinoxes. There are fundamental differences, but I really don't know very much about it.

I wonder if as one masters use of Qi inside of a weapon, if the physical properties of that weapon matter quite as much any more. Perhaps a flexible weapon can be made straight when the compressed qi inside of it is "frozen", and thus block or hack, but also be maneuvered over and around the opponent's defenses using it's ability to be flexible. I've come across the idea that at a high enough level, one may simply pick up a stick, fill it with Qi, and it will not break when used as a sword in a fight. Or perhaps even one's sword hand used to project qi into the air, like a light saber. Hehehe. Just ideas, but I'm not one to rule anything out just because it sounds fantastic beyond my ability to comprehend.

Yin and Yang are different in different contexts. It is my understanding, from texts, that by way of balancing Yin and Yang in one context, one is able to ultimately cultivate True Yang, which is in a completely different context. Often balance takes effort, but that does not mean it does not flow. Inevitably the flowing leads one to challenges, often internal, whereby one must face these challenges. But even so one overcomes these obstacles by slowing down and looking for the ways to flow through without force. See Zhuangzi and how the butcher uses his knife. I agree, more or less. In our current societal paradigms people cultivate desire. But animals do not. No doubt a human living free of society would still be lead to the flow of death, but would likely have fewer desires and live more in balance with the Tao. Yes, if we wish to go somewhere, it is helpful to have the guidance of one who has been there. I believe people can find their way with books and without a teacher, but it is so very easy to not get all the way, and to end up following a side-path. However as long as that side-path ends up taking them closer to the way, their next lifetime will be that much closer. Well, I've tried to say this is what I do, but I've been attacked because of it. So do you create a argumentative environment on purpose then, to stir things up? As long as you are doing it on purpose, and are clear about it. Application of hexgram 18. However, is this a path of cultivating virtue? The Sage treats blindness by speaking to what the person needs to hear, rather than using principles or methods. Seems that if one just stirs things up indiscriminately, it could also lead to greater blindness. There's a quote that better illustrates this concept. I'll add it later if I can find it.

I made a full post that answered your questions before you asked them. I'm not even disagreeing with you, but supporting the OP. Then why do you post using methods that clearly trigger people's emotions? Please don't take this the wrong way, but it feels to me as though you miss some of the subtlety in the English language. You are very well spoken, but often you phrase things in ways that are considered violent to natives in this language. This is what I am trying to point out for you, so we can stop having discussions on the emotional level. Your whole understanding cannot be based just on your thoughts. It has to have strong proofs in texts AND strong proofs in the teaching passed by your teacher. But your teacher didn't provide any words, so you use your own words, neglecting a possibility that it can lead to the lack of any proofs of your understanding... You're projecting again. You're telling me what my teacher provided me with, and telling me what I did without any knowledge of my background. I didn't say my teacher didn't use words, I said that living experience is emphasized more than words. Again this is something that triggers others to respond emotionally and is viewed as an attack in the methods of NVC. As to what you quoted, how are you seeing that my understanding is based only on my thoughts? I quoted Zhuangzi: "This change of description and arrangement caused no loss, but in one case it brought anger and in another delight. He just went by the rightness of their present "this." Thus the Sage uses various rights and wrongs to harmonize with others and yet remains at rest in the middle of Heaven the Potter's Wheel. This is called "Walking Two Roads." My argument is that clinging to texts without adaptation is itself an inconsistent method, which is supported by Zhuangzi, who advises adapting one's argument so as to work within harmony rather than remain attached to working form a perspective that is causing anger and contention. Rather than answering my argument you attacked me, projected onto me that my words have no support from either ancient texts or from a teacher, neither of which are true. Why are you so interested in attacking me instead of discussing what we are here to discuss? Why are you being such a bully? references? For example, "Tao merges/unites with everything" - where you took that? Hmm... that isn't something I said in the quote, and I don't recall phrasing something like this, although perhaps I did. Can you help me recall where please? I'd prefer to emphasize that the Tao IS everything, and in cultivation we merge with it even as we find our own root within it. See TTC chapter 1: The Tao that can be spoken of is not the eternal Tao. The name that can be named is not the eternal name. The nameless is the origin of Heaven and Earth. The named is the root of all things. Therefore, by being free from passion and desire, the subtleties of Tao can be experienced. The things existing in the world of duality can be well known by possessing passions and desires. The two above mentioned have the same source but are given different names. The ability of transformation between the two is a most mysterious thing, or the door of all mysteries. tl; Hu Xuezhi Edit: Here, from the Book of Balance and Harmony (中和集): The Accomplishment of Sages The reason sages are sages is because of their application of the Changes. The means whereby application of the Changes produces accomplishment are openness and calm. When open on takes in all; when calm one perceives all. When open, one can accept people; when calm, one can deal with events. When openness and calm are practiced for a long time, the awareness is clarified. Openness is the image of heaven, calm is the image of earth. Spontaneous strengthening without cease is the openness of heaven, rich virtue supporting beings is the calm of earth. Empty vastness without bound is the openness of heaven; universal breadth without limit is the calm of earth. The Tao of heaven and earth is this openness, this calm. When openness and calm are in oneself, then heaven and earth are in oneself. This is what is meant by the saying in Taoist scripture, "If people can always be clear and calm, all heaven and earth will come to them." Clarity is openness; openness and calm are the sages' accomplishment of spiritual qualities." Do you agree or disagree with Lu's ideas? Can you be sincere and direct? Are you saying I am not being sincere and direct, or are you simply asking me to be? The later is an innocent question, the former is laden with implications without directly giving me a chance to discuss them. Ironically that would make this an indirect attack. I'll assume you are innocently asking me to be sincere and direct. As for agreeing or disagreeing let's see. First of all, it is Lu asking a question and Zhongli Quan who answers. He basically says that the Great Tao is difficult for people to understand and realize because false methods are considered efficient and widely spread and lead people to discredit the teachings. Yes, I agree with this. I have never disagreed. Now, now. My desire to share Non Violent Communication with you is so that you can see why your words trigger battles everywhere you go. If you feel attacked, it is only your violence that is being attacked, by myself and others. Even as I challenge you, I attempt to do so with compassion, making as few projections as possible. Thus I am trying to point out where and how you trigger others to react based on principles which I have been doing my best to support in multiple ways. Otherwise I have been objectively defending myself from your attacks. Here's another example of where you are telling me I only support my claims with my experience, even as I provide an entire lineage to support my accusation of your violence. Perhaps I wasn't clear enough, and for that I do apologize, but Non Violent Communication is a system that has specific science behind it and evidence to it's efficacy. It may not be a Neidan classic, but it follows principles to achieve results. Further, it achieves results in resonates with Taoist principles. The Taoist I Ching suggests it is best to meet the world with Flexibility while keeping Firmness on the inside, rather than using force and weakness (Taoist I-Ching). And the concept of flowing like water, can be found within the practice of NVC. 8 The highest goodness is like water. Water is apt to benefit all things, but never strives with them for its own ends. It abides in places people disdain; thus it has the closest resemblance with Tao. The superior people follow the example of water. They stay at ease with lowness, They are profound and still with their hearts, They bestow without aspiring for returns, They speak with sincerity and faith, They govern in a clear and upright way, They deal with affairs in a capable way, They take actions in a timely way. It is just because they do not strive that they keep free from any faults. Hu Xuezhi As I've discussed above, you are projecting labels onto me without attempting to discover anything. You ignore where I have supported myself using texts and say my thoughts are based on my own experience alone. You presume that just because my teacher uses few words that we do not speak at all, and that I am taught nothing of Taoist heritage from my teacher or his lineage. Further, when I specifically describe how I respect the texts and work on embodying their principles in all I see around me, you seem to be dismissing my experiences as presuming that I understand Dao without basis. Why do you attempt to discredit me so strongly? You seem to see my attack upon your violence as an attack upon your teachings. To me this feels as though you are so deeply enmired in this lifestyle of attack and defense that you cannot fathom how I might be able to support you and attack you at the same time. You've mentioned before how you do not believe something can be right and wrong at the same time. But that's what I think you are missing. Please consult chapters 1 and 2 of Zhuangzi - they clearly describe how we are all made of different scopes, and what is right for one person might be wrong for another. Further, the idea of "Walking Two Roads" is precisely the method by which one of higher development maintains walking the road that is right for the internal, while simultaneously discerning what might be right according to the present external environment. When the internal scope and the external scope are radically different, to project what is internal upon what is external is to invite an exchange of force between both sides. However, if one is able to discern the way in which one might act in harmony with the external, one preserves the internal. Thus one thing may be both right and wrong at the same time, from different perspectives. I hope I have offered enough support to my statements. Indeed, incorrect methods are often noted as either "wrong" or "side-paths" to the true way. However, the texts mainly point the direction to the way, without declaring any particular method to be "right." The necessary results are described, as are the principles by which these results are operating. The operation is specific, but I do not recall any methods being declared "correct" and "absolute". Rather in the tradition it would appear there are many schools, each with differing methods. Some texts to work with methods, such as The Secret of the Golden Flower, attributed to Lu. The methods found in here resonate with the principles in the classical texts, but do not declare themselves to be the only methods. If you believe I am incorrect please document in what way. Edit: Found something in Thomas Cleary's introduction to Understanding Reality: "Generally speaking, the most pervasive practical concern in Complete Reality Taoism appears to be the purification and deautomization of the mind so as to make it sensitive to reality; and it is well known that practitioners commonly practiced quiet sitting as an aid to accomplishing this. Nonetheless, Liu I-ming, who generally presents an interpretation of Understanding Reality characteristic of the "pure serenity" approach of the northern school of Complete Reality Taoism, which emphasized quiet sitting, still makes a point of repudiating even this as a magic key to enlightenment. There are indisputable indications that Liu did himself practice abstract trance in quiet sitting, but he did not preach it as a mechanical cure-all; rather, he emphasized more the use of everything in life as a means of self refinement, with abstract trance a means of finding the "medicines" of unconditioned spirit and energy, which subsequently have to be refined in the "furnace" of everyday life. There is no indication that he, or Chang Po-tuan for that matter, ever set up any sort of fixed program for students to follow." Have I said they are correct? Rather I said I take the principles found in the classics - meaning they are not my principles, but principles of the classics - and test them against life all around and within me. I know whether I understand a principle based on how well I am able to identify it within the myriad changes of life. I don't force understanding, I employ sincerity and patience. Over time what was unclear may become clear... at this point I find I am starting to grasp a principle, and all of a sudden it tends to be all around me. When I consult the I Ching (reading several translations to remain objective), the principle shows up there. In class my Sifu will give a (rare) lecture upon this principle, without having spoken to me about it. I may be present in a circumstance where I find the principle directly presenting itself to me, without myself having directly invited it. At this point the principle begins to become a part of me, and I no longer need to read from a text - I have reached the root of the principle and can feel it in operation everywhere around me - I am one with it. Even so, I wouldn't use the absolute terms of correct or incorrect. What I've gotten to the root of is within my own scope. It works for me and thus is "right" for me. What I see as contention in the behavior of others is undoubtedly what is right for them in their present development. But when I saw that it doesn't seem to be allowing their message to come across, due to all the attacking and defending, I though perhaps I could share what I see in case it could help them to see it too, and thus help them deliver their message more effectively. In the end what I was trying to offer became an attack upon what is right for them, and thus they attacked me in return. That is fine, and follows the principles of raising something up and having it brought down. It is not a matter of not having a lineage, it is more a matter of engaging in public debate and using my lineage as credit. In discussion I speak from who I am alone, because I have no wish to pretend to speak for my Sifu. If my truth cannot be heard by ears open enough to listen to it, then why should I desire to force them open artificially? Are you speaking on behalf of WuLiuPai as a spokesperson with permission to speak on behalf of the school? I have not seen that explicitly stated, but if that is so it might be important to know. Edit: added quote from intro to Understanding Reality. added quote from The Book of Balance and Harmony.

I'm not really seeing where you are attaching "peaceful demeanour" to "heremetic quietism." May one not apply a peaceful demeanour via social integration? To me yes this is very important - if one merely sits apart, they are excluding themselves from where the currents naturally flow, and the collective development there-in. I also do not see where Social Integration implies that a peaceful demeanour is not cultivated. It is simple math - if one cultivates contention, these are the patterns that ripple out and return. This leads to a lifestyle entrenched in attacks and defenses, and the use of force. Conversely, if one cultivates harmony, this leads to a lifestyle of balance. Being balanced in the present situation without force allows one to flow like water uncontested. Thus one integrates socially without being impeded by their choices. A peaceful demeanor (ie, not being forceful, which causes people to react, thus limiting options for all), is A key - not the only one, but very important. These principles are clearly stated in the Tao Te Ching.

Tearing apart my argument still doesn't give me much to discuss with you. Not sure what you're trying to accomplish. As far as lineages and weight goes, that's my point - I'm not interested in speaking when my words only matter because of their provenance.

Yeah, we're almost upon the full moon, so the yang has entered the phase where it is full enough to be a little unstable for some. Depending on where we are in our own patterns and sensitivities, we may feel it stronger during some months. Or depending on other astrological factors we might feel it stronger. I don't know what astrological aspects are being made, but in general when the sun is in Leo people tend to feel very awake and full of life and energy... as the Moon opposes the sun from Aquarius we feel the polarity of self vs other, the individual in opposition to the collective, creative expression in opposition to wu-wei. It'll be interesting to see what unfolds after Yang culminates and yin enters, on August 10th around 2:11PM EST. Essentially this is the extreme of the cycle, but if people are too linear and don't know how to flow in a circular way, it is easy for them to keep trying to wax their yang... but conditions are changing and it is easy for the rug to get pulled from under one's feet.

See, when people make statements and add question marks to the end, it makes it seem like a question, but really it's a declaration. This particular type of projecting is a manipulation - the question helps the subconscious open up, but really it's not a question at all, and in one's vulnerability one feels the stab of the declaration and closes off, raising defenses and usually reacting with their own projections in return. Essentially, your above words are laden with emotion, and people are responding to the emotion, not the words. Most of my argument is based on my interpretation of the OP: It is important to aim at the whole rather than falling into the trap of inconsistent methods. When we cling to particular texts this is no different than any other inconsistent method. The importance of the text lies in our ability to apply the principles in real life. The one paragraph you chose to quote is based on my own reflections after studying the essence of Tao found in many places, including classical Neidan texts. In the spirit of the OP, it isn't about proving the method that achieves the result, it's about pointing out methods that fail to achieve results. So I'm not really interested in proving my beliefs, but I am happy to discuss them with you if you offer me something to discuss. If you want something scientific to study, I recommend Non Violent Communication. It is remarkably Taoist in principle, and remarkably Scientific in practice. It has been effectively used in war to create peace between two conflicting sides. My lineage is the Tao. Everyone's lineage is the Tao. Anything else is standing in the way of the Tao. My intent here is not to ruffle your feathers with a flashy retort. This is the truth. We should never take our awareness off the Tao. Otherwise I am blessed to study with a Master, who has taught me more through living experience than through words. I find it more effective to learn from the living demonstration of principles than reading about them in books. But also in books I have discovered much, and I have a great deal of respect for the classics. But the more I am able to embody the principle and see it come alive everywhere around me, more free I become. If you want a direct lineage or whatever I'm not interested in giving you one. I would prefer to stand on the merit of my own actions.

Thanks for pointing this out, and I completely agree. No one is at blame here, and ALL judgments from both sides contribute to struggle within the intended discussion. Including mine. I don't mean to press the issue... it'll be what it'll be. In any case, I like to think y'all are true courageous heroes, and regardless of the patterns any of us may fall into in our online communications, that outside of these forums we are all doing our best to navigate this beautiful life.

In my cultivation I find a union between conscious and subconscious awareness which tends to give "directness" a new meaning. What the union perceives as direct cannot be understood by only using the conscious mind, similar to how xian tian cultivation cannot be increased by only working with hou tian methods. However, the conscious mind can set its focus upon what is not completely conscious, just as hou tian methods can make room for xian tian development. The peaceful taoist is simply one manifestation of one who sees clearly that to move in a straight line is to not move in a circle. We may use straight lines as methods, but they are incomplete unless they become circular in result.

I have no trouble respecting the choices of a particular school. But generally contention arises when the dogma specific to one branch is projected as the true way of other branches. There is a lot of projecting onto others in this thread in the name of truth. Just bullies shoving people around. It has nothing to do with their message. If other threads arise in this fashion they'll just generate more of the same. Personally I'd like to have a chance to hear their message unclouded by contention.

Sincerity is a principle and a tool. It can be applied in different ways. Essentially it is the attaching of our intention in a particular shape and space, and the commitment to nurturing this attachment. The greater our sincerity, the more powerful we make this attachment, and thus "Where sincerity is, the way is open." The direction of our sincerity determines which way we open. When we are sincere in our cultivation, we are sincere to our true self. This is sincerity applied within. When apply sincerity externally, we might open a way towards many things, including things that are blocked. The more powerful our sincerity, the sharper it cuts when applied externally. In the nature of teaching others with sincerity attached to truth, there are different ways one might open. If one shapes so as to attach to the importance of avoiding side paths and inconsistent methods because of the importance to aim at the truth and recognize that inconsistent methods do not lead to the heart of the tao, then one's sincerity will be expressed in ways that strengthen this message. This opens a way of guidance through confusion. If one shapes so as to attach to the importance of avoiding side paths and inconsistent methods because the side paths are "wrong," then one's sincerity will be expressed in ways that stress the importance of the concepts of right and wrong. This opens a way of polarization. In this thread I see a lot of declaration without correction. Discipline without guidance. Absolutism without substance. People are told what is wrong, and when people ask what is right they are told it is secret and hidden. People are told things like: "it's better to not reveal your ignorance", essentially declaring others wrong regardless of what they might say. When people ask leading questions in attempts to work with the absolutist frameworks that have been presented, the response is one of "this is what is wrong with your question" and no guiding answer is given. The people who was asking the question has their momentum completely cut off, and rather than being guided towards correcting in a constructive way, the momentum is directly opposed and they feel like they have been met with hostility. Thus when sincerity is shaped in a contentious way, it draws contention. The bickering seen in this thread is a result of the method of sincerity, not a result of the intended message, which is quite important. Unfortunately all the contention here is easier to see than the bits of and pieces of the message, most of which it seems people didn't really take to heart. If one was sincere in guiding others with this message, and approached it with compassion and applied sincerity in a way so as to lead the momentum of others towards something, rather than shutting down their efforts every step of the way, the contention could have been avoided and the message would come through loudly. In this thread I see conflict covering up a message that was not delivered. I see where this conflict originated and my intent is to shine the light on what happened, and perhaps share something which others might be able to USE to avoid conflict in the future. If I were simply to say something to declare the "mistake" in inviting conflict, it would only make others feel "judged" and "belittled". Not only would their momentum be stopped, but in not guiding their energy somewhere, it is no different than were I to step in front of a charging bull. Maybe I can stop it once or twice with force, but every time it gets up it wants to charge right at me. Doesn't sound very developmental for me or the bull. So my intent is to invite speculation on how, with sincerity, one might deliver a message more effectively without inviting conflict by artfully leading and guiding others with actual substance. Thus I am sincerely intent on describing an inconsistent method that is not getting anywhere, offering principles on how and why it is failing to achieve results, with guidance on how to apply the principles more effectively. And yet I do not say there is only one right way. Just as in the texts, there are many right ways and I have no desire to limit others from discovering their own way of applying the principles. I do not withhold some "secret correct method"; there are too many methods to describe - what is important is for one to remain sincere to the truth without getting lost. Ni, Hua Ching, The Uncharted Voyage Toward the Subtle Light, From Chapters 35 and 20.

To which LaoZiDao replied -"- Possibly best NOT to argue that point LaoZiDao as you're in for a soupçon of disappointment down the pike. 100% of people die. Always and every ways. That buddy, you can take to the bank. In one sense you are correct - but there are many ways of looking at life and death. Taoist Celestial Immortality posits the possibility of transcending the paradigm of death found in the realms of Heaven and Earth. If you disagree with this, that is fine, but don't speak as though there is no room for alternate interpretations. Certainly the principle of life and death extends beyond the realms of Heaven and Earth, but speculation on how seems rather futile and pointless. We can only say it is likely to be much different in principle. Yeah, honestly this baffles me. They use very absolutist methods, which following the principles of Taoism are clearly known to draw contention and create karmic ripples. Their attachments to right and wrong are hardly helping anyone go deeper and do not seem to be changing any minds. Rather separation is the result. We just rattle each others defenses and emphasize the line between us. So I'm confused by the motive of such actions. The nature of Tao is to merge with everything else. Thus we see how the principles of Tao react to the influence of Confucianism and Ch'an Buddhism by absorbing these other Ways and applying Taoist principles to them, to show how the root of both is one. In this modern era with its melting pot of beliefs and evolved intellectual behaviors, Tao remains true, and remains able to merge with other systems without contention, ever guiding them to the oneness shared by all. Neidan, or, Internal Alchemy, is more than a set of methods - it is a map of principles. These principles explain how the energy of any life form might move through change. There are two directions - division and unity. Via the direction of unity, these principles map the way to true oneness. Yes these principles are a science. But the words used to describe these principles, and the methods used to practice them, must also know how to adapt, lest their attachment to a fixed perspective cause them to stop flowing with the Tao and become themselves a side-path and an inconsistent method. As society changes, the way people hear and understand things also changes. To force dogma upon them, calling it truth, and tell them they're wrong will only cause separation. However to listen to how they are hearing things, and to translate the principles so that they may be understood and applied is going to be more effective at leading them to listen to their tao and understand how the principles of Neidan are in operation inside of them. Teaching like this cultivates oneness rather than resistance and follows the way of Tao. Forcing people to go along with something completely foreign to their way of life is hardly going to let them connect deeply enough to attain the Tao. They must learn to understand the principles from inside. from Zhuangzi chapter 2, Brook Ziporyn So too can the principles of Neidan be adapted and leveraged to uses of correction and guidance, without sacrificing either the integrity of the principles or the use of harmony. If one really understands the principles, one should not be afraid to speaking of them in more than one way. If one really understands the principles, one need not fear getting lost and trapped by inconsistent methods.

For training, perhaps teaches more sensitivity to work internally with a blade whose quiverings are not felt with the slightest movement, requiring one to seek deeper.... on the other hand, if too stiff one might have trouble getting deep enough to connect to the responsiveness enough to get proper feedback to help evolve one's training. Also if wushu flexy, it may take more skill to really sync with the quiverings so as to get deeper into the metal energetically, rather than connecting to the movement. In the end somewhere in between is probably good. Just my speculation. Curious how my "theories" will evolve when I start practicing next month! Again, principle extends into the realm between black and white, adapting but undaunted. I suppose that's how my mind works... can't wait to get rid of the need for it. ~_~ With staff work, I've mostly used a heavier staff that isn't flexy - it's been trying to get it to vibrate without forcing it too much, but I can. Then in class I've started using a borrowed staff that is much lighter, and instantly I was surprised by how much I was able to get it to quiver. I feel if I had started only with the lighter staff, I might have been tempted to work on a more surface level in the beginning. In any case, to really understand the difference it is probably helpful to train with different amounts of flex and see how your training naturally responds and evolves as it adapts to different mediums. For training purposes it might be more developmental to send qi into something stiffer and heavier... perhaps you get only so deep... but then you pick up something lighter and then find not only are you able to penetrate fully, but can compress into it as well. On the other hand, if using something heavier it might be too difficult to not wield it physically instead of energetically. So to adjust to moving with the blade energetically and not physically, perhaps something lighter is best, and to work on compressing energy into something heavier might be suitable, if one can avoid physicality.

Is one holding the hilt of the sword, or the guard, for this measuring? I was taught something similar, but to hold around the guard using a sword hand - with the index and middle fingers pointing straight along the length of the hilt towards the pommel, and the thumb, ring and pinky fingers clasped around the guard. It was mentioned the tip should land somewhere in the ear region. If held by the hilt however this would raise the tip higher.

A teacher cannot teach with force. A teacher must listen to their students and be willing to change from what is learned from them. Fixed perspectives are ever holding back the inevitability of growth and instead invite decay. Nothing can escape change. It is easy to doge the predictable sword swing - if one wishes to connect, one must adapt, not wait for people to stand in the way. What skill in that? Wielding principle one may adapt beyond the realm of black and white.

ChiDragon, I hear you are tired of people urging you towards a teacher. And it is fine if you don't want one. But it is still true that others may find use in one. Taomeow - your sharpness of intent is easily felt and reacted to!

I believe the true methods are largely spoken of in terms of principle, but not specific method, because there are multiple approaches. Certainly specific things need to happen to progress, but there are many ways to cultivate these conditions. By discriminating against the specific practices that have not reached the root on their own, we are guided further to understand the importance of the principle of aiming towards the one truth. Each of us are unique and different, and we might be led to specific teachers who can share a method appropriate to what comes most naturally to us. Or if we are divinely led, follow the principles and practice hard, we might have a chance to uncover the principles without a teacher, but this is also an easy way to get lost. Even with a teacher it is easy to get lost - we must be wary of side ways and secondary methods if we wish to reach the root and attain union with tao. Some methods are explicitly spoken of, as in The Secret of The Golden Flower and Ling Bao Bi Fa. But still, unless one has dedicated one's life to and has an innate skill for navigating the internal, these methods are best illuminated by a teacher. In the end, when the whole is divided, parts need names. Aim at the whole, don't attach to the vehicle. Even though the vehicle must be working, it is not what is most important.

Yesterday I posted over in this thread about WuWei, but mostly in reference to how it applies to Internal Alchemy, as suggested by the Tao Te Ching. There it would seem the terms we call "doing" and "non-doing" apply specifically to how to cultivate our way back to living in the moment as healthy, whole, non-interfering life forms. They are vehicles to attain wholeness one moves beyond the necessity of their use as one moves to higher levels. Human kind has evolved so as to make choices about what we do, rather than simply living in the moment like most life-forms. This has given us an intellectual advantage and we've demonstrated many uses for our intellect. However, deciding not to live in the moment, we actually step out of living in the moment. Our ability to store information from our perception literally gets in the way of the purity and natural operation of our awareness. The more we transform flowing and freely transforming energy into the attached energy of stored thoughts, the more what is naturally bright and spontaneous becomes clouded and stagnant, until it completely separates and divides and separates. Liu Yiming describes this process very simply in Solving Symbolic Language. When we decide to go back to living naturally, being one with the current of the Tao, we reverse the process of our conditioning until we are pure and unpolluted enough to act with keenly honed intuitions rather than knowledge. Acting based on knowledge is a crude process. We must separate from the flow of life in order to learn he knowledge, and when we apply it we are only listening to the mechanical churnings of facts and reasons inside our minds, which prevents us from being fully connected to the situation we are attempting to act within. When we hone our intuition, we empty out our minds so that we may be open to everything happening around us... and then we listen to where we feel our heart tugging, and we know how to act. The more we practice this, the better we get at discerning where the tugs are and what we need to do. I read a study done on humans mimicking the radar of bats by tongue clicking, human echolocation. Surprisingly it doesn't take very long to attain results. The same is true for the intuition - just needs practice, and one must be willing to surrender the bias of the ego. Perhaps WuWei is both a method leading the way towards cultivating wholeness, but also a method to understand the principle to avoid losing our wholeness. To replenish our depleted life-force-of-existence (ming) we practice intentionally, "doing", until our "ming" is full again, and then we turn around the light of the mind in order to prevent the mind from applying it's desire, which would again deplete the ming, but also by turning the light of the mind inward, we cultivate the xing (open-awareness-of-spirit) back to completeness by use of emptiness - that is we stop learning, but start unlearning, dissolving blockages formed by thought patterns, even as we embrace the spontaneous, natural ability of xing to intuit the entirety of the ever present knowledge of heaven. When we can simply unite with all and feel the knowledge of all, what point in attaching to bits and pieces of it when this only blocks our connection to the whole of it? We don't have to forget everything - it's just like food - many of us simply eat more than we need, or think and consume media more than we spend simply being aware without thinking. In Inner Alchemy, one applies this process of returning to what is simple, natural, whole, healthy, and fully aware while one keeps intention and attention held upon the root of life and death, the root of heaven and earth, where in stillness one may slip between the edges into what is real. But even as one moves beyond the need to maintain WuWei in order to maintain one's unity, I believe one should still respect the importance of this principle, and if possible use it to an even greater extent to foster a powerful healing effect.

If he doesn't have it yet, he might want to experiment a bit before putting his ideas up before a peer review. On the other hand, it is possible he'd be open to hearing non-dogmatic suggestions.

Wow that is a whole new level of Internal, mYTHmAKER! I remember seeing a sword swallower at a medieval fair when I was a child. His finale was to bring up a damsel and have her slide a stack of 3-5 swords down his throat as he bent over. More swords == higher level of immortality?