ChiDragon

The Dao Bums
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    9,819

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    19

Posts posted by ChiDragon

  1. Posted · Edited by ChiDragon

    1 hour ago, DynamicEquilibrium said:

    I'd say by trying one's best to keep a neutral point of view while coming across different versions during our exploration.

    I guess neither absolute truth nor absolute falsehood can exist within what basically smells like working through relative dynamics.

    Thank you. I couldn't agree more.
     

    The cultivation of  性 and 命 is not pertaining the Neidan. The cultivation was intended for one to be a better person as 真人. 真人 should be known as a "True man," other than a "real man" as commonly translated. The idea for being a True man is to have a good educated mind with a healthy body. BTW They don't called this as 性命雙修 for nothing, you know!

    A good educated mind is able to distinguish what is true or false and able to sort and filter things out with logic. 

    • Like 1
    • Oh boy 3

  2. Posted · Edited by ChiDragon

    4 hours ago, forestofclarity said:

    Xing and Ming appear to be open terms with a broad spectrum of meanings with different nuances depending on the context.

    Yes, people made it too broad and lost its esoteric narrow meaning in the context. BTW The same problem applies the 气。

    • Like 1

  3. Posted · Edited by ChiDragon

    https://fabriziopregadio.com/files/PREGADIO_Destiny_Vital_Force_or_Existence.pdf

     

    I was wondering where are the people getting the confusion from. People took this as Bible. That was the problem. He wasn't sure what he is talking about. He may know the definition of the individual characters. However, he doesn't know what the individual meaning of 性 and 命 abide to definition of the cultivation. 

     

    P.S. 
    The cultivation of  性 and 命 is not pertaining the Neidan. The cultivation was intended to be a better person as 真人. 真人 should be known as a "True man," other than a "real man" as commonly translated. The idea for being a True man is to have a good educated mind with a healthy body. BTW They don't called this as 性命雙修 for nothing you know.

    Quoted from the above:
    "Neidan or Internal Alchemy has developed two main modes of selfcultivation. The first is based on cultivating the mind and intends to remove the causes that prevent one from “seeing one’s true nature,” which is equated with the Elixir. The second is based on purifying the main components of the human being—Essence (jing 精 ), Breath (qi 氣 ), and Spirit (shen 神 )—so that they may serve as ingredients of the Elixir. These two modes of self-cultivation are said to place an emphasis on xing 性 and on ming 命 , respectively. However, Neidan texts repeat time and again that xing and ming can only be understood and realized in conjunction with one another."

    I can accept that the 精 as essence. However, 氣 is definitely doesn't mean breath here. Rather, it is the vital force to keep the body to function. Also, it is not an energy. 

    神 is not spirit, rather it is a driving force to keep the body in motion.

    • Like 1
    • Oh boy 4

  5. Posted

    17 hours ago, Peter Jennings said:


    If Dao is “nothingness with potential,” then it already has properties.
    If it has properties, it is not nothing.
    Therefore the concept contradicts itself.


    Rephrase:

    If Dao is “invisible with potential,” then it already has properties.
    If it has properties, it is not nothing.
    Therefore the concept does not contradict itself.

     

     

    17 hours ago, Peter Jennings said:

    Logic is the foundation within which anything that does exist can exist. For example, something cannot exist and not exist at the same time. The creator must abide by logic. 

    Logic also shows how this idea of "nothingness" is literally impossible. How can nothingness be anywhere? If you had something to point to, it wouldn't be nothing.


    Good point. Very logical. I would replace the word "nothingness" to "invisible", then, there is no argument. Laotze had already defined Tao is either visible and invisible in Chapter One. It was the first thing that he pointed out before anything else.  If someone misread that, then, there is no need to go any further for the translation.  Sorry, the way it was written is very paradoxical. That was his style of thinking. He always say something negatively but ended up positive. No one can deny the authenticity of the TTC that was not written by him. Laotze was a wise man, a sage to be exact.

    • Like 1

  8. Posted · Edited by ChiDragon

    1 hour ago, DynamicEquilibrium said:

    It is a reminder to myself to strive to live by this way. 


    So far it eased my heart from a lot of burden, improved my health, clarified my mind, pacified internal conflicts, harmonized my human relationships...all this is very real, so i can say that the principles and practice of dynamic equilibrium applied to individual psychosomatic system and very ordinary daily life activities and interactions have great meaning and value. 

     

    Yes, I figured that there was something hidden in the username.  Without any explanation, I see 性命雙修 is taken place in your daily life. What a coincidence, Wu Wei helps me to do the same. 


    So far it eased my heart from a lot of burden, improved my health, clarified my mind, pacified internal conflicts, harmonized my human relationships...all this is very real for sure.  You've said it all. The mutual resonance on our part 可算得是知己知彼. No wonder the friendly gesture is unavoidable.

    • Like 2

  9. Posted

    6 hours ago, cake1234566 said:

    The idea is that logic doesn't bind anything, if you realize an inconsistency, then its the logic that you've created which is incorrect, the birds and trees will not stop existing

    Yes, well said!

     

    6 hours ago, cake1234566 said:

    Logic in daoism doesn't bind reality, but nature binds logic 

    I see that differently. Perhaps, you might give an example to make it a valid statement.
     

     

    6 hours ago, cake1234566 said:

    Everything created naturally brings its opposite into existence

    Yes, Chapter Two had laid out beautifully.

     

    6 hours ago, cake1234566 said:

    These aren't errors or things that laozi or other eastern philosophers weren't exposed to, these philosophers explicitly reject scientific rationalism

    I am curious about what you have said here, would you please elaborate on that. Thanks!

  10. Posted

    6 hours ago, cake1234566 said:

    As a side note, careful with the AI usage in philosophy. It's excellent for resource gathering but if you express an idea to it it'll always agree with you and find a reason why you're correct to keep you using it instead of being a steady hand ready to correct you which is what people really need
    I say that as someone who uses AI quite frequently as a tool


    The part you said "It's excellent for resource gathering" that I agree.

    " but if you express an idea to it it'll always agree with you" I may not see this is a valid statement.
     

    • Like 1

  11. Posted

    6 hours ago, cake1234566 said:

    The ttc is super hard to translate because of all of the metaphorical language, in this particular case you're running into a common beginners trap

    True.
     

    6 hours ago, cake1234566 said:

    But yes absolutely, if you can't read ancient Chinese you are reading something that is fundamentally altered you are correct about that

    You should learn how people that have studied the text in the native language understand it, if you don't learn how to read it that way yourself

    Very true.

     

    6 hours ago, cake1234566 said:

    You have to keep in mind that you cant systemize taoism the same way western philosophies are systemized and follow it as a logic flow chart (he says it cant be described but then he describes it)

    Whatever pre-existing framework you have in mind, to really understand the ttc you have to completely tear that down

    It doesn't fit into anything else, it doesn't even really fit into itself

     

    Exactly true.

     

    6 hours ago, cake1234566 said:

    Laozi says that the tao cannot be attached to or described as any single thing because the tao is both thing and no thing

    When you use a noun in any language, you pin it down as thing and he is explicitly telling you about something that is thing and no thing, he is however conveying a practicable and and at least partially comprehensible concept even if it also means the opposite of that concept, otherwise he just wouldn't have written the book

     

    Couldn't agree more.

    Welcome to the Taoist /non-Taoist site. It seems you are very knowledgeable of the TTC. I love to read your words. What you had said is total relevant and resonant with anyone who understands the TTC. Thank you very much for your contribution of the profound philosophical presentation.

    • Like 1

  16. Posted · Edited by ChiDragon

    9 minutes ago, DynamicEquilibrium said:

    Yes, psychosomatic.  

    You are right about 性, 性格, 品性, same goes for 人性, 人格, 人品.

     

    At this point i may disapear, i feel the FaceBookImmortals agents are on their way and as a 芻狗 i can only surrender to the Nature's authority. :ph34r:

     

     

    TY I expected that you won't be here long. I was just about going to ask you. Have you given up yet?😂

     

    PS I will be missing you, my friend. 

    • Haha 1

  17. Posted

    我們可以從以下三個層次來理解：
    1. 起源：早於全真教
    「性」指心性、神、意識；「命」指身體、氣、能量。
    先秦時期： 《易經》中已有「窮理盡性，以至於命」的說法，這被視為性命雙修的思想源頭。
    唐宋內丹家： 在王重陽之前，鍾離權和呂洞賓（鍾呂內丹派）以及北宋的張伯端（南宗始祖，著有《悟真篇》）就已經明確提出了性命雙修的思想。張伯端強調「只修祖性不修丹，萬劫陰靈難入聖」，主張身體與心靈必須同時修煉。
    2. 王重陽的貢獻：確立體系
    王重陽雖然不是發明者，但他創立的全真教（北宗）對此有獨特的貢獻和偏重：
    正式確立為教義： 王重陽將「性命雙修」明確列為全真道的修煉大綱，提出「性命是修行之根本」。
    「先性後命」的特點： 與南宗（先命後性）不同，王重陽和全真七子更強調先修性、後修命。他認為應先從「澄心遣欲」入手，心性定下來後，再進行身體能量（命功）的轉化。

  19. Posted · Edited by ChiDragon

    5 hours ago, DynamicEquilibrium said:

    Maybe because 身 is related to 性 and 命 more than it seems. 

    The universal concept of 性命雙修 is cultivation of the mind and body. The esoteric term to a Taoist for the mind is 性 as 性格 and 品牲. And for the for body is 命。These terms are universal to a Taoist. Even a native person cannot be understood as such without guidance or proper explanation. 

  20. Posted · Edited by ChiDragon

    1 hour ago, forestofclarity said:

     

    I think the biggest problem is no one agrees on what is authoritative. Some think generative AI, some use internal school documents, and very few refer to anything common or verifiable. People say neidan, but they don't say which school, or commentary, or cite a source. 

    The concept of the method of Neidan is the method and universal. Why should it be different from school to school. Why does matter where the source is coming from? Perhaps the documental descriptions may have a slight variation. However, the concept does not change.

  21. Posted · Edited by ChiDragon

    4 hours ago, DynamicEquilibrium said:

    About 形:

     

    「夫形者，生之所也；氣者，生之元也；神者，生之制也。一失位，則三者傷矣。是故聖人使人各處其位，守其職，而不得相干也。」

     

    In modern term, it is more easy to be comprehensive

     

    It is interesting that 身气神 are used here instead of 精气神.

     

    这句话出自《淮南子·原道训》，是道家思想中关于身、气、神三者关系的经典论述。它通过类比政治秩序，阐述了生命健康的根本在于“各司其职”。
    以下是为您整理的详细解读：
    1. 核心字词翻译
    形（形体）： 指肉体躯壳，是生命的载体（“生之所”）。
    气（元气）： 指维持生命的能量和动力，是生命的根本（“生之元”）。
    神（精神/灵魂）： 指心智、主宰，是生命的统帅和控制者（“生之制”）。
    位/职： 它们各自应当处于的位置和担负的功能。
    相干： 互相干扰、互相僭越

     

    2. 现代文意译
    这段话的意思是：
    “人的形体是生命的寄托处，元气是生命的本源，精神是生命的统帅。如果其中任何一个失去了它应有的位置，那么形、气、神三者都会受到伤害。因此，懂得养生之道的人（圣人）会使这三者各就其位，各守其职，互不干扰。”

    • Like 1

  23. Posted · Edited by ChiDragon

    14 minutes ago, Peter Jennings said:


    Haha, thank you. If I talk like a Taoist, it is only because I discovered the same concepts that Lao-Tzu wrote about. I do have some strong disagreements with the way TTC scholars interpret the book. If you had any particular chapters that you thought were especially interesting or confusing, point to it and I can break it down. That might be fun and informative.

    Haha You have no idea that how many chapters I am disagreed with. Try Chapter One. I love to hear this chapter from you and compare with mine. 

  24. Posted · Edited by ChiDragon

    53 minutes ago, DynamicEquilibrium said:

    It is always difficult to understand something we didn't learn. If Neidan practitionners can't explain something in common langage with a clear enough definition and high enough resolution to outsiders who is to blame? The one who can't understand or the one who can't explain? Maybe none of them because in such situation the obvious fact is that both didn't start to learn yet. 

    @ChiDragon You won't find the science of taoism, or more broadly speaking chinese traditionnal Life sciences, in Neidan, Qigong, Taijiquan etc for a very simple reason. If you use 微信, the official account 身心道工房 might be of interest to you, last year my teacher's teacher shared some ideas there. 


     I think we ran into a situation of 先入為主. Something we had learnt is hard to unlearn it.  The biggest problem, here, is the language barrier with no common ground to stand on. One side tells the other side is wrong. It is the stubbornness of both sides won't yield one to the other. Perhaps it is impossible. Thus it ended with 牛頭不對馬咀,  then, it comes a standing still. Luckily, just between you and I do not have a communication problem. My heart is calm and blood pressure is normal as I type. This is good for 性命雙修。

    • Like 1
    • Downvote 1