amoyaan

Hey guys, For the past few months I have been studying and starting to practise the Microcosmic Orbit. I have meditated for many years and also done some yoga and basic chi kung (qi gong?), including for a while zhan zhuang, which I learned from a DVD by Master Lam Kam Chuen. A few months ago the words 'microcosmic orbit' kept appearing in my mind...was kind of strange, I felt strongly compelled to learn about it and to practise it. I began reading 'Taoist Yoga' by Charles Luk, which is extremely advanced, but with the help of a highlighter pen and some note-taking I think I got the basics...although I'm still only a quarter of the way through the book. I'm struggling with all this talk of immortal foetuses! lol In the meantime I got 'Awaken Healing Energy with the Tao' by Mantak Chia, which I'd heard was a far simpler book, and it is! I've found it helpful - it's just there are some slight contradictions between the approaches and a few things I would really like clarification on. I know it can be a bit annoying when a newbie jumps in with what might sound like stupid questions. As I study further I'll probably find the answers, but I just feel I'd like to make sure I'm doing it right at the moment, before I pick up bad habits. I do feel that I am able to successfully do the Microcosmic Orbit, I can feel the energy travelling up my spine and into the dan tien, sometimes more pronouncedly than other times. But here are my queries if anyone thinks they can help (again - sorry if these questions are really basic! - In 'Taoist Yoga' it stresses the importance of starting by focussing all attention on the brow (between and behind the eyes), before starting the orbit. Mantak Chia instead says to begin in the dan tien. Is this just a case of apples or oranges? I don't really know which is best to start, I've tried it both ways and both seem to work...any suggestions? - I'm wondering how much energy should you build up/rouse before starting the orbit? Should you start when you feel just a subtle sensation, or do you have to wait until the energy is 'buzzing'? - Is it meant to be sexual energy that you are working with, or non-sexual feeling energy - or could it be either? - Is there a certain length of time you should spend at each 'location' as you are raising and descending the energy, or is it just 'go with the flow'? - How many times do you need to circulate the energy? Currently I am managing a single orbit in a 20-30 min session. This could be just because I'm taking time and care to make sure I'm doing it properly. I think I read a recommendation that you do upwards of 34 orbits a session? This would take me several hours - haha! Maybe I'll speed up as I get practise? - Finally (for now! Whew!)... I'm a little confused as to whether, once learning the 'large heavenly cycle', which includes the legs and arms, I should be doing that in place of the small heavenly cycle? Is it a matter of personal preference? I tend to have v bad circulation in my hands and feet, so maybe doing the large heavenly cycle would be beneficial? Thanks in advance. I don't have access to a teacher anywhere near here (live in a small town), so I was hoping I'd find some support here

Hey WillingToListen, Sounds like you're at an immensely difficult stage. I've enjoyed reading people's advice and perspectives, there's a lot of amazing and very wise stuff here. Obviously when you're at a very low point it's hard to take on such advice, but sometimes something someone will say will pierce through the thick heavy clouds like a ray of sunlight. My intuitive response? Hang in there. Surrender to the shitness...the resistance and the need to have things be more/different/better always creates a kind of resistance in us. The moment I've fully accepted the seemingly unacceptable it shifts something, and usually things begin to flow again and I just surrender to that flow. I'm in a weird transition point in my life, I think a lot of us are, I don't know how I'm gonna sustain myself in the future. But I try to snap myself out of the occasional worry/freak out moments and realise that I'm not really the one in the driver's seat, life happens through me, and it has always looked after me. It doesn't always bring me what I want, but it brings me what I need in any moment. Studying vedanta has helped immensely. You need to find a good (traditional) teacher and avoid the half-baked neo advaita stuff that proliferates because I've seen that mess people up. What I learned is this: I am not the little experiencer-entity-ego-doer that I always took myself to be. I'm not my thoughts, or feelings, or beliefs, or my body, or the sum total of my life situation or circumstances. All of those are constantly changing. I am the awareness in which they arise and subside, and that awareness is ever-present and never-changing. Shifting from identification with my thoughts/emotions/situations, etc, and instead identifying with that baseline awareness always helps, it transforms the way I relate to situations and to myself. It's immensely freeing. All this shit that life throws up comes and it goes. If I don't get caught up in it and identify with it, I am free of it. Doesn't mean situations won't be challenging and I won't have problems. It just means I am independent of these problems and they can't touch the changeless part of me, my Self. Nisargadatta said something about the importance of realising that all this is just a passing show, and not allowing ourselves to get sucked into and swept away by it. Vedanta teaches that when we live from a place of integrity and follow our dharma or nature, and live our lives nobly and with love, life takes care of us. Even when situations seem bleak, forces will kick into play and we'll be taken care of. And it always pays to remember that no matter how bad you are feeling currently, it won't last. "No feeling is final". Hope that helps at least a little.

I guess there are no 'shoulds'. It would depend on whether you felt teaching was your dharma. If it's something you are good at and enjoy then that's probably a sign it is. If not, there may be other ways you are innately meant to express it I think you'd be a good teacher. I like reading the way you express this. I feel an urge to teach it as well, part of my dharma is writing. Though I still consider myself a student it's amazing how I've been presented opportunities to share this. Including on a blog and my novel which is being published this year (I found a way to slip vedanta and taoism into it ). It'll be a long while (if ever) before I hang a sign above my door and advertise myself as a spiritual teacher, but as I continue to learn and relax into Self there seem to be more opportunities to share this...including with a family member who I've watched transform as they assimilate the knowledge

Hey. No problem. I love talking about this stuff. I love a deep meaningful conversation. Imagine the fun all of us would have spending a lazy afternoon in a coffee shop chatting about this Yup that's one of the initial chapters. The book spends a fair amount of time laying out groundwork. The real meaty stuff is later on. But if you don't relate to it or feel an aversion to him or his style of teaching it's prob not for you. It's not for everyone. What he is teaching is traditional advaita vedanta. It's a very specific and rigorous style of teaching and a specific methodology and style of unfoldment that stretches back centuries. From what I gather Swartz is one of only a handful of teachers that do this in English. The only other I know of is Swami Dayandana. Both he and Swartz were students of Swami Chinmayanda and they carry on the tradition. Ramana and Nisargadatta were not vedanta teachers per se. Though they essentially taught vedanta, what they did was base their teachings on their own experiences and rather than have a specific format to their teaching and way of unfolding its tenets, they had satsang Q&As. They were not neo advaitins, but they were kind of the inspiration for the neo advaita style of teaching. They were both absolutely amazing and I love them and the collections of their teachings. They just kind of taught their own thing and often changed their teaching depending on who they were talking to. This has caused some confusion for people. On another forum someone was talking about how Ramana said that the 'heart' is in the right hand side of the chest. They actually believed he meant this literally and that he wasn't quite human or was extraterrestrial or something. I'm not joking. Wow. That seems odd that a type of Buddhism could predate the Buddha by that far! I guess it must incorporate elements of far older traditions? I don't know anything about it so couldn't comment. The Vedas, the basis of vedanta stretch back at least 5,000 years but possibly far longer. Some of the newer Vedas were written in the past few hundreds years. There are a lot. Over time the teachings of the vedas were correlated into a specific system that kind of evolved over the millennia. The renowned Shankara was responsible for consolidating and revivifying vedanta in the 9th century and is very much the father of what is known as advaita vedanta. His work is amazing in itself. Guy was truly a genius

Yeah, I've studied enlightenment for years. What i've learned is that it's not something we really control. Heck do we (the 'doer' entity) even really control anything? We can't even really control our thoughts or emotions...we don't know what we'll be thinking or feeling in 10 mins. We don't really control our body. Although we have a limited level of control certainly. So yeah, if I understand what you're getting at. Enlightenment just happens by a kind of grace, same with epihanies and visions etc. We can cultivate the right circumstances or means for them to happen but that doesn't mean they will necessarily happen. All depends on so many factors. I like the zen story where the master says that enlightenment is an accident, not something we can really control or make happen. The student asked what the point of all the meditation, study and preparation was then. The master smiled and said 'it makes you more accident prone'. So yeah, all the preparation helps clear out the mind and make it like a still lake in which the light of the sun (Self) can shine brightly, enabling us to eventually assimilate the realisation that we are the Self and not the doer. That's the true grace. It'll happen by itself I guess when we are ready and not before

Hi Bob I'm not entirely sure what your question is, could you maybe rephrase it? I'd be happy to answer. I might sound like a vedanta maniac but I'm not, I just really love it as it was like coming home after 15 years of spiritual searching. I've studied it intensively for a year so I'm really happy to answer genuine questions

Hey TI Experience can be wrong though. Each day I experience the sun appearing in the sky and then disappearing at night. If I was to derive knowledge from this based on my experience (that the sun somehow appears and disappears) my knowledge would in fact be ignorance. Same goes for so many things in life, including spiritual life. Ignorance is basically hard-wired into us as we are brought up to believe we are little entities encased in a mound of flesh and blood and that there's a world and other people out there separate from us. Even physicists are now close to determining that this is, as Einstein put it, an optical delusion of consciousness. Hence the importance of knowledge. Then...then we can use the logic of that knowledge and test it to see how it can be experienced as true. No, it's subtler than that. Swartz does say, yeah forget chasing after spiritual experiences, spiritual highs and visions etc. That keeps our attention extroverted. It might feel great but it mst likely won't give us realisation of the Self; the 'Who' that is experiencing it. We just tend to get a high and chase after more experiences. Yeah...just intellectually understanding that we are one won't cut it, unless the mind has been purified first by sadhana (I spoke of the 4 main 'qualifications' in a post above to Dominicus). That enables us to truly ASSIMILATE the knowledge, to shift our modus operandi away from the experiencing entity/doer/ego and into the baseline of pure awareness. That shift won't happen just by hearing some neo talk about the Self unless the necessary groundwork is laid and the mind is prepared. It's a subtle understanding...it's hard to elucidate and get. Once the mind is sufficiently 'ripe' for the teaching, Self knowledge can take hold, can transform our understanding...and then becomes our experience. It's a neat exercise - powerful. Again, this is a form of inquiry which is the essence of vedanta. Yes, it is a problem. There's some nutty stuff out there. A lot of it I've even been taken in by in the past. Ascension and stuff. I even find the whole Taoist immortal feotus stuff silly. We're already immortal Vedanta...pure traditional vedanta taken from the Upanishads and related Vedantic texts...is the origin of all enlightenment traditions including Buddhism. We're so lucky that these texts have been retained in their purity, uncorrupt. And they are extremely beautiful, stunning, poetic, simple. There's no need for anyone to reinvent the wheel, or come up with new concepts and definitions of enlightenment...it's all there, and has been for millennia. Neo advaita does not have a proper teaching. They cherry pick elements of vedanta but offer people no methodology for REALISING those truths. They can be lazy and quite cruel: if you don't get it, you're often made out to be stupid, or not 'advanced enough' and if you're suffering you might be told to 'just drop your suffering. Just DROP it!' Not helpful. Maybe some of the neo teachers have Realised the Self, but that does not qualify them to teach. I've read and watched some Jeff Foster and suchlike. He may or may not be enlightened, but he just waffles...he has no proper teaching. He probably doesn't even understand true vedanta. This sounds like shamanic kind of territory, which is cool. I'm quite drawn to that too. But you can get into all this kinda stuff and still not really know who you are. It doesn't necessarily have anything to do with enlightenment. But it can be mighty cool. I have studied a lot of Buddhism. I have a great love and fondness for it. Ultimately I found I reached a dead end though. It derives much of its basis and background from vedanta, but I have found vedanta to be clearer and more logical in many ways. In fact, during the time of Shankara there were 'dharma wars' in India...not actual war or conflicts, but lively debates in which the good and noble would challenge masters from different traditions to public debates. Those that lost the debates either tended to convert or move along somewhere else. Shankara basically chased Buddhism out of India (in the nicest possible way haha) ...the logic of vedanta is pretty much untouchable. I remain open to all perspectives but as I have found vedanta to be the clearest path and have the utmost faith in its teachings, I defer to it. It's worked for millennia so who am I to argue? lol You're right, it's necessary to have faith in the teacher and the teachers or else it will not work. Before discounting Swartz I would say pick up his book. If you really don't like it you can sell it or pass it on. It's astounding, fascinating...liberating. It's not his teaching either, and this is an important point. He hasn't concocted his 'own' teaching as just about every spiritual teacher in the west does. It's basically a distillation of pure vedanta...and none of this neo advaita baloney. In fact he has an entire chapter dissecting neo advaita. I'm not immensely interested in Swartz as a person. I don't idolise him. He's just the instrument through which this teaching is being disseminated. I know some spiritual people to whom the teacher is somehow more important than the teaching. But since you asked. Swartz is not in the traditional spiritual teacher mould. He makes it very clear that he's NOT a guru...he doesn't even often call himself a teacher. Vedanta is just his true love and he enjoys talking about it (and my god he does it so well). He's just a guy doing his dharma. Totally down to earth, absolutely no airs or graces. He's very very blunt, a little sarcastic and that puts a lot of people off initially. He tells things like they are. I have no doubt that he is Self Realised or enlightened, but he's just a regular guy with it, which I actually find immensely cool. But again -- it doesn't actually matter too much what you think of him. Check out the book, you'll see he's a bloody superb teacher. To answer your questions; 1. Aside from my initial purchase of his book, I have spent 0 in my communications with him. There are dozens of books, texts, translations and 1000s of pages of e-satsangs (which are fascinating) on his site, and 100s of hours of audio downloads...all FREE. You can email him and get ongoing support and ask questions all for free. You can even have a skype chat of you so require, although it's suggested you give a donation for his time as after all the guy is in his 70s and has to eat. He's clearly not out to make a quick buck. 2 & 3: he's not a shaktipat guru. He's spoken at length about these and in particular is extremely disparaging of 'kalki avatar' and that diksha stuff. That a guru can transmit shakti is no evidence of enlightenment, there are countless examples of this.Shakti itself is fickle, like any energy, you can feel great for minutes/hours/days but it passes. Shakti does not generally enlighten people. It's just energy and energy is not opposed to self-ignorance/unenlightenment. It can make them 'energy junkies' though lol 4. Ok...I rarely talk about my own journey but here goes. I read his book in late 2011...amazed and deeply compelled. It requires multiple readings though there is SO much in it. Started listening to his audio talks April last year and have done so almost daily, really helpful for assimilating the teaching. We're basically rewiring lifetime/s of hardwired ignorance (not ignorance as in stupidity, ignorance in terms of who we are; misidentification). I participated in a week long web seminar on the bhagavad gita in October - it's incredibly working intensively 8 hrs a day with this teaching. Had email support. Am I enlightened? I wouldn't say that. Though even if I was I'd never make that claim, it's too loaded & misunderstood a word. I do know what I am now. I am still working with some binding vasanas that obscure this self knowledge though and keep pulling me into identification with body/mind/thoughts/desires/fears etc. Tip: if you really want to mess up your progress get into a relationship with someone you knew wasn't right for you This enlightenment stuff is hard work. You have to train yourself to constantly practise self inquiry, which is pulling your attention and identification with 'not-self' (the objects appearing in awareness including thoughts, emotions, vasanas, habits, patterns) and take a stand as the Self, as awareness. Then the binding vasanas gradually burn up but it takes time and work. Unless one is highly qualified and fully 'ripe' to pop. I will say that this teaching is the purest, most logical, insightful, comprehensive, beautiful and frankly idiot-proof (good for me!) that I've ever come across. You gotta be ready for it though. Instead of measuring up vedanta against you existing preconceptions about self and enlightenment etc, you have to set your existing ideas aside and see how THEY measure up against vedanta. Otherwise we'll just pick the bits that tie in with what we currently believe and set aside the rest. This won't work though. Again - this is not Swartz's teaching. Forget about him. It's pure vedanta. It's as old as time (well, more or less), it's beautiful, simple and it's a proven method of enlightenment, it's worked for millennia. My search ended. From hereon, it's just chipping away at remaining ignorance and misidentifcation of Self...

Hmm, I haven't heard of these things being part of traditional vedanta teaching. They are part of the yoga path but there's a slight disconnect between the approach/perspective of the yogi and that of the vedanta student. That said, vedanta integrates yoga as a means of purifying the mind/body/emotions. Just not as a direct means of enlightenment. Yeah! My understanding of it is that once enlightenment/self realisation happens there is a long period of integration. You know you are the Self but you still have all the old vasanas and mind tendencies to clean up. Swartz believes that once Ramana attained Self Realisation he sat in a cave for 10 years, basically to clear out all the mind's impurities, burn away the vasanas and mindstuff...and that's why he was such a pure and radiant expression of Self. During this clean-up phase it's prob also possible to attain siddhis and refine the physical body to a great extent. Others after realising the Self may not do the same work and may still have vasanas and personality-level stuff that plays out. Doesn't mean they aren't Self realised; they might completely know they are the Self but still not be a 'textbook perfect' example of what we think a human should be. I mean Nisargadatta was an amazing Self realised master...but he was also cranky, irritable and a chain smoker lol It may be you're at a stage you don't need Swartz. But if you're interested in understanding traditional, pure vedanta and seeing how it relates to what you're experiencing his book 'how to attain enlightenment' is fascinating! Yeah it's a naff title, meant in a tongue in cheek way but this is an amazing book. It's the ONLY book I've ever read that lays out the entire system of vedanta in a clear, concise, accessible way that follows a beautiful and perfect logic. It's a fascinating read!

Hey D Yup I'd agree with that. Mind doesn't know how to process the nonlinear stuff. Yeah, in my post I wasn't specifically referring to you or anyone in particular. Just some general reflections. It seems to me that you have had or have genuine realisation of the Self. I just wanted to clarify some points on vedanta as there were a few misconceptions about vedanta. and I felt I could do this here as it is a vedanta forum. If it had been another I may not have said That's not really the point I wanted to make. On an absolute level that statement is correct but it's a neo advaita copout if that's basically all Sailor Bob tells us (I don't really know him, I think he's a neo though?). Obviously there are things you can do to purify the mind and enable yourself to 'gain' Self realisation...which isn't really a gain, but more of a change of our default settings I guess. True vedanta has an entire arsenal of tools to enable us to make this shift. Yes! Again the neos don't tell us this, because their satsangs might get a lot quieter, but in order to GET this, we need to be 'qualified'. Obviously the mind needs to be relatively stable and pure to be able to assimilate the teaching and make the shift. Shankara outlined the four main qualifications necessary for really assimilating Self knowledge: discrimination, dispassion, discipline and desire for Realisation. These are the qualities necessary for ripeness. i guess they are the difference between someone who seeks enlightenment for decades but can't seem to get it (must lack one or more of the four D's!) and those who can listen to a single talk and just 'click'! All true vedanta teachers emphasise the necessary for be fully prepared in order to assimilate the teaching. Yeah there are definitely things you need to do to 'ripen' yourself. Koans are good - zen is an amazing tradition and works amazingly for many people. Vedanta offers sadhana, spiritual practise to prepare the mind - karma yoga/letting go of the fruits of our actions, bkhati yoga/devotion, meditation, etc. These are not direct means to realisation, but indirect. They whip the mind into shape, into a suitably pure and receptive mode in which we can practise jnana/knowledge yoga/self inquiry and process our inquiry. Neo advaita generally ignores this necessary prerequisite and tells us no practises are necessary, trying to offer 'enlightenment for lazy people'. I've never met anyone that's worked for! The Neos are lazy. They don't have a complete teaching. They just cherry pick elements of jnana yoga and pass that off as all we need. Clearly it isn't, unless the person is already highly qualified and has a very pure, still, dispassionate and discriminating mind. That's very rare in our crazy culture. You say 'that's it' like it's nothing special at all. It's pretty fcking amazing! I haven't got to the state where Self knowledge is completely abiding, I dip in and out (still some vaasnas to work out!!), but when I'm grounded in t completely transforms everything...in that you are no longer bound by anything in this world. It's a sense of freedom and fearlessness. It's just the start of the journey. Of that I am certain... I guess it really depends what perspective we take, This whole topic is extremely subtle, expansive, multi-dimensional. It's hard to discuss also, because a statement that is true from one perspective may be untrue from another, but that doesn't negate the truth of it. I feel it's a contradiction saying there's the Absolute and 'not the Absolute' because that would mean the Absolute isn't absolute. Maybe it's wording and semantics. I think of it as the Absolute and the apparent reality/apparent separation/apparent world/maya/etc. It's not *not* the Absolute, but it appears to be lol Excellent. I've had periods of depression and whatnot...sensitive, emotional guy...through it all awareness shines. It outlasts everything. The mundaka upanishad astounds me with it's simple but mind-shattering realisation. The person we think we are with its problems and emotions and desires and fears doesn't even last a full 24 hours. It recedes into a dream self with entirely diff problems and emotions and circumstances. And then that self recedes into pure unconscious consciousness. Awareness (what I think you mean as the observer) ties together these ephemeral selves like the string connecting pearls. Only in this case the pearls are made out of the string, all one substance. It's crazy...beautiful...

Great thread! Dominicus, I enjoyed reading your experiences. The technique of dropping from head to heart is similar to some techniques I've heard of, only they tend to drop into hara/dantien/navel. It works though. Too much of our energy is concentrated in the head region. I think there is an energetic component to enlightenment, although it's not something I know much about. What I've seen from my experiences with most Taoist practitioners or 'cultivators' or whatever is that they tend to overemphasise the energetic aspect...they might build up vibrant energy bodies but still not know who they are and still be bound by all manner of vasanas/conditioning/etc. I've learned that chasing after energetic experiences does not constitute enlightenment. This is one of a number of misconceptions about enlightenment -- I recognise them because I've had them all at some point or another. One of the things Swartz (whom I will go on to discuss in a second) made v clear to me is the distinction between experience and knowledge when it comes to enlightenment. Almost everyone in the spiritual world is chasing after the 'experience' of enlightenment; the experience of the Self. They want to feel great, feel powerful, feel blissful 24/7. But the thing is, it's a nondual reality so we're already the Self. There's never a time we're not the Self. In this maya apparent-reality, EVERYTHING, including our bodies, minds, emotions, etc - the psychosomatic apparatus through which consciousness expresses - is governed by the interplay of the gunas. Even if we attain a highly sattvic (peaceful, balanced, serene) state in which the reflected light of awareness shines very clearly, leaving us blissful and in a state of felt oneness...eventually tamas (inertia, dullness) or rajas (activity, passion, extroversion) will set in and the experience will pass. I've had hours/days/weeks in highly sattvic states...which I initially mistook as being 'enlightenment'. Total bliss and peace and perfect flow! It was hellish each time that state passed because I felt like I'd been kicked out of heaven and desperately wanted to get back in it. I learned not to chase after or grasp at these states though. 'I' don't make them happen, although by living a relatively sattvic lifestyle I can encourage them to happen. Thing is... as long as we're here we can't sustain any particular state indefinitely. It's not the nature of reality. And enlightenment isn't a 'state' anyway...if it was, it could be taken from us. Enlightenment according to vedanta is the hard and fast knowledge that we're already the Self, we're already whole, complete and limitless nondual awareness. We're not this little body or mind or the gunas and vasanas that determine its experience. There's nothing to chase after and nothing we can possibly add to ourselves. Yeah - that's basically what the neo advaita people tell us. Their 'teaching' fails however because they have no methodology for getting us 'where we are' to the point where we have a complete realisation/understanding/integration of that truth. It helps to be clear on what enlightenment is. It's not an experience we can add to ourselves. And I'm sorry Tibetan Ice but it's certainly not about being able to walk through walls or walk on water. It's true that you can work on certain yoga practises to develop siddhis and powers. But that does not constitute being enlightened --from what I understand there are many yogis that can do pretty neat stuff, but they still don't know Who they are. I guess that's why I prefer the term moksha - freedom from bondage. It's clearer and less easy to misinterpret or project onto. You guys really shouldn't judge James Swartz based upon a couple of youtube videos and interview transcripts or whatever. He's one of the few folk around that can actually teach this stuff and teach it really well. And, important point -- it's not 'his' teaching -- he teaches pure traditional Vedanta. He hasn't found any need to put 'his' stamp on it or modify it and create his own teaching as virtually every spiritual teacher on the planet does. The teaching is already beautiful and perfect as it is and he is one of those teachers of impeccable integrity who preserve its purity (for that reason he's scathing of neo advaita btw). Vedanta is not a teaching you can dip in and out of. It has to be unfolded in a certain way following a precise sequence of logic. Which is why you really need to read his book and/or listen to the audio available for free on his website in order. Please don't judge the teaching based upon your initial opinions of Swartz. It's not about him anyway. He didn't initially match up to my preconceived notion of how 'enlightened beings' might behave. That's because my initial notions of enlightenment were coloured by a lot of the 'magical thinking' that blights the spiritual world. Having watched his talks and listened to hundreds of hours of audio and communicated with him by email what I found is that he truly is a guy who has attained moksha. He's totally free (he doesn't care what others think of him or how many people come to his talks -- he's just doing what he's doing because it's his dharma, and he totally loves life)...definitely the real deal and one of the only spiritual teachers alive today that I'd fully trust. He knows vedanta inside out and truly lives it. But don't take my word for it...

I liked 'the power of now', the book. It was the start of my journey and helped me rather a lot NOW is good. Most people spend their lives wanting to be in the past or future and so don't really live. I wonder why the compulsion to escape the present moment?

I briefly thought about a journal, but then realised it wouldn't be very interesting haha. I wouldn't want to bore people - though I do enjoy peeking at other people's, they seem more interesting than me somehow. I feel I just need to sit in the silence a lot now. My mind resists because silence is a place the mind can't enter, it has to remain at the door. Although it does try to gatecrash rather a lot.

Good points Joe Blast. There is a natural instinct to have a safe space, a territory I guess. The issue of ownership however is something that spiralled into all kinds of abstract complications with the human species, forming the basis of our monetary capitalist system as well as the notion of the nation state...which I still think is ridiculous each time I'm in a plane, looking down at the land. I don't see separate countries and nations -- I just see an unbroken continuity that gets cut into chunks by limited grasping minds. So I guess from my perspective ownership is kind of based on a false sense of division... to a certain extent it's a necessary convention of functioning in this life, but that doesn't mean I see it as real. I once bought one of those novelty presents for my ex: an acre of land of the moon! Even at the time I thought it was hilarious and ridiculous (yet kinda romantic I hoped). But really it's not much more ridiculous than people believing they own parts of this world, and trying to sell it or charge others for it. I found it unintentionally funny when I read a while back the government were wanting to sell the country's forests, roads (and most likely oxygen supply) to other countries to make some cash. I guess why I think a lot of (or at least some) indigenous cultures had a far greater wisdom in that they realised we don't own the world -- not a single part of it. It owns us. But I guess that's a pretty philosophical argument and one that'd infuriate a lot of people as it seems counter intuitive. And I'm rambling

Oops, posted the same message twice. My bad.

Funny you should say that. I went to the woods yesterday to do qigong and I just wanted to stay there. I had a sudden desire to live in the woods, surrounded by trees. I've had it before. It may not be very practical, but I sure would love to. Where you find nature you find peace, aliveness, stillness...where you find humankind you find concrete, noise and conflict. The concept of 'ownership' is a totally manmade illusion, like kids playing pretend. I remember learning in philosophy that the"'state of nature", where mankind essentially lived in harmony with nature and his fellow man was shattered by the invented delusion of ownership and all the power struggles, greed and conflict that came with it.

Wow Sinan, 5-6 hours a day, that's incredible! No wonder you're experiencing breakthroughs in consciousness. I'm doing one full hour sitting and then I'm doing additional amounts at other times of the day, including lying down and walking, so I'm prob about 2 hours a day, and then gift of the tao on top of that. It's funny, I'm not sure how to rate my progress with the S-M, for some reason I was struggling last week but this week it feels natural and easier. The movements have tailed off a fair bit...but I find it easier to dip into pure stillness and awareness. Jetsun, I'm not sure, although I imagine the levels of consciousness are the same regardless of the practise, because consciousness is consciousness. Obviously there's a different level to the S-M because it's not just meditation but has a physical, energetic component. But yeah, the ancient Buddhists, yogis such as Patanjali and the rishis of the Upanishads had such an amazing understanding of consciousness, its nature and levels. I'm fascinated by it. In my view it far exceeds the modern day understanding of psychologists/neurologists/etc, although those disciplines are still comparatively in their infancy so they may yet catch up

From what I understood the kundalini unlocks itself naturally and in its own time, if you're following a path of meditation, right living, spiritual practise, etc. They usually advise against attempting to coerce it. Although, that said, there is a whole subset of yoga called kundalini yoga, but that comes with its dangers.

Sounds like amazing progress Sinan. I think they call that savikalpa samadhi. I get that at times, the mind kind of dissolves into awareness, and there's just awareness observing itself, or whatever happens to pass through the mind. How long do you practise for?

I highly recommend 'How to attain enlightenment' by James Swartz. It's a naff title perhaps, but it's an amazing book and a powerful distillation of authentic vedanta by a Westerner (in his own words a 'redneck from Montana') who was a disciple of Swami Chinmayanda. His website is www.shiningworld.com Anyone else heard of him?

Neat thanks for sharing Turtle Shell. It's something I might consider when I get more proficient, although I rather like using my mala beads I have to say

Great thread, and very helpful. Thanks especially to Snowmonki; your insights have helped further my understanding of SM neigong. My understanding and experience of it seems to be evolving all the time. Like Raimonio I'm still a novice, but entirely committed to the process...if you can call it a process, that's prob not the best word. In fact I find it very hard to put SM into words...words seem too linear and constricting. I get the feeling it's a kind of multi-dimensional process in some way, but who can say. I'm trying to keep it simple and just let it unfold...

I enjoyed reading this thread and learning more about mantras. I have used them on and off for years, particularly favouring Om mani padme hum and om namah shivaya. I recently felt compelled to start doing the Gayatri mantra. It took me a while to get the pronunciation right (or as right as I can get it) and to be able to do it without looking at the text, but I soon settled into it and I'm amazed at how powerful it is. I can't put it into words, but it really has an incredibly cleansing, clearing, balancing and harmonising effect. I absolutely love it.

Just wanted to stop by and share some thoughts. I'm extremely grateful to Michael, Brian, Jukka and any and everyone else who was involved in the workshop. It was amazing! I had already been using the Stillness Movement practise for a couple of months with great results, but going to the workshop really brought it to a whole other level... The first day was great, but the second was somehow more intense and powerful. I still don't entirely know what happened, but during the S-M practises all my energy seemed to pool into my forehead. There was so much light and a strange kind of pulling or attraction into the centre of it. I don't know why, as I was trying to focus on my dantien, but I was being pulled into my forehead...I actually felt like I was going to leave my body, and far from being scary it was a wonderful feeling (although my mind was a little unnerved at the same time). When Michael called us back, I really didnt want to come back. Was so strange...yet good! My mind felt extremely clear and still, thoughts basically stopped and didn't return till we took a break and I had to communicate with people again Like Raimonio I've been dealing with chronic fatigue and was concerned I would be really exhausted during the weekend, but on the whole I ended up very energised! Even if my body was a little tired I felt somehow separate from it, and the deeper part of me was buzzing with energy. I love the practise, and the Gift of the Tao movements. I will continue to use both daily for the foreseeable future. When I came home people are commenting on how I seem more energised and how I even look better. Awesome! I really wish I'd been able to stay for the third day, although I believe everything happens for a reason. I feel a great draw to healing, and would love to learn medicine qigong some day, when I've got myself feeling up to speed I guess. Anyway - thanks again to Michael and everyone, it was an extraordinary weekend and a real gift in many ways. It was also really cool to meet so many amazing people, some of whom felt like long-lost friends, even though we'd never met before. Finland is really beautiful too btw. It's a bit like Scotland, where I live. If Michael is ever looking for another place in Europe for another workshop, I recommend Scotland!!

Nice to hear from you Raimonio, hope you manage to make it to the workshop in Finland as well. I've been finding S-M has really been helping my energy levels in addition to seeing a really good acupuncturist. Still not quite there, but I'm definitely better than I was this time last year

Just booked!! SO excited