Three critical issues in Taoist alchemy

[Procurator]

 

 

It's too bad that no one can really share anything valuable about the practical aspect of things, however i guess less is better than nothing.

the practical aspect is not shared for 2 reasons. firstly it would be useless to you personally - shared on a public forum it will become just more cheap talk , another old opinion. Since you have no means to verify its validity you will just file it away as yet another opinion without putting into practice and will keep searchin for "real stuff".

 

the second reason, far more important, is that true words are very powerful, if parroted by the false teachers they will easily led students astray, students will waste money time and health, while the true teaching will become indistinguishable among imitations.

 

those who have the true knowledge feel this prohibition physically, a person literally becomes tongue-tied if attempts to divulge. if he still goes ahead there will be..issues.

 

so you can be certain that any practical details divulged on public western forum, be it internet, dvd, book, public seminar...are worthless.

[宁]

the practical aspect is not shared for 2 reasons. firstly it would be useless to you personally - shared on a public forum it will become just more cheap talk , another old opinion. Since you have no means to verify its validity you will just file it away as yet another opinion without putting into practice and will keep searchin for "real stuff".

 

the second reason, far more important, is that true words are very powerful, if parroted by the false teachers they will easily led students astray, students will waste money time and health, while the true teaching will become indistinguishable among imitations.

 

those who have the true knowledge feel this prohibition physically, a person literally becomes tongue-tied if attempts to divulge. if he still goes ahead there will be..issues.

 

so you can be certain that any practical details divulged on public western forum, be it internet, dvd, book, public seminar...are worthless.

 

 

there must be something that can be divulged, such as there is so and so theory, and it's not only theory, i and my fellow students have experienced it - just a crude example

 

usually 'something' transpires thru the message, it's 'shadow' or 'energy imprint' can actually tell more about the information itself. with my limited means i tracked one of our ttb's posts, to clear out the inconsistencies between what i read and what i sensed, and it seems to work this way.

 

for example, you yourself (no disrespect intended, you may even take it as a joke if you can) talk like a knower, which to my (subjective) senses is inconsistent with the 'shadow' of your post.

 

however the ideas are familiar, and i think you do a gread job sharing them.

 

this is not taunting or trying to demonstrate anything, it's just a poor example of how some of us 'read' the information they receive, via taoist forums for example.

if i was too straightforward i apologize.

[xuanying]

It's all clear now... Give me a few days and I'll post it here.

Here it is:

 

9 Taoist Books on the Elixir

 

I hope it's more or less what you meant... Let me know. The bibliography of Western-language works is found in the appendix at the end.

 

Fabrizio

Edited April 7, 2011 by xuanying

[Stigweard]

Here it is. I hope it's more or less what you meant... Let me know. The bibliography of Western-language works is found in the appendix at the end.

 

I will also post a copy in my website.

 

Fabrizio

Excellent !!!

 

[tccii]

Here it is. I hope it's more or less what you meant... Let me know. The bibliography of Western-language works is found in the appendix at the end.

 

I will also post a copy in my website.

 

Fabrizio

 

 

Fabrizio,

 

Thank you for taking the time to compile the annotated bibliography. It is certainly well thought out and presented.

 

Although it is probably still a little too technical for a beginning Neidan student, it is fantastic as an introduction to primary texts on Neidan for those with a more academic interest.

 

Do you anticipate publishing a translation of the Bao Pu Zior Taiyi Jinhua Zongzhi in the near future?

 

Thank you,

 

Shawn

Edited April 6, 2011 by tccii

[xuanying]

Fabrizio,

 

Although it is probably still a little too technical for a beginning Neidan student, it is fantastic as an introduction to primary texts on Neidan for those with a more academic interest.

Then my plan didn't work out... In my way of seeing, there is very little "academic" in this bibliography. I give references to texts in Chinese, but one doesn't need to be an academic to read them. I quote books published by academic presses, because in several cases those are the only available translations of a text. I give the main details on each text (author, date) because I think they are useful to everybody, and here I have omitted as many technical details as possible. I mention lineages, because one should know what kind of text one is reading. I reproduce translations of a few passages for almost all texts, so that those who don't know them can get a glimpse and decide whether they may be interesting. I point out problems in certain "popular" translations of Taoist texts (or popular websites such as Wikipedia), because I think everyone should know what they are reading (believe me, here I could have been much nastier).

 

The last point is especially important. If you cannot compare many of those translations to the original texts, you have no idea of how much their translators omit from (and in some cases, add to) a text. As a rule, everything that is too difficult, or would at least require an explanation, is omitted. Then a good editor cleans up their English, their prose sounds smooth and captivating, and everybody says "wow". The original Chinese text, however, says something else.

 

The "historical" reconstructions of Taoism and Taoist alchemy found in those books are often works of fantasy. For example, to compile this bibliography, I checked Eva Wong's "The Tao of Health, Longevity, and Immortality". In the space of three pages (p. 6 and p. 8), she is able to say, first, that "the alchemists of the late Han through the Chin (254-420 CE) dynasties" practiced "internal alchemy", and then that "the early phase of internal alchemy started around the end of the Tang dynasty". So, did it start in the 2nd/4th century, or in the 9th century? We know for sure now that there are no sources, references, or allusions to internal alchemy before the 8th century in Taoist, Confucian, Buddhist, medical, or literary works.

 

There are a lot of reciprocal biases between academics and non-academics (sorry, I don't know what other term I should use here, but I don't want to say "practitioners", because that's not the point of the distinction). This is perhaps implied in the very essence of the "academia". But I find it unfortunate that the non-academics can rarely benefit from the views or the works of the academics.

 

Maybe we should continue this discussion in a separate topic?

Edited April 7, 2011 by xuanying

[The Way Is Virtue]

Hello Fabrizio,

 

I posted this a little earlier but didn't see a reply from you. Are you aware of any of the books I posted earlier, namely the two Ching dynasty alchemy texts (性命圭旨 and 大成捷要), or the books on Taoist cultivation by contemporary Taoist master 田诚阳? If you are aware of any of them, just wondering what your view is on them?

[gendao]

Although it is probably still a little too technical for a beginning Neidan student, it is fantastic as an introduction to primary texts on Neidan for those with a more academic interest.

To hell with n00bs, lol. The entire pop Tao American market is already full of generalized books for them...

 

What's missing from the English language market are good translations of classic neidan source texts for aspiring adepts. This is exactly the desperate void that Fabrizio is thankfully filling now.

 

I recently ordered "Foundations of Internal Alchemy" and "Awakening to Reality" - and have been very duly impressed. Unlike many other translators - Fabrizio includes all the original passages in Chinese, lots of pinyin for key terms and also tries to explain all the meanings based upon his overall ken of the subject (that extends beyond just each single text). Now, since many of these neidan texts are encoded like Nostradamus prophecies, there's actually a double translation required to really decipher the inferred meanings here. So, including all these various angles is key to triangulating and clarifying the original intent. (Still not really possible without the oral transmission...but every bit helps!)

 

Anyhow, I'd love to see Fabrizio translate all the neidan classics, mijue from powerful lineages and books by select modern neidan masters with his very comprehensive, holistic approach! The bar has just been raised!

Edited April 7, 2011 by vortex

[tccii]

Then my plan didn't work out...

 

The selected bibliography is great, my comment was not intended as a criticism.

 

In my way of seeing, there is very little "academic" in this bibliography. I give references to texts in Chinese, but one doesn't need to be an academic to read them. I quote books published by academic presses, because in several cases those are the only available translations of a text. I give the main details on each text (author, date) because I think they are useful to everybody, and here I have omitted as many technical details as possible. I mention lineages, because one should know what kind of text one is reading. I reproduce translations of a few passages for almost all texts, so that those who don't know them can get a glimpse and decide whether they may be interesting. I point out problems in certain "popular" translations of Taoist texts (or popular websites such as Wikipedia),

 

By "technical" and "academic", I did not intend to refer to details of citation, which are essential for any sort of bibliography. In fact, those items which you cited tended to strengthen your work. I had expected a short list of books. You provided much more.

 

because I think everyone should know what they are reading (believe me, here I could have been much nastier).

 

While there is no reason to be nasty, I don't think there would have been problem with you providing more critical commentary on some of the works.

 

The last point is especially important. If you cannot compare many of those translations to the original texts, you have no idea of how much their translators omit from (and in some cases, add to) a text. As a rule, everything that is too difficult, or would at least require an explanation, is omitted. Then a good editor cleans up their English, their prose sounds smooth and captivating, and everybody says "wow". The original Chinese text, however, says something else.

 

Agreed. Unfortunately, many of the works in question are only available in the English language in translations of questionable quality. This is, in fact, why a bibliography from someone with your background could be so useful. For example, you suggest the "Long Hu Jing" and "Zhong Lu Zhan Dao Ji" in your bibliography. The only English language translation cited for both of these is by Eva Wong, giving her 2 of 9 of your selected bibliography. Would you say that these works are so important to an aspiring Internal Alchemy practitioner that this translation is better than nothing for the someone not fluent in Ancient Chinese or non-academic (i.e. someone not trained in Taoist studies), or would it be better to replace it with another text that has a sound English language translation?

 

The "historical" reconstructions of Taoism and Taoist alchemy found in those books are often works of fantasy. For example, to compile this bibliography, I checked Eva Wong's "The Tao of Health, Longevity, and Immortality". In the space of three pages (p. 6 and p. 8), she is able to say, first, that "the alchemists of the late Han through the Chin (254-420 CE) dynasties" practiced "internal alchemy", and then that "the early phase of internal alchemy started around the end of the Tang dynasty". So, did it start in the 2nd/4th century, or in the 9th century? We know for sure now that there are no sources, references, or allusions to internal alchemy before the 8th century in Taoist, Confucian, Buddhist, medical, or literary works.

 

Your point is quite valid here in the strict sense of defining "Internal Alchemy". Although I am not overly fond of Eva Wong's work, I have great appreciation for the effort involved. To look at it from a different perspective that might underscore some of the issues: What Wong says on page 6 of the above cited work is "Thus the early Taoist arts of longevity were a mixture of external alchemy... sexual alchemy... and internal alchemy, the method of transforming the body with breath control, calisthenics, and meditation." Rather than embarking on a "work of fantasy", do you think it possible that she simply made a mistake common among non-specialists in the field -- that is confounding the terms Internal Alchemy and Internal Cultivation?

 

There are a lot of reciprocal biases between academics and non-academics (sorry, I don't know what other term I should use here, but I don't want to say "practitioners", because that's not the point of the distinction). This is perhaps implied in the very essence of the "academia". But I find it unfortunate that the non-academics can rarely benefit from the views or the works of the academics.

 

Agreed. Most practitioners who only speak English have no idea of where to start.

Edited April 7, 2011 by tccii

[xuanying]

Hello Fabrizio,

 

I posted this a little earlier but didn't see a reply from you. Are you aware of any of the books I posted earlier, namely the two Ching dynasty alchemy texts (性命圭旨 and 大成捷要), or the books on Taoist cultivation by contemporary Taoist master 田诚阳? If you are aware of any of them, just wondering what your view is on them?

Tian Chengyang is a very important contemporary master. There are now several books similar to the one he wrote (containing a summary of the practices, explanations of the main terms, anthologies of texts, etc.), but his is especially well done and detailed.

 

The Xingming guizhi and the Dacheng jieyao are well known (especially the former one). They are both late texts, and intend to give an overview of Neidan. But then, this is true of many other works. Daniel Burton-Rose has written an MA dissertation on the Xingming guizhi, a bit disenchanted, which contains translations of some parts, and should be available somewhere online.

 

Sorry for not replying earlier.

[Procurator]

Then my plan didn't work out... In my way of seeing, there is very little "academic" in this bibliography. I give references to texts in Chinese, but one doesn't need to be an academic to read them. I quote books published by academic presses, because in several cases those are the only available translations of a text. I give the main details on each text (author, date) b.....I point out problems in certain "popular" translations of Taoist texts (or popular websites such as Wikipedia), because I think everyone should know what they are reading (believe me, here I could have been much nastier).

 

this your bibliography is a gem. thank you very much.

 

The last point is especially important. If you cannot compare many of those translations to the original texts, you have no idea of how much their translators omit from (and in some cases, add to) a text. As a rule, everything that is too difficult, or would at least require an explanation, is omitted. Then a good editor cleans up their English, their prose sounds smooth and captivating, and everybody says "wow". The original Chinese text, however, says something else.

 

truer words have never been spoken.

 

We know for sure now that there are no sources, references, or allusions to internal alchemy before the 8th century in Taoist, Confucian, Buddhist, medical, or literary works.

 

this is a bit of a moot point, as you yourself noted "Can Tong" could be a neidan text. more over, "neidan" as is indeed "daoism" are still floating signifiers.

 

 

Maybe we should continue this discussion in a separate topic?

definitely Edited April 7, 2011 by Daode

[Procurator]

Rather than embarking on a "work of fantasy", do you think it possible that she simply made a mistake common among non-specialists in the field -- that is confounding the terms Internal Alchemy and Internal Cultivation?

 

lumping her together with non-specialists is unreasonable. she definitely is an expert and as such not prone to naive mistakes as this.

[Stigweard]

We know for sure now that there are no sources, references, or allusions to internal alchemy before the 8th century in Taoist, Confucian, Buddhist, medical, or literary works.

This is an interesting statement. I would be interested to hear how you discount the Baopuzi 抱朴子, authored by Ge Hong 葛洪 (283-343). The inner chapters are rich with content about the procurement of Jindan 金丹, the Golden Elixir, and the achievement of Shen Xian 神仙, Heavenly Immortality.

 

[xuanying]

this is a bit of a moot point, as you yourself noted "Can Tong" could be a neidan text. more over, "neidan" as is indeed "daoism" are still floating signifiers.

 

It "could" be a Neidan text, not in the sense that maybe it is a Neidan text, but in the sense that it can be read as a Neidan text. The first Neidan reading is by Tao Zhi (about 800 AD), and the first Neidan commentary is by Peng Xiao (947 AD). Thus the Cantong qi was first read as a Neidan text 600/700 years after its supposed date of composition in the mid 2nd-century AD.

 

It's a bit ironic that you say Neidan and Daoism are "floating signifiers", since this is one of the favorite views of the "academics"... I think Neidan should be defined, first of all, as a doctrine that teaches that the human being inherently possesses the so-called Elixir, and/or that the Elixir can be generated or manifested by means of appropriate practices. After this, there are almost infinite ways of expressing the same point. There are also several practices to "compound" or "refine" the Elixir, and this is where the problems among the different schools, lineages, and practitioners begin.

Edited April 8, 2011 by xuanying

[xuanying]

This is an interesting statement. I would be interested to hear how you discount the Baopuzi 抱朴子, authored by Ge Hong 葛洪 (283-343). The inner chapters are rich with content about the procurement of Jindan 金丹, the Golden Elixir, and the achievement of Shen Xian 神仙, Heavenly Immortality.

This is perfectly true, but for Ge Hong, the Elixir is made of minerals and metals heated in a crucible. Look at chapters 4 and 16 of his Baopu zi and this is beyond any doubt. The only type of inner practice that Ge Hong mentions in the Baopu zi, like anyone else at his time, is meditation on the inner gods.

Edited April 7, 2011 by xuanying

[Stigweard]

This is perfectly true, but for Ge Hong, the Elixir is made of minerals and metals heated in a crucible. Look at chapters 4 and 16 of his Baopu zi and this is beyond any doubt. The only type of inner practice that Ge Hong mentions in the Baopu zi, like anyone else at his time, is meditation on the inner gods.

Good o ... I guess you could regard the instructions as weidan falling into the category of it "could" be symbolic speech for neidan practices. So fair comments.

 

What then about the nei yeh 內業 ?? I know Kirkland dates it's authorship 350-300 BCE < http://kirkland.myweb.uga.edu/rk/pdf/pubs/ref/NEIYEH98.pdf >

 

And if this is to be credibly discounted also, how do you account for the development of neidan for it to have "emerged" in the 8th century?

 

[xuanying]

For example, you suggest the "Long Hu Jing" and "Zhong Lu Zhan Dao Ji" in your bibliography. The only English language translation cited for both of these is by Eva Wong, giving her 2 of 9 of your selected bibliography. Would you say that these works are so important to an aspiring Internal Alchemy practitioner that this translation is better than nothing for the someone not fluent in Ancient Chinese or non-academic (i.e. someone not trained in Taoist studies), or would it be better to replace it with another text that has a sound English language translation?

You perfectly detected one of the many problems in this bibliography--at least, one of those I was aware of.

 

I have included the Longhu jing (Scripture of the Dragon and Tiger) because historically it is an important text, but also because there is an English translation. It is important historically because the Cantong qi is said to derive from it, but actually it derives from the Cantong qi. Zhu Xi (the famous Neo-Confucian philosopher, who wrote a commentary to the Cantong qi from his own perspective) and Yu Yan (who wrote a very learned Taoist commentary) were the first ones to notice this. As for the English translation, well, it is disastrous in certain points. Should I omit the text just for this reason? Maybe...

 

The Zhong-Lü chuandao ji is another important text. Strictly speaking, it should be a general description of the Zhong-Lü teachings, but historically, it enjoyed much wider renown because the two immortals featured in this work (Zhongli Quan and Lü Dongbin) later became important figures in both the Southern Lineage (Nanzong) and the Northern Lineage (Beizong, i.e. Quanzhen).

 

The main omission that I regret in this short bibliography is the Yinfu jing (a title almost impossible to translate... maybe Scripture of the Hidden Accordance). But this is a text so difficult -- despite, or just because of, its conciseness: only 300 or 400 characters -- that can be left for a later time...

 

The best thing would be learning classical Chinese, and read the texts in the original language, instead of depending on translations. It's not impossible, and anyway, whether you start at 15 or 50 or later, you will never be able to say "I've learned it", so it's never too late to begin.

Edited April 7, 2011 by xuanying

[Procurator]

It "could" be a Neidan text, not in the sense that maybe it is a Neidan text, but in the sense that it can be read as a Neidan text. The first Neidan reading is by Tao Zhi (about 800 AD), and the first Neidan commentary is by Peng Xiao (947 AD). Thus the Cantong qi was first read as a Neidan text 600/700 years after its supposed date of composition in the mid 2nd-century AD.

that is all eminently correct but the questions remain.

 

if it can be read as a ND text how we do know that it was not a ND text originally?

 

the fact that its possibly true ND meaning surfaced belatedly is not an argument to the contrary.

 

It's a bit ironic that you say Neidan and Daoism are "floating signifiers", since this is one of the favorite views of the "academics"... I think Neidan should be the defined, first of all, as a doctrine that teaches that the human being inherently possesses the so-called Elixir, and/or that the Elixir can be generated or manifested by means of appropriate practices.

i know:)) i borrowed that term so we speak in the same terms. i also subscribe to that view i.e no satisfactory definition of daosism or ND exists.

 

Your definition of ND is terminology based - i.e if some process and final product is termed "elixir" and stages of its development are described via metallurgy metaphors and I-jing then its ND. Its a perfectly valid definition. For academical purposes.

 

however if the very same process and the very same product is described in different terms - is it ND or no?

 

the scholars say no since their scholarship is semantics-based. the practitioners say yes, for the obvious reason that its the same product and the same process.

[exorcist_1699]

This is an interesting statement. I would be interested to hear how you discount the Baopuzi 抱朴子, authored by Ge Hong 葛洪 (283-343). The inner chapters are rich with content about the procurement of Jindan 金丹, the Golden Elixir, and the achievement of Shen Xian 神仙, Heavenly Immortality.

 

 

 

Another guy we should not miss is Wei Bo Yang (AD 151 ~ ∞ ), who writes a book named《周易參同契》 ,which is said to be the Source of Taoist Alchemy. ( The source should be Laotze, but in Laotze only the principles are given , no concrete steps ..)

 

Edited April 8, 2011 by exorcist_1699

[The Way Is Virtue]

Tian Chengyang is a very important contemporary master. There are now several books similar to the one he wrote (containing a summary of the practices, explanations of the main terms, anthologies of texts, etc.), but his is especially well done and detailed.

The Xingming guizhi and the Dacheng jieyao are well known (especially the former one). They are both late texts, and intend to give an overview of Neidan. But then, this is true of many other works. Daniel Burton-Rose has written an MA dissertation on the Xingming guizhi, a bit disenchanted, which contains translations of some parts, and should be available somewhere online.

Sorry for not replying earlier.

 

Hi xuanying. Ok thanks. I have seen a recommendation for 'Da Cheng Jie Yao' as being a very helpful and useful alchemy text. Maybe one day I will be able to read it myself. It sounds like some of the books by Tian Chengyang might well be useful for those who are not too familiar with Taoist cultivation practices to get a better overview of all the practices and terms and such then. Thanks again for the feedback.

[Guest allan]

Neidan or inner alchemy, according to the Neo Daoists, involves the cultivation of essence and of bodily life. (Note: Neidan is a generic term. Quanzhen use a different term for it, probably the ancients too.)

 

This is in line with what the Holy Sages who wrote the Book of Changes (Yijing) did. These sages have had examined and investigated in depth, human nature and fate. Thereafter they defined the Ways of Heaven, Earth, and Man for posterity.

 

In the Tao Te Ching, Laozi wrote about the ancients and his deep insights arising from his cultivation, with some of the chapters tying up with what is written in the Yijing. These chapters are usually neidan related.

 

In his book or treatise, Zhuangzi also referred to the ancients and some of his chapters relate to (neidan) meditation and that of wu wei.

 

The other record on neidan practice was written in the Records of the Great Historian (Shiji) where Sima Qian indicated that Zhang Liang (the renowned Daoist strategist of the First Han Emperor) practised meditation and had abstained from eating various grains with the hopes of flying through the air.

 

What Wei Boyang wrote came centuries later from the last available record on neidan.

 

Scholars are aware of the depth and profoundness of both the Yijing and the Tao Te Ching.

 

Therefore it is unsurprising that a well known Daoist sect adopted the text of Zhuangzi as their main source for neidan practice (?). It could be better than those who have had practised weidan (outer alchemy) to attain immortality, so to speak, to avoid early death via metal poisoning.

 

Neidan practitioners will find that the texts written by Zhong LiQuan, Lu Dongbin, and Zhang Boduan useful to their practice, especially where signposts have been given. Practitioners may find that major signposts indicated in their texts are in line with what is written in the Tao Te Ching and in the Yijing. (A few although minor ones had also been mentioned in the Zhuangzi.)

 

For those who really want to practise neidan, read the books, texts and classics of the three doctrines. These writings or teachings all teach the practitioner how to reach the Center.

 

If we do not have the requisite intelligence and diligence to become learned and wise, it could be difficult to reach a good aptitude and witness some of the major signposts of the Way. (Refer to what Lu Dongbin indicated in The Secret of the Golden Flower.)

 

All the best to your intended neidan practice.

 

Cheerio!

[xuanying]

Good o ... I guess you could regard the instructions as weidan falling into the category of it "could" be symbolic speech for neidan practices. So fair comments.

 

What then about the nei yeh 內業 ?? I know Kirkland dates it's authorship 350-300 BCE < http://kirkland.myweb.uga.edu/rk/pdf/pubs/ref/NEIYEH98.pdf >

 

And if this is to be credibly discounted also, how do you account for the development of neidan for it to have "emerged" in the 8th century?

 

• "I guess you could regard the instructions as weidan falling into the category of it "could" be symbolic speech for neidan practices"

 

No please, this is a recipe to fall back into Original Chaos Waidan is Waidan, and Neidan is Neidan. Ge Hong essentially quotes the texts of the Taiqing (Great Clarity) tradition of Waidan, which he had received from his master (actually, they already belonged to his family, and he just received the instructions). If you read the texts, you will be able to say when a Waidan text talks about Waidan, or when a Neidan text uses Waidan language to talk about Neidan. There are no doubts about this. If you have doubts, well, you could even say that Waidan has never existed, and it's all Neidan.

 

• "What then about the nei yeh 內業 ?? I know Kirkland dates it's authorship 350-300 BCE "

 

Kirkland and Harold Roth (who has written an excellent little book on the Neiye) do not say that the Neiye is a Neidan text (if they said it, they would lose their jobs). The Neiye is about inner cultivation, not about Neidan.

 

• "And if this is to be credibly discounted also, how do you account for the development of neidan for it to have "emerged" in the 8th century?"

 

It's hard to say it in a few words. There are several trends that need to be followed:

 

(1) The first clearly identifiable Waidan tradition is Taiqing (Great Clarity). It develops in the 2nd-4th centuries AD in Jiangnan (southeastern China), and is documented by a few extant texts, and indirectly also by Ge Hong (Baopu zi). The elixirs are made of different ingredients. The focus is on ritual, not on cosmology.

 

(2) Taoist meditation on the inner gods develops from the 2nd century AD (some say a bit earlier) and is documented by the Scripture of the Yellow Court (Huangting jing) and the Central Scripture of Laozi (Laozi zhongjing). These texts also circulated in Jiangnan. They use certain alchemical metaphors, but do not intend to generate an Internal Elixir. The focus is on the inner gods. The innermost god is the Red Child (Chizi), said to represent the "true self" (zhenwu 真吾). He is a clear precursor of the Internal Elixir (especially in its representation as an embryo).

 

(3) From the late 4th century, the revelations of Shangqing Taoism occur in Jiangnan. Shangqing inherits and develops the earlier meditation practices, and uses an even stronger "alchemical" language to describe them. It also mentions, for the first time in an explicit way, the creation of an immortal "embryo" by means of meditation.

 

By that time, the Han-dynasty cosmological traditions based on the Book of Changes had been transmitted to Jiangnan. The Cantong qi is initially a product of those traditions. In Jiangnan, the cosmological portions of the Cantong qi are integrated with new portions that, using the emblems of the Book of Changes, propose a new alchemical model based on the conjunction of Lead and Mercury.

 

No Waidan text (and, of course, no meditation text) uses the Lead-Mercury model until the end of the Six Dynasties. From the early Tang period (7th century), instead, the Lead-Mercury model begins to be used in Waidan. Shortly later, this model also begins to be used for inner practices. The inner gods are discarded, and are replaced by abstract emblems: Lead-Mercury, trigrams and hexagrams of the Book of Changes, and other cosmological emblems. Neidan begins here.

 

This is the very short version of the story. Essentially, an earlier model is replaced with a new one both within Waidan and within Taoist meditation. The new model is the same, and is described in the Cantong qi. The replacement occurs first in Waidan, and paves the way for the emergence of Neidan.

Edited April 7, 2011 by xuanying

[xuanying]

Your definition of ND is terminology based - i.e if some process and final product is termed "elixir" and stages of its development are described via metallurgy metaphors and I-jing then its ND. Its a perfectly valid definition. For academical purposes.

 

however if the very same process and the very same product is described in different terms - is it ND or no?

 

the scholars say no since their scholarship is semantics-based. the practitioners say yes, for the obvious reason that its the same product and the same process.

This is an important point. It's not just a matter of "language". The emblems of the Yijing (Book of Changes) are needed to represent the stages of generation from the Dao to the cosmos, and the reverse process from the cosmos to the Dao (Neidan). Using Qian, Kun, Kan, and Li makes it possible to represent the process in three stages, and accordingly to frame the reverse process (Neidan) in three stages.

 

The same is for the alchemical emblems. Native lead and cinnabar are the Yin and Yang of the postcelestial world (our world). They contain True Lead and True Mercury, which are the Yang and Yin of the precelestial world. The joining of True Lead and True Mercury produces the Elixir, the unity of True Yin and True Yang. These are, again, the three stages of Neidan.

 

I think you can talk of Neidan when you see this representation of the process and of its reversal. It's not a definition for academic purposes. It's the same representation used in the home page of your website! (Which adds the ultimate stage, "refine emptiness and merge with the Dao")

 

Of course, the "process" happens in one instant, and so can its reversal, too.

Edited April 7, 2011 by xuanying

[Procurator]

Fabrizio thanks for a lucid historical presentation, i disagree with it on paradigmal grounds, and so would native neidan schools who trace their lineage back to Lao-zi. I understand that you stand by your thouroughly researched POV , which i respect. i am not sure whether you are interested in a protracted technical discussion so i will just note a couple of technical points below

 

 

Native lead and cinnabar are the Yin and Yang of the postcelestial world (our world). They contain True Lead and True Mercury, which are the Yang and Yin of the precelestial world.

this POV is specifically warned against as a recipe for "false elixir". The true components come from elswhere, not from postcelestial realm.

 

 

 

Of course, the "process" happens in one instant, and so can its reversal, too.

that is surprising since prolonged stages of 10 months, 3 years and "9 years of facing the wall" are well known.

[xuanying]

I think we shouldn't hijack this topic, which had begun discussing other issues.

 

I have started a new topic, with a similar title: Critical issues in Taoist alchemy. Click the title to move to the new topic.

 

Daode, thanks for your comments, I'll respond under the new topic. See you there!