Why does all this overexposure of Taoist inner alchemy happen?

[thelerner]

I don't think I'll ever 'get it', not physically, not the big stuff but its still fascinating.  Like the Theory of Everything, what's the path, what's there at the end.  Who made it and what maps did they leave behind? 

 

There may be a time I'm less involved in the world and can set up a truer practice then an hour or so a day.   May as well survey the field, respectfully and do what I can and let it percolate in my subconscious, along with reruns from Lost. 

[Geof Nanto]

8 hours ago, Aetherous said:

Because external alchemy is too much work!

 

I agree if you mean external alchemy as the treating of the whole of life as the alchemical cauldron. All that inner work can be used as an escape from the difficulties of life, but used positively it can strengthen our alignment with Dao so that we're able to engage more meaningfully with life. That’s why I consider working with political engagement can be valid practice, for instance. And intimate relationships, love and the whole damn catastrophe; that's real challenging alchemical work. 

 

But if you mean what’s normally meant by external alchemy, namely the search for the physical pill of immortality and the ingestion of substances, then I disagree. 
 

Edited April 21, 2019 by Yueya

[Geof Nanto]

15 hours ago, Zork said:

I mean seriously? Inner alchemy is just a fragment of taoist doctrines. Why do people care so much?

Are they ready?

Most people don't know what they are talking about and very few even practice it.

The way I see it only 1 in a million are ready for that.

So really, why there is so much talk about this practice?

 

I say it's because it's the yang / masculine aspect of Daoism.  It gives the illusion that you're in control of the process, not ineffable nature, the mysterious Dao. Classical Daoism emphasised the importance of the yin / feminine aspect of reality, perhaps because these yang aspects always tend to dominate in one form or another. They're what's visible and graspable; the Dao is invisible and ungraspable.

[Fa Xin]

I think a lot of people get tired of looking for the answers outside of themselves, and decide to turn inward to look. 

[ilumairen]

11 hours ago, Starjumper said:

People with a warrior spirit, which is more about ethics than fighting, are perfectly fine to cultivate power to kill some bad guy; and the other guy is always the bad guy, isn't he?   We selfs are always the good guy, right?  At least that's the attitude one must have in order to be a warrior - which is why the game of ethics is important.

 

After giving this some consideration I find myself disagreeing. 

[ilumairen]

1 hour ago, Earl Grey said:

 

Many people here claim to have the answers, so when someone like you is asking and already knows a bit about the inherent problems common to it, others become cynical and assume you’re a know-it-all instead of engaging in discussion or answering the question.

 

I didn't see a subtle attack, and didn't assume he was a know it all either. 

 

There's a lot of guard and parry here. Or is it parry and guard? Hard to tell...

[ilumairen]

45 minutes ago, Fa Xin said:

I think a lot of people get tired of looking for the answers outside of themselves, and decide to turn inward to look. 

 

The outside answers may not correlate with experience, and then the age old conundrum arises. Do you trust yourself or another, and if you don't trust yourself how can you trust the choosing of who to trust?

 

Messy stuff..

[ilumairen]

Just now, Earl Grey said:

 

I didn't say there was an attack, I just answered the part about why that cynicism seems to happen.

 

What you quoted did.. And I was responding to both what you quoted and what you stated.

[ilumairen]

1 minute ago, Earl Grey said:

 

Hmm I'm having a hard time understanding--what are you saying and what do I appear to be saying about the guard and parry?

 

I didn't see what zork saw as a subtle attack. It was just discussion.  And didn't think the attack I didn't see was due to him being a know it all.

 

[Zork]

5 hours ago, Yueya said:

They're what's visible and graspable; the Dao is invisible and ungraspable.

That is somewhat close to my own opinion on the subject.

 

2 minutes ago, ilumairen said:

I didn't see what zork saw as a subtle attack. It was just discussion.  And didn't think the attack I didn't see was due to him being a know it all.

It depends on what or how you perceive things as an individual. I saw the switch of the focus from the IA, which is the subject of this thread to my knowledge or ability to discern, as an attack because it derails the subject and becomes personal.

Even if i were the greatest fool on earth my question is still valid and it deserves a relevant answer.

[ilumairen]

Edited April 22, 2019 by ilumairen

[Fa Xin]

1 hour ago, ilumairen said:

 

The outside answers may not correlate with experience, and then the age old conundrum arises. Do you trust yourself or another, and if you don't trust yourself how can you trust the choosing of who to trust?

 

Messy stuff..

 

It can get messy  I also think an important step in figuring things out for ourselves.  Intellectual understanding vs experience, and all that jazz.

[Mudfoot]

8 hours ago, Zork said:

 

What is the point of this subtle attack?

Nobody has all the answers.

Look at your posts. 

You might find my subtle attack relevant in the context. 

I interpreted you as you were putting people down here, as if you new things about nei dan that they don't. 

[Fa Xin]

When I was starting out, I bought a few books on Neidan & Inner alchemy.  I read them, dabbled, even had a Kung fu teacher who practiced himself and would give me pointers and tips.  But it seemed overly complex, some of the instructions seemed contradictory and in general - just did not sit well with me.

 

Qigong on the other hand, felt more natural and was easy to practice.

 

I went with the easy route... glad I did.

[ilumairen]

13 minutes ago, Mudfoot said:

Look at your posts. 

You might find my subtle attack relevant in the context. 

I interpreted you as you were putting people down here, as if you new things about nei dan that they don't. 

 

I stand corrected. 

 

Apologies to Zork and Earl Grey.

 

[Cheshire Cat]

Quote

Why does all this overexposure of Taoist inner alchemy happen?

 

Because a few decades ago Mantak Chia demonstrated that there's a market for it. 

[ilumairen]

12 hours ago, Aetherous said:

 

Please say more if you want.

 

At this point in time, I only wish to say thank you for taking the time to address my queries. 

 

There is potential for this to become a rather interesting thread imo. But right now there's alot of defensiveness. Hopefully we can get past that.

 

[Armando]

2 hours ago, ilumairen said:

 

The outside answers may not correlate with experience, and then the age old conundrum arises. Do you trust yourself or another, and if you don't trust yourself how can you trust the choosing of who to trust?

 

Messy stuff..

 

Things always tend to get messy as long as our awareness is restricted by the limits of the egotistic (NOT egoistic!) mind. We must penetrate beyond that in order to stably function from a level of undistorted and trustworthy inner information.

 

There is a learning process involved. At the end of the day, only experience will allow us to sort out the different voices that are constantly talking in and to us from different levels of self.

 

And even though there are no hard and fast rules, it is usually not the loudest voice that offers the best guidance.

 

Regular meditative practice goes a long way developing our sensitivity to deeper levels of self that are tuned into universal knowledge.

[Mudfoot]

2 hours ago, ilumairen said:

 

I stand corrected. 

 

Apologies to Zork and Earl Grey.

 

It wasn't only a subtle attack. 

 

In this area, I would be delighted if threads not just revolved around how poor practices everybody else have and how their motives are wrong, but instead focused more on how one thinks that the practice should evolve. 

 

There are enough of threads here where we call each other deluded idiots for not practicing the right way. 

 

I believe Eva Wong writes in one of her books that her teacher told her to learn taiji first, and that she was taught Nei Dan later. I don't have the book anymore, so I might be mistaken. 

 

Both Chia and Mitchell, to name two authors, want people to start with other practices first. 

 

So is the problem that people want to practice Nei Dan, or is the problem that "they" (since it is hard on a forum to tell how any individual practice) lack a proper foundation? 

Or is the problem that, again "they/done", hunt manifestation of power? 

 

Because I can totally understand why the area is sought after, Wang Liping has a rep, and) Livia Kohn or Pregradio?) called Nei Dan the pinnacle of chinese meditation. 

 

(I might also add that i do not practice Taoist internal alchemy, so I do not feel that you stepped on my toes. If it came out like that, then I'm sorry that was not my intention. And in my method you cannot skip levels, the next level open up when you have done enough work where you are, so if one line of your argument would evolve in that direction, I would not disagree.) 

Edited April 22, 2019 by Mudfoot
Clarification

[Zork]

4 hours ago, ilumairen said:

Apologies to Zork and Earl Grey.

No need to.

 

4 hours ago, Mudfoot said:

Look at your posts. 

You might find my subtle attack relevant in the context. 

I interpreted you as you were putting people down here, as if you new things about nei dan that they don't. 

And?

I keep looking at my posts which I usually double check to prevent them from being confrontational and i see nothing.

How do you know when and if I am being cynical, sarcastic or bitter to deserve that?

 

Also if it isn't obvious I don't practice neidan (getting an orbit is a higher priority) and I really don't understand where this downplaying of others comes from.

 

Yes unfortunately there are people that claim to practice neidan and have no orbit in this forum. Do you find it ethical that i stfu about it?

I don't.

[Taoist Texts]

5 minutes ago, Zork said:

practice neidan and have no orbit

And that is wrong because...?

[Zork]

15 minutes ago, Taoist Texts said:

And that is wrong because...?

Because you don't use conventional housing wires to transfer high voltage electricity.....

[Taoist Texts]

17 minutes ago, Zork said:

Because you don't use conventional housing wires to transfer high voltage electricity..

Sorry your answer makes no sense. What high voltage? What wires? Could you answer my question directly without meaningless metaphors? I will try again.

 

Why does a neidan practitioner need an orbit? What is the purpose of the orbit?

 

Please speak to the point. Thank you.

[Mudfoot]

44 minutes ago, Zork said:

 

And?

I keep looking at my posts which I usually double check to prevent them from being confrontational and i see nothing.  /... ... /

and I really don't understand where this downplaying of others comes from.

Yes. 

Whatever. 

It is always hard to look at ones own writing. That's fine, never mind. 

[Mudfoot]

I believe that we got to the point: People who try to practice Nei Dan without having an orbit are fooling themselves? 

 

Is that right?