Lataif

Jing is a good example. The default in QiGong is to conserve it for longevity. But if, instead, you transform Jing into Shen via extensive/intensive sexuality . . . you end up with less longevity and more immortality.

You can use Chi to build and maintain the physical body. But it's that same Chi (even if in different form) that is used to build and maintain the immortal body. At a certain point . . . it's one or the other. You use up some of the one . . . for some of the other.

There are doubtless many different ways to get to psychic powers. You don't even have to necessarily have much self-development (in which case it's sort of an accident whether or not you get them). I'm guessing (from personal experience) that the most likely way to get to psychic powers if you DO already have some significant level of self-development . . . is to receive transmission of the ability from someone else who has it.

Mantak Chia's teaching of the "Inner Smile" . . . puzzles me quite a bit. It definitely works for me (as far as it goes) . . . but that's after 40 years of doing all kinds of spiritual and energetic practice. So I'm not sure what exactly it's tapping into. It wouldn't have worked for me 20 years ago . . . and certainly not 40 years ago when I was starting out. Does it in actual fact work for new students today (?) Sort of hard for me to imagine. It's similar to experience of Chi in that respect. I trained in Tai Chi 30 years ago and 15 years go and etc . . . and had no actual clear experience of Chi until about 5 years ago. I think "Chi" is probably just a vague idea for many students for a long time. Likewise . . . do people actually have a distinct and specific experience of the "Inner Smile" (?) Or is it not much more than just a vague idea (?)

In Sufi psychology, rejection is understood to be an energy of "separation". The "opposite" energy is understood to be one of "merging". These are two primary energies of childhood developmental psychology: a child wants to remain "merged" with mother . . . but also wants to "separate" into its own individuality. It's pretty much the story of our entire life . . .

Integral Theory (Ken Wilber . . .) has a very good opinion of how strength training can contribute to spiritual development. And my experience is consistent with that. Here's an audio discussion of it: https://www.integrallife.com/node/123641

You might want to read a biography of Alan Watts. He did what you apparently asked about doing. You can see from his example how it turned out . . .

The book "Energy Orgasm: Awaken Your Inner Bliss" (2015) (114 pages) by Ron James was recommended in another thread. I bought a copy from Amazon for $13.00. Personally, I found it worth the time and money. But I'm unsure whether other people who don't already have some significant experience in sexual QiGong (or Tantra) would find it equally so. The book was useful to me in 2 ways: (1) it clarified/articulated some theoretical points in a way that improved on my existing understanding of them; (2) it introduced 2 or 3 new and useful techniques that I'd never come across. The theoretical points are that "energetic orgasm is in the domain of the parasympathetic nervous system, not creating but actually removing stress" . . . and that "there are 2 main ways of working with the techniques . . .: one is for stress and anxiety relief . . . and the other is to enter into a sexual meditative state." There's also a better-than-average description of what the experience of energetic orgasm is often like. The useful techniques include the so called "diamond posture" (on one's back with knees spread open and soles of feet together) . . . certain types of breathing into the perineum . . . and certain energy touch methods using the palms of the hands. More generally, the book is not particularly well organized. And the proportions are not quite right (chapters on psychology and diet that are too short to be of much systematic value). Neither of these bothered me personally because I had enough experience already to know how to pick out what was helpful to me and ignore the rest . . .

Whoa. I prepared a lengthy post about this the other day . . . and then decided not to submit it because I got tangled up in terminology. Basically: how are the "Mental Body" and the "Emotional Body" in western terminology . . . related to the Lower, Middle, and Upper Dantien in QiGong terminology (?) And how are they related to the idea of a "Mind/Body" in QiGong (?) If I have an Emotion . . . where is it coming from in QiGong (?) Presumably (?) an Emotion has a physical component (neurotransmitters, peptides, hormones) . . . and an energetic component (some form of Chi?) . . . and a mental component (thoughts, memories). But I've never seen a clear explanation of how these are understood/mapped in QiGong terms. Hope this helps advance the discussion . . .

Thanks for your extended and personal reply. I agree that "Inner Smile" can be a lot more fundamental and a lot more comprehensive than maybe it's given credit for. Your experience seems to confirm that. But that's exactly what makes it so puzzling to me. Maybe I'm not explaining my puzzlement very well. Heck, maybe I'm even puzzled about my puzzlement (LOL -- I hate when that happens . . .). I simply don't understand what "Inner Smile" is supposed to be accessing in Healing Tao terms. Is it Chi . . . of a specific kind (?) Or is it a capacity to sense and direct Chi . . . in a specific way (?) Or what (?) If beginning students are supposed to be able to do this practice (which I'm very unsure about . . .) it's a much bigger deal than it appears. They would then already have some very fundamental and very comprehensive access to something that is . . . very fundamental and very comprehensive (LOL). Even if most beginning students DON'T have it (which seems likely to me -- but what do I know??) the fact that the Healing Tao system would assume that they do . . . puzzles me. Am I making myself any clearer (?) *** As for how "Inner Smile" relates to my other practice . . . I'm not 100% sure. I do know for a personal fact that I could only do the "Inner Smile" effectively (not just think/imagine that I was doing it) after years of other practice -- unlike what the Healing Tao system seems to assume. So for me personally, "Inner Smile" seems dependent on some other capacity or "energy" that was realized/developed by my other practice. In the technical terminology of Sufism (which is my base practice), "Inner Smile" seems to be made possible by the presence of one or more specific "Lataif". The candidates seem to me to be: "Joy" (least likely) . . . or "Compassion" . . . or "Healing" . . . or "Merging". I can do a version of "Inner Smile" with any of these Lataif -- although "Merging" seems the most general and basic. But again: what does the Healing Tao system think that "Inner Smile" does (?)

Well, that's the problem. I think the most effective techniques for energetic orgasm presuppose an established Yin energetic practice (or a "natural" predisposition to such an energetic state) that has primarily nothing to do with orgasms. Without that, you have to "force" it with Yang PC-squeeze methods . . .

But what is the difference between the nature/functionality of the Middle Dantian . . . and that of the Upper Dantian (?) What is the energy of the Upper Dantian about (?)

This can lead to a certain kind of question that I asked myself 40 years ago. If (as it seemed) I can't follow through on my intentions . . . even though in my better moments I know that I should . . . what can I do about it (?) Can I make an decision (when I'm at my best) that "forces" me to do what I know is good for me (even when I'm not at my best) (?) Consider this "Twilight Zone" episode, in that context: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6p1I8_qFyY

My take on this is that there's a profound historical tradeoff going on with Chia and Winn. In exchange for making unknown teachings known to anyone who buys a book . . . they've dropped the sure-fire safeguards that those teachings naturally have when they are only passed down to a very small and select group of people. I myself am very grateful for that tradeoff. Both Chia and Winn caution people about sequence and timing and so on -- but people don't listen. That's their choice . . .

"I personally do not believe in the word style[system]. Why? Because, unless there are human beings with three arms and four legs, unless we have another group of human beings that are structurally different from us, there can be no different style of fighting[cultivating]." -- Bruce Lee Well, that's nonsense, I must say. It's like arguing that there are no different cats. OF COURSE . . . every cat is a cat. But it's not meaningless to say that THIS cat is a Persian . . . and THAT cat is a Siamese . . . and that they are DIFFERENT. Sheeesh . . .

Yes, definitely. Here's an example: http://www.amazon.com/Sufism-Taoism-Comparative-Philosophical-Concepts/dp/0520052641 This compares Taoism to Sufism (which is the most sophisticated historical version of Neoplatonism) . . .

Yes . . . that's true for the original Neoplatonism of Plotinus. But it's best subsequent formulation is through Sufism . . . which adopted the Neoplatonic ontology and metaphysics in whole and DID integrate it with methods for "deeply interacting with things". IMO, Sufism is the pre-eminent spiritual practice of the West . . . as Taoism is of the East. (BTW: Plato (375 BC) and Plotinus (250 AD) are two different people, in case anyone is confusing them . . .)

I'm not sure about this distinction. My experience is that qigong and neidan are on a continuum . . . just as reality is a continuum. You can transform (transmute) any matter into any other matter . . . because every kind of matter has previously been transformed into its current state from some other state. Of course, a given teacher may specialize in only certain transformations . . .

An advantage of the Chia and Winn teaching . . . is that there are people related to it all over the place. There's a social component to learning/living Qigong and having a variety of people to potentially connect with (at different levels) can be useful . . .

Believe it or not . . . it's possible to stay outside the typical teacher/student paradigm. If you look around, you can find knowledgeable people that will willingly interact with you on a peer basis. Some of them (not necessarily all) may also be "teachers", but they'll drop that dynamic if you show yourself worthy (basically: sincere and polite). In fact, they welcome it as a change of pace from the usual stuff they have to do. It's not for everyone, but it's an alternative that's not often appreciated . . .

Go for it (!)

Sexual energy reflects the creative energy of Absolute Being as it unfolds its multi-faceted meaning and purpose in us Human Beings. If you don't want to be a conscious part of that unfolding creation (or don't know how to be) . . . then that's too bad, for sure.

I feel that's a serious problem with mindfulness meditation (and many other Buddhist meditations): you're not "really" experiencing your experience. I have background in an American Zen lineage that specifically addressed that with a zazen style that emphasized the experience of bodily sensation. It used to freak out new students when the teacher would explain that the style of meditation she recommended involved re-experiencing all the negative experience from our past (which will inevitably arise again if you sit still long enough). That wasn't what they wanted to hear . . . at all.

A thread in "Daoist Discussion" got me wondering how much previous exploration there might have been here on differences between Eastern and Western interpretations/implementations of Taoism. Can anyone remember a thread on this from the past (?) Among the issues: ** In Eastern perspective, society (and even all of reality . . .) is understood to benefit most when individual psychology is subordinated to society. ** In Western perspective, society is understood to benefit most when society is subordinated to individual psychology. How you understand Taoism (both in theory and practice) diverges a lot based on which perspective you take. Michael Winn, for example, emphasizes how his perspective differs from that of Mantak Chia (who has himself been pretty non-Eastern) . . .

I don't consider "Inquiry" to be primarily a matter of thinking . . . at all. Thinking and awareness are not the same. Inquiry, at its best, is a multi-faceted curiosity about what's happening in our experience -- physically, emotionally, intellectually, whatever . . . Of course, if we think we already know what's happening . . . we're not going to be very curious. Sophisticated Inquiry requires a lot of different capacities. For example:: -- energy (to do what it takes) -- confidence (to keep doing it, sometimes) -- a sense of fun (to enjoy doing it) -- compassion for yourself (when you're having a tough time doing it) -- relaxation (not doing a certain thing, sometimes) -- absorption (not being detached from what's happening) -- balance (of all the other capacities) -- etc. Inquiry assumes that our experience unfolds in a purposeful, meaningful way . . . that we can become aware of that purpose and meaning . . . and that we can become more and more attuned to it. It's a way of Life . . .