Mikey_Power_Up

The Dao Bums
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    86

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Mikey_Power_Up

  5. Posted

     
     
     
    1
    15 hours ago, Gerard said:


    And you will learn NOTHING from any of them.

     

    Only a live teacher from a reputable and long standing tradition will.

     

    End of story.

     

    Note: He Jinghan's vídeos are free and are very good but still you need to learn the art first from a teacher and not necessarily him. 
     

     

    I don't agree with that. My stolen collection of SFQ about 15 years ago served me well. This reminds me that I need to make a donation to Chunyi Lin. His techniques helped a lot when I was going through health issues back then. I'm about to send him an email. The whole you have to have a teacher and lineage trap is a presupposition that many have, a type of programming, people just need quality techniques, and a resource to lean on if they have more questions. Potentially, good remote teaching will answer more of the questions and provide solutions for the most frequent issues that people might have. I find that it isn't just ethical, it is the cornerstone of good business. 

  7. Posted

    4 hours ago, ralis said:

     

    That kind of seeking plays right into the hands of a cult leader. You have been warned.

    I'm no one's follower. I would probably out a## hole him. I've been around far more toxic ppl than what he displays. But I like the idea of the non-hippie Taoist master. :)  Douchbags can have attainment too?!!

  10. Posted

    On 4/12/2020 at 9:36 AM, freeform said:

     

    We might have better tools - but these tools - as applied to medicine for example - are the third biggest killer in the US. These tools are used to destroy precious resources that our world has to offer - to satisfy the greed of a relatively few people. And these tools all come with rising obesity, poor physical and mental health for the rest of us.

     

    These analytical tools have not made a dent on our understanding of our bodies or our minds. The techniques you're using (like spinal breathing) has nothing to do with any of these analytical tools - but everything to do with the analytical tools of the very lineages you're keen to disregard.

     

    The most powerful and sensitive tools we have is our bodies and our minds - both of which have only suffered in the modern-day. Most people don't have enough self-awareness to look away from their phones let alone understand the cause and effect chains that are ruling their lives.

     

    I'd love to see these objective samples you're talking about in regards to internal practice in recent years. Everything you've mentioned so far (from Jungian psychology to AYP, KAP to TM) all of them are using the tiny bits of ancient technology that they've been able to comprehend. And they're only scratching the surface of what's possible :)

     

    I don't think this is a good argument. The 'tools' that we have been talking about are quite subjective in the internal arts. We know very little about the details of them, we have only been told that they work, what to expect, and then we have our own anecdotal experience that sometimes is similar to others likely because of how the human body is constructed, but also because of priming. Priming is a huge thing, and why accepting the frames that others present to you can be dangerous. When our teachers do attempt to break it down on an analytical level, they result in framing it in modern neuroscience and the various nervous systems in the body (PNS, CNS, ENS)  

    Now, modern analytical tools could be used to do more research into how these things actually work, and from there we could create a more refined understanding and set of best practices. Remove it from faith, myth and our own filters. 

    Also, you moved the goalposts. You went from suggesting that the ancients were wiser when they couldn't even heal childhood diseases that we have eradicated, to changing the argument about the internal tools that we use without much data suggesting how they really work. 

    I'm not against the ancients, I'm against the Golden Age fallacy. I'm often prone to say that science is slow to research these things. 

    Modern medicine's/research tools do not destroy the earth, mining for the resources for us to have this conversation on our phone does-- We don't need to conflate the two. :) 

  11. Posted

    On 4/12/2020 at 9:46 AM, Earl Grey said:


    False conclusion. Having a structure that challenges the certainty of your own doesn’t mean anti-self-development, nor has anything I suggested led to any negative path—unless negative means you fulfilling your own Dunning-Kruger criteria. This is more a reflection of your own lack of objectivity in your own practice.
     

    Nothing more to be said as at this point you’ve got your own game figured out and freeform has more patience and interest than I do. Cheers!

    I am correct, if it doesn't fit your frame you suggest inevitable negativity. 
    Shoot you even suggest the same thing when it comes to entity possession. 
    The universality of your argument is what I am taking aim at, not that you have a POV that is different. 

  13. Posted

    @Earl Grey You are as I suspected anti-self-development if it doesn't fit your narrow frame. That is fine, just don't sell your point of view universally. Because someone can be subject to Dunning-Kruger effect as they undergo self-creation, doesn't mean that this is most often the case. If people focus on humility and self-awareness (not in just the go sit in silence version) but more  a running assessment of who they are in all their dealings, they are less likely to come to where you suggest they have to end up. I find this odd, everything you suggest has to lead to some negative path, which to me means you have an overarching negative view of such things and possibly cannot deal with this subject matter objectively. 

  14. Posted · Edited by Mikey_Power_Up

    2 hours ago, freeform said:

     

    Ah! my favourite argument - the arrogance of modernity :)

     

    You really think we're wiser now than hundreds of generations ago?

    The Golden Age Fallacy also exists as well :) 
    My point is quite succinct: 
    (1)We have far greater analytical tools and better research methods today. 
    (2) We don't need to depend on legacy and faith, when we try, test and create far more objective samples vs myth handed down with cultural flavorings and hidden 'truths' and the such. 

    I would love for you to attempt to refute my #1. 
    I want to know how magically the people of the past had better tools and methods of analysis than we have today.  
    Why didn't they wipe out polio or cowpox earlier, if they were so wise and had greater analysis tools and methodology than we have today?

  15. Posted

    38 minutes ago, Earl Grey said:

     

    Straw man. This is not what I stated at all. 

    I gave a lot of options that would allow a person to develop self-awareness as they engage in self-making yet you still take issue with it. What is you overarching issue with self-making? Self-aggrandizement doesn't naturally flow from what i suggested.   Then again, what is wrong with healthy self-aggrandizement? 

  18. Posted

    56 minutes ago, Earl Grey said:

     

    The trap of self-aggrandizing is equally dangerous in both what he describes and what you attempt to differentiate. 

    Perhaps, but it isn't certain that a person ends up aggrandizing themselves.  They might just become a better version who is aware of their power, worth and limitations. Teaching self-awareness with self-making might be an awesome combination. Perhaps a lifelong never ending black/white mirror journal., wins/losses,  good me/bad me, reality vs inflation...

  19. Posted

    6 hours ago, gatito said:

     

    I've no idea why they get "overload" but, as I inferred, TM isn't a "legitimate" practice.

     

    However, I'm not going to hammer this issue further than that with you, especially as there's now lot's of info. out there that's easily accessible for anyone to do their due diligence about both AYP and TM.

     

    Furthermore, if you "got results" that worked for you, W(ho)TF am I (or anyone else) to nay-say your "results". :-)

     

    I no huge defender of TM, but it is well researched. There's research that shows its sticking points for some, and its positive attributes as well. What do you mean when you say TM isn't a 'legitimate' practice?  TM also seems to only be maybe 15% of what they teach.  

  20. Posted

    5 hours ago, freeform said:

     

    It's what I call 'self-making'... basically a way of creating a bigger/more powerful sense of self...

     

    I discovered something profound. I became self enlightened. I hacked my body to achieve superhuman this or that... the focus is always on me and making the me bigger/better etc.

    What is wrong with self-making?
    Healthy self-making. 
    Potential realized. 
    Not necessarily oil in muscle type of self-making, but building the ME. 

  21. Posted

    4 hours ago, dwai said:

    Is feeling a flow rising up your spine the only evidence of Kundalini? MCO doesn't raise energy up the central channel, only circulates through the ren and du meridians, so not really intended to raise kundalini IMHO. 

     

    Pranayama is one way to raise Kundalini, of course, but there are more esoteric ways, but it requires preparation (first the spiritual heart needs to be opened). Or if an adept/teacher initiates you by doing what is called a power transfer (aka shaktipat). 

     

     

    I'm not really comparing MCO and spinal breathing directly, but more along which practices have given the more 'peak experiences' over the years. I can say that spinal breathing has done that, but intermittently.  

  22. Posted

    3 hours ago, dwai said:

    This! 

    It has more to do with the preparedness of the student than the lineages themselves. Today's seekers are unable to overcome the urge for ego gratification for long enough to really absorb the teachings.

     

    There are of course those who quietly go about their lives even after 'attaining' their objective -- the noosphere it turns out, is not different from this samsara.  :D 

     

    How do we know if the teachings are any good? 

    Today's students are more customers than they are disciples, and as such demand the good stuff at an 'appropriate' time, not 30 years later into their servitude. I think the master/sifu/guru racket has been going on for thousands of years, probably even more so when the the 'great' ones couldn't be questioned.  The greatest egos I've seen have come from those who promote they are free from their own, yet demand to be exalted in the most humble brag/humble 'flex' of ways , by faith, belief and unquestioning.  Maybe as we shop for practices, we should ask for proof of concept. Don't show me you, show me your top 10 students! :)  

    As an offshoot from my other question, I wonder if those who believe that all lessons should be free are willing to give up some of their autonomy for those lessons? If you are are not willing to pay for your lessons, which would  help the master pay their mortgage, rent or afford food, maybe taking an undying oath to them is a more suitable 'free' exchange? 

  23. Posted

    @freeform

     

     

    Muscle boy wasn't willing to do the work!  By hacking mean that we have better data collection and analytical potential now than in the past. We do not need to depend on masters and lineages. We can test what works and what doesn't. A lot of us just have beliefs around what is the superior war to learn. I prefer 'good' information which is hard to judge, so I settle with what I respond well to, and then just giving it a go. I know so dangerous some might say, but my running belief is that the horror cases that ppl speak about as a warning are far and few between the cases of  mild or little results.

    There seems to be a lot of fear mongering, and I think it results from public groups where a lot of ppl with delusional expectations jump into these practices and fry themselves far more than more 'stable' types of people. I remember being on a forum a few years ago for SFQ and there was always the super chi monster guys who were having these scary results, more than likely primed by their expectation and on psychological make up. 

    I do agree with you and Grey that knocking loose some of our unconscious bits can be a bit dangerous both in 'energetic' practices and even mindfulness. That is the danger of having things being made available to the public, the risk is worth it, similar to how gun ownership is 'mostly' worth it in the US. Freedom is a dangerous thing, becoming more than who we currently are, or if you are an essentialist becoming who we really are, also, is probably not without its own risks. People should choose their own risk tolerance.

  25. Posted · Edited by Mikey_Power_Up

    3 hours ago, freeform said:


    If veganism is deeply important to you on a moral level, then there are always other ways of satisfying your nutritional needs. If it’s a practical or health-related choice then it’s different :)


    I'm more 100% plant-based than an ethical vegan. So, it is more about the health advantages that i have found than ethics. I want to add bovine liver pills and mussel based pills because they pad my micronutrient shortcomings better than plant alternatives do.  I'm sure my ethical vegan friends will be upset that I'm taking 2 pills derived from animals, but too bad! :D

    • Like 3