Forestgreen

What is the difference between trying to get enlightened and being enlightened and trying to realize that enlightenment?

This differentiation is most likely done by non- theravadins. I base my practice mostly on theravada texts, and no- self relates to reality, not to me as an isolated practitioner, since the idea of an isolated practitioner is conventional truth, not absolute truth. If the practice doesn't reflect that, it is inheritantly flawed. I still feel that mahayana rethoric is based on an hair-splitting attempt to prove spiritual superiority, while causing a split in the sangha. And intending to save all beings before one has realized reality and cleared the storehouse mind, isn't that just a bit arrogant?

This is why I avoid zen/ chan texts. Too cognitive.

Holding their breath, the crowd surrounding him awaits a quotation that supports his statement.

So, basically: Getting a treatment one does not need, or getting a treatment not focused on ones needs, might be bad for you? Sounds like something relevant for any treatment, really.

No.

It's ok, you don't have to. I, on the other hand, is quite confident that it does. And in terms also used by tibetan buddhism, the wuzhenpian tradition, some hindu traditions, and so on. The difference is that they describe the road to understanding it by the process of analysis and synthesis, while the usual chan quotes seems to be avoiding the issue by cloaking it in an unclear language. But again, just my opinion, heavily influenced by textual support.

If they cannot be falsified, they are not theories. So yes, theories should be tested. Otherwise, they are just ideas.

The fundamental nature of prior heaven is empty, [nonexistent] primordial qi. In short, it is emptiness, that is all. I found this to be useful, if understood as in page 47. Using two traditional Chinese terms, the unconditioned and conditioned domains are respectively defined as precelestial (or prior to Heaven, xiantian, lit. “before Heaven”) and postcelestial (or posterior to Heaven, houtian, lit. “after Heaven”). The postcelestial domain is distinguished by multiplicity and relativity; it is the state that features transitory events and phenomena that succeed one another within space and time. The precelestial domain, in one of the approximations that might be used to describe it, is the constant and omnipresent original state of Oneness, which contains all events and phenomena independently of whether they do or do not occur, and with no distinctions of space and time, here and there, before and after. I interpret this from the theravada abhidamma theory, which makes it comprehensible and in line with my experience during practice. I find this slightly too abstract in it self though. When the alchemical texts use the word “original” (yuan), they refer to the Origin (yuanshi), i.e., to a primordial substance that is not born in the postcelestial state. Therefore the Shihan ji (Records from a Stone Casket), attributed to Xu Jingyang (also known as Xu Xun, trad. 239–374), says: 元陽即元精，發生於玄玄之際。元精無形，寓於元炁之中。若受 外感而動，與元炁分判，則成凡精。 Original Yang is the same as Original Essence, sent forth from the bourns of the Mystery beyond the Mystery. Original Essence has no form, and resides within Original Breath. If it receives an external stimulus, then it moves: it separates from Original Breath, and becomes the common essence. So yuan yang = yuan jing, and yuan jing resides within yuan qi. And according to Huang Yuanji, yuan qi is also Xing. And the unified qi of the vast harmony is the unborn ming suspended between heaven and earth, which is also real xing and real ming. About here, I usually waves with a white flag and return to the buddhist terminology.

With a friend?🤣

Yes, we can only cultivate/practice/develop how the body utilize those subststances, if we are looking at it from a physiolgical ppint of view. My real question was answered though, that the discussion so far was on the level of the preliminary practice.

Did you find any of these descriptions useful in your practice?

Is dan dao about cultivating post heaven qi?

No, but your model of conditioned reality would fit better in another section on the site. It makes it easier to communicate, since we basically are discussing categories and models. Have you noticed that many of your posts are interpreted as way of topic when you post them in for example discussions related to neidan?

And most of the time, the right qigong is to do enough of whatever style one is practicing.