freeform

7 hours ago, awaken said:

The first type and the second type are both typical black liver light.

The fourth is the phenomenon that the third eye has just opened.

The third possibility asks you to describe the timing of the occurrence.

The third kind of bright white light has "radiation light"?

The rays of light are the lines that radiate out like the rays of the sun.

So my teacher has explained most of these… and you’re not quite right about all of them… but that’s because I’ve explained in more depth to my teacher and he can ‘see’ what’s going on anyway.

The original reason I started talking about light is because @Taoist Texts said something like “white light is white light” - but actually there are many white lights.

oh and the third light - no there are no radiating lines. I also don’t practice Vipassana… but I do practice meditation.

1 hour ago, liminal_luke said:

Years ago Joe Blast shared a method of working with the MCO that involved light focus on the various points of the orbit combined with opening and closing the various dan tiens in a particular order.  I haven't worked with it but it's long been on my radar.  You don't move the energy along the orbit with your mind, instead letting the opening and closing of the dan tiens ignite the process.  

 

In your view, is this a transfer method practice mistake or more along the lines of "digging the channel"?  Thanks!

Essentially using your mind in a focused, contrived or restricted way is ‘transfer method’… so focusing on points along the line would count as that. I’m not sure what’s meant by opening and closing the Dantiens means specifically, but that could certainly be contrived if it uses the mind to do it.

I think there’s a time and a place for that actually - but with the more subtle stuff like MCO, it’s better to ‘dig the channel’… Qi is sensitive and will rebel as soon as you try to contrive its movement… and contrivance also blocks access to various deeper aspects of qi (such as ‘cultivated qi’ or ‘preheaven qi’… or ‘Ling qi’ etc)… the wrong aspect of consciousness is driving the bus!

For instance many internal methods will have various standing and moving forms… your awareness is simply allowed to absorb into the body - and it’s the maintenance of correct mental and physical principles when standing that does the work (such as allowing the crown to be suspended as the rest of the body sort of hangs off it… and releasing the sternum… setting the shoulders, sinking into the kwa… stable, relaxed, attentive awareness etc)… all of these physical principles set up lines of internal tension (as long as muscles can relax) that correspond to various channels… like a taught guitar string that can carry a vibration in just the right tone… and along with the mental principles together they also allow the qi to sink while increasing the generation of Yang qi… (qi sinks - downward movement… yang qi is generated - upward movement) this sets up the initial ‘channel’ for the microcosmic orbit and the initial movement of qi… (though this isn’t the ‘real’ alchemical MCO yet… it’s just qi movement…)

There are also methods that use the hands to shape the qi… 
 

We never give the qi direction with the mind - with the mind we only ‘listen’ (absorbed, stable, relaxed awareness) and ‘release’ (Sung) while holding the correct posture (or doing the correct movements) - and this ‘digs the channels’ by reshaping the body - which in turn reshapes the channels for the ‘water’ to run down.
 

In fact the hardest and most crucial thing is training the mind not to interfere… constantly releasing even the tiniest level of contrivance (for example wanting to feel some effect is a sort of contrivance at the back of the mind)… it’s a never ending, almost impossible task  

Awaken wouldn’t agree with this methodology I imagine - she’s more keen on zifagong (spontaneous movement) - but in my tradition we use both ‘digging the channels’ and allowing the qi to refine and self-organise through spontaneous movement. One is better for ‘building’ and ordering - the other is better for mobilising, releasing and refining.

44 minutes ago, awaken said:

If you really want to understand what a black liver is, you can describe the light you see.

I remember you said that you have seen four lights.

1 - white light like snow envelops the inner vision from around the sides… fills the vision. After, when I open my eyes all I can see is white for several hours. Slowly the white receded and it was like looking through fog.

2 - I absorb into the body, it starts to disappear, all that is left is a field of qi… over time as I absorb into the qi field, it disappears and various colour lights start… depending what I’ve been working on.

3 - very bright flashing light at the centre of inner vision that stabilises into a pure white light that over time condensed into a disk.

4 - a light that only appears outside of practice like a lightning flash - usually flashes 3 times.

Now thinking about it there are a few others - but doesn’t matter too much  

6 minutes ago, Mithras said:

What if a cultivator can’t use qi because their practice and have to use their ego entirely to cultivate.
 

Ex: Ego over mind instead of body soul relation

 

What are some possible options to cultivate considering no physical activity or spiritual practice considering communication?

Im not sure I completely get what you’re asking…

But prayer and service to others is one of the best cultivation methods if you’re not able to cultivate at the level of the qi or use the mind to reach meditative absorption.

29 minutes ago, awaken said:

A black liver is not a soul, at least not as defined by the Western world.

Could you try to explain a little more about it then?

You’ve mentioned the coloured lights that then form into a round shape… that’s the experience of the black liver… but what is the black liver actually?? It’s not Yuan Shen, right?

From what I understand it is the light of your Original Self (or your Soul… or the deeper aspect of Hun-Po) 

If you could explain Black Liver from your point of view, I think people would be able to understand you a little better.

25 minutes ago, dwai said:

belligerent members (not yourself). 

Oh I’m sure I fall in that category from time to time 😅

Quote

The mind is not acquired. It is a phenomenon that arises with the "entry" into the phenomenon world (birth); it reflects pure consciousness, which can neither be created nor destroyed/dissipated.

Honestly I think it’s just a case of semantics…

Daoists tend to differentiate the mind that arises out of sense-based cognition and the one that was there prior to this… of course they arise from the same source.

But they differentiate not for the purpose of explaining the truth of the matter, but for helping to give context to the process of internal alchemy… That’s why it might seem a bit arbitrary to ‘seal the senses’ (which is not quite what it appears to mean in reality) - but it’s important for the alchemical transformation process.

And as we know the views of internal alchemy and your views diverge significantly after the process of recognition of one’s true nature.

23 minutes ago, awaken said:

For example, when someone practices qi, he wants the qi to move in which direction, so he will use his attention to try to influence the direction of qi movement.

This is what I object to.

Another situation is that when the attention is naturally placed on the body, this way of placing the attention itself will cause the movement of Qi. I have no objection to this way.

Great  

We agree on both of these points then.

5 minutes ago, dwai said:

What is "acquired" consciousness? That in itself is a misunderstanding of epic proportions! There is no "Acquired" consciousness. There is the mind which is reflected consciousness. Consciousness can neither be acquired nor abandoned.

You’re starting to sound like Awaken yourself! 😅

The only way I can understand others is to let go of my own views for a short while to understand their views from my (admittedly faulty) interpretation of their POV.
 

I think that sometimes it’s worth giving people the benefit of the doubt and being gentle with the imposition of your own views before fully understanding.

By Acquired consciousness, I mean the consciousness of the acquired mind. ‘Sense-based consciousness’… the self that dies when ‘you’ die.

The consciousness revealed when you ‘seal the senses’ is the consciousness of the Original Self - Soul (or black liver (from what I figure of her writing)) or whatever you want to call it.

2 minutes ago, dwai said:

The "Carrying" and the "transfer method" dichotomy

In Awaken’s terminology ‘carrying method’ and ‘transfer method’ are one and the same thing.

It simply means using the mind to cause change… she correctly (imo) points out that using acquired consciousness to move qi (or enter ‘meditative’ states) is incorrect…

1 hour ago, Wilhelm said:

It'd be real nice if all these months of disagreement were based on an understanding of who was and wasn't using intention to guide the process...

Oh I always understood what she meant  

I don’t agree with her on all points - but guiding the qi with intention - whether visualised or directed with focused mind or with some other sensation is indeed incorrect.

It’s something that is taught very often but as Awaken says it blocks of access to deeper layers of the process (as well as severely limiting the amount of qi that can be generated/regulated).

On 28/01/2023 at 3:16 AM, Creation said:

By this do you mean, that this happens in a way that is dramatically deeper, longer, or more complete of a stopping than in previous jhanas or samadhis?  Because this could very well be what the Buddha meant when he said in the Suttas that the breath stops in 4th jhana, and later generations moved the goalposts to mean some type of less deep or complete stopping of the breath. 

Yes - and that all bodily processes apparently slow down/stop - not just the breathing…

Between the 4th and 5th Jhannas there’s a bit of a paradigm shift from functioning in the physical realm to functioning purely in the spiritual realm.

On 29/01/2023 at 2:16 AM, liminal_luke said:

Awaken's criticism of the transfer method reminds me of Freeform's criticism of popular methods to "sink the chi."  If I remember correctly, Freeform suggests that it's a mistake to mentally imagine or intend to bring qi down.  Instead a practitioner would set up the conditions which naturally allow the qi to descend on it's own.  Do I have that right?

 

I predict that Awaken and Freeform will join forces and open their own online school together.  Sign me up!

Yup - exactly right  

Pretty much every important method  is done this way…

Dig the channel and the water will flow of its own accord…

Instead of ‘carrying’ the water in your hands like a low-level schmo  

I think before we can set up our school she’d have to unblock me first 

(I predict a sitcom style love-hate relationship for this one)

4 hours ago, Creation said:

For instance, in the original Pali Suttas, the Buddha said the breath stops in 4th jhana.  Some traditional commentaries say this is not to be taken literally, the breath just seems to stop (can't remember a reference for this).  Some take it literally and say, "Why would you want such a thing, it's not important to practice this" (Vausbandhu).  Others, like the famous Visuddhimagga of the Theravada tradition, take out any mention of the breath stopping at all in their description of jhana, as though it's no longer a criterion for determining correct jhana.

I side with the Theravadan interpretation - that it’s not one of the conditions for determining Jhanna…

Only because for me, my breath stops at various lesser samadhi absorptions…

However I’ve been taught that both breathing - and all other metabolic processes pause during 4th Jhanna… things like heartbeat, pulse etc - and this absorption can last from days to months at a time…

The place I go to in Burma they have these tiny caves that have been lined with smooth clay - once you’re in they seal the entrance with clay too… apparently to stop insects and vermin messing with the body during  extended meditation… it struck me that once the entrance was sealed closed, there wouldn’t be any air exchange… not a problem if you’re not gonna be breathing I guess 😅

Ive heard stories of having to plug the various orifices of the body to stop insects and rats making their way in aswell 

3 hours ago, ChiQiGuy said:

There is no trauma in my life that has been able to released without some form of acknowledgement. I do see that being able to acknowledge those traumas and going back to address them has been easier when turning my attention away from them for a time. But it never eliminates them to just ignore and forget. The body (physical and spiritual) remembers far more than our conscious mind can maintain.

 

I sincerely hope that you're right that the scars will fall away on their own and I won't notice.

I agree.

I’m suggesting that turning your attention to something else would be the best way to disconnect from the immediate influence…

Talking and analysing the situation is like stirring up the mud at the bottom of the lake.

Just give it some time, let it settle… once the water is clear, releasing that trauma will be far easier - and will avoid re-anchoring it in your mind and body.

2 minutes ago, awaken said:

I've said many times

Yes you speak - but you never listen.

Take time to listen and you’ll find that the world is not as black and white as you imagine.

You may discover that people agree with you far more than you realise…

And if you’re able to listen, many more people will be interested when you do speak.

4 hours ago, Barnaby said:

 

Let's loose the broad brush, guys... 

 

What do you know about the motivations of millions of ground-level practitioners?

Sorry but I think you absolutely misunderstood my intention.
 

I never said that Christians are political. Or that they’re bad or not valid.

I said Christianity is more often political than spiritual.

That’s very different.

I try to be reasonably precise with what I say - Let’s loose the broad brush indeed. 

I actually believe that Christianity as a religion - and prayer as a form of spiritual cultivation are both very much as valid as Asian ones.

As an institution however - it has, over the centuries, done exactly what you mentioned is ‘evil’ - which is manipulate peoples innate spiritual calling for power and control.

12 minutes ago, Wilhelm said:

Any of us who've read your PPD know you feel this way (as is your right - I can only assume it's based off your own experience), but it's pretty strange to say you arrived at these conclusions logically...

I know that when I have a disproportionate reaction like this, it suggests to me that there’s an inner disharmony or contraction around some unresolved inner conflict…

23 minutes ago, Indiken said:

 

Christianity is not spiritual.

I think it can be - but more often than not it’s political more than spiritual…

Interestingly - many of the pastors flying on their private jets and sailing around on their private yachts don’t charge - but encourage donations instead…

(sorry @Wilhelm - I can never stay on topic for long!!)

11 minutes ago, Barnaby said:

Or maybe it would end up getting exactly to those who needed to hear it  

Well, he’s no Buddha, but I’m friends with a gifted and attained monk who was meditating to a high level from a very young age - he tried this…

He came to Switzerland with a group of monks, was asked to stay and teach - so he did, all on a donation basis (that’s all he knew).

Even though he got plenty of donations, after paying various costs and fees he was saddled with extreme debt within 3 months and had to ask his friends to pay for his ticket back to Burma.

Western life is not suited to spiritual cultivation… you either adapt skilfully or you fall through the cracks (or you escape back to a country that has spiritual tradition baked into the culture )

2 minutes ago, freeform said:

I think that’s probably one of the worst things, yeah.

 

I should add - if the main aim of teaching is to manipulate people for the satisfaction of one’s base desires (in whatever form) - then yes that’s probably as close to ‘evil’ as anything.

However if the main aim is a genuine attempt to pass on teachings and do what one can to help the person achieve these things - then asking for money (whether donations or a set price) is absolutely beside the point.

5 minutes ago, Barnaby said:

But I do think there's something evil about manipulating, exploiting and peverting the natural spiritual yearning of manifested beings for material gain. 

I think that’s probably one of the worst things, yeah.

It’s not just material gain either… there are plenty that give teachings for free but exploit the spiritual yearning for: a sense of power or control (like the lady that tells her followers to commit suicide - Teal Swan is her name, just remembered)… or sex and adoration (like that ‘Buddhafield’ guy) or many other such base instincts.

1 minute ago, Barnaby said:

 

I didn't know he charged for them... 

We don’t know whether he did or not… I’d imagine he didn’t. 
 

But I suspect in that day and age people would bring what they could as gifts and donations…

I wonder how such things would work nowadays in the western world. I imagine if he, or his entourage didn’t ask for payment or donations, his message wouldn’t get far…

4 minutes ago, Taoist Texts said:

But the issue is not the money. The issue is the goods, the subject matter of the talking and writing. The issue is what exactly we sell: is it good or is it evil.

People go to concerts, operas, burlesque shows, standup comedy etc etc.

Is it good or evil?
 

I mean why even care?

3 minutes ago, Taoist Texts said:

From the fountainhead of all knowledge of course

How did I not work that out ahead of time!

25 minutes ago, Barnaby said:

 

Video and Zoom... Infinitely scalable too. Blame the Internet 

Yeah - I’m personally not anti seminars in person or on zoom.

I mean it’s not exactly how I would suggest to go about learning cultivation - but so what. It can still be helpful for some.
 

I’m just curious why in TT’s view seminar peddlers are on the same level as Trungpa - (who was, by all accounts an abusive alcoholic and a rapist - having ruined many lives and caused a number suicides…)

I could imagine high level Yogis and Brahmins during the historical Buddha’s lifetime calling him a seminar peddler as he gave his Dharma talks...