gendao

This reply applies here too:

 

Who are you in your dreams? Do you have free will in them? Or are they predestined - and if so - by whom or what?

 

Do "you" have a "choice" in "your" dreams?

A taoist abbess who invented the martial art known today as Wing Chun or a taoist immortal female Sun Bu-er who invented dantien breathing are every bit as revered today by "real taoists" as they are ignored by "pop taoists" (who actually still haven't outgrown Father In Heaven's tit if you ask me...)

Hmm, I haven't read the TTC or HHC in years and need to re-read them anew with a gender context in mind...and will then report back with my interpretations.

 

Anyhow, slight correction here - Ng Mui was likely just a Qing-era cover story by Ming rebels who wanted to overthrow the Qing Manchurians:

Recent findings uncovered by historians and martial arts teachers feeding continuous streams of information and documentation to the Ving Tsun Museum in Dayton, Ohio -- and verified through extensive travel by the Museum Curator and staff to substantiate sources and documentation -- reveal that Ng Mui played no role in the creation or development of Wing Chun Kung Fu, if she ever existed at all.

I would like to hear about this Sun Bu-er, though!

Who are you in your dreams? Do you have free will in them? Or are they predestined - and if so - by whom or what?

 

Do "you" have a "choice" in "your" dreams?

Actually Taoism is full of chick crack.

Ha really? Such as?

Then men who are fed up of false yin start trying to be cocky pick up artists. More false yang. Which "works" to an extent, but with women who are so full of false yang themselves that it's basically a type of homosexual relationship, even though the bodies are different.

So, we're all pseudo-homos with pseudo-yang now? Lol...man are things f'd up these days!

Exchanging of oppinion in the masculine sense focus on the actual oppinion - in the feminine sense it's an exchange of energy and emotion - the actual content of the exchange matters very little (from my experience)

 

Ideas for men are part of this drive to make things permanant - ideas are permanent(ish) - For women it's just a way of exchanging emotional energy...

Right, well just take a look at big media. The most successful woman is Oprah - whose show revolves around emotional bonding. Meanwhile, her successful male "counterparts" involve a lot of intellectual conflict (shock jocks like Howard Stern and assorted wingnuts like Bill O'Reilly).

 

Of course, these are just generalizations and you do always have some "exceptions" like Ann Coulter or Dr. Phil...

 

As far as being under-opinionated...I think that may often have more to do with differing interests between the genders. Men and women tend to have different interests and are going to be under-opinionated about the ones of less interest. This site is a good example. Clearly, it is male-dominated and so your average woman out there is going to be more "I dunno" when asked about Taoism. But ask her about celebrity gossip and she might have far more opinions! In PU, these types of topics are known as "chick crack."

For me I see as distinctly feminine is not about pink and flowers, cooking or not cooking, speaking or not speaking but about being open and receptive.

True, but why have these particular things been associated with women? Again, evolution. Since women incubate the child, they have to screen out bad food. Hence, women tend to have better senses of smell and taste than men. They tend to be far pickier eaters, if anyone hasn't noticed. Well, this should theoretically also make them better cooks too - as well as able to enjoy fragrant flowers more. Not to mention they have smaller hands and greater fine manual dexterity. No surprise then that the recent texting champion was a 13-yo girl:

Point is, feminism looks down its upturned nose at these activities as "demeaning," but in reality they are simply logical extensions of natural feminine strong suits.

 

Seriously, so many young women today BRAG about how they can't cook!

 

Gee, when was the last time a guy BRAGGED about how he can't change a tire, or can't do ANYTHING, for that matter?

How do we get premission to start our own blogs?

 

Or how do we make entries? It seems I have one now but it's blank and I don't see an entry button?

If you try alternative energy healers, I would recommend finding ones with genuine qi/jing power. They are quite rare, but do exist. Because your standard acupuncturist probably doesn't have this and so their treatments are not going to be very powerful.

 

But cancer is not something you want to f*** around with, btw. You need to hit these hard and fast. Time is of the essence! Not saying yours is cancerous, just saying in general.

 

I've done a bit of casual research on cancer and as far as other alternative treatments, I've heard of a few that were rumored to be effective for some. Basically they entailed:

 

1) Agaricus Blazei mushroom and controlled doses of selenium

2) Hoxsey's herbal cocktail formula

3) Laetrile (B17), graviola, curcumin

4) Royal Rife's old frequency generator machine

5) DCA (dichloroacetic acid)?

My limited experience is: the middle dan tien is where intention is birthed - the lower dan tien provides the power/the juice/the will and the upper dan tien provides the 'inspiration' and awareness... but this is only when you're really quiet in your mind...

 

I find this source of intent can be reached by that drill I posted a little while ago (on a manifestation thread I think) - it's an amazingly profound excersise, and it empties you so much that anything that arises becomes maginfied and feels slower and more pronounced - so I can just be aware and witness what happens without interference.

Cool, the middle dan tien would be pretty close to the heart chakra, so there seems to be some congruence here.

 

And what drill? Would you mind linking it here, please?

Interesting, because doesn't TCM say that the heart is the source of intent?

 

As opposed to the "mind" which most of us associate with our heads...

 

I believe using your "heart" or "body awareness" instead of your "head" is the key to transcending one of the basic paradigms in meditation/qigong - whether to use intent or an empty mind.

 

Well, if you use your intent straight from your heart (or wherever in your body), instead of waiting until it gets to your mind first...then you will be using both intent and an empty mind. Wala - paradigm transcended and problem solved.

To then allow yourself to remain perfectly stabalized in this state for about two hours is the first basic accomplishment, as I understand it. Once you can enter this non dual state for four hours at will any day of the week, you are ready to begin formally practicing cultivation.

Pffbtt...no problem!

 

 

Ok seriously, is anyone here near this level of cultivation? Just curious?

You might be right, but again what is the point. These big questions are beyond the scope of a forum. If you what to practice Taoism, start at the beginning and create your Dan. Than you can worry about God and whether Dao comes from within or whatever.

 

It's the idea of the Shen and the Bodhi Mind which are interchangable terms. The dreamer that is dreaming to be you. Your true face. It is only through communion with this source which is OUTSIDE the self that we can escape the fisherman's net that Lao Tzu spoke of.

I agree. My point is basically that those big questions are not only beyond the scope of this forum, but for most of us mortals at the level that we're at. Hence, the term "agnostic" which basically means "uncertain knowledge." And to believe you know any more than you do is fooling yourself.

 

Interesting idea there. The Dunhuang scrolls contain Ch'an techniques of "viewing the mind" and examining it for shape and color, etc. The point of this exercise (I believe) ironically to get you OUT of your mind into a tri-state of non-thought, non-conceptualizing and not engaging the mind. Basically, an eye cannot see itself. So, if you are told to see your eye, then you must not be using your eye.

Vortex,

 

how come out of the One Thousand Wealthiest People in the USA, 999 are men and 1 (Oprah) is a woman?

 

"Abuse" is not what you see on TV for which the solution offered is "shelters for battered women." Your mother and grandmother were treated very well. Great. Mine had to live through wars unleashed by men, lose husbands and children to concentration camps that were men's business ventures and men's political work; drop out of med school because of pregnancy (grandmother), throw away the "most talented mathematician I've met in all of my career" (a letter to my mother from her old math professor) and work as "something or other now pregnant and later wiping snotty noses instead of working" (my mother's boss a couple years later), work night shifts with infants at home, and no, they weren't shelter-worthy abused... they were abused by default by the set-up offered by society from the start. A man-made set-up, not a woman-made one.

 

What's your take on Chinese women with crippled legs -- bound feet -- the practice existed for about a thousand years, and it was supposedly the "mothers" who did it to the daughters -- ever wondered why? When asked, they responded, oh, but the girl won't be able to marry if her legs aren't bound. OK. Won't be able to marry, what's the big deal? The big deal is, it just so happened that for a thousand years, you could be either a peasant girl working eighteen hours a day every day, or a member of the aristocracy having no access to any income of your own other than through your husband. And the husband won't take you if you're not crippled. It was considered 'lowly and unfeminine' to have natural feet. For a thousand years. Femininity as defined by men, insane men at that.

1) Why are men also bigger, stronger and have IQs 4-8 pts higher on average? The answer is in evolution. Sexual dimorphism was the result of gender role specialization and sexual reproduction - which proved more effective than asexual androgny. The proof is that we are all here today as a result of the former, not the latter. Anyhow, in this role specialization, males assumed the roles as protectors and providers and women as nurturinng replicators. So, females chose men for survival value (power), males chose females for replication value (beauty).

 

Therefore, men compete more strongly for power - because our worth depends more upon it. Why are 99% of the self-cultivators on this forum male, and not female? It's not just wealth - but the creative, inventive force of exploration is largely male. We are driven to this from when we were still sperm competing against millions of others for our very survival. Women just don't have that same pressure placed upon them.

 

2) Footbinding originated from upper-crust Chinese women imitating Western "ballet" dancers in "pointe" shoes.

"Tang court women followed Persian and Turkish fashions, wearing dresses with tight-fitting bodices, pleated skirts, and hats with enormous veils. And it was apparently imitation of foreign toe-dancing groups that originally led upper-class Chinese women to bind their feet. At first it was just palace dancers who bound their feet slightly, like ballet dancers, to stand on their toes." - When China Ruled the Seas: The Treasure Fleet of the Dragon Throne, 1405-1433 by Louise Levathes

So, it was essentially a Tang Dynasty "boob job" that eventually spread down to lower classes. But, it was started by women and passed down by women in the name of vanity and social-climbing. To blame it on "abuse" by men would be like blaming boob jobs on "abuse" by men. BS. Sorry, but feminist revisionist history and cultural illiteracy really piss me off. As does lack of accountability and scapegoating of men for women's own choices. Did men feed into it after awhile? Sure. But, where does the buck really stop here?

 

3) We can trade counter-examples all day long. Why is it that "99%" of those who have died in battle were all men? Why is it that "99%" of those drafted for military service have all been men? Why is it that "99%" of garbage workers have all been men? Why is it that "99%" of job fatalities have all been men? You see, there are 2 sides to the coin - and the problem with feminism is that it sees only one. Fact is, you HAVE been brainwashed by feminism to carry this chip on your shoulder against men due to a distorted, 1-sided pereption of events. And I find this typical for women today.

Why make a judgement. John says he's a Cristian and follows the christian ideal. Who the hell are we to start debating what his beliefs are and are not and what difference would it make?

 

Are we really looking to someone we have only read about and asking these questions? I mean what is the point of that. If we really wanted to know the truth we would go ask John Chang, anything else just speaks about itself. John has said he believes in God with a capital G. I just take him at his word. Who cares about the rest it has no meaning to us and it can't possibly.

Well again, I think we can only be as precise as the language is...

 

Lots of religions believe in some type of "God." Although "God" is an Anglo word that wasn't even in the original Bible. Therefore, "God" has a vague definition to begin with...and simply believing in "God" does not make you a "Christian," either. But if John says he currently still is a Christian and follows the "Christian ideal" - ok. Although I would still be curious as to exactly what his definition of "Christianity" and the "Christian ideal" is. Because that can vary widely - amongst both "Christians" and "non-Christians" alike.

 

And we can't just go ask him now because I believe he has retreated to Borneo?

 

Sorry for the tangent, Wayfarer...

My point is not to get into a discussion here, but simply to illustrate that what the reality is just IS. Belief or opinion really doesn't enter into it. John Chang is a devoted Christian and goes to church regularly. Does he believe Jesus is the only savior? Probably not, but I don't think even Jesus intended his life to be interprited that way. The ignorance of the massess has nothing to do with reality, but also know that people with very simple beliefs can reach the heaven too. It's really not about having the right politically correct version of the gospell. It's about what is between you and 'your lord' whatever that is to you, period. There's really little to discuss on the matter in my opinion.

Good point, some of what Jesus said has been interpreted as saying everyone needed him as an exclusive savior...but really those could be interpreted in different ways too.

 

I think John technically fits the definition of agnostic more than Christian, because I think even he agrees that we are not at a high enough level to really KNOW the answers to all those really big questions. And to pretend otherwise is unrealistic.

 

But do we know enough that there's probably some type of higher being(s) that we can pray to? Perhaps.

Let me just say this. When we develop wisdom, what might appear dogmatic, "Jesus was the son of God" becomes a metaphor for a deeper reality. The idea that we are all potential sons and daugthers of God or Dao is very true. At the same time, we need to be humble enough to except that the idea that eden or the garden or heaven or whatever is not "this" current condition, but also a story that reflects a deeper reality. I believe we have to seek it to find it, and part of what makes it so worth while is the fact that it is so challenging.

 

The issue of Traditional Daoist cultivation vs. western views on the subject, could have and should be a seperate issue. Here to me there are some clear misunderstandings that hopefully will come to light over the years, but again, this is a discussion on a seperate issue.

 

S

Well, I would love a separate thread on this then - the 2 paradigms of Taoism vs Christianity and how they fit together if someone believes in both?

 

I mean, I think Christianity in particular is an inkblot that can be interpreted in many ways to suit your own beliefs - so I am curious what those beliefs actually are for "Taoist Christians" like David. Like, do Taoists really need a personal savior in Jesus? Because that would seem to be one sticking point between the 2 paradigms - whereas various others could be resolved more easily through creative interpretations.

 

Like, I don't think John Chang is remotely an orthodox Christian, if he even still claims to be one. What I recall reading is that he was raised as one but during his adult retreat in the mountains was running around asking if "God" exists until he got a meteor hurled at him! Which made him conclude there might be some vastly higher being, but he had no idea if that was "God" or not. This would seem to paint him more as an agnostic or deist, not necessarily a Christian.

Brilliant post. I wish I had anything to add or some other useful comment. I rarely comment with what can be summarized in a smiley, but this deserves applaud. Can I quote this on my blog?

Ha sure...glad you enjoyed it!

 

Taomeow - my mother nor my grandmothers were abused. They were all treated very well, in fact.

 

But that does not insulate me from the misandry I am subject to in this feminized culture. For elaboration on that, please read post #4 here. I hardly think all of that is due to "men's abuse of women transmitted through the umbilical cord before birth." Nice try, though!

I think the members here are mature enough to respect this simple request. I posted the links in good faith and if people want to violate it, then I have no control over that. I only posted these few links to address particular issues I feel are usefull given recent discussions.

 

Anyway, you can discuss them as much as you want here without having to copy the material.

Personally, I don't have a problem with this. I don't feel like it's much to ask and certainly no one is stopping anyone from joining your board to argue it there if they so please.

 

And I do enjoy having specific articles or essays linked here just to highlight some particularly good points...

 

In short, I'd rather comply with minimal privacy requests than have you stop linking articles or shut the foundation board down (as with Kosta's old board).

Great questions. The story david told us about the old priest, actually tow diffrent guys, was amazing. One of them was a hermit living somewher near the Ukrane. Went David would go to visit him and listen to him answer question for the local villagers, the old man would become so full with divin he would levitate about three feet. Often totally unaware of it. David was in shocked and asked hi what kind of meditation he was doing and what techniques, etc... the saint just laaughed at his and replied that no such nonsense was the case. He just explained that when your heart is filled with the lord you become 'light' literally. We are all made up of light, I think any way.

 

The second story was of a man who, a priest actually, who was probaly a Buddha, but is know passed away. David believed he was on a par with people like Wang Liping who can duplicate his body.

 

Actually David does still teach the principles of the Christian Mystics, the real saints who undersatnd the teachings of Jesus without all the BS. He has a very strong Christian faith himself and often speaks of the holy spirit with great emotion, as does John Chang who's favorit advice is to pray to the lord daily with joy in your heart and tears in your eyes. Some of these Daoists are real Christian Mystics as well you know. I'm not kidding and David really does ask his students to pray every day and I do, simple bastard that I am.

That is very interesting, would be proof-positive that there are many ways to enlightenment.

 

Now, is Wang Liping Christian too?

 

I've been rather shocked to learn that quite a few high-level Chinese masters in Taoism or Taijiquan are actually Christian.

 

Although, I'm curious as to what their definition of Christianity is? Do they really believe Jesus was the "son of god" who died for our sins and is the only way to "salvation?" I mean, from what I read from John Chang's book - he believed that "Heaven" was a white wave and "Hell" a black wave after death - but Hell was only temporary anyways. And if you become enlightened, do you even have to worry about going to "Heave" or Hell," or even need a "savior?" Or if you have a savior, do you need to become enlightened? So, what's the real paradigm here?

 

Or do they simply take it more as a generic deism - and simply pray to "God?" If so, what is their definition of "God?" A "Pan Gu" type creator or the "Tao?"

 

Perhaps this should be its own thread and a question to David - what their interpretation of Christianity is and how does it relate to Taoism? Compare and contrast the 2 paradigms?

David has spent time in old Europe with Orthodox Christian mystics that make some of his masters in China look like beginners.

Great post, Sean!

 

This quote caught my eye, though. After hearing stories of Wang Liping walking through walls and "daylight ascensions," you're saying that there are Orthodox Christian mystics who make these feats look like child's play?

 

 

Um, could you elaborate? What exact Christian traditions are these guys practicing and what have they achieved in comparison? And why isn't David discipling under them instead of WLP then?

And who actually does that?

Well, Bob Cooley did and thus "invented" resistance stretching!

 

After which he used yogic asanas and TCM meridian theory to verify his independent findings.

 

Oops, bad example...or is that a good one?

 

 

 

 

But think about that - you had millions of yoga students following gurus...and yet none of them (I don't think) had figured out that you're supposed to contract, not relax, the muscles being stretched. Why? Because they were following the finger, not the moon. And that very slight, subtle distinction can make all the difference in the world.

This is ungrounded in my oppinion... if I pour a glass of water on you - you get wet, I dont...

 

I know deeper down there is an implicit connection, but that's deeper down not here on the surface... I know some people can be deeper down and on the surface and higher up at the same time - but I cant, so it wouldn't serve me to talk of that...

Well, like I said, until we reallly transcend that dualistic paradigm via "enlightenment," it's more theoretical than applicable.

 

Kinda like how we still use Newtonian physics for most science and engineering calculations - even though we know relativistic physics is technically more accurate. But for our purposes, Newtonian physics suffices and is far easier to apply.

 

So sure, focus inside...but don't just strictly LIMIT yourself to JUST THAT as some ironclad rule. Or at least that's my opinion...

Well also don't forget - let's not get too stuck in this paradigm of "in me" vs "out of me" or "myself" vs "not myself."

 

If we are ultimately all connected as one, then everything is really "in me."

 

Although until we achieve enlightenment and really unite with everything, our current paradigm is still probably a better approximation for the time being.

What is the "state of Sung?"

I think ideally you want a good balance between self-discovery and experienced guidance. Isn't this true in most disciplines and skills in life?

 

But I would agree with perhaps your sentiment that people may tend to rely upon gurus too much. I've noticed that those who follow the finger instead of the moon never get that far in the end.

 

I think you must still find your own way, with teachers as signposts and teachings as verification.

Sexism is the exploitation of one sex by another, as racism is the exploitation of one race by another.

But many feminists would beg to differ with you about your definition...or claim that EVERYTHING qualifies as "exploitation" of women. Even if it is due to biological differences or the woman's own choice.

 

The reality today is as in Pietro's well-linked post. If anything, women aren't getting exploited nearly as much as men are these days...