dwai

You just don't get it. Advaita is not Monistic. It is Not-istic. There is no "Ism". There only "Is". And Dependent Origination invariably means super-imposition. We had this entire thread about it. Without superimposing a categorical framework there IS no phenomenon. Without phenomena, there IS no Dependent Origination.

I did...you weren't reading. You still don't. I guess you never will... Ah...so it boils down to an existential crisis! Your buddhist identity is threatened by the fact that Vedanta says that Brahman is also Buddhist Ultimate truth. Pratityasamutpada (dependent-origination) is simply a realization in the path. It demonstrates the illusory nature of phenomenal reality. Since every phenomenon is dependently originated, they are Maya (or illusory). That doesn't make them unreal...they are simply superimposed creations.

That's what you think...Brahman is everything. That which you think is dependently co-rising and without true identity or essence is simply the result of superimposition on the Brahman. I never claimed that Buddhism says it agrees with Vedanta. I said Vedanta's Brahman IS also Buddhism's ultimate truth. If you guys choose to not see the unity then that's your shortcoming, imo.

well said! That is Brahman...

that's why Brahman is silence.

Quote some...and if he has said different things publicly vs privately, that makes him a hypocrite and dishonest. No you dont see it. Dependent Origination is only valid in phenomenal realm. Brahman is non-phenomenal. Nothing you can say or do can prove that Brahman is a phenomenon. Or Aatman for that matter. They are the same and it is just words. Over-zealous buddhists just like to believe that they are not the same. Actually we are starting off learning the Tai Chi sword forms.

No I dont. Shankara was not just an author of complex philosophy, he was also the author of compositions such as Bhavani Ashtakam, Aatma Shatakam, etc. Advaita Vedanta considers all valid paths to spiritual inquiry as valid foundations for ultimate absorption/realization. The Vaishnavas or Shaivas are bhaktas of Saguna Brahman. So much so that at their pinnacle they will naturally start identifying with their deity. Maybe some will understand that Saguna Brahman is simply a limited version of Nirguna Brahman. Also Vaishnavas are famously Dvaitins or dualists. They reject Advaita completely. That doesn't mean that advaita doesn't consider sincere attempts at seeking the truth as invalid. They are limited. As it seems your version of Buddhism is. That's why Shankara's advice to the "Moodha" scholar -- "Bhaja Govindam Moodhamate"... In other words, the necessity to show "exclusivism" is a tell-tale sign of deep-rooted insecurities. I am not sure if all Buddhists are this way or is it simply the hallmark of neophytes who overcompensate for their newly-converted status. The Dalai Lama sure doesn't seem that way...yet you guys do. Why? Why is it so hard to see the underlying unity of ultimate truth? The truth is the same, different categorical frameworks give different results, which are limited views of the ultimate truth. EvZENy, I'm excited about starting the sword practice on Sunday. Hope it doesn't rain like last week!

the ultimate truth is the same...the wise describe it by different names

This sounds scarily similar to: "my buddhism is better than your buddhism...nyah nyah nyah nyah nyah nyah!! Oh! And yeah...my Zero is zero'er than your zero!" Geez! Man...c'mon already...like Grow UP!

You focus on your liberation (or enchainment to what you think is Buddhism)...the rest will take care of itself. You have demonstrated to me the uselessness of discussing the Tao. It cannot be discussed. If it can, it is not the real Tao.

Fraud or not, Carlos' description of Nagual and Tonal are almost eerily similar to description of Maya (phenomenal world) and Brahman. Each and every concept mentioned in his books is mirrored in Taoism and Vedanta. In my opinion, a faker cannot capture the essence of the knowledge as beautifully as Carlos had in his writing. Don Juan may or may not be real, but the wisdom in Carlos' writing is undeniably present.

haiku shmaiku...same to me i like to rhyme for eternity! how long has it been? when did haiku begin? time to draw things in

Philip Zarilli's book is the best. My friend used to learn Kalari when he lived in Kerala...he was a scary fighter but a gentle soul BTW if you are interested, here's an article on Indian Martial Arts I'd written a while back -- Indian Martial Arts -- Will they survive?

Time to catch the dew how do you do nice to hear from you

Chi is an aspect of human physiology that has not been tapped into by Western Science. Biology as we know it today is the Western framework of studying physiology and lifeforms. The frameworks are different if we consider traditional systems such as TCM and Ayurveda. It is not that one is better than the other, but it just happens to be that they use different rules of categorization and thus come up with different outcomes (there are overlaps however). TCM and Ayurveda talk about a "life-force", an energy that is called Chi, Prana, Ki. They have discovered ways of studying it's effects and the results of modifying/controlling it's flow. Mind-body disciplines such as Yoga and Tai Chi etc help individuals sensitize themselves and eventually manipulate Chi in their system. There is sufficient empirical evidence available to validate it's veracity and the fact that both these ancient systems of healing work precisely because they are based on these principles. One might be tempted to dismiss TCM and Ayurveda as "primitive" and "proto-scientific", but that would be short-sighted. That's because they simply seem that way when viewed from the de facto standard categorical framework of today, ie Western Medicine and Western Science. Similarly, Western Science and Western Medicine might seem primitive and bumbling attempts at explaining nature or healing patients by serious practitioners of TCM or Ayurveda (there might be some veracity to that perspective). Western Medicine/Science is developed on the premise that there is a distinction between Mind and Body (the Cartesian divide). However, in TCM, Ayurveda (I will call them Traditional Sciences or TS from this juncture for brevity) there is no demarcation. According to the TS, mind and body are a continuum (what affects the mind will affect the body and vice versa). Chi naturally animates the body and mind. It is the basic building block of life. An organism (or an entity) cannot be called alive unless it has Chi. Chi is also inextricably linked with Consciousness. Both Indic and Chinese Traditional knowledge systems cover the nuances of Chi, Consciousness and their inter-relationship with all beings in great detail. I guess what I'm trying to get to here is that unless Western Science has a paradigm shift in it's hypotheses about the mechanics of Nature, it will not be able to understand Chi. There needs to be an adjustment in the framework.

but which one are they? it is every- thing time where but it are nothing

I dont know

Why not?

Indeed...you are right. I can only tell that what I'm learning works. I would love to learn other techniques as well, though Single form Tai Chi IS Qi Gong, is it not?

a heavenly match surely made by man why does it not end?

Works well for me I guess your experience must have been different than mine.

According to my teacher, the foundations of taiji chuan are in the 8 energies and 5 directions (or the basic 13 forms) all taiji forms rely on one or several of these energies put together in application (be it healing or martial) to learn to play with these energies one has to learn to cultivate Qi. without cultivation, discharging is like discharging a battery that is not fully charged. Nourishment or Cultivation is paramount.

play the weakest link for weakness is also strength the wise seem foolish

divine bubble bath the scholar warrior at war break all shackles

It depends on the intent behind your practice, imho. The style of Taiji I practice involves practicing single forms repetitively. The long form is done to test whether flow can be maintained through transitions. Emphasis is given to single form practice (the style is called Temple style tai chi). The intent encouraged is to make the practice a nourishing practice, with circulation of chi with the flow and finally drawing it into the lower dan tien at the end of the practice. For the first several years we are not taught transference of power. I have noticed that during practice sometimes little animals are attracted. They will stop and sit and observe me practicing, which I become aware off after a while, usually when transitioning. I have had rabbits, squirrels, feral cats, birds stop moving, and sit around. My teacher said he's had similar experiences too. The forms are the same as anyone would practice I guess. For instance brush knee twist step, grasp sparrow's tail, tai chi stance, raised hand, playing pipa, snake creep's down. I would assume that if the intent applied was martial, the result would be in these animals not staying but scattering. But that's just my interpretation.