dwai

Vedanta involves self-inquiry. The Neti-Neti method is used to delve into what the "Self" means and is a core method employed by all Vedantins. Also, there ARE NO universals. Everything is dependent on circumstances. The truth that is "Absolute" has to be attained by transcending these categorical frameworks. But a Categorical framework is essential because of the fact that we are human beings who work on the level of subject and object duality, of form and description duality (Nama Rupa). All so-called Universal truths are only Universal within a specific categorical framework. Tao, Brahman are what are Absolute truths, that do not operate on or depend on categorical frameworks. Think about it, you are using a Categorical framework to access something that cannot be accessed by it, that cannot be described by it. The realization that you cannot access it (true realization) is what transcending that framework means.

We must not misunderstand and mistake polemic and rhetoric for knowledge. Buddhist doctrines are replete with various interesting stories and opinions about the Vedic/Vedantic tradition, since they were competing against this massive system (and they lost) in the birth place of Buddhism, ie India. Here's an excellent essay (not written by one of those superstars everyone seems to not see beyond) that discusses the dynamics between Buddha (Siddhartha) and the Upanishads (Vedantic literature). http://medhajournal.com/index.php?option=c...&Itemid=269 What I'm trying to suggest here is that studying Advaita without Vedanta is like studying Electronic instrumentation without any knowledge of Electronics. The foundation has to be right...think about the semantic differences after you understand first one and then the other side(s) of the argument.

You have very poor knowledge of "Hindu" Advaita. " Tat Tvam Asi" and "Aham Brahmasmi" are two very important pronouncements that have gotten lost in the mist of avidya (Ignorance). Tat Tvam Asi -- YOu are That Aham Brahmasmi -- I am Brahman Where is this ground of phenomenon? Buddhists call this ground something else, that's all. Taoists call it Tao, Advaitins (and all Vedantins in general) call it Brahman. There is no ground...but everything is the ground. There is no phenomenon, but everything is the phenomenon. Advaita Vedanta calls the practitioner to use his intellect and a categorical framework (which comprises of these "phenomenon") to rise above the categorical framework. That is why there is no name for Brahman, only Brahman. There can be no description of that which is beyond the duality of phenomena.

Hmm...everything that we call "Reality" in this material universe exists because of two things. Cognition and Perception. Classical Indian Philosophy calls it Nama Rupa (Name and Form). Every categorical framework, based on which claims about the reality of things (or so-called unreality of things) is derived from these two primary pillars of perception and conception. Just because certain subjects cannot perceive or conceive of (one or the other or both), doesn't negate the reality of the phenomenon.

I recommend reading books on Advaita Vedanta. A good start would be "Vedanta -- The Voice of Freedom" by Swami Vivekananda. Also, all of Swami Vivekananda's works are great and provide a great resource for all levels, from beginner to advanced practitioners. I also recommend "Jnana Yoga -- The Way of Knowledge" by Dr. Ramakrishna Puligandla. This is not just a fantastic introduction to Jnana Yoga, but covers the basics of Philosophy is the most lucid and pleasant manner.

Dear mewtwo, This works for me so -- * Sit in a comfortable position (on a chair or cross-legged or in vajrasana). * start by relaxing your body from the crown point to the soles of your feet * close your eyes or look into infinity without focussing on any thing (if you want cross your eyes a little, so everything seems to hover in your vision but nothing is focussed on). * bring your attention to your nostrils and observe the breath going in and out. * Observe the coolness of the in-breath and the warmth/heat of the out-breath * simply stay there for as long as you can, and if you mind wanders, gently bring it back to the task at hand of breath observation * do not try to consciously force any breathing, simply observe the breath going in and out. After a while (and with some practice), you will get a sensation of falling within yourself, like transitioning to a deeper space within yourself. And the thoughts will slow down And as you spend more time in this stage, you will sense another feeling of falling deeper into yourself. Each of these shifts will be startling. Don't focus on the shift, but remain calm and do the task at hand. You could also do this lying down, in Shavasana (Corpse Pose), but I would recommend doing a sequence of asanas with Ujjayi breath (Victorious breath), slowly, with as much time in hand as possible before trying the Shavasana. Here is a sequence I use, holding each pose and doing 6-8 long, unstrained ujjayi breaths with each pose (note: I don't know english names for some of these asanas, but you can find these easily via google) -- * 2 rounds of Sun Salutation * Uttanasana * Plank pose * Chaduranga Dandasana (four posts pose) * Cobra/Upward dog * locust * Downward dog * left and right side spinal twists in cross-legged position (or Marichi's twist, as your practice progresses) * left and right side paschimottasana * paschimottasana * lie down and do the bridge (setubandha sarvagasana) * Shavasana (Corpse pose) For Corpse pose, use the same techniques as mentioned for the seated meditation. I can't speak for others, but this sequence helps get into a state of deep relaxation and then fall into meditation easily. This entire sequence will take about 20-25 minutes and then you can spend as long as you wish in the corpse pose. It sounds complicated, but is very simple actually and doesn't have any really negative side effects. Only thing to remember is to not force the body into any pose. Work within the limitations of your physical capabilities. Don't strain and ease into each pose with the help of your breath. Best Regards, Dwai

Dear Friends, Thanks for your responses and good vibrations. I will try and work on the advice given here. Best Regards, Dwai

Friends, I've been reading Bruce Frantzis' excellent two volume series on Water Method of Taoist Meditation and find that the Water method seems to be somewhat different from the type of Taoist Tai Chi I am learning. In our system so far, we have focussed on single form practice and the micro-cosmic orbit and moving energy first with Yi and then just go with the flow (without Yi). Per Bruce Frantzis' description, this a Fire Method. But then again there are some aspects of just letting things happen as they happen, without trying to force too much onto the system, which my teacher tells me seems like it is the Water Method (dissolving blockages and the mindstream, etc). Does anyone here follow either pure Fire or Pure Water Method? Any thoughts you would want to share on either or both the techniques? Warnings/Pitfalls and/or advice?

Wikipedia has a good list of Hindu/Vedic Texts -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedas

Hi Creation, I agree with your analysis of BKF's style. I personally find it very appealing and love the "story-teller" way of conveying profound stuff. Also I am a grand-student of Master Liao. I have been studying under his disciple since 2003. All of Master Liao's books are great. My personal favorite is the "Nine Nights with the Taoist Master" - since it too mixes the Story-telling style with conveyance of Taoist teachings in a most brilliant manner.

I study under Master Liao's student. I know at least a couple of others on this board have been/still are students of his school -- Temple Style Tai Chi.

I have tried doing the "Outer" dissolving with some success, but as in the post you quoted, it seems to take a lot of effort to do the dissolving. But when it works it works like a charm. I have a problem with the left side of my body, which is very difficult to shoong. I tried integrating dissolving (based on the books) into my regular practice (eg: dissolving on my one hour train (each way) ride to work and back back then) but it was hard to reconcile the two practices. So now, I have started doing the preparatory work BKF recommends, starting with releasing, and it seems to help. The tenseness in certain spots on my left side, jaw, neck/shoulder along the Gallbladder meridian seems to release automatically. So the trick is to be effortless (as is mentioned in the Tai Chi Classics)...but that is a very hard state to attain...

Get Purva Karma and Pancha Karma treatment after discussion with an Ayurvedic practitioner while in India. Purva Karma is the preparatory treatment following which Pancha Karma is done to flush the body off toxins. This will also open up the nadis. Remember to find an Ayurvedic doctor who also does Marma/Nadi treatments.

As requested by Goldisheavy, I am starting a new thread on why/how I think Yi can be dropped. "The mind leads, the Chi follows" is true only till a certain level of chi awareness is attained and exercises on guiding flow of Chi is done. After that, the intent should be dropped and the Chi allowed to flow as it does. That is the water course way (as I understand it and as I have been told).

I like your concept of aligning mundane Yi into Shen Yi...and the more I think about it, I am inclined to agree that such a thing might indeed be happening. After reaching Silence, and emptiness, the practitioner becomes aware of that which doesn't change and is eternal. Bruce Frantzis' books on Water Meditation have very profound description of this process. In the Yogic world, this realization is the discovery of the aatman (the true Self). After this juncture, it is only a matter of time before aatman realizes it's unity with everything else -- therefore Brahman. P.S. I was going to use the terms Te and Tao, since in the school I study in, Te is not a moral/psycho-ethical construct as is usually understood, but actually the rediscovery of and the completion of the energetic aspect of Tao that is present in all creation. This is analogous with aatman ( te == aatman and tao == brahman) I keep context switching between Yogic/Vedantic and Taoist words because one comes naturally/easily to me (Yogic/Sanskrit/Hindu) and the other is something I greatly in love with (Taoist). I understand that this will possibly cause confusion and even maybe vehement reactions in some readers...

Stig, Yi is the conscious mind/intention that we use to do everyday things. Such as "I need to drink a cup of coffee", or "I need to pick up this pencil from the floor", etc. At a certain point in one's practice, one can drop all props and tools used to do Chi work, such as Yi, the Breath, etc. Then you don't move the Chi, the Chi moves you, spontaneously.

I think the point is that Yi is used as a prop to drive Chi (which is necessary for Chi sensitivity and controlling flow of Chi). Yi is a tool and has to be dropped after sufficient Chi sensitivity and Chi quantity/quality is built up. I think Physical strength is considered secondary to Chi because of the quantum nature of Chi/Jing (sudden dramatic jumps, as opposed to working within a more "normal" range that is possible with Physical strength).

Ego

Mrs Yoda should see a TCM or Ayurvedic practitioner who can tell her what not to eat.

Like I mentioned in my original post -- there was no such thing as Caste. There were Varna and Jati. It was mutated into caste to accomplish the following - a) accomodate for British sensibilities (with their history of the Feudal system and class divide) try and retrofit something they didn't quite understand into a framework that would (when propagated sufficiently long enough) create the grounds for a effective means to divide and rule the Indians (The British were invaders in India after all...) It is very important to not parrot what "historians" with poor knowledge exacerbate (by echoing each other). Varna's role is/was to identify professions. Jaati's role was as a genealogy/anthropological system of nomenclature. That aside, India was and is a very diverse country (the 7th largest by area and 2nd largest by population). Each state in India has it's own language. They have distinct cultural and food habits...it is not unusual that there would be some circumspection involved while people from different backgrounds interact. How do the Hare Krishna's get treated in the West? Why do they get treated differently. That aside, there are people who abused the varna/jaati system. Those were social aberrations, not religious. It is imperative to know and understand the difference. I hope I managed to elucidate this position a little further. This is something who browbeat Hinduism using the "Caste" bogey must read -- http://www.amazon.com/Castes-Mind-Colonial...8509&sr=8-1

Like I said -- it is an invention of the British. Wikipedia isn't always the best source to look at.

You obviously don't know anything about either the "Caste System" or India. First -- Caste was an invention of the British. In India, there are two modes of identifying/categorizing people. a) Varna Jaati Varna -- grouping people by their profession Jaati -- the ethnic group a person belongs to. And India is not "heavily influenced" by the "Caste" system -- India is very much on the way to mindless Westernization...and it is unfortunate, because India is the last bastion of Dharma today. And India's population problem is unfortunately or fortunately the result of Modern Science and lower mortality rate.

feels like an electric, magnetic, fluid pressure inside the body. Strongest in the hands and arms. feels like a tight ball in the lower dan tien feels like a heater radiating heat in the middle dan tien feels like a cool mentholated aftertaste in the upper dan tien feels like a tight string (and sometimes a steel rod impaling) on the crown point feels like fire in the soles of the feet feels like heavy pressure in the legs i'm told i have to make it all one complete thing (each part is connected to every other part -- Tai chi classics)

One current example is Bhutan. It is a Buddhist nation with a King and all that. You might call them backwards and underdeveloped, but they seem to be happy enough with what/how things are. And you aren't juxtaposing your personal beliefs in this analysis/judgment? Your attempts at sounding objective aren't really working -- all that you have mentioned seems subjective to me (not even anecdotal). What is the basis of your claims? Share you sources with us so we can evaluate these claims ourselves. To each his own I guess. How can you consider the tibetan system failed, when it was forcibly ejected and replaced by an insidious and deplorable government (Communists, of all people)! As far as the India imbroglio goes, well those Ram Sena (Ram's Army) are self-appointed morons who are looking to get political visibility out of their activity. Don't think that just because a bunch of goons decide to use the name of a Deity to justify their activities, there is actually even an iota of truth behind it. And the conditions behind and around this situation is more cultural/socio-political than spiritual or religious.

To add a few notes about the Tibet/Buddhism/Fascism allegations by Rallis, with no intention of stoking this fire (of discord on this thread further), but with the intention of putting things in perspective. Most of the World (until the advent of the 18-19th century and the Industrial Revolution) has needed a King/Queen/Ruler to give structure to geographic regions (states, fiefs, Nations, etc). Why would Tibet be any different? You have to understand (Rallis, and those Tibet scholars he is quoting) that you are juxtaposing your Western, Modern/Post-modern ideals and concepts onto a historical period and passing a judgment (it is known as anachronism, in technical terms). The judgement will only make sense to you and your peers, who share the ideas and concepts with you (of Democracy, Western model of Nationhood and ethics that are direct offspring of Christian thought). If you put yourself in the shoes of the rulers of Tibet and the people (who you claimed were suppressed and subdued), you might find that for a yak-herder at 16,000 feet above the ground, your model of nationhood, democracy, etc might make absolutely no sense (even today). The Dalai Lama provided a political and religio-spiritual control system for your simple yak-herder. The Lamas were the bureaucracy and selection into this fold was partly elective (the yak-herder might have chosen to send one of his sons to a monastery to become a lama) and partly predictive (as in reincarnation of this lama or that lama in a common household). The Bureaucracy provided structure, law, order to the society. Where is the case of oppression? Okay, so your yak-herder didn't get to choose his Dalai Lama or any of the other Lamas who wielded positions of power. But the society worked on the model of Dharma, following a valid philosophical guideline (you will find almost all Dharmic societies work on this model). No one telling the masses that if you don't accept so and so as your saviour you will go to hell and burn there for eternity. The society and it's rules ensured that certain value aspects of that philosophical system be implemented irrelevant of whether an individual member understands or follows it. But isn't that the case in the West as well? As for the Buddhist monk treating you like crap before initiating you -- perhaps you were unlucky. Perhaps your attitude was questionable (there's a saying that an empty cup is easy to fill) or perhaps the teacher was testing your passion for the teaching. Eastern teachings and teachers are often that way (that's a way to separate the fluff from the stuff). Admittedly your reading of religion is rooted in those that you have experienced in your native culture. If you are a Westerner with a Christian or Judeao-abrahamic background, what you consider a religion and what a Hindu or Buddhist considers a Dharma are dramatically different.