dwai

Admin
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    8,449

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    78

Posts posted by dwai

  1. Posted

    On 11/17/2024 at 11:48 AM, Sahaja said:

     

    https://youtu.be/hwGk0k2NNRM?si=BZyaM9iUrvnwqsEc

    This video by him has a very interesting and clear differentiation of the various frames of yang tai chi. From his perspective Large frame uses internal qi (ti qi), middle frame uses external qi (ling qi) and small frame uses yi.  Interesting discussion of application to weapons as well. 

    He also goes into a very esoteric concept here. 

     

  2. Posted

    On 11/7/2024 at 4:17 PM, Mark Foote said:



    My understanding of the teachings of Gautama the Shakyan is that the first four concentrations end in automatic activity of the body in inhalation and exhalation solely by virtue of the location of consciousness.

     

    The five further concentrations end with the cessation of habit and volition in the activity of the mind in feeling and perceiving,  presumably feeling and perceiving solely by virtue of the experience of consciousness without habit or volition.

     

    The first three of the further states Gautama declared as "the excellence of the heart's release" through the extension of the minds of compassion, of sympathetic joy, and of equanimity, respectively,.  The extensions were each the extension of "the mind of" beyond the boundaries of sense in all directions, and without limit.

     

    Some objective, particular instruction, although Gautama declared that some were freed through the further concentrations and "intuitive wisdom", while others were freed through "intuitive wisdom" alone.
     

     

    Hi Mark,

     

    Can you elucidate this for me? It'd be great if you could explain the first four concentrations in lay-person terms, etc. 

  3. Posted

    1 minute ago, Maddie said:

     

    I would say another point most Buddhists would make between Buddhism and Hinduism would be Hinduism's focus on god's and goddesses, but at least with Mahayana Buddhism functionally Bodhisattvas and cosmic Buddha's fill the same role.  

    The role of deities is necessary, depending on the path one travels, IMHO. Understanding that Deities are "real" at the transactional/causal level is essential. Deities can help individuals progress spiritually so long as one knows how to practice with them.

     

    Not having deities and not having a practical approach to spiritual practice, but only theory about a formless G_d (half-baked IMHO) will lead to problems such as fundamentalism and violence. Having deities but not having a practical approach to working with the deities (such as tantra, etc.) will also cause problems of superstition and delusion/dependency. 

     

    • Like 3

  4. Posted

    2 minutes ago, Maddie said:

     

    I feel like a lot of Buddhists would say that one of the primary differences between Hinduism and Buddhism is the teaching of "no self" but the Buddha never actually taught there wasn't a self (or that there was). He just taught that the five aggregates were not self. 

    Which is the locus standi of Advaita Vedanta as well. The 'self" and "no self" debate is inconsequential (IMHO) beyond the preliminary stages of study/practice. We should simply do the work and the truth will be revealed. 

    • Like 2

  5. Posted

    23 minutes ago, old3bob said:

    the Upanishads do not entertain the  idea of being "accident prone" to enlightenment although imo the idea has certain validity if in the sense of  of preparation,  but still one can prepare until the cows come home but it is The Self that chooses the Self, and not by any culmination of "accidents". 

    Technically, the Self doesn't choose the Self; the Self is always and forever the Self. The "accident" is for the so-called separate individual who seems to suffer from the delusion of separateness and individuality. 

     

    P.S. This kind of thinking (Self choose the Self) arises from being unable to discern between the jiva and Atman.. From the jiva's perspective, there is ignorance and corresponding liberation/enlightenment. From Atman's perspective, there never was any ignorance or a need for liberation. 

    • Thanks 1

  6. Posted

    I recently saw someone "raging" against the Advaita Vedanta teachers (such as Ma Anandamayi), asking if their perspective -- that, at the highest level, most religious traditions have more in common than not -- isn't a disregard for each tradition's view.

     

    Most spiritual traditions have a vacyaartha (literal meaning) and a lakshyartha (implied meaning). People who have not had a realization shift (not yet had the profound accident) cannot understand the implied meaning, so they stick with the literal meaning (or the word of the teacher/lineage/tradition). While this might seem patronizing, it is not intended to be that way—it is merely an empirical statement (based on observation). The literal meaning is like an encoded message; the implied meaning is understood once a practitioner can access the decoder. 

     

    Many accouterments accompany specific spiritual traditions in their specific socio-cultural and temporal contexts. One doesn't need to discard these - they have a lot of beauty (for those who choose to see it that way). 

    • Like 1

  7. Posted

    In Classical Advaita Vedanta, three levels of "reality" are defined.

    1. Pratibhasika Satya - Pratibha means image, pratibhasika means imaginary. This is what can be called illusory - imagination-driven, the stuff of most dreams, etc.
    2. Vyavaharika Satya - Transactional reality - this makes up our waking world and waking experiences
    3. Paramarthika Satya - The Ultimate Reality - This is the undifferentiated nature of Pure Consciousness, where there are no longer differences (dualities) such as me and you, this and that, subject-object. One could also call it pure objectless consciousness. 

     

    The practical aspect of Advaita is to discern between Vyavaharika and Paramarthika by recognizing that our true nature is pure, undifferentiated consciousness. Towards that end, a few different methodologies are provided. These are both phenomenological as well as intellectual in nature, and requires some preparatory work such as the ability to steady the mind and body -

    1. Drik-Drsya Viveka - The method of seer and seen
    2. Pancha Kosha Viveka - The method of processing the five layers/sheaths of our being
    3. Avastha-traya Viveka - The method of the three experiences (waking, dreaming and deep sleep) 

     

    • Like 3

  8. Posted

    On 11/6/2024 at 6:08 AM, DynamicEquilibrium said:

    According to the Taiji theory logic, "taijiquan for self-defense" makes no sense because where there is really a Taiji there are no opponents, if there is an opponent that means Taiji already differentiated into Yin and Yang and for some reasons one attacks the other, but yes martial arts can teach how to recognize and avoid dangerous situations and how to improve our self-control abilities to make better decisions in the struggle to maintain this dynamic state of balance, if that's what we are looking for of course. 

     

    In real life, yin and yang are usually not in equilibrium. So, taijiquan gives us a practical tool to practice bringing them into balance internally and externally. Taijiquan practice does several things—when we do solo practice, it works mainly on the internal aspects of balance and harmony. When we do partner drills, it simulates situations where we can harmonize externally. It teaches us not to react blindly and how to neutralize/harmonize disruptive external forces with minimal effort. 

    • Like 2

  16. Posted

    46 minutes ago, Taomeow said:

    "Non-violence" is an empty set, as a mathematician might put it.  What constitutes violence?  If one is attacked by a murderer, is defending one's life "violence?"  How about defending a child?  Everyone and everything that is being threatened with annihilation?  How about planet Earth if it gets in the way of some nefarious, demonic entities bent on unleashing extinction?  "Non-violence" would be a crime against humanity under many special circumstances.  Peaceful folks might train for such circumstances -- they are not the ones unleashing violence, but to be someone who can oppose it is fully compatible with both high spirituality, high moral standards,  and common sense. 

     

    I couldn't agree more. There is no honor in being a pacifist in the face of tyranny. The Indian strategist Chanakya wrote in his treatise on statecraft - Arthashastra, some 2000 years ago that the following course of action should be taken (when faced with those who mean us harm) -

    1. Negotiate (Sāma) - Try to negotiate for peace.
    2. Payment (Dāma) - If talks don't work, try compensating the other party within reasonable means (and depending on your ability to endure a conflict)
    3. Divide (bheda)  - If that fails, divide your enemy and scuttle their will 
    4. Punish (Danda) - Use force (if you have the ability) 

    Violence should be the last resort, but one should be prepared to deal with it. While the above guidelines are intended for statecraft, they also apply in everyday life. 

    • Like 2

  19. Posted

    23 hours ago, Sahaja said:

    It’s very interesting that he actually uses the term ling qi  on the video screen for  what he describes as extracorporeal qi in the audio. My understanding is that Ling qi can have  a pretty deep spiritual connotation whereas extracorporeal qi seems more of a general term that could mean many different things. 

    It IS spiritual. My teacher calls it "surface" power. We are not big on academic terminology - we focus on experience and application. 

    We apply it in all our form practice by activating certain points in our body as connection points for this surface power. For example, if you move your arm, the shoulder, elbow, and wrist joints are expanded, acting as an energetic conduit to this outside qi. Mentally, the practice involves splitting the world into two halves (conceptually). As the arm moves forward, it pulls the half of the world (that is behind the arm) forward with it. If it moves backward, it pulls the half of the world in front of it. This is just an example on how to get started. Eventually it works in all directions, as if we are floating in an ocean of this "stuff" - each movement causes ripples or tidal waves depending on the power of our intent. 

    23 hours ago, Sahaja said:

     

    My experience with  tai chi is pretty limited, is ling qi something that is commonly viewed as part of the 8 energies or is his interpretation/usage pretty unique?

    According to a comment in his video, he says it is an artifact of the neigong he teaches (shendao neigong). But in our system, this is considered pretty advanced (as opposed to the "internal" hydraulic based system most taichi people seem to be doing). 

    23 hours ago, Sahaja said:


     

     I also don’t recall any reference to the 5 directions and how they might be related to this. 

    Can't say about his system, but in our system, the 5 directions have to do with the 5 elements, and they are, IMHO, application strategies - not alchemical things. 

    • Like 3

  20. Posted

    35 minutes ago, Taomeow said:

     

    That's a good approach.  I hold in rather low regard teachers who start talking taiji esoterica with beginners before they get the basics down pat.   (And "the basics" are huge -- a long learning curve!) 

    agreed 100%

    35 minutes ago, Taomeow said:

    When the student in the video tells the master that "it's like coming up against a wall" that reminds me of some "high end" push-hands encounters -- a wall, a tank, you name it, an unstoppable force advancing on you.   Though I must confess the opposite impressed me more when I had the good fortune to deal with it -- a cloud, a swath of fog, a nothing...  nothing to hang your hat on, I mean your skill.  I would like to see how a wall or a tank would fare advancing on a cloud.  :)    

    It’s interesting that you made the point. After I started with my teacher, I happened to get a chance to touch hands with his then second most senior student. It felt like a tank was coming at me, though he wasn’t really “turning it on”. It was intimidating. 


    My teacher on the other hand felt like a cloud (still does), and he can “disappear” at will and “reappear” suddenly, by which point it is too late to do anything. :) 

     

    A few years later, I touched hands with that person again (I didn’t get a chance to meet him in between). I felt like he was a child, and I could move him around at will. I figured  my skills had improved (I’d been working out with my teacher diligently for a few years, plus my own daily practice of 2-3 hrs).

    • Like 3

  21. Posted

    3 hours ago, Taomeow said:

    I have only watched it diagonally and recognized some of the ideas as legit, but I was surprised that throughout the presentation talking about taiji, no taiji distance with peng-lu-ji-an dynamics has been demonstrated, everything is happening at the kung fu/hard MA distance.  At 9:40 he says, "original Yang taiji understanding of peng-lu-ji-an involves manipulation of qi that is outside your body." (Could have thrown in  cai-lie-zhou-kao too while at it -- why mention peng-lu-ji-an in passing and never show what they are?..)  A more meaningful way to put it -- and not in the "original Yang taiji" but in any of the five major styles -- is that it involves manipulation of the qi of your opponent -- or his li if he ain't big on cultivated qi.  It's not some mysterious qi outside your body you are manipulating in a tuishou practice/fight situation.  The borrowing from the opponent is the cornerstone of this art, but he keeps talking about manipulating his own qi.  Do you agree with his take?

    I think he’s showing concepts, so focusing on a specific aspect he wants to demonstrate. 
     

    In our system we train all aspects, from close-range tuishou to the more esoteric. My teacher wants us to focus on the esoteric stuff, and the rationale is that the “normal” stuff ends up becoming more physical and we’ve already spent years on it. But for beginners I would not teach the more advanced concepts before they’ve spent sufficient time working on the foundational skills. 

    • Like 1

  23. Posted

    11 hours ago, blue eyed snake said:

     

    being the subject of the extracorporeal chi of a master can be quite baffling

    In our system we work on two “external” qi aspects. One is our personal shield, which extends a few inches to a few feet around our body. The other my teacher calls the “surface” (which permeates throughout all the space). One very interesting exercise we do is holding a thin tissue between two practice partners. One is just holding on, and the other starts to pull the surface from behind the static partner towards themselves. The results are very interesting :) 

    • Like 1