Adam West

Hey all, I have recently come into possession of the complete set of Spring Forest QiGong leaning course lectures, levels 1 - 4. I wonder if those so inclined would be happy to share their opinions on Spring Forest QiGong as a complete system for self-healing, meditation, and enlightenment? If you do not recommend it, do you recommend an alternative accessible system and why? I am very interested in hearing the basis for your determinations and personal experiences with Spring Forest QiGong (SFQ), and or your alternative recommended systems! I understand we have some ardent followers of (SFQ) on this board, I appreciate this and look forward to hearing from them; however, a wider sample of positions and experiences would bring balance and a more complete picture of (SFQ). Many thanks guys! In kind regards, Adam.

Hey guys, Thanks for your replies!! I've listened to the first four or five lectures on qigong from Level 1, they are quite good and to the point. I get a sense that his course will be a very good condensation of the pertinent sub-traditions within qigong. But, he no doubt focuses on some practices at the rejection of others, and assumes some spiritual and healing propositions and rejects others. Do people think he is going in the right direction, and is he getting results in their experience? He claims to be, and has studies to back it up. Is he legit or is he just a nice guy who's getting a lot of attention due to clever marketing and the curiosity of some of the local medical research community? I am very interested in self-healing, but primarily meditation for spiritual realisation, does this system support those ends? What you guys recon? In kind regards, Adam.

Hi there, Well, I was unable to get through it due to the previously mentioned reasons. However, I will return to it. I tend to read 4 or 5 books at once, and I gravitate to the best (for me) and come back to the others in turn. So I am reading an amazing book on Mahamudra - the best English representation out there in my view. So that easily one out my attention. http://books.google.com.au/books?id=AFm8Gq...ary_s&cad=0 If you'd like a copy of the "Best and Worst", PM me and I'll send you one. In kind regards, Adam.

My take on Bodri is that his information is very good - top quality and accurate. My problem with his work is more to do with his style of writing. He is all over the place, he simply does not stay on topic. I much prefer a more formal style, whereas, he is rambling and all over the place. I prefer one idea per sentence and one complex idea per paragraph. And a systematic and complete exploration of a single topic per chapter. He, often at times, seems unnecessarily long winded and generally scattered. In my view, he needs a strong professional editor for his books. But if you can ignore all that and simply condense the content of the writing, I think he is great. The story of Chinese Taoism seems great, much more formally written and academic. I don't think he wrote it, Nan did. I have a copy, but have not looked at it too closely due to its academic nature, as I am more concerned with practical meditation, and the insights and mechanics thereof. In kind regards, Adam.

I don't assume the Self-Realisation Fellowship lineage is not direct from Babaji, even if it has been simplified. In kind regards, Adam.

I'm reading it just now, he seems to think it is merely playing with the bodies lowest level of energies and not very useful, and has no comparison to real meditative kung-fu... In kind regards, Adam.

Hey all, If anyone wants the Self-Realisation Fellowship lessons, PM me. Just do the breath through the nose and not the mouth. It's a 13 meg download. In kind regards, Adam.

Hey guys, I think Bodhi's "How to Measure.." is good, but it's more of a review or analysis of different Buddhist meditative traditions - a comparison of their models and the achievements of the masters thereof. On that level, it is very theoretical and, in my opinion, it gives very little information on how to meditate in terms of method and technique. So it good for theory but bad for practice. In kind regards, Adam.

Wow Mwight - that's pretty amazing! What do you attribute the development of such an ability to? I wonder what other weird and wonderful things you can do?? In kind regards, Adam.

Indeed! That's why, I would suggest, so few have historically realized their true nature - enlightenment, if you like. Mostly, we spend out lives stuck in the detritus of consciousness... In kind regards, Adam.

Hey this thread is developing very nicely. It is an inquiry on the how-to and what is important on the path to enlightenment. I will, when I get some time, review what has been said, and probe further. As there are some very interesting debates and propositions that have come up... I love it... Thanks, all, for sharing..! In kind regards, Adam.

I wonder what school you study with and what are your thoughts about the training and what you are getting out of it? It's very cool to share, I think! In kind regards, Adam.

Where can we purchase this video and how much is it? I'm sure many of us would love to see it! In kind regards, Adam.

As I see it, the "who am I", the "who is it that sits in meditation" type of questions are not meant to result in any kind of linguistically based, discursive response from the mind or ego - quite the contrary. The idea is to pose the question, thus causing the attention of awareness to turn within for a moment, to be directed to the base or Tao, the logical-analytic mind comes to a rest just long enough for the intuative awareness to open up into a flash of realisation revelaing the aspirant's fundamental nature as pure awareness. So one does not answer the question per se, one sees one's true nature in the act of dropping attention from form into the formless. The question causes one to look within, that is all. It is a simple method of seeing through form into the formless. As others have since postulated and realised for themselves, one can drop the question altogether and simply look into awareness, if sustained in relaxed meditation, the same result occurs - one sees directly the nature of Self and the great realisation is permanently noticed. In kind regards, Adam.

Hey SJ, Yes, but through proper cultivation - whatever that is - it seems we can transcend or see through the discursive mind and the said limitations of language. So this brings us back to the question of what is proper cultivation. Even assuming a non-dual stand where there is nothing to see or nothing to get or even cultivate - enlightenment or otherwise - it seems to most that something is missing, that they exist and they are suffering or somehow incomplete - perceptual or something more primitive; thus, the search moves forward, as each is relentlessly compelled whether through sensual gratification, emotional or psychological drives or spiritual aspirations. So, we may say how to properly cultivate, or we may ask how do we find lasting - non-contingent - peace, satisfaction and happiness; or how do we notice that which we already are? Word or frame it as you like, but the historical human cognitive experience is a real one, a need at this level, I would suggest, has existed in every person through time - locally at least. Resolution is sort - a drive that is fundamental to the human condition. So the problem of resolution is a genuine one, and exists whether their is a language to describe it in or not. Certainly, we need language to discuss it. And the scientific method seems to suggest some descriptions are more useful than others, and perhaps statistically, more effective at realizing a resolution to the said problem. It would appear Lin has argued for the development of wisdom as a means to the resolution of the above said problem. SJ, do you feel this is an adequate solution? Would you offer some other, more concrete, less vague proposition? Wisdom as a trans-personal referent - perhaps a non-dualistic state or condition personally developed or realized - may not be vague per se, but its linguistic representation certainly is. For what is wisdom and when is X not wisdom? In kind regards, Adam.

Hey SJ, I think Lin's central thesis is the development of wisdom and all else follows organically. Do you think this is a truth or a bias? I would be interested in hearing you ideas on how we may realize the absolute! What ya reckon? Anyone else? In kind regards, Adam.

Very cool! Very entertaining and revealing. So that is how a cute, and deeply connected couple interacts; the opposite polarity of the monastic path - intriguing indeed! Thanks for sharing! In kind regards, Adam.

Hey Jonah! Thanks for providing this tremendously interesting information on Chinese research into the paranormal. The Soviets and Americans have also done this kind of research. If the rumors are true, they have gone places with it that are the stuff of science fiction on a grand and global scale. But who knows about that? In kind regards, Adam.

Hmm... a good example of politically motivated prejudicial fundamentalism if I ever saw one. No doubt partially premised upon an incomplete understanding of a competing tradition; or its otherwise, unfounded and irrational rejection. I would be interested in a compelling argument for this thesis. See my previous post for, what I would argue is, a Buddhist example of similarly metaphysically unjustified attitudes. One thing we can very clearly establish, I would suggest, humans are consistent creatures with apparently all of the worlds traditions containing their share of culturally prejudiced individuals. Evidently, very few historical personages have fully transcended their human conditioning. I wonder if any ever have. In kind regards, Adam.

Hi all, I'm happy for Pietro to go, as it seems that he wants to go and his life circumstances are such that it is conducive for him to go; and it does not seem that there are too many other candidate equally willing and able. In kind regards, Adam.

Mmm.. the first failed for me too. I hope Buddy reposts a working one! Many thanks! In kind regards, Adam.

Hey buddy, Thanks! In kind regards, Adam.