devoid

I have spent quite some time pondering Yin and Yang - to me the symbol is - well, just a symbol. But the underlying concept is what is really important: Yin and Yang tells us about polarizations of forces on any one-dimensional level. The examples are many:

Within martial arts

• Being weighted or not
  
• Vertical motion (up or down)
  
• Horizontal motion (left or right)
  
• Relative to the body (to or from)
  

Within integers

• The Natural Numbers vs. their negatives
  
• One number relative to another
  

With drinking coffee (or tea if that's your preference)

• The quality (inferior or superior)
  
• The strength (weaker or stronger)
  
• The temperature (colder or hotter)
  

(too) often it is said that yin and yang are mainly opposites. While that is of course a true statement the true understanding only comes from being comfortable with applying the yin and yang philosophy to any one-dimensional level.

Stig i did not address you directly precisely because its not your personal problem. its mods problem as a group. something went very wrong with you guys.

 

between your "half-wits ..toilet..garbage"; mal's considering "cheerleader" an insult (wtf?); taomeow creepy "sword sheethed..unsheethed..half-sheethed" it is precisely you guys against us.

 

you see, we dont like to feel that we are potential half-wits or varmint to be skewered. there are already 7-8 ppl who raised their voices, guess how many are unhappy but just to passive to say something?

 

you guys have succeded in creating a toxic enviroment, that is the long and short of it.

TianShi,

Just because a group of members raise their opinions loudly doesn't mean that it is representative of the Forum (or of the non-moderator members of the forum, for that matter).

As an example I am no moderator, yet I am in disagreement with the general picture you paint of TTB moderator members vs. TTB regular members.

Recently I had a discussion with Mal in regards to moderator action on this forum. I was making quires as to why my questions are ignored or given vague answers. I was told the moderators are shaping discussions to add value. When I asked how value is defined in this context, I was given no satisfactory answer. If the moderators have some vague idea that manipulating discussions add value, then there must be personal biases in determining value in a given context.

 

The recent banishment of Raymond Wolter "cheerleader" remark, was never given a satisfactory answer as to cause. I suspect there may be a cultural misunderstanding. However, that is no excuse, given the vast resources of the internet to arrive at a better understanding of a term in a given context.

 

When I inquired as to the reasons for my banishment this summer, I was told that I was disturbing the valued members on this forum. Huh? What does that mean? Who are the valued members? I was ignored as usual.

 

The attitude toward me was that I needed to be banished to have time to think and ponder the error of my ways.

 

Has this forum turned into a money making enterprise that will trump free speech? Again, who are the valued members?

 

 

http://www.thetaobums.com/index.php?/topic/16216-ttb-reputation-system/page__st__80

Hi ralis,

I want to say that I for one think the moderators are adding a lot of value by trying their best to ensure that we adhere to thetaobum's set of guidelines on etiquette and behavior on this site.

I am grateful for their services, which are even unpaid other than in kind.

To put forum moderation into perspective, on other sites you constantly see people getting bullied and run over just because their opinion differs from those louder than themselves. Although perhaps a symbolic encroachment, I don't see how that's necessarily an insult to free speech - not moderating is certainly an insult to those being bullied.

Back to the question of personal vanity: Why me? is always the question most central to the ego: I don't know (as I am not a moderator) - I don't know why you were given time out and frankly speaking I don't want to know either. What I do think is nice however, is that if one is given time out one may still come back to contribute instead of having been barred for good. As such, it's good to have you back on board (even if all we may be able to agree on is to disagree )

What is the difference between a Religion and a Plosophy?

Hi Alfred,

(Note: I take it that you meant Philosophy when writing 'Plosophy')

Good question - obviously it is not always black or white, but in trying to generalize I would say that religion is a set of beliefs whereas philosophy (or love of wisdom) is a study. So, I guess that if you accept somebody's else's philosophy without studying and questioning it on your own you're easily back to the premise of religion as you will treat it as a set of beliefs which you choose not to (or may not be willing to) question.

Hello!

 

Been lurking around here way too long, I feel it's about time I join in on the fun.

 

Got room for one more?

Welcome Greenback - glad you made the plunge! ...always room for one more

[...] this is all I se frantzis do:

[...] well everybody here I think belive varjasattva can beat this guy,but no

[...] earn his money on tao bums like ya mu and others.

[...] I am waiting.please wake up tao bums

Hi sykkelpump (= bicycle pump in Scandinavian?)

I think you're in the wrong forum, Buddy. Try one of the IMA sites where you can find lots of the 'just-wack-em-hard' crowd to cheer in.

Anyone out there who studies Ba qua with a recommendation?

Hi mYTHmAKER,

I do study it. This said, I am not sure this is the recommendation you're looking for though....

There are so very many styles of Baguazhang - pls. recall that Dong Haichuan who is credited as the creator taught some techniques to very different top martial artists at the time who in turn incorporated it into their own style / flavor of doing things. Thus, if you take classes, almost any book on Bagua is not likely to help (unless if you're training with a teacher of a style which is described specifically in one of the books out there). If you don't take classes or similar I am of the opinion that no book can teach you this.

Back to your initial question on palm positions: Take the much talked about 8 mother palms as an example: If you study some of the different circular lineages and add them together you will find approximately 15 or so (keeping in mind that each circular style predominantly sticks to 8 in order to remain true to the idea of the 8 trigrams) - other styles and linages do things differently and may talk about 64 although they are typically rather sub-forms than cardinally different palms.

Here's my experience for you: When I wanted to start Baguazhang I found a good teacher after trying in vain to read some books (you may be interested to hear that I've been through most books mentioned in this thread plus some more). He told me to start with Xingyiquan before he would teach me Baguazhang. His thinking was that if I couldn't first do a much simpler linear form to some adequate degree it would be pointless. At the time, I recall thinking that was weird, but decided to heed his advice. About a year into Xingyquan I was allowed to start cross-training with Baguazhang and since then I can see his point: There is simply too much going on at the same time in order to have a chance to get things right when learning from scratch unless if you just want to use it to bounce around...

Excellent!

Thank you very much for sharing this, Giano.

What is the Taoist view on alcohol?

[...]

I'm open to all opinions, I just think it may be a bit black and white to label something as either good or bad, it seems certain things in moderation can actually be healthy.

Hi Surfingbudda,

I don't think there's Taoist view on alcohol which could be chiseled out in stone.

However, here are some observations stemming from Taoist philosophy which you may find useful:

• Alcohol is predominantly yang (relative to no alcohol - in this case predominantly yin) - as with all things a balance must be found.
  
• Alcohol clouds the mind - thus making it a distraction in cultivation of any form (e.g. alchemy, meditation, gong fu, etc.)
  

Remember that there's a quasi-balance in almost everything already without alcohol, thus moderation would probably be important in an attempted generalized view.

GamBei!

Here's a view quite opposed to the concept of connecting traditional Chinese literature with IMA (Although it is about Tai Ji philosophy vs. Taijiquan I believe one can confidently extend the argument to also covering the discussion of Ba Gua philosophy vs. Baguazhang). The following quote by Master Gabriel Chin is taken from a section in which he advocates avoiding trying to link Taijiquan with classics such as the I-Ching and the Tao Te Ching:

From "Nei Jia Quan - Internal Martial Arts", 2nd Ed. Edited by Jess O'Brien, p89

In response, the unworthy writer must admit that he fails to see the relation between the philosophy of the of Dao De Jing and the principle of Tai Ji. I have presumed that this confusion is due to the fact that Chinese is a "tonal" language. For example, in the sentence "Mr. Baer, walked out of his house bare-footed, ran into a bear, and barely escaped," all the bears in the sentence have the same sound. Similarly, whenever the term "Tai Ji" occurs, regardless of what subject it is related to it has been falsely assumed that "Tai Ji" is "Tai Ji," therefore people think they must have the same meaning.

Here's a view which I would consider fairly secular about it - indirectly, the view that there is a correlation and connection is made clear, yet it is also stated explicitly that one needs to approach them as individual topics:

From "Nei Jia Quan - Internal Martial Arts", 2nd Ed. Edited by Jess O'Brien, p69

As you practise, don't worry too much about the Yi Jing and the philosophy of Ba Gua. To understand Yi Jing is important, so you should study it. But while you are physically working, you have to focus your mind on that work. Don't think about the Yi Jing then; it will split your mind. Concentrate on your movements and postures. Work on the Yi Jing separately.

In his book "The Tao of Taijiquan", Jou Tsung-Hwa argues that an understanding of the book of changes, yin/yang, etc are essential to high level mastery of Tai Chi Chuan. The underlying idea of the I Ching it seems is that an understanding of the mechanisms of change is necessary for mastery of anything in flux.

 

http://www.amazon.com/Dao-Taijiquan-Way-Rejuvenation-Tai/dp/0804813574

Thanks Xakarii,

I have not yet read Jon Tsung-Hwa's books. I would be interested to understand if he get's specific about it or just stays with the old introducing of the subset (8/64) of the eight double hexagrams and then forgets to tell you in greater detail what the correlation is with the remaining 56 Hexagrams of the I-Ching?

Optimally, I would love to see a synopsis, like e.g.

I-Ching number | Hexagram | Translation of Hexagram Meaning | Interpretation related to IMA

-i.e. at least one comment for each of the 64 Hexagrams.

The proponents for studying IMA and I-Ching together which I have come across have not gone to such detail at all, which continues to leave me puzzled...

I try to will post a few more views (from both camps) in some additional posts.

I know you said books, but maybe you should also take a look at Classical Tai Chi DVD I: Internal Discipline

 

Stephen Hwa's explanation of Tai Chi is very good IMO. If you like his approach there is also more DVDs with complete forms.

 

joeblast: I have Embryonic Breathing. Although I do not practise it I can see the link between that kind of breathing and tai chi - I only understood it when I saw the above DVD.

I agree: Stephen Hwa DVDs are really good - quite unlike anything I have seen before and full of essence.

Yet, perhaps starting out from scratch with a full 108 form Taiji may be more than you'd want to bargain for in having a sniff at it.

Thus, I suggest starting with getting Opening the Energy Gates of Your Body - it is quite straightforward to follow and once you've read through it a couple of times and practiced daily for a few months you'll probably develop your own feel for what is right for you to do next.

There are two concepts/beliefs that are quite well-established in spiritual circles, and I wonder about logical conflicts arising from that, because some people use both concepts simultaneously, e.g. that one guy who read my palm (not that I put much belief in that), who told me that there were spirits of dead ancestors watching over me and at the same time told me how often I had been reincarnated.

Wouldn't that require those ancestors to have become enlightened immortals?

And does the traditional belief system of reincarnation allow for anybody to not end up in nirvana? Or are 'ascended immortals' too supposed to reach nirvana eventually?

I think your question is very valid (even if we allow for the rephrased version suggested in this thread )

I.e. how can one return to the source as well as exist as an immortal and indirectly: Does one exclude the other?

I have been playing around with a theory of virtualization for some time: Yes, pretty much like with computers. Take a back-up at some given point and install it on different (virtual) machines and after that let them lead their separate or semi-seperate ways.

One 'copy' merges with the Tao - another 'copy' co-existing in some Astral plane, etc.

I can see if it sounds weird, but I want to make an end-note that Robert Bruce talks about something similar in what he coined the mind-split effect in OBE / Astral Travel. Back to the purpose of TTB: Taoists traditionally also have the concept of spawning different different processes; a key example is the spiritual embryo from Taoist Alchemy. I also seem to recall something similar from a passage in Opening the Dragon Gate: The Making of a Modern Tao Wizard in which Master Wang Liping spawns seven processes or so at once while visiting some poor, secluded village during the cultural revolution in China.

Hi Sean,

Thanks for the great interview with Chunyi Lin - what a great idea to continue interviewing contemporary masters this way for the benefit of us all!

Bruce Frantzis has a few landmarks in his teachings which are only alluded to in limited detail in his books:

1. The 16-part nei gong system

2. The connection between Baguazhang and the I-Ching**

My question is if would be possible for Bruce Frantzis to elaborate some more on the above points?

**NB I happened to post a poll on this morning http://www.thetaobums.com/index.php?/topic/16144-connecting-baguazhang-and-the-i-ching/ in case anybody is interested in having a go

Hi Friends,

While trying to come to terms with the connection between Baguazhang (the martial arts) the I-Ching (the Book of Changes) I have noticed that the opinions of different masters vary greatly. Obviously, not everybody sees it black or white, but to get the discussion started I present the two generally opposing views which I have come across:

• Baguazhang and the I-Ching have very little to do with each other and should be studied as two separate subjects.
  
• Baguazhang and the I-Ching are very closesly interrelated and should be studied closely together.
  

I have not fully made up my mind yet, although I have a tendency. I am hopeful that we can have an interesting discussion stemming from this poll and discussion thread.

I think there are quite some misunderstandings and possibly misconceptions in the thread that I would like to help to try to clarify.

Newtonian physics is a great thing. There's nothing wrong with it when constricted to our daily environment, in which it is very accurate. It can be used to discuss pretty much anything of enough physical substance to hold and feel in your hand. Basically, Newton's Law of Universal Gravitation tells us that two objects are attracted to each other and a consequence of it is that the greater the masses of the objects, and the shorter the distance between them, the stronger the gravitational pull will be. It also has the advantage that the formulas are simply enough to be used to teach 7-graders to use them.

OK - enough about Newtonian mechanics - back to the thread: So, the argument is that while Newtonian physics hold true for practical purposes in our physical touch+feel environment, this turns out not to hold universally true, after all. So let's look at what Einstein said: If two objects are moving towards or away from each other they cannot do this faster than the speed of light. Furthermore, if two objects are are travelling together on some vehicle at the speed of light, you cannot accelerate one of them go even faster.

While this is really interesting when looking at what light is made out of (i.e. photons) which mindbogglingly hold hold the properties of being particles of mass as well as waves of energy while in motion (and in isolation) - this tells us that that Newtonian physics don't hold at this very marginal level (i.e. particles of almost infinitely small mass and which travel at close to the speed of light). For such extremities we have quantum mechanics.

(The following is what I remember from a Uni course in quantum mechanics many years ago: you will have to forgive me for any inaccuracies). This can lead to a bunch of cool stuff, such as e.g. "quantum teleportation" which involves giving a photon a spin and then physically splitting the wave form of the photon - and after having taken the parts away from each other (and assuming you have managed to maintain their state undisturbed) then the following happens when you try to measure (and thereby stop) the one half: the other one also stops or disappears at the same instant and if measured at the exact same time it would have maintained the same spin. Please notice that these are properties of photons and similarly small particles which prefer to travel at close to the speed of light in a vacuum. In other words, it does not apply to humans, tangible objects, etc. (Somehow, this important additional fact is typically neglected conveniently in a lot science fiction stories ) To play around with the basic ideas of quantum mechanics (in a meaningful way) one needs to master mathematical tools which require maths / physics of at least university undergrad course level - things that you cannot easily teach your average 7th grader or even your average college student.

I therefore suggest telling your kids Newtonian physics work great for almost all practical purposes and that quantum mechanics (which require a very deep mathematical understanding) rule things once we get into looking at the little pieces that make up atoms, light, etc. At least, that's what I tell my kids

I'll be happy to suggest few titles on Quantum Mechanics if anybody's interested.

Yes this regards to their physical body, for example one of the eight immortals has been burned by his disciple because he came back to late to his original body.But If you have cultivated a Yuanying the Yuanying isn't affected by it. When you have only cultivated your mind , the Yuanshen leaves the body. So their is no problem with their immortality. The only thing is that he cant appear in this dimension.

Hi Xian,

Thanks for this post.

(Please excuse me, but I am not familiar with the Chinese words you used and therefore prefer to ask for clarity:)

With Yuanying you mean the cultivation of the spiritual embryo / immortal fetus, right? And with Yuanshen you refer to the enlightened spirit which can exist in either vessels, i.e. in both the physical body as well as in the spiritual embryo / immortal fetus, right?

I think I am beginning to see your point about this being a prerequisite exclusively to immortality in the taoist sense.

Best regards,

devoid

The Tibetian Rites having their movements from the center in the waist.

The movement will generate the breathing itself.

I never thought of it this way before - how very true - thanks for posting this clarifying follow-up!

Hi Kate and apepch7,

Thanks for clarifying the awareness vs. consciousness for me.

Hi Xian,

So, in your definition, I understand that immortals and deities are different because they represent the result of different cultivation paths (implying different values, practices, etc.). Therefore there must be a difference in their types of enlightenment.

Thanks for clarifying this.

I am still somehow caught up with the inherently taoist principle that there are many (different) ways leading to the tao. But, I guess, in the light of what you said we need to consider that there can be many forms of enlightenment even if there is only one tao. I find this interesting and good food for thought.

Are people still talking about, imagining, revering, talking to, asking for help, invoking a given "entity"? Is the "entity" incarnated right now on Earth?

 

If the entity is not presently incarnated then I reckon an "immortal" would fit that description pretty neatly.

Hi Kate,

Thanks for posting this. I guess this is at the core of where I was coming from in my initial post: I.e. regardless of whether one is receiving help or guidance from an immortal, a deity, or a god, what's really the difference and does it matter? (assuming, of course, that ones motivations are pure, should intent be involved..)

If we mean "immortal" as pertaining to "universal consciousness" then everyone is, well, except for the mortal parts of them they currently incarnate.

Universal Consciousness: I guess that's a New Age term for talking about an aspect of the tao - i.e. the aspect of knowledge within the tao?

To me immortality is about relating to that which is eternal. In any non-dualist system there is the individual and the infinite, like the atman and the brahman - if you realise that these two are not different then in a sense you become as immortal as the absolute ...

Hi apepch7,

I guess that you are saying that there can be no immortality except within eternity?

But how would that correspond to the taoist concept that everything comes from one, only to eventually return to one? (doesn't that defeat the concept of eternity?)

An Immortal is one who has attained Enlightenment after the rules of his Daoist Cultivation school. Its been said in the past that they travel everywhere they want to, or some are taken to heaven by Dragons or Cranes. Buddha, or the Buddhas, which is more common because their wasnt Shakyamuni alone. Of course Shakyamuni teached his school, but their were the ones before him, or after him. He is no immortal, he is a Buddha and also Jesus is no Immortal. It is possible to call them gods If you understand god

as a word to descrice that they are far different from humans.

Hi Xian,

I am not sure I got this. Did Buddha not reached enlightenment, like a taoist?

Perhaps one could argue that Jesus had some nepotist predisposition to becoming enlightened, but I guess that would require the acceptance of a monotheistic god.

Thus, in a taoist sense (regardless of whether according to Marblehead's definition or the definition I attempted to post initially) I still think that we can consider both immortals.

If not, I think we would need an different definition of what an immortal is?

Hi Cowtao,

Your stinging sarcasm really made me laugh I agree that one needs to keep an eye out not to get caught up in the materialistic. I would even advise not get caught up in formalism, but probably that's a different discussion altogether...

I read between the lines in your post that within taoism one should stick to immortals and the tao and then leave it at that. I think that's a valid statement.