Athanor

Very well. Snowflakes ALL consist of crystallized water molecules, ALL have a shape of a hexagon, ALL of them is white (in the sense that they don't alter white light's wave length), and ALL of them is different than all the others in its patterns. As you see, there ARE common parameters in the snowflakes. Just like in men. And in women. You can't simply say that something is totally different than other things. Ignoring similarities is as narrow thinking as ignoring differences.

I was watching the Wild Goose Qigong practice and some questions occurred to me. It's ok that people a long time ago watched animals and they thought that those movements might be vital and healthy. But beside this, why did they think (and why do we still think today) that this actually benefits us in a special way? I mean just because the goose needs to shake its wings to get rid of water on its feathers, it doesn't mean that if we imitate that movement then it's going to be good for us. We don't have feathers, we don't have wings, why should we do a like movement with our hands? How does this whole thing connect to qi energy? If qigong's fundamental principle is to align ourselves with nature, then shouldn't we align ourselves with OUR OWN nature instead of animals' nature? Edited: Thank you for all the valuable and helpful comments and information. I appreciate everyone's help.

Hm... and others worry about my style of writing because I use "to be" too often LOL

Alright, in case I really don't understand this, please tell me how you would have changed my sentence. Show me how to avoid "to be", please.

Although David Bourland is most likely right with his observation regarding the apple , I think the E-Prime concept has a general error which is actually well corrected with the use of common sense and a little education. The thing is, and I use "is" with full confidence, that we cannot claim anything for sure, simply because we cannot be sure whether anything we observe is real or not, or whether anything exists or not. We have no other perspective of reality than from inside of reality, so reality ultimately can be something totally different. In fact, several signs show that the world is not how we perceive (for example, perspective exists only in our heads). So we should always avoid using words like "is", "be", etc. But then we would have a problem in communicating. "The apple is red" would then be something like "According to my thoughts about an apple and the color red, I think I perceive redness in relation with the apple." Now, this is already a complicated sentence, yet, it's still not really more accurate than simply claiming that the apple is red. If you look at it, "my thoughts" assumes that there ARE thoughts in my possession, which assume that I am, and that I have possessions, and that the ability of possessing exists. Further more, the fact that I perceive something claims that something exists that I perceive, and also that I exist. So to put it in a more accurate form, the whole sentence has to be conditional, somewhat like this: "If reality exists and if I am a part of it, then according to my thoughts, if I have any, about what an apple and the color red might be, if such things can possibly exist, I think I perceive something I might define as redness in relation with the thing I might define as an apple." I don't think that my last sentence was totally accurate, but I think I could fairly render the difference between our usual sentence and a more proper one. However, we all know, or at least should know because of our education, that red is not in the apple but it is the name of a specific length of light wave, and an apple is also just a word which identifies a thing that has a shape, taste, etc. which can be referred to as the shape, taste, etc. of an apple. I believe this about covers the demonstration of the uselessness of this stuff. But if you like it then enjoy

I suggest you not to replace one extreme with another for the sake of development - like replacing lust with celibacy -, because that is not going to be development at all. Besides that they're not opposites and so they won't cancel each other out, it's also not healthy to deal with extremities. Everything what's healthy is in balance, even sexuality. However, I can't tell you what's the balance between sexuality and spirituality, I also posted one on this issue here. Maybe if you read those comments then it helps you step forward. What I'd like to tell you besides this is that noticing beauty, and even feeling lust for it, is for no reason a deniable thing. Nature is created with beauty for a good reason. Beauty (regardless of which sense organ perceives it) is what triggers the desire and the feeling of living creatures to spread life, to make more of it (in any sense) The question is whether you drive your lust and benefit of it, or it drives you and ruins your life. But I can't tell you how to avoid the latter...

Thanks for your suggestion, you're right. I already know that I do this many times. Although sometimes I do it with the purpose to trigger more responses, most of the time it's accidental. But I try to avoid it - if I notice it What's the ePrime? I don't know it. What's wrong with these words appearing in my posts?

I admit that not all women are the same, not everyone's behavior can be defined by average observations. Excuse me for drawing inadequately previously. However, I don't think that my previous comment would have resulted in such a conflict if it would have started with "men" instead of "women", although I specifically mentioned at the end of it that the same tendency occurs in men too (which is also only true for the average and not for everyone). I wonder why men aren't incensed about this... immortal_sister: Further more, I bet that most of us here in this forum will never have as much done for humanity as Freud, regardless of whether he was right or wrong in his theories. So even if you think of his work as bullshit, please do it with less arrogance, or show us that you're better. -- We're not the elite of humankind. We're just a bunch of guys and girls who're talking about things interesting to us. As a matter of fact, we're no more special than a role-playing game community. We're just talking about different things. So please don't be upset if it turns out that you might be possessing average characteristics, for you see, visiting this forum will not make you better than others. And to turn the conversation a bit back to the original questions, the wisdom which I (and I think many others) are looking for does not appear in smog and smug

Maybe I'm untrue and psychological therapy is a joke, and Freud was also wrong - and you're right. Or maybe you're just one of them, as I am too. Denial is a common response to ugly truth.

A Chinese taiji master, Han Kui-Yuan, who first taught me taiji in Budapest while I used to live there, told me quite the contrary. He said, it's much better to start with taijiquan because it is the smoothest, it deals with the inner energies more than outer parts of the body, while other martial arts deal more with muscles and joints. Since he also teaches xingyi, specifically told me that he doesn't recommend it to me because of my weak joints. It seems that complexity is a much less problem than the strain of the parts of the body.

Women tend to comfort themselves with ideas that they don't care (in a sexual-relational manner) about men of power; they do this simply because those specific people don't have an interest in them. Such statements are used as a self-protection, usually an unconscious one, and it would change in an instant, if someone from the top of the social hierarchy would suddenly show interest in such a woman. However, this is also true for men and the women on the top.

So you think imbalanced sexuality, or the feeling that the spiritual and sexual desires aren't in harmony with each other, is the result of a basically ego-centered, fear-oriented mental attitude? Well actually it makes sense.

Well, I'm not sure about how far this human-development can bring us, but I agree with you: we should develop. I experienced a breakthrough (at least I felt like that) about conversation with strangers, telling things to them, during my college years. I had to do plenty of presentations in front of 20-200 other students. I found that the main difference between being nervous about speaking and being calm (or being able to handle my nervousness easily) was not how much I knew the fact I was talking about. The difference was how much I enjoyed talking about that specific thing in general. The thing is that although someone might have a great job and might be really smart in it, it might still not be something he was meant to do. If one finds what one was "born to do" then it will be all positive. One still might have obstacles, but nothing what will make one sick. I was wondering a lot, what might be the divide: whether something is a problem to solve, or a sign to change direction? And I think it's the effect something has on your health. Every problem and obstacle makes you stressful, for stress is the natural consequence of facing something harsh or opposing something. But stress can be used to gain power and focus, for a degree. However, after this certain degree stress will get out of hand and cause more or less serious damage in one's health. This is the difference. If someone could become a public speaker then for him the stress what fills his first speeches can be handled and reduced later. But if someone can't handle it, then it's probably not the thing he should do. It's difficult because sometimes we choose wrong right at the beginning, when we're young and don't know anything about life. And then we keep sticking to that choice, although it would be time to turn around for a long time. The other thing is that development doesn't necessarily mean gain. Well, it should mean that, but in life, it doesn't always happen so. Sometimes we should build back from what we've already achieved to be able to develop. Spiritual development is a perfect example for it. Imagine that you've achieved everything you've ever wanted: big house with a pool, nice fast car, plenty of money, parties, lots of "friends" who are constantly visiting you, many things to do, many places to go, trips, travels, etc., a very joyful and eventful life with lots of experiences. Then you realize that you should also develop in spirituality. What do you do? You can't keep up this lifestyle beside spiritual development. You must cut back from parties, traveling, consuming and such, and change on your attitude to create the possibility for the further development. It seems like loss, and this bothers you, because you still evaluate the situation with a playboy's attitude. But later on, as your attitude changes after you start to focus on the new direction, you will find that it was actually a step forward.

This gave me some idea, but it will take some time to ponder upon... It reminds me of the books of Wallace D. Wattles, who says that life is a principle instead of a mechanism or a structure; and the definition of the ego, which says that the ego is not a thing or a part of the mind, but a specific mechanism of it. Maybe the thing why I can't understand this whole qi-thing is that qi is not what I thought it is... Thanks.

I don't know much about talking with dead people and gods and such, but I might think that this can be a source of your confusion... So Thoth, the mighty god, who ruled over Egypt for 16 thousand years, talked to/about people who follow a man named Drunvalo? Aha. Sure. I wouldn't give much of an effort to this whole 2012 thing. Beside the fact that the Mayas thought that the next era in their calendar is too far from their current time to already create the calendar for it, I don't think that it has any other significance. Yes. According to some scripts, Hermes is the reincarnation of Thoth, as well as Mercurius was too. They were the three mighty aspects of Hermes, some think this is why he was called Trismegistos (Three Times Great). However, the Emerald Tablet says that he is called Three Times Great because he possesses both the wisdoms of the above, below, and inner realms.

Adyashanti: Emptiness Dancing Amazon.com I have to tell you, this is one of the most surprising books I've ever read on the topic of spirituality. It clearly outlines problems that spiritual seekers face but no one really talks about. It asks and answers important questions, it helps to deal with things that are unsure or uncertain in many of us. Adyashanti is not from the far-east, he was born and grown up in the western culture, so he has a unique perspective, and a much greater understanding of the problems of western seekers. A part of the description: "From the first stages of realization to its evolutionary implications, Adyashanti shares a treasure trove of insights into the challenges of the inner life, offering lucid, down-to-earth advice on topics ranging from the ego, illusion, and "spiritual addiction" to compassion, letting go, the eternal now, and more." I recommend this book for everyone who is seeking something in the realm of spirituality, and for those who aren't

OK, I mostly disagree with you. If I would need so much to learn before being able to properly supervise myself and do the qigong practice in the right way, without causing harm, then everyone should learn this much, because a master's occasional supervising will not substitute this vast knowledge. I don't think it's really necessary. What you call "main principle" is actually the goal, and not the principle. It's like saying that the main principle of eating is to satisfy hunger. That is the result of it, while the principle lies in the acquiring of adequate food; how to eat; and the consequences of eating. You don't seem to understand, or take serious, my point here. "My god is better than yours" has nothing to do with what I was talking about. Although on the surface these systems may be different, they all have a common basis, and that is called physical reality, which is independent of the practitioner's beliefs and thoughts about his qigong. I'm looking for that foundation. You see, if qi equals all the other energies we know about, then the whole concept of qi is a big joke, probably the biggest and oldest hoax in history. If we can explain something with those physical energies, then why would we need qi? To make the equation more complex? To put one more variable into it for no reason at all? Although qi might happen to be wherever these other forms of energy are, qi does not equal these energies. It's like saying that a human equals atoms. Because wherever a human is, atoms are there. But there are plenty of other ways atoms can coagulate, and human is just one of them. And qi can manifest in many forms of energy, like electricity, chemical energy, heat, or such - but none of these equal the pure qi that (according to scriptures and old teachings) is flowing in our body, in the meridians.

Once upon a time I had a conversation with a man who heals with acupuncture and teaches yoga and pranayama. He told me how to breathe properly to gain internal strength and better health. He detailed it well, he answered all my questions, and I did what he said, I gave my best. Yet, after about one or two weeks, my stomach started to hurt, the pain was more and more intense. When I quit practicing, the pain disappeared in 2 days. I don't think the guy taught me wrong. I don't think there is too much mistake to do in something so simple as breathing. I think that there was something what I didn't understand about it, and this something made me do it wrong. What I'm trying to say with this is that my question is not really about different forms of qigong, or schools, or masters... It's about the main principles which you have to understand to do it properly. Like in taiji practice, if you simply copy the movements, you still won't have any idea about how to start a movement from your waist. And without this, even if you seemingly do exactly what a master does, you still do it wrong. The source of the movement is a part of taiji's concept. That is the knowledge what you have to have for proper practice. And this is the kind of knowledge I'm seeking in qigong. For example, guiding qi: What makes qi come towards me? - like absorbing qi from the ground, or lifting up qi from feet to the chest. What makes qi go apart? - like pushing qi into a specific region of the body, or into some other object. Some movements result in having qi in my hand, while others result in releasing qi through my fingers into the environment. What makes up this difference? What makes qi stuck in my hand once, and flow out in the other case? I can tell why electricity flows in a certain way, but why does qi flow in a certain way? I have no idea of these things. But if I would, then I'd probably be able to practice properly, and maybe I'd be able to experience the benefits of it, since it's almost sure that there's no other way than experiencing it... The reason why I hesitate about this so much is simply that if something can be so powerful that it heals you, then if you do it wrong, it is also powerful enough to make you sick.

You mean, according to spiritual development, our sexuality should simply be observed, without actually deriving anything from it, or concluding something from it intellectually, regardless of how intense, perverted or whatsoever it might be? And so it will develop us in a spiritual manner, just like any other kind of self-observation, and lead to a "more proper" sexuality, if such thing exists at all... Is this what you mean?

Interesting thought, but what does one's sexuality tell about the way one responds to life? What can you know about it? What could I know about my own responding to life from my sexuality? - or backwards, I think that also works.

Well, I see lots of people do the same stupid thing... so why not? Finding something I believe in is a good advice. However, there are two kinds of beliefs. One doesn't connect to intellectual understanding - this is called blind faith, which can usually be queried with some reasonable questions, but these always fall on deaf ears. The other kind of belief is the one that becomes necessary beyond intelligence - when one tries to know reality with an intellectual approach as much as possible, but after a certain degree intelligence cannot return valuable answers because of appearing paradoxes. So, when you say I am caught up in intellectual abstraction, you're probably right, but it's still better than accepting and dedicating my life to something what might be a total bullshit, or might just need to be done in a totally different way. For me, understanding the concept of qigong, the concept that makes it so effective, is something that leads to a possibility to believe in it. If I don't understand it, then it feels like if I believe it then I do it with blind faith, and we all know how dangerous it can be. I'd like to avoid that. Thanks for the book recommendation, can you maybe tell me something downloadable? Because, you see, these books aren't really available in my country... You think about people as if they'd always do things right. If something is done by 100 million people, even that isn't a guarantee that the particular thing is right. Like smoking, just to name one. We've seen many times how people can be lead astray by one man, or a few, how people believe something even if it's not really there or it's not true. This is what religions are based on. This is what politics is based on. This is what psychotherapy is based on. This is what marketing, or in fact, the whole global economy, is based on. So don't tell me why 100 million people are doing something. Most of them do everything they do without proper understanding of the thing, and without the awareness of the reason why they do it. I know. I used to work in advertisement. Yes, my questions were serious, although I sometimes polarize more or less to render something. Thanks for the invitation, but I live on the other side of the planet, and I'm not going on a world trip soon

I don't understand this last sentence, what do you mean by using sexual desire to escape needs or fears? How could it happen? I don't understand this one either. Can you explain what you meant here? Thx.

Alright, I agree with what you say. But here's my question. If I practice something for hundreds and thousands of hours that will supposedly lengthen my life and give me health, will it lengthen my life more than just with hundreds or thousands of hours? What I mean is, if I have to practice qigong for one day to reach the benefit of a one day longer life then it makes no sense at all. Just living to practice something that makes me live longer is not worth it. And it seems that although this can be really boring, those who really do benefit of it do it all day, every day.

What you forget here is that we, even as living creatures, and also as humans, we also have instincts, of which one is sexual instinct. If you look at nature from this perspective, you will find that there is about 1/4 of each and every year, when all male animals try to have as much sex as they can with as many female animals they can. This also belongs to our nature... should we act the same way? When people come up with our "natural parts" which should help us realize what belongs to us and what doesn't, they tend to forget that we have these kinds of instincts, and even worse, and a subconscious mind that is so big that without consciousness it would ruin our civilization. And since nothing else has a consciousness like ours, so nothing - no animal or known creature on Earth - can be a pattern to determine how we should act, what whe should do. My body is saying "hey I need to produce some chemicals" when my mind is saying that too. Without my mind saying it, my body will never say it. And, if you have a sexy workmate who makes you 'happy' each and every day because she's so gorgeous, so there's a constant sexual stimulus in your life unwillingly, it doesn't mean that you should have sex with her each and every day. I mean having a bunch of porn on your computer is a decision that you fill your life-space with sexually overheated material, but you can't make this decision or the opposite for all areas of your life. You didn't choose who to work with, or who will be your neighbor. If your neighbor is conveniently a pretty girl who raises your interest, you will either have to resist, or you will probably have to surrender to the feelings triggered by her unwillingly much often than you would if she wouldn't live there. If you are surrounded by sexual impulses, which may or may not be your choice, then your attitude to sexuality is much different from someone who's not surrounded by such things. The question is, if you don't have a choice to change your environment, then how to deal with what's already there?

As I think about this from a viewpoint outside my comfort-zone, I think you're probably right. Maybe impatience and tension are just excuses for my chaotic mind to be able to remain chaotic.