The understanding of 運氣, Yun Chi (Yun Qi)

[ChiDragon]

1. As I have been taught, 意 Yi, is made up of a musical note 音 (yin) emerging from the xin 心.

 

2. Xin is often translated as mind, heart, heart-mind,

 

3. but in Daoism can also have more of the meaning of 'Being'. Yi can be that which is expressed from our heart/mind/Being. As such it is most often seen as 'intention'.

 

1. That is something new to me. It is not true. Yi is not a thing that was came from another thing. Yi is only a description like the "intent of the mind". Yi is only can be manifested by one's action. If you want to breathe, so, you breathe. Breathing is the action of your Yi. If you want to raise your hands; your Yi(intent) is to raise your hands. Even though you may not have raised your hands, but you have the intent to. The intent is your Yi.

 

2. It is very true but not originated from 1 as the way you have described.

 

3. Yi can be expressed as from our heart/mind/intention. Yes, but not Being.

 

 

I don't want to brag that how much I know about my own language. I am not saying who is right or wrong. However, my presentation may have come out that way. I had spoken the language for more than sixty years, I do have the ability to distinguish any discrepancy in the meanings. Use your own discretion, if my comment contradicts what you had learned from your respectable teacher. IMHO If I read something that was different than what I learned before. I would review the contents with an open mind and determine which has more weights. In your case, I think you did. So, let it be and have it your way. Peace.

Edited January 13, 2012 by ChiDragon

[寒月 Hanyue]

1. That is something new to me. It is not true.

 

The character for yi 意 is the character 心 with the character 音 above it. How is this not true? We all know 心 so;

 

音 (yin): [sound / noise / note (of musical scale) / tone / news / syllable / reading]

 

I don't want to brag that how much I know about my own language. I am not saying who is right or wrong. However, my presentation may have come out that way. I had spoken the language for more than sixty years, I do have the ability to distinguish any discrepancy in the meanings.

 

Brag away. I still find different definitions, nuances and meanings of words with my own first language, as well as how words used today meant something quite different in times past. I have spoken with MANY native speakers of Chinese who know nothing of the way terms are used within Daoism or Buddhism, particulalry old texts. They know the words and their current usage yes, but nothing more.

 

Arguments over words is pointless, that is not what I am trying to do. Unfortunately they are all we have to express experiences and understanding. As I said before all you can do is investigate your own experience with the guidance of people you trust. Understanding words is no different regardless of the language.

 

Peace to you to

Edited January 13, 2012 by snowmonki

[ChiDragon]

The character for yi 意 is the character 心 with the character 音 above it. How is this not true? We all know 心 so;

 

音 (yin): [sound / noise / note (of musical scale) / tone / news / syllable / reading]

 

Oh, I see what you did. You broke the character into radicals. That was how you make the interpretation. Now, I understand where you were coming from. OK....let's settle at that. I rest my case.

[steve]

 

The first one uses 意 yi, that which emerges from the xin as a medium to engage with the qi. The second is direct contact with the qi from the xin, no intermediary. While I agree this second idea is more in line with ziran and 'dao', it can be used in ways other than say spontaneously, ie for healing.

 

 

 

I think that's at the beginner/intermediate level. As practice deepens, the objective is to get the "yi" out of the picture so your qi moves with the universal qi (or the Dao). To be able to allow the Dao to move your qi is to be able to vibrate at that frequency (so there is no self and no other...but only one -- re-integration). Or so I have been told as part of the system of Dao Gong I learn.

 

I find it curious how we tend to think that removing the "I" or the Yi part of the equation is more in line with Dao/universal Qi/whatever you want to call it than when the "I" is operational. Despite the fact that the "I" is a natural part of the human experience, albeit heavily conditioned. This is a very common theme in Daoism and Buddhism and Non-Duality. And at the same time those traditions acknowledge that once you make the mountain go away you come back to it in the end.

 

And I don't mean to imply that any of that is incorrect or that I have any answers. But I have been thinking lately about why is it that I think that I am any closer to Dao when "I" is not there. "I" is not "other" than Dao in the first place so why is it any more natural when it is not there? So I just wanted to put that out there. I think the relationship between the thought that calls itself "I" and the unconditioned awareness from which it arises is a fascinating one that is worth some time and attention.

[dawei]

As I have been taught, 意 Yi, is made up of a musical note 音 (yin) emerging from the xin 心. Xin is often translated as mind, heart, heart-mind, but in Daoism can also have more of the meaning of 'Being'. Yi can be that which is expressed from our heart/mind/Being. As such it is most often seen as 'intention'.

 

Intention is still a mediary between heart/mind/Being and action hence the phrase xin-yi-qi-li. Yi is born of the xin, yi moves qi moves, qi moves and is expressed in action, in this case 'li'. But action does not have to move through this process in nature, it is however helpful in learning. But that then is getting into yuwei and wuwei.

As to Yi made up of Yin and Xin in pictograph, I agree. Intention/thought/think is thus called "the sound(s) of the heart". The ancient masters described the Shen (housed in the heart) as accessing and perceiving the spiritual realm when the 10,000 voices arose (Wuji). Since this is the higher levels of Shengong and not the lower levels of Qigong, some will not comprehend the deeper meaning.

 

My Medical Qigong teacher was fond of explaining in a different way: Yi leads Shen; Shen leads Qi. This would create a different picture than your xin-yi-qi-li.

 

Somewhere along the lines (or in some lines), the role of Shen is lost in that equation or simply replaced with Xin (where it is housed). Intention is actually stored in the Spleen.

[dwai]

I find it curious how we tend to think that removing the "I" or the Yi part of the equation is more in line with Dao/universal Qi/whatever you want to call it than when the "I" is operational. Despite the fact that the "I" is a natural part of the human experience, albeit heavily conditioned. This is a very common theme in Daoism and Buddhism and Non-Duality. And at the same time those traditions acknowledge that once you make the mountain go away you come back to it in the end.

 

And I don't mean to imply that any of that is incorrect or that I have any answers. But I have been thinking lately about why is it that I think that I am any closer to Dao when "I" is not there. "I" is not "other" than Dao in the first place so why is it any more natural when it is not there? So I just wanted to put that out there. I think the relationship between the thought that calls itself "I" and the unconditioned awareness from which it arises is a fascinating one that is worth some time and attention.

Hi steve,

 

My undertanding of ths matter is as follows:

 

We are told at first to cultivate breath, because we dont have awareness of qi. As we focus on breath, we start to sense that which moves with the breath.

Then we are told to drop te breath and only use intent to move the qi (not meaning stop breathing, only stop using breath to drive the yi to drive the qi)

Then we are told to drop the yi and he qi will flow on its own.

 

Does the qi not flow if we didnt focus on the breath? Of course it does.. We are alive because it does.

Does it not flow without intent...of course it does. I think what happens as we move deeper into the practice is that the qi becomes more refined and stronger. And it can sense the qi at large and we have to get "out of the way" so it flows unimpeded by controls. So our true nature is that of dao...by dropping the controls we simply surrender to that. So does the "i" go away? No, it simply becomes the "i" of the dao...

 

As to why it is so...ie the i separates us from dao ...i dont know. The hindus call it avidya or ignorance. I dont think thre is a simiar technical term in daoist thought. But the crux is no one knows...

Edited January 14, 2012 by dwai

[寒月 Hanyue]

You broke the character into radicals. That was how you make the interpretation.

 

It's not my interpretation. I am simply passing on an interesting piece of information. It comes from a well respected daoist priest and medical qigong teacher, I know several students and find his work interesting while his approach is not a fit for me personally.

 

Best

[寒月 Hanyue]

I find it curious how we tend to think that removing the "I" or the Yi part of the equation is more in line with Dao/universal Qi/whatever you want to call it than when the "I" is operational. Despite the fact that the "I" is a natural part of the human experience, albeit heavily conditioned. This is a very common theme in Daoism and Buddhism and Non-Duality. And at the same time those traditions acknowledge that once you make the mountain go away you come back to it in the end.

 

And I don't mean to imply that any of that is incorrect or that I have any answers. But I have been thinking lately about why is it that I think that I am any closer to Dao when "I" is not there. "I" is not "other" than Dao in the first place so why is it any more natural when it is not there? So I just wanted to put that out there. I think the relationship between the thought that calls itself "I" and the unconditioned awareness from which it arises is a fascinating one that is worth some time and attention.

 

Hi Steve, yes it reminds me of the "you must destroy/kill/leave behind the ego", "if you are alive you have an ego" etc etc. Paradox seems important.

 

A lot has happened to systematise Chinese medicine, qigong, even Daoism in the last 100 years. Sometimes seeing the different ways that the same thing can be explained, described helps with the whole 6 blind men and an elephant conundrum.

 

All models that attempt to explain these things won't hold water if scrutinised. Lao Zi wrote on the first page of the Dao de jing that you have to work on understanding the Dao, and yet also let it be and wonder at its mystery.

 

Best,

[Protector]

aaaaaaa so much Chinese, not enough me aaaaaa

OK I should say something ummmmmm

Gi empowers Ae and if Ae matches Shin then... things get awesome

[ChiDragon]

aaaaaaa so much Chinese, not enough me aaaaaa

OK I should say something ummmmmm

Gi empowers Ae and if Ae matches Shin then... things get awesome

 

Of course, without your presence, things won't be as relax as it should be....