Maddie

Mind Body cultivation

Recommended Posts

If you have a healthy dumb mind without knowing how the body functions and does not know how to treat the body or give what the body wants to enhance its health, what good is to have a good healthy dumb mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As @Shadow_self says - the channel system is the extension of consciousness into the body…

 

The 10 Heavenly stems and 12 Earthly branches describe the interplay between body and mind. (Though most think it’s about astrology :ph34r:)

 

The popular view of Buddhism we get in the west doesn’t reflect the Buddhism I saw in the East - at least when it comes to actual cultivation (rather than religious tradition).

 

Some of the strongest and most forceful body cultivation methods I’ve seen come from various Buddhist lines… Daoist methods are far more gentle and nuanced.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, dmattwads said:

I believe today there is a lot of confusion about what Yi Jin Jing is and what it's used for. YMAA has a book that describes it as a series of exercises whereas Damo Mitchell says it is something else. Aside from what it is, there seems to be confusion on what it's for.


Exactly.

 

As with much Chinese, an ancient origin legend and a multiplicity of modern interpretations. 
 

In that context, who‚Äôs¬†to say what‚Äôs ‚Äúauthentic‚ÄĚ?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Barnaby said:


Exactly.

 

As with much Chinese, an ancient origin legend and a multiplicity of modern interpretations. 
 

In that context, who‚Äôs¬†to say what‚Äôs ‚Äúauthentic‚ÄĚ?

It's true.  From what I understand original text is though to be lost with modern translations coming from the fragments.  Sounds like more of a historian's problem than a practitioner's to me, so what about changing the question to something that avoids such speculation like - is it effective?

Edited by Wilhelm
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, dmattwads said:

Buddhism basically ignores the body in cultivation and focuses on cultivating the mind with the mind.

 

Here is a course on buddhist neigong recently released by alex kozma: https://lineofintent.com/product/buddhist-nei-gong-for-martial-cultivation-longevity-and-enlightenment-foundation-course/ I don't have the course so can't say much about the content but Alex is a cool guy, and I guess this shows that there are in fact buddhist body cultivation methods.

 

17 hours ago, dmattwads said:

My question is aside from systems like Qigong and Yoga asana being healthy for the body, can they be used to cultivate the mind and if so, how so?

 

I wouldn't be suprised if there exist qigong systems that allow you to enter the meditation state achieved from sitting and stillness while in motion. As far as I know, where daoist systems in the beginning keep a rather clear separation between body and mind cultivation techniques. Ultimately, it should evolve towards more unified practices where all is trained at the same time.

 

At the same time it is perhaps interesting to discuss what the actual goal of qigong is. The main focus of neigong certainly is to cultivate or build the body. But qigong is perhaps much more a multi purpose thing? There certainly are qigong that focus specifically on health and also some which come from martial arts systems which perhaps have an intent of expressing and cultivating the qualities of this martial art system. Both qigong, but the intent is rather opposite. Perhaps there are also qigong for things like magick, prayer or, ... cultivating the mind.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, mcoolio said:

There certainly are qigong that focus specifically on health and also some which come from martial arts systems which perhaps have an intent of expressing and cultivating the qualities of this martial art system.


Yep. And in my experience these latter martial versions also refer to themselves as nei gong. So the terminology is even more complicated than you say.

 

A real can of worms… ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something I've found interesting on this thread so far seems to be the wide variety of opinions on this topic which seems to mirror the wide variety of opinions and views about this subject in general, thus the confusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, freeform said:

Some of the strongest and most forceful body cultivation methods I’ve seen come from various Buddhist lines… Daoist methods are far more gentle and nuanced.

 

If you would care to expand on that I'd be very interested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, dmattwads said:

 

If you would care to expand on that I'd be very interested.


Well since we’ve had a vajrayana theme the last couple of weeks:

 

 

Literally beating open the channels. Blocking, breath holding, pressurising… hitting the mat with the legs to descend the qi… jumping down onto the hui yin point with great force to raise the qi…

 

Super directed, contrived practice. 
 

Very different to the Daoist approach that would just allow the qi to sink or raise of its own accord after setting up of internal conditions.

 

The YJJ process - (not the gentle stretching stuff) - is also very intense… even with the Daoist adaptation that took out some of the more forceful aspects, it’s still the case that if by the end of the session there’s not a puddle of sweat and you’re not feeling bruised and exhausted like you’ve been through a car crash, you’re probably not doing the correct method.

 

Theres other Buddhist-line practices I’ve done with various rather forced breathing methods, breath holds and so on…

 

And of course Shaolin gongfu methods are no joke either 

 

untitled-2-23-16616063924x3.jpg

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, freeform said:

As @Shadow_self says - the channel system is the extension of consciousness into the body…

 

The 10 Heavenly stems and 12 Earthly branches describe the interplay between body and mind. (Though most think it’s about astrology :ph34r:)

 

The popular view of Buddhism we get in the west doesn’t reflect the Buddhism I saw in the East - at least when it comes to actual cultivation (rather than religious tradition).

 

Some of the strongest and most forceful body cultivation methods I’ve seen come from various Buddhist lines… Daoist methods are far more gentle and nuanced.

Hi! ūüėä

 

Could you describe some of this interplay with regards to the 10 heavenly stems and 12 earthly branches? 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, MIchael80 said:

Hi! ūüėä

 

Could you describe some of this interplay with regards to the 10 heavenly stems and 12 earthly branches? 


That’s too big a topic to be honest… 

 

Heaven is consciousness… Earth is body… the 10 stems and 12 branches are at the level of the Qi… It’s the Jing, Qi Shen model. It’s the interplay of preheaven spirit joining with preheaven essence as it manifests onto the physical level - creating time, space and life…

 

Just as we’re a microcosm of the greater macrocosm - similarly our overall reality manifests along the same lines and the stems and branches just as they generate a life cycle (from birth to death) on the microcosmic level - they manifest the process of time and change on the macrocosmic level.

 

The Daoists created a very intricate, nuanced and wholistic model of creation.

  • Like 4
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, freeform said:


Well since we’ve had a vajrayana theme the last couple of weeks:

 

 

Literally beating open the channels. Blocking, breath holding, pressurising… hitting the mat with the legs to descend the qi… jumping down onto the hui yin point with great force to raise the qi…

 

Super directed, contrived practice. 
 

Very different to the Daoist approach that would just allow the qi to sink or raise of its own accord after setting up of internal conditions.

 

The YJJ process - (not the gentle stretching stuff) - is also very intense… even with the Daoist adaptation that took out some of the more forceful aspects, it’s still the case that if by the end of the session there’s not a puddle of sweat and you’re not feeling bruised and exhausted like you’ve been through a car crash, you’re probably not doing the correct method.

 

Theres other Buddhist-line practices I’ve done with various rather forced breathing methods, breath holds and so on…

 

And of course Shaolin gongfu methods are no joke either 

 

untitled-2-23-16616063924x3.jpg

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, ChiDragon said:

Wisdom and knowledge have to acquired externally, not internally from the body to the mind.

 

If that is your position there is a world of wisdom and knowledge that you may be neglecting.

The very process of wu wei is connecting to a deeper and richer source of wisdom and knowledge that can only be accessed internally.

And yes, that is related to neidan but it is also related to this discussion, IMO. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, steve said:

 

If that is your position there is a world of wisdom and knowledge that you may be neglecting.

The very process of wu wei is connecting to a deeper and richer source of wisdom and knowledge that can only be accessed internally.

And yes, that is related to neidan but it is also related to this discussion, IMO. 

 

I say this respectfully,  and not aimed at anyone, but is this not what happens when this sort of hybrid of secular scientism has sunk its teeth in deep at the societal level?

 

People ignore the internal, the metaphysical and the spiritual because they've been led to believe it is nothing more than imagination

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Practice above looks very similar to the hatha yoga practice of mahavedha (great piercing or penetration in Sanskrit) the way it was presented to me was much more gentle than practiced above with warnings about not doing it too aggressively. 
 

My understanding is that Mahavedha  arose originally as a spontaneous movement that was then turned into a practice. I have a feeling this route (spontaneous to codified practice) was more common than we realize.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shadow_self said:

 

I say this respectfully,  and not aimed at anyone, but is this not what happens when this sort of hybrid of secular scientism has sunk its teeth in deep at the societal level?

 

People ignore the internal, the metaphysical and the spiritual because they've been led to believe it is nothing more than imagination

 

I think there's a lot of truth to this. 

 

On the other hand, if one digs a little deeper into science in the 20th and 21st centuries it is very clear that there are large gaps in our understanding and the power of secular scientism to explain everything, even the most fundamental aspects of our experience is lacking (eg dark matter, the nature of consciousness, our inability to reconcile relativistic and quantum theories, etc...). I think fields of inquiry and paradigms like quantum mechanics, organism-environment system theory in biology, Luhman's social systems theory, the nature of time, the structure of space, and so on, are pointing to those very same truths we may discover when we explore that internal knowledge and wisdom. Books like those by Carlo Rovelli (relational quantum theory), The Dancing Wu Li Masters by Gary Zukov, The Tao of Physics by Fritjof Capra, Time's Arrow and Archimedes' Point by Huw Price, Time Space and Knowledge by Tarthang Tulku, and and many others play with these themes in interesting ways. As an aside, I recently learned more about a cousin of mine that I'd never known who was a theoretical physicist that specialized in nuclear theory and particle physics. He was especially interested in the asymmetry between matter and antimatter and the physics of ''time reversal." I've tried reading some of his books and papers but they're way over my head.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, freeform said:

Literally beating open the channels. Blocking, breath holding, pressurising… hitting the mat with the legs to descend the qi… jumping down onto the hui yin point with great force to raise the qi…

 

Super directed, contrived practice. 
 

Very different to the Daoist approach that would just allow the qi to sink or raise of its own accord after setting up of internal conditions.

 

The YJJ process - (not the gentle stretching stuff) - is also very intense… even with the Daoist adaptation that took out some of the more forceful aspects, it’s still the case that if by the end of the session there’s not a puddle of sweat and you’re not feeling bruised and exhausted like you’ve been through a car crash, you’re probably not doing the correct method.

 

Theres other Buddhist-line practices I’ve done with various rather forced breathing methods, breath holds and so on…

 

And of course Shaolin gongfu methods are no joke either 

 

Very interesting as I've been studying and practicing Buddhism for over a decade now and I've never heard of any of this but maybe that's because I studied primarily the Pali Cannon. So that makes me wonder if either it's hidden in the Pali Cannon like some things are supposedly hidden within the Dao De Jing or if it's a later development? 

 Personally I have noticed through doing mindfulness and mantra getting these weird bumps on the ends of my heart lung and large intestine meridians and no one within Pali cannon Buddhism has been able to explain this to me or even seems like they know what I'm talking about.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, steve said:

As an aside, I recently learned more about a cousin of mine that I'd never known who was a theoretical physicist that specialized in nuclear theory and particle physics. He was especially interested in the asymmetry between matter and antimatter and the physics of ''time reversal." I've tried reading some of his books and papers but they're way over my head.

 

Try Paul Davies who writes quite understandable popular science books.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, dmattwads said:

and I've never heard of any of this  

its because its a delusional heresy not Buddhism

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, steve said:

 

I think there's a lot of truth to this. 

 

On the other hand, if one digs a little deeper into science in the 20th and 21st centuries it is very clear that there are large gaps in our understanding and the power of secular scientism to explain everything, even the most fundamental aspects of our experience is lacking (eg dark matter, the nature of consciousness, our inability to reconcile relativistic and quantum theories, etc...). I think fields of inquiry and paradigms like quantum mechanics, organism-environment system theory in biology, Luhman's social systems theory, the nature of time, the structure of space, and so on, are pointing to those very same truths we may discover when we explore that internal knowledge and wisdom. Books like those by Carlo Rovelli (relational quantum theory), The Dancing Wu Li Masters by Gary Zukov, The Tao of Physics by Fritjof Capra, Time's Arrow and Archimedes' Point by Huw Price, Time Space and Knowledge by Tarthang Tulku, and and many others play with these themes in interesting ways. As an aside, I recently learned more about a cousin of mine that I'd never known who was a theoretical physicist that specialized in nuclear theory and particle physics. He was especially interested in the asymmetry between matter and antimatter and the physics of ''time reversal." I've tried reading some of his books and papers but they're way over my head.

 

Just a comment on the bold, given my field is tied to that

 

It has become very apparent to me that there is a  clear vested interest in keeping people invested in the belief that the brain produces consciousness. If you start to unravel that thread, a whole network of disciplines and markets fall apart

 

There is much to be lost for those who have sunk so much into this, and that's just the tip of the iceberg in my opinion.

 

I don't think any of them want the key to consciousness to be outed. This is because it is outside the realm of scientific investigation insofar as to to get to the root of it, you must detach from the sense faculties, but the entirety of the scientific body of knowledge was founded on observations through the sense faculties. So certain shifts are needed

 

There are those who will always work to try their best, like the very fine names you mentioned, however what credence are they given?

 

It is far too easy to brush good information aside when you paint an image of it that makes it appear as nonsense

 

Kind of like covering a gold bar in dog crap, so nobody sees it :) 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, steve said:

The very process of wu wei is connecting to a deeper and richer source of wisdom and knowledge that can only be accessed internally.

The knowledge about the philosophy of WuWei was acquired externally from the Tao Te Jing. It couldn't be obtained internally. WuWei was Laotze's original philosophy. No one can out smart Laotze.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An interesting issue using science to buttress our belief in  and use of self cultivation practices.
 

On the one hand using statistical methodology or scientific method  (essentially using math) to see if we are really seeing underlying correlations or are in error/delusion can shed light and provide clarity to what’s really going on. I think we would benefit from more of this to help our discernment with the practices, particularly to apply accountability to those inappropriately using secrecy to hide their delusion or to gain personal power and money.  In doing this it is important to understand the limitations of what the tools can tell us. Correlation is not necessarily causation and the appropriate use of these tools still require a strong theoretical basis that will by definition contain some subjective elements. There are even errors built into these methods that can take one down the wrong path from a scientific perspective if one is not very disciplined in drawing conclusions.

 

On the other hand we can also be missing the point when we try to measure the unmeasurable using tools that are actually only a finite component  of something infinitely larger. This can come across as apologetic rationalizations for what we choose to believe or what has arisen in us as direct knowledge that really miss the larger point.  it reminds me of the  practice I see in some 19th and 20th century writers who used  parallels to Christianity to justify/rationalize Eastern philosophy and religion. Some things don’t need to be apologized for and the use of prevailing cultural norms or prevailing scientific views to justify them to me transmits a lack of discernment and conviction.
 

Scientific method can help us be better cultivators if wisely used and can give us useful perspectives that can expand our capabilities. However, direct knowledge that naturally arises on the path can easily be prematurely dismissed by the rational logic of our own left brains or by prevailing cultural norms and scientific views . The tragedy of this is that it results in missed opportunities for us.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Shadow_self said:

 

Just a comment on the bold, given my field is tied to that

 

It has become very apparent to me that there is a  clear vested interest in keeping people invested in the belief that the brain produces consciousness. If you start to unravel that thread, a whole network of disciplines and markets fall apart

 

There is much to be lost for those who have sunk so much into this, and that's just the tip of the iceberg in my opinion.

 

I don't think any of them want the key to consciousness to be outed. This is because it is outside the realm of scientific investigation insofar as to to get to the root of it, you must detach from the sense faculties, but the entirety of the scientific body of knowledge was founded on observations through the sense faculties. So certain shifts are needed

 

There are those who will always work to try their best, like the very fine names you mentioned, however what credence are they given?

 

It is far too easy to brush good information aside when you paint an image of it that makes it appear as nonsense

 

Kind of like covering a gold bar in dog crap, so nobody sees it :) 

 

I think another piece of this puzzle is that our very nature as biological organisms, our physiology and anatomy, creates such a powerful illusion of separateness, of being wholly encased in a bag of skin, of mind-body separation, of consciousness coming out of the brain ... all of that is extremely tricky to see through, particularly as you point out in such a deeply materialistic and deterministic culture and society. Perhaps there are ominous and hidden forces at play to keep the status quo (certainly there are to some degree) but I think it's also somewhat hard-wired into us in this current form. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, ChiDragon said:

The knowledge about the philosophy of WuWei was acquired externally from the Tao Te Jing. It couldn't be obtained internally. WuWei was Laotze's original philosophy.

 

So let me get this straight. Wuwei come from the DDJ

 

Laotze was the originator of said text (apparently) 

 

Do you think he came up with it from internal insight or external observation?

 

Quote

No one can out smart Laotze.

 

You think he was the smartest person that ever lived?

 

Hows Daoism doing as a belief system/religion/worldview or whatever label you'd like to use (I dont think its any of those, but anyway)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Shadow_self said:

Do you think he came up with it from internal insight or external observation?

It came up by external observation. Like the universe and the phenomenon within  nature around us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites