Hi Mantis108,
I am happy to have spoken on your behalf on the other thread. Some on this BB seem to receive satisfaction by bullying and ridiculing others. Perhaps it is how little people make themselves feel big.
You have made some thought provoking comments!
I would equate the concept of the “Golden Mean” not with Chi, but with the Taoist principle of balancing Yin and Yang. They are identical in that they seek to manifest a balance between extremes.
If Chi is a form of energy that permeates existence then it would be closer to the Stoic concept of Pneuma, which is related to the spirit that permeates existence. It seems that for the most part Greek thought does not take the concept to the same depth as Chinese thought. The Stoic concept of Pneuma is not directly identical to Chi, but it does have many similarities. Some Greek philosophers did approach a consideration of a phenomenal force possessing similar qualities as Chi.. The Greeks tended towards rational explanations/arguments to explain Soul, Nature and the Soul of Nature. While this too occurred in China, Chi seems to have been more of a given. Direct experience of Chi was pursued rather than a rational argument proving its existence.
Mysticism is not the rational description of phenomena (the purview of the scientist), but the direct experience of the essence of phenomena, commonly referred to as God, Tao, Suchness, etc. Both rational explanation and direct experience have a place in human experience, but rational descriptions/explanations tend to lead towards a separation of the individual from the experience in order to define/describe it while the mystic seeks to immerse himself in the experience thus merging with the essence of phenomena.
So while a rationalist would primarily seek to demonstrate his understanding through explanations and reasoned argument, a mystic, while perhaps using words and explanations to describe his direct experience, is concerned with gaining direct experience for himself. Once this is gained he does not communicate his experience through rational proofs, but by using metaphor and direct pointing!!
This is comparable to the difference between describing the taste of an orange and actually tasting one. The description is not the thing! A scientist may understand the chemical interactions that are interpreted as the taste of an orange within our brain, but this understanding is of lesser quality than the direct tasting of an orange. Descriptions are the shadows of direct experience. The mystic communicates his experience of the taste of an orange by giving you an orange to eat (direct pointing) or by stating what the taste of an orange is like (metaphor)! This is for the purpose of helping us recognize the phenomena when we experience it for ourselves and is not meant as a substitue for direct experience.
The concept of “To live is to Die!” refers to the act of dying to who we think we are, not the physical process of death. Humans tend to think the essence of their being is their ego-identity, but the ego is merely a tool used by our greater self or essence to navigate the world system. It is sort of a subset of a larger identity. As a rudimentary example, let us take the portion of our ego-identity that considers itself a parent. If we limit ourselves to thinking of our self as ONLY a parent we will ignore the portions of our identity that are expressed as a spouse, an employee, a child to our parents, a sibling to our brothers and sisters, a friend to our comrades, etc. Our narrow perspective limits our experience. While there may be lessons to learn by limiting our experience, there is much to gain by recognizing the fuller more complete expression of our essence.
This example identified the various expressions of an ego-identity within this world system, but think of how much greater a portion of our essence we neglect when we become preoccupied with a transient and temporary ego-identity. Our ego-identity is only a shadow of our greater selves and this is why many philosophers, mystics and artists have referred to this existence as a shadow of the true reality. Plato’s “Allegory of the Cave” is a very good example of this as is Shakespeare’s, “All the world’s a stage, And all the men and women merely players.”
So in order to truly live, or to live free from the bondage of the world system we must die to who we think we are in order to awaken (Live) to our true selves. It is likened to a death because we must literally give up who we think we are and the ego-identity does not like to give up its control. We must metaphorically kill our ego-identity or allow it to die in order to be reborn (metaphorically) to our new self or true identity.
I agree with you, I do not consider Chi work to be Mysticism.
