Neidan: The Traditional Meditative Practice
http://www.literati-tradition.com/meditative_practice.html
Doc
So, are you a bot?
LOL 
Now that was really a classy reply to the thread topic…NOT! :rolleyes: How embarrassing! :o Sometimes, it’s better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open the mouth and remove all doubt! 
Doc
Multiple topics with the same vague double link was suspicious. Maybe you should make one topic?
Maybe I intended to keep them separate in case anyone wished to discuss them individually, hence the specific thread links for each, but thanks for the suggestion.
Knowledge of and/or posting of multiple topics does not necessarily imply a ‘bot’! :rolleyes:
Doc
And why thou wishest to speak in proverbs is also unbeknownst to us all.
Too bad that you don’t have anything of meaningful substance to say about the content of the linked article, but then I’m not totally surprised by that! :rolleyes:
Doc
[QUOTE=NJM;794604]So, are you a bot?[/QUOTE]
A simple question that was not rudely stated and was not answered either.
[QUOTE=Doc Stier;794672]LOL Now that was really a classy reply to the thread topic…NOT! :rolleyes: How embarrassing! :o [/QUOTE]
It is more productive to ignore what may be considered a classless post rather than to follow it with an even more classless one.
[QUOTE=Doc Stier;794672]Sometimes, it’s better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open the mouth and remove all doubt! ;)[/QUOTE]
You might want to take your own advice here!
[QUOTE=NJM;794674]Multiple topics with the same vague double link was suspicious. Maybe you should make one topic?[/QUOTE]
This is a good point! Multiple posts like those posted raise red flags to some. NJM was not rude or disrespectful in his questioning.
[QUOTE=Doc Stier;794677]Maybe I intended to keep them separate in case anyone wished to discuss them individually, hence the specific thread links for each, but thanks for the suggestion.
Knowledge of and/or posting of multiple topics does not necessarily imply a ‘bot’! :rolleyes:
Doc[/QUOTE]
Posting them without actually providing any comment raises red flags to some as well.
And…it does imply a ‘bot’ which is why a question was asked. The question received a snide response which increases the likelihood of a bot.
[QUOTE=Daniel09;794691]And why thou wishest to speak in proverbs is also unbeknownst to us all.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Doc Stier;794738]Too bad that you don’t have anything of meaningful substance to say about the content of the linked article, but then I’m not totally surprised by that! :rolleyes:
Doc :D[/QUOTE]
Your links are interesting, but so far you have provided nothing meaningful or of substance yourself. Only snide responses.
I understand you may feel offended by the questions and the comments that have been posted, but so far your responses have not demonstrated anymore substance, maturity, insight, or wisdom than what you seem to imply you are receiving from the responders!
Scott:
Your comments are also interesting, and entertaining, but so far you have provided nothing meaningful or of substance yourself. Only more snide responses. So you are apparently just one more guy looking for an argument and offering only criticism, while the meaningful substance of the linked article that I offered remains totally unaddressed. What a hoot! :rolleyes:
If you have something intelligent to offer relative to the linked article, please post it. I’d love to see what your perspective is. If not, please ignore this thread altogether. Thanks.
Doc
Ok, I read the article (mostly, not all)
It’s talking about an inner alchemic meditative practice that focuses on bringing the spirit to the “timelessness”
Some of the things addressed in it are very interesting and provide a good read for people with time.
Thoughts
[QUOTE=Doc Stier;794561]Neidan: The Traditional Meditative Practice
http://www.literati-tradition.com/meditative_practice.html
Doc[/QUOTE]
Interesting. It seems to me, that many translations from Chinese to English, either are far too vague, too complex or perpetuate a misunderstanding. Take the term ‘neidan’, the referenced text translates it as ‘inner alchemy’.
Nei is usually translated as ‘inside’, ‘internal’ or ‘inner’, depending upon context. Whereas ‘dan’, usually translates as ‘centre’, and in spiritual development, is often used to translate the Sanskrit term ‘chakra’, both meaning ‘energy centre’ or perhaps ‘energy wheel’.
I do not necessarily concur that ‘dan’ translates as ‘alchemy’. Firstly, this is the history of the word;
'[Middle English alkamie, from Old French alquemie, from Medieval Latin alchymia, from Arabic al-kmiy’ : al-, the + kmiy’, chemistry (from Late Greek khmeia, khumeia, perhaps from Greek Khmia, Egypt).].*
And is generally defined as;
‘A medieval chemical philosophy having as its asserted aims the transmutation of base metals into gold, the discovery of the panacea, and the preparation of the elixir of longevity.’*
It is the association with ‘longevity’, that the term ‘alchemy’ is often used to describe Chinese Daoist texts, in English. However, the two traditions are quite separate from a historical perspective. The latter probably started in ancient Egypt, and may well predate Chinese Daoist practices.
The Chinese term ‘neidan’ then, simply translates as ‘internal centre’. This maybe further clarified as to ‘cultivate the centre’. However, as there are more than one of these centres in the body, according to Chinese medical thinking - the description is unclear in its title. There are at least three ‘Dantien’ or ‘Heavenly Centres’ - one between the eyes (the third-eye of Indian yoga), one below the sternum, and the other two inches below the naval. Of course, the term ‘Heavenly’ is contensious, as the ideogramme used to write it, refers only to that ‘which is above’, and in everyday Chinese, is used to refer to the ‘sky’! The implication is clear however, to cultivat these centres, literally lifts one ‘up’ to a higher level. In neidan philosophy, these centres are cultivated from the ‘inside’ out. The intention of the student, is the work from the ‘inside’ of the centres, to create a change.
Waidan however, literally translates as ‘outside’ the centre. The cultivation of Qi can be either ‘within’ the centre of the body, or outside the centre of the body. In martial terms, inner (or ‘nei’) development occurs within the bones, as well as the energy centres, whilst outer Qi ( that is ‘wai’ or external force) is cultivated outside the bone, and outside the centres. This model corelates to an inner circulation of Qi, moving around the inside of the body, and an outer circulation of Qi, moving around the outside. Both are inherently linked however, and it would be incorrect from a developmental view, to see each as separate and ‘apart’.
The statement regarding Ch’an Buddhism is mistaken. The realisation of the Mnd Ground, is to see clearly the empty nature that underlies all phenomena. The Ch’an school then has the teaching of manifesting this understanding ‘in’ the world. That is, manifesting the insight of ‘emptiness’ through everyday actions, so one is inaccordance wih the Dao. The Ch’an Buddhism penetrates the surface of phenomena with the concentrated effort of meditation. There are very similar, Daoist meditative exercises. Once penetrated, insight is immediately acquired into the experencial nature of the phenomena. Phenomena does not cease to function.
‘Taoist inner alchemists make it very clear that their ideas are different from the notions of Chan/Zen Buddhists. According to Taoist inner alchemists, Chan/Zen Buddhists only dwell on xing , or the original nature in its pristine purity, which they wish to attain in an intuitive and immediate vision. They neglect ming , or fate, life, which represent the resistance of corporality and gravity within human beings.’
This is incorrect, because the ‘Original Nature’ as defined within the quote, is not the Mind Ground of Ch’an Buddhism, but would roughly corelate to another layer of illusion that one has to transcend, to move on. The Mind Ground lays beyond the ‘pristine’ state, quoted above.
Ch’an Buddhism, is really Indian Buddhism, heavily influenced by Daoism. Other than that, I found the article very interesting.
Thank you
[QUOTE=Doc Stier;794561]Neidan: The Traditional Meditative Practice
http://www.literati-tradition.com/meditative_practice.html
Doc[/QUOTE]
Very interesting Doc, inner alchemy is something I have started to take note of more and more, things like tantric martial arts and such.
Thanks for the article.
I shall study it more.
Neidan: The Traditional Meditative Practice
Any attempt at semantic interpretation of Taoist Neidan philosophy and methodology from the uniquely different spiritual points of view and different accompanying world views inherent to other Religious and Spiritual Traditions is doomed to misunderstanding and failure from the outset. It must be viewed in its own Light in order to fully and accurately understand its spiritual philosophy, the agenda priorities of its methodology, and its foundational ‘intention’ or ‘yi’. To approach it in any other way, from any other point of view, is merely a misdirected attempt to fit a square peg into a round hole. :o :rolleyes:
Whereas Western or European Alchemy strove to transmute base metals into gold for material wealth gain, Taoist Alchemy strives to transmute Essential Physical Vitality (Jing) into Intrinsic Energy (Qi) as a means of Physical Self-Cultivation for health and indefinite longevity, and to subsequently transmute Intrinsic Energy (Qi) into Pure Spirit Consciousness (Shen) as a means of Spiritual Self-Realization. Correctly perceived, this is clearly an Inner Transformation of Body, Mind, and Spirit which emanates from the very core or ‘Center’ of one’s Being at every level, hence the use of the identifying term ‘Neidan’ or ‘Inner Center’. The ‘Center’ so referenced certainly includes, but is not limited to any ‘chakras’ or ‘energy centers’ with specific anatomical locations, nor any specific states of consciousness, however these may be envisioned or defined. Thus, the culmination of the Neidan practices is indeed unlimited, unrestricted, and ‘Timeless’ in nature, and devoid of any dependency on intellectual or philosophical constructs found in other Traditions.
Doc
And the martial application of such?
A long the lines of the Iron vest, iron wire and so forth?
Neidan: The Traditional Meditative Practice
Without question, the transformative physical and energetic aspects of Traditional Taoist Neidan practice can and have been applied to internal gung-fu training in general, including practices intended to develop the ‘Iron Shirt Kung-Fu’, the ‘Golden Bell Cover Kung-Fu’, or other related skills, but such agenda priorities were never the original goals of Neidan training and meditation, which has always focused primarily on spiritual attainment instead. The physical health and longevity benefits, and the energetic benefits of Traditional Neidan training have generally been viewed as totally awesome ‘perks’ or auxilliary benefits experienced as a part of the overall process of inner transformation leading to the experience of its intended spiritual goals. 
Doc
[QUOTE=Doc Stier;794997]Without question, the transformative physical and energetic aspects of Traditional Taoist Neidan practice can and have been applied to internal gung-fu training in general, including practices intended to develop the ‘Iron Shirt Kung-Fu’, the ‘Golden Bell Cover Kung-Fu’, or other related skills, but such agenda priorities were never the original goals of Neidan training and meditation, which has always focused primarily on spiritual attainment instead. The physical health and longevity benefits, and the energetic benefits of Traditional Neidan training have generally been viewed as totally awesome ‘perks’ or auxilliary benefits experienced as a part of the overall process of inner transformation leading to the experience of its intended spiritual goals.
Doc[/QUOTE]
Understood.
[QUOTE=Doc Stier;794813]Scott:
Your comments are also interesting, and entertaining, but so far you have provided nothing meaningful or of substance yourself. Only more snide responses. So you are apparently just one more guy looking for an argument and offering only criticism, while the meaningful substance of the linked article that I offered remains totally unaddressed. What a hoot! :rolleyes:
If you have something intelligent to offer relative to the linked article, please post it. I’d love to see what your perspective is. If not, please ignore this thread altogether. Thanks.
Doc[/QUOTE]
Hi Doc,
I am afraid you have misunderstood my comments. There was no snideness in them. There was an honest explanation of why Daniel and NJM made the comments they did. It is your own comments that are argumentative, not mine, Daniel’s or NJM’s.
I also pointed out that you responded in a manner that demonstrated yourself to be behaving in the exact manner you were criticizing. Except that neither Daniel nor NJM were behaving with the snideness you have. Your comments say more about your poor attitude they do about Daniel’s, NJM’s and now my own comments. You are free with the criticism of others yet are unwilling to take any in return. It is this hypocritical behavior I was addressing.
You suggested that others not open their mouth to remove all doubt as to their foolishness. I recommended you do the same. You have not followed your own advice by continuing your rude behavior. This is also hypocritical behavior. If you wish a certain decorum in your threads then set the example yourself by behaving with decorum to begin with.
It is your attitude that needs some adjustment not mine, Daniel’s or NJM’s.
You posted no comments of your own, you posted links, that is all. This caused the responses you first received and your rude attitude is what motivated the following posts.
If you choose to engage in civil discussions then I suggest you behave civilly yourself. If you do not like the responses you get then don’t reply to them or reply to them with the decorum you expect to receive.
Try following some of the spiritual modes of conduct discussed in the links you have posted. This is what creates respect and civil discussion not your continued rude behavior.
I will be happy to comment if and when I have the time and if and when I am so inclined. Just as I am inclined to comment now.
The Taoist alchemical methodologies tend towards the mind washing methodology of the Northern Chan sect of Shen-hsiu although the Alchemical methodologies are more intricate and complicated. Many of the practices are over complicated and unnecessary to accomplish the stated goal. That is, the same goal may be achieved with much less effort and a lot less adherence to unhealthy and unnatural methods.
It was Shen-hsius Northern Chan and later Chan schools that recommend meditative practices. Hui-Neng clearly stated meditation is unnecessary and creates an hindrance to realization. He criticized the mind washing methodology as clinging to the concept of purity. This clinging creates a barrier to complete realization. One focuses so much on purity that the idea of purity becomes a barrier to realization.
The same result occurs with Alchemical practices. The individual becomes bound by a clinging to an unnecessary methodology rather than transcending all methodologies. If one is clear that the method they follow is merely a tool to be discarded eventually, and the method fits their temperament, benefits may be gained, however why would one want to learn to swim with an anchor around their waist when they could learn to swim more easily and effectively without it.
That is, the same goal may be achieved with much less effort and a lot less adherence to unhealthy and unnatural methods.
Are you refering to “jing/semen retention” for example ?
I have heard concerns voiced by urologists and such in regards to this practice.
[QUOTE=Scott R. Brown;795007]
It is your own comments that are argumentative, not mine, Daniel’s or NJM’s. I also pointed out that you responded in a manner that demonstrated yourself to be behaving in the ‘exact’ manner you were criticizing. Your comments say more about your poor attitude they do about Daniel’s, NJM’s and now my own comments. You are free with the criticism of others yet are unwilling to take any in return. It is this hypocritical behavior I was addressing.
[/QUOTE]
Scott:
Thanks, Dad! 
But contrary to your esteemed evaluation of the situation, I responded in kind to the attitude I received for merely posting some great links to interesting articles, without commenting on the articles before anyone had a chance to review them. Thus, my initial comments to you, Daniel, and NJM were essentially a ‘mirror’ which simply reflected the quality of energy that was directed towards me back to its original source. :eek: I neither want or need such energy in a leisure time activity such as posting on this or any other forum. Hence, the “poor attitude” rests squarely with those who put such energy in motion to begin with. As such, there really is no hypocritical behavior originating from me. :rolleyes:
You may have noticed that I also responded to others on this thread in a manner akin to their own non-adversarial attitudes and productive comments of positive contribution to the thread topic! You have yet to post anything in a similar manner, so I can only surmise that continuation of an adversarial debate is more important to your ego needs than a positive and productive discussion of the article is. :o Take a long look at your own agenda priorities to find a comfortable resolution to your misdirected energy. My comments and replies to individuals other than yourself are not your business, and never will be. So unless you wish to contribute to a meaningful discussion of the thread topic, I would kindly request once again that you simply refrain from posting anything else, as it serves only to sidetrack the discussion for those who actually have an interest in the subject matter of the article. 
Doc