bill: attention attention attention..."the island"...merle.. p.s. wash your mouth out with soap and water edgar is a listening.. we are not permitted to use the word force...remember..too comic book for him... don't you just love a good laugh and a comic book.?.. a comic book a day keeps the doctor away!!!!!!
Joe, I did misaddress my last post to JMJM when I meant you. It must have been due to a momentary disturbance in the Force ;>) ...Bill! --- In [email protected], "Joe" <desert_woodworker@...> wrote: > > Hi, Bill!, > > Good to catch you. Well, it was my post you replied to about Chi, not > JMJM's. Maybe you know this, but you wrote "JMJM". > > Sometime, if you like, I will tell you my experience of Chi, over the years. > I began early as a Yogi, before I can to Ch'an and Zen, and have always done > physical practice in concert with meditation, so the body has had a good > clarity over the years. But this did not prevent my needing to undergo a > powerful purification, which happened spontaneously and automatically. The > manifestations of Chi were very clear after this, and did a lot of work. I > believe it was this rather thorough "scouring" of the body that the Chi > carried out which allowed the open state to persist for so long in my case, > upon and after the first opening with Sheng Yen (although I also continued > practice after that first "Wu" opening). That period lasted 8 weeks, before > the mind moved again. > > Chi is well understood and well identified by people who know about it. They > can even help each other with it. But it is not fundamental to Ch'an, or to > Ch'an teaching. It is just a fact of life. > > Taoists of course are "all about" Chi. But Ch'an-ists and Zennists tend to > be mute about it publically, because it is a fact of life that simply goes > with the territory, the territory being our Human body, and our energy. No > mystery, and entirely real. More Western people will catch up, as more > people experience it. > > No use my making a to-do about it. But if anybody is interested, I can offer > observations and speak about effects. I've been a yogi a long time, and a > Ch'an yogi, and Zen yogi, almost as long. I'm the same human, and have used > the same human body in all kinds of practice. Chi will be quite a boon to > western medicine and western science when it is experienced by more people. > > I laugh, remembering my observation earlier here about how western science is > so well-equipped (literally) to study and monitor all sorts of things, but we > can hardly produce ONE western subject worthy of study, when it comes to > yogis or Ch'an or Zen adepts. In China and Japan, these things are > well-studied by Science there already. For a while I might have been a good > subject of study. I'm not sure, now. One grows accustomed to Chi and its > movements. It's not a big deal anymore. As Dogen famously said about > awakening: "It goes on endlessly, and leaves no trace". > > --Joe > > > "Bill!" <BillSmart@> wrote: > > > > JMJM, > > > > I like you're characterization of 'inconsequential' or maybe we could say > > 'moot' better than my characterization of illusory. In fact the more I > > chew on this the more I think a term like that would be better for me to > > use most of the time I have been using 'illusory'. The term 'illusory' > > seems to have a negative connotation for a lot of people, and I don't > > intend it in that way. I'll have to do some more chewing... > > > > Japanese Zen Buddhism does have the concept of 'joriki' and it is an energy > > that is used in koan study to build up a critical mass of doubt (or just > > plain nervous energy) to assist in kensho (initial experience of Buddha > > Nature). I experienced it myself. > > > > However when I did ask my roshi later just what 'joriki' was I do remember > > him telling me something like 'it's not important'. > > > > ...Bill! > > > > --- In [email protected], "Joe" <desert_woodworker@> wrote: > > > > > > Bill!, JMJM, > > > > > > Chi is definitely not illusory. The fact that few Western people are > > > trained enough to be open enough to sense it is something of a pity. > > > That is changing. > > > > > > I will say openly that Chi is of no consequence in Chan, any more than > > > breathing is. I know that some teachers may mention it or even help > > > individual students with issues concerning it, but this is due to > > > awareness of the matter being more common in China and probably in Japan > > > than in the West, so far. Again, that is changing. > > > > > > We can practice Chan, just as we practice Zen, and never mention Chi, > > > just as in Japan we don't need to mention ki. > > > > > > The more adept Chan and Zen yogis know all about Chi or ki or Shakti, and > > > don't need to talk about it. > > > > > > It is *not* a fundamental part of Chan. > > > > > > JMJM may give me some heat for saying this, but I'll just give him some > > > Chi, right back. Gladly. Chan is Chan. Chi is Chi. Breathing is > > > breathing. > > > > > > --Joe > > > > > > > "Bill!" <BillSmart@> wrote: > > > > > > > I know 'Chi/qi' is a fundamental part of the belief system in Chan so I > > > > won't try to convince you it's just illusory, but that is my opinion. > > > > > >
