Confucian/Taoist qiqong

[ZIM]

As regards Confucian/Taoist approaches to qi cultivation:

The Confucian approaches seem to correspond to the qi of the upper burner, the "righteous" qi, while those of the Taoists seem to correspond to the lower burner, the source qi.

The Confucian rectification of the heart and the cultivation of brightness, ming, IMHO presuppose the availability and conservation of the source qi. Hence, for someone entering the world of qi cultivation, is it best to have the Taoist practices precede the Confucian ones? Do you think they should go on to Confucian practices? Might the Buddhist 'middle way' practices also correspond to 'upper burner', righteous qi? I'm looking for experience/information on this part.

Until the qi is preserved from wastage and nourished by appropriate diet, meditation, and exercise, the practices of the Confucians will not be attractive, and might even be counter productive, i think. Anyhow, just a question, as i don't know much regarding Confucianism...

...don't even know if it makes sense! :p

[bodhitree]

Some Taoist methods (specifically the Mantak Chia methods) place great emphasis on the upper energy centers. The energy is all stored in the lower dantien, however cultivating virtues or rightousness seems to be the highest priority in most of the meditations. I would recomend 'Awakening healing light of the dao' good book, all the meditations in it are geared toward turning internal organ energies into virtue
Peace, enlightenment, and enchelada nirvana!@!

[ZIM]

thanks- that actually does help to know of it. I was seeing the Confucian methods as being more relatively 'yang'/masculine in comparison to the Taoist being more 'yin'/feminine. Which sort of makes sense... they do, however, also seem to meet in the middle, which got me thinking on buddhist lines, etc.

But, all in all, maybe theres a point at which you just have to stop thinking about it all...i mean, you can actually think yourself into ignorance. :p Again, thanks! I'll look for it.

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..


But, all in all, maybe theres a point at which you just have to stop thinking about it all...i mean, you can actually think yourself into ignorance.

Precisely.. As we intectuallize it, ritualize it, apply contrived value systems to it.. its simple wisdom becomes tangled in a mental quagmire.. Taoists? Confucians? Virtue? Righteousness? each means something different to each observer.. beyond the favor of a style or the perspective of a philosophy is life itself.. life, unconcerned with our conjurings and beliefs, beckons us to join in without shaping it to a style or confining it to a philosophy..

Qigong is Qigong, the effects are clear and observable.. those effects manifest according to our perserverance in practice, attention to internal bio-feedback, and clarity of purpose.. the effects will not abandon us based on Confucian or Taoist beliefs.. and, virtue or righteousness are simply arbitrary labels of desirability assigned by consensus..

Find the practice that best suits your goals (some experimentation required), then, stay focused on the practice, the physical practice.. still the mind (abandon affirmations and visualizations).. the still mind performing the qigong sets receives clear input, unprejudiced experiences, and can sense the inner workings of "being" much more efficiently that one dallying with mental massage.. Grand theories and complex rituals hide simple truths... "Just do it", as some wise marketing exec once said..

Just another perspective, Be well..

PS. All that being said, i favor the simplicity of Taoist Philosophy..

[ZIM]

TCB-
thank you very much for your words, there is a lot of good advice in them.

You know what got me interested in this whole thing? A stray comment from Alan Watts: "The Scholar learns something everyday, the Taoist unlearns something everyday."

Now this I agreed with. But then I realized that he was pointing towards two differing approaches, one that deconstructs, one that re-constructs. From there I'm looking at Mencius, etc. Its a different school of qiqong learning, but then I shouldn't be surprised, hmm? Qi is what it is, and just that.

All in all, I know that I don't need to explore that avenue fully as of now... other works, other unlearning, must needs be done, and I do seem to be making decent headway so I'll stick to what works. But I did wonder if what I was seeing was in part truthful.

I'm seeing that, essentially, it is. But I also see that results won't be forthcoming from the Confucianist angle for me at this time. Questions of precedence then come up, etc. Maybe its just enjoyable for me to think on. ;) The key though, is to let it go! Ha. Thank you again.

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

Among others, i think Bruce Lee said "learn to forget".. at first the wisdom escaped me, but.. once learned and internalized, we can forget the learning, it is now simply a part of "who we are".. another statement, "we learn so we can forget" points to the same thing.. the Learning is only improtant during the process, at some point we shed the mental discipline and get back to living simply, secure in the being we have "become"..

Be well..

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings again..

Oh, and Alan Watts is a super source.. excellent link from eastern to western concepts.. i value his insights highly..

Be well..

[Former castleva]

Is there such a thing as confucian qi-gong?
I´ve never heard.

[ZIM]

Essentially it is the scholar's and the householder's path.

In the Analects, Confucius himself speaks of the qi six times and gives it the four following meanings: 1) qi is the breath; 2) qi is the vital and psychological force in liaison with the blood and the breath (respiration); 3) qi is a way of expressing oneself (ciqi); 4) qi is the current social customs. (http://www.hsstudyc.org.hk/tripod-1.htm)

What I was getting at is that paying excessive attention to the niceties of propriety and scholarly pursuits- while very good in themselves- may in some ways interfere with actually approaching the subject from a western POV. Buddhism, OTOH, adds a different dimension or road inwards... and I was comparing them to the upper/middle/lower burners and their relation to qi in the body. Just a mnemonic and conceptualization trick! ;)

[Former castleva]

Heavy reading,even too heavy.

I looked at some of that and unless I missed it,I did not notice it addressing what could be considered Confucian qi-gong,sure there were vague links to qi but gong...
I´m being technical here.I´m not aware of any confucian principles that you could wrap such a system around,so to speak.I just do not know.
Thanks.

[Former castleva]

"..." Human beings, as human persons, are different from animals and things because, by proceeding from the clearest and most marvelous qi, they can communicate and unite with the Qi of Heaven through the practice of the virtue of Heaven. Thus, the Qi in man has a privileged moral and spiritual value. ..."

I get chills from this quote.
This imo is quite close to xianity,as far as these things can go.

[ZIM]

There is not a lot available in English on the ritual aspects of Confucianism. Much more on Taoism. But again, just think 'scholar', 'caligraphy', 'art', 'knowledge', 'philosophy', 'honor' etc. and you won't go too wrong, I bet. They are each of them a training of the mind/spirit.

[Former castleva]

I see then,to some degree at least.

[Former castleva]

"There is not a lot available in English on the ritual aspects of Confucianism. Much more on Taoism. But again, just think 'scholar', 'caligraphy', 'art', 'knowledge', 'philosophy', 'honor' etc. and you won't go too wrong, I bet. They are each of them a training of the mind/spirit."

I get that.

[ZIM]

While I understand your adversity/distrust to xianity and spirituality in general, there is nonetheless a kind of spirtuality even within 'science', if we are to take someone such as the late Carl Sagan at his word.

"...they can communicate and unite with the Qi of Heaven through the practice of the virtue of Heaven."

Sounds almost like his "We are made of the stuff of stars", doesn't it??? This is not a word game, but something I think he may have felt strongly. This is what I mean WRT the scholar's path.

[Former castleva]

I´m not sure what you mean by referring to Sagan.

The quote you are giving me,I unfortunately cannot see the correlation of yours without stretching my imagination to a higher level.
Considering that you mentioned Sagan,as far as his words go,I think he was a strong,secular skeptic.As far as these relate?

Spirituality in science? Well...whatever it means to you I guess.

[ZIM]

I think we see scientific progress in differing lights. I get the impression from your wordings that you view science as an enterprise devoted to 'debunking' whatever comes into the fool heads of humanity..... rather like a zealous gardener pruning back the wilds of the imagination... it becomes a process of cutting back the fields of knowledge.

I don't see it that way. I try to observe the world in all its wonder- and I try to feel its wonder about me. I'm curious about it, and that is what drives my scientific inquiry. I don't seek to debunk, but to verify; I feel that if I can contribute and enlarge what belongs to humanity, I have succeeded in something.

What all of this has to do with Sagan and the spirituality of science, qi and Confucius: you figure it out. ;)

[Former castleva]

" I think we see scientific progress in differing lights. I get the impression from your wordings that you view science as an enterprise devoted to 'debunking' whatever comes into the fool heads of humanity..... rather like a zealous gardener pruning back the wilds of the imagination... it becomes a process of cutting back the fields of knowledge. "

I see.
Well,I would not say it is exactly so,my view I mean.
I suppose you could come off like that,but I think there lies the danger of extending the method a bit too far,it would be like religious fundamentalism and that´s not exactly where I would like to go (like,say Richard Dawkins as a supposed example of driving the "truth" home. ;) ) Picking up the word "fool",I could say that I don´t think this debunking process would necessarily lead to great achievements.I think a general what I´d call an education process might be a good direction (I don´t think the "element fool" as I now put it,can ever be defeated) So you won´t go around falsifying what cannot be falsified,but provide reasonable ammunition for thinking "right".The ever lasting progress driven process leading the way to better understanding.
I hope this makes sense.

"I don't see it that way. I try to observe the world in all its wonder- and I try to feel its wonder about me. I'm curious about it, and that is what drives my scientific inquiry. I don't seek to debunk, but to verify; I feel that if I can contribute and enlarge what belongs to humanity, I have succeeded in something. "

OK.
I assume being curious is a must.

"What all of this has to do with Sagan and the spirituality of science, qi and Confucius: you figure it out. "

Not my field.

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Former castleva
The quote you are giving me,I unfortunately cannot see the correlation of yours

Perhaps the correlation is that they are both symbolic language aimed towards seeking an understanding of man's place in the universe?

[Former castleva]

Maybe.
I´m yet to know for sure.
Nice avatar.