Good Sword to share

[YouKnowWho]

Ghosts are not naked,

How can a 1000 years old ghost, his clothes is not rotten?

[CYMac]

How can a 1000 years old ghost, his clothes is not rotten?

Use your logic man, do you wear the same clothing as you did in 3 yrs old today? Come on! We are real beings here, not people on drama / TV! We don't wear the same clothing all the time and not need to go to washroom in the 3 hrs! We are alive.. and so are ghosts! They have to pee, ****, eat, sleep as well.. so why don't they need to bath and change??? um...

[YouKnowWho]

We are alive.. and so are ghosts! They have to pee, ****, eat, sleep as well.. so why don't they need to bath and change??? um...

That's something I didn't know before. It's always good to learn something new everyday.

[PalmStriker]

I use this sword to slay wizards

"Now that's a knife", I mean, sword. A nice Templar cut.

[TenTigers]

every gwai I have seen was neither clothed nor naked, they just...were. You don't "see" them in the usual sense, at least I don't. Different people see things differently.
some were critters..odd looking things that looked like trillobites...

[TenTigers]

why hasn't this been moved or locked?

look, just because you don't believe in exorcisms, ghosts, angels, and tree gnomes, or wonderful sea nymphs who have miraculous powers that can transform a mortal man into a great warrior, who can summon all the powers of the known and unknown universe to design really nice boots with high heels and buckles and straps that go all the way up to my thighs...um...uh...yeah. This thread should be locked.

[CYMac]

every gwai I have seen was neither clothed nor naked, they just...were. You don't "see" them in the usual sense, at least I don't. Different people see things differently.
some were critters..odd looking things that looked like trillobites...

Seriously speaking though, we do "see' them when we have to do exorcism job for people. That is a must because you have to know where they are in order to bust them effectively. I know some people do exorcism without having to see them at all but that's how I was too (before) but now that I can possess the ability to see them, then it become much easier to end the case successfully without any problems at all.

The critters things you mention are not ghosts, but probably they are "goo". 蠱. There are "goo" that are spiritual and some are physical as well. in the old days, people use (there are still there now) many insects and poisonous stuff to mix into a pot of "goo" and use that to cast evil magic on people and poison people by distance without having them to consume it directly. Now, people have magic that can summon non-physical living things to do the same job and those might be what you are seeing.

Ghosts are easy to deal with because they are often very easy to exorcise. Anyway.. I have just put together a file today and it might explains some of my TERMS to you and so the vocab can be understood easier, hope you like it:

http://makchingyuen.files.wordpress....oism_v1_21.pdf

[CYMac]

This is called the "Dragon Head God Hitting Whip" 龍頭打神鞭, originally a weapon of famous Geung Tai Gung, a war strategist in the past who fought for the chow dynasty and overthrown the evil king.. Anyway, this pair of whip is super heavy and I am sure it weight about 10lb or more each. I have a pair of modern made garn and they are said to be 5lb each and I don't see that is anything like this here.. I mean.. the modern one is also heavy but this is REALLY heavy! Love it!

Can't master it before.. but I can do it now.. harsh!

[CYMac]

This is the pair of modern "garn" I use, both are solidly build as well and they are about 5lb each. Quite surprising to see them so heavy at first impression when I got them in 2009, but then when I got stronger, I mastered them and so moved on to the double whip above. This is STRONG. (I must use bawang's favorite phrase here!)

[Xiao3 Meng4]

I totally understand what you say about those "phillosophy Taoist" but that is NOT what Taoism is in China

It's more accurate to say “NOT ONLY” what Taoism is in China. The Philosophy of Taoism comes from China as well, and permeates throughout Taoist inner alchemy. It also penetrates far deeper into the Chinese martial arts than Magico-Ritualistic Taoism.

I can just say these "philosophy Taoist" are missing out a lot of stuff.

By choice, not by ignorance.

First off, consider the following passages found in Sun Tzu's art of war (written between 476–221BC) which, as is readily apparent to anyone who's read both the Art of War and the Tao Te Ching, contains many related ideas:

The chapter translated as “The Nine Grounds” (九地 ) or “The Nine Situations” contains the following instructions:

凡為客之道，深入則專，主人不克，掠于饒野，三軍足食，謹養而無勞，併氣積力，運兵計謀，為不可測，投之無 所往，死且不北，死焉不得，士人盡力。兵士甚陷則不懼，無所往則固，深入則拘，不得已則鬥。是故，其兵不修 而戒，不求而得，不約而親，不令而信，禁祥去疑，至死無所之。吾士無餘財，非惡貨也；無餘命，非惡壽也。令 發之日，士卒坐者涕沾襟，偃臥者涕交頤，投之無所往，則諸劌之勇也。

Two different translations from two different scholars show that the text contains this advice:

“Prohibit the taking of omens, and do away with superstitious doubts. Then, until death itself comes, no calamity need be feared.” -Giles

“Prohibit soothsaying, eliminate what is dubious, and they [the soldiers] will stay to the death.” -Cleary

Furthermore, the chapter translated as “The use of Spies” (用間 ) or “Employing Secret Agents” contains the the following:

孫子曰：凡興師十萬，出征千里，百姓之費，公家之奉，日費千金，內外騷動，怠于道路，不得操事者，七十萬家 ，相守數年，以爭一日之勝，而愛爵祿百金，不知敵之情者，不仁之至也，非人之將也，非主之佐也，非勝之主也 。故明君賢將，所以動而勝人，成功出于眾者，先知也；先知者，不可取于鬼神，不可象于事，不可驗于度；必取 于人，知敵之情者也。

Again, two different translations of the above text's last sentences are:

“Thus, what enables the wise sovereign and the good general to strike and conquer, and achieve things beyond the reach of ordinary men, is foreknowledge. Now this foreknowledge cannot be elicited from spirits; it cannot be obtained inductively from experience, nor by any deductive calculation. Knowledge of the enemy's dispositions can only be obtained from other men. “ -Giles

“So what enables intelligent rulers and good commanders to move in such a way as to overcome others and accomplish extraordinary achievements is advance knowledge. Advance knowledge cannot be obtained from supernatural beings, cannot be had by analogy, and cannot be found out by calculation; it must be obtained from people who know the enemy's condition.” -Cleary




Second, the Northern Song Dynasty emperor Huizong's reliance on Taoist external alchemy, notably the use of Fu lu (符簶) and Qi rang (祈禳) against the Mongols, proved INEFFECTIVE and played a significant role in the Northern Song Dynasty's downfall... which in turn brought about a dismissal of the Fu Lu Pai (符簶派) from State-Sponsored religions.

Around the same time, a gentleman by the name of Hsu Ch'un Fu* (1156AD) wrote a book called “Complete System of Medicine of all Times.”* He said something to the effect of “We speak of Wu-Yi (Sorcerer-physicians, 巫医) because these people replace medicine by magic. It is apparent that those who join the sorcerers possess no knowledge of the principles of medicine and drugs. ... Although these people merely display empty ostentation, they nevertheless have to remain persistent even in this.”* -Unschuld

So 900 years ago, external alchemy was already being criticized. Maybe if the Northern Song had followed the advice of Sun Tzu's Art of War regarding sorcery and the supernatural, they would have survived!

Okay, maybe I should give you this reference which I think you will believe more. Even in Wudang mountain, they are Quan Zhen sect, which I don't like myself on the Taoism side but then, they STILL HAVE MAGIC in their lineage as well. Look at their temple, they held magical rituals too. Don't you know? (snip) If you want to study Taoism history in depth, try to search for 道藏 and you find the whole encyclopedia of Taoism is about TAOISM MAGIC. All flooded with spells, FU (talisman or the magical writtings), magic cultivation, and rituals and so on. Famous huge ceremonies done in the past for the king are like Gold Ceremony, Jade CEremony and the Yellow CEremony 金籙大齋, 玉籙大齋, 黃籙大齋 and so on.. What are these? They are MAGIC in Taoism.

I'm not denying the historical existence of Taoist external alchemy; I'm simply pointing out that many people, including ancient Chinese Taoists, have given well-reasoned criticisms of it for some time.

Sun Si Miao (孫思邈, 581–682AD ), one of the most famous Chinese doctors of all time, was both a Taoist and an exorcist who lived to be 101 years old. Nevertheless, HE HIMSELF explained that “Great Physicians” did NOT rely on demonology or exorcism when treating patients. Since I practice Chinese Medicine, I respect Sun Si Miao greatly and work towards embodying what he considers a "Great Physician" to be.

He ALSO wrote that

“It has indeed never happened that spirits distributed [the understanding] for the difficult aspects and the details which were necessary for physicians, people versed in the prescriptions, soothsayers and magicians.”* -Unschuld

This runs EXACTLY OPPOSITE to your claim of being taught by the Taoverse Deity.

Yes, those text you mentioned don't talk about magic, BECAUSE they are not Taoism advance magic books! You need to read things like the Taoism Canon and stuff like that to see it. You are reading BABY BOOKS of Taoism you know?

If you're implying that texts such as the Dao De Jing are “basic training” for Taoists, then I agree. Elaborating on your analogy, anyone who disregards or fails basic training is stuck in Taoist kindergarten.

Taoist internal alchemy has enjoyed consistent growth and development – due in part to the “basic training's” emphasis on developing De (德, inner power, virtue) along physical and mental paths. It is this aspect which some external alchemy seems to dismiss as unnecessary, and therefore why it is so much more prone to moral and ethical abuses.

If western Taoism think there is no magic in Taoism, it's their responsibility to get educated more before making such statement or else they are just "uneducated on the subject" and doesn't makes them right even they blind fold themselves though.

It's not that there's no alchemy in Taoism – it's that your particular expression of magical Taoism is criticized not only by one of the most famous Taoist doctors in history, but also warned against by none other than Sun Tzu... and this is a martial arts forum, after all!

Don't try to convince me on "there are two different paths". There aren't. There is only one, and that is TAOISM. Taoism is Taoism.

As such, the philosophy of Taoism should be inseparable from your practice and identifiable within it – it does not seem to be. By not adhering in any significant way to the “basic training” and dismissing the inner alchemical aspects of Taoism, including the cultivation of De (德), how can you claim to have passed beyond “Taoist Kindergarten” ? One could say that you are like a child pretending to be a doctor without having any actual training.

Again, I cite 道德經 verse 24 as an example that your practices are not in line with Taoism's “basic training” and bring up certain moral and ethical concerns:

企者不立；跨者不行；自見者不明；自是者不彰；自伐者無功；自矜者不長。其在道也，曰：餘食贅行。物或惡之 ，故有道者不處

“He who stands on his tiptoes does not stand firm; he who stretches his legs does not walk (easily). (So), he who displays himself does not shine; he who asserts his own views is not distinguished; he who vaunts himself does not find his merit acknowledged; he who is self- conceited has no superiority allowed to him. Such conditions, viewed from the standpoint of the Dao, are like remnants of food, or a tumour on the body, which all dislike. Hence those who pursue (the course) of the Dao do not adopt and allow them.” -Legge


“He who stands on tiptoe is not steady. He who strides cannot maintain the pace. He who makes a show is not enlightened. He who is self-righteous is not respected. He who boasts achieves nothing. He who brags will not endure. According to the followers of the Tao, "These are extra food and unnecessary luggage." They do not bring happiness. Therefore followers of the Tao avoid them.” - Gia / English


“On tiptoes a man is not steady
Taking long strides he cannot keep pace
To the self-serving, nothing shines forth
To the self-promoting, nothing is distinguished
To the self-appointing, nothing bears fruit
To the self-righteous, nothing endures
From the viewpoint of Tao, this self-indulgence
is like rotting food and painful growths on the body
Things that all creatures despise
So why hold onto them?
When walking the path of Tao
this is the very stuff that must be uprooted, thrown out, and left behind.” -Star


*(Chinese characters unavailable, if you know them please post them)

---

SWORDS

Here are a two pics of my Favourite sword to date: my Hanwei Qi Jian. It's sturdy, forged entirely from a single billet of steel from pommel to tip, weighs 2lbs 9 oz., is wrapped in Rayskin and has a P.O.B that's just beyond the guard. It arrived moderately sharp, but I will be sharpening it. I strung the Scabbard with leather cord, added a leather lanyard and beads; I also made a small clasp out of the beads and leather, preventing the sword from falling out if the scabbard is held upside down but allowing for quick access with a simple tug on the bead.

[SimonM]

Thank you Xiao Meng, your argument was cogent and compelling.

As somebody who personally holds philosophical Taoism in moderately high regard, and who dismisses magic as frippery, it makes me feel happy to see a clear and well cited refutation of the Taoism = magic argument.

My preferred version of the sunzi, admittedly one influenced heavily by Buddhism, provides this translation of the relevant passage in the Nine Grounds:

"Prohibit omens, remove doubt, and even death seems no disaster."

Prohibit omens seems pretty darn clear, especially for the Sunzi.

From Employing Spies:

"Foreknowledge cannot be grasped from ghosts and spirits,
Cannot be inferred from events,
Cannot be projected from calculations.
It must be grasped from people's knowledge."

Have you read this article? Ran across it recently and haven't had a time to read far into it, but it seems quite interesting.

[taai gihk yahn]

Thank you Xiao Meng, your argument was cogent and compelling.

unfotunately, it will b completely disregarded by CYBigMac...

nice to have u back, XM...

[CYMac]

Hi Xiao Ming,

Nice long reply, you have to give me time to read when I am off work and so that I can reply you nicely.

Well, first impression to say is - you are using the wrong book to understand what you are trying to study. Art of war is a war strategy book, it is not a Taoism book. It is for those who have to fight a war, for generals and for war leaders to read. Of course a war leader cannot depend on magic, if not, then they are crazy. There are many superstitious people in the past who just believe in magic and instinct but their belief is totally bizzare and non-sense and so they lead people to death and suffer. If you ever heard people in China toss babies into the river to worship for good luck in the past.. that's the famous story of the river god.

To study real TAoism though, you must know the difference between being a TAOIST and being a General in war. It is different.

The King also don't learn from these art of war and stuff. The king learn from their own stuff and not the books from generals. But having said that, the text that the king read are all RESTRICTED for public to see or read in the past and so they are all not exposed to the public and even now, many books are just destroyed and not leaked to the public. You cannot even find them at all. That's how secret it is.

So you have to know that Taoism is not like reading Art of War, that book is for generals and those who are fighting a war. The chapter you are citing is also for war and not for "Taoist" or Taoism study.

External alchemy is not magic either.

So.. I would have to say, without real experience in the subject of Taoism magic, you won't undersatnd why I am telling you all these today. But it's like when people try to imply Tao Te Ching or Art of War in just everything, it is going to be so off topic and so not right. The problem is, the way of being a king or being a general or being a citizen or being a polic or being a TAoist, is all different.

It's like a rich businessman can have his way of spending, but if you take that and use it youreslf, and you don't have that kind of background, money and stuff.. as the rich man.. you will for sure be in deep sheet mode very soon.

That is the problem with new age too. They mix here and there, take a bit here and then take a bit there.. but end up with a very mixed pot of stuff and going nowhere in their life. The problem is, you can't. Sometimes things just don't mix well. You can't be a woman and e a man and be a dog at the same time. You can only chooe to be one. If you do be one, then you have to learn how to be that one good, and not go weird.

Back in the old days, Zhuge Liang was famous for his calculation in wealther and all that using Taoist astronomical study to win wars and do his strategy too, did he just knock Suen Ji over?

Just that one book say something, it is not the rule of the world. Just like Steve Job, he broke every rule in management, but he is successful too. Thsoe who set the rules, they are not always right. They could be wrong too. Just because the rules are there for long, doesn't means it's right.

Science in the west is like that too, it's starting to have flaws and stuff with the weather and climate prediction now and they just can't make up the math.. in a documentry I saw, they explain this.. and so they are kind of overthrowing the theory of global warming too. Just because they finally found what's wrong after so many years, seeing the patterns.

If Suen Ji is not 100% correct, then does his books have to stay "always 100% correct" now?

Please study some more famous strategist instead of just one or two famous one. There are even Taoist or people with great magic or forecasting power who became famous strategist too such as Lau Pak Wun, Zhuge Liang, and so on. You must not forget that Suen Ji is only ONE of the many wise man in history. So his take is like that, but other wise man can also have different ways of doing things.

Philoosophy in Taoism is not false, it is real but then it is only PART of Taoism in my view. My way of Taoism have both philosophy and practical magic as well, it's not a superstitious belief when you can teach your students to see, feel and experience what magic is and what they are seeing is already telling them the truth. It's just not real when you don't learn the real thing. When you get the real thing, then itis not a belief anymore, you can say, you are just gaining more ability to open your eyes to more things in nature, such as proofing to yourself that more energy than chi exsist, more realms exsist and more living beings in other realms exsist... not because I tell you, but because you gain the ability to see it yourself already. What's there to debate? Waste of time to debate, because it's already proven real to the student already.

-----

Sword -- good sword! I saw that sword selling for a high price in wle.com too, is yours forged and hammered? how do you go about sharpening it? what you use for measuring?

[taai gihk yahn]

Have you read this article? Ran across it recently and haven't had a time to read far into it, but it seems quite interesting.

typical post-structuralist claptrap, if u ask me; but it's a handy tool for toturing Dave Ross, as he had to endure an entire semester at NYU sitting next to me while I tried to pigeon-hole the Chuang Tzu into a framework of deconstruction (hey, I was young and foolish, so sue me); Dave was never quite the same afterwards, and still has a nasty tic to this day...

Derrida is derrivative of the CHunag Tzu without even knowing it; to wit: on page 36
From Of Grammatology by Jacques Derrida (trans. Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak) the following is written:

In this play of representation, the point of origin becomes ungraspable. There are things like reflecting pools and images, an infinite reference from one to the other, but no longer a source, a spring. There is no longer a simple origin. For what is reflected is split in itself and not only as an addition to itself of its image. The reflection, the image, the double, splits what it doubles. The origin of the speculation becomes a difference. What can look at itself is not one; and the law of the addition of the origin to its representation, of the thing to its image, is that one plus one makes at least three.

Almost identically in the Chuang Tzu chapter "Discussion on Making All Things Equal", (Burton Watson trans.) we have:

We have already become one, so how can I say anything? But I have just said that we are one, so how can I not be saying something? The one and what I said about it make two, and two and the original one make three. If we go on this way, then even the cleverest mathematician can't tell where we'll end, much less an ordinary man. If by moving from nonbeing to being we get to three, how far will we get if we move from being to being? Better not to move, but to let things be!

The first passage was highlighted to me in a seminar by Richard Sennett, a long-time student and friend of Derrida, who basically declared that it was the fundamental principle of deconstruction; when I showed him the passage from Chuang Tzu, he looked at me blankly, as if there was no connection...ah well...

[CYMac]

Again, I must say that your translation of Suen Ji is very misleading as well which is not rare to see in the west. The problem is, people tends to like to make sun Ji not a book for war strategy but "a book fo wisdom for all". That's why you are trying to imply it and make it an argument reference to TAOISM. Well, it is a book for war and generals, not for Taoism study though. Not for normal people too. It's ONLY for fighting wars. Sun Ji Bing Faat, it is Bing Faat, the method to war. It is obviously stated what it is, please don't use your imagination too much and made it "book of wisdom for all". That's very misleading already. There are just way too many people doing the same thing nowadays because they think these people who wrote these anceint text are so wise and so they expect these knwoledge can be use for everything in life. Obviously they cannot. When the author like Suen Ji wrote his book, it is meant for war and generals only, not for normal people, not for your daily life, not for your business and not for Taoist. It is JUST for war.

Dao De Jing or Tao Te Ching, it is a book of virtues, so it ONLY teaches you about virtues. People somehow go way off and started to read the book as "book of Tao" and just like you, treating it as the "outline of Taoism study', which is wrong. The reason is, the book only talks about virtues as the title say and it is not about TAO or TAOISM. It is not an outline or an index.

Okay, let me make it simple here.. just like when you go to grade one and got the first book of history, that is not going to tell you what your 10 yrs of history study is going to be about in the future.. it's just going to teach you maybe history of XXX period.. and then next year you get a book for YYY period..etc. You are now taking the grade 1 book of XXX history and telling me that my XK2L history is not in the program because your XXX history book don't show my stuff? That's hilarious. You have to know and accept the fact that Tao Te Ching is not abuot OUTLINE OF TAOISM. There are WAY MORE THINGS than those in Tao Te Ching and the book of TTC never listed them out because it is not a book about those subject! You won't find calculus or algebra in your english grammar book, does that means your education system should not have math? Okay, now you get my point?

That's also the main problem with new agers as well, they think Taoism is about TTC only and TTC tells you what Taoism is about.. then they started to use the same thing to imply into everything.. which leads them to lots of confusion, cloudiness and false knowledge.. Taoism is way more than TTC, as I said, it is a basic beginner book in Taoism only. It is meant to be about TAo Te only, not about TAoism. Taoism have more things.. Tao Te is ONE of them only. Just like math.. science, english, whatever.. School is not just abuot science or physics.. there are also math, english, art..and so on...............

I am not fighting or anything there, I am just stating what I mean and why I always insist on what I say. Not that only I am right, but it's just that I see things are wrong for a reason, not just because they aren't my cup of tea. If you talk about Jesus or things like that I won't talk back. For Taoism? For sure I will be able to answer anything you post and respond to anything you post too.

--

btw, I hate to cite back to books and stuff, I am not a scholar or a book worm. I am just a Taoist and Taoism master who teach things that are practical real deal. My knowledge and things are real and so they come out out of mouth naturally already, I am not going to debate with a bookshelf in hand. Sorry for no citations or anything.

(*please read my post just imagine I am smiling and talking with laughing too, I am being friendly here, and sometimes people are so bias to think I am mean and shouting back.. hey no, I am just talking with a friendly laughter and smile!)