What is infernal?

[LDShouler]

Apologies, Affa, I missed the subtle hypertext links- I'm a bit new to all this.

[BruceP]

Integrity is maintained by not investing the soul in the 'ten thousand things'. One cannot possess a thing without being possessed by that thing.

JC said something about not storing your treasures here on earth where moth and rust consume and thieves break in and steal. I think he was talking about the same thing in terms of maintaining one's spiritual integrity.

[affa]

apologies

no apologies necessary

[LDShouler]

Klonk: I still don't think our collective moral values speak for the rest of humanity throughout time, especially as an attestation to a universal evil; my view point tends to come from more of a biological position- acts of altruism do not preclude acts of violence unless a given group 'morally' disprove of it. If I were amongst the Mongolian hordes of the 13th century, or following in the steps of Leonidas, or engaged in a tribal war in the Sudan, or even a British soldier fighting in Afghanistan (insert any other 'if I were...'), I'm sure the actions I would undertake (and be supported in) would/could be morally reprehensible by our standards.

[Chris Fleming]

"For experimental validation, go around and beng quan every moral relativist you meet. When he protests, say, "Who are you to impose your values on me?""

The essence of moral relativism right there. That position falls to pieces if a person is forthcoming enough to follow their own thought to its conclusion.

[klonk]

The primitive and inescapable definition of evil is it harms me unjustly. It takes a bit more sophistication to generalize and say evil is what harms anyone unjustly.

[LDShouler]

I don't quite understand why those who believe that morals are relative to historical and social context would'nt hold to a given moral system themselves: to understand anothers ideas is not necessarily to justify them. I believe that (in general) our legal system encapsulates morals that I adhere to and see as logical, but it is only since the Enlightenment era that such values have started to be applied on a larger scale.
Don't forget, even the perspective that we are all one humanity has certainly not been supported until the last few centuries, and even now (unfortunately) there are those who believe certain races to be inferior to others. People consider what is good for their group as a priority over other groups...

[internalenthusiast]

Integrity is maintained by not investing the soul in the 'ten thousand things'. One cannot possess a thing without being possessed by that thing.

JC said something about not storing your treasures here on earth where moth and rust consume and thieves break in and steal. I think he was talking about the same thing in terms of maintaining one's spiritual integrity.

i made a couple posts last night but erased them. as i wasn't sure i had anything very forward-moving to add...

...but one of them was quoting bruce/shooter.

i like his post.

one of the things i like about it is it focuses on what we can do.

i.e., it's not just about being a victim to some (supernatural?) entity, but about seeing something, and adopting a useful course of action...

there are two tacit questions (it seems to me) in this thread:

1) how can we protect ourselves from "evil" if it exists (as an entity).

2) how do we avoid succumbing to it.

they seem to me related. kinda like: how does one avoid being cheated?

avoid being "one of those suckas born every minute"--who is out to get something.

sorry if i'm being abstruse. i don't mean to be.

but what i like about bruce's post is that if focuses so clearly on what "we" can do. and stated in a clear way, understandable to anyone of any faith.

ok, i'll leave this one up.

[edited for clarity]

[LDShouler]

Personally, if I were to take the concept of there being a universal evil as a truth, I think I might find myself becoming slightly paranoid. How could humanity ever hope to overcome such power? And if one were to follow the belief in 'Revelations' then as a race we're already predestined for apocalypse, with only personal salvation as an option.
In my opinion, concepts of extra-human 'evil' forces can lead to us misunderstanding the real causes of psychotic behaviour; how many 'possessed' people have in fact suffered from psychiatric problems thoroughly treatable IF IDENTIFIED AS SUCH? When faced with the unknown humans search for some kind of pattern to cling to in order to explain phenomena, thus giving them a perceived chance of controlling their circumstances; this can be problematic if the 'pattern/explaination' does'nt quite gel with the reality of the situation.

[Steve James]

The only place one can surely find devils and angels is in human beings, more specifically, in every human being. "Evil" as a concept is not the same as an "evil" person or being. It doesn't take a Devil for evil to exist; and if we blame the Devil for something, we inevitably absolve a human being --typically someone like us. Neither devil nor jinn has done anything in this world that can't be ascribed to some human. So, to me, the relevance of the existence of a devil is less important than the prevention of doing evil myself. The only devil that concerns me is my own, and he/she can be very tempting. But, he/she is helpless without me.

[LDShouler]

Maybe it's the semantics, but I think using such loaded words as evil can sometimes lead to an obscuring of facts as to an explaination (and hopefully limitation) of sociopathic/psychotic acts. I agree that we need a shorthand reaction to abhorrent acts that occur around us or to us, but if trying to reflect from a more objective view I reckon the use of 'evil' is just too subjective. I'm not sure if that makes sense...

[Steve James]

From the semantic pov:

Definitions of evil on the Web:

morally objectionable behavior
morally bad or wrong; "evil purposes"; "an evil influence"; "evil deeds"
that which causes harm or destruction or misfortune; "the evil that men do lives after them; the good is oft interred with their bones"- Shakespeare
having the nature of vice
the quality of being morally wrong in principle or practice; "attempts to explain the origin of evil in the world"
malefic: having or exerting a malignant influence; "malevolent stars"; "a malefic force"
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
Evil is defined as something that is immoral, causes pain or harm, is offensive, or threatening. In many cultures evil is a broad term used to describe what are seen as subjectively harmful deeds that are labeled as such to steer moral support. Evil is usually contrasted with good. ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evil

From the social perspective, however, "evil" is determined by the social context. Every society, afaik, has a concept of "evil." Using a different term wouldn't change that problem. Besides, the question was, iinm, whether evil existed. I would argue that, if someone perceives "evil", it is irrelevant to argue its existence with that person. The question becomes "what is evil?" The answer "That which is bad for me" is fine, but doesn't respond to the question or address the fact that someone else finds that what is good (not evil) for you is bad (evil) for him. Then we're back to square one.

[LDShouler]

I guess, once again, perspective defines evil rather than 'universal truth'; the importance seems to be to consider the question rather than find a homogenous reply.

[Strange]

the term "zou huo ru muo" is mostly used in 'internal' type qigong practice, whether it has a martial element or not.
personally, i define it as something/thought/concept/idea that a person introduces artificially into his own natural physical and mental system; because of this the natural functioning goes out of whack and sometimes what is natural becomes forgotten.

i have always maintained that qigong practice can be very dangerous without close monitoring of very qualified teacher.

There are many books/articles on the practice of qigong; many extol its health benefits and it is common that examples of superhuman feats are cited. Many qigong master share their knowledge; and there are also many eager students.

But, as students, many do not know that the instructions written are the descriptions of states and sensation of those who have already achieve the Minor and Major Heaven Cycles. Some have instructions mixed in with what is felt as one reaches the Cycle stages. It is extremely difficult for the beginner or advance beginner student to understand.

And if you add in each students particular aptitude, physical disposition; one will looking at a very difficult where the student can commit very serious and injurious mistakes in many many different ways.

For example, 气沉丹田, lit. Qi Energy Sink To Dan Tian, or Sink/Direct Qi to the Dan Tian
This is a very common guideline or term for the correct direction of Qi. many internal schoo'ls instruction on qi has this term; LHBF also have this term. many times, it is to be found in the very first beginning sentence.

So when the student read this to practice, most will try to sink their breath to the abdomen and feel the dan tian and think that this is correct. But where is it written that breathing to the abdomen and feeling the dantian is the correct interpretation of the above term?

The term says Qi Sink to Dan Tian, so:
1) you must have Qi first correct, are you sure you have it?
Many do not know that before qigong practice can begin, the master must 通关, or Open Gates, using his own Qi on the student. If not where do you begin?
2) "Student feel the Dan Tian" First, we must understand that if we use a cadaver and examine a normal human body, the best surgeon cannot show you, in physical term, where or what an acupoint is. Some say the Dan Tian is 1.5 to 2 inch below the navel. So is it 1.5 or 2? Lets say if you have a beer belly, whats the location?
3) Some instructions are very 'fierce': "feel/visualize fire in dan tian". because this type of instruction have very fierce/heavy intent, the concentration of the student tenses up the system and cause the process to be unnatural and the qi is stuck. if you are lucky, you just walk away unharmed. but many end up with unnatural qi flow that cause the student to have prolonged stuffiness in chest, headaches, ringing in the ear etc.

Another term is 提肛 or Lift Anus
this term is use mainly for directing qi flow and not let it escape from the body.
So how does one Lift the anus? is it like kegel technique? how hard or soft to lift? and when?
we cannot read off a meter and know what is the strength that we are exerting, nor does the qigong instruction give any indication.

Many do not understand that in MA or qigong, understanding the term is not the same as being able to do it. in fact, it can be very dangerous to think so. So one must be very careful if doing this type of practice.

cheers,
S