Actually this historical fact is not a positive, because China embraced Mahayana Buddhism, which developed in Persia. Mahayana Buddhism simply re-wrote the canon to suit themselves, and dumped the practice of meditation, and the superior fruit it leads to.
Thank you for the clarification. Would Mahayana be separate from Ch'an/Zen? It seems like Ch'an came from an indian monk known as Bodhidharma. They claim that Bodhidharma is the 28th in patriarchical lineage from Gautama, from the arahant Maha Kassapa.
The chi of taoism suggests to me the experience of the tactile charism, but I agree that there are overlaps with the concept of the classical kundalini phenomena.
Yes, that's the part that confuses me, because firstly they say everything is composed of chi. And then they further divide it into all kinds of chi, like universal chi and human chi. Then within human chi there is original chi (from parents) and post-natal chi (from food and air). Then all the other concepts of jing (essence) and shen (spirit) comes in, it makes the whole thing even more complicated. It might be possible that their concept of 'shen' means the holy spirit, since it is translated as 'spirit'. They differentiate 'shen' from 'hun', which is translated as soul.
I remember writing the last sentence of that post and thinking to myself, "wait, if the immaterial body isn't the self, then what is?" I was comfortable with the mind/body not being the self, but not the immaterial body. I missed where Jeffrey clarified and said anatta means non-identification with one's clan/caste, not that there is no soul or self. Funny how one translation error can taint all of one's perspective of Buddhism.
I wrote that post coming at it from the Gurdjieff perspective which was:
Astral body
Mental body
Divine body
It's interesting to use Gurdjieff as an avenue into the contemplative life. He said people by default have the physical body only, and the spirit has to be built up. His perspective lets someone with a secular perspective enter the spiritual life.
I believe Gurdjieff got his "bodies" from Tibetan Buddhism. I also see the rationale, compared with the after-death fates of people you hear about:
Astral body - returns as human with continuity of self
Mental body - angel/deva
Divine body - fully liberated, free movement across all planes
Oh, that makes a lot of sense, to translate anatta as personality/clan identification. I know the Buddha liked to use negation to discuss nirvana (free from... not this... etc), so it might imply that he did not want to place a label on the 'self', because no matter how one labels it, it becomes a thought/concept instead of direct experience.
I believe Tibetan Buddhism tried to combine yoga with Mahayana Buddhism though, so that is probably why they came up with the bodies. In Hindu yoga they have the following sheaths/kosha, followed by the Atman.
- Physical/food body - Annamaya kosha
- Energy body - Pranamaya kosha
- Mental/manas body - Manamaya kosha
- Wisdom/ego body - Vijnanamaya kosha
- Bliss - Anandamaya kosha
- Atman-soul
I do find it interesting how they describe the innermost sheath as bliss-body. I however, do not yet have the direct experience of these kosha so I do not wish to speculate.