I know!

[oath]

This is tao, this is chi, this is yin yang.

what do you say?

[LordArt]

Huh?

[Strider]

No

-Thus speaketh the philosopher.

[oath]

http://qi-journal.com/Taiji.asp?-Token. ... chID=Taiji Basics


All religions fit within the tao, it is base. Here is a good link for some little understanding?


From what I have read and seen, this is chi that you write of and use, only that you take a more mechanical like approach to it, hence your word "tech"

[Strider]

The link you gave was an article discussing the study and develope of eastern religions... or at least a sect of them. Specifcaly those revolving around Tai Chi.... your point? Are you trying to imply that in my very terse and quite accurate response I did not have the knowledge to qualify it as being the best answer?

Allow me to clarify:

All religions may fit into Tao but that is like saying all fish swim in the Ocean. While Yes, in an overarching genralization all religion fits into Tao, So do all things, thus it is meaningless.

Omnimancy is not Tao, though the genralization of naming conventions might lead someone to draw similarities. Omnimancy is the magical study and development of one of the fundimental elements that links all paradigms of magical studies... energy. Omnimancy is "All Magics" because we work with that energy and the theories learned can either be used stand alone or used to suppliment other schools of magical practice. That being said Omnimancy also happened upon the name as the Head Mages wife at the time made a bad joke and it kinda stuck... hate to destroy the illusion but we do have a twisted sense of humor sometimes.

Omnimancy may be a part of the greater Tao of things, but as stated before, given the generalities of Tao it is meaningless in a technical or more refined sense past generalities.

Omnimancy, also, is not a religion though we do tend to tread on grounds that most religions claim given the nature of our craft.

Chi, in any spelling of the word, is energy, yes we use energy, however, Chi in most martial philosophies of eastern thought take it to mean life force. While the energy that we use is part of that it is more than just that. Chi is only an aspect of the energy we utilize.

"Tech" is not comparable to Chi as Chi would be, in this case, comparable to raw will. While yes, we can and some do develope a larger capacity for chi in Omnimancy it is more of a personal persuit and or pass time. Additionally Chi as raw will is not "Tech". Chi as life force is not "Tech". Chi as any form of basic energy (which, unfortunately it is a basic energy) is not "Tech".

"Tech", as we refer to it, is a series of techniques and magical constructs (or technologies) that utilize energy to amplify effect or produce more large scale, efficient, profficient, complex results. This is an extremely rough explination and I would suggest that you reread what is public as far as documentation as you have derived fraudulant conclusions.

Additionaly, Ying and Yang are philosophies, symbologies, and different aspects of Chi to help better understand the fundimental dynamics of energy work. They are tools... deeply pondered aspects of Chi to help the practitioner understand how it functions and how to utilize it in both an Internal and External fashion ... but they are not "Tech" they are filtered and refined forms of a genral aspect of energy.

So, to repeat myself in my answer to your post

This is tao, this is chi, this is yin yang.

what do you say?

No.

-Thus Speaketh the Philosopher.



::ponders putting on the Sifu pants::

PS: This post may sound arrogant but I am having fun with it. I enjoy a good debate. And I do stand firm by my first answer... after all... I've been involved with the physical groups for 6-7 years... and have been studying martial philosophies and practices for about 10-13 years... I think I know what I am talking about.

[oath]

Okay Mr. Debater (I am liking this as well ) heres my counter/point of view, which being mine, I am inclined, and entitled at that to say it is absolutely true and way more than yours (unless you can prove me wrong that is, logically speaking, great way to start eh? ) (Lastly, being that I am also arrogant. I believe whenever one should see it, one should be paying close attention lest they lose the important point, but I believe I can do you one up on your comments)


Meaningless, hardly, although the nothing this is one duality to the equation. I suppose I like the ocean example, but tend to think in smaller simpler terms, for tao is like the primal or primordial essence, thus how all things are born out of it, and even though I did say all religion you also have to think of all the things within each religion, including creationism. Good to see you at least partially agree with it being what one might call the source though. In which case I merely see tao as everything and something like chi only slightly different in that it is a word used by the author lao tze to denote something which he apparently didnt understand all that well, else he would have called it its true name, truth, which doesnt actually exist in the first place very well being that it is sort of a description of things if you will, and so we call it "the way" (tao).

what you get is up to you, if thou thinketh meaningless, then so it be meaningless

-thus speaketh the philosopher



Wether or not omnimancy is tao or not is still a matter of debate, and though I wish to take your word for it, being that you are a senerior member/leader I am finding difficulty seeing as how what I have read so far confirms what I have already stated. Much the same way these religions are a facet of the tao, your system and many others as well seem to be a facet or perspective of the chi energy work system which encompasses the yin yang dualities need I say the source of which is based on mostly tao and some buddhist teaching or in this case I prefer the word truth and the phrase "the way".


Chi is all things, you forget, physics has taught us MATTER-ENERGY that we may better comprehend. Thus chi comes in many forms in the many different combinations of yin yang. SO tell me have you studied the trigrams? I find it good to explain in binary code combinations,
11
10
01
00

And so each of these can be further multiplied into different combinations such as the pre heaven and post heaven trigrams or the 64 trigrams of baghuazang, and even further than this with many different meanings and understanding gleaned.




Oh yes, and I absolutely must comment on your years of training comment, I absolutely love these ones. Now I would like you to tell me honestly, how many hours or days or weeks out of those years you have actually spent studying these things and see if you can even come to a 1/4 of the way close to your original number!

All hail the knowing one who is above truth and may use and change it to suite his beliefs and preferences!

Edit: I have thought about this before posting, but in all respectfulness I feel I must make known my awareness of the situation at hand in which it may be perceived that I am being negative or destructive towards this group in which the case is that I am simply here to learn and as was suggest, debate.

Thank you very much, and I would be more than happy to contue such a conversation via more private methods, that is unless you think you can change my mind pretty easily here soon

[LordArt]

Just to clarify a few things not to get into the conversation too much. (And no I don't feel Omnimancy is TAO and CERTAINLY isn't CHI. Changing personal definitions of words to fit one's agruments doesn't make it so) (I'm not the philosopher that Strider is, so I'll leave it at that.).

The name "Omnimancy" didn't come from my Ex-wife. It came from Contrary, which then my Ex decided it was rather arrogant, and I said "Well, so are Mages" and it stuck. The explanation for the name is also explained somewhere around in here, so I won't repeat it here. It fits from our perspective(Well, at least mine anyways!).

Tech has been the MOST difficult things to explain to people. Without seeing an example of it, it's VERY hard to have point of reference to say "what it's like". They think that they understand it and move on when they read about it, but they generally don't. Those that HAVE been exposed to it all agree "It's VERY different", but that doesn't help the casual reader of the forum. And saying it's different doesn't mean much. The best that can be done is explain as best one can, but it still does not do it justice. Is it energy? Yes, but in the same sense that all matter is energy.

Lets see if I can try to explain it a different way than it already has been. It might be best understood as if you built a many orders of magnitude scaled larger version of a molecule and compared it to the original. The larger scale might be considered raw will magic. Now you want to change the inherant properties of that energy/matter. It's not very practical on the larger scale model. But what if you rewrote how the normal molecule was put together to give it different properties? Then making it interact with itself or other complex molecules to produce a new material, like an alloy, but something that has inherant active properties versus(and including) passive properties. (An alloy would be considered to have passive properties, while an ossalator crystal that is present in most computers would be considered having an active property, ie. expose it to energy and it does something interesting) Then you decide to build a macro scale machines out of these EXTREMELY diverse set of materials you can build, toward a specific end effect. Because of the scale of actual energy used (and even needed to create it), the efficiency for an effect is MANY MANY orders of magnitude smaller than if it was done via raw will. Because of limitations of how much an individual can move and shape via raw will, having such effeciencies allows abilities that otherwise would be prohibitive because of lack of power/magical strength/fine detail control.

Sort of like what your cell phone looked like 5 years ago, versus now, versus what it will look like five years from now. Not only in size but what it can do additionally than just being a phone(or even how well it IS a phone). It's that kind of progression, that is still going on in Omnimancy.

Oh yes, and I absolutely must comment on your years of training comment, I absolutely love these ones. Now I would like you to tell me honestly, how many hours or days or weeks out of those years you have actually spent studying these things and see if you can even come to a 1/4 of the way close to your original number!

Don't be so argogant about such things. Yes, I've known many who have said they have studied for 10 years, and you find out that they are 19 and studied since they were 9 and have read 2 books and didn't give it much though in the intervening years. In such cases, your right. I personally find quality of training more important than time. I find most first year students in Omni to be more competent than most 3-5 year students of other traditions. But in the end, experience and wisdom is something that comes over time and oppertunity, not training.

Currently I am involved with two groups (so that's twice a week for me) and that's been true for years. As far as time actually working on things, at this point, it's close to 15 years for me. So are you counting actual minutes from those days or what? If you count minutes, of course it's not on the same level number. The job field that I work at even if you say I worked for 10 years at, but only 8 hours a day, 5 days a week, then that reduces down to 2.37 years, so what's your point?

Do you count that I am involved in two groups per week as 2 days or one week? What about the time I spend on the weekends with people off the cuff that I do quite often? If your talking about a hyatisis of weeks or months not doing anything...Hasn't happened. To Strider, myself or quite of few others I know for MANY years (read 10+ years for me, and since Strider joined up so many years ago...It's been 6 or so now...scary ).

You might want to talk a little more with people before inferring such accusations that they haven't put the time in and therefore don't have a clue what they are talking about. If they sound coherant and their logic is sound, even if you don't agree with it, give them the benefit of the doubt. Otherwise you make yourself out an ass by doing exactly what your accusing them of. I.E. Not knowing what your talking about.

[oath]

I already said I was arrogant. Allow me to Break that down: I am accepting and acknowledging of this characteristic about my being arrogant, I openly admit it, therfor it must somehow be useful in such a way. I do speak matter of factly. The reason I do this is because of truth. Because I hold to the highest standards of yang chi. That supreme of supreme of truth, divinity, light and right/wrong. The extreme of the extremists. the 1, the 11, 111, 1111, 1111, ........ And there is another good example, for I am cold in attaining that and whilst fighting for this, you see the yin, and negative fighting I am doing like the arrogance. I can only see myself changing from this if and when there is no need for it, which would mean a no need to fight for these ideals, which most likely is going to be a forever continuing battle. Life being one big series of battles, such as this debate, in which case each of us has different strengths and weaknesses. Different extremes and points of balance and power or strength of each point and extreme, and that is why there is no such thing as perfect warrior in the present IS sense, yet there is in the future tense WILL BE, for we are perfect in potential (we have the tools to accomplish it). Am I arrogant? Yes, and damn proud of it

But really, really really, I am starting to realize that I missed something before in regards to the response I am getting. I mean, this doesnt quite feel like a friendly debate to me, and I sure didnt feel like I reached the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow when I entered this part of the site earlier to check the new post, but I digress.... No, what I really think this is about is most likely an adversion to that extremism, that highest ideal and attainment of divinity, but mostly, its about truth. A ... denial of it if you will. Of course I dont have all the information I would like to seeing as I'm just a visitor to the site, so I'm leaving plenty of room to be proven wrong here so ill leave it at only 80 percent sure of my claims in regards to omnimancy.

Omnimancy: one of the many and smaller aspects of tao used towards in a tool like basis in which is oriented towards a mechanical and logical working of chi otherwise known magical acts, psychic energy, lifeforce, etc..


Edit: 111 views, luck?

[LordArt]

Arrogance to me is a MOST negative trait. Something that I know is in myself, but something I try to remove. Generally it's unnessarily abraisive and generally causes the "Won the battle, lost the war" symdrome. (ie. You may or may not prove your point to yourself, but you piss off the people that you are talking to that they don't want to deal with you anymore). If your goal is more information, or sway another to your way of thinking, being arrogant isn't the way to do it. You'll get dismissed before you get too far. Being knowledgable and confident is different.

I openly admit it, therfor it must somehow be useful in such a way....Am I arrogant? Yes, and damn proud of it

And in this, in my opinion, is your failure. If a form of yourself is self destructive, to acknowledge it is a fine goal, for once your aware of that nature, it can be combatted or muted. To embrace a self-destructive trait is nothing to be proud of. It's kind of akin to a drug addict deciding he can't change his nature (because it's too hard, or whatever the reason), and proclaiming "I'm PROUD to be an ADDICT!" While it's very nice he has accepted himself, which admittedly is more than most will do in their lives, it's not enough. It's resigning to your own self-destruction, which to me is a defeatest attitude.

I use to work with a guy who was an arrogant prick, who was use to BSing people into making them think he knew what he was doing. He didn't really appreciate me poking holes in his BS. In anycase, eventually he said that I should simply accept how he acted because it was his nature. I told him if there was a child molester next door after my child, should I just accept it because it was their nature as well? Accepting unacceptable behavior simply because it's "their nature" is not an acceptable excuse to me. You justifying your arrogance because it's your nature, is also not acceptable to me, regardless of how you justify your actions to yourself for why you do it.

I mean, this doesnt quite feel like a friendly debate to me

You don't get a friendly debate by attacking the very thing your trying to learn more about, or attacking those that you are speaking with. (I really didn't appreciate your verbal attack on Strider about his credentials or abilities considering you know nothing of him. All it showed was your ignorance). What exactly do we know of you that you have that right?

Of course I dont have all the information...

You also don't get a debate by blatently saying something is something else when you self admit you know nothing about it. Becareful that you don't become what you hate in others. Saying something IS something else when you know nothing of the former subject is recklass at best, and slander at worst, and simply shows your own ignorance which of course damages any credibility you might have built up.

And this is where your arrogance gets you. I could care less if you think Tao or Chi is Omnimancy. It doesn't change things for me one way or the other. I know it is not because I know what I'm talking about, since as the founder of the Omnimancy system, I have an authoritive understanding of what it is and is not.

Definition of Chi: the circulating life energy that in Chinese philosophy is thought to be inherent in all things; in traditional Chinese medicine the balance of negative and positive forms in the body is believed to be essential for good health .

Chi is not Omnimancy. Omnimancy uses QUITE a few other energies that are NOT lifeforce based at all, even indirectly. If for no other reason then Omnimancy does eventually go quite far outside that limited scope. Psionics, and most magical studies do not go beyond use of soul energy in one form or another, so in such a regard, one could say THEY use chi only. And if your only exposure to magic is soul based systems, then I can understand you limited viewpoint and assuming Omnimancy is the same. But that'st he point, You're ASSUMING! Omnimancy CAN use chi, but certainly doesn't have to, and after a point RARELY does higher up.

If you REDEFINE the definition of CHI to mean "All ENERGY"(kinetic, electrical, etc. including magical types), then the word becomes meaningless or at least redundant. You might as well say "Omnimancy uses Energy." Welll, it does of course, but we said that in the first place. But that's the point, your redefining a word to fit your argument which isn't a debate, it's mental masterbation.

Besides, I'm not Chinese nor do I subscribe to the philosophy that lifeforce energy exists in all things. And since it is a philosophy and not a provable "law", any truth it has is from your own perspective only.