Aeran

Solid advice, I'll keep it in mind - thanks. I have a tendency to get carried away intellectualizing things occasionally

I'm trying to make a point of not getting dragged into these redundant faux pai debates anymore, but I wanna touch on this because it's one of the things that's always bothered me about MPG and his crew. He claims that his group is practicing genuine Mo Pai and that the books written by Danaos and McMillan are a valid guide to doing so, but in all these discussions I've never once seen the subject of standing meditation come up until now. Meanwhile in his second book, Danaos says this: So if people really are training in the way advised by MPG and his crew (solely through seated meditation, as far as I'm aware) and ignoring this fairly crucial instruction, they're not only not practicing the genuine training (despite the fact that it's outlined in Danaos' book), they are, according to their own sources, doing themselves potentially debilitating damage.

Sifu Terry, Thanks for taking the time to answer these questions in detail - I'll let this train of conversation end there so the discussion can go back to a more practical basis as you requested. Just wanted to say that re: the breath percentages, I certainly wasn't encouraging anyone to experiment in that regard (or planning on doing so myself), just hoping to gain a deeper understanding of the exact function of the breath sequences and role that they play in distinguishing the FPCK system and the unique energy/effects it creates from other yogic systems.

What about when you see a grainy image of something that may or may not be a bird at all?

I went back and rewatched the video, and I think you're overstating it a bit. the "crowd," from what's visible in the video, is about a dozen people, standing a few meters behind him, clapping politely when the bulb lights up. I don't think "distant but adoring" is an accurate description. I would argue that, within the context of the Chinese internal arts, the whole "point at a student and have them bounce around a bit" routine is far, far more common than the lightbulb routine. And I never said that the video should be convincing. What I said was that people shouldn't jump to conclusions. That's kind of my point. Maybe he did, maybe he didn't, we don't know. Therefore why not say "we don't know" instead of responding with rudeness, dogmatism and derision? I never argued that the video is convincing, or unconvincing. And we have no way of knowing whether it was intended to be convincing or unconvincing. I can't read Italian so the corresponding links are useless, so all we're debating about is an out of context video. An admirable attitude, but shouldn't it cut both ways? If a video as a medium is poor evidence that an individual is a master, shouldn't it be equally poor evidence that the individual is a fraud? Personally, if I was making a "highlights reel" of a nei gong workshop, I'd have it consist of the most interesting snippets of what the individual hosting the workshop has to say during his/her lectures, giving the viewer a feel for the teachings of the individual, their worldview, understanding of their own practices, etc. Because as you said, video's can't prove anything. And this is just an out of context video - sure it could be the case that the man in question had the video filmed and uploaded it with the specific intention that it serve as proof of some kind of power he possesses. On the flip side, it could have been taken by someone who was randomly invited to come along to a lecture or training session hosted by the guy, consisting of a few out of context seconds of a much larger chain of interactions and teachings, and then been uploaded without the man's knowledge. We have no idea. I would argue, again, that the "point and bounce" routine is the oldest trick in the book by far. And I'm not ripping on Ya Mu, from what I know of the guy my opinion is that he's most likely a legitimate teacher, just saying that the videos are more or less on-par. You're kind of mis-stating my case. If people had just responded to the OP with "yeah dude, it's just a grainy video of something which can be faked, I wouldn't take it as evidence of anything either way," then I never would have chimed in. Cause that's how I feel myself. But people are taking it as evidence, just of the opposite kind that the OP implied - instead of taking it as evidence that the guy is real, they're taking it as evidence that the guy is a fraud, when in truth it is evidence of neither. It's shoddy thinking and it's a pretty crappy attitude for a community based around discussing energetic arts and spiritual cultivation. And that's not even touching on the response of certain individuals when I responded with something other than jumping aboard the hate-train. Yeah, let's not go there

There's nothing interactive about a video of people jumping around after someone points at them. Unless you were actually the person being hit with the Qi, there's absolutely no way of knowing whether what he's doing is legitimate or not. What does vibe have to do with it? What exactly would make the video a "serious" demonstration instead of "desperado street magic"? And even if the video is fake (which for all I know, it could be), does that mean that it's inherently impossible to light up a lightbulb with Qi? But not to kill bugs then bring them back to life, or change the weather patterns, or create sparks, or levitate, or heal people from across the room - to give examples of "legitimate" Qi abilities cited in this thread. Why? I'd think that on the scale of things, changing the weather (not to mention killing and resurrecting insects) is both much more unbelievable, much more useful and much more impressive than the useless ability to light up a lightbulb. But for some reason there's this arbitrary line drawn with absolutely nothing to back it up but dogmatism and lack of critical thinking. The implication being that because I don't automatically write something off as impossible because it doesn't match up with my personal experiences, I'm somehow desperately and selfishly power hungry - really? Hungry for what power? I would hardly call lighting a lightbulb "extraordinary power," again, certainly not compared to the other examples given, which people don't see to shrug at.

I never said it should be assumed that the video is true - I said that we shouldn't make assumptions either way. I guess I just hoped at least some people posting on a board about practicing arts which entails phenomena which are well outside the mainstream scientific materialist/reductionist view of reality would be a bit less dogmatic about these things and more able to accept that there are possibilities within existence which they aren't aware of either way, since they've (presumably) actively experienced things which are, by society's standard, impossible, but it appears that isn't the case. Brian, you practice Stillness-Movement, right? By the same chain of reasoning, I should automatically discount all of those videos of people bouncing around as Ya Mu heals them and assume that the man is a fraud, because they could be faked far more easily than lighting up a lightbulb. Yikes. Ok, sure thing.

Perhaps not in so many words, but it's been your train of logic for the entire discussion. Good, so do I. That would be a bit hard, since you yourself don't know. The difference is that I at least know that I don't know. We've been down this road before. I ask you if you know whether what happened in the video is fake and how you know this, and you respond by insinuating that it's fake because it's possible that it's fake (in which case all Qi phenomena are fake, for the purpose of this discussion, as any of them can be faked on video), or it's fake because it isn't in line with the phenomena you've personally witnessed being performed with Qi or similar (in which case you happen to be the one person in the entire known history of humankind who, by complete chance through their few decades in a field, managed to learn everything there is to know or ever will be to know about that field). What you haven't done is given any reasoning to support the idea that either: A ) This specific case is fake, either through examination of the video which demonstrates positive evidence that he's performing an illusion and not producing a genuine phenomena, or through some personal experience with the individual involved which supports the idea that he is incapable of the phenomena being demonstrated B ) The phenomenon being demonstrated is inherently impossible. Regular practice? just under 4 years. Research and dabbling? One and off for 14 or so. No idea, although I suspect you brought it up because it's a lot longer than me and that somehow overrides your faulty reasoning. No clue. I have no idea who he is, and before this thread was made I had no idea that he even existed. For all I know, he might be a fraud who's never practiced a day in his life. About qi gong? Or about basic logic and reasoning? The only explanation I'm trying to make is the one I made on the first page: "I have no idea if this guy is legit or not - in fact I have no idea who he is and had never heard of him until I clicked this thread, but automatically writing someone off as a fraud without definite reasons to make the accusation is childish, close minded and rude. Why not just accept that you have no idea who this guy is and what he is or isn't capable of and leave it at that? ... I'm not trying to prove anything or claiming to know anything, except that the attitude of making assumptions about things you know nothing about is counterproductive. It's the same attitude which leads people to believe that everything discussed on this board (spirituality, metaphysical energies, etc) is "new age nonsense" or "pseudo-science" or "superstitious woo" or however they prefer to term it - they haven't experienced something and/or they lack the knowledge to understand how it could occur, so they automatically assume that it couldn't occur instead of just accepting that it could potentially be an aspect of reality which is outside of their range of knowledge/experience at the present. It's the kind of faulty logic and close-minded thinking which holds back serious inquiry into any field of knowledge."

Nobody does repression like the Brits

I don't see why they have to contradict. The soul could reincarnate over and over, slowly developing spiritually until it reaches the stage at which it has nothing more to learn from physical existence - at this point it can work to attain spiritual immortality (ie. the ability to exist in a non-corporeal state permanently and with full awareness, without having to go through the cycle of rebirth) and continue to develop in higher realms of existence and/or work to help other souls from these higher realms (akin to the Boddhisatva ((sp?)) concept). Or it could choose to reincarnate voluntarily to help people from within the material realm.

I'm pretty sure everyone here practices qi gong (or a related art) in some form or another, so I'm not sure why you keep jumping to that. But qi gong is a vast field made up of many different systems which work with different energies in different ways and produce different results. Just because one practitioner can do X but not Y, doesn't mean there isn't another who can do Y but not X, or one who can do both, or one who can't do either but can do Z. You keep repeating the same argument over and over again, "it can be faked, therefore it's not real" and "I've never seen it, therefore it's not real." Both of which even the most basic logic can shut down instantly. Which could all just as easily be faked - and would go against the whole point of giving a dramatic demonstration to a large audience. If someone wants to hunt this guy down and hook him up to a meter and see what happens, then by all means, but until then, why not just accept that we don't know?

Except you have absolutely no evidence either way, you're leaping to conclusions based on preexisting assumptions. To back your statement up, you either need some reason to believe that that video in particular is fraudulent (ie. some kind of first hand inside knowledge regarding the individual involved and/or the events being filmed), or some reason to believe that it's inherently impossible to light up a lightbulb using Qi. If someone can make sparks fly off objects, or levitate/be thrown 12 feet, or alter the weather, why can't they light up a lightbulb?

I've never used one and have no idea if they work, but if you google "earthing mat" you'll find in the top few results a website which sells them within Australia. http://www.earthingoz.com.au http://www.barefoothealing.com.au

Thanks for such a detailed reply Sifu Terry - and sorry for taking so long to get back to you on it, I typed up a draft reply, got diverted and saved a copy, then forgot that I hadn't actually posted it. I've got some more questions if you don't mind me dragging the conversation back a few months Regarding the spontaneous "jump healing," is this an effect that can also be initiated at will and focused to provide a more specific or intense healing process. ie. if someone has a problem in a specific organ, can you direct the FP Chi with intention to heal this specific organ, or will it naturally diffuse throughout their system to provide the overall "whole system" healing/balancing as it does when cultivated through the FPCK? More generally speaking, I'd love to hear more about how you heal with the FP Chi. How does the practice of the FP Chi Kung and the cultivation of the FP Chi effect the pre-existing energy and energetic anatomy? A lot of the postures and movements in FP are similar to what I've seen in other Chi Kung systems - does this mean that the "regular" Chi will increase in quantity to some degree on top of tapping into and cultivating the FP Chi, just by the act of undertaking a yogic/meditative practice? What effect does FP Chi have on the regular Chi within the body? Does it remain something separate to a degree, or is the FP Chi, to use a poor analogy, "soluble" with the regular Chi? Regarding the FP "stem," would I be correct in thinking of this as something akin to the Western concept of an Egregore (I'm not sure of the Daoist terminology, sorry)? Does it have some kind of active, unique consciousness of it's own (akin to a spirit, deity, etc), or such an entity related to it? You state that the FP Chi in the body only connects to the main "stem" after a certain amount has already accumulated in the practitioner - just to make sure I fully understand the process, does this mean the process of cultivating the specific FP Chi is an internal, alchemical process triggered by the breathing percentages and movements, and once a sufficient quantity of it occurs in the system it kind of "magnetizes" the practitioner to the main stem, which further energizes them and speeds up the expansion of consciousness? What would happen if someone performed the breathing percentages without the movements, or vice versa, or matched the wrong percentages to the wrong movements? I assume nothing good, as you warn against it I'm just really curious to learn more about how exactly the system and it's unique energy function. I get the impression that the breath percentages are the catalyst in the meditations which connect the practitioner to the FP "stem." To what extent are the other Bok Fu Pai meditations similar to the FPCK system, in the sense of using breath percentages (I believe Sifu Hearfield's Sunn Yee Gong does), tapping into a unique macrocosmic energy as opposed to inherent/internal/local/environmental energy, etc? Sorry if that's too many questions In truth I actually have a lot more, as I'm fascinated by how these systems work, but I don't want to consume too much of your time. Thank you again for taking the time for such a detailed answer.

Fair point - I'm not huge on medieval/Renaissance grimoire magic, but you're right that they did play fast and loose with definitions (and spelling )

Yes yes yes, it can faked, we know that. I could make a fake video of myself bench pressing 300kg. Doesn't mean it's impossible for a human to bench that much. I'd still like to know why you feel specifically that it's impossible, either in this video in particular or in general on a theoretical level. And if this is impossible, what do you feel is possible with Qi? Why one, but not the other?

Brown rice with chia, bit of ghee thrown in and some smoked paprika on top.

If you want to get technical about it, etymologically speaking, it's only necromancy when you contact a deceased spirit for the express purpose of asking them about the future (the "-mancy" suffix refers to divinatory practices). The term only became more generalized to refer to any magic involving the dead (or their bodies) following Tolkien's use of the term in his fantasy novels and it's entrance from there into the pop-culture lexicon.

If the music is something you made yourself I didn't mean to rip into it, sorry if it came across that way - . it takes work to put music together and guts to post it online, so I have nothing but respect. I figured it was just something you came across online.

I don't have any group that I know of, unless you count "the 99.9% of the population who don't think that Mo Pai is the only legitimate system of cultivation" as a group. You do realize the whole Mo Pai Eradication Force thing was a (rather lame) joke, right? I've never said any of that. You seem to insist on taking the things certain people who disagree with you have said and applying them to everyone who disagrees with you, then putting them into one large group even if they have nothing to do with eachother other than not agreeing with you - which is also shoddy reasoning. Although I obviously don't know for sure, given the available evidence I have always leaned towards Chang being at least legitimate to some degree (what degree exactly is hard to say). I didn't argue for the demonstration being legitimate (how could I? I have no idea who the man is), I simply pointed out that nobody here has any idea whether it is legitimate or not, and that people should just accept that instead of prejudging it.

It's "17 year old got home from his first rave, downloaded Reason and tried to make his first track while still coming down from the dodgy pills he ate the night before" music.

So your basic chain of logic is "I've seen it faked before, therefore it cannot possibly be real"? Cause that's some shoddy reasoning. By all means. What do you think is possible with Qi, and why are those things possible and not, to go with the example pertinent to this conversation, lighting up a lightbulb?

Yeah I can't see why you would (although I'm no expert - perhaps it's harder to establish a connection if there's no lineage/karmic relationship?) - but in general I don't see a problem with having a chat with deceased master, as long as you're respectful about it.

It's also an extension of a much larger dramafest that's been going on surrounding the teachers mentioned and several of their students who left them and then began a rather extensive campaign of online attacks against them. So yeah, grain of salt and all that, there's no objectivity and a definite agenda here - mods might want to keep an eye on this one.

What in particular about the video makes you feel that it is a trick, as opposed to a genuine metaphysical/energetic/spiritual phenomenon?