VCraigP

Yeah, but it's that weird extra high shoulder hunched single whip so its not saying much (running joke folks, not really insulting Mal)

You are hereby fined 25 cents for egregious use of a pun. Please pay the moderators. _________________ The MCO IS. It exists whether you believe in it or not. The question is whether one should ever utilize methods which use the mind to "open" the orbit or to assist in circulating in the orbit. I studied with Chia and first learned about this through his theory and practice. I first experienced "something" in the orbit through his methods. Is there a rift between qigong and neigong in this subject? No, I don't think so. The rift is principally between a few well known schools who teach methods to open and circulate the orbit and what appears to me to be the the majority position of everyone else who adhere to principals of Just Do It and things will open of their own accord at your own pace. In my experience MOST teachers don't want provide "leading" information. They don't want to comment on phenomena. They don't want to provide the student with expectations. The same attitude prevails with the orbit. IME it seems that most traditional qigong, kungfu, Neigong schools do not like to go into much details at all with regards to energetic architecture. This seems to be to avoid leading the student to have an experience an in interest of allowing the student to experience what arises naturally. Of course I am speaking in generalities. I believe I have expressed my preference elsewhere as that of allowing what arises to naturally arise. However my preference is entirely mine and biased by my personal experiences. Also it may be somewhat unfair to say to a beginner to NOT explore MCO practice as taught by Chia and others because that is just what I did...for years! But it is not what I do now. Also, my positive experiences with Chia methods were perhaps enabled by years of my own meditation experimentation and years of Martial Arts training and especially flexibility training which preceded training with Chia. In other words I believe that there was already some water in the reservoir and some foundation had been laid already. So the principle of foundational basics before considering MCO practice or not is still one I adhere to. Craig

I for one am glad you and MJJ still post here. Hundun too Craig

Kelly's Heroes - spoken by Donald Sutherland. Sorry couldn't resist responding :-) Craig

Mal Ok, then we can expect YOUR follow on review in due course?... and not have to wait 90 days or more :-) Since SJ has been sent to the woodshed

OK Then. Can we expect your follow on review in due course? Hope so. Craig

Shilajit and Moomio are synonyms- Same item, different regions. Craig

Can I ask for a clarification re the above? It seems to me that visualization in some form is always a component of qigong. Once again we may be running up against the problem of the same word having different layers of meaning to different practitioners. You have previously on several occasions expressed a dislike (maybe not the right word) for visualization. What I think you mean is that visualization is wrong if it is only a substitute for actually moving qi or fully interacting with a process. My thinking and the way my teacher expresses it is that visualization belongs to the Shen layer. So qigong is composed of three essential layers. Proper physical alignment (representing jing) proper breathing (representing qi) and visualization (representing shen). All three components must be there in order to have qigong. The important distinction is made by my teacher when asked about the MCO practice the response is basically "if there is no water in the reservoir there is nothing to move in the channels" So visualization in this case would be fruitless especially if done in abcense of the other layers. To sum up your objection to "visualization methods" is that they are not connected to the other essential layers and many students remain in a head space and fail to connect with Qi and even their bodies (jing) properly. Comment? Craig

Creation If I may clarify what I read from Michaels post I really don't think he is criticizing BKF's teaching here. What he is doing is criticizing imprecise language and teaching in general which conflates breathing with moving Qi or sending Qi. Now to address Pietro's discussion. I think one problem is a tactful lack of specificity on Pietro's part. I believe BKF and Pietro are referring to SPECIFIC practices taught by M.Chia which Pietro had studied in the past - Testicle or Ovarian breathing and/or Scrotal compression. These are techniques taught as part of Sexual Kung Fu in the Healing Tao system. I believe Pietro to be relaying this message from Bruce specifically about this system which was quite prevalent among early contributors to this board most of whom had some exposure to the Healing tao system. I fully agree with Ya Mu (Michael) and others about the "natural" approach. A basic practice in the style of my primary teacher can be summed up as follows; Breath in and Feel the Qi like sunlight penetrating every pore of your body. Breath out allowing the Qi to condense in your Dantien. Craig

I'm not sure which "Wu" your character refers to as there are certainly several characters which can be transliterated into "Wu" via Pinyin. However, my teacher Master Zhongxian Wu describes Wu as the Shaman. So, the dancer as Shaman is the obvious connection for me. Wu = Shaman , at least to my meager understanding, but I would have to check my notes to determine whether this would be the same character. See "Vital Breath of the Tao" by zhongxian wu to go into detail about the meaning and origin of Wu. BTW - Master Wu has never directly discussed how his name happens to correspond in this way :-) Craig also see http://masterwu.net/

toooo Funny. too much subtle humor in this thread for relative newbies, but I like it. Craig

Maybe its comfy! also....YIN Yang. Not Ying. And I know you know better :-) Craig PS - on the original starting post 5ET wrote "As usual, I will not respond directly to any discussion questions on this forum" So I believe your sartorial inquiry will fall on deaf ears.

Sifu Terry and Sifu Garry Thanks for your responses to my lineage question, among others. I have since read through this thread in full again and gleaned more which should keep my monkey mind happy for a while. I started an account of daily practice which should prove interesting over time. Now for a couple of simple questions which I mulled over for a while before posting: Questions are arising for me about the breathing patterns. In a relaxed state I can easily do close to a minute for one full in/out breath without pausing. Should I breath this slowly for the practice, specifically the beginning breathing pattern (three breaths followed by the percentage breath). In bending the bows should I go as slow as possible and breath as slow as possible while keeping the breath linked to the movement? Or should I try to uncouple the breath from the movement which should be "like shifting sand"? My habits lead me to want to connect the breath with the movement, although I am fairly sure Sifu Garry mentioned to breath without connection to the movement. Possibly the fact that in the warm ups there is breath/movement connection has contributed to this confusion. Thanks for your time. Craig

Sifu Terry thanks for quick service. I am beginning to study FP DVD #1. I hope to have a practice log soon to detail my experience. My question; Do you have any comment about engaging in practice of other systems of qigong alongside FP? I have fairly extensive experience in other qigong styles, including Ermei lineage forms. Although as you may know just because a style is named after a mountain doesnt mean it is directly lineage related. On another tangent I know you have indicated this form as coming from GM Doo Wai (sp?). Would you be able to discuss further the lineage as it comes down from your master? If you already covered this fully earlier in this thread maybe I missed it. thanks for your continuing contribution to this thread. PS - I hope you sorted out your website glitch by now, thanks for the personal service. Craig

First of all Penn & Teller = ENTERTAINMENT I found this episode Hilarious. You couldn't make humor fodder out of this stuff if there wasn't plenty of material to work with. There IS a tremendous amount of Bullshit in the Martial Arts world. Of course for every example they provide it would be easy to find better examples which prove the opposite point. for example watching a TKD master break multiple unspaced boards with a flying jump turning back kick would be a tad more impressive than breaking a hundred spaced boards with choppy chops. As far as chi kung goes I would be hard pressed to find a better example of someone who is a weak example than poor Dena. Though she certainly must have known P&T would skewer her so I can only wonder what she was thinking. She was certainly entertaining and demonstrated a lot of the reasons M.Chia's system lacks credibility. This is not to say that Dena lacks ability or any accomplishment. What P&T provided after editing did make her look REALLY SILLY. Unfortunately I don't get the impression that Dena can provide basic grounded instruction that would give a newcomer a positive impression. This IS an important issue for an instructor of qigong. Also her pronunciation of Chi Kung was fairly atrocious. In the end, if a potential student of martial arts or even gigong were to use as their research this episode of P&T then they obviously don't have what it takes to do research or be a student of anything. Leon Basin To try to take apart this "expose" by P&T is like shooting fish in a barrel. But to do so also takes them far too seriously. They are entertainers after all, and I found it funny. PS - I have several decades of MA training in hard styles, IMA, Qigong, including Healing Tao. Craig

I wanted to like it so much. My kids and I LOVE the animated series. the movie has none of the humor of its predecessor. Perhaps its an insurmountable obstacle to take the many hours of the series and try to fit in the key elements into two hours. IMO it would have been better to add a 1/2 hour to develop the characters a bit more and maybe have a laugh here or there? On the other hand maybe more of the dialog in this case would have made things worse considering the lack of quality of what was done. On the action side the bending scenes were - ponderous - in comparison the the speed of the animated series. Also I was hoping to see Aang do some Bagua as in the series, but I couldn't see much at all that even tried to represent that art, unlike the series which definitely has Aang doing Bagua techniques. On the water bender side they were doing something somewhat representative of Taiji (single whip for example). But the bending mostly happened so slowly you could have run up and punched someone in the nose before they got finished summoning up their attack. Also, watching it in 2D the action scenes often got blurry when a lot was going on. I assume this was because of it being shot in 3D. I haven't seen other 3D in 2D films do this ,as I can recall, so I can only assume that the criticism of 3D done on the cheap may be accurate. Of course my kids (9 and 11) liked it alot. As far as positive messages I would have to say the Jackie Chan Karate Kid movie was far superior in that area. My kids are eager to have the whole story told on film, but with the reviews I am seeing this seems somewhat unlikely now. Craig

I saw it with my Son (11) and Daughter (9). We all enjoyed it. fun fight scene with Jackie Chan (Mr Han) making a bunch of Kung Fu kids beat eachother up while trying to attack him. Typical Chan slapstick, always fun. Many good messages for kids, probably adults too. One quote I liked, "an Empty mind is not the same thing at all as a still mind" Bad paraphrase I'm sure, but a good message. Yeah, the winning kick was totally over the top (literally and figuratively). But the concept of winning through better control of your mind, through inner stillness, is a great lesson to take to my son and our training. The lesson of being respectful to your parents may seem cliche' but it is still valuable. The Bad Man teaching brutal Kung Fu may not be possible in Beijing, but hey, that is the story element which is inseparable from the story line, without which you wouldn't have the same story. In the end we must remember this is hollywood, it is entertainment. Take what value you can from it. Ask the question, "does this send a positive message to non initiates?" In my view it does. PS - Did anyone else think a couple of the Mountain shots from Wudang were actually Huashan? I haven't been to Wudang so I'm not sure, but a couple of the shots of sheer granite cliffs really looked like Huashan to me. Craig

I've been to Hua Shan twice. I've spent weeks climbing in Yosemite valley. When I first came to Mt Hua I thought that it could easily be promoted as the Yosemite of China, a true granite wall climbers paradise. But then I thought of ropes and chalk and climbers scrambling all over those sacred mountains and considered perhaps it is better the way it is. I highly recommend hiking from the Jade Spring Monestary at the foot of the mountain and ascending all the way to the top using the established trails. This is a great way to connect with the mountain through sacrifice of your physical energy. Quite a hike, something like 4500 feet elevation change from the bottom to the top of the West peak, and from there you still have to hike around to the other peaks for the full experience. Still, all that granite does scream "climb me" to a rock junkie. Craig

What you (Ya Mu) and Pietro are arguing about is silly! From what I gather Pietro has substantial training and experience in Qi arts under his belt. Also a serious academic bent which leads him to quibble over definitions and imprecise (read-non scientific) use of science. When my friends argue like this it reminds me of how much our interests are more congruent than not and it seems like splitting hairs. That is my view from outside your discussion. It seems in the end Pietro takes issue with the inadequate construction of your experiments. I seriously doubt that he doesn't believe in what you do and also in the merit of trying to have some proof of the same for your own use if nothing else. Maybe the two of you together could figure out a better protocol to demonstrate what you are doing. You could work together. Also, you used the word "quantum" to describe a "non-linear" process. Use of this word and similar jargon belonging to Quantum physics seems to bring out the science police who feel this word has been usurped by Pop press and new age nonsense. I have seen this pattern before (not only from Pietro). To me it comes down to silly semantics. As I said earlier, even if there are any quantum physicists here we are not having a discussion about quantum physics really. We are trying to use language which is inadequate to the task to talk about something many of us view as real in theory and in experience but which we cannot easily demonstrate in a tangible way. You (Ya Mu)have been able to prove to yourself what you are achieving. We all agree I think that "proving" the existence or activity of Qi is problematic at best. Pietro. Your academic viewpoint can be constructive. It can also be viewed as critical in the negative meaning of the term. I think you are trying to encourage precision here, but I don't think there are many here who would expect or recognize scientific precision in discussing these matters. Your insistence on it seems misplaced. Do you really think we shouldn't try to explore such things outside the scientific model as practitioners? I think you guys are talking past each other a bit here. I do think that Ya Mu is relaying his experience and attempts to validate in a clear way. Whether or not instantaneous transmission is measureable using Ya Mu's described method seems unimportant to me. Perhaps it is significant to Pietro because we may be talking about a transmission which moves at the speed of light which IS measurable, but not by the means Ya Mu has described. Is that your issue Pietro? You think the idea of the experiment is good but that Ya Mu flubbed the science in the attempt to do it? Finally Ya Mu responded that the effect of setting of intention may even be seen affecting the patient BEFORE the actual transmission work, and is thus anecdotally demonstrably a non-linear event. It would be nice to be able to PROVE any of this. Why did I write all of that? I just want my two Brothers in the Tao to see their common ground because it is not a narrow strip but a broad gathering place along the road, along the way, the Tao. Craig

Yes, but the question is "how can you best learn how to effectively ask nicely?"

The question is not whether the term was used correctly but rather whether his meaning was understood. Language is the use of words which have accepted meanings. We are none of us quantum physicists (dont correct me if i'm wrong please)therefore use of this term may be inaccurate among physicists but perhaps quite intelligible among cyberpsuedotaoists. As for me I understood the meaning Ya Mu was trying to convey quite clearly I think. Therefore we have achieved communication, perhaps even resonance, probably not transmission. Regarding like or dislike of the word Transmission it doesn't really matter. If the majority of people in this little subculture understand what meaning is conveyed then that is the appropriate word to use to describe something quickly and efficiently. Again, that is how language works. Further explanation of the meaning of tranmission is useful but I doubt we'll switch to referring to the phenomenon as quantum level energy event interactions - too many syllables. Are you receiving my signal? Craig

But seriously folks... Can you get a transmission from the internet? Do mere words connect you to Ya Mu, or any other teacher. I seem to have that experience from time to time, but is it just another way to connect to my own uplink? Craig

It's funny to me. I have often commented on the way music is lumped together. Although Led Zep is often cited as the origination of Heavy Metal, to my ears they have as much in common as renaissance music has with Wagner. Another interesting mental exercise to me is comparing musical eras. In 1975 the music of 1945 seemed far far away from the music of the day. In 2005 the music of 1975 doesn't seem as far away in difference as that, but is it? If you compare Led Zep of 1975 with what is current in heavy metal in 2005, or today, maybe there is a similar gulf. Anyway, I like Led Zep and I mostly don't listen to modern heavy metal music. My personal sense is that heavy, chaotic music is not conducive to practice. There are activities which are exciting and pleasurable which although seemingly positive tend to be pleasurable but have a net effect of draining/dispersing energy. Alcohol can be pleasurable, but its characteristic is that of dispersing energy (TCM theory, not just my idea). Enjoy your music. BTW my Ipod contains classical music, chinese Qin music, Jazz, pop, Rock, prog rock, New wave, New Age, middle eastern traditional and fusion, trance, and I'm sure I have missed several. Craig

you forgot #7 drama queen :-) This thread has drained my emotional energy... I will say no more. Ha ha. Hundun you said what needed to be said - to the original poster. Why are emotional vampires preying on you? In this case I think it IS fair to blame the so called victim. You can choose not to be effected by EV behavior, but obviously your post is firm evidence that you feel the need to point out how undeveloped these EV's are here on TTB and all you have really done is say something about yourself. Ciao Craig