sunshine

I am out Hern Heng. Not because I am not willing to have a good and straight discussion. Read through all the messages written about David and all else and I hope you will realize. But I realize as well that it leads absolutely nowhere to continue. One thing I can tell you for sure. I haven't been in Wang Liping's home and have therefore no photo to show. One more thing is sure: Had I been and were there a photo in my hands I very likely would still refrain from showing. Sean. If you like to continue. I have lost the sense for it. Take care. Harry

Yep. Hern Heng. It is okay. By now I understand I am cult member. Seriously though: I have absolutely no trouble with you ciriticizing someone I like. Maybe with the approach you are utilizing, but maybe not even that. It just gets tiring because, as stated: All this criticism has been repeated over and over again... I always try to the best of my abilities to reply in an honest way and balance some sometimes pretty vague views, often criticism based on lack of information and so on. What you have presented so far is in no way different. Sure enough sensed though my filters... don't worry. You have enough people on your side. They will state that all I try is just a try to discredit you, chastetize you and whatever. I have learned to live with that although it is far from truth. My above statement referred to the statement of your "clean yard". Purely based on personal perception your approach does not speak for that. On a sarcastic side note (I am sorry cat that I lose my balance): Someone some time ago stated that he feels that even the negative posts about David are just there to keep him in the mind of all and pop up ones in a while by students of his. SeanD. Do you actually know if there is anything to it? I am tired. Harry

Fine Hern Heng. Good to learn what you believe about yourself. The way you approach the topic sure does not leave that impression. Harry

Hi again Hern Heng. I will soon stop replying to these discussions ones again as they are pretty time consuming and tiring, especially because most of it has been actually discussed to death. Please do your research first: >>Well there are a few problems, for one your forums, where you link for more information requires a $250 membership fee. So if someone wants to see any evidence of what you are saying they have to pay first. This is preposterous, to say the least. << For one: this happened somewhere in the last 2 weeks or so. The forum has been freely accessaible for quite some time. So just because you seem to have become aware of it just right now is simply bad luck (or more esoteric: Heaven's will possibly?) >>How much have you trained with Wang and why do you refer to levels from the Mo Pa'i tradition and not Wang, Li-Ping's lineage's ranking system instead? << Simply because David has been studying with a different master he is still studying with. It is important to make distinctions as they are not the same! >>Lastly (for now), what documentation is there of this? Any pictures of you and David in Wang's home (i.e. in a less than public setting)? Any letter or accreditation of any sort from Wang? Asking for credentials is not asking anything more than what is expected in all circles. << I leave that to Sean... Still: Do you know Master Liping in order to know from a picture if he were it or not? >>As well, i read here that "Doctor" Verdessi has a degree more than a Bachelors but less than a Masters. You should not call him a Doctor to non-Italian audiences. The world of academia would not consider him a doctor and you should not refer to him by a title understood the world around as meaning something different than what it means in his context.<< Have you read what I stated about titles? If he has a title he has a title. Simple as that. Otherwise I will start to inquire that no American should be allowed to write Phd. in front (or behind) her/his name when coming to Germany, as most of us have no clue what it is. The sad bit is. Writing all this I realize that I lose my inner balance right now writing this. thankx for your presence pointing out this weakness in me. Got to stop. Practice to do. Harry

If I fear anything in all of this then punishment from Heaven, not from a human being and sure not by criticism based on speculation. David does not have achieved Level 4 in the Mo Pai tradition you are likely referring to. According to recent happenings witnessed by students he has reached a somehow equivalent but different in specific ways level in the tradition he is learning now from his current master(s) in China. Regarding the topic of virtue mentioned above and in the way it was mentioned above, I recently stated: one should first clean ones own yard before... Harry

At the moment I am just in the mood to answer: David by now can but some will still accuse him for charlatanism anyway: Teslacoils. Right guys? Sean is a second year student (correct me Sean if I am wrong). What do you expect. One thing is sure. He has changed in the process... on a sidenote: if people want to give him money there is no ethical obligation to provide anything at all. just in the mood to answer Harry

I agree Pietro. Titles can be misleading. In Germany the differences are made by prefixes like: Dr. med. Dr. phil. Dr. whatever.... if I remember correctly in Germany the Dr. actually is part of the name, so usually one would have to say: Dr. Jenson, Dr. whoever... Nobody would address anybody by using the other prefix. So. Dr. is Dr. and people often get confused when the have doctors without the Dr. in front of their name. The tile is just the degree showing they did some kind of study work ad wrote a thesis. It does not tell if you are an MD or not. Harry >>Sean, do you want to say that you don't even know at which university your own teacher studied?<< To answer from my position. I don't know and I am not interested. And Sean and I for the time being share the same teacher. Harry >>turns out david verdesi isn't as high and mighty after all, bummer<< If you actually ever thought/believed that it tells more about you than about the person themselves Harry

Hi Gamuret, >>My intention is to find the Truth. I've no ax to grind against Verdesi. I'm not asking about any secrets or anything, but about things that should be freely accessible.<< I fully get your point, Gamuret. But the question to ask is: why am "I" looking for a certain "truth" and what do I do with it if "I" found "it". Say you were actually interested in studying with someone. In that case I think asking those questions can be considered valid and beneficial. Say you have a friend who intends to study with him and you have your doubts and worries and and and. Again I personally consider the search valid and beneficial. But just looking for "Truth" focussing on one person... I don't know. The following is not about David. I have no ideas about his background with regard to the questions raised. Just in general (so please. Whoever reads it. No need to filter the following through the lense of: Harry knows more and tells us in a roundabout way that it's all just claims!): Whereever you go you will find claims that do resemble truth only to certain extent. In many instances truth is a pretty elastic term. Do you think that all those Professors who seem to have written hundreds and hundreds of articles actually did? I was once so naive to actually believe that and wonder how they do it and how genius-like they are. Today I know it simply is not true (well. sure enough in some cases it indeed is). You asked for a peer-review of the intended upcoming study. Do you actually know it is not that easy to get even quite okay studies published in high-level magazines? I am right now in the process of finding it out. I do not know if you are American. I am German and I always felt the American way of advertisement to be threatening. Claims are made a thousandfold. Further: I have seen biographies and you get sick reading them: oh yes. I had this teacher and that. And then I have a degree here. And another and another... I could have such a biography as well. What people usually don't tell you is that they often just trained one weekend here and there. But they list it all and as if they were the most close students of whoever. I very much realize that all of the above is leading away from your request. I understand it and in other cases likely would ask or at least search for the same. >Is it not normal for any person to want to verify claims being made?< Well. To certain extent it is. Unfortunately there are some who just have an obsession trying to completely deconstruct what they do not like and leave no stone unturned... I don't perceive you that way. In your case I just have the question in the back of my mind: do you just ask for clarities sake or with something else in mind. If you were to learn the Truth: Would you then just troll along being happy you found it? (sorry. Sounds as if I am making fun of you here. Not intended though. Just don'T know a different way to put it). >>And I'm intersted in claims that can be verified. Therefore I intentionally refrained from making any judgement about D. Verdesi's school, tradition, experiences with his masters, etc. It would be unfair to judge about something in public, that I don't know about. Privately I can have my opinion. But I'm not interested in opinions, but in hard facts.<< I appreciate that mindset. Harry

Hi Gamuret, While I very much understand why such questions are raised (although I have no clue what your personal intent to ask them is) I want to be honest: I neither think you will actually get the information you look for, nor do I think anyone of those who know should feel in any way pressured to give it out (whatever way they look like). note: In order for noone to unnecessarily become suspicious and possibly even go into length of creating a conspiracy theory out of why I edited out my full name in the above post (quite some of the discussions in recent times indeed have been quite bizarre): Gamuret read my message and saw my name so there is no reason to leave it there. I am a little bit phobic to be honest: in modern times to have ones name all over the internet is not such a good idea. Think about a possible future boss of mine googling my name and finally finding themselve reading my blog about my initital experiences with the Aneros... (SHUDDER) Harry

>>It's not just about the academic degrees, but also about other claims. I simply cannot understand why things have to be kept so vague. Why is it nowhere mentioned at which university did David Verdesi study? Just look up any CV of any minor public figure or academic. All of them have it written where and when they studied.<< I don't know Gamuret. I very much understand what you ask for but once again. Everybody deals with things differently. When I meet doctors from India they hand me visiting cards you can unfold and list even the credentials of their grandfather's grandfather. I hardly ever mention my degrees. Further: It is usually only necessary to write those things if you are in an academic context. If you are not it simply is not necessary. I know that all this does not help as you are keen for an answer. I can not give it though. >>What kind of a professor? A professor engaged in what kind of studies? Physics, chemistry, biology, sociology, history, etc? Is he from the University of Vienna? Which department exactly? How can he be reached?<< Here it gets a little tricky. I can tell you that he is PhD, Assoc. Prof. at the Medical University of Vienna Department of Pathophysiology but I hope you understand that I won't give away his name. There is no reason you can trust me, but if you are interested in my part of of academic studies and this is enough to give me some trust: search pubmed for (note: named edited out for reasons explained below) (just two articles so far written in the context with others). >>The problem is that I simply don't understand why one has to be so vague !<< There are many possibilities for it... got to go to bed If you want to know why I do not easily give out the name please PM me. Harry >>Please tell me what kind of degree is a German doctor of philosophy awarded with if not a Doctor philosophiae?<< Well. It is the Dr. phil. = doctor of philosophiae, but it is not the American Phd. Getting back to Wikipedia there is stated: >>In the English-speaking world it has become the most common denomination for a research doctorate and applies to graduates in a wide array of disciplines in the sciences and humanities<< The German Dr. phil. does no have this position and applies only to somebody having written a thesis in philosophy. Harry

I enjoyed it very much, Jan. talk to you soon Harry

Wow Gamuret. I have a thought about this I better do not tell... The trouble is that from country to country there are different rules as what you can carry and how to carry it. I for example am a medical doctor. In some parts of Europe you get the degree "Dr." without having to write a thesis when finishing university, in Germany you need to write a thesis. This "Dr." might be considered equivalent to the Phd in some regards but it is not as there is no Phd. as title in Europe as far as I know. P.hd. stands for Philosophiae Doctor but a German doctor of philosphy does not get the title of Phd. in this country. I am not quite sure why Pietro can not carry his title. I am pretty sure he can. When I leave my country and I actually carry the degree I carry the degree. I have further an M.A. in social sciences (major sociology, secondary philosophy and psychology), but the M.A. (= Magister Artium) is not the same as the M.A. Americans for example are used to. I for example had no bachelor degree as a few years back this was not part at universities in Germany. They changed that now though as far as I realized. Then there is the Diploma in Germany which is completely different to what Americans know as diploma. so. To focus on the degree is not very helpful I feel. Regarding possible collaborations I can tell your for sure that there is a Professor in Vienna (if I remember correctly) who is planning studies with David and his masters (or one of them). I have been in contact with him (a short email-exchange) and know that he is not a virtual construct. No more information I can share. Harry

Valued offer indeed. Thank you Buddy. May your team make history Harry

I am fully fine with it, Buddy, an no chastizing going on from my part. Should I ever get to Massachusetts (copied it, otherwise would sure would have written it wrong) I will knock and ask for a game of football (not very good at it though)... maybe in your yard then Harry

Sorry Buddy. I live in Germany so no football... Considering my statement about the yard I should not chime in here. But seriously. Your statement only shows off a great ego. These things got discussed long before you appeared on the playground and quite a few of those that voiced there opinions now voiced them before. So. Nice that you are here but you sure do not have the "I layed the path for those to come"-role-modell function. That is far from any possible tuth. Harry

>>I said "to gain back".<< I assume you refer to the "need for the bulls"... if yes then no. There was no talk about "gaining back" level 4 in 6 monthes. >>David needed the bull? I dont know but he used the bulls, thats all I do know from what has been written. Taking Qi from other living things to reach higher, well, its not for me. Did David truely put in the time and effort to make his achievment without the need for this method, only his heart knows.<< See. David did not "suck" the bull. The "story" goes that one of the grandmasters did the transfer. Why he did it I do not know. There was an explanation given but I know too little to go into details. And yes. Once again: The "story" goes that David achieved what he achieved and the bulls came thereafter. When discussing these things and people arguing about it I am reminded of a Chinese proverb: One seeing is better than a thousand hearing. Only those that did what they did if any do actually know. All else is pure speculation. >>I am sure that he is clear that it is different, but in his new website biography and in verious posts in forums it is made out that he did reach the same thing (level 4 as in the Magnus of Java book)<< I just checked. This is a question to ask those who created the webside. I have a different understanding but I might be wrong. Maybe it indeed is but I am sure to remember that David pointed out differences. I apologize for having put things into my post I introduced with addressing you while in my mind referring to others. And yes. Organization sure is a better word than cult. I just have a different idea of what an organization actually is. thankx for the exchange to all: I stop here. I have voiced my concerns and I think a lot of the info being spread is not reflecting the actual situation and the actual happenings. Not that I am surprised that it happens. Have seen that happening often. I am well aware that all could be fake and all of the voiced concerns could 100% be valid. I am a natural skeptic and carry around a heavy bag of doubts and also quite a few experiences. Contrary to most of you though I am a student of David and I actually have met him and many long-year students. One seeing is better than a thousand hearing. won't continue to respond further. Harry

Who said that level 4 takes only 6 monthes to achieve?

I do not know which student of David you specifically refer to, but I have a clue. Let me ask you: How do you expect a one, a two, a even a three year student to achieve something which "masters" achieved only after many many years of practice and most often under much better practice conditions that we face today? And listing all he has done before David can hardly be taken as a sign against what David teaches... or I am missing the point. Now. What can any of David students do: How many of them do you know? >>It becomes quiete obvious that david is incapable of producing-cultivating the power Himself thru his own methods and thats why he was forced to pay for a transfer....Duh !<< I already stated in an earlier post that the story is different. David cultivated the power himself through the methods he was taught. He wasn't forced to pay for the transfer... and, while not going into details why he got it, for what he achieved and cultivated it was not necessary. >>Why did David not pay Wang Liping for an energy transfer ? Could it be that master Wang is a pure traditionalist & scoffs at this idea like the rest ? I was told According to Indonesian Students of a well known teacher that it is spiritually illegal to charge for the real thing. The real thing cannot be bought. Heaven does not have an Entry Fee.<< So many speak of "THE" traditional way. I personally assume that there has never been "ONE" specific traditional way... but always different ways of approaching matters at hand. And as someone once said: sometimes it is necessary to focus on beyond what seems to be directly under your nose. None of us buys the entrance to heaven the way you put it. Harry

Hi Vitagong, >>I do believe that David has good intentions, however the direction and path which the group is taking is a manifestation of there own weaknesses and gaps in initial development. So I dont see it as right or wrong, but just unfortunate as so many are been affected.<< Thankx Vitagong for pointing out what you do. One thing though. I assume you and so many others have the idea that the foundation forum with its members represents all of David students. This is not so. So speaking about "the direction and path of THE" group needs a clear differentation. Further most of the criticism focusses on two or three people which CLEARLY DO NOT represent each individual student. Many have not even visited the forum in the past, if they ever actually registered. >>My truth and experience is that nothing can be given to you apart from correct method, the rest is up to you, your will and strength and your fate as to how long and how far you reach in your spiritual development.<< Good for you if it turns out to be true. >>There is no need for the bulls, this is the path for those who want to short cut or do not have the strength.<< Now. I have no clue what your spiritual background is and what "truth" you have reached in your practice. To state "there is no need ..." is speaking from a pretty authorotive place, putting it here as objective truth and fact.. How many of us have reached such a place? So. To make that clear. I am still one of those students who have probably the most issues with the "bull-story" (or maybe I am just one of the fews who actually voiced their thoughts about it). My fellow students know and my teacher knows! But even considering this one has to keep a straight picture here: not everybody "needs" the bull's Qi and not everybody gets it. Simple as that. Most of us, I assume, do not have true insights about the rules outside of this dimension. Now I know some will want to jump in and say: "Harry. Why are you so sure these masters know." And my honest answer is once again: "I don't, but I believe it." >>David now says that he has reached YinYang Gong or Nei Gong, thanks to the bulls. However its misleading to creat the picture that this is equivelant to the now legendary Level 4. Its also dishonest to constanly use the credibility of John Chang as a draw card. You have been playing with fire in your marketing.<< What you state above needs clarification, as the story is a little different: 1. David has reached the Yin Yang Gong without the need for the bulls. 2. Interesting how we all filter informatioon differently. From all that I gathered David is pretty clear about that it is different! 3. John Chang: I have wondered myself a little... it is important to state one thing though: David holds John Chang very high and speaks most highly of him. All bits of information running round the net claiming they have deep troubles are to certain extent rumours. The topic has been mentioned, there seem to have been some issues and there seems to have been a lot of blackmailing going on behind the curtains. At the end of the day it is up to John Chang and David to know what it is all about. >>There are many many other things too, however my intention is not to Hurt the organization, but rather urge it to be more honest thru all its levels so that it may grow the correct way.<< So far there is no "organization" in a specific sense. If you address the "honesty" please do not address the group but those who "speak it". Further: while there is a danger of drifting into a cult (as with groups there likely to certain extent always is) and whatever this has not taken place from all I saw so far, accept you define a cult just by the criteria of a group with certain believes and views that do not conform to major religious orthodox thinking. There is no talk about a doomsday and a world-end-view etc. which is usually the problematic part and Buddy with his examples wanted to hint at that. Do some students express a kind of worshipper personality. Likely some do. Quite natural with so many students. Is it a reflection of the group? Not as far as I so far managed to evaluate. Do I have trouble with such a mind-set. Indeed I do. Harry

>>You were "politely asked" to get Sean to reconsider what decision? If he would allow free expression on his board?<< Not that way Buddy. It had nothing to do with not allowing free expression on his board. If Sean wants to give his impression about me contacting him I am glad if he will. >>And you decide this how?<< Same way that is utilized to create the negative picture that has been painted. >>So, how much does he have to pay before he can complain?<< As you know he is complaining already. So you know he does not have to pay a penny. >>You jumped into this yard, I guess yours is clean?<< Unfortunately not. But as he is attacking something that is dear to me, I feel to be in the position to have a right to give a response. >>Your compassion for the great unwashed and "uninformed" must be a great comfort to you, Harry.<< I don't understand the above statement, buddy. language-barrier here. But if I get your story right: In that story there was one who knew the truth and helped a fellow. How can you help one if you do not know the truth? Harry

It is pretty likely they would have found a different way. Buddy: what are your criteria for declaring something a cult? thankx Harry

>>Yes, it is.<< See Oolong. I perceive it as follows: you have formed a certain opinion about me and there is absolutely no way that I could say anything without you finding a way to put what I say in the "he wants to discredit you"-box. I personally keep with my perception that you WILL ALWAYS find the negative BECAUSE you WANT to find the negative. Now that I stated it I won't repeat it and leave it as that. You talk about controlling behavior on the forum. To make that pretty clear: I have not always been happy witht he decisions made there and have not always been happy with some statements or responses. But to put things into straight light: It was a forum created for a clear intent. It was a moderated forum with a clear statement of what it is all about and what does not belong there. If people do not stick to the rules they have to live with the result. Simple as that. By the way: I have been close to being banned from the forum. So. Just in order to make clear that I know both sides of the coin! Further. The forum was moderated by one, maybe two or three. Even if their behavior were to be "discussed as possibly being cultish" your extension to consider the group as cult-like... you sure get my point. The decisions of contacting Sean O were pretty much personal decisions. I was politely asked to contact Sean and I did so not because I was pressured or whatever. There was no try of mine to censor Sean from my side but I asked him if you could reconsider his decisions. What others did is up to them but once again does not speak for the group of students who often are only losely connected. >>He is allowed to have an opinion, and from what I read it looks like a pretty informed and well expressed opinion. It doesn't look at all like he is "venting his anger".<< Sure enough he is allowed to have an opinion. And it is well expressed indeed. "pretty informed" so far as what he could gather from the discussions here and there. Lacking the insights from the discussions I mentioned taking place somewhere else. Further filtered by his perception. Quite natural and once again no way to "subtly" do whatever... >>If I see someone about to jump off a building, should I just let him jump? If I drive by a car accident, should I not bother trying to help, because I am not directly affected?<< See Ooolong. I understand all of the concerns raised, and there are people I have been interacting with in recent times who from my point of view at least have a right to have concerns and further have valid concerns. Just having concerns for the sake of having concerns does not necessarily belong into that category. In Chanwus case I do not see that though... what I see though is the try to discredit something he has no true understanding of, as -once again-, his informations are limited and in several instances were not properly put into context. Regarding your above examples: they just do not represent the aspect at hand well enough to go into other implications they actually have, >That is symptomatic of what is wrong with this world.< Symptomatic of the world is that people care about things outside of themselves too much thereby scattering their mind into many directions and leading away from themselve. First clear your own yard before judging anothers... this is what I try to stick to. >>I think it is immensely helpful for uninformed people to have his objections listed. The same way a well written book or movie review can help guide one to make a better informed decision on what to watch or read. << Uninformed people will have to find things out for themselve if they want to get close to any level of truth. I have read a lot of book or movie reviews that were far from what my own experience finally told me. If you really do trust in them you are missing out a lot. >>I am sure you would.<< Indeed I would. Harry

>>Like I've said, I have no problem with folks needing to pay the mortgage. But when you indoctrinate someone into a belief system and then use that belief system against them when they don't toe the line, that's a cult.<< Where you got that from Buddy? Chanwu, Why in heaven do you so much care about something that does not really affect you? You are not interested in it and you don't pay. No reason to vent your anger on something that shouldn't even be touching you. Energy could be better spent with something else I honestly feel. You want to protect people from "it", fine. Seems to be a nice thing to do. But I feel it is of absolutely no benefit to go into length into enumerating all things you do not like if you by no means have been affected yourself, do not know what is being discussed behind the scenes (you just have your landscape of "extenal picture" and quite a few things of what you raise as "problematic" are discussed and have solutions) and so many other things. Really guys. In psychology one would very likely say you are projecting something here... (Oolong. Is this again a wicket try to make Chanwu look like the "bad" or "silly guy"? No intent Chanwu!) So. I would very much be happy if you leave the discussions of the topics at hand to those who are indeed affected (if at all). Harry

Girls and guys, due to a new job I am pretty tight with time and do not have enough room to read through all that has been written so far. But I feel the need to address what Oolong wrote: I have not the slightest intent to make anybody a "bad guy". Neither openly nor subtly! In a way you continue to amaze me: We both could argue a lot and I have personal gripes with your approach because you seem to always choose to paint the possible negative. Now. Is this again a try to make you look as the "bad guy"? And yes: I absolutely see human truth as relative. I DO believe in an objetive truth & I DO believe there are people more close to it than others. And I DO assume "these" masters are. Do I know for sure? Simple answer: I don't! Chanwu and I simply have a different believe about things. I personally do not believe that meditating one hour a day and deep bellow breathing etc. will lead you "there". If I were to believe it I would do it. The story with the "girl and her believe in God" was meant to point that out clearly. There sure ARE different ways towards "the" destination (whatever it is)... I chose one because I believe in it. And I believe not every way actually leads you there. One more: I want to tell you openly: I have absolutely NO clue what the way is to actually realize the "objective" truth without having the "subjective" interfere. Once again though I assume it is possible. Practice hopefully gets me closer to it... and if it happens I doubt it is clearly expressable so that everybody can understand. By the way: thankx Max! bye Harry

>>I have aired my feelings about it all. I have read through countless pages from one very active forum participant in particular, one who goes through great lengths to make himself heard and his views heard. This is a direct response to the very hardlined approach this man has.<< Then it is a pretty personal thing... and allow me to be honest: to air your feelings the moment you "seem" to get excluded is a little... hmmmmmmmmmm... >>I believe they have given in to their ego, this is my view, and this is not "the old way" to do things. The "Old way" isn't a secret one, it's one that is earned, not through who can afford it, but through dedication.<< "They" is pretty far fetching especially as it is not clear whom you actually mean. And believe me. A lot of us can not really afford it but are actually VERY dedicated and thereby work on making it possible...!!! The old way clearly is a secret one in many instances... taking your example: How much is "dedication" in order for "the old way" to open? >>That is my view and all I wanted with this post is to get out both sides of the coin, on the net.<< Your view is welcome, just that I think everyone who knows of one side should naturally consider the other... Harry PS: got to go to bed now...