Stillness Movement Neigong and Michael Lomax's 'Light Warrior's Guide' Book

[mjjbecker]

[sifusufi]

Thank you mjjbecker

[Raymond Wolter]

Great Review! Thank you

 

Ya Mu,

 

If it is not too much of a botheration, can you briefly explain the difference between Stillness Movement Qigong and Gifts of Tao Qigong? Are they both Medical Qigong systems? Do they have different goals? Is there a specific way to learn them as in learn A first and then B?

 

I searched the archives of this forum and saw that you said one can learn the Vibratory Qigong from DVD. However, that is not true w.r.t to Stillness-Movement as you need to project Chi directly? So, the book is basically to gain a theoretical understanding of the practice? Or one could get some benefit practicing from the book?

 

Thanks in advance.

[Starjumper]

Okay Mr. Becker, you sold me on it. I never expected to, I've only bought a couple of books on chi kung and haven't gotten one in over a decade, I think.

[mjjbecker]

Okay Mr. Becker, you sold me on it. I never expected to, I've only bought a couple of books on chi kung and haven't gotten one in over a decade, I think.

 

Thank you, I really appreciate you saying so.

[mjjbecker]

'Raymond Wolter' and 'sifusufi' you are both very welcome.

[Sahaj Nath]

i have to say,

 

i'm a bit surprised to see you (mjjbecker) come out in support of Ya Mu like this. i remember you doing a very similar thing when you supported vajrasattva's work, but i didn't expect lightning to strike twice in this case.

 

i don't know a lot about your history except for superficial details, but i had come to trust your opinion as that of a sincere practitioner and seeker. based on the strength of your review, i'm inclined to purchase the book and see for myself.

 

BUT,

 

since your review is so overwhelmingly positive, i think that makes this thread the appropriate space with which to express my misgivings about Ya Mu's teachings.

 

first, i also read the negative review it was given by a member of this forum, as well as the first response to that review from a guy named chris on amazon.com. if chris' response is in any way an accurate portrayal of Stillness-Movement Qigong, then it's just one of many other schools that employ spontaneous, natural flow qigong, and i probably don't stand to learn much from the book. i DO believe that spontaneous, natural flow is kind of the "hidden secret" of modern day practice that keeps a lot of hard-working students from breaking through to higher levels, but if that's the only true gem that the book has to offer, then i would recommend the textbook that i use which is much more thorough and costs less: Healing Promise of Qi. also, Grandmaster Wong Kiew-Kit, a master who has often been dismissed in this forum (and this continues to perplex me), teaches a method called Flowing Breeze, Swaying Willow, which is also a spontaneous, natural flow practice. it's the foundation of Shaolin Cosmos Qigong.

 

i employ an element of 'natural flow' in every form i practice, and i believe it to be the gem that allows me to accelerate my development (as well as the development of my students) beyond the conventional timeline of the traditional practice. kind of a no-brainer to me, and since Sloppy Zhang recently posted a thread about transmissions, i should also mention that people like Sloppy Zhang pick up clues like this, often under-emphasized in obscure places, and they excel beyond other folks who put in far more hours. Sloppy Zhang is the kind of practitioner that would probably read Ya Mu's book and NOT be impressed. because he already gets it, and he just doesn't get how other committed practitioners don't see it. my own development has followed a very similar trajectory.

 

That having been said, i have still always admired Ya Mu's knowledge in various topics on this board. i rarely find myself in disagreement with his perspective, and he sorta won my heart when he gave honor to Master Duan Zhi Liang in a thread in which he and i were both participating. Master Duan taught me about the importance of honoring the element of chaos in all things, and i believe that THAT'S the basis for Stillness-Movement Qigong as well. many students are indeed missing this and would do well to learn it. but this can be learned in many other styles, which kind of makes Stillness-Movement a bit unremarkable to me.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sw-aDENlHWA&feature=related

 

 

but what REALLY put me off of Ya Mu's teachings, and i'm really hoping to get a response/some clarification, is that he posted a video, which i consider to be fraudulent, in order to attract students.

 

http://www.thetaobums.com/index.php?/topic/14082-stillness-movement-qigong-qi-projection/

 

it's not the student's movements that i find problematic, as i have clients who shake and twist and move as well. i know that this kind of thing happens. it's the comment he made later on the same page:

 

I project front and back, top and bottom, and (no direction that can be described - dimensionally). What you may have missed in the video at one point I was working on heart through the front. And yes, you are correct about the non-linearity; I could have stood several feet away turned in the opposite direction and done the same thing - wouldn't have looked good on camera :lol:

 

this killed it for me, and while most might take this as nit-picking, i felt like it makes all the difference in the world. i was very disappointed to see Mr. Lomax resort to theatrics in order to appear more "masterful," more like "the doer with all the power," to attract more people who are seduced by that kind of thing. had he sat cross-legged on the floor, just facing the general direction of the student so we knew who he's directly affecting, and without all the theatrical hand movements, i would have contacted him long ago to study with and perhaps exchange ideas.

 

i understand the impulse to give in to the unnecessary theatrics, as that seems to be what so many are looking for. But i don't respect it. and most importantly, i've never given into it in my own teaching.

 

this is something i've wanted to post since Ya Mu first posted that Stillness-Movement thread, but i'm glad i waited until now. i'm totally open to criticism on this, and if anyone thinks i'm missing something, PLEASE share it.

 

i have always liked Ya Mu and how he represents himself for the most part on TTB, but as a fellow teacher/genuine sincere student of the art, i couldn't just overlook something i consider to be a matter of integrity.

[三江源]

.

Edited September 28, 2015 by 三江源

[Birch]

Throwing this in http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B8G4W-4PP8PK9-C&_user=10&_coverDate=12%2F31%2F1995&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1416607829&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=83dfea31d5aab63cabf5a8e3fb5acf46

 

Thanks for the review. I'm going to check out that book. Still it does seem as if we're re-circling around the issue of "transmission" again.

[宁]

Thanks mjjbecker, and hundun for completing the opposite part, very interesting posts.

No matter what system we talk about, I doubt it can be learned from books or seminars.

You need to live a couple of years close to the teacher.

Wouldn't you agree?

[VCraigP]

Okay Mr. Becker, you sold me on it. I never expected to, I've only bought a couple of books on chi kung and haven't gotten one in over a decade, I think.

 

OK Then.

Can we expect your follow on review in due course?

 

Hope so.

 

Craig

[mjjbecker]

i have to say,

 

i'm a bit surprised to see you (mjjbecker) come out in support of Ya Mu like this. i remember you doing a very similar thing when you supported vajrasattva's work, but i didn't expect lightning to strike twice in this case.

 

i don't know a lot about your history except for superficial details, but i had come to trust your opinion as that of a sincere practitioner and seeker. based on the strength of your review, i'm inclined to purchase the book and see for myself.

 

BUT,

 

since your review is so overwhelmingly positive, i think that makes this thread the appropriate space with which to express my misgivings about Ya Mu's teachings.

 

first, i also read the negative review it was given by a member of this forum, as well as the first response to that review from a guy named chris on amazon.com. if chris' response is in any way an accurate portrayal of Stillness-Movement Qigong, then it's just one of many other schools that employ spontaneous, natural flow qigong, and i probably don't stand to learn much from the book. i DO believe that spontaneous, natural flow is kind of the "hidden secret" of modern day practice that keeps a lot of hard-working students from breaking through to higher levels, but if that's the only true gem that the book has to offer, then i would recommend the textbook that i use which is much more thorough and costs less: Healing Promise of Qi. also, Grandmaster Wong Kiew-Kit, a master who has often been dismissed in this forum (and this continues to perplex me), teaches a method called Flowing Breeze, Swaying Willow, which is also a spontaneous, natural flow practice. it's the foundation of Shaolin Cosmos Qigong.

 

i employ an element of 'natural flow' in every form i practice, and i believe it to be the gem that allows me to accelerate my development (as well as the development of my students) beyond the conventional timeline of the traditional practice. kind of a no-brainer to me, and since Sloppy Zhang recently posted a thread about transmissions, i should also mention that people like Sloppy Zhang pick up clues like this, often under-emphasized in obscure places, and they excel beyond other folks who put in far more hours. Sloppy Zhang is the kind of practitioner that would probably read Ya Mu's book and NOT be impressed. because he already gets it, and he just doesn't get how other committed practitioners don't see it. my own development has followed a very similar trajectory.

 

That having been said, i have still always admired Ya Mu's knowledge in various topics on this board. i rarely find myself in disagreement with his perspective, and he sorta won my heart when he gave honor to Master Duan Zhi Liang in a thread in which he and i were both participating. Master Duan taught me about the importance of honoring the element of chaos in all things, and i believe that THAT'S the basis for Stillness-Movement Qigong as well. many students are indeed missing this and would do well to learn it. but this can be learned in many other styles, which kind of makes Stillness-Movement a bit unremarkable to me.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sw-aDENlHWA&feature=related

 

 

but what REALLY put me off of Ya Mu's teachings, and i'm really hoping to get a response/some clarification, is that he posted a video, which i consider to be fraudulent, in order to attract students.

 

http://www.thetaobums.com/index.php?/topic/14082-stillness-movement-qigong-qi-projection/

 

it's not the student's movements that i find problematic, as i have clients who shake and twist and move as well. i know that this kind of thing happens. it's the comment he made later on the same page:

 

 

 

this killed it for me, and while most might take this as nit-picking, i felt like it makes all the difference in the world. i was very disappointed to see Mr. Lomax resort to theatrics in order to appear more "masterful," more like "the doer with all the power," to attract more people who are seduced by that kind of thing. had he sat cross-legged on the floor, just facing the general direction of the student so we knew who he's directly affecting, and without all the theatrical hand movements, i would have contacted him long ago to study with and perhaps exchange ideas.

 

i understand the impulse to give in to the unnecessary theatrics, as that seems to be what so many are looking for. But i don't respect it. and most importantly, i've never given into it in my own teaching.

 

this is something i've wanted to post since Ya Mu first posted that Stillness-Movement thread, but i'm glad i waited until now. i'm totally open to criticism on this, and if anyone thinks i'm missing something, PLEASE share it.

 

i have always liked Ya Mu and how he represents himself for the most part on TTB, but as a fellow teacher/genuine sincere student of the art, i couldn't just overlook something i consider to be a matter of integrity.

 

I speak as I see. If that does, or does not cause surprise, so be it. The intention is simply to add my tuppence worth to the mix. People can and will respond in light of their own experiences and opinions. C'est la vie.

 

No one should blindly accept-or dispute-anything I write here. If they feel compelled enough, then they can take it for checking. That is how we learn. That is how I've learned and picked up information. Without the prior comments by Michael Lomax and others, I would not have bought the book and tried the practice.

 

There's lots of good information out there from different sources. The purpose of reviews like mine is to highlight a particular one. There is the opportunity for others to do likewise by starting their own threads.

 

I mean this in a non-confrontational way and without any intent to be unpleasant. However, this thread isn't about you. Like your comments elsewhere, I get the impression that you are jumping in more to say how much you know. I understand the point of establishing ones credibility, but that can be done in a far more concise manner.

 

You're right in saying you know little about me beyond superficial details. That is because the strength of my arguement is far more important and relevant in a discussion that me banging on about how wonderful I am and how much I know. I can't cure cancer but I have been known to kick hubris squarely in the balls with attention getting results.

 

Sometimes when one sees nice things being said about others, even if we disagree, resisting the temptation to jump in and piss all over it is a good thing. I don't think you needed to make the comments about Santiago on the 'Shaktipat' thread. If he didn't dispute the comparison to Wang Liping it is likely because he gave it little to no thought. He has always shown humilty and respect to his teachers, so he isn't prone to raising himself on a pedestal. He expresses what he thinks in a forthright manner is all.

 

I've always had the impression that Michael Lomax is sincere in what he says and does. If I had doubts, I would go and find out for myself, or let it pass, rather than just jump in crying 'fraud'. I don't know you from Adam, so I would not presume to rain on your parade in such a manner. Claiming to be outspoken is not a justification for being crass. If you wanted to bring up the matter of the video, you could-and should-have done it on that particular thread.

 

If I wanted to recommend particular books, I would show some tact. 'Buy this one, it's half the price and twice the value' kind of remarks on a thread reviewing a particular book is hardly polite. I don't think you would care to have someone behave this way towards you.

 

Whatever the merits of those other methods are, they are not what is being discussed on this thread. It is not a 'Spontaneous Qigong' thread. I'd consider myself ignorant if I'd posted my thoughts on Stillness Movement in one of Jenny Lamb's seminar announcements, or in one of the Kunlun threads. They are specific to a particular method, not to a particular genre.

 

If you do choose to investigate further what Michael has to offer, I hope you can do so objectively. It might also help to keep in mind the old zen advice about emptying ones cup beforehand.

 

My best,

 

Mike

[Starjumper]

OK Then.

Can we expect your follow on review in due course?

 

Hope so.

 

Craig

Well I'm not so sure I felt kind of like an idiot for ordering the book and now that I read Hundun's post I feel more like an idiot. Reading about how the chi kung can be done sitting in a chair and that it appears to be more and more like spontaneous flopping around kind of turns me off. I might cancel the order.

 

I'm such a sucker sometimes, too impulsive, getting swayed by a good spiel. At first I even fell for Max's opening statement, but quickly changed my mind after seeing all the other untruths.

 

I watched the video that Hundun posted and I must say it doesn't sit quite right with me. The reason is because the patient's movements don't correspond to the healing hand movements. I've seen plenty of hand/energy work by people with a lot of energy and the subjects movements frequently correspond to the actions of the projector. For example if you want to make someone do a flopping around chi dance then you give them a little energy for just a few seconds and they can dance for minutes with no additional input. However, when doing healing work they don't usually do that dance because the energy should be directed to and generally confined to whatever area is being worked on. Of course there is some overflow energy also.

 

In general if I do energy work on someone: if I compress energy into their bodies then they will wiggle around and shudder, but they are sitting, so no dance. If they are standing and I push energy at them they will be pushed away, if I pull they will be pulled towards me, almost falling down if I do it to them when they aren't expecting it and have their eyes closed. However, when working on a specific part they usually just feel buzzing, pressure, heat, flowing, or extraction and it doesn't cause much moving. My kung fu teacher (not my chi kung teacher) can make people move in specific ways that he wants, as if they were a puppet on a string, with a great deal of control, whether they cooperate or not. My chi kung teacher can move his hand suddenly one inch while he is standing ten feet away and you feel like you were hit by an explosion, but it doesn't make you move.

 

Anyway, long story short, I think Hundun had the right idea, that it is partly theatrics.

 

What I can say from my experience, after having watched the video, is that the subject was very yin and sensitive to energy, and he probably had a history of doing energy work with Ya Mu. People who are very yin and sensitive to energy will have strong responses but the opposite type who has hard muscles and is very grounded and yang might not feel a thing and won't move. Just as an experiment I'm going to try to move someone with energy while their backs are turned to me. I want to find some musclebound worker type who is absolutely numb to energy and try it on them. I'll bet that even though they can't feel the energy that they can be moved.

 

I guess I'm going off on a tangent here, I should be working

 

Oh ya, I know, once I was visiting my next door neighbors down the canyon up at my place in the mountains. The neighbor's wife and I had just finished a bowl of primo weed and I decided to try to see if and how she could feel energy work and she was interested. So while she was sitting there I tried some different stuff like I do when my students are sitting and each time I did a different technique she exclaimed stuff like:

WOW!

Oh my gawww...

Oooooh

Wow

That's amazing!

Oh my

and so on and so forth.

 

It actually spooked me a little bit because that was the first time I tried doing it 'just for fun'. Then I tried it on the husband, who is a hard working building contractor, and he didn't feel nuthin'.

 

Once I did a demo at a Reiki practitioner's meetup and when I did the thing that I call sprinkling stardust (or pixie dust) which feels like a gentle sparkly shower to the subject, she exclaimed: "What on Earth are you doing?" and had to look up at my hands

 

So yeah, whatever, do you think I should still get the book?

Edited July 31, 2010 by Mal
Insult removed

[RiverSnake]

I'm usually pretty good at smelling bull-shit and from what i've read Michael Lomax seems like a genuine cat. I've not tried the still-ness movement qigong but am learning the Gift of the Tao from his DVD and am enjoying it.

 

-I also believe it says in his book that Michael works at an alternative medicine hospital and has been healing for years. It would appear that he not only talks the talk but walks the walk.

 

-I also recently read the book and very much enjoyed.

[mjjbecker]

Reading about how the chi kung can be done sitting in a chair and that it appears to be more and more like spontaneous flopping around kind of turns me off.

 

Thanks, Feng Zhiqiang is a grand teacher of mine and I've learned the Hunyuan system.

 

Then you will know that Hu Yao Zhen taught neigong to Grandmaster Feng? You obviously don't know that spontaneous movement is recognized within the Hunyuan system though. Don't believe me? Go and ask someone senior within the school. Perhaps you never got past the basic exercises?

 

Relevance?

 

Hu was also one of Wang Juemin's teachers. Not only that, but Hu 'invented' Stillness Movement neigong. He wrote a book on it in the 1940's. Hu's daughters still teach it*, and videos of them demonstrating can be seen on 'You Tube'. Yes, spontaneous movement with all the trimmings. Performed standing, and yes, sitting on a chair.

 

That's the thing about making sure you drink deeply from the well of knowledge. A little does indeed seem to intoxicate some.

 

 

 

*For anyone interested, the only places that I know of that they have taught is parts of Europe and currently in Beijing. Given this, learning from Michael Lomax is an easier teacher to access.

[Starjumper]

Then you will know that Hu Yao Zhen taught neigong to Grandmaster Feng? You obviously don't know that spontaneous movement is recognized within the Hunyuan system though. Don't believe me? Go and ask someone senior within the school. Perhaps you never got past the basic exercises?

 

Relevance?

 

Hu was also one of Wang Juemin's teachers. Not only that, but Hu 'invented' Stillness Movement neigong. He wrote a book on it in the 1940's. Hu's daughters still teach it*, and videos of them demonstrating can be seen on 'You Tube'. Yes, spontaneous movement with all the trimmings. Performed standing, and yes, sitting on a chair.

 

That's the thing about making sure you drink deeply from the well of knowledge. A little does indeed seem to intoxicate some.

 

*For anyone interested, the only places that I know of that they have taught is parts of Europe and currently in Beijing. Given this, learning from Michael Lomax is an easier teacher to access.

 

No, I didn't know that Hu Yao Zhen taught neigong to Grandmaster Feng, I never bothered much with lineages as I can tell when a master is a real person or not.

 

I think Ya Mu is a real person too, marketing just makes us do weird things sometimes.

 

Concerning spontaneous movement, I didn't take Hunyuan that far, however I understand the benefits of spontaneous movement and do it as well. The ultimate goal of arriving at the formless, which is stated in the tai chi classics, is about being spontaneous, but it also says that such spontaneous movement should be based on extensive mind/body training and that this spontaneous movement comes from experiencing all the ways of movement. The goal of arriving at the formless is important in self defense in the internal arts as well.

 

In spontaneous chi kung that is based on arriving at the formless it generally looks more like a soft flowing dance rather than flopping around, this spastic flopping around which has been popularized lately, which is based on lack of experience in the practitioner, seems to me like a scam, that is all. Sooo, depending on how the results look in the students I can get a feel for how this works in this case. I do like Ya Mu, he is straightforward and helpful, and I think he has good chi power. My question is, does he teach the way of power to others or is it taught for some healing effect?

 

Hu was also one of Wang Juemin's teachers. Not only that, but Hu 'invented' Stillness Movement neigong. He wrote a book on it in the 1940's. Hu's daughters still teach it*, and videos of them demonstrating can be seen on 'You Tube'. Yes, spontaneous movement with all the trimmings. Performed standing, and yes, sitting on a chair.

 

You seem to have quite a library of past posts and stuff could you provide some links to these videos please.

Edited July 30, 2010 by Starjumper7

[gendao]

Then you will know that Hu Yao Zhen taught neigong to Grandmaster Feng? You obviously don't know that spontaneous movement is recognized within the Hunyuan system though. Don't believe me? Go and ask someone senior within the school. Perhaps you never got past the basic exercises?

 

Relevance?

 

Hu was also one of Wang Juemin's teachers. Not only that, but Hu 'invented' Stillness Movement neigong. He wrote a book on it in the 1940's. Hu's daughters still teach it*, and videos of them demonstrating can be seen on 'You Tube'. Yes, spontaneous movement with all the trimmings. Performed standing, and yes, sitting on a chair.

 

That's the thing about making sure you drink deeply from the well of knowledge. A little does indeed seem to intoxicate some.

 

 

 

*For anyone interested, the only places that I know of that they have taught is parts of Europe and currently in Beijing. Given this, learning from Michael Lomax is an easier teacher to access.

Interesting, Feng Zhiqiang said that he's witnessed Hu YaoZhen levitate while meditating...wish I could find out more about that guy!

Master Hu was a master of five arts. He was a master of Buddhism, Taoism, Confucianism, and Chinese Medicine as well as martial arts. When he meditates, I have seen him levitate for about a foot off the ground. One time he was meditating in the house and I went to visit him with some fellow students. We knew he was meditating, so we stayed outside the house, we didn’t want to go in and disturb him. However, master Hu could somehow sense that we were there, and asked us all to come in. He asked us all to come in, and said, “I’ve been meditating too long, my legs are numb, it’s all crooked, so can you all come and lift me up?” So all five of us said, oh that’s pretty easy, because all five of us were strong young men in our prime, so we said, “no problem, we can lift him up.” We tried, but couldn’t move him. After he saw us struggle, he said “Never mind, I’ll do it myself, I’m no longer numb.” He just walked down from the bed himself. While we were trying, five of us each took a limb and the other took the body, but none of us could move him. Only when he said “I’m moving myself” then he’s coming off the bed. When we were pulling him, it felt to us as if he was almost moving. We felt as if he’s giving, he’s giving, but he’s never quite coming off the bed, and when we’re out of strength he somehow moved back. It’s almost like he’s elastic.

And could you link some of the videos of Hu's daughters, please? Edited July 30, 2010 by vortex

[mjjbecker]

No, I didn't know that Hu Yao Zhen taught neigong to Grandmaster Feng, I never bothered much with lineages as I can tell when a master is a real person or not.

 

I think Ya Mu is a real person too, marketing just makes us do weird things sometimes.

 

Concerning spontaneous movement, I didn't take Hunyuan that far, however I understand the benefits of spontaneous movement and do it as well. The ultimate goal of arriving at the formless, which is stated in the tai chi classics, is about being spontaneous, but it also says that such spontaneous movement should be based on extensive mind/body training and that this spontaneous movement comes from experiencing all the ways of movement. The goal of arriving at the formless is important in self defense in the internal arts as well.

 

In spontaneous chi kung that is based on arriving at the formless it generally looks more like a soft flowing dance rather than flopping around, this spastic flopping around which has been popularized lately, which is based on lack of experience in the practitioner, seems to me like a scam, that is all. Sooo, depending on how the results look in the students I can get a feel for how this works in this case. I do like Ya Mu, he is straightforward and helpful, and I think he has good chi power. My question is, does he teach the way of power to others or is it taught for some healing effect?

 

 

 

You seem to have quite a library of past posts and stuff could you provide some links to these videos please.

 

I just remember stuff and the brain makes the connections. Probably the reason I ended up studying history at university. I remembered from way back you'd done the Hunyuan stuff. Did a search and the information came up.

 

It is indeed like a dance, uncannily so when watching the daughters of GM Hu. Myself I prefer to sit on the floor, and I don't have the space to move around without bumping into stuff. If you have to avoid doing this, it isn't spontaneous any more.

 

I can't directly post the You Tube links because You Tube is still blocked in China. Here's a link to a Chinese version though (thanks due to my Chinese friend Helen, who has been a massive help to me). Enjoy!

 

http://www.tudou.com/programs/view/594-RjFZUyQ/

[Ya Mu]

[mjjbecker]

[Ya Mu]

I read this as Michael being an astute communicator. Too many people dont even believe in qi projection at all, their suspension of disbelief may just about be managed when they have a literal depiction of projection, but if they cant see where the qi is even coming from, cant see a direct literal line of projection.. then they will resort to the position of "It aint real"...

 

Visually, it could have looked utterly lacking a narrative, really quite devoid of meaning, without Michael physically being explicit.

 

It happens so often even on this board that people fail to believe what others experience, and attempt to impose a rationale on it that negates a reality which they arent sharing.

Yes

[Aetherous]

It's very normal on a discussion forum that if too much good is being said people feel the need to post negative things to balance it.

[Starjumper]

Someone who will help you fire up your dantien without charging you several grand for the privledge.

Yup.

 

The energy you give someone fades away over a period of three days or less and is the GONE, the firing should be repeated many times, each week, for years, synchronized with the exercising of the form, for it to really take and make a lasting difference.

Edited July 30, 2010 by Starjumper7

[h.uriahr]

MJBecker brought the pro and Hundun brought out the con.

 

I dont exactly see the problem. It's a spirited debate here, nothing wrong with it. I cherish the opinions of both Becker and Hundun and having personally met and trained with Hundun, I can say with absolutely undesputable certainty that Hundun has juice. A good debate is one without insults and foul language conducted in such a manner that both parties walk away feeling that they did the best they could about getting the point across without being disrespectful.

[Mal]

beautiful post h.uriahr

 

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

 

I love how Synchronicity works. I ordered my copy (book and DVD) a day before MJJ posted his review.

 

No I'm not giving up on KAP.

 

Ya Mu initially rubbed me the wrong way, I tended not to agree with his positions. I now feel that was just my ego's knee jerk response of "he's wrong" That was a barrier to me learning. Over time I have come to value his contributions here. So now I want to know more about his system.