Yigong by Sifu Jenny Lamb

[konchog uma]

I am happy to report that I have ordered Sifu Jenny Lamb's DVD "Qigong for Self-Healing".

 

What little of Max's kunlun I have been taught is very effective, and I think that the bad publicity and pseudo scandal that surround him are interesting. I think he's got that "crazy wisdom" that lends itself to wild shamanic energies really well but doesn't "play well with others". So having a flashy website, he's going to attract the kind of beginners with big eyes that are going to cause his reputation problems when they make mistakes or get in over their head.

 

That being said, those practices by any name are extraordinarily healing! Like wow man! So I want to learn from Jenny Lamb (Yigong), and also from Chris Matsuo's DVD (Kuan Yin Magnetic Qigong). Is DGS out of stock of that DVD right now?? All I see is 3for1 haha $300 indeed

 

Aside from Easterninternalarts.com's info page, are there any resources besides seminar with Jenny herself for learning her yigong? I have googled such things, but you resourceful type bums might know of something that I didn't find, because basically all I found was the Q&A page on her site.

 

Also, why all the hype about Max Christensen, and almost none about his teacher?? I have read he didn't even credit her in his book, and made up a bs history of Kunlun to sell that book! Is that true? Why don't people put Sifu Jenny up on the same sort of pedestal? I would be curious to hear from people who have interacted with both of them. I mean his website is nice and so are his eyes but is he That amazing? I think its a good mark of Sifu Jenny that she hasn't attracted negative attention.

[Aetherous]

I say focus on the practices.

[Lucky7Strikes]

I've been to both teacher's seminars. Both are great and have utmost respect for one another from what they said.

 

Also, Max teaches it differently from Jenny in terms of context and purpose, not to mention it is only a part of what he teaches.

Edited October 13, 2011 by Lucky7Strikes

[Cameron]

I have interacted with both of them.

 

Actually it is a very deep question. One I have pondered quite a bit myself.

 

I'll say what I can about it. Hopefully it is helpful. This will be my last post on Taobums.

 

My experience with Max. What I was told is his main teacher is a Maoshan Master of a different lineage then Jenny's. It is from this teacher who Max learned Red Phoenix as well as other things. When Max learned spontaneous qigong from Jenny he had already gone very, very deep into the Maoshan arts from his main teacher. Thus he was already well along in that lineage but had a deep connection to Sifu Jenny as well.

 

My understanding is Max took what he learned from his Maoshan Sifu and combined it with the spontaneous he learned from Jenny and he had his great attainment from that. Basically what Max told me in no uncertain terms when I first met him was that combining "Kunlun" with Red Phoenix you can attain Gold Dragon Body.

 

So if that attainment and Max's understandings about combining these different practices together interests you then he is the teacher to see. It is more of an experimental path.

 

Sifu Jenny comes from an unbroken lineage of Maoshan teachers who taught the spontaneous qigong. She also has very strong Buddhist influences. She is a wonderful teacher. Perhaps if I hadn't met Max before I met her and already was well along the path he shared I would have been more open to her perspective. In any case she is an awesome teacher.

 

She taught me Yigong("Kunlun") in person on the day that her father died. I walked into class and she looked at us all in the eyes and told us "My father died today". Then we practiced together.

 

It was only one weekend workshop I did with Jenny but even if I never see her again I feel blessed to have met such an amazing person.

 

Strictly speaking, I am more aligned with Max and have recieved several transmissions from him. So I consider him my main teacher.

 

However, I would strongly urge anyone who is interested to check out both carefully. They are both awesome but imo follow different philosophies and styles. So you should use your own intuition to guide you to who is is the best teacher for you.

 

Don't waste your time or merit on here speaking critically about teachers who frankly are both light years beyond any of us.

 

Best wishes and take care,

 

 

Cameron

[konchog uma]

Don't waste your time or merit on here speaking critically about teachers who frankly are both light years beyond any of us.

 

Cameron,

 

Thank you for your thorough response. That is really helpful.

 

I did not mean to speak negatively or critically about Max, and am sorry if I came across that way. I was asking questions about some things I have read regarding him. If you read, you will notice I was not making statements. Even if he is light years beyond me, those might be valid questions. No disrepect, I just don't believe in putting teachers up on pedestals where they are not subject to the scrutiny one would give anyone else. If I heard such things about you or anyone else, I might ask questions for clarification. Especially if I were going to practice techniques you had taught.

[thelerner]

I am happy to report that I have ordered Sifu Jenny Lamb's DVD "Qigong for Self-Healing".

 

Also, why all the hype about Max Christensen, and almost none about his teacher??

 

I agree with Cam, both are high level, very impressive teachers.

 

To answer the question: Its all about press releases. Early on Max had Chris T. who was very good at marketing. Also Max's teaching style and demonstrations have a wow factor built in. Some connect to it, it may turn others off.

[Nilo]

I feel Max likes to make himself seem all mystical, unreachable and special, interesting ego trip.

 

I like Jenny though.

[Aetherous]

Yeah, well. I like Max.

 

Someone recently asked me, do you think Max is qualified to combine some practices and create his own Kunlun system?

 

My answer was: more than anyone alive at the moment.

Edited October 13, 2011 by Scotty

[konchog uma]

I say focus on the practices.

 

Thanks for the reminder! Focusing on the drama is only going to lead to bad things.

 

I am not trying to cultivate opinions or stir up muddy water, at least not consciously. I am just amazed at some of the rumors and dirt i read about Max. I just have to say it that way. I do not personally have a shred of disrespect for him in me, I don't know him, and I don't pretend to. But some of the things I read seem contrary to how true spiritual master would act, so it just raises the question thats all. Maybe its rumors! I am not saying I know. Like i said, if you look at the original post I was not making statements I was asking questions.

[Aetherous]

Yes...it's totally rumors, gossip and negative assumptions. Not wise to spread that garbage, but do as you wish. It is truly your choice, and I will actually understand if you feel the need to continue.

 

One of my favorite quotes is "when you point your finger at someone, there are three pointing back at you".

 

I said "focus on the practices" for your own benefit, not to shut you up in any way. Life is better with letting go, enjoying the moment and doing the right thing. That's all.

 

[Warrior Body Buddha Mind]

BRB Popcorn and beer

[konchog uma]

Yes...it's totally rumors, gossip and negative assumptions. Not wise to spread that garbage, but do as you wish. It is truly your choice, and I will actually understand if you feel the need to continue.

 

One of my favorite quotes is "when you point your finger at someone, there are three pointing back at you".

 

I said "focus on the practices" for your own benefit, not to shut you up in any way. Life is better with letting go, enjoying the moment and doing the right thing. That's all.

 

 

Again, thanks for the kind reminder scotty. I really did not mean to point fingers, just trying to clarify why people say that stuff. Why would I attack Max? I'm not an idiot. But i did read that stuff, so i naturally had those questions.

 

Sorry everyone for the way I came across. I am not a gossip or a troll. I thought they were healthy concerns.

[Aetherous]

just trying to clarify why people say that stuff

 

Consider this: a total beginner comes into this thread and reads your questions. Automatically, they begin to form the opinion that Max:

 

1) Has bad publicity and a "pseudo scandal" following him.

2) Doesn't play well with others.

3) Has an unnecessarily flashy website.

4) Attracts beginners who end up experiencing problems.

5) That the practices are called something else, by other (supposedly better) teachers.

6) That he is hyped up.

7) That he's a liar, and doesn't acknowledge his teachers.

8) That Sifu Jenny was his teacher.

9) That he is trying to sell his book.

10) That he is placed upon a pedestal unnecessarily.

11) That he attracts negative attention.

12) That he doesn't act like how a true spiritual master should act.

13) That he "likes to make himself seem all mystical, unreachable and special, interesting ego trip".

 

So the total beginner already thinks these things that have been said about Max are probably true, because they're being presented as common knowledge. But the fact of the matter is: none of those things are true.

 

Not one.

 

Yet this total beginner will go on to repeat these things...

 

This is the nature of spreading rumors. The more people that do it, the more true the rumors can seem.

 

I am not saying that you were attacking Max, or calling you an idiot, or a troll. Just pointing out why people, yourself included, say that stuff. Because we tend to take other people's word for it, especially when it's considered to be common knowledge.

 

In the case of Max, this stuff shouldn't be considered common knowledge.

 

Enough said.

[Sloppy Zhang]

I'm a fan of investigation and knowledge. When I was young, I was duped by someone who seemed to make legitimate claims, but none of the facts lined up upon my investigation. Of course, the party line from the senior teachers and students was "oh just do the practice", "oh it just detracts from your development".... well, really, it was lies! Some stuff had value, and some stuff was trash.

 

So since then, before picking something up I'd investigate it, the people teaching it, and its history. Where it came from.

 

I think that is very valuable.

 

If someone finds a thread that says "oh so-and-so is a fake", and stops there from a single comment from a single thread, well guess what? They ain't doing the proper amount of research or investigation. That's on them.

 

That same person COULD use that comment as a springboard to investigate the person and the system. In this case, it could lead to many threads on this forum where the practice and the history and the results of the practice are discussed. And there have been some very good discussions about that. Not to mention those discussions have sprung into larger discussions about what spirituality is, what it means to be enlightened, what a lineage is, how transmissions work, importance of teachers, etc etc, which are topics that impact MANY areas.

 

Each of the bullet points that Scotty listed are very interesting subjects for research, and very interesting points that will turn up some very interesting topics of conversation. At least, they were interesting to me when I researched them, because at the time, Kunlun very much appealed to me as a potential practice (never picked it up, but it was a strong contender for a good while). There is a reason why those points listed appear as they do, and there is a reason why some people may consider them true, and others may consider them false.

 

My insistence on investigation and corroborating claims has provided me much insight and knowledge regarding people, history, cultural developments, how things grow and change, how things are maintained, etc etc (in martial arts, spirituality, etc). I think it's valuable.

 

And I encourage other people to investigate and ask questions. But yes, it involves lots of work. And it involves personal responsibility for what you think, what you know, what you allow yourself to believe, what you will chose to repeat, how you chose to repeat it, and where you decide to stop on your quest for knowledge.

Edited October 14, 2011 by Sloppy Zhang

[Seth Ananda]

I just did Jenny's seminar here In melbourne, and it was very very good

 

Her take on the Max situation was Interesting. She has great love for him, called him a Dharma brother from other lives...

 

But he told her he had written a book and said he would bring it around for her to see, and never did. Then she realised that the main part of it was her stuff, as people kept finding her and saying, this is what Max teaches, why are you not more acknowledged? [in my copy of pillars of bliss, he acknowledges Jenny Wu as 'my sister in the Kunlun tradition who taught me to push forward'] {my observation is - where is the Credit for her being the actual lineage holder of the spontaneous form?}

Then eventually when Max wanted to reprint, he sent a student round to show her the planned print, and they said we will give you credit as the lineage holder, but we need you to sign off on the what we have written. Jenny read it and said sorry I can not Lie, ever so I can not sign off. The history here is a total Fabrication, and If I lie for Max, I create bad Karma for both him and me, which I will not do. So she seemed a bit sad, and said her hands are tied. She loves Max, but cannot support his Lies.

 

 

Now when i learned Kunlun, I got to peruse through the teachers hard drives, and unfortunately saw a file on the original planned story for How Kan met Max. It was probably filmed by Mantra if I am remembering it right, but It is completely different to the current online story of how Kan met Max. To me this is proof I unfortunatly can not show anyone, that both Kan and Max are both happy to be completely fraudulent.

The origional planned story had Kan as a blackbelt student of some martial artist in Japan, sitting with his teacher watching a Demo from Max.

Now Max is on stage, and 'volunteers' from the audience are getting up to try to attack him, but his powers are too real and they instead roll around on the floor... It showed the footage of this 'obviously' staged event. Kan then says his teacher gets outraged and tells him to go up their and break Max's spine {or some such drastic thing} and It goes pack to the performance footage, where Kan gets up on stage, tries to attack Max, but rolls around on the floor just like a golden Bamboo demo. Kan then tries a few more times before submitting and asking to become Maxes student.

All this was described conversationally, by Kan and Max, in an interview setting, with flashes to footage from the event. It was obviously going to be a public release.

 

I think Max wised up to general public opinion, around MMA fighters punching Golden Bamboo masters in the face. He probably realised that if he released that footage, he would have people other than gullibale students who just roll around from his 'energy' actually trying to punch him in the face. He backed out just quick enough. He Initially wanted people to believe that he really could stop attackers with energy, which is partially seen even in his movie, with all the allusions to actual combat scenarios...

 

So he is a sneaky lucky man who just missed becoming the next Golden Bamboo laughing stock.

 

Any way that story I watched with my own eyes is totally different to the last 'How Kan met Max' story. There is no way out of it. He and Kan are Liars.

 

But, they may still be good teachers, even Great. Just a bit challenged on the integrity Level.

[Aetherous]

Seth Ananda,

 

Eh, I disagree with your view and could debate it, but it's a total waste of time. I'm living my own life, and while I hate to see someone awesome slandered behind their back, I also don't wish to be the thought police here.

 

Peace, and best of luck to everyone in their spiritual path.

 

[Sloppy Zhang]

I think this kind of issue came out in a thread talking about Carlos Castaneda. Factually his stories are demonstrably false and/or plagiarized. But there are people who perform the practices and get benefit.

 

Does it change the fact that Castaneda attributed things to himself that he never did? No. He still did that.

 

Does it mean the practices are not real and are not useful? No, because there have been people who have done the practices (including but not limited to the original people who got plagiarized), and there are people who are still going through these legitimate practices who are getting benefit.

 

So can a legitimate teaching come from a less than squeaky clean source? I, personally, believe so, yes.

 

Again, I support knowing the facts and the truth, ugly as it may be. It's been known for a while that the marketing side of Kunlun has been a bit at odds with the touted spiritual side. Whether this is a product of someone working on the marketing side, or Max himself... well, I don't know if it's certain.

 

I think it is valuable to know when a story has been stretched or fabricated. Even if it is done for show and the sake of marketing. It happens. People tend to respond to the flashy stuff, and, you know, sometimes before you can keep people you have to first draw them it.

 

This doesn't change the legitimacy of the practice, I don't think. It's sad to hear that people are doing this but, you know... it happens.

 

I think people should be empowered by knowing the truth. If the practice is real and legitimate, then let people do the practice, and let them know full well where it is coming from.

[Aetherous]

Just something I thought of, not debating about anything...

 

Consider how mythological Taoism has been throughout the ages (very). Especially the Shangqing school. Is it "lying" to keep it that way, by adding a little mythology and stories to the history of the practices? Is it disempowering?

 

Or is it actually empowering? Doesn't it increase the enthusiasm and personal exploration of the practitioners?

 

I personally believe in both answers to the question...I'm all for knowing the truth, but also see very clearly how knowing the whole truth can sometimes detract from someone's enthusiasm for the practices...and that by shrouding everything but the method itself, it can sometimes be more beneficial.

 

Luckily for us, we have both the truth and myth with Kunlun, and it can be challenging to really know which is which, if you're honest enough about things.

 

Edited: to clarify a sentence.

Edited October 15, 2011 by Scotty

[Birch]

It all seems a bit complicated to me. Couldn't a contemporary practice just come out and say "here it is, here's what to do" without the bells and whistles and made up stuff?

But then people probably wouldn't even try it. I think bells And whistles and rattles and feathers and snakeskins work, which is why they get used. If i recall correctly, Ya Mu has a crazy narrative in his book intro too. in fact, get anyone to tell you their story and how they got to be where they are and explain their current understanding and i almost guarantee there will be some falsehoods in there somewhere.

 

I've explained before about where i stand on "taking advantage". We all know when we're doing it. Don't we? (I don't

know the answer)

[Sloppy Zhang]

Just something I thought of, not debating about anything...

 

Consider how mythological Taoism has been throughout the ages (very). Especially the Shangqing school. Is it "lying" to keep it that way, by adding a little mythology and stories to the history of the practices? Is it disempowering?

 

Or is it actually empowering? Doesn't it increase the enthusiasm and personal exploration of the practitioners?

 

I personally believe in both answers to the question...I'm all for knowing the truth, but also see very clearly how knowing the whole truth can sometimes detract from someone's enthusiasm for the practices...and that by shrouding everything but the method itself, it can sometimes be more beneficial.

 

Luckily for us, we have both the truth and myth with Kunlun, and it can be challenging to really know which is which, if you're honest enough about things.

 

Edited: to clarify a sentence.

 

I like fiveelemnttao's approach to his modern Teutonic shamanism class. From what I can tell, he's been very up front about where it is coming from. He's been very up front about his integrating his knowledge of Chinese systems in the search for a universally applicable system, his meditative experiences, his scholarly research, as well as his "oral traditions" of looking at known mythologies and looking at the practice points illustrated in them.

 

It is up front. It is honest. "Yes. We're talking about stories. But you know what? The stories tell us something. Let's see what we can practice from them."

 

That is good and I fully support that.

 

But it does not seem that Kunlun necessarily follows that path.

 

If knowing the truth about the origin of a story will diminish enthusiasm for the path... then what kind of path is it? If you found out you were practicing something that somebody made up on after an acid trip, would you care? If that method gave you results, would you care? If it healed an ill, would you care?

 

What if you had an ill and wanted it healed? What if you were placing your faith in something based on a message you heard which was in line with what you believed?

 

I consider it disingenuous to present yourself as something you are not. Lies of omission go into that category. Using a variety of carefully nuanced phrases to create an illusion that you KNOW people will believe fall into that category.

 

Some people WANT a lineage. Some people want to get into something bigger. They want to know that their teacher learned from a teacher who learned from a teacher who learned from a series of teachers going all the way back to the Buddha or what-have-you. That is important to some people.

 

Now you can believe whatever you want about that belief, or any other belief, but if you tell people that's what you are, when you aren't, or if you have to start playing semantics games to get out of answering direct questions.... That is not genuine.

 

And if you are doing that to try and motivate people... well, either find what's in your practice that people want which is lacking, or forget about trying to appease the whims of the rest of the population.

Edited October 15, 2011 by Sloppy Zhang

[Birch]

Interesting points Mr Slopps.

Leaving practice paths aside for a moment, we could also look at the "healing professions" more widely and what use stories are in that context. Patient puts faith in doctor to do something because doctor has a map of patients that came at some price of effort (medschool) and (one hopes) practical getting of results with other patients. But who is actually doing the healing ( if it does occur)? Patient's body, albeit in response and in relationship with the doctor and the stories and the maps.

 

Would the healing still "work" if every aspect of the process was explained in a transparent manner? "Oh i'm just using this desk i'm sitting behind as a prop to convey authority so i can seem to you to be more convincing." And "in order to make you feel less anxious, I'm going to send you for a general test i know i won't find anything on anyway." Or "Your flu should clear up with 5 days of these antibiotics". (The latter is a bad call, however. Over-prescribing antibiotics in non-necessary situations paving the way for bacterial resistence, apparently...)

 

It's possible that some patients would be outraged if doctors were more transparent. Does this mean they currenly lack integrity?

 

That does sound like an interesting approach 5ET has.

[Aetherous]

Nah, what I said stands, Sloppy.

[Aetherous]

K,

 

Would the healing still "work" if every aspect of the process was explained in a transparent manner? "Oh i'm just using this desk i'm sitting behind as a prop to convey authority so i can seem to you to be more convincing." And "in order to make you feel less anxious, I'm going to send you for a general test i know i won't find anything on anyway." Or "Your flu should clear up with 5 days of these antibiotics". (The latter is a bad call, however. Over-prescribing antibiotics in non-necessary situations paving the way for bacterial resistence, apparently...)

 

It's possible that some patients would be outraged if doctors were more transparent. Does this mean they currenly lack integrity?

 

Yes, what's more important...actually helping others, or being brutally honest at the expense of helping them?

 

At least personally, I can say with full integrity that the first choice is preferred.

 

(Anyway...consider how we know about Max's teachers in the first place. It's because he told everyone the real history. )

[spiraltao]

It all seems a bit complicated to me. Couldn't a contemporary practice just come out and say "here it is, here's what to do" without the bells and whistles and made up stuff?

But then people probably wouldn't even try it. I think bells And whistles and rattles and feathers and snakeskins work, which is why they get used. If i recall correctly, Ya Mu has a crazy narrative in his book intro too. in fact, get anyone to tell you their story and how they got to be where they are and explain their current understanding and i almost guarantee there will be some falsehoods in there somewhere.

 

I've explained before about where i stand on "taking advantage". We all know when we're doing it. Don't we? (I don't

know the answer)

 

 

 

 

 

 

I agree K. ...and I think our answer to this is Lao Xie, Christopher Matsuo! That is just my humble opine.

[gendao]

Yes, what's more important...actually helping others, or being brutally honest at the expense of helping them?

This could also be a false dilemna, though.

 

You could also help others by being brutally honest. They are not necessarily mutually-exclusive..

The more sensitive an issue, the more polite we tend to become, according to the researchers.

 

But, because it can require us to become evasive and vague, politeness can have a downside: It can lead to uncertainty about what the polite person is actually saying. As a result, we have to spend more mental resources trying to parse the actual meaning, the researchers write in their review of past studies on politeness in the October issue of the journal Current Directions in Psychological Science.

 

This can have negative consequences for safety and security in high-stakes situations. The authors note a chapter in Malcolm Gladwell's book "Outliers: The Story of Sucess" (Little, Brown and Co., 2008) devoted to the idea that politeness crashes planes, because crew members sacrifice clarity for politeness. In one of his examples, a first officer attempts to tell the captain about a dangerous amount of ice on the aircraft's wings, "Look how the ice is just hanging on his, ah, back there, see that?" the officer reportedly said, followed by a second and third attempt that are just as unclear and polite. By this time, the plane is about to take off and will crash a short while later, the researchers write.