March 26, 2010 at 11:37 am #33678
The only recognized master, by Chia, as far as I know, in the universal tao system is speaking about how to begin practise according to hes ideas.
He is speaking alot of the focus on the tip of the nose and how that creates ligth that goes to the tan-tien and further into the microcosmic orbit. A method not teached until much later in Chias system. When and if M.Winn uses it, I have no idea.
Look for yourself for the interesting discussion on thread at the tao bums:
Swedich DragonMarch 26, 2010 at 9:24 pm #33679
Yes I have been reading his posting on tao bums too. But how can we be certain it’s really him, or someone else having a little fun acting like him. In the end I guess it doesn’t really matter if it’s him or not but it does kind of make you curious.
DamonMarch 28, 2010 at 1:10 am #33681
>>>The only recognized master, by Chia, as far as I know,
>>>in the universal tao system . . .
Most senior instructors in the Healing Tao (what Universal Tao
is called in the USA), have under consensus agreed to NOT use
the “master” terminology . . . excepting in some occasions
when referring to Mantak Chia himself.
This is due to the philosophy in this country of not encouraging
the master-disciple relationship; such a thing is really just
an ego trip. A student should be able to judge from a teacher
after any experience with the teacher how skilled they are
without any such “qualifications”.
When I say this, it is not to put down Yudelove’s achievements.
I don’t know the man, and have no intention of judging him.
I know you and others respect his work.
BUT I just want to clarify that others certainly fall into the same
category; it’s just that they haven’t been characterized as
such because of the philosophy on the word “master” here.
There are certainly some senior instructors in the Healing Tao
that could be considered masters; they have the knowledge
and skill base . . . they just choose to remain humble about it.
In particular, MICHAEL WINN has been practicing for 30+ years,
and has made his own advances and improvements beyond the
original practices as well. For instance, Michael Winn also
agrees (as in the link you gave) that the original way
the Microcosmic Orbit was taught could be too mental and
could be done with too weak qi.
He has since incorporated additional improvements to opening the
orbit, including qigong to open the orbit flow as well as an
INCREDIBLY POWERFUL secret method for opening it that came
from Wudang mountain–which to be honest, is far more powerful
than ANY OTHER approach I’ve seen. It makes other methods seem
almost like a waste of time.
I’ve also seen M. Chia purchase teaching materials made by some of
the advanced senior instructors, so his regard for them is the same–even
without the “title”.
Actually, for me, when I hear someone using a title, it makes me
skeptical of them. It makes me feel like they are not as good as
they appear and they are trying to make themselves look more skilled
than they are via a title.
Also one last thing:
Difficult to compare one person’s system to another’s just by saying
that one person teaches one technique early and another one teaches
it much later (or not at all). The instructor may have good reasons
for doing things in a different order (or not doing them).
SMarch 28, 2010 at 4:20 am #33683
Thanks for clarifications about the non use of the word master.
I by no mean ment to say that Yudelove is better than anybody else, the master
word was just an information for those not knowing anything about Yudelove.
It has no big meaning for me. But it is an information about what level of perfomance Chia have in the past seen in hem.
I myself are on such a low level according to alchemy, a beginner, that I can’t distinguise in any case between levels among many of those that teaches in the system. I have no such interest either. But I can see which ones that have things to say that I’ve learn alot from: Such as Winn, Yudelove and yourself Steven 🙂
Sincerely SDMarch 28, 2010 at 4:24 am #33685
Yes I went thrue the same question in the beginning. I have read the most of hes posts and I myself feel wery sertainly that it is hem. He has also posted some photos on hemself and hes wife…
Also the feeling from how he acts makes me sertain about hes identity. No question about it.
Even though you never know for sure on this kind of open forums, of course.
SDMarch 28, 2010 at 4:31 am #33687
The meditation of the tip of the nose inteterests me a bit. It is comparable to what I have done in the white tigress system with a point behind the eyes, called the original cavity or ancestors hall. I had some greate results by it.
Interesting also to get more energy into the mco. Seems right to me. Sometimes the pearl in fusion gives quite strong energy to me anyway. I have sertainly much to investigate about this in the future.
Should be interesting to hear about how and when in the practise M.Winn uses this meditation on the tip of the nose and the third eye and also original cavity, if he do.
SDMarch 28, 2010 at 7:28 am #33689
Hello Swedich Dragon!
I have understood that your sister lives somewhere in Greater Helsinki and you also have asked few years back what kind of Daoist practices one can learn in Finland.
So Zhang Changwang comes again to teach some Yiquan in May. If he is not very Daoist, he has interesting approach to teach Zhan Zhuang anyway.
If you sometimes go to visit your sister or visit Finland for some other reason, maybe this middle of May would be good time.
Course itself is quite near Helsinki center in one of the local Rudolf Steiner schools.
I might myself go to Stockholm in July 2010, because HH Sakya Trizin gives Kalachakra initiation there then. Well, it’s very different from Daoist approach, but anyway.
I don’t actively follow Tao Bums’ forum, but when I now checked it, I noticed that Yudelove was again pushed about what really happened when he supposedly attacked somebody with samurai sword. So according to his own testimony reporter got it wrong, and maybe for purpose, but what is most important his (Yudelove’s) reputation was of course severely harmed for qigong circles.
I have two of his three books but practically I wouldn’t try to combine something very Chinese to something very Jewish like he suggests. Nearest I have ever been in that direction was when I few years back read and also bit studied Kenneth Garant’s Nightside of Eden (Tree of Life vs. Tree of D). Not for me.
C_HowdyMarch 28, 2010 at 2:52 pm #33691
>>>I myself are on such a low level according to alchemy,
>>>a beginner, that I can’t distinguise in any case between
>>>levels among many of those that teaches in the system.
My recommendation here is to get some exposure and take
some classes with different instructors. It helps to
give you perspective. Also, it helps to notice if the person
who is teaching you is matching what they teach. If they
come across with a lot of arrogance, or anger problems, or
lack of compassion, or if they make fun of others who are
different, then those things indicate spiritual weakness
as compared with whatever “skills they advertise”. By
comparing these “in practice” life behaviors with the practices
they claim to know along with the depth of knowledge you feel
they give, and along with whether you feel you resonate
with their teachings . . . all of these things can give you
an indicator–not only of the person’s spiritual attainment,
but whether they are the right person for you. I’m not
saying it’s easy, but those would be tips I could provide.
>>>I have no such interest either.
Well, it’s only important to the degree that you want to train
with people at a much higher level than you, so that they
can help lift you up. It’s also important to find someone
with good character, because the character of the teacher will
rub off on the student, and so you want to train with someone
who has developed good character . . . because some have certain
traits that are not something you want to emulate. You want
to develop into a more genuine being, not acquire negative traits.
>>>But I can see which ones that have things to say
>>>that I’ve learn alot from: Such as Winn,
>>>Yudelove and yourself Steven 🙂
That’s a very nice compliment SD, but I assure you that I am
nowhere near an advanced person. I’m very much a beginner
myself and have a long ways to go. I share what I’ve picked up,
but there’s still plenty of room for growth and I consider
myself still very much at the beginner.
Sincerely SDMarch 28, 2010 at 3:04 pm #33693
You should try Michael’s Wudang Mtn. method of doing the Micro.
It’ll blow your socks off!!
Get QF2 audio set for it . . .
As to focus on the tip of the nose, I’m not familiar with that
practice in Michael’s system for the Micro.
I do know he does work with the third eye in his
Star Alchemy (advanced alchemy) course, but having not taken
the course yet, I can’t say the content or speak further about it.
I’ll have to defer you to someone else . . .
StevenMarch 29, 2010 at 2:54 pm #33695
Yes you were put in a list of some I guess adorable persons, still what ever level you are at, I have learned from you. 🙂
I do not follow any master in real life at the moment beacase I have wery few chances to do that. But hope to soon continue my course whit Hsi Lai. And to be able to travel in the future to take clases, perhaps to tao garden in Thailand or some classes I with Winn, is also on my which list for the future.
Instead I learn together with my friends in my yoga group. I have tried to find some
new people to join us. It seems to land on one single male, but he seems to fit in wery well and add some knowledge wisdom and inspiration to our nice litle yoga group.
Sometimes I meet my instructors in this system also. But not realy often actually, beacase some sircumstances that are at the moment.
F DMarch 29, 2010 at 2:56 pm #33697
Ok, I have enough to practise for the moment and M.W methods have to wait, but they are planned to come into mine and our practises.
So I have to blow my mind in some other way, untill then 🙂 🙂
S DMarch 29, 2010 at 3:20 pm #33699
Don’t know if and when I go there, to Helsinki, but you remember right. Perhaps that is something I will try out someday, but for several reasons it will not be in maj this year. I like the connection to Rudolf Steiner though. It just vibrate good for me 🙂
Yes I believe the story has given hem a wery bad reputation and perhaps hes arguments isn’t wery convincing. But I have no interest in that story any more, beacase it is anyway wery difficult, not to say impossible, to know what realy did happen. My interest is only there if Mr Yudelove hemself whant to speak or write about it. What is more of interest to me is the knowledge and wisdom you can see from hes words, from what he writes at the tao bums right know. For me it is interesting, as a followers of hes practises, from hes books, to start to know hem a litle bit and start to feel hes character in some way.
I do not remember if he suggest that you should mix the Jewish Kabbalah practises with the taoist. Perhaps he suggest such a mix, but I realy haven’t read about the practises from the book “the three of life”. My memory of the book is more about the general descriptions and comparisons of the two systems, or more than two if you go into details. Of course he himself is wery accomplished in bouth of them. Perhaps it is difficult to combine them at higher levels, but what do I know about that realy?? Nothing.
I myself isn’t realy interested either in the Kabbalah system. I come more and more to the conclusion that it is must interesting to follow just one path as much as possible, even though inspiration from other nearby paths might be of interest sometimes. I remember once that I dreamt a dream about Jungian Psychology and the dream told me that it is enough to follow just one theory in depth and to follow many ways at the same time doesn’t realy give anything more than what you can get when following one that suits you. This dream did realy give me a new perspective and I haven’t been such a reader I was before ever since.
Sometimes I feel that I have lost something. My intellectual sharpness. I had a meeting with an old friend of mine the other day. He did new me frome the time when I was wery much an intelectual, with many wide interests. I felt a bit shy to hem for my new me that didn’t have the same vigourous and dynamic intellect. I was telling hem about this, when suddenly a woman, we was at a public place, did turn to us and gave me a paper and told me this is something I think you realy should read. On the paper there was an zenbudist Enso, a calligraphic circle. I emediatly saw a deeper meaning with that symbol, a symbol for emptyness… I did emidiately see how stupid my shyness about my former intelectual me was, and could even see the bigger streangth of the emptyness all my meditaions the last 10 years was worth. It was worth so much more than the intellectualism. The emptyness was me! It was my creative potential to live from the moment and to adapt to the real sitution with all of my personality, without the hindrance of conceptual ideas…
Well my asociation gone away a litle bit from what you did write, that was anyway quite nice 🙂
S DMarch 29, 2010 at 8:15 pm #33701
Well, you are always welcome to come here to
the Healing Tao Retreats that Michael offers 🙂
If money is an issue, you can talk to Michael
or our retreats registrar and get a work-study
and/or extended payment plan.
If you ever even consider coming, you should
just take the plunge and do it. Ideal times in
the future may never come ^_^
StevenMarch 29, 2010 at 8:18 pm #33703
Fair enough. I understand.
You are always welcome to come here and share,
and if you do want to get some training here
in the future, that’s fantastic too.
StevenMarch 29, 2010 at 8:56 pm #33705
I just wanted to comment on something you said:
>>>Sometimes I feel that I have lost something.
>>>My intellectual sharpness. I had a meeting with an
>>>old friend of mine the other day. He did new me frome
>>>the time when I was wery much an intelectual, with many
>>>wide interests. I felt a bit shy to hem for my new me
>>>that didn’t have the same vigourous and dynamic intellect.
>>>I was telling hem about this, when suddenly a woman,
>>>we was at a public place, did turn to us and gave me a
>>>paper and told me this is something I think you realy
>>>should read. On the paper there was an zenbudist Enso,
>>>a calligraphic circle. I emediatly saw a deeper meaning
>>>with that symbol, a symbol for emptyness… I did
>>>emidiately see how stupid my shyness about my former
>>>intelectual me was, and could even see the bigger
>>>streangth of the emptyness all my meditaions the
>>>last 10 years was worth. It was worth so much more
>>>than the intellectualism. The emptyness was me!
>>>It was my creative potential to live from the moment
>>>and to adapt to the real sitution with all of my
>>>personality, without the hindrance of conceptual ideas…
I really don’t think “emptiness” is the goal.
I know a lot of Buddhist practitioners spout that
philosophy, but they really have the idea wrong.
It’s not the “thinking” itself that is the bad thing.
It’s the attachment of ultimate importance to it, that is.
We were born into physicality with certain tools available
to us . . . thinking and intellect being one of them.
It’s not the right idea to try to eliminate this tool;
it is a useful tool after all! It’s just that you want
to recognize it as a tool, and a tool only–and also
recognize that there are other tools that can be
developed (i.e. through spiritual practice) that can
be useful in other ways. The mistake comes from when
we misidentify the tool with “who we actually are”, and
when we “deify” the tool and treat it as the most
important thing to the exclusion of everything else.
You want to identify the “person” or “being” that is
behind it all, and is operating the tools, and not
confuse the tools with the operator; you want to
place the importance on the operator, and not the tools;
but you don’t want to get rid of tools . . . they are useful
for our ability to create and play in this reality.
The real key is what you effectively said in your
last sentence: you want to be free and unlimited in
any given moment to create . . . boxing yourself
in with thoughts and intellect limits you, but
trying to eliminate or “not use” thoughts and intellect
limits you also!! This sounds like a paradox, but
the solution to it is what I tried to outline in the
preceding paragraphs. I hope you could follow it.
See my recent post on the Philosophy page about
“Why Zen is useful . . . ” for more on this topic.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.