[QUOTE=theo;1069527]Scott, what I’m saying is that the ancients had a process to develop and reproduce the art, or a process of transmission. if they weren’t good at what they did, then why would we all be doing this? as hendrik pointed out, we’re just looking at what is Natural here and what works, technology. Can someone take that technology and make it work. It’s a process and method of passing the art on. understand the point of the story, but to get the right result, you’ve got to take the right steps. as it has been done for so many years, there is a way to get there and we can either try following it or reinterpret it and try and have a million different opinions on what it’s supposed to mean. the human body can only move in so many ways, so we’re not talking about becoming invisible or qi blasts or anything, but a deeper awareness and handling of the entire body, getting back to Nature. not sure what lineage you come from, but the concept of “internal” exists in all of the red boat lineages. to quote Leung Jan, “your power must be internal”. this is well defined and there is a process of attaining it, that is the transmission Hendrik describes. so if we’re just going to use our own scientific hypothesis and assumptions in the manner of if we can’t prove it then it’s not real kind of mindset (although some experiments have been done to prove, don’t have the facts on me though) maybe we’re missing part of the picture.[/QUOTE]
Hi Theo,
You have explained yourself very well! I appreciate that you have taken the time to do so. I cannot argue with a thing you have said.
I am not intending to state or imply the process you are addressing is useless or ineffective. I am saying that Hendrik presents himself and the method he follows to readers here as different and special and that no one can understand it or apply it effectively unless one is taught by a master. (something he really doesn’t actually know, although he clearly believes it)
I am familiar with more than one method of internal development. All of these methods follow a similar method, process, technology, even cross culturally, just as all forms of martial art follow the same IDENTICAL foundational principles. While there is some differences in application and performance of actions, so to speak, the underlying principles always remain the same. The claim that this particular method is different and special and unlearnable except when taught by a recognized master is specious as long no evidence is provided in which to measure that claim.
There have been many books over the years written on methods of internal development. Whether one can gain any benefits from these may be debated, however the point is they HAVE been written, which means the processes, may be outlined in a clear and concise manner for all to read. EXCEPT, apparently, Hendrik’s method!
Hendrik’s unwillingness or inability to explain himself or his process effectively and the subtle demeaning and dismissive attitude with which he treats others when pressed to give explanations gives the impression of insincerity, untruthfulness and having something to hide. Not to mention it is rude, which is something he refuses to recognize or acknowledge. Yet he presents himself as a teacher of internal arts, which have the purpose of not just improving ones health, but supposedly ones spiritual and emotional maturity. Qualities his pattern of behavior clearly demonstrates he lacks!
If this is a process that he is unwilling to share openly online, then it never should have been mentioned online, unless all he is doing is trying drum up followers.
Think of it this way: What if someone came online and said, “Hey everybody, I just cured cancer! It is easy to do with practice. Anyone can do it, BUT I am afraid I cannot share it with anyone or tell it to anyone, because you just wouldn’t understand!
Isn’t that just what Hendrik is doing here? Isn’t this just the same method used for centuries by “Snake Oil” salesmen? Present something with implied value, but withhold it from an eager and interested public? This is both unkind and unfair to those who are interested in the method. It would have been better not to present anything at all.
So while your explanation, so far, is the best explanation presented on the this thread, it still does not provide any meaningful information. All we have is your anecdotal information, and Hendrik making vague and illusive comments about “popcorn”! Is it any wonder then, that some people are being a bit harsh with Hendrik?
Once again, I really do appreciate your response. It was very well stated and it is very clear and reasonable! Thank you!