Kan/Li vs. Water method

[ZIM]

This is probably a can of worms...;)

Anybody got any thoughts about differences, effectiveness, etc. of these two methods? Any preferences, and why?

For those who don't know what I'm referring to, Taoist Water Method is the one Kumar Frantzis does, Kan & Li [fire and water] is Mantak Chia.

Thanks :)

[PLCrane]

It's been awhile since I've heard Michael Winn give his explanation of this, but what I recall is that Frantzis claims that his is a water method and Chia's (Microcosmic Orbit) is a fire method. Winn says that it's an inaccurate characterization, because both systems are fire and water methods.

Kan and Li rocks! I can't speak from experience on Kumar's system, 'cause I've never done it.

[QuaiJohnCain]

Kumar just put a twist on semantics to promote his own system. If you examine his "dissolving" techniques, it's easy to see that it's not much different from "the Inner Smile". Kumar's basic definition of a water method is one that uses little more than relaxation and gentle focus of the mind to penetrate blockages versus using vigorous breathing and visualisation to produce a charge to "burn" through a blockage. Semantics. He could have used the words "gentle" and "forceful" and it would make more sense.

[ZIM]

I don't have any experience with the water method, except from reading up on it trying to understand it. I'd agree on the surface that there's semantics involved, yet Mantak Chia at one point made a statement regarding claims that Kumar was making and I've yet to have seen any response.

While I don't have the statement to hand, the bulk of the argument went like so: Kumar stated that fire/water was forceful and water method was superior because it wasn't. Chia stated that water method could be seen as 'frozen water' because there was no opposition in it and thus no movement could be generated from it.

From what I'm understanding, this isn't the case, but it seems like a strange argument... on the whole I think that Chia was more interested in getting Kumar to stop making absurd claims than to contradict his experience or lineage.

[QuaiJohnCain]

Originally posted by ZIM
I don't have any experience with the water method, except from reading up on it trying to understand it. I'd agree on the surface that there's semantics involved, yet Mantak Chia at one point made a statement regarding claims that Kumar was making and I've yet to have seen any response.

While I don't have the statement to hand, the bulk of the argument went like so: Kumar stated that fire/water was forceful and water method was superior because it wasn't. Chia stated that water method could be seen as 'frozen water' because there was no opposition in it and thus no movement could be generated from it.

From what I'm understanding, this isn't the case, but it seems like a strange argument... on the whole I think that Chia was more interested in getting Kumar to stop making absurd claims than to contradict his experience or lineage.


Here's a link to the article you referred to:
http://www.healingtaousa.com/cgi-bin/articles.pl?rm=mode2&articleid=1

Kumar once described the water method as converting ice directly to a gaseous state (like dry ice evaporating) versus melting it with fire. Not a good analogy if you consider physics. Dry ice won't evaporate unless it is placed in an environment that is at a higher temperature than itself. Fire.

The technical difference between water and fire methods is this: in the water method you use your awareness to maintain posture, follow the breath, and "relax into" blockages. A fire approach would employ the awareness to maintain posture as well, but instead of merely relaxing and breathing naturally, more vigorous breathing is used (think of rebirthing breathing) as well as active metal visualisation of energy penetrating blockages, versus just watching them and relaxing.

Now, if you take Michael Winn's idea of the mind/awareness as fire, both approaches are water and fire. One just uses more fire than the other.

Is one "superior" to the other? Not really. A more firey method can certainly be more dangerous, however. It's highly individual. Kumar himself admits this.

Back when I first began Taoist meditation, I would breath vigorously enough to activate my olfactory bulb, while focusing a visualisation of energy coagulating at my dan tien. I continued this way for a year or so until my teacher said, "just maintain your posture, breath naturally, and put your mind at dan tien." So instead of projecting images into my dan tien, I simply "looked" at it. I also would "smell", "listen", "taste", and FEEL it. This really got my mind to shut up. When some tension popped up, I would simply be aware of it, and just relaxed and kept going. Quite often the tension relaxed away all on it's own. I kept this up and was soon able to circulate. But that was just my experience, it's all highly individual. :p

[PLCrane]

One of the simplist Kan and Li methods I learned from Micael Winn is to let your awareness descend into the body, and everywhere your mind (fire) touches your body (water), you make steam. This is a much gentler practice that the standard formula with all its pearls, buckets and other details. We did this near the winter solstice, with the idea that a more yin practice was appropriate for a more yin season.