The Art of KanYu

The classics say: -

Using the Map Luck as the body, Book Luck as the application, this way (of application) is the usual. Using the Map to explore the Book, Book to explore the Map, This is the method of transformation.

If these phrases braced the essence of YangGong Fengshui, then all method practiced to date has been faulted. Similarly if one sees Fengshui as The Burial Classic says: Qi rides the wind and scatters, but is retained when encountering water. The ancients collected it to prevent its dissipation, and guided it to assure its retention. Thus it was called Fengshui (and) according to the laws of Fengshui, the site which attracts water is optimum, followed by the site which catches wind, and then all method practice to date has also faulted. The ancient never called it KanYu for any reason. The key is to know there is no such a thing as Feng and Shui. This is the first fallacy.

ZhangShu has this to say: Earth is the receptacle of Qi, where there is earth there is Qi. Qi is the mother of water, where there is Qi there is water. If by any standards one were to hold on to this essence, then all method practice to date has also faulted. It is not the earth we are reckoned with. Why ride the Qi when we don’t even know if it has life? Similarly if the notion of a death Qi were to be discarded, there will also be no ShengQi. Similarly if Qi is not being born, why worried of it being dead? This is the second fallacy.

If there is no Qi to sit on, what is there to sit? The classics stressed the importance of sitting as compared to facing. It is never in the context of the term to sit and to face, currently practiced. If one were to replace such with the term in and out, one will be able to read it differently. This is the third fallacy. Had one ever asked, why would one given 2 eyes, 2 nostrils, two ears but only one mouth? Knowing the in and knowing the out, do one still need to sit? This is the third fallacy.

XuanKong is never about activation of the stars. This was created evolved into something else to make believes. The essence to XuanKong on its original name, Yuan and Kong is an art of doorways. The closest is liked a roller coaster. What goes up will come down. What comes down will go up. Does this sound any closer to the famed DianDian Dao theory of the YangGong method? Even if it is far off different by any standard of understanding according to a specific body that gazettes the authenticity of the body of knowledge not knowing this is the fourth fallacy.

The whole entire corpus of knowledge could be screwed up, but the real will remain real be it in SanHe, SanYuan or whatever names one would like to call. Remember, there is a reason why the key was kept only by these hardly 12 families. Similarly, there is also reason, for any Chinese descendants to have a family name. If the Chinese were to share the same forefather, the arts will remain within the descendants of these forefathers and it can never be of a person. For once, I knew the death could talk.

Ar. David Yek Tak Wai