Tuesday, July 21, 2009

My Report (2)

I will only disclose the parts of my report that are non-specific. This is the part regarding health issues:
The numbers labeling the paragraphs are not the same as in the original report.

1. Fung Shui is not magic. What Fung Shui can do is to help people tap into the beneficial qi (energy in the metaphysical sense) so that they can perform with efficiency, enjoy a happy and successful life. Regarding illness, what Fung Shui can do is to help people distancing themselves from sickness qi (metaphysical energy) and to help people to absorb the healthy or good qi thus strengthening the body and to be lucky to receive the best medical care. Whether or not the patient can recover still depends on how serious the illness is. Fung Shui practices are usually directed at the residence of the patient, and typically involve at a minimum making adjustments in the bedroom, the kitchen and the main door. Some Fung Shui practices involve relocation of the bed/desk/sofa/stove/door so that the patient can receive healthy energy at rest. Some would involve choosing the time when health energy is strong to make the Fung Shui setting more effective. Different schools use different techniques. For many schools no special technique is required.

2. In Fung Shui practices, we cannot guarantee any result. We can just say that we can reasonably expect certain results from fung shui practices. Typical fung shui techniques might involve relocating the patient to receive healthy energy so that he can recover from illness or to enjoy better health and/or longevity.

3. It is suggested by the Plaintiff’s witnesses that the digging of holes in 2005 was related to Nina’s health problems. Digging large holes activate earth energies. In most cases, it will not help a patient to recover. There is a general principle that one should avoid any movement of the earth (動 土) when health is at stake. If the inappropriate energy is disturbed, it will make matters worse.


Saturday, July 18, 2009

My Report

In this series of articles, I will provide some first hand information about the case to clarify something disclosed by the press.

This first article is the introductory paragraph of my report:

1. The profession of Fung Shui is not regulated. Usually we classify Fung Shui consultants under the categories (1) scholarly researchers and (2) professional consultants. The former is also known as the Academic School (Xue Yuan Pai 學院派) while the latter as the Commercial School (Jiang Hu Pai 江湖派). The Chinese term for the latter carries a negative meaning as most of the commercial practitioners only know the how but not necessarily the why regarding to their practices. The scholars, on the other hand, may know the theory quite well but often lack practical experience.

2. I started studying and researching into the theoretical background of Fung Shui while I was studying at the University of Hong Kong. The knowledge of Mathematics and Physics helps me tremendously in understanding and deciphering the ancient Fung Shui classics. Although I became a full-time Fung Shui practitioner after moving to Toronto, Canada, I think it is more appropriate to consider myself belonging to the category of scholarly researchers. Since I have been traveling to teach and practise Fung Shui all around the world, my practical experience covers Hong Kong, Singapore, Malaysia, Brunei, India, Australia, Israel, Greece, Russia, Austria, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom, South Africa, Canada, USA, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, and Chile. The practical experience confirms what I learned from the books.

3. In 1998, I founded Feng Shui Research Center to offer education in Chinese Metaphysics. To date, Feng Shui Research Center has branches in many of the countries I have referred to above.
My CV is included at the end of this report.


Saturday, July 11, 2009


There is some misunderstanding on reports by journalists that the judge abruptly ceased the cross-examination during my session of testimony. Here I hope that the situation can be clarified.

The work of an expert witness consists of two parts: to write a report based on the witness statements by various witnesses with reference to the field of expertise of the expert witness. In this case it is Feng Shui (known as Fung Shui in Hong Kong). The second part is to appear in court to be cross-examined by the barrister of the opposite side. Usually the cross-examination is focussed on the expert witness report. Most of the time, the barrister tries to find fault with what is written.

The first expert witness Mr. Szeto was cross-examined and it was pointed out that his report plagiarized a website and contained false information. It took over 3 hours and the barrister tried to impress the judge that his report is not trustworthy.

When it was my turn, the barrister did not mention anything from my report but instead began with my biography that is on my website. He asked whether my standpoint of vowing to destroy the superstitious part in Fung Shui. My answer was positive.

He then asked whether I considered Mao Shan and black magic Fung Shui practices. My answer was negative. He then asked whether I know Mao Shan and black magic and I admitted that I did not know and this topic was beyond my scope of expertise. He then asked whether I consider anything I did not know as not Fung Shui. I explained that even though I may not know certain practices, I could use common sense to tell that they were not Fung Shui.

At this point the judge took over to ask me whether my Fung Shui knowlege came from self-study. I said it was 90% from books and the other 10% was guided study by my master. When I asked the master something, there was no direct answer but he pointed to certain chapters of a certain book. When I thought I understood something, then I reported to my master. If he turned away without a comment, then I knew I was wrong and did further research until he was satisfied with my research work. That was the way I learned.

The judge then asked if I encountered something that I did not understand but made no sense to me, would I consider it not Fung Shui. I said I would not consider it Fung Shui as Fung Shui is a study that is based on logical development.

The judge then told the barrister there was no need to further cross-examine me. What I understood was that the judge had asked the questions on behalf of the barrister and he fully understood the point and therefore there was no need to carry on. He then asked the barrister who defended Tony Chan whether he had anything to supplement. He said not and the cross-examination was over.

It must be noted that the judge did not order to adjourn the cross-examination and had the barristers wanted to continue, the cross-examination could have continued.