Sloppy Zhang

Keeping in mind that I do not research and study every known sage of history or legend...

I don't think that all were. Just like I don't think that all of them were physical alchemists, diviners, healers, tradesmen, teachers, etc etc.

I think that they all realized the tao through their unique path. So I think some of them could have reached it through martial arts.

As a consequence of realizing the tao, they see (saw?) the tao in everything, thus, they could do anything the situation required.

Which includes fighting.

Were they all martial artists as we might call them today? Probably not.

Were some of them? Probably.

Did they all realize the tao? Yes.

Could they have fought, had the tao flowed in that direction? I believe so, yes.

But again, as someone had pointed out in the taoist magic thread I started, us observing might see that they are doing various different things- fighting, magic, etc etc, but to a sage, they are just following the energy, changing, and following again. But to us, we wee a mountain moved, or an army of enemies defeated. So in the case of a sage, hard to say.

[edit] Just typing into google "tao te ching 15", I came upon a translation from here

"The ancient Masters were profound and subtle.

Their wisdom was unfathomable.

There is no way to describe it;

all we can describe is their appearance.

 

They were careful

as someone crossing an iced-over stream.

Alert as a warrior in enemy territory.

Courteous as a guest.

Fluid as melting ice.

Shapable as a block of wood.

Receptive as a valley.

Clear as a glass of water.

 

Do you have the patience to wait

till your mud settles and the water is clear?

Can you remain unmoving

till the right action arises by itself?

 

The Master doesn't seek fulfillment.

Not seeking, not expecting,

she is present, and can welcome all things."

Interesting translation given our discussion, and useful. I've added bold to the line in particular. Now maybe that's a good translation, maybe not, but it conveys the point I'm trying to make:

"Can you remain unmoving till the right action arises by itself?"

In the context of the martial arts, this is not to seek a fight, nor is it to constantly avoid a fight because you think fighting is not the way. It is to not make a judgment, it is to just observe, and act when it is necessary.

Now maybe it is to fight. Maybe it is to do something else. Maybe it is to do nothing. All of these things are EQUALLY possible.

The whole, "well if you know how to fight then you seek out more fights" or "well you should avoid all fights" is, when talking from this kind of taoist perspective, very much NOT the way of the tao, because you have already made up your mind regardless of the situation! Rather, see what the situation calls for, where the energy is flowing, and act in accordance with that.

Maybe fight, maybe not. In seeking tao, I'd say don't get stuck in one or the other.

As per our discussion in the other thread, I'm not advocating "going out and fighting" per se, I'm advocating being able to fight competently should you need to, as such, I can't really support the "avoid all fights", because while it's a good strategy, it's not always what the situation calls for. So, like fighting- use it when the situation calls for it.

Hello Sloppy Zhang,

 

I understand what you're saying. I think we're just going around in circles, so perhaps we should accept that we've expressed our views and move on. I accept that some people feel martial arts as a form of self defense is appropriate and there's nothing wrong with that. Now if you accept that some people feel it isn't then we can talk about more important things, like how screwed up Luke must have been when he realized he kissed his sister... wow... talk about scarring. I have doubts that any amount of jedi training will get rid of that.

 

Aaron

No, you have still dodged, on two occasions, an important question that I have asked you:

What would YOU do if you were in a situation such that fighting were unavoidable? What would YOU do if you saw someone being attacked, or otherwise physically victimized, and you lived in an area that SFJane described, where police response can take upwards of 20 mins?

Would you speak up? Would you step forward? Would you keep your head down? Would you yield?

Twinner,

 

I am in agreement with you.

 

I've reached an age where I realize a lot of the

man attitude towards fighting and doing so, is really

a major distraction from the True Path of Tao to me.

 

As a younger man I can remember not feeling sure of myself,

and resorting to the kind of behavior to "prove" I was a tough

guy, by fighting.

 

The judgment placed on us as being weak, or unmanly by

seeking to avoid physical violence, is counter to what I have

experienced in life, after I moved beyond that very limited point

of view.

 

True strength is having the ability to control your reactions,

and not give in to feeling the need to "do" anything. Sometimes,

non-action is much more important...and safer.

 

The truth is... we help to create the situations we are immersed in

by the sometimes poor choices we make, way in advance of the events that

then take place at a later time. Action/ reaction, Causality...and

the bullheadedness of young inexperienced men acting on the motivation

of a deep seated fear.

 

I applaud the clarity of what you have said...

 

And believe the Tao Te Ching is the best representation of this

Sagely ability to read the circumstace to such a degree, that avoiding

confrontation and physical violence, becomes a second nature.

 

Peace to you!

I would like to say that I agree with this 100%. Looking back, I can see my own causes in many of the fights I got into. Of course, each of those gave me important lessons. But still, my own fault.

I can see how stupid it is, and I agree that many fights are caused by notions of "strength", "weakness", labels, etc etc. Many people think they have to fight, when in reality they do not have so. So many situations are our own doing.

Many, but not all.

Well, no physical causes. If you believe your karma puts you in situations, then it's your own fault. I don't know how I feel about that. But there are some instances in which you are just not the cause of the situation, other than that you are there to (potentially) be a victim.

Hello Sloppy Zhang,

 

There is absolutely no way to defend against that. Everytime you step out your door something bad might happen. It's not necessarily a mugger, it could be a terrorist or even food poisoning. I tend not to worry about those things so much and just live my life to the best of my ability.

I don't really know what you mean by "there's no way to defend against that". Not sure what you're referring to when you say "that", could you clarify?

I agree with you that bad stuff can happen no matter what. But just because you are cognizant of the risk, does not mean you are afraid. Just because you take precautions, does not mean you are living in fear.e

In regards to the Sages being martial artists, I'm very much a philisophical Taoist with bits of mysticism thrown in, so I'm not big on alchemy, the i-ching, the immortals, or magic per se. I believe that if the Sages were martial artists, then Lao Tzu would've presented them as such, and in my opinion I don't see that.

I added emphasis to the word "philosophical", because that's really what you're talking about. But philosophy alone does nothing- you have to apply it. I think, with the philosophy present in the tao te ching, you can apply it everywhere. Lao Tzu did not say every situation in which one can carry out the philosophy he presented, and if he tried, it would be futile- the potential applications are limitless.

One can certainly be in combat yet still be in accordance with the tao te ching. Combat is an aspect of life. It may happen to some more frequently than others. It may not happen to some people at all. But it does not mean combat is going against wu-wei. Rather, combat can be the area in which wu-wei is realized.

Again, as Jess O pointed out, not everyone wants to travel the path of the martial arts cultivator. Not everyone is willing to do what Miyamoto Musashi did, fighting duels to the death his entire life before realizing enlightenment (of some kind, at least that's what I hear)

But just because you choose not to do that, does not mean that combat should be avoided. What should be avoidance is stagnation. And if avoiding fights is carried to such a degree that it causes stagnation, well, perhaps it's time to examine your beliefs.

Again, if you like martial arts or feel the need to study martial arts for any reason, that's fine. My argument is that one should do it for the right reason.

I agree that one should study for the right reason. But I also think that one should USE it in the right reason (and sometimes that DOES mean NOT using it)

I find it rather irksome that it's such a prevalent belief that, "if you want to learn martial arts to actually be able to fight, then you're doing it wrong, stop seeking fights, that's not the way". I also find it rather irksome that people live under the belief (yes, it is a belief, because it is believed despite many situations which are to the contrary) that, "well we live in a world of guns, learning how to fight is meaningless".

I attended Job Corp for two years. I'm not sure if you know about it, but most of the people that are in Job Corp are court mandated or have been kicked out of school and have nowhere else to go. Anyways, I had to navigate a sea or red and blue, crips, bloods, BGD, and posse. I never once got in a fight, because I understood the rules, you stay low, mind your own bussiness and don't pick sides. Now on the other side of the coin, you can't show weakness either. Wu-Wei in that instance was learning when you couldn't back down.

That's great. I agree completely. And you know what? Sometimes it works out that way. But it doesn't always work out that way. And it doesn't always work out that way for everyone. Did you ever see a friend of yours attacked? Did you ever see an innocent person who you didn't know attacked? Have you stood on the sidelines and watched as people were victimized, and you wanted to help, but couldn't? Because I have, and it sucks. I do not think that's wu-wei. I don't think that's compassionate. I don't think that is fitting the behavior of a sage, enlightened person, or even just a well developed human being.

Keeping your head down is great when that conforms with the situation, when it follows wu-wei to keep your head down. But what if keeping your head down causes harm, leads to stagnation, and corruption? I ask you again: what would YOU do?

There is a way to survive without resorting to violence. And even if you do end up encountering a violent person, there is no certainty that martial arts will defend you, in fact the chances are, if you are killed outside your home, you'll most likely be shot rather than beaten to death (this is conjecture, I don't have stats to prove this, consider it a dramatic exercise). So if I do study martial arts (and I am going to start learning Tai Chi and Qi-Gong) it's not because I want to defend myself (which isn't really something that will happen with either of those anyways), but rather to enrich my understanding of the principles of Tao on another level.

Again, this is kind of a warped way of looking at things. Just because some people have guns, some people use guns, and some people are shot, does not automatically mean if you are going to be in an encounter, all of your martial arts will be useless because the person will have a gun. That is just not the case. I'm sure if you think a bit, maybe back to what you described at Job Corp, you'd realize how this exaggerated way of looking at things is not doing you much benefit- did every potentially dangerous person you've ever met carry a gun? Did ever potentially dangerous situation that you may have gotten yourself into end with someone shooting you? I think not. Plenty of people injured, if not killed, are done so with weapons such as knives, or other blunt weapons, or are done so with fists. Some maybe are even ganged up on (three or four or maybe five people) and are beaten. Maybe a martial art like bagua, which can take on 8 people at a time, would be quite helpful in those situations......

Now would you want a bagua which you KNOW works, or which you BELIEVE works based on what your teacher has told you?

See this is what I like about the internal martial arts- you don't HAVE to fight. Their use is not JUST for fighting. As Gerard has pointed out, you can go your whole life and never fight, but still reap benefits, physical, energetic, spiritual, etc, of your practice. And if following wu-wei leads you into a battle, you can follow wu-wei out of a battle.

But, you've got to have the tools to do that. And that includes training in a spiritual discipline that actually lets you DO what it is it says it can do, and if it's a martial discipline, actually lets you DO what it says it can do (namely, fight people). If it's both, and you expect to use it as both, you gotta train it as both.

Hello SZ,

 

The gun issue might be true, but my statement about avoiding conflict is still valid. In the event that a homeless man attempts to assault me, I will run, very fast. If that doesn't work, then I will fight if I adsolutely have to. I'm not saying one shouldn't fight, I'm just saying that if I'm smart the chances this will happen will be slim at best.

Yes, I agree with all of this.

My point is that: in the slim chance that it might happen, do you want something that you believe works, or something that you know works?

I want something that I know works.

First I will avoid anyone who looks like they might assault me. Second, I will avoid neighborhoods that I think I might be assaulted in, and last, but most importantly, I will do my best to mind my own bussiness (wu-wei at its finest) and thus reduce my chances of any of this happening dramatically.

Again, great, I agree 100%

I'm not even saying studying martial arts is wrong, rather I would recommend that if self-defense is the reason you're learning martial arts, then there are better alternatives that require less time and effort, mace comes to mind.

Again, you've got to justify the use of force. The person you mace, even if they may have been acting sketchy, could sue you for hurting THEM. Competency in martial arts, especially something like bagua, which could be used to deflect and evade, could easily avoid these problems. There will be no issue with necessary use of force, and you can avoid further legal problems.

For me, learning martial arts because you feel a need to defend yourself stems from fear, if you are that afraid that you need to learn martial arts, perphaps the healthiest thing to do is examine exactly why you are afraid?

Same thing that I said to Gerard- preparation does not mean the presence of fear.

Do you keep a flashlight in your home with fresh batteries? Do you have a fire escape plan? Do you lock your door at night?

It's not fear, it's precaution. It's knowing the risks, knowing the chances, and even though you know it's slim, you play it safe.

My nephew learned Karate for instance, not out of fear, but because he thought it was "awesome". I can understand that reasoning and I never discouraged him from his pursuit. However if he came to me and said "I want to learn Karate because the kids at school are bullying me" I would've said, well that's a poor reason to learn Karate.

I learned karate because the kids at school were bullying me. It was a great decision.

Bullies are tricky. Going to teachers and parents does not work. But at the same time, kicking the crap out of them doesn't work either. It's kinda the same with necessary use of force- being the good guy sucks. You have to defend yourself, but you also can't hurt the other person, because of legal action (or if you're lofty, you take moral aversion to beating up someone even if one could say they deserve it)

However, karate, and other self defense methods, teach DECISIVE techniques which disengage from the harassers, let them know you are physically capable, that you do not want to get into a fight, but if they press it, you know how to defend yourself. You don't have to hurt someone to send a message. Their inability to hurt you can send a message.

After I got rid of the bully situation (elementary school), I NEVER had a problem with bullies in my own situation. But do you know what I DID have? Bullies in OTHER peoples' lives. People who were bullies to someone else. So, what do you do then? Mind your own business? I tried that. I watched as some guy got harassed by the same two guys every day. When the two guys were around, I did nothing. When the two were away, I tried to console the kid. It was a big school, I had moved to a new district, there were some rough people in the school, it was middle school, 6th grade, and there were 7th and 8th graders who were more fully developed physically, and some were in gangs. I wanted to help this kid, but I didn't want to get into a physical fight with a gang.

Well, that kid decided to hit the gym himself, beat the crap out of one of his bullies, got suspended from school, joined a gang, and I don't know where he went after that.

Humans are physical. We live in a physical world. We have physical abilities. We have physical problems. That is a FACT. That is the human condition. What kind of wu-wei would ignore a basic reality of the human condition?

I am not advocating that one seeks fights. I am advocating that people are COMPETENT and CAPABLE when a physical fight seeks THEM.

If one learns to practice the principles of the Tao Teh Ching in their lives then I think there is absolutely no need to learn martial arts for self defense.

You keep thinking that! Then try stepping outside one day.

Oh, that's right, I forgot:

Without going outside, you may know the whole world.

Without looking through the window, you may see the ways of heaven.

The farther you go, the less you know.

Thus the sage knows without travelling;

He sees without looking;

He works without doing.

- Tao Te Ching, 47 (translation by Gia-fu Feng and Jane English)

I'm positive that none of the Sages were martial artists, rather they had an intuitive understanding of how the world worked and how to interact with the world in a way that was harmonious.

The legends say Zhang Sanfeng (a.k.a. Sloppy Zhang ) created tai chi (though we can trace it historically to Chen village... mostly) B.K. Frantzis talks about in high levels of bagua that one no longer fights based on what the opponents are doing- but that they just flow with the energy. To an external observer, it looks like a fight.

In a taoist magic thread, I believe it was stig (if it is not, my apologies to who it was) who said that the magician just changes with the energy, other people perceive it as magic (wording it like that, maybe it was goldisheavy? again, apologies for my lack of recollection!)

So to the sage, he/she may just be walking the circle, flowing with energy.

Of course, both of them produce the same physical result: success in a fight.

Perhaps the best thing to do, if you feel the need to defend yourself, is figure out why you need to defend yourself and then how you might avoid having the need to defend yourself.

There are people in this world who take offense to the fact that you are living, breathing, and in their field of vision.

There are people in this world who take offense to the fact that someone else (you may or may not know) is living, breathing, and in their field of vision, as well as your own.

They want to end, or seriously disrupt that life.

How would YOU deal with that scenario?

Hello SZ,

 

I never said that every time someone wants to hurt you, it's with a gun, you're implying something that isn't there, I said, that if one really wants to defend themselves, a gun would be better.

It was a deliberate overstatement made sarcastically. Which is why I even put sarcasm tags. I guess sarcasm really is hard to convey over the internet

My point is, guns, in many situations, are overkill. Guns are not always used, and there is not always a reason to use guns.

In fact, in many areas (at least in the US) there is what's called "necessary use of force". In the event that you are in an altercation and that altercation is being investigated by law, you are going to need to defend the actions you took. If you pull out a glock and blow someone away, you better have a damn good reason. And, depending on your area, unless you have a bunch of licenses and stuff, you might not even have the gun accessible when you need it. And even if you carry it openly, the only bad guys you are going to deter are the small fries- determined attackers, such as those intent on killing you, or those with guns, are going to do so, even if you are carrying your gun.

There are an infinite amount of possible situations in which hand to hand self defense would be relevant and applicable.

Some things you can't avoid, but most of the time, as someone else pointed out, if you're in a place where you need to fight, you've probably put yourself in that place. The Tao Teh Ching has nothing to do with fighting, not even remotely. Martial Arts came as a result of a need to defend oneself in a time when people were still using spears, swords, and bows and arrows. The people studying these arts were Taoist so they applied Taoist concepts to their martial arts, but that doesn't mean that Lao Tzu ever encouraged martial arts as a means of wu-wei or as an expression of Tao.

Has it ever occurred to anybody that the rigid aversion to fighting and combat because it is "not wu-wei" is, in and of itself, an obstruction to wu-wei?

If a mentally deranged person encounters you on the street, and possibly starts physically harassing you (keeping in mind that this is a situation that can happen even in a "safe" area even in broad daylight), and you sit there and take it because "fighting is not wu-wei", then you are effectively sitting there stagnating as someone proceeds to do whatever they please with you, as you await whatever fate to befall you.

I have a little story about when I first learned wing chun that illustrates this: My new teacher was instructing me on how to use a 45 degree angle of my arm to block a wide arced punched (like a haymaker punch). I had a karate background, so he told me, "not rigid like karate, you wanna be relaxed." So I relaxed my arm. My partner swung, hit my arm, and my open palm smacked me right in the face.

My teacher told me, "relax, not limp, firm, but not rigid".

Just because you decide that fighting is not your approach to life, does not mean that you just turn into a limp noodle as soon as a physically tense situation starts, and should any fights break out, you just don't do anything.

Again, avoidance is most of the battle. In no way do I disagree with what anyone has said on the issue. Most systems of self defense teach avoidance strategies, basic sociology/psychology, mentality of groups, attackers, victims, etc etc. Knowing the neighborhood, knowing the dangerous parts of town, knowing where is safe and unsafe during what times of day will do a lot. But, again, as SFJane illustrated, sometimes it just doesn't happen that you don't get into fights. Maybe part of wu-wei is finding that you've been put into sticky situations, and knowing how to get out of them in one piece, whether you need to adopt the attributes of firm or soft.

It just seems rigid that one will not even consider the option that perhaps sometimes fighting happens, and maybe knowing how to fight would be, you know, fitting of a man of the tao..... but I guess not everyone's looking at it like that.

I appreciate that you wanted to clarify the mistakes in my argument, but I would recommend that you spend some time clarifying what I've said in the future, before responding. After all my comment would be considered hard, perhaps the best response would've been soft.

 

Aaron

I'll try to avoid using sarcasm when speaking with you in the future, then

If you think Tao is about self-defense, you need to wake up. There isn't a fist in the universe that can stop a bullet. If you want to defend yourself, go buy a glock,

Because every time someone wants to hurt you, it's with a gun. [/sarcasm]

if you want to learn how to stay alive without having someone beat the crap out of you, then read the Tao Teh Ching... it's about avoiding conflict.

 

Aaron

Because avoidance works 100% of the time [/sarcasm] Take a look at SFJane's rather excellent post- sometimes shit happens, and you are there!

Next I urge you to share whatever you feel you have to share for the sake of the many, many who sit on the sidelines and read TTB hoping to glean some kernels of knowledge, wisdom and inspiration.

Excellent point! There are lots of lurkers here- people who read but are not members. There are also lots of members who read but don't post. So when you post something, who knows how far it reaches? Maybe someone years from now will do a web search and find the material that you posted here.

So to remove it, or just not even post it, because of how you feel about the "quality" of discussion in the present, well, who knows what you have denied to present anonymous readers and future seekers?

I actually disagree. Hehehe. This is the first time since I have been here that I have been able to do that.

 

If the person you called an asshole actually was being an asshole then you were simply stating a fact. I see no reason why you should be banned because, afterall, you were just stating a fact and I am sure it could be varified by others.

Though I'd contend that it's not a statement of fact, but a statement of opinion, I think the context should be taken into consideration.

If it's one thread, been a pretty vicious back and forth, a lot of harsh statements, leading up to a final, "you're an asshole", then I don't think banning should be considered. I'd also suggest against an immediate temporary suspension. If it's a heated discussion, and someone flings something one way, well, sometimes that happens.

Tell the people to chill, and encourage them to walk away. If they can't, close the thread for a couple of days (but then re-open it), or send them a warning via PM to chill, or if they won't, temporarily suspend them for a day or two, but then let them come back.

However, if two or more people are chasing after one another, and each new thread they both talk in turns into a battle ground for their personal grudges, well more serious action is in order, I think.

Well, if you've got an experienced teacher, who is also sensitive to energy or familiar with other systems, try asking them specifically about another system you are into, and if it will mesh. If you ask a general question about combining systems, you will get the general answer that sometimes it's okay, sometimes it's not!

For me, a guy practicing on his own, I gotta feel it out. Frantzis' published material is my base that I work with. My core practice routine. Anything else I do either meshes well with that, or I don't practice it. In the past, exploring other systems sounded like they'd go together in theory, but in application I felt my body was starting to go out of whack. So I dropped the practice immediately, and resumed with my usual practices for about two weeks, then tried again. I'd repeat that process about three times, then drop the system.

Usually stuff I do that isn't strictly Frantzis' material is stuff that is natural that I've been doing my whole life, or things that arose spontaneously during practice, or things that have meshed pretty much instantly as soon as I picked them up.

To be honest though, the kind of stuff that will mesh, for me, anyway, is few and far between. Frantzis' methods are pretty unique for me, as are their feel (again, for me). It's water method, but even it doesn't always blend well (for me) with other water method practices, even if the theory is the same. I can learn a lot about myself and the way I'm doing things by looking into other systems, and talking with their practitioners, but doing their practice just doesn't yield the same result (for me).

But the thing is, most well developed, complete systems have their own ways of doing things that other systems do. There's really no need to mix systems if you are working with a complete system. If you have an incomplete system, or incomplete knowledge, studying another system can teach you what you don't know. If you're a beginner, or even just want another perspective, another system can give it to you. However, with a full system, combining arts probably isn't necessary.

I'm not familiar with wild goose qigong, so I dunno how full of a system it is, even in theory.

So feel it out!

Nada

Actual study means just what it says.

I am always amazed at people who think Medical Qigong can be learned from a book. Do the same folks think brain surgery can be learned just from reading a book? How about world-class tennis playing? Read a book and be able to do it? How about any number of subjects that require much more than reading?

 

Acupuncture training and medical qigong training require the same intense study. So, read a book and think you now know how to properly stick a needle in - whoops. So read a book and think you now properly know how to repair a broken bone with medical qigong - whoops.

No; it doesn't work that way.

If anyone doesn't subscribe to this then the next time they are in need of a doctor should they just go to some lay person who has read a book? Need surgery? Why, Jim down the street read a book or two on it. Anyone who thinks this should just show a book on acupuncture to a friend and ask them to put needles in? And then they should just grin and like it because that is all that is needed? Sheesh

 

One can learn about something by reading a book. Not the same thing as studying it.

Oh, I completely agree with you!

But not everyone else holds that same viewpoint, and it's surprising how many INSTITUTIONS do not hold that same view.

Which is why my point in saying be careful about schools saying they'll teach you stuff. A lot of times you just give up a shit ton of money and they tell you what books to read, then send you on your merry way, which you could have done for free anyway! So either you're a brilliant person who succeeds in self study, or you wind up screwing yourself and/or other people up.

UMM when it comes to walking, yes you can. I dont care what they want to say, anatomy is anatomy, movement is movement. If he is walking that way more forces are being placed on the knees than what is healthy according to modern standards. This is what I mean dude by mumbo jumbo, its just NOT the case, atleast not in this situation.He may do it his whole life and feel nothing, there are are many factors at play as to why he woud or wouldnt feel pain which does not mean that he is not causing damage. Progressive Damage can be done with no pain felt ever.

 

 

The reason that it is unhealthy is because walking is one of mans most basic, foundational and essential functions. AND WE DONT WALK THAT WAY and did not evolve to do so. The joints, ligaments and structures of the legs and pelvis are not designed to handle forces in that way. not to mention that if u do that enough your burning those habits into your nervous system which is going to carry over to normal walkiing in some way. So that maybe the right muscles dont fire at the right time durning normal activity.

 

 

I value ancient wisdom as much as anyone here but some things are obsolete because of modern knowledge.

I dunno what else to say man. Looks can be deceiving. Ever learned how to stage fight? As in, make it look real without actually hitting anybody? (well sometimes you do hit them, but everyone is still in control)

I dunno. Learn the method. A lot of people have been doing bagua for a long time and, well, the only people who I've ever heard of with problems are people who were either doing it wrong, or learning it from someone else who was doing it wrong.

This is why you hear all these warnings about internal arts, that you have to do them right or you'll just wind up hurting yourself. Because if you just try to copy the movements, without learning the finer points of the stepping, you are probably going to run into exactly the problems you are describing.

It's not mumbo jumbo. It's finesse.

Oh on a side note im glad we can al talk without getting upset.

Me too

Because it's cool.

We should agree to not accept comments that are of

no usefulness and serve no purpose to learning.

Perhaps you should look more closely into a comment before just saying, "ah, this is obviously of no usefulness and serves no purpose to learning!" Perhaps examine why you say that? Perhaps examine the motivations for the person saying that? Perhaps learn a little bit about the person? Perhaps examine yourself and what about it you don't like? The reaction and thoughts it provokes in you? Why that's the case?

If we just "don't accept" things that we don't like because of a perceived lack of value, well that's not learning, that's just selectively picking things that reinforce whatever your current view is.

What I see is that the quality of the topics discussed and what is discussed is going downhill because of a bunch of "enlightened" users who get away with their constant trolling, subtle and overt attacks, post-filling technique, and lack of "real" spiritual experience and guidance.

 

Ramon25, orb, goldisheavy, sloppy zhang, ralis, marblehead, thesongsofdistantearth are just some names that spring to my mind.

 

If Tao Bums wants quality instead of quantity correct moderation should be applied asap.

 

I am still staying but will be careful with some of the information I can provide because most of the users here are not ready for it, and honestly I am tired of personal attacks that only leave me with the feeling that maybe I am wasting my time by giving quality information to people who would really appreciate it.

 

Is this perhaps the reason why some spiritual practitioners leave the world behind or teach secretly because humans are not ready for these teachings? Only time will tell.

 

 

Edited: typing errors

Moderation should not be based on who is supposedly "enlightened", who brings "quality", or anything of the sort, as that is entirely opinionated. I find it interesting that you decided to specifically call out certain people, as some members on that list (goldisheavy and ralis are two prime examples) contribute INCREDIBLY thoughtful and insightful posts to this forum consistently.... however...

Where is the problem with the members I've named?

They bring an unpopular perspective. Sometimes it can be direct and abrasive, sure. But that does not lessen the quality of their posts! And it CERTAINLY does not necessitate any censorship or removal of posts!

You could just as easily add yourself to the list, because while you provide interesting insights, one first has to get past your condescending tone before finding anything of value!

Somehow you've assigned yourself the role of spiritual barometer, letting us all know how high or low we are on a measure of spiritual growth and value, and somehow you seem to believe that moderation should be based on that.

However, since there is no legitimate way of verifying it, perceived spiritual advancement (or lack thereof), should not be the standard for moderation. And I do not think it is.

I really do like the moderation here. I too am not too hot about the "cheerleader comment" thing, because, well, there are a LOT of different ways different meanings can be gotten from one term, and, well, I guess it's too late now, anyway.

Moderation I think should be the last step taken, and only in situations in which direct negative attacks are carried out, and I think I should add on a consistent basis.

For example, Gerard's post above spoke directly about certain members, and I responded directly to another member. Technically, you could say that it is no longer discussing ideas, but discussing people, and may require moderator action. But I do not think that I launched any sort of personal attack on Gerard, and I do not take Gerard's post to be a personal attack (at least in my case as one of the name's mentioned, and I am greatly honored to be included in that list, as all of the other people are great people and great contributors to this forum in general, as is Gerard, so I'm glad he thought of me along with them!). It was an opinion on certain members here, and everyone is entitled to their opinion. I'm not bothered by it, and hopefully Gerard is not bothered by mine. I'm not bothered by the expression of another member's opinion, and I certainly hope that another member is not bothered by mine.

But if two+ people consistently started launching personal attacks at people consistently across several threads, well, that could require action.

And one could learn to stick needles in people by reading a book as well; see how far either one gets you compared to actually study of the subject.

You'd be surprised, in a lot of places, "actual study of the subject" pretty much entails "just reading the book".

Non, thanks for giving the link.

Unfortunately, I don't know much about this field, so I can't comment on it. Have you checked the admissions requirements? Seems like they got some pretty high standards. Two years prior to transfer + three years of their program, that's 5 years of education you're looking at, at least.

What is the tuition for this place?

Not everyone practising IMA are interested in the martial aspect. The foundation of IMA is to be found in Daoist and Buddhist methods which have ZERO interest in hurting any sentient beings. This is also my approach and this is how I see it: purely internal work with external awareness.

 

If you are keen to approach IMA with your fist in mind, go ahead, you are free to do so, but don't expect to attain a Buddha mind or Wuji state.

And that's fine, but in that situation, you aren't practicing the martial art of bagua. You are practicing bagua meditation, you are practicing bagua circle walking, bagua energetics, bagua whatever. But you are no longer practicing the MARTIAL art of bagua.

Internal martial arts are still martial arts. If you decide to cut out the martial aspects of the art (even if they still maintain lots of spiritual components), then it's not a martial art.

There's nothing inherently wrong with that. Just don't try to fool yourself or try to fool others by saying stuff like, "well it's a superior martial art, it'll work when I need it to", because, well, a LOT of people think that about their art, and if they are lucky, they only get the crap beat out of them. Martial training involves martial training. Even if you have the most spiritual martial art in the world, if it's a martial art, it deserves to be treated as such. If you choose not to do so, you choose not to practice the martial arts.

Which, again, is fine.

that guy is walking toes firstf. they hit the ground before the heel. walking in any other way besides heel first is gonna put undue stress in the lower body.

Again, you cannot appraise an internal martial art by what it looks like externally. There are more forces at work. It's not just "stepping with toes first", or something like that. A lot more forces at work.

Frantzis on bagua stepping

He also teaches walking method in "The Great Stillness".

I've been meaning to ask--I've heard of Tai Chi incorporating qi gong/nei kung aspects. Does this include all styles of Tai Chi?

I'd say most of the styles that can trace their lineage back to one of the originators/higher practitioners can be pretty credible.

So Chen style, Yang Style, Wu style (both), and Sun style would be safest bets.

However, further down the line than that, probably iffy, unless you can trace the lineage back to another legitimate source. I know that some style say they can trace their stuff to Wudang and the like, but I haven't really looked into that kind of stuff. My initial feeling is that there could be a lot more fake stuff than in other places, since it's such a big name, so a lot of people could be trying to cash in on just that.

Also, look at how long the instructor trained with, and with whom. Learning the form itself isn't that hard. Learning how to apply it in combat, or learning the qigong/neigong aspects? Much, MUCH more difficult, subtle, and specific.

Credible teachers are usually pretty open about who they studied with, for how long, what they know, and to some extent, what they don't know. They can list pretty clearly what you can expect to learn in your study with them. It's a little iffy when prospective teachers don't really tell you specifically what they learned, and what they teach. If they stick with vague, sweeping categories.... be cautious.

So unless a teacher says specifically, "I can train you in the martial/qigong/neigong aspects of tai chi", then they probably can't. I know B.K. Frantzis says that, and I think he probably means it. Though you'll notice there aren't a lot of people who are even making that claim. It's pretty high level stuff.

Does the school have a website?

Maybe some of us here can take a look. Though I don't know much about the subject myself, I'm sure plenty of people around here do

Hey Jess O, thanks for adding some perspective!

I certainly agree with the point that most people, at best, are just going to become mediocre fighters. And seeing as how lots of people don't live in situations were violence is common, even a mediocre level is probably far above what you'd need in your entire life!

It's fine if you say you don't want to fight, you don't train to fight, and you don't know, or care, what the martial applications are or if they are effective.

But for me, that's no longer a MARTIAL art. That's just a meditative/energy art. B.K. Frantzis mentions (from my recollection) that there are monastic traditions of bagua that do not come in contact with martial arts at all. They are no doubt valuable and have contributed to the advancement of humans. But that's still not fighting.

Just be honest. With others, and especially with yourself. Know what you are studying for, and know your own limitations. And tell people what the boundaries are. Make sure YOU know what your boundaries are. Otherwise you might think, "ah, I will flow with the tao and persevere!" and you instead wind up with a knife in your gut.

For me, fighting is valuable. Not in a sense of, "hey I'm going to go out and look for a fight", but, more like, "fighting has occurred throughout the history of civilization, and occurs on a daily basis in the present, I am going to be prepared." It's a precaution. I'd like to know that in certain situations, I'd be able to protect myself and possibly others, even if it doesn't happen, just as I'd like to know that in the event that the power goes out, I'll have a flashlight with full batteries.

Okay I wont reply to alot of the above because I dont care about his lineage. And regardless they WORK, creating force I never could have dreamed of.

Yes, but how do they work?

If they work because some dude has more muscles than you and beats the shit out of you, well.... I don't really consider that to be in the same classification of internal martial arts!

but see we are going in cirlces here because there are alot of internal training methods in regrds similar to the "lions opnes it mouth" posture in jiulong, Specific to jiulong like the other is specific to yin bagua. I dont see the what we are discussing really

Mind sharing? Or did he put it in his book?

And you keep using the analogy of a figher in another art walking a cricle. That just doesnt apply here. These are bagua palms and palm changes were talking about, not boxing mixed into a circle.

And my question is: where did he learn these palm changes? Did he just make them up because he saw them somewhere, and decided to make some of his own? What experience did he have to do that? What did he train prior to bagua? The bio on his site said he learned since he was a boy, well who did he learn from? Looking for evidence of his lineage turns up, well, nothing!

All that you talking about is really good structure, body mechanics and proprioception in realtion to specific technique. Thats not mystical, I guess I misunderstood what you meant but modern science gives us alot of that already. There is no need for a lineage pursay, they dont own the patent. Then what if different sects have different internal processes. Which one is bagua?

Different sects do have internal processes, but they share a common focus on the focus of the structures of the body, focusing on stretching or working with certain body parts in different ways than other arts. Kinda like how karate develops you in a certain way, boxing develops you in a certain way, the internal martial arts develop you in a certain way. They claim to focus on working the tendons, sinews, and other stuff. He Jinbao talks about developing muscle in a stretching, twisting way, rather than a contracting sort of way. These kinds of things (but I don't study anatomy so I don't know how much is real and how much is bullshit I just know that doing internal structure work taught by Frantzis and other internal methods feels VERY different than just hitting the gym).

Oh by the way like I said earlier the way they walk in traditional bagua is a disaster on a biomechanical level. Its a good way to fuck yourself up with time, YET its is taught as if it is beneficial. It is not and does not apply to combat. So tradition to me is shit unless validated in modern science when it comes physical movement.

This would be a great time to say where you got this from.

I know you practice alot of BK's stuff and I know his opinion on IMA's and teachers/tradition. But i disagree as arrogant as it may sound

I'm as anti-traditionalist as you get, I hate the way that people use tradition to lord over people. HOWEVER, I cannot deny the fact that through traditional systems, a coherent body of work, research, application, and revision has allowed methods to develop and be refined to the point that they are today. I don't look to tradition because they are the "authority", but because tradition has given the study of a certain art for GENERATIONS, as opposed to the single lifetime that someone who just develops an art from scratch has (though perhaps that one person has had exposure to lineages themselves!)

You attract the energy you give out. You'll fight if you seek or need fights. I don't, hence won't get involved in any.

I suppose you don't keep a flash light on hand with a fresh pair of batteries, because you don't put out the energy that the lights are going to go out, or there is going to be a storm.

I suppose you don't lock your door at night, because you don't put out the energy that someone is going to break into your house, and do who knows what?

I suppose you don't have a fire escape plan, because you don't put out the energy that the building you're in is going to burn down?

I suppose you don't check both ways before you cross the street, because you don't put out the energy to get hit by a car?

The view you are putting forward is short sighted and rather naive. Just because you learn how to fight and defend yourself, and you make sure that what you are doing works, does NOT mean you are "looking for a fight". In fact, many systems of self defense teach conflict avoidance and de-escalation techniques. Actually getting into a fight is the absolute LAST resort, and should be avoided at ALL costs. But sometimes it just happens.

I approach Bagua for health and spiritual purposes. And of ocurse, I know it is a superior MA, just ask my current teacher for instance, whom I happened to ask a couple of weeks ago: J. have you ever used Bagua in a threatening situation? His answer was quite clear: hell no! And I hope I won't ever have to, for God's sake not.

That's good. And if you live in a developed country, use some common sense, and avoid risk areas, it's very likely that you can go your entire life without even being in a fight (well, at least one you don't put yourself in) trained or untrained.

Yet as the saying goes, chance favors the prepared mind. I'd rather think ahead, and prepare adequately for an encounter that might happen, though I know that it very well may not ever happen. Better to have, and not need, than need, and not have.

If you think that is inviting danger upon myself, well...

You better take the batteries out of your emergency flashlight, unlock your door, forget your fire escape plan, and quit looking both ways before you cross the street, because guess what? You are inviting natural disaster, burglary, fire, and motor vehicle accidents to you and those around you!

That sucks man, I wish you luck and it is my hope that the money will appear somehow so that you can afford it. Just pay attention for it

Thanks!

Its moot because the distinction your making is way to subtle and like i said "mystical" for me to see any real value to it.

It is subtle, but it is NOT mystical. Look at the videos I linked about the Yin style bagua daoyin. Look specifically at the standing postures. The lion posture, for example, looks the same whether you do "lion opens mouth" or "lion holds ball". But the internal actions are drastically different. In one you are stretching the arms so they extend out. In the other, you are tightening the arms so they pull in. Both look the same, and the differences are in what you are doing with small amounts of musculature and structure. Now if you don't know this, and just stand there, then you aren't doing either, and are accomplishing nothing other than getting your arms tired.

These are subtle, but very REAL aspects of training that occur on a PHYSICAL level. It has taken years, possibly generations, to discover, develop, and refine these techniques. You might be able to discover it yourself, but it is VERY unlikely. Best way to learn this is to discover a lineage that HAS come up with these techniques, find the people teaching, and practice your ass off.

Or, do lots of more conventional training- weight lifting, other conditioning, find more conventional fighting methods- karate, boxing, judo, muay thai, brazilian jujutsu, etc, become a good as hell fighter, and then start walking in circles. You'll be a damn good fighter, can talk about links to symbolism all you want. Will that make your art bagua? Will it have the subtleties of internal martial arts? I would say no, personally.

I do not belive that there is some sort of ABSOLUTE truth when it comes to the Internal arts, chi gung ECT.. to me it ALL related to somatic psycology and archetypal influences. So there is wiggle room, If it looks like, feels like and fights like bague yet doesnt contain some really esoteric notion related to traditional lineages of bagua, i really dont see how that matters in my view of what all this is. Its bagua by the very spirit of it regardless of what small internal distinctions are present. It bagua because the internal and external are one and not separate. Jiulong is a modern interpretation, the internal world of modern man is different now, so too must be the practices and somatics he expriences. ALL things must change to remain true.

But see that's the thing, the high level internal arts are not internal just because they use a certain symbolism, philosophy, or principles, but they have very REAL training methods that are very specific, subtle, hard to distinguish from the untrained eye, but very different than anything else out there.

The only way it seems "esoteric" is because not many people know about it, and even people who know OF it do not KNOW it.

It's more than symbolism. It is the entire way of training mentally and physically. If I just wanted something that used symbols that I liked, and all the right keywords, but used training methods I'm already familiar with, well, learning this shit wouldn't be so hard! I'd hit the gym, chug some protein shakes, walk in a circle, learn some BJJ, judo, and muay thai, and beat probably 90% of the people in many "traditional" martial arts communities.

But that's ignoring the less than 1% that have such a highly refined skill, which is what I'm truly looking for.

Not everyone is interested in stepping into any rings to prove how big their egos are, or to deal with karmic issues resulting from childhood abuse.

 

Good health and spiritual development are more important than martial arts.

Sometimes fighting is necessary. Sometimes people will come in, and pick a fight, even if there is none. Sometimes they will hurt, or at least attempt to hurt, those you care about, or even people you don't know but otherwise have nothing to do in that situation. Sometimes they will come for you, by virtue of the fact that you do nothing other than exist in their line of sight.

When that happens, I for one want a martial art that can actually DO something. Because flowery words, good intention, and a superior attitude isn't going to get you out of trouble once the shit hits the fan.

And nobody come up with some crap about "oh well in the modern days, combat is fought with guns and rockets, hand to hand fighting is outdated." BULLSHIT! TONS of fights occur on a hand to hand, or small weapons scale (close range knives, blunt objects, etc etc). There are a lot of street smart people out there. They aren't going to run around shooting people up. Guns make noise, bring attention, are traceable, etc etc. Fists aren't so much. Plenty of guys out there who will hurt you, or kill you, bare handed.

If an art like bagua, or other internal MARTIAL arts, not only can bring health, but bring superior fighting prowess, well, shouldn't that be tested as rigorously as possible? I feel it should. Otherwise you are doing yourself and others a grave disservice.

Of course having sexual attraction is natural, what is not so natural is when sex becomes problematic. You don't see animals in nature looking at animal porn, or becoming animal sex addicts. If you really want to use nature as an example you could look at it in a couple of ways. First of all most animals only mate at speific times of the year (mating season). Second a lot of creatures of the male gender die after they mate.... so what does that tell ya?

But since animals usually only mate at specific mating seasons and don't waste their jing, you don't tend to see animals in the wild with cancer and all the health problems we humans have in our society.

Looking at nature, there's about as much variety in it as there is between humans.... maybe so much so that it's hard to draw a one to one comparison?