Not me, I’m not convinced of anything. I need to have it proven to me, either by feeling the power or trying it out in the ring. It keeps me honest.
The actual quote
The more I learn … the more I realize I don’t know.
“The more I learn the less I know… how true is that?”
I think the intention was what I wrote-ish.
It relates to, when you find out something new, you realize that there might be more than you thought. And the more often you get something new you might get the comprehension that there’s a lot you don’t know. By the time~ that you Are a master you’ve consigned yourself to the belief or understanding that you Don’t Know (much of (Anything))comparatively. From a womb to a room to out doors (forest or radius of one city block) to the country to to continent, to the world, to the solar system to the, galaxy to all of Space to the mind.There seems to be a pattern of More being beyond what gets to be Known. And every time you gain new know, it is usually merely an aspect (relevantly small aspect) of all that has to do with the new, each new. So (needle and thread), the phrase as I understood was closer to the original of what was recently brought-up here on page two of this thread is something more like, “the more one knows; the more one realizes that that one doesn’t know (anything)” Likely spoken in the first person.
“I’d like someone to give me the final end all to end all answer to the Question” what is internal power?"
I bet no one can"
Internal power–Breathing with Will; movement is breath. Barely breathing.-by Ernie Moore Jr.
Not that you agree that I did it, you might not could tell if it was correct as end all any way. But Keep your money, I don’t bet. Yes, you didn’t say money. Merely so to speak (shake-a-can).
Very some such, perhaps might have been, likely say some, some not.
[This message was edited by No_Know on 11-16-01 at 09:08 AM.]
a point of view
I think these two points of view offer a good way to understand how we look at things and understand based on present experience and level.
I would be very interested in hearing how this is possible or impossible?
In the summer of 1994, I had a chance to push into Grand Master Hong’s chest during a learning session. I issued power suddenly and felt as if my hands had entered a gear box. They were chewed up and thrown out. I was thrown out downward so quickly that upon landing, I hurt my hip. I suffered over ten small fractures to my fingers and wrists and did not completely heal until three months later. The hand injuries were from Master Hong’s chest and the hip injury was from my own falling. At the time, Master Hong was 88 years old and was paralyzed from the belt down. He was able to stand on his feet but could not walk."
End quote:
“Stories like this are exactly what is seriously wrong with internal arts. If your reading this and don’t understand what I’m talking about, then you need to think long and hard about the many stories like this that abound in internal arts. Ask your self “do these sound real?” “
I think the event was real but the explanation reflects a point of view that may not explain what really happened in a way that most would accept.
Again taking this event how do you think it happened?
This is another story that some may have heard:
Short version: a famous TC master gets challenged by a local (wrestling type) style master. He said something to the effect that TC is not real and doesn’t work.
They grasped each other’s arms, after a couple of minuets each laughed and the match was over.
A student of the TC later asked the wrestler what happened. The wrestler said something like “when I held his arms his chi was so strong there was nothing I could do, we both knew it and just laughed it off†the same student again asked his TC teacher about it. The teacher said, “ at the first touch we both knew he couldn’t do anything, he is also a master there was no need to go furtherâ€
So what happened? My view would be that the wrestler had no place to apply his force, the TC master was rooted more then him and he cut the wrestlers root in effect he was floating.
Or he was so rooted that his peng was to strong for the wrestler to deal with.
Which idea is more in line with your own thoughts?
Others might have a more in-depth idea?
bamboo leaf
"Certainly training opens one’s eyes to an ever-increasing realm of possibilities, hence the “less I know” part. It’s all about semantics to me. "
As you can see, Earth Dragon, nothing you posted I am in disagreement with.
There’s a story of a T’ai Chi Ch’uan type master who demonstrated by taking a bird in his hand. The bird could not fly away although it was trying to fly. The master was so supple that the bird could not get the footing to push-off to take flight, from the master’s hand.
According to those stories, theoretically, in the first one the master used an adhering strength (pores breathe, as in, take in air, perhaps there can be a manipulation to form a suction, even outside of the clothes/through clothes). That, with the shifting of soft and hard anywhere on the body with someone pressing; shifting the hard/soft rightly might damage the fingers at the joints at least. A shifting of weight is what T’ai Chi Ch’uan does with the purpose of off balancing Sometimes to the effect of seeming to have thrown-off or thrown-down. That he didn’t fall good, welllllll, that’s that.
"Short version: a famous TC master gets challenged by a local (wrestling type) style master. He said something to the effect that TC is not real and doesn’t work.
They grasped each other’s arms, after a couple of minuets each laughed and the match was over.
A student of the TC later asked the wrestler what happened. The wrestler said something like “when I held his arms his chi was so strong there was nothing I could do, we both knew it and just laughed it off†the same student again asked his TC teacher about it. The teacher said, “ at the first touch we both knew he couldn’t do anything, he is also a master there was no need to go furtherâ€
So what happened? My view would be that the wrestler had no place to apply his force, the TC master was rooted more then him and he cut the wrestlers root in effect he was floating.
Or he was so rooted that his peng was to strong for the wrestler to deal with."
P’eng (ward off?) might indicate resistance. Resistance the wrestler could work with. So it must be something else. Cutting the root? A T’ai Chi Ch’uan master doesn’t need to move their feet to move someone. Cutting off the root of the wrestler is unnecessary. I have the impression that they doinn’t really move. Like the bird, the wrestler couldn’t get a grasp even though holding on. Grasping being the doorway to wrestling, the wrestler realized it wasn’t going to work. And was amused. The T’ai Chi Ch’uan master knew what he was doing. Knew that it was working. And was pleased it was working and that an equal (in training (though a different discipline)/dedication…) was suprisingly educated. It’s amusing when you’re good and see there’s more than you thought there was.~
On the second story, if there was floating he could be moved but no one was knocked down.
Reading it again I’m thinking that the wrestler couldn’t move the arms. And a strong, leverage person being unable to move the arms of an apparantly not as strong person teaching a real world physical confrontation art that is practically worthless. Would be friendly amusement to masters.
Very some such, perhaps might have been, likely say some, some not.
nothin but stories
Wujidude
Sorry I just don’t believe your story.
Did you witness this yourself? Did you push hands with someone and their chi “damage” your hands?
Or was their skill level above yours and you were neutralized and injured your hands when you hit the floor?
Its happened to me, but it wasn’t chi that did it. (It was my opponent’s superior skill and my self that injured me)
After twenty years I’ve seen chi, but I never known anyone to have Chi that strong.
I think what’s happening in these stories and others posted, is that the persons high level of skill is being mistaken for “mystical chi” or Star Wars’ the Force! “Yes, it does exist, this isn’t an argument against the reality of chi”
I just question a lot of these stories. In my youth, having lived with some “Han” Chinese, I
Know how they like to embellish the truth like everyone else. “****!” Everyone does, “especially Americans.”
Was Paul Bunyan true?
Where are these great exponents of Chi and how come we have never seen anyone of them fighting professionally? In the modern age?
Huh?
We all know the real reasons why we don’t see them?
I’m not saying some couldn’t, I believe some have the skill…notice I said “skill.”
If you read carefully into these stories, you can get a glimpse of the real truth.
For example, Tai Chi magazine recently did a special on Chen Fa-ke and it talks about him doing push hands with a master of Wu style Taiji.
If you read in-between the line of the stories you come to understand: A) Chen Fa-ke practiced a much more reality based Tuo shou than the Wu style master "faster and harder. B) Chen Fa-Ke practiced much more rigorously and more numerous than the Wu stylist. “Where was the Chi in this story?”
I say this not because I have a disdain for internal arts, Nay, I highly respect them (life long student of mainly Xingyiquan and a little Yang style Taijiquan) I poo poo stories like the one you gave (and others given by other people) because most are un-true or can’t be proven. Plus you can’t fight/defend yourself with chi alone. Secondly, only hard work increases your abilities.
Internal arts are great! To me they are probably the most efficient and well thought out martial systems of self defense and self-cultivation ever created.
I believe only through sweat and hard work (like sparring etc. can these be realized.
The Spankster is correct
I believe that the stories about Taiji masters refer to
Chen Fake and Yang Luchan respectively.
I think both of them refer to the ability to make someone float. It is basically sticking with them, but not giving them anything to push against. I don’t know how to do it though.
Fu-Pow
http://www.geocities.com/fu_pow/vmrc-halloween-3.jpg
Spanky
You asked a couple of questions…
“Was Paul Bunyan true?”
No, neither was his blue ox.
“Where are these great exponents of Chi and how come we have never seen anyone of them fighting professionally? In the modern age?”
You said that you studied Hsing-i for awhile. Now I have a question. At what point did you ever have a Shrfu that gave two flips about “competition”? If this competition exsisted, what would the rules be?
If you want to know where the “great exponents” of Chi are currently, they’re probably off swinging bricks somewhere.
“There is no try…do, or do not.”
Tai Chi Mag, Chen Fa Ke
I have to take issue with the stories of Chen Fa-Ke published in Tai Chi mag.
There are two in particular I have problems with.
The first one states that Chen Fa Ke used to practice the form 60 times a day. The Lao Jia forms take 20 to 30 minutes to complete, last time I watched. If it’s 30 minutes, that means that Chen Fa Ke practiced 30 hours a day…
The second refers to a high level wu stylist being surprised by the speed at which Chen Fa Ke performed his form. The Wu Fast form was a secret for some time, but I’ve been told by my teacher, who was a disciple when it was still a secret that disciples were taught it. So how high a level was this wu stylist really?
With stories of old masters, you really do have to read between the lines. Not to take anything away from Chen Fa Ke, though.
The best story in that whole article was the one where a student asked Chen Fa Ke about his ancestor who had such strong sticking power he could pick up a table with his palm. Chen replied something to the effect that if he spent all his time reading stories and worrying if he’d ever get that strong, he’d never have time to practice.
Merciless is Mercy.
..
i think that chen fake practiced laojia yilu in around 10-15 minutes. pretty fast. that would still take 15 hours a day, which would only leave 9 hours for laojia erlu and weapons.
i’m not so sure about the story about yang jianhou and the sparrow. although it might… might be possible, it is probably just a story that came from the famous movements of “grasp the sparrows tail.” it is certainly a very old story, though, dating back probably not long after yang jianhou died.
Gano-B
posted 11-16-01 02:19 PM
Gano-B
wrote:
You said that you studied Hsing-i for awhile. Now I have a question. At what point did you ever have a Shrfu that gave two flips about “competition”? If this competition exsisted, what would the rules be?
If you want to know where the “great exponents” of Chi are currently, they’re probably off swinging bricks somewhere.
End quote:
My Sifu cared a lot for competition, as long as it was healthy and productive.
I can name many others that cared for competition too. In order to perfect your skills you need realty based training.
However you raise a good point about “what would the rules be?” Yes, I agree most internal arts have techniques that do not lend themselves well to sport.
None the less with the proper equipment, reality based training can be achieved.
Reading mystical stories about masters does not make me better, hard work does.
I agree with you on the hard training, and we can agree to disagree on competition. I personally am a big fan of sparring, I think it is an absolute necessity in training, but I disagree with competition. I don’t care about trophies and awards, I don’t have an “I love me” wall at home, nor does our Kwoon. The last thing on my mind durring training is going to some tournament or some other form of competition. I have fantasy football for that!
I did enjoy your response though, and I see where your coming from. We are just opposite ends of the spectrum. Also, I don’t buy into all of the myths of the great exponents of chi, I do, however, believe that many things are achieved through the cultivation of said chi.
Good talking to you.
“There is no try…do, or do not.”
“I think what’s happening in these stories and others posted, is that the persons high level of skill is being mistaken for “mystical chi” or Star Wars’ the Force! “Yes, it does exist, this isn’t an argument against the reality of chi””
The people who called it mystical, likely were the people trying to sway people into disbelieving in what has been referred to as Ch’i. Ch’i it’s self is not a skill. It is the use of ch’i within the body that allows for various levels of, some skills.
"Where are these great exponents of Chi and how come we have never seen anyone of them fighting professionally? In the modern age?
Huh?"
They are drinking tea. They are enjoying a meal. They are laughing with old friends they are running resteraunts or mercantile shops. They are heading Kung_Fu schools waiting for a sincere and dedicated and willing pupil to go throught the hardships they mete, to become the master they have become (though itmight be a master of a different discipline (depending on the sincere student’s gift). Sincere does not mean paid-up through next month.
Very some such, perhaps might have been, likely say some, some not.
Spanky wrote:
>nothin but stories
Wujidude
Sorry I just don’t believe your story.<
I don’t give a flying f___ what you believe, Spanky. It’s your life. It’s not my responsibility to convince you.
>Did you witness this yourself?<
Uh, no . . . if you read the article, Chen Zhonghua reported it. Chen was a student of Hong Junsheng, and later of Feng Zhiqiang.
>Did you push hands with someone and their chi “damage” your hands? Or was their skill level above yours and you were neutralized and injured your hands when you hit the floor?<
Again, Spanky, Chen Zhonghua reported this incident. I’ve met Chen Zhonghua, and he has a very good skill level in tuishou and application. It would’ve taken someone of vastly superior skill to have done what Hong did with Chen.
>Its happened to me, but it wasn’t chi that did it. (It was my opponent’s superior skill and my self that injured me)<
That’s all that Chen Zhonghua said happened here. Hong Junsheng didn’t teach that the cultivation of qi was essential to the development of high skill in taijiquan. As a matter of fact, according to both Chen and Peter Wu, Hong didn’t refer to qi at all in training the taijiquan solo forms and push-hands drills. Hong believed in diligent, correct practice as the key–the only “secret”–to practical ability in taijiquan.
Hong taught various drills and patterns from the taijiquan solo form to train the ability to use the joints and structure of one’s body to adhere to, neutralize and return the opponent’s incoming force at just the right angle to off-balance and send them flying. The taijiquan practitioner’s own strength could be added to it, but development of power like that was not the primary emphasis of Hong’s form training. He specifically distinguished his method of taijiquan from xingyi and bagua by noting the higher emphasis in the those arts on independent training of fajing. Hong was more concerned with development of neutralizing/hua skill, which he felt was the distinctive feature of taijiquan.
>After twenty years I’ve seen chi, but I never known anyone to have Chi that strong.<
Maybe that’s because you’ve been limited in who you’ve encountered. Either out of lack of desire, or blinded by skepticism, or bad timing, you apparently haven’t sought out the more highly-skilled masters. Don’t judge the abilities of the world by your own limited experience.
IN ANY EVENT, QI ISN’T THE ISSUE WITH HONG JUNSHENG. Or, for that matter, with me. ;- )
>I think what’s happening in these stories and others posted, is that the persons high level of skill is being mistaken for “mystical chi” or Star Wars’ the Force! “Yes, it does exist, this isn’t an argument against the reality of chi”<
Neither Hong nor Chen Zhonghua made that mistake.
>I just question a lot of these stories.<
D’oh.
>In my youth, having lived with some “Han” Chinese, I
Know how they like to embellish the truth like everyone else. “****!” Everyone does, “especially Americans.”
Was Paul Bunyan true?
Where are these great exponents of Chi and how come we have never seen anyone of them fighting professionally? In the modern age?
Huh?
We all know the real reasons why we don’t see them?
I’m not saying some couldn’t, I believe some have the skill…notice I said “skill.”<
So who is your point directed to? Hong’s great skill at taijiquan, obtained through his own persevering practice and intelligent training, was Chen Zhonghua’s main point.
>For example, Tai Chi magazine recently did a special on Chen Fa-ke and it talks about him doing push hands with a master of Wu style Taiji.
If you read in-between the line of the stories you come to understand: A) Chen Fa-ke practiced a much more reality based Tuo shou than the Wu style master "faster and harder. B) Chen Fa-Ke practiced much more rigorously and more numerous than the Wu stylist. “Where was the Chi in this story?”<
Ummm . . . where did Peter Wu in that article (it was actually a series of articles over three issues, if you read through them all)ever ascribe either Chen Fake’s abilities or Hong Junsheng’s abilities to qi? Man I wish you would learn to pay attention to what you read, instead of jumping to conclusions after the first paragraph.
Peter Wu’s tales of Chen Fake are based mostly on Hong Junsheng’s reporting (Hong published a book which included a biographical sketch of Chen Fake). Neither Wu nor Hong ever ascribe Chen Fake’s skill level to deliberate qi cultivation.
>I say this not because I have a disdain for internal arts, Nay, I highly respect them (life long student of mainly Xingyiquan and a little Yang style Taijiquan)<
“Nay”? Please leave the Shakespeare behind. “Lifelong student of xingyiquan”–you started in utero? “A little Yang style taijiquan”? Umm . . . taijiquan is quite different from xingyiquan, in training and in principles. “A little Yang style” will most likely mislead you as to what taijiquan, or certainly Chen style taijiquan, can do.
In any event, xingyiquan, baguazhang and taijiquan were never described as of the same family (the so-called “neijia”)or exhibiting the same principles until Cheng Tinghua and his xingyi and taiji buddies in Tianjin decided to encourage cross-training of their students around 1894, and the promotion of these “neijia” arts as belonging to the same family and set of principles can really be blamed on Cheng’s bagua student, Sun Lutang, and his incredibly vacuous and rambling theoretical writings (his form descriptions are much clearer).
>I poo poo stories like the one you gave (and others given by other people) because most are un-true or can’t be proven.<
Yeah, hard to rouse up a long-dead person like Chen Fake or Hong Junsheng to get up and satisfy your terminal skepticism. History is like that, Spanky. The anecdotes that Hong Junsheng relates are not otherworldly, do not depend on a belief in qi, and are at least as reliable as, say, the evidence that Lee Harvey Oswald assassinated John F. Kennedy. I hope you don’t wait until a fist smacks you in the face before you believe it’s coming at you.
In any event, show me how you conduct a randomized double-blind study of taijiquan applications. Like most people who get hung up on the reality of qi rather than demonstrations of practical skills, you seem to aspire to the standard of sheltered, highly-ordered laboratory environments. Hong and Chen both conducted spontaneous trials of their skills against random, martially-respected opponents. Chen’s great line (to me), as reported by Hong, was in response to the shuai-jiao wrestler Shen, who asked how a taijiquan master would handle a skilled wrestler–something to the effect that in real life one can’t choose what style the opponent will attack with.
>Plus you can’t fight/defend yourself with chi alone.<
Your point? Hong didn’t rely on qi.
>Secondly, only hard work increases your abilities.<
D’oh. That seems to me to be what “gong fu” means. Or rather, hard, persevering, intelligent, correct practice/work. Blind repetitive incorrect practice can injure or kill you.
>Internal arts are great! To me they are probably the most efficient and well thought out martial systems of self defense and self-cultivation ever created.<
I’m glad ya like 'em. Now give them the effort they deserve and seek out the most highly-skilled teachers and practitioners you can before you go dissing the history.
>I believe only through sweat and hard work (like sparring etc. can these be realized.<
I’m pretty sure Hong Junsheng and Chen Fake would agree with you.
DANIEL:
Hong Junsheng was a newbie to taijiquan when he encountered Chen Fake. By his own account, he had only studied Wu Jianquan’s style with Liu Musan for a few months when Liu invited Chen to demonstrate his art. So it’s no wonder that Hong was surprised at the speed and tempo changes and fajing in Chen’s form, since in all likelihood Hong had only seen the long, slow form of Wu Jianquan by which beginners are introduced to the art.
As far as Wu’s “fast form”–keep in mind that it’s Ma Yuehliang who said that Wu Jianquan’s slow form developed from the fast form. Wu’s father, Chuan Yu (student of Yang Luchan and Yang Banhou), taught Wang Maozhai and others besides his own son Jianquan. Wang Maozhai’s teachings (passed down in Beijing by Yang Yuting and others as the so-called “northern Wu” style)apparently did not include a “fast form”–you can check with David Dolbear at www.northernwu.com or Zhang Yun, student of Wang Peisheng,at http://www.geocities.com/ycgf/YCGF.htm
In any event, here’s a sort-of-related question I’ve always wondered about: was Chen Fake’s arrival in Beijing in 1928 purely coincidental with Wu Jianquan’s and Yang Chengfu’s departure for wealthy patrons in Shanghai that same year–or was it the cause of their departure? I haven’t found any reference indicating that Chen Fake ever encountered Wu Jianquan or Yang Chengfu, let alone crossed hands with them. It just makes me wonder that Wu and Yang wouldn’t have sought out a master of the acknowledged parent (or one of them)art of their taijiquan.
As far as Liu Musan (Hong Junsheng’s Wu style teacher)goes, much if not most of the senior Wu style talent left Beijing in 1928 with Wu Jianquan. The push-hands practice of the Wu Jianquan and “northern Wu” stylists by that point had become rather stylized, since most of their customers were effete intelligentsia or government officials or wealthy merchants needing to nourish their health and feel a connection with legendary tough guys and Taoists. Chen shi tuishou is a much more rough-and-ready energetic training practice, with much more grappling in proportion to the light-pressure pushing in Wu style tuishou. It’s no surprise to me that Chen moved Liu around easily, disrupting the patterns Liu was used to. At the same time, it would be a mistake to conclude that Liu would not have been skilled in actual application, or that under the rules of engagement in Wu style tuishou, Liu would not have acquitted himself better. Liu was a true master in the sense of recognizing superlative skill, however, and (according to Hong)didn’t try to stop his students from studying with Chen. Liu continued to teach Wu style, what he knew best.
Every thing aside, I was merely pointing out, as did Peter Wu himself, that several of the stories may have been exagerrated. You can specifically reference the whole issue of the “size of the dog” to see that.
As for Northern Wu, Southern Wu and Shanghai Wu, you are right, Southern and Northern Wu do not seem to have a fast form. I was unaware of this until after I posted the aforementioned information. As to why or why not, to be honest, any guesses on our part are simply conjecture, and as such should be left alone. Until recently, I had no wish or desire to learn more about the Wu divisions, being happy with my own, and not desiring to mess with politics.
Thanks to Bamboo Leaf however, I met a Southern Wu stylist just recently, and enjoyed the experience greatly, so it has perked my curiousity.
Thanks for the info on Northern Wu. I just read it (This is an edit) and now I remember why I don’t really care about lineages, or crap like that too much. I’ve never read a site that site “My teacher sucked, but he had a good heart, so I decided to study under him, even though he learned from a drunken homeless guy”. Not that Northern Wu said anything of the sort, but I just don’t care for justifications and lineages too much anymore. Wu seems to have a lot of that, unfortunately. Chen’s too busy claiming that it’s the original, Yang is too busy saying they don’t suck and can fight, Sun is to busy crowing about Sun Lu Tang being great at everything, and if you can find a Hao stylist other than me, you’ll find that “there’s a big difference between authentice wu yu hsiang, and what Hao Wei Zhen did”.
Pet peeves, pet peeves.
Anyway, it’s no big deal.
I’m still sticking with Chen Fa Ke’s alleged comment.
Practice is better than stories.
Merciless is Mercy.
[This message was edited by Daniel Madar on 11-20-01 at 05:07 PM.]
My reply
First
Gano-B
I also have a huge disdane for awards, trophies or even rankings. They mean nothing to others. Sincerity and honesty are what matters to people. So, what I ment by “healthy compitition”, I meant any training that revolves around this.(with Sincerity and honesty). This come through by fully respecting your training partners. However, sometimes this can be really brutal or blunt for everyone. I do admit from time to time I like to do a tourney or two, but I don’t judge others that do not.
What I was judging was the typical internal arts kwoon that does nothing but short forms and no real sweating. (i.e. training you know… bodies flipping, people punching, people rolling around on the mats. etc etc etc Things soccer moms and dads usally don’t do.)
Unfortunatly this notion of soccer mom or dad is stereotyped as your typical Internal artist.
If you find me guilty of believing this stereotype. I say I’m guity as charged! for this I apologize
As long as you practice compitition with sincerity and honesty and respect you have done your best!
Next:
Kn_know
Your right! some of the best do nothing but live thier lives to the fullest and are not interested in fighting profesionally.
If you noticed, I said there are internal artists out there that have the skill to fight pro but choose not to for whatever reasons. I was commenting on how these people have gotten the skill with hard work not believing in mystical stories about qi.
Now for Wujidude
Spanky wrote:
>nothin but stories
Wujidude
Sorry I just don’t believe your story.<
I don’t give a flying f___ what you believe, Spanky. It’s your life. It’s not my responsibility to convince you.
Judging by your response “maybe YOU DO!”
It(your response) was so long I couldn’t read it.
But I think you said you didn’t witness this story? “is that correct?”
Didn’t you?
This proved the point I was trying to make.
i.e. (that most of these stories can not be proven and should not be taken seriously)
Yea I was harsh in my respose to your post, however I’m not slamming your character. Heck, I agreed with your response in another thread. I’m just stating my point here. And as far as me not meeting anyone with an incredible level of qi “your right!”
I haven’t yet, but I’ve met some really good solid people who have a lot of knowledge and skill.
I believe real skill comes from hard work. I believe people are chasing their tales if they are seeking some way of developing qi to a level where they can use it offensivly without learning actual fighting skills. So many external martial artist laugh at the notion that Qi can do what some internal artist claim. You can’t learn martial skills by pole standing or forms alone.
“It just can’t be done.”
I believe some of these stories “sometimes” hint that the practioner somehow has obtained some special power that is exclusive to his or her style.
Rubbish!!!
To new students of internal arts who read these stories many of them go down the wrong path.
The real path to mastery is through simple hard work!
Nothin mystical or special about it!
Wuijidude
This is the point I was making when I commented on your story.
Spanky has left the house!
[This message was edited by Don’t call me spanky! on 11-24-01 at 04:54 PM.]
[This message was edited by Don’t call me spanky! on 11-24-01 at 04:58 PM.]
[This message was edited by Don’t call me spanky! on 11-24-01 at 04:59 PM.]
[This message was edited by Don’t call me spanky! on 11-24-01 at 05:01 PM.]