Hope you dont mind.The questions and posts here and other places are just to much for me. Perhaps you can give me something easier to grasp. Yes,I agree the best way to learn is to see it first hand but since that is not possible for me the following:
Situation- you are in a crowded bar or Ohio State Michigan game. lots of drunk rowdy men around and very crowded. You bump into someone and spill their beer.They are drunk call you a nasty name and swing at your head.
How would you respond?
Is this the same response you would have had when you just knew Moy Yats WC?
Situation- you are in a crowded bar or Ohio State Michigan game. lots of drunk rowdy men around and very crowded. You bump into someone and spill their beer.They are drunk call you a nasty name and swing at your head.
How would you respond?
Is this the same response you would have had when you just knew Moy Yats WC?
If the response is different how is it different? [/B][/QUOTE]
Hi, this is Savi from Mengs of AZ.
The most correct thing is to apologize, offer to buy them another drink. One would not be able to address the presented situation from a technical standpoint though from the current information. Does he punch without changing position? Is he moving as he punches? Does he chamber the punch? Are his arms down or up when he punches? Is it a punch coming from the front or back side of him? Is he presenting a front/back position to you? What “type” of punch is it? An upper cut to the head? A jab? A cross? How close is he? How much room do you have? Is he swinging his arm or leg at your head? etc… Are you looking for a technical response?
Is this a direct question to a particular person?
Again, need more information to accurately answer your question unless you asking somebody in particular.
Originally posted by hunt1
[B]Hope you dont mind.The questions and posts here and other places are just to much for me. Perhaps you can give me something easier to grasp. Yes,I agree the best way to learn is to see it first hand but since that is not possible for me the following:
Situation- you are in a crowded bar or Ohio State Michigan game. lots of drunk rowdy men around and very crowded. You bump into someone and spill their beer.They are drunk call you a nasty name and swing at your head.
How would you respond?
Is this the same response you would have had when you just knew Moy Yats WC?
If the response is different how is it different? [/B]
I have to agree with the first response. It’s really hard to answer questions like this in an internet chat room since the only true way to learn or understand is to EXPERIENCE. This idea is fundamental to the Chan philosophy intrinsic to HFY.
In order to answer your question I invite you to observe a class or participate in a HFY seminar. What else can I say or offer?
I have to say Geezer you displayed and fine example of the limitations of a forum or should I even go as far as saying the written word. JK, Savi - I would even go as far as to say an answer to this question is impossible. especially understand the precise nature of HFY. My example would be to ask the question “Exactly How does a apple taste?” with out using the word apple. Now most of us have experienced the taste of a apple many times but no one can isolate the exact taste with out having those that question take a bite!! No matter what words we use no matter how good we are with the written word. It cannot be exact without taking a bite! There is only one center of the room if off in any direction N.S.E.W up or down etc… or even if off by 1 micron it is no longer the true center. I promise you if you come and see it you will understand why I say this.
Originally posted by hunt1
[B]Hope you dont mind.The questions and posts here and other places are just to much for me. Perhaps you can give me something easier to grasp. Yes,I agree the best way to learn is to see it first hand but since that is not possible for me the following:
Situation- you are in a crowded bar or Ohio State Michigan game. lots of drunk rowdy men around and very crowded. You bump into someone and spill their beer.They are drunk call you a nasty name and swing at your head.
How would you respond?
Is this the same response you would have had when you just knew Moy Yats WC?
If the response is different how is it different? [/B]
Hunt1 - all the responses given are good answers.HFY or even kung fu for that manner is not fixed. Formlessness is a key element.The response I will offer is I dont know how i would respond. If he was really drunk, even swinging at my head he might be way off target. The variables are far too great for an in- depth discussion. I would go as far as to say that if you trained HFY you would not have a programed response either.
-David
> “or should I even go as far as saying the written word”
With the breadth and depth of literature in this world, even if we confine ourselves only to English, it is possible not only to read how an apple tastes, but read it in ways and language we, constrained to our own experiences, bound in our own microcosm, might not otherwise imagine. Give me a Shakespear or Asimov or Elison or any of a hundred other apples, and they’ll all taste lush and vivid and wonderous.
RR (off to burn my rendered useless copies of Way Virtue Classic, Universe in a Nutshell, Old Man and the Sea, Julius Caeser, Invisible Man, and the rest of library, since they ain’t worth nothin’ no more 8((( )
thanks for your replies. The consistency or your answers is impressive. Perhaps one day I will see HFY first hand. I dont travel much for pleasure at the moment. If you are ever in the Tampa Bay area of Florida give me a call. Visotors are always welcome.
If I read you correctly HFY does an analysis of a situation before acting?
With the breadth and depth of literature in this world, even if we confine ourselves only to English, it is possible not only to read how an apple tastes, but read it in ways and language we, constrained to our own experiences, bound in our own microcosm, might not otherwise imagine.
I don’t think there’s any way someone could explain to me what a HAGGIS tastes like:confused:
Sheldon - Well, no, not Haggis. That’s the exception that makes the rule. Perhaps if I’d spent time running things over in a NYC cab in the middle of a heatwave in week-old clothes while eating souvlaki and coughing up all manner of bacteria. Perhaps.
But then I’m still working on instantaneously finding the center of an 8 cornered box when 4 of those corners want to aggressively kill the other 4, and both sides are idependantly, unpredictably, and sentiently mobile… 8(
Originally posted by Chum Kil I have a question to the HFY people. Is reading about Chan philosophy a requirement of the system?
A requirement of the system? I personally have never called it that… Well let me put it this way. Hung Fa Yi, as with all Shaoiln arts, consists of the 3 treasures of the Shaolin Temple: Combat, health and philosophy.
If you, or any practitioner really, is searching for a full understanding of HFY, or any shaolin art, you have to dive deeply into these 3 areas. If only for one or the other, maybe two out of the three, that is the choice of the practitioner. It depends on where your finger is pointing (the moon?)! To become an HFY teacher, most definitely YES! But not just reading, I’m sure in your question you meant practicing Chan. Chan is the overriding philosophy of the HFY. If you are only interested in fighting and nothing more it is certainly possible to train the HFY, but not understand it.
<<<If you, or any practitioner really, is searching for a full understanding of HFY, or any shaolin art, you have to dive deeply into these 3 areas. If only for one or the other, maybe two out of the three, that is the choice of the practitioner.>>>
Well said.
There is one thing stronger than all the armies in the world: and that is an idea whose time has come.
Sitting quietly doing nothing,
Spring comes,
and the grass grows by itself.
It seems that you have some knowledge about Chan. I very much agree with you that the 3 treasures of BUDDHISM (not only the Shaolin temple) are Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha. But come on dude, you don’t have to take it so literally!! Combat, health and philosophy might not be the three treasures but it has a lot to do with buddhism. Matter of fact, Combat, health and philosophy is part of a “Moe Jung” (fighting monks) way of life. So, was it neccesary for you say all that stuff about Karoke?? All you had to do was just correct him. You should loosen up a little! and study more chan… because a true buddhist would never have the kind of tone that you have… please read more about Compassion… or did you skip that part? LOL! But seriously, those comments to Savi were very unneccesary.
AMI TOH FOH (Buddha Bless You)
A requirement of the system? I personally have never called it that… Well let me put it this way. Hung Fa Yi, as with all Shaoiln arts, consists of the 3 treasures of the Shaolin Temple: Combat, health and philosophy.
If you, or any practitioner really, is searching for a full understanding of HFY, or any shaolin art, you have to dive deeply into these 3 areas. If only for one or the other, maybe two out of the three, that is the choice of the practitioner. It depends on where your finger is pointing (the moon?)! To become an HFY teacher, most definitely YES! But not just reading, I’m sure in your question you meant practicing Chan. Chan is the overriding philosophy of the HFY. If you are only interested in fighting and nothing more it is certainly possible to train the HFY, but not understand it. [/B]
It sounds like you have to be a Buddhist to really understand HFY. You said philosophy but it seems like more people practice it as a religion instead of just philosophy.
So would someone have to change their religion to become a HFY teacher or really understand it? Could a Muslim, a Jew or a Christian have a fare shot to become a teacher? How about a Taoist or a Confuscianist? Do some of the students feel pressured to convert to Buddhism? How many non Buddhists actually practice HFY, or does it mostly attract people who are Buddhist anyway? Seems like there a lot of implications in all of this.
How in the world one can practice Chan when one couldn’t even get the a b c basic of Chan right?
It is more fun, positive, and happy to sing Kareoke.
Forget about Shao Lin and WCK, those are just suffering. LOL:D
Sing------
Amitaba Amitaba great great you all are right! so everyone is happy. LOL [/B]
Wow…Hendrick you sure are something! Thanks for enlightening us! A little cryptic critisism goes a long way when you are trying to baffle and belittle people.
At least this post of yours was a little more lucid than normal! Thanks for coming down from your perch on high and almost joining us lowly, swamp traversing, human beings in reality.
It sounds like you have to be a Buddhist to really understand HFY. You said philosophy but it seems like more people practice it as a religion instead of just philosophy.
So would someone have to change their religion to become a HFY teacher or really understand it? Could a Muslim, a Jew or a Christian have a fare shot to become a teacher? How about a Taoist or a Confuscianist? Do some of the students feel pressured to convert to Buddhism? How many non Buddhists actually practice HFY, or does it mostly attract people who are Buddhist anyway? Seems like there a lot of implications in all of this. [/B]
Don’t read too much into the practice of the Chan philosophy. I admit to being very inexperienced and even naive on this subject but I will say that in my opinion you can apply Chan thinking and philosophy to any “religion”, lack of religion, or way of life. At our school we have quite a few people in the HFY program who are Catholic, Mormon, Protestant, athiest, agnostic…so on and so forth. There is no pressure to “convert” since there really is nothing to convert to! There are no assigned religious texts to read, no rituals, no tithing, no secret Chan meetings, no nothing that you would find in a standard religion.
Wow…Hendrick you sure are something! Thanks for enlightening us! A little cryptic critisism goes a long way when you are trying to baffle and belittle people.
At least this post of yours was a little more lucid than normal! Thanks for coming down from your perch on high and almost joining us lowly, swamp traversing, human beings in reality.
JK [/B]
JK,
I learn that from Hui Neng, the 6th patriach of Chan.
So do you still want to join Chan? LOL
Great insight! I think you pointed out an error I did not see, you will have to forgive me on that statement. I think I said that comment (about practicing/reading Chan) directly from my Buddhist nature (I should have restated that comment from a detached/neutral position). It certainly does not mean that anybody has to convert from their religion to understand HFY, just understand its perspective. From a Buddhist perspective (well, at least from my perspective), that understanding only comes from practicing HFY; actually doing it. The saying “Hau Chun San Sao” permeates the HFY. It means to learn first- face to face. Direct from the source. Then to gain a full understanding (100% - no less!) through the rest of the 5 (6 in Buddhism) senses. In other words, learn through experience and interaction with others. *So by default, if you are practicing HFY, and searching for that complete understanding (not yet attained, or even have attained for those at that level), you are in essence practicing Chan. But your religious disposition is yours alone. Not neccesary to violate that just as JK addressed.
It is near impossible to justify within yourself what you do in combat to somebody else if you do not understand the philosophy and nature of the system itself. You just won’t understand (and “understand” is the key word) what, and why you did what you did when you did what you did. You may KNOW what you have done and how you did it, but I use that in the context of only surface understanding, not a complete/internal understanding. As in my understanding/contemplations going back into history, the Shaolin Temple nurtured those on the path of Chan Buddhism (perhaps only one faucet in the temple, I do not say exclusively!), so those teaching HFY should also be Buddhist. In that sense I could say your conclusion about Buddhist teachers would be correct in reference to the Shaolin monks… these are just my personal thoughts though on history. I’m not an authority on that.
Hendrik, thank you for the information, but are you respecting others’ willingness to share their understanding of Chan? Are you sure your understanding is complete and realized? Would you mind clarifying if you consider your understanding to be universal or personal? And are you speaking from a neutral or personal disposition? I’d like to know!
