Style vs. Style, Internal vs. External

Re: Re: Are we still talking Internal external?

Originally posted by Kumkuat
[B]

Torso? You mean how good external arts do it? Anyway, internal means coordinating external and internal harmonies. External harmonies for the whole body relaxed movement, and internal harmonies to use ‘qi’ instead of ‘li’ for power.

Of course, leading the ‘qi’ with the mind can be interpreted as using micro adjusetments to the muscles in the body so the body creates a ‘spring’ or a relaxed groundpath from the ground to the point of the contact which can be manipulated by the expanding of the joints for opening. And gravity with closing of the joints for closing. There, I used almost everyone’s terminolgy here. :slight_smile:

Anyway, I’m probably talking out of my arse here, but that’s what I currently believe. And if you feel the movement of high-high level players such has Wang PeiShan, Chen Xiao Wang et al., they say there is a difference. Anyway, I’m going to a Chen Xiao Wang seminare in a few months and hopefully, I will be able to find out if his movements and touch are really different from normal people.

Anyway, it is true that a good internal practicener can do Karate internaly. But it is very true that Taiji can be done externally. Heck, most people do play taiji externally and probably don’t know about it due to ego problems, denial, ignorance, etc., Maybe an intervention is in order. [/B]

You can say that again, I have seen many of those external Taichi people too, they do think they are internal.

You can have bio-chemical forces–>physical power–>physical contect–>physical results. Or you can have bio-chemical forces–>physical contect–>bio-chemical results. I am thinking of center and root rather than torso

When you are deep into things, you see the world different. for example, if you are deep into ChinNa, you might not see people, you will see moving bones with tendons. If you are deep into internal, you will see qi and meridiums instead of people. That is why these masters deep into arts often don’t have(or almost don’t have) any sex life at all, I think they are not seeing the same as regular people are seeing.

BJJ is superior.

Gentlemen,

This is a very fascinating subject. I guess I will throw my two cents into the fray.

It is my understanding that Tai Chi’s main purpose is to develop one’s internal energy for the purpose of personal development first and self-defense secondly. Why is this? By developing our character and by extension our spirit we transcend the need for violent actions. This occurs as a consequence of the development of maturity and the expansion of our understanding and awareness. Understanding provides the individual with the knowledge of how and why conflicts occur and how they can be AVOIDED. Awareness provides the ability to perceive when circumstances are developing towards conflict. The superior student then intervenes before conflict acquires enough momentum to spiral into violence. Maturity provides us with motivation for applying our understanding and awareness in a violence avoiding manner.

By accommodating ourselves to the Tao we are able to flow through life and its phenomena like water. That is, in a responsive, flexible and flowing manner. The violent actions and intents of others are not interpreted by us as violence against us, but as actions that carry the potential of harm to us or others, therefore we have no ego-centric need to retaliate or return violence for violence. We then choose to redirect the violence in a manner that causes the least amount of injury to ourselves and the aggressor while still neutralizing the attack. Our actions are a result of objective observation and not of subjective emotional motivations. (i.e. “How dare he attack me” or “I’ll teach him not to mess with me” etc.)

The question is less a matter of what is functionally effective in combat and more a matter of how one can perceive the possibility of violence ahead of time and avoid conflict all together. This occurs as a consequence of maturity and wisdom, not skill. It is possible to “only” develop one’s character and spirit and be an effective martial artist. This person will have the ability to perceive potential violence prior to its eruption and intervene in a manner that dissipates the energy more productively or in circumstances that do not allow for the avoidance of violence provide the individual with the insight to leave the vicinity.

One may be effective in the physical aspects of Tai Chi or other internal styles and still not understand or develop the aforementioned abilities. This person only has a superficial understanding of Tai Chi and Taoism and has not understood the deeper meanings and goals.

The most effective physical martial skills to develop are also the easiest to learn. They are simply the body movements necessary to empty space and avoid being struck. It is not necessary to learn how to kick and strike if our goal is merely to avoid injury. If we want to quickly and effectively neutralize an attack it is much simpler to purchase some pepper spray, avoid the attack through body movements, then spray the attacker in the eyes, so much for 50 years of training for hours and hours everyday.

If our purpose is to defeat an opponent with greater skill, we can use strategy and tactics effectively to take him out. Stealth and or overpowering odds are the most effective means here. I can sneak up on my adversary and bash him in the head with a baseball bat. I can slit his throat with a straight razor. I can shoot him from 50 feet away with my .357. All these have been done to experienced martial artists, so much for years and years of training.

If we are training in the martial arts in this modern world for the sole purpose of being a “bad ass” or to protect ourselves from assault and not for some other, higher, purpose we are being foolish. There are much more effective and less time consuming ways to effectively defend ourselves than spending hours a day in martial arts training.

The question was posed, “How many Tai Chi schools do you know of to field fighters in MMA?” I would ask how many schools care about producing field fighters? It is not the inherent purpose of Tai Chi to produce fighters, but superior individuals with the collateral skill of being able to defend themselves in many, but certainly not all circumstances. Fighting is a last resort. Running away is always more effective and the more morally, ethically and legally preferable choice. It is ego-centeredness that motivates most people to stand and fight. This is immature and not a goal Tai Chi.

The purpose of the Taoist is to accommodate ourselves to the patterns of life in order to live a more successful, happier life. Training to perpetrate violence or to be a “bad ass” does not accomplish this. Training to avoid conflict and violence does. The Tao does teach us that there is violence in the world. The Tao teaches us to use the most effective and least energy consuming means to transform violent intent into a more productive form of energy. Tai Chi provides a framework for developing these skills. Running away and/or pepper spray are more economical and effective means of reducing the risk of injury from an assailant however, and therefore more in accord with the Tao.

Tai Chi is primarily an attitude acquired through the understanding and proper application of Tai Chi principles. One could conceivably apply these principles and attitudes to any other system of martial arts and still be performing Tai Chi. It is not the action performed, but the attitude behind the action that gives it meaning.

One last thought. I have seen the term “Humanistic Taoist” or something of the like used a number of times. One can not be a Humanist and a Taoist at the same time, at least not without redefining the terms, which in and of itself is a humanistic act. Humanism believes that man is the measure of all things. Man defines and determines right and wrong, good and bad, value and insignificance. The Humanist is a pragamatist and seeks to perform actions that benefit the greatest numbers of individuals or his own purposes. The Humanist disregards the higher concepts of good and bad, right and wrong or the greater consequences of his actions. The Nazi’s were humanists. They determined that the highest good was the elimination of the Jews. They redefined good and bad, right and wrong according to their own principles and thus justified their actions in their own minds.

The Taoist recognizes that there is a higher intelligence/consciousness and that we are to understand and bring ourselves into accord with this intelligence. A Taoist accepts that there is something greater than himself and seeks to understand the principles/patterns of this Greatness and accommodate himself to its principles rather than his own principles.

The Taoist conforms himself to the patterns of Nature, the Humanist attempts to conform Nature to himself. The Humanist is a fool because he cannot perceive the flaws of his thinking and cannot see beyond the boundaries created by his own ego. A Humanist would not allow anything other than his own system of measure to determine his actions. A humanist is eternally bound by his ego, because his ego is the measure of all things to him. The Taoist recognizes that his ego is merely a portion of his greater identity and does not allow it to rule his actions, but relegates it to areas of life for which it was designed. The Taoist recognizes that Life is greater than he and it is us who are to conform to the patterns of Life, not Life to us. The Taoist does this not because he is compelled to by the Tao, but because he has come to recognize that it is in his best interest to do so. Life is greater than the individual and Life will always win. The Taoist chooses to be on the winning team, so to speak, because he recognizes this is where a successful life resides.

Re: Re: Re: Are we still talking Internal external?

Originally posted by PaulLin
[B]

When you are deep into things, you see the world different. for example, if you are deep into ChinNa, you might not see people, you will see moving bones with tendons. If you are deep into internal, you will see qi and meridiums instead of people. [/B]

ya know, there are some mushrooms you aren’t supposed to eat.

“It is my understanding that Tai Chi’s main purpose is to develop one’s internal energy for the purpose of personal development first and self-defense secondly.”

Not in spite of the other points made in your post, I’m not sure there is much evidence that this is the case.

Originally posted by Scott R. Brown
[B]Gentlemen,

This is a very fascinating subject. I guess I will throw my two cents into the fray.

It is my understanding that Tai Chi’s main purpose is to develop one’s internal energy for the purpose of personal development first and self-defense secondly. Why is this? By developing our character and by extension our spirit we transcend the need for violent actions. This occurs as a consequence of the development of maturity and the expansion of our understanding and awareness. Understanding provides the individual with the knowledge of how and why conflicts occur and how they can be AVOIDED. Awareness provides the ability to perceive when circumstances are developing towards conflict. The superior student then intervenes before conflict acquires enough momentum to spiral into violence. Maturity provides us with motivation for applying our understanding and awareness in a violence avoiding manner.

By accommodating ourselves to the Tao we are able to flow through life and its phenomena like water. That is, in a responsive, flexible and flowing manner. The violent actions and intents of others are not interpreted by us as violence against us, but as actions that carry the potential of harm to us or others, therefore we have no ego-centric need to retaliate or return violence for violence. We then choose to redirect the violence in a manner that causes the least amount of injury to ourselves and the aggressor while still neutralizing the attack. Our actions are a result of objective observation and not of subjective emotional motivations. (i.e. “How dare he attack me” or “I’ll teach him not to mess with me” etc.)

The question is less a matter of what is functionally effective in combat and more a matter of how one can perceive the possibility of violence ahead of time and avoid conflict all together. This occurs as a consequence of maturity and wisdom, not skill. It is possible to “only” develop one’s character and spirit and be an effective martial artist. This person will have the ability to perceive potential violence prior to its eruption and intervene in a manner that dissipates the energy more productively or in circumstances that do not allow for the avoidance of violence provide the individual with the insight to leave the vicinity.

One may be effective in the physical aspects of Tai Chi or other internal styles and still not understand or develop the aforementioned abilities. This person only has a superficial understanding of Tai Chi and Taoism and has not understood the deeper meanings and goals.

The most effective physical martial skills to develop are also the easiest to learn. They are simply the body movements necessary to empty space and avoid being struck. It is not necessary to learn how to kick and strike if our goal is merely to avoid injury. If we want to quickly and effectively neutralize an attack it is much simpler to purchase some pepper spray, avoid the attack through body movements, then spray the attacker in the eyes, so much for 50 years of training for hours and hours everyday.

If our purpose is to defeat an opponent with greater skill, we can use strategy and tactics effectively to take him out. Stealth and or overpowering odds are the most effective means here. I can sneak up on my adversary and bash him in the head with a baseball bat. I can slit his throat with a straight razor. I can shoot him from 50 feet away with my .357. All these have been done to experienced martial artists, so much for years and years of training.

If we are training in the martial arts in this modern world for the sole purpose of being a “bad ass” or to protect ourselves from assault and not for some other, higher, purpose we are being foolish. There are much more effective and less time consuming ways to effectively defend ourselves than spending hours a day in martial arts training.

The question was posed, “How many Tai Chi schools do you know of to field fighters in MMA?” I would ask how many schools care about producing field fighters? It is not the inherent purpose of Tai Chi to produce fighters, but superior individuals with the collateral skill of being able to defend themselves in many, but certainly not all circumstances. Fighting is a last resort. Running away is always more effective and the more morally, ethically and legally preferable choice. It is ego-centeredness that motivates most people to stand and fight. This is immature and not a goal Tai Chi.

The purpose of the Taoist is to accommodate ourselves to the patterns of life in order to live a more successful, happier life. Training to perpetrate violence or to be a “bad ass” does not accomplish this. Training to avoid conflict and violence does. The Tao does teach us that there is violence in the world. The Tao teaches us to use the most effective and least energy consuming means to transform violent intent into a more productive form of energy. Tai Chi provides a framework for developing these skills. Running away and/or pepper spray are more economical and effective means of reducing the risk of injury from an assailant however, and therefore more in accord with the Tao.

Tai Chi is primarily an attitude acquired through the understanding and proper application of Tai Chi principles. One could conceivably apply these principles and attitudes to any other system of martial arts and still be performing Tai Chi. It is not the action performed, but the attitude behind the action that gives it meaning.

One last thought. I have seen the term “Humanistic Taoist” or something of the like used a number of times. One can not be a Humanist and a Taoist at the same time, at least not without redefining the terms, which in and of itself is a humanistic act. Humanism believes that man is the measure of all things. Man defines and determines right and wrong, good and bad, value and insignificance. The Humanist is a pragamatist and seeks to perform actions that benefit the greatest numbers of individuals or his own purposes. The Humanist disregards the higher concepts of good and bad, right and wrong or the greater consequences of his actions. The Nazi’s were humanists. They determined that the highest good was the elimination of the Jews. They redefined good and bad, right and wrong according to their own principles and thus justified their actions in their own minds.

The Taoist recognizes that there is a higher intelligence/consciousness and that we are to understand and bring ourselves into accord with this intelligence. A Taoist accepts that there is something greater than himself and seeks to understand the principles/patterns of this Greatness and accommodate himself to its principles rather than his own principles.

The Taoist conforms himself to the patterns of Nature, the Humanist attempts to conform Nature to himself. The Humanist is a fool because he cannot perceive the flaws of his thinking and cannot see beyond the boundaries created by his own ego. A Humanist would not allow anything other than his own system of measure to determine his actions. A humanist is eternally bound by his ego, because his ego is the measure of all things to him. The Taoist recognizes that his ego is merely a portion of his greater identity and does not allow it to rule his actions, but relegates it to areas of life for which it was designed. The Taoist recognizes that Life is greater than he and it is us who are to conform to the patterns of Life, not Life to us. The Taoist does this not because he is compelled to by the Tao, but because he has come to recognize that it is in his best interest to do so. Life is greater than the individual and Life will always win. The Taoist chooses to be on the winning team, so to speak, because he recognizes this is where a successful life resides. [/B]

I think I am seeing a little unclear about Tao and Taichi in here. Tao is the final goal of what Taichi aim to achieve. But being qualified as Taichi don’t have to be at the final destination of Tao.

however, you have explained why there is no high level internal martial artists in tournament, it is vitally against the Tao that they are followed.

But nowadays, just look at all the people in the MA world, who believed that only pains would gain, brutal force would win, only fight and keep save and being who they are, believed in donmination rather than harmonation.

I see the tounament as a so call “yan”, and it is a good yan if you have the right motive, bad yan if you have the wrong motive.

So as you have said, the ego, the self-pride, to rely on beating others to secure the self confidence…these are all bad yan. People will fall into a bottomless trap by having these.

I am thinking of to find out a higher level of MA knowledge, to physically domostrate the Tao. To make friend and found partners on the journey of aquire Tao. These are good yan.

From the way you wrote, it seems to me that the Humanism is only a incomplete partial Tao of the lower level.

What do you think?:slight_smile:

Re: Re: Re: Re: Are we still talking Internal external?

Originally posted by chingei
[B]

ya know, there are some mushrooms you aren’t supposed to eat. [/B]

Well, you know, I am not SuperMario Brothers.

Originally posted by Fred Sanford
BJJ is superior.

Will there ever a style can be the all superior? All styles has its strong and weak points. You should refine your statement and put more words in it.

One of the diffulties in using an art to faciliate understanding and accordance with the Tao is that one can easily become entangled in the myrriad images presented by the art and never return to emptiness or the Tao.

Taichi upholds the core principles of taoism. These principles are like looking at your reflection in a pond on a very windy day. You will learn to see your reflection, however you must still discern the features through the ripples using your own insights and understandings. Ideally, the principles lead you to the pond, however you must still have clear vision and the will to see in order to perceive that reflection.

As a child on the playground in primary school, I distinctly remember enjoying recess (a portion of the day spent outside playing freely in any activity chosen) for the mere purpose of having fun and playing with others. It did not matter whether I was using the slide or crossing the monkey bars, or swinging on the swing set. Each of these activities is one of the “Ten Thousand Things”. If I became attached to the monkey bars, and began to do the monkey bars every day for the mere purpose of being the fastest one to cross them then daily I begin to lose sight of what I originally came out on the playground to do. Suddenly my motivation has become racing the other children accross the monkey bars, and in doing so I have set myself apart from the source of my fulfillment.

Internal and external are monkey bars and swing sets…

  • Nexus

I honestly thought that “Tai Chi Chuan” was “Grand Ultimate Fighting Art” as in “This style can beat other styles down”.

In Chen village, isn’t Tai Chi practiced with a very combative emphasis? Chen Xiaowang and Ren Guanyi are obviously very good tough fighters. I do not recall either of them publicly endorsing Taoism or Buddhism or any other philosophical or religious concept via the practice of their Chen style Taijiquan.

My understanding of Tai Chi has been that it started out as a fighting art and then was popularized for exercise purposes by Yang Cheng Fu. Yang himself earned his reputation via combat. From there, people took Yang’s art and expanded it to fill meditative purposes. Even a guy like Cheng Man Ching was a heck of a fighter and proved himself repeatedly in a number of different circumstances.

Then again, I saw Master Yuanming Zhang’s video of “Taiji 13 Postures”. I do not know the veracity of his claim, but what he shows seems to be more for personal development than fighting. That’s not to say his Taijiquan couldn’t be used for combat - those sets have some very interesting concepts that could be threaded out to free fighting applications.

And ultimately, it doesn’t even matter. What a martial art is to a person depends strictly on the individual. The same goes for this debate on humanism and Taoism.

As nexus said, the intense exertion spent debating this stuff is energy that could be (not necessarily better) spent on just practicing the art.

HKV - Just FYI, the taiji in taijiquan refers to a chinese philosophical concept describing the relationship between yin and yang, with further implications via it’s relationship with related concepts, like wuji. It’s not “grand ultimate” as in “the best.”

Thanks for the clarification, Braden.

Due to your teaching, I’ll change my tune!

Nah, I think you’re mostly right, that was just an aside. Although a further aside would be that I don’t think violence is contrary to the tao in the first place, and I think Mr. Brown makes a humanistic conclusion despite outlining the differences between and characteristics of humanism and taoism.

Braden,

You clearly have little to no understanding of Humanism and Taoism. When you make a general criticism, providing no foundation for your opinion, how is one to respond? If you believe my definition of Taoism and Humanism is unclear or incorrect I suggest you study them both a little more indepth and you will find that my comments are not my opinion only, but carry the weight of many learned others. Be specific about what you believe my “humanisic conclusion” is… a general comment is meaningless and carries no validity. Any idiot can voice a meaningless opinion. I believe you are unable to argue against my comments effectively and that is why you have not done so. Generalized comments without an arguement to support them are meaningless. How is anyone to agree or disagree with you if you do not formulate an arguement to support your specious comments? At least I voiced an opinion and supported my opinions with reasons as to why I came to my conslusions.

Further I made it clear in my in my post that violence is in some cases approriate and I agree that it is not exlcuded from the Tao. However, I would argue that the vast majority of individuals do not possess the maturity to determine when violence is appropriate or inappropriate.

PaulLin,

You wrote:

“I think I am seeing a little unclear about Tao and Taichi in here. Tao is the final goal of what Taichi aim to achieve. But being qualified as Taichi don’t have to be at the final destination of Tao.”

I wrote:

One may be effective in the physical aspects of Tai Chi or other internal styles and still not understand or develop the aforementioned abilities. This person only has a superficial understanding of Tai Chi and Taoism and has not understood the deeper meanings and goals.

You wrote:

“From the way you wrote, it seems to me that the Humanism is only a incomplete partial Tao of the lower level.”

A humanist will not recognize the Tao as having authority over his life. A humanist believes that man is the sole measure and final authority on all things, that there is nothing higher than man. A Humanist cannot be a Taoist because the Taoist recognizes that the Tao has sway and power and control over all things. Since the Taoist recognizes this he understands that it is profitable to understand the patterns and principles or the Tao. Once doing so he will bring himself into accord with these patterns and principles rather than attempt to force his will onto the Tao, which is the action of the Humanist, not the Taoist. Humanistic will cannot be forced onto the Tao no matter how hard we try anyway. The Taoist recognizes this, the Humanist does not.

Scott - I made no personal attacks at you, I would appreciate it if you offered me the same charity.

I didn’t expect you to respond at all, as I did not direct my statement at you (although, as it concerned you, you were clearly welcome to respond, and I outlined my disagreement clearly enough that you could clarify your position if so interested). I stated that simply to clarify my position on issues brought up by HKV. He argued a point, I posted disagreeing with something he said, he posted saying (maybe sarcastically; couldn’t tell, but still) that he retracted what he said; so I replied explaining simply why I still believed what he said was true. So again, no response from you was necessary, as no attack was levelled.

“If you believe my definition of Taoism and Humanism is unclear or incorrect …”

Perhaps you didn’t read my post as I explicitly stated the opposite.

Originally posted by Nexus
[B]

Taichi upholds the core principles of taoism. These principles are like looking at your reflection in a pond on a very windy day. You will learn to see your reflection, however you must still discern the features through the ripples using your own insights and understandings. Ideally, the principles lead you to the pond, however you must still have clear vision and the will to see in order to perceive that reflection.

Internal and external are monkey bars and swing sets…

[/B]

Well, there goes lunch.

put down the citar, turn off the lava lamp and get over yourself, lao.

:rolleyes:

Since you are interested in my opinion on the matter, I will outline it via analogy.

If you watch a wolf pack, they exhibit a peculiar (by human standards) approach to aggressive behavior. In particular, aggresive behavior between two individuals in the pack occurs in perfect unison, both in terms of timing and degree of violence. Furthermore, both immediately before and immediately after the situation, all members will return immediately to whatever they happen to be involved in beyond the aggresive incident. For example, if you were to watch an alpha female losing her position in the pack, what you would see is the up-and-coming female and the present-alpha wandering around, sniffing the ground. Suddenly, both will look at each other and curl their lips and release a low growl (if you are observant though you might notice slight differences in the behavior - such as one of the wolves recoiling her posture somewhat). And then immediately they will return to sniffing the ground - even bumping up against each other in their way and paying it no heed. Then perhaps somewhat later, both will simultaneously look up - one will leap forward with a snarl and a bite while the other will leap backwards with a snarl and a bite. And then back to business as usual. This kind of tandem behavior will continue, and can include extremes up to violent contact resulting in blood-soaked hides. It is quite spectacular to watch - it is as if there is some kind of energy between the animals which coordinates their responses. This behavior is not unique to wolves, but found all over the animal kingdom, and even occurs between species (observing multi-species scavenger groups around carcasses is a prime example of this). This kind of violence is peculiar, as I said, by human standards, not just for it’s perfect balance in time and degree, but also it’s egolessness.

This, I would argue, is a better example of ‘the way’ than the concepts of nonviolence you have put forth. I would argue that the concepts of nonviolence (the conclusion) you put forth is humanistic and ego-driven. I do not mean to imply and judgement by this statement. One could certainly argue that there’s alot of good that comes out of the ego. I say it is humanistic because it is an action based upon “the determination of right and wrong, good and bad, value and insignifiance”, a determination made by man. (Note: from your definition of humanism). It is ego-driven because it is based upon a concept of the self which happens to have the quality of nonviolence; a self which makes a judegemtn of right, good, and value upon being nonviolent.

Or at least, that’s what I would have argued had I had more time, but I’m afraid I was busy with more pressing things and only had time to reply briefly to clarify my criticism of HKV’s post. Had I known this would result in personal attacks, I wouldn’t have bothered.

I believe you are unable to argue against my comments effectively and that is why you have not done so.

If there’s any part of my argument you would like elaboration on, please ask.

sdfds

Scott-If taichiquan was invented only as a philosphy that contained fighting as a last ditch effort why the hell does it have swords forms???
I can really see a guy walking down the street carrying a sword when all of a sudden a gang of thieves tries to rob him.

And another thing your posts seem as ego-driven as anyone elses. Your post is basically this “everybody is wrong but me, no one understands taichi but me, everybody is ego-driven but me taichi isnt about fighting and anyone who disagrees with me is wrong”

Originally posted by chingei
[B]

Well, there goes lunch.

put down the citar, turn off the lava lamp and get over yourself, lao.

:rolleyes: [/B]

Chingei, you just love to do that do you? :rolleyes:

toss you one more ball here:

Life is like a similation training program of driving, whatever you did in the similation chamber seems so real, but it is not the same when the times that you are out of it.

Why should we bother about doing any thing in our life when it is not eternal? Just to enjoy it while it is being? Are you prepared to accept the universe itself as your own body after you must leave you little weak human body? Got milk? Got qi? Got Tao? Got spirit?

keep on rolling eyes…:rolleyes: