Hi Bob,
Do you have a link for CTS that you speak of?? I would like to read more about it, so I can have a more informed opinion. I did a search but all I come up with is Carpal Tunnel System. Thanks.
Greetings..
Hi yangyang: these are a few links that do a pretty good job, but Rick Barrett’s book “Through The Western Gate” is a well done reference as it relates to Taiji..
http://www.i-sis.org.uk/lcm.php
[http://www.findarticles.com/p/articl...12/ai_n9153887
http://www.uvm.edu/~annb/faculty/PDFs/C747.pdf
http://www.sportsmedicinenaturally.com/
http://www.massagetoday.com/mpacms/m...cb6dcb58d6f671
http://www.backfixbodywork.com/Athle...ement_Pt_2.htm
http://www.healing101.org/somaticrecall1.html
http://www.idealspine.com/pages/AJCC...y%207%2001.pdf
I hope this helps.. Be well..
PS: oops.. these are aged, it seems.. the first link has much good info.. or, just google “Connective Tissue Tensegrity” for your own search…
thank you sir, i will read up on it.
Looks like an interesting read. I just bought the book.
Hi TaiChiBob,
If you read my post carefully you will notice that it is not as complex as it might first appear. I merely stated simple principles repeatedly in differing ways to provide various examples of the same concept. This is done frequently by me in my posts as you may have noted. The reason I do this is for a few reasons. One, repetition helps when attempting to retain information, or in my case when communicating information. Another reason is that not everyone thinks in the same manner. Some people are more literal and require a reasoned explanation while others do better with a metaphor whereby they may visualize the principle being discussed through the illustration of a story. Others must DO to understand, this I cannot help with much via the internet other than suggesting actions.
By stating the same principle a number of different ways it is more likely to be communicated effectively to a wider audience. When restating the same principle a number of ways it can appear to be complicated, but a closer examination will reveal it is merely the same principle repeated differently.
Some information appears complicated when a reader does not have the proper foundation of knowledge to understand what is being discussed. How can one understand multiplication and division when they do not have a complete grasp of addition and subtraction? Addition and subtraction is the basis of multiplication and division. One must develop a rudimentary knowledge base to understand seemingly more complex principles. Once the basics are grasped comprehensively the seemingly complex principles are found to be simple after all.
Some concepts are seemingly complex because the reader has no foundation for the information being presented. That is my argument pertaining to Tensegrity primarily and CTS secondarily. These are new terms that communicate information that is not new, but the new terms DO complicate these principles by making it appear like the information is new and revolutionary. What I am saying is, state these principles using the terms people understand instead of using unfamiliar terms to describe known principles.
I return to my Library/Learning Resource Center reference. It is not necessary to use new terms for well known and understood principles. This only confuses the issue being discussed because others are not familiar with the new terms. At some point the renaming of well known principles becomes pretentious. I am NOT stating I believe your use of these terms is pretension on your part! I understand this topic is fascinating to you and providing you with new insights. The concepts may have provided you with newer insights, but they are not new concepts. They are just new to you! They are merely known principles redefined and packaged anew, that is all! Truth is truth; facts are facts no matter how they are packaged, so why not use terminology that is common to all. The principles of Tensegrity are as simple as I have previously posted and are nothing more than the principles of Yin-Yang dressed in new clothes.
I would contend that while the connection between CTS and Tensegrity are an interesting study they are none-the-less immaterial to the successful application of Tai Chi or other physical movements. It is still only a modernized and more complicated way of explaining known principles.
I do not need to know how my eye functions in order to see. Why complicate the act of seeing with unnecessary information while in the process of seeing. Understanding how the eye sees does not assist me in seeing any better! Practicing seeing does! What is of primary importance is whether I can see clearly or not, in Tai Chi practice, whether a particular exercise WORKS, not how or it why works. How and why is the prevue of medicine and is important when treating injuries or illness. It is the practice of Tai Chi principles that will activate whatever it is that creates the results we experience. If it is the CTS that produces the results that is fine, and as I stated an interesting study, but it is not necessary to the practice of Tai Chi or any other activity to understand the CTS process of information and energy transmission. What is important is DOING it! It is advantageous to avoid getting so caught up in the minutia that we forget it is results that matter. My proof of this is, if knowledge of tensegrity and CTS were necessary then the Tai Chi Masters of old would not have achieved the levels of performance they did without this NEW and PRECIOUS knowledge, which is neither new nor precious. My point here is that they DID understand the overall principles, just not the details of how it works in a technical sense and it is this overall understanding and the knowledge of how to develop it that is what is important here.
I am not trying to be insulting or devalue anyones preference to study anything they believe will improve their understanding and performance. Hey! If it works, it works! I am merely stating that high levels of performance are a result of practice which provides practical information and feedback. Knowledge and understanding of Tensegrity as it is associated with the CTS is interesting, but unnecessary. A race car driver does not NEED to understand how his cars engine, wheels and other mechanical systems function, he only need understand the abilities and limits of the his car and how to work within those limits. Experience and insight gained through practice is what is important, not knowledge of minutia.
Tensegrity as it applies to the CTS are subject to the principles of Yin-Yang. If one seeks to understand and apply these principles in every area of their life then results will occur of themselves, naturally and have nothing to do with an understanding of Tensegrity and CTS! It is that simple!
There is a point where the search for wider perspectives becomes distracting and counter productive to actual improvement. I understand for you this has not been the case with this information, but I reassert it is not new information, it is just new for you and presented to you in a manner that resonated with you.
To me it is the difference between knowing how or why something occurs and actually being able to do it! True knowledge and understanding is not found in the measuring of experience, as you are well aware, but in the actual living of the experience. It is like reading about meditation as opposed to practicing meditation. One can gain useful information from reading, but the information is useless if one does not actually meditate. It is the information gained from the actual experience that is of true value.
The information you have gained from your reading appears to have either confirmed for you information you already intuited or experienced or pointed your awareness towards an area of study you had not previously considered. This explains your enthusiasm for sharing your new personal discoveries and I would not seek to diminish the value of your new experiences. As always I merely seek to broaden the perspective by offering an opposing or contrasting view of the same information.
Please consider what you may have surmised or intuited about me from our many past conversations: if your position on this topic of discussion was the one I am presently espousing, I would most likely present a contrasting view to that perspective as well. This is not merely a means to exercise an argumentative nature, it is to provide a conflicting view. For out of conflict comes growth!!
As always, a pleasure contrasting principles with you my friend!
Greetings..
Scott: Always on your toes!! and, of course, i appreciate the feedback..
Now, a different analogy.. the old farmer is tooling along in his wooden cart, with its wooden axle, and its wooden wheels.. along comes this guy in a cart with nice rubber tires, looking to help the farmer out.. but, try as he may to help, the farmer assures him that he is quite comfortable with his wooden wheels.. now, if that’s not enough, the wooden wheels are actually made from a rubber tree.. (see the connection).. the principle is there in the wooden wheel, but familiarity and the comfort zone deny the farmer the benefit of enhanced performance.. even with the principles already inherent to his own wheel..
I would contend that while the connection between CTS and Tensegrity are an interesting study they are none-the-less immaterial to the successful application of Tai Chi or other physical movements. It is still only a modernized and more complicated way of explaining known principles.
And, i contend to the contrary.. or, better yet, i contend that the “known principles” are so poorly explained and so distant from western thought processes that they are virtually nonexistent in Taiji circles.. as an observer, i see little, if any, evidence of understanding at this level.. and, that is not a casual remark, it is as a judge in many tournaments.. it is clear to me after presenting this concept and very tangible examples to quite a few students and teachers, the “known principles” are not so well known..
What we are dealing with is a system (The CTS) that has just recently (last 30 or so years) been studied in depth by Biophysicists, and many other healthcare and research professionals.. the contribution of this system to our health and, specifically, to our Taiji, is profound, even at its infancy as a fully understood aspect of the physical existence.. There are very simple and effective techniques that teach us to activate the CTS and establish “energetic coherence” throughout the body (and beyond).. Energetic coherence and the techniques used to maximize its effects are not intuitive from Taiji practice alone.. while they can surely be felt by chance through disciplined training.. it more about cultivating a direct relationship between the Yin/Yang as presented in the classics, and, the CTS as recently understood.. in time, the CTS will be common knowledge, and its techniques will be mainstream healthcare and mainstream Taiji.. only because it is so simple and so remarkable.. originally, the airplane was rejected as having no military value.. hmmmm…
The old farmer will get where he is going.. he may change wheels several times, but he is comfortable with that, he carries several spares (baggage with weight) and feels a certain accomplishment in the resourcefulness and perseverence he needs to make the journey.. but, the guy with the rubber tires is capitalizing from his utilization of old principles in new ways..
So, in a final analogy…:
A race car driver does not NEED to understand how his car’s engine, wheels and other mechanical systems function, he only need understand the abilities and limits of the his car and how to work within those limits. Experience and insight gained through practice is what is important, not knowledge of minutia.
Or, as he races against his peers he notices that a driver with the same car and similar skills is winning consistently and by a wide margin.. that driver was privy to information of a little switch under the dash that activated the turbocharger.. now, having no NEED to know of the cars intracacies, the slower driver is faced with a dilemma.. keep losing, or learn…
We have a turbocharger, the rest is, of course, up to the individual…
Be well…
Hi TaiChiBob & cjurakpt,
cjurakpt:
LOL! Yes! It would be wise to not attempt to arbitrate between Bob and me. Just sit back and watch the interplay or participate in the manner you have chosen. Your comments are insightful and beneficial to the discussion!
I noted you used the word contradictory in your comments when referring to the interplay between Bob and me, whereas in my post to Bob I referred to our perspectives as contrasting. They are as complimentary as they are contrasting, but they are not really, in fact, contradictory perspectives. As expressed in your example of the Chan master, they are merely two different ways of looking at the same phenomenon. We each approach the subject according to our unique purpose. We each begin with a sort of basic viewpoint which colors our interpretation of information and phenomena. By considering each others comments over time we will not only expand our own perspectives, but we may discern the underlying purpose or basic proposition of the other.
Bob and I approach identical principles and activities from similar yet different perspectives. I hope Bob will correct me if I am wrong here:
I perceive one of Bobs interests as investigating the claimed feats of ancient Tai Chi practitioners and attempting to test and validate them. He seems interested in understanding how the feats were accomplished from a non-mysterious viewpoint. There are reasonable explanations for these feats and to discover the means by which they were accomplished and to be able to pass on the information effectively would benefit the overall Tai Chi community and improve Tai Chis standing in the martial arts community overall. One of the reasons he seems to have this interest is because of this love of Tai Chi and the ridicule it has received from some martial artists over the years as an inconsequential and ineffective self-defense form. So it appears to me two of his motivations are the improvement of his Tai Chi through a thorough investigation of the principles and applications of Tai Chi from a modern scientific perspective and the improvement of Tai Chis public image from a merely New Age exercise to a fully respected self-defense form.
These comments should not be considered in an absolute sense. I perceive Bobs overall perspective as being an Holistic approach and not limited to this present description, but for the purposes of this thread let us accept them as a basic premise until Bob elucidates, corrects or refines this description.
While I appreciate and respect these qualities of Bob, to me they are inconsequential. This is in no way to be construed as implying they should be inconsequential to Bob or anyone one else. I emphasize they are inconsequential to ME! I dont care what others think of Tai Chi. I am not concerned about its reputation. While I am interested in the reported fantastic skills of the masters I am not overly concerned with understanding them. I prefer to focus on the application of the principles of Tao through its various manifestations, one of which is Tai Chi. I hope to explain my reasoning for this view below.
One of my interests is to investigate and understand how the principles of Tao infuse and are manifested in all things, but in this discussion in particular, the learning and practice of Tai Chi. To me, identifying and understanding foundational principles are of primary importance in ALL things. Foundational principles are the source of all things that manifest from them. They are merely a reflection of Tao and are its manifestation. If we investigate and understand the foundational principles of Tai Chi or any other activity we will easily comprehend all that manifests from those principles. If we become overly occupied with the manifestations (the details) we will hamper our understanding of the underlying source from which all power and understanding truly springs.
We may compare this view to a tree. The root is the underlying principles of Tai Chi; the leaves are its manifestations, the forms and their application. Keep in mind that the underlying source/principle of all world system manifestations/phenomena no matter what they are is Tao! All things are merely manifestations of Tao! We may focus on the leaves or focus on the root. To pay attention to the leaves is important, but if we wish to understand the deeper meaning/power/manifestations of the tree (life, Tai Chi, etc.) we must understand the root. The leaves are multitudinous and to attempt to understand them all would be a Herculean and futile task. To completely understand one or two leaves may be possible, but it provides only a cursory understanding of the peripheral aspects of the root, it is nothing more than focusing on transient detail.
To understand the root is to understand all the leaves that spring from that root. When we have a comprehensive understanding of the principles of Tao and are able to apply them effectively we acquire, as a naturally occurring consequence, an inherent understanding of all things from a holistic perspective.
The pursuit of Tai Chi is a comprehensive study and application of the principles of Tao through actions that are both an exercise and a form of self-defense. However, to master Tai Chi one need not master its external manifestations, its forms, but must master the principles that are the root of its study, that is the principles of Tao! When one masters the root, the principles of Tao, their body will spontaneously perform accordingly. This is why, to me, the study of CTS is fascinating, but unnecessary. It reflects a focus on the manifestations, the details, and not a focus on the root, the source.
You see, a Master follows no fixed form. He has transcended form because he is able to apply the principles of Tao effectively in his daily life. While “form” is the tool used to accomplish this transcendence, attachment to form binds us to the manifestation which is merely an illusion created by the mind. Transcendence of form occurs as a consequence of the unobstructed functioning of the mind, NOT through the practice of form. This does not mean the practice of form is useless; it is the manner in which we learn and apply the principles of Tao. Forms are the leaves, the finger that points us to the source. If we become preoccupied with the details of the leaves there is a tendency to get lost in greater and greater detail. This leads away from a comprehensive understanding of the source. We must remember that the underlying purpose of the leaves is to guides us to the source. It is the source that matters most. Even if our wish is to comprehensively know the leaves as well we must understand that the best way to accomplish this task is to understand the ultimate source, which is Tao! To know the root is to know each one of the leaves, but to know a few leaves is not necessarily to know the root. To comprehensively know the leaves of interest to us we MUST know the root. This is why it is said, To master oneself is to master all things!
From experience, through numerous lively interactions I know Bob realizes all of this. However, not everyone that reads his posts will understand. Therefore, I post contrasting principles and ideas in an effort to widen the perspective for the benefit of keeping the ultimate goal in perspective. At least it is MY ultimate goal, LOL and I think it is the underlying if not recognized goal of many others.
But I could be wrong!
P. S. Hi TaiChiBob,
I dont have time to respond to your latest post in a comprehensive manner right now. My previous post here was meant to try to address my overall intent rather than address your post point by point. It is not my intention to ignore or devalue your response, I only have limited time in which to post as I am sure is the case with many of us here. Your points are well made! Please do not confuse my statement of not necessary to know with not beneficial to know! Information may be beneficial without being necessary!
Hello Gabe,
The thing is, Tai Chi must not be interpreted in terms of Shaolin type of dynamics. Surely, all those proper body alignments and so on are important in the beginning, but ultimately Tai Chi operates with a different set of rules, and cannot be adequately analysed with Shaolin type of mind set.
In terms of the Yin and Yang, it is all done with Yi Qi, and NOT the function of relaxed and tensed muscles. That’s why the old masters always say “Pan Quen Chuen Shi Yi” which means the whole form is done with Yi. If you read up on the Tai Chi Classics (esp. Wang Zhong Yue, Wu and Li) and apply their methods in terms of Yi Qi instead of bodily methods, you will see the classics in a whole new light.
Of course, as Scott pointed out, without muscular tension we will fall down like a sack of potatoes. And when someone’s attacking us, it is so hard not to turn to muscular effort. But everytime we activate muscular effort, we are restricting the amount of power coming through. In terms of Qi, we would be restricting Qi flow; in terms of TCBob’s CT theory (which I like very much) muscular tension will interfere with the natural power coming from the CT system; and in terms of bow and arrow (TC Classic “Fa Jing yu Fang Jian”) it is like you are trying to fire and arrow and trying to push/throw the arrow at the same time. Just let the bowstring do the work! don’t interfere with it.
Of course, to be able to fully utilize Yi Qi, one must fully understand and be able to master their operations. Shen Yi Qi operates according to very specific rules. Especially if one wants to activate the “True Yang (Zhen Yang)” which comes from extreme Yin. Have faith in your Yi Qi. Let go. Explore. The power that you will develop from letting go of wanting to use the muscles is tremendousely rewarding.
Cheers,
John
Greetings..
Scott: As always, we exchange insights with gusto and respect.. but, always with the best interest of Taiji in mind.. i do not contend with your perception of my motivation, nor do i limit that motivation to your perception ..
In the “tree” analogy, it is interesting how there seems to be a divided perception, separating roots, leaves and such.. i see it as a complete system, each perceived part interdependent, a symbiotic whole.. My good friend and fellow Taiji player remarked how during his military service he was responsible for ordinance.. he said, understanding the principles of explosives is one thing, but.. you better understand the mechanics of using them, if you hope for longevity..
I suppose some level of clarity is useful, here.. as i’m sure Scott is aware, i advocate a full and complete experience of the principles.. it is empty to pursue Taiji without the primary experience of how Yin/Yang interplay.. they are not separate concepts, no more than breathing is either inhaling or exhaling.. it is both, in cycles and degrees..
I do see Taiji holistically, and the Tao as well.. i see no difference. Tao is not the roots, it is not the leaves.. it is what allows roots to be roots and leaves to be leaves.. and it is what creates the perception that they are different and yet the same.. there is no difference between the principle and its manifestation as nuance.. by way of analogy: Tao would be the sunlight, present in the result of roots, trunks, branches, leaves and TREE… in my experience, i cannot separate the result from its motivation.. i can only regard the process as worthy of my full attention.. that process, of which even my consideration is included, is the a unified expression of BEING.. and we express being by DOING.. so, when i DO the work of exploring fundamental principles, and.. when i DO the work of exploring nuance and mechanics.. i am expressing Tao as BEING…
The CTS is no less fundamental than Yin/Yang.. which is no less fundamental than cooking.. it is only by separating and assigning priorities that we degrade the subtle beauty of this experience.. Now, this sounds well and good, but.. it isn’t.. It is an over-simplification of the process of realization..
To understand the root is to understand all the leaves that spring from that root. When we have a comprehensive understanding of the principles of Tao and are able to apply them effectively we acquire, as a naturally occurring consequence, an inherent understanding of all things from a holistic perspective.
I do not understand the Tao.. but i deeply respect its processes.. i can experience its wisdom through every aspect of this physical existence (and beyond).. Tao’s principles are known only by application in the nuanced art of living, not as a sterile pursuit of principles as means to an end.. Certainly, focus on basic concepts support broader applications, but.. they will not manifest until we apply.. The CTS is just another adventure into the principles.. like cooking, fishing, and washing the car.. or, even the world of combat arts..
The pursuit of Tai Chi is a comprehensive study and application of the principles of Tao through actions that are both an exercise and a form of self-defense. However, to master Tai Chi one need not master its external manifestations, its forms, but must master the principles that are the root of its study, that is the principles of Tao! When one masters the root, the principles of Tao, their body will spontaneously perform accordingly. This is why, to me, the study of CTS is fascinating, but unnecessary. It reflects a focus on the manifestations, the details, and not a focus on the root, the source.
And, i may master the physics and chemistry of understanding water’s many miracles.. yet, i still drown if i don’t study the nuance and minutia of swimming.. The principles of Yin/Yang and Tao will not “spontaneously” arise without familiarity with the environment of the experience.. i may practice my fundamentals for many years and feel the experience of Tao, Yin and Yang quite fully, but.. without experience applying it in the world of full-contact Martial Arts, it would be unadvisable to challenge a seasoned fighter.. Now, there will be those that assure me that if my understanding is complete, the result should comply with my intention.. back to the cars: i can hone my driving skills to a razor’s edge, but lose to someone who knows their local roads, roads i have never seen.. however nice the ideal may seem, there’s work to be done…
It is advantageous to avoid getting so caught up in the minutia that we forget it is results that matter. My proof of this is, if knowledge of tensegrity and CTS were necessary then the Tai Chi Masters of old would not have achieved the levels of performance they did without this NEW and PRECIOUS knowledge, which is neither new nor precious. My point here is that they DID understand the overall principles, just not the details of how it works in a technical sense and it is this overall understanding and the knowledge of how to develop it that is what is important here.
I see no difference in the “minutia” and the “result”.. what i see is evidence that the ancestors had some deep insights into CTS, but no formal way of comprehending.. We are blessed to live in an age that can shed real light on this subject, how much more can we add to the art through this understanding.. that is, if improving and evolving the art is desirable by anyone’s standards.. (it is by mine).. Confining the Art to the experience of the ancestors, is a slow and suffocating demise.. Breathe fresh life and broader understandings into the Arts, seek the deeper mysteries so that they too might someday become known…
Be well..
Imperial:
“Of course, as Scott pointed out, without muscular tension we will fall down like a sack of potatoes. And when someone’s attacking us, it is so hard not to turn to muscular effort. But everytime we activate muscular effort, we are restricting the amount of power coming through. In terms of Qi, we would be restricting Qi flow; in terms of TCBob’s CT theory (which I like very much) muscular tension will interfere with the natural power coming from the CT system; and in terms of bow and arrow (TC Classic “Fa Jing yu Fang Jian”) it is like you are trying to fire and arrow and trying to push/throw the arrow at the same time. Just let the bowstring do the work! don’t interfere with it.”
Your bow and arrow analogy is beautiful. Can we discuss this further? There is tension in the bow- the degree of tension and flexibility determine how far the arrow travels. There is tension in the string- along with the bow, the two create the stored energy that power the arrow upon release. The arrow itself has tension in its shaft and hardness to its point- to allow for penetration. They don’t shatter on impact. Your intent guides the arrow, but the bow, string and arrow are the tools of delivery. And this tool is a balance of tension and flexibility. And our tools are made of muscles and connective tissue. Yes, the act of drawing the arrow, mounting it and releasing it is a thing of smooth, effortless and natural beauty- but we are still talking about tension and relaxation and flexibility. And that perfect economy of motion in the master archer comes from contrived, repetitive practise, not some kind of “natural” reaction. Though we talk about being formless, or “structureless” you need perfect structure to shoot that arrow, and structure that maintains uninterrupted chi flow.
And lastly, was it Kenneth Fish or Rober Smith that talked about Shaolin masters having higher internal than most of the tai chi people he’s met. Many that I’ve spoken to do not agree with the classifications of “internal” and external" martial art.
Very interested in the responses so far.
g
Greetings..
Many that I’ve spoken to do not agree with the classifications of “internal” and external" martial art.
I agree that many proficient “external” Martial Artists arrive at internal by virtue of realization.. they reach the limits of “external” efficiency, and begin to realize their further potential through internal principles.. as the theory of Yin/Yang suggests, when Yang reaches its maximum, it begins its journey into Yin.. similarly, as internalists approach maximum Yin, they begin to seek the Yang compliment.. The difference being the focus of training.. the optimum being a balance..
Be well…
I just wanted to add that caveat in case anyone erroneously thought I was comparing you two to the two monks and casting myself to the Master in the story, telling you that you are both right; perish the thought! who has time for that?!? (“No! I am not Prince Hamlet, nor was meant to be; am an attendant lord, one that will do to swell a progress, start a scene or two…”)
at the risk of repeating our last exchange of self-deprecation, thank you…
actually, I stated that they are “not contradictory”, which would certainly “not” contradict their description as contrasting - and I certainly agree with that…so c’mon Scott, what’s YOUR problem? I guess pressing all those wild flowers gets you a little incoherent, hmmm? 
actually, to “defend” Bob a bit (like he needs that!), I’ll give you my own reason for, at times, “preferring” the western / relatively analytical (complex) model over the eastern / relatively metaphorical (simple); if you will indulge me, for it may seem somewhat circuitous:
what I have found is that, in the health care field at least, many folks who consider themselves hollistic-type healers follow an unfortunately typical tack: first, they decry the insensitive, fragmented, ego-driven etc. failings of allopathic medicine to address the “whole person”; then, they tout their particular alternative remedy du jour as just what the public needs; then, they try to explain why what they do works in one of the following two ways: a) western pseudo-science: using an interchange of typically quantum physics, electro-magnetism, complexity theoy, whatever, they seek to “legitimize” their approach by giving it scientic validity (this is the same science that they just reviled, but never mind that); b) eastern pseudo-metaphor: they pick whatever they like from TCM, Tibetian medicine, etc. and apply it, usually in the gaps that they leave in their use of western science; what’s even better, they use this as a justification why what they do can’t really be studied appropriately by a double blind randomized clinical trial, essentially meaning that it canot be disproved
so, they use the best of both worlds to argue their case, and the outcome is typically a poorly blended amalgam of two systems that in and of themselves are both more then adequate of describing a variety of different phenomena, but when fragmented in this manner (so much for holism!) become essentially useless
another are where i see this is in the world internal arts /qigong / tai chi - a lot of teachers do the same flip-flopping between the two systems, using one when they can’t say something in the other, using the science when they want to appear “analytical” and the metaphor when they want to appear inscrutable (very often, they do so to slip out of a corner when someone points out their incorrect assumptions about western science - they pull the whole yin/yang card, and basically trump the other person, because of that person’s lack of familiarity with the eastern system); so, I decided that instead of defaulting to “eastern mode”, of which I have very limited knowledge, when faced with supposedly inexplicable tai chi phenomenna, I wanted to be able to describe them in a western manner; doing so by using the conventions of tensegrity, complexity theory, CTS behavior in context of gravity / ground reaction force etc. has therefore been an area of study for me for nearly 10 years; my delight when Bob started posting about this, because he seems to be doing similar “research” in a way that no one else I’ve interracted with has done - so it’s nice to see that approach confirmed independently by a knowledgeable / reliable source
so, I guess my point is that I am trying to combat sloppiness: it’s so easy to shift from one paradigmm to the other without realizing it, based on the desire to be authoritative; another reason to use the western approach - we live in the west - many people here relate better to that sort of thinking, and actually reject any attempt to describe things in an eastern mode - to me, being able to satisfy their left brains with a detailed explanation of why what’s happening is happening in their own “language” conceiveably removes an obstacle to their more fully investing themselves in the practice of tai chi / qi gong - just an attempt at using skillful means to trick someone into trying the practice (hey, don’t look at me - Chogyam Trungpa very directly says that you have to fool beginners into trying meditation because if they knew what it was really like they’d never do it!)
well, I guess I failed miserably in terms of not getting in the middle of things…
Come on, TCB. More of your thoughts please.
Hi TaiChiBob,
A most marvelous response! As always!
In the “tree” analogy, it is interesting how there seems to be a divided perception, separating roots, leaves and such.. i see it as a complete system, each perceived part interdependent, a symbiotic whole..
I agree with you there is no separation between root and leaf. Inherently there is nothing that is not Tao; however Tao may be perceived/experienced as a unity or as separate entities, Yin-Yang or Yin and Yang. While each separate entity inherently contains qualities of the whole (IS the whole), this is not generally perceived by the general population. In point of fact, Tao is experienced as Separate Entities by the vast majority of people NOT as a unified whole. When individuals do perceive Unity the experience is transitory and not a permanent condition, likewise those who understand inherent unity primarily experience Tao as separate entities. Those who achieve unobstructed perception as a consistent state of being perceive Tao as unity and as separate entities at the same time or alternately as they choose! (Remember my illustration of this point using the Old Woman/Young Woman optical illusion!) Because Tao is primarily experienced as separate entities we communicate its unity through the context of separate entities. In order to direct perception towards a realization that the parts ARE the whole we use metaphorical allusions that illustrate the point. We use separate entities (words) with inherent limitation to allude to the holistic condition or unity which is Tao!
Because we must use separate entities (words) to communicate Unity (Tao) there will always be flaws in the method used to indicate it. Limitation is inherent within the system of separate entities. Therefore, there will always “seem to be a divided perception, separating roots, leaves and such..” What is important is to understand the metaphor according to the context with which it was intended. If we change the context of the metaphor it does not communicate the intended principle. A metaphor is not a logical syllogism. It is not intended to arrive at a logically true conclusion. It is a general allusion to a state or condition of being that cannot be precisely indicated. It points to phenomena that must be directly apprehended in order to understand; as such a metaphor cannot be fairly parsed as we would a logical argument!
Figures of speech or metaphorical allusions are not to be taken literally; they indicate phenomenon or principles that occur within a specific context. When we change the context we change the meaning of the metaphor. Metaphors are fingers pointing to a principle, they are not THE principle. If we change the direction of the pointing finger by changing the context of the metaphor we miss that which was being pointed at and the metaphor loses its designed purpose. The metaphor of root and leaf indicates a specific way of perceiving the interconnectedness of Tao to its manifestations and the manifestations to Tao.
Since we must use separate entities to communicate Unity it is beneficial to speak to others according to a context of metaphors that are understandable according to the most common way of perceiving reality. Thus when we say the leaf leads us to the root which is the source we are alluding to the connection between the leaf and the root. The fact they are inherently One (the tree) is implied within the metaphor whether it is directly stated or not!
My good friend and fellow Taiji player remarked how during his military service he was responsible for ordinance.. he said, understanding the principles of explosives is one thing, but.. you better understand the mechanics of using them, if you hope for longevity..
i may master the physics and chemistry of understanding water’s many miracles.. yet, i still drown if i don’t study the nuance and minutia of swimming.. The principles of Yin/Yang and Tao will not “spontaneously” arise without familiarity with the environment of the experience.. i may practice my fundamentals for many years and feel the experience of Tao, Yin and Yang quite fully, but.. without experience applying it in the world of full-contact Martial Arts, it would be unadvisable to challenge a seasoned fighter..
This position is not supported by historically reported events experienced by Masters and traditional Taoist literary metaphor. In truth it is not necessary to even know any martial arts at all or how to swim.
The first is a true story, an example of a Master knowing NO martial arts yet overcoming numerous martial arts masters:
Shoju (1642-1721) was a Zen master, a dharma teacher to Hakuin, father of modern Rinzai Zen. Shoju was not a martial artist. He was a Zen Master; one could say he was a “Master of Himself” which is synonymous with being in tune with, or at One with Tao! He is well known for an episode called “The Thrashing of the Master Swordsmen!” On a particular occasion Shoju was invited to observe a demonstration by a group of Master Swordsmen. Following the demonstration the Swordsmen discussed with Shoju the principles of Zen. The Swordsmen doubted that it would be possible for a skilled Swordsman, without the element of surprise, to be defeated by another who relied on spirit alone. Hearing this Shoju invited the Swordsmen to attack him all at once. During the attack not one struck Shoju, while Shoju rapped each one on the head with his fan. When asked by the Swordsmen how, without any training, he could perform such a feat, Shoju replied, “If your eye is true and your mind unobstructed, there is nothing you cannot overcome, including a sword attack.”
A similar event has been reported to have occurred to Hakuin as well. I have not been able to locate in English any reference to this possible event. However, what we have here is a man, a Zen Master, one in tune with Tao, with no martial arts experience anticipating through intuitive insight impending attacks. He effectively avoided the attacks, preserved his safety and demonstrated to his faux assailants his ability to return harm for harm if it had been his intention.
My second example is 2 stories from the 19th chapter of Chuang Tzu:
[B]”A drunken man who falls out of a cart, though he may suffer, does not die. His bones are the same as other people’s; but he meets his accident in a different way. His spirit is in a condition of security. He is not conscious of riding in the cart; neither is he conscious of falling out of it. Ideas of life, death, fear, etc., cannot penetrate his breast; and so he does not suffer from contact with objective existences. And if such security is to be got from wine, how much more is it to be got from Tao. It is in Tao that the Sage seeks his refuge, and so he is free from harm.
Confucius was looking at the cataract at Lüliang. It fell from a height of thirty jen, and its foam reached forty li away. No scaly, finny creature could enter therein. Yet Confucius saw an old man go in, and thinking that he was suffering from some trouble and desirous of ending his life, bade a disciple run along the side to try and save him. The old man emerged about a hundred paces off, and with flowing hair went carolling along the bank. Confucius followed him and said, ‘I had thought, Sir, you were a spirit, but now I see you are a man. Kindly tell me, is there any way to deal thus with water?’
‘No’, replied the old man; ‘I have no way. There was my original condition to begin with; then habit growing into nature; and lastly acquiescence in destiny. Plunging in with the whirl, I come out with the swirl. I accommodate myself to the water, not the water to me. And so I am able to deal with it after this fashion.’ [/B]
These three examples illustrate the basis of my assertion that understanding and accommodating ourselves to Tao, the foundational principle of all creation, provides a quality of experience and preservation of life, beyond what may be provided by the practice of forms!
That is enough for my friend I must be off to bed now! As always I am learning and growing through our interaction!
Greetings..
cjurakpt: Humble thanks for your support <bows>.. but, we are all “absolutely correct”
I do favor linking science with the perceived mysticism of the east.. i have always considered the “middle way” favorable.. As Scott appropriately asserts, a deep understanding of the Yin/Yang process is essential.. but, it is not so difficult as to be a hindrance to moving into experiencing it in the generallities of “Living”.. and, one of those “generallities” is exploring the application of the various tools available to the Taiji seeker, i.e.: CTS..
I am respectful of your years of study in the relationships of the CTS to Taiji, and would be honored to meet you and your teacher if the opportunity presents itself.. equally, i would also be honored to meet Scott, he is respectful, knowledgable, and given to good-spirited dialogue.. it is through such dialogue that we either cultivate a deeper sense of our own beliefs, or.. are rewarded with a more desirable perspective.. either way, it’s a win/win.. the loss comes when we reject better researched data in favor of prejudiced preferences, or.. when we assume we “know” the right answer and fail to adequately consider alternative perspectives..
I do not assume i am “right”, in fact.. i generally put my opinions out for commentary, to see if they stand up to scrutiny.. i would rather adjust flawed perceptions than cling to ego needs for acceptedness.. The more we put this concept out there, the more people will consider it.. the more it is considered the more feedback we can expect, and.. hopefully, we can further refine its worthiness.. Much of the research on CTS is health oriented, some of it is specifically tailored to sports enhancement, and precious little is directly linked to Taiji.. it is my hope to inspire others.. (actually, i’m lazy.. i’m hoping others will do the work and share it )..
Once you learn to activate the system (and it’s ridiculously easy) it’s almost a no-brainer to equate the sensation to the most valid feeling of “Peng” you have ever experienced.. trusting the CTS to work under bizarre circumstances (testing its limits), we stand with our feet together, activate the system, and.. stand in amazement as people apply tremendous pressure pushing our center to no avail, and with little to no active resistance.. the “Tensegrity” absorbs the energy and distributes it throughout the whole system, ultimately driving it into the ground and further stabilizing the apparent weak stance.. such a unique feeling..
Thanks, and.. Be well…
Hi cjurakpt,
Thank you for another meaningful post. I agree with most of it. I do have some comments. I dont have time to write them now however. As I just mentioned I am off to bed. If Bob does not preoccupy me too much I will try to respond later or tomorrow.
I guess I misunderstood you concerning the contradictory comment!:eek:
I don’t get the joke about pressing wild flowers!
If it is an allusion to New Age thinking that is NOT pertinent to me! I agree with your perspective concerning the embarassing amalgam of eastern thinking and western thinking amongst some who dabble, but have no real understanding. I also agree with attempting to take eastern thought and principles and communicating it according to a western mindset. There are some inherent limitations however so we cannot completely discard some eastern methodologies. I will try to comment more on this later.
I have little in common with the New Age thinking. My study is 30+ years of Ch’an and Tao with no interactions with New Age thinkers.
Thank you for your comments!
I anticipate your response with bated breath…
no muss, no fuss - just wanted to make it clear that we are all on the same page
It’s your by-line bro: sing the whole Lumberjack song and you’ll get to it by the middle of verse 2…right after the “skipping and jumping”
good God, no! it is with full certainty that in no way shape or form do I equate you AT ALL with New Age claptrap :eek: - in fact, both you and Bob strike me as being varient (deviant? ) manifestations of an ideal that I strive for in myself - we could maybe call it mythological realism…
Ch’an is the way to go - my limited study first began with two years of biweekly lectures / meditations given by my teacher, with dinner (read: Ch’an style group interview) out afterwards with a few of us who helped him set-up/clean-up (the “dharma crew”) to “get rid” of whatever voluntary donations were made by attendees…good times…
again, looking forward to it - in regards to the limitations, I don’t necesarilly disagree that there are - so then, in what way does one responsibly cross-over from one system to another, whilst maintaining the integrity of both? that, to me, is an interesting question…
likewise
Hi Taiji Bob and crew,
Great information ive been sitting here reading the whole thread, now i have a question about CTS if you can bounce people when playing puhs hands using the CTS can you push a car in the same way? I know there is different weights and energy but is it possible to push a car without the muscle as in the way you push using CTS?
Regards
Garry
Hi Dr John,
Not all shaolin kung fu is external, didnt Taiji come from shaolin at one stage and was called Pao Chuan?
Actually, how much of Taiji has still shaolin rootss in the movements?
Garry