What the heck is Jing?

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Wing Chun
41

[QUOTE=Mr Punch;898233]Er Hendrik, don’t judge a book by its cover! 9 times out of 10 the cover is chosen between a designer and the publisher and is NOT the choice of the author. Don’t know if this book is any good, but just saying.

Otherwise, like what you’re saying so far, and nothing to add other than pointless speculation, so I’m back to reading.[/QUOTE]

you could be right on the cover.

However,

On,

http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/1583942114/ref=sib_dp_pt#reader-link

click on to the “surprise me.” to see for yourself.

my take is the power generation level in the book is a level lower then the general Kyokushin or Mua Thai school. it is staying in the 19 60 Karate era. IMHO

42

I’m not learned in the subject at hand, but to me “lik” is raw strength. You can have it naturally or even build it via sheer physical work/training. So you have bigger muscles, stronger tendons, etc. But it is not technique specific.

Now faat ging/fa jin to me is a technique to express that raw strength. It sets the parameters of distance, timing and duration.

I liked the hammer and nail analogy. Having “lik”, you can just bash the nail into the wood in one or more attempts. But the nail might be skewed, bent, etc. If you have good technique you should be able to hit it once with the right amount of force such that it will go straight in with no deviation.

CMA applies the concept of ging to more than percussive striking though which confuses the heck out of me. What is silk reeling ging, soft/cotton (min) ging, listening (teng) ging? Is it as “simple” as touch sensitivity?

Examples of non-MA ging that I have seen:

  • the chop of the butcher/roast meats man
  • the noodle puller who creates long thin strands of noodles without breaking the dough
  • the Chinese chef who tosses the wok with seemingly little effort and still catch the food

Hmmm … all seem to be food related … time for lunch! :smiley:

43

1, short power is not equal to percussive sharp shock. short and shock are two different things. —H

yes it is, i think you have been mislead if you think it isn’t exactly that ----David

please explain what and why it is the same thing for you.

2, long power also doesnt egual to steady increasing push. yes it does, powers are about “time” not “space” --H

again, you have been mislead or are unstudied on teh subject --David

Again,
please explain what and why it is the same thing for you.

3, corrrect structure, combined with rapid exertion of force = power issuance or fa jin.

what is a correct structure? what is a rapid exertion of force? ----H

if you are asking these questions, you shouldn’t be in a forum, you should be in a beginners ma class ----David

principle is principle,
Again, I am interested in your view of WHAT and why on the subject.

6, It’s not so hard to understand in the doing of it so much as it is trying to wrap your head around it when your only source is words on a page. — David

Doing is certainly is better then fantasying. ----- H

you bring up fantasy a lot. I suggest training instead to get understanding of these things ----- David

For me, Training without understanding WHAT is it is a dissaster.

if some one think that is so simple,
Take a look of the evident of , even if one’s read most of the Taiji classic and doing Taiji for decades such as those Taiji practioners, how many of them knows fajing beside some demonstration which is only worthed for demonstration. ----- H

most chen players are more than familiar with the idea of power issuance or explosive power or whatever you wish to call fa jin ------David

Are you a Chen players?

take a look at the old movie of the taiji and crane challenge in hongkong. see what is the reality. These people train and also read alots… ---- H

that movie demonstrates the poor quality of those people’s training as compared to the training of today or the training that actually deals with physical combat.

BOth are completely pathetic in their abilities and it is harshly apparent — David

IMHO, I would say something wrong with the whole system instead of on the people.

am I missing something here? The topic seems rather straight to the point. I think many have spoken directly to it and answered it.

Hendrik, why are you convoluting things more by being contradictory or rejecting the answers in favour of ?? ----- David

Simple, because I am not satisfied with the answer.

I don’t know what you are in favour of , but you are rejecting appropriate answers . ---- David

Perhaps I am not favour of anything but i am rejecting everything which is not Wholistic or partial.

Perhaps there is no single answer but lots of answers and changing answers?

44

[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;898240]The easiets way for a layman to understand Fa jin is the analogy of a sneeze.
Of course it can’t be described per say, only seen and felt.
Much like trying to describe being choked out or kicked in the balls.[/QUOTE]

Honestly, IMHO, the sneeze analogy can only analogy partial of the fa jin. for it doesnt tell what and how to sneeze or activate at will and what and how to direct the force flow to the target.

IMHO, the analog cant be described per say because it is missing other two components. and thus, it is not about the analogy but it is about fail to identify the components.

without be able to know every details that cause un repeatable issue.

Thus, in the Kuen kuit it says, ten thousands variation begin from the small details.

we call our art the Siu Lien Tau or the Essence training of the details. the power of this training is beable to laser sharply knowing the details and thus have an excellent handling on the subject.

45

[QUOTE=David Jamieson;898243]You are entitled to form your own opinions and conclusions about anything i suppose.

I will have to disagree with you as I use this stuff regularly (read: pretty much daily)

I can physically demonstrate it, which is probably better than writing it down. lol[/QUOTE]

could you please describe what you propose instead of going toward you you and I I where lead to ego and not the subject.

as I mention above let’s answer WHAT and WHy and HOW instead of I can do it I know it , You dont know…etc. those are not contribute to understanding or knowing the subject.

For me, Short is not equal to shock. certainly not.

Short Jin,

In general, Shot is refer to (or for describing ) how long the jin’s effective distance (ie short extended physical movement , short penetration range) or short time / fast acceleration at generation.

Shock Jin

shock is the characteristics of the effect.

Shock has different charecteristics
IE penetrate deep and then explode, shatter in the surface, deep shatter…

after one has master the above, one can combine or fuse them together in any way one desire. But Shock and Short are not the same things.

Yee play a big part of these fajin because Yee is the component which Guided the Jin (missile) and decide how, where, and when the “missile” directed and activate.

Thus, if one have no handle in one’s mind , the Yee will certainly fuzzy. if one have no experience in the silence or the shen, the Yee will certainly not clear…

This is the part of jin which physics doesnt reach. and this is the part of the Jin that most doesnt get it and stays/limit mainly at the physical level only without a full mastering.

Full mastering means clear , precise, sharp, details handling. without that quality repeatable fa jin is impossible and that explain why everyone is speaking about Jin but not many mastering it. IMHO.

So, David, you turn to describe and explain why your Short and Shock jin is one thing?

46

you aren’t seeing the forest because the trees are in the way. :slight_smile:

seriously, martial practice is less about words and the meanings of words.

short sharp shock is what i use as the description. that’s what it is. If you chose definition 3 for shock from dictionary number 2 then yes, meaning becomes unclear and can even be contrary.

however, physical demonstration or visceral reality is the best teacher of these concepts. One can gloss over things here in a forum and share concepts.

But this is really going down into the weeds and losing sight of what is.

no ego about it. but this thread is worthless if there is no conclusion to the query.
Use the literal definitions if you need to, but “doing” is way more valuable. :slight_smile:

most all the possible written answers are already here.

47

[QUOTE=CFT;898248]I’m not learned in the subject at hand, but to me “lik” is raw strength. You can have it naturally or even build it via sheer physical work/training. So you have bigger muscles, stronger tendons, etc. But it is not technique specific.

Now faat ging/fa jin to me is a technique to express that raw strength. It sets the parameters of distance, timing and duration.

I liked the hammer and nail analogy. Having “lik”, you can just bash the nail into the wood in one or more attempts. But the nail might be skewed, bent, etc. If you have good technique you should be able to hit it once with the right amount of force such that it will go straight in with no deviation.

CMA applies the concept of ging to more than percussive striking though which confuses the heck out of me. What is silk reeling ging, soft/cotton (min) ging, listening (teng) ging? Is it as “simple” as touch sensitivity?

Examples of non-MA ging that I have seen:

  • the chop of the butcher/roast meats man
  • the noodle puller who creates long thin strands of noodles without breaking the dough
  • the Chinese chef who tosses the wok with seemingly little effort and still catch the food

Hmmm … all seem to be food related … time for lunch! :D[/QUOTE]

good analogy for the first level of understanding.

48

So, do we have any videos of "jin’ ??

49

[QUOTE=David Jamieson;898253]you aren’t seeing the forest because the trees are in the way. :slight_smile:

seriously, martial practice is less about words and the meanings of words.

short sharp shock is what i use as the description. that’s what it is. If you chose definition 3 for shock from dictionary number 2 then yes, meaning becomes unclear and can even be contrary. -----

if your “short jin” is a fusion of different components, that is fine. make it clear so others understand what you mean.

and also Words are important, because words is communication. words communicate to others what one means and what one knows.

however, physical demonstration or visceral reality is the best teacher of these concepts. One can gloss over things here in a forum and share concepts. ----

how likely is a neuclear bomb can be constructed
if it is not theoritically proven do able within the law of physics?

and also,

How can others know what kind of forest is it when one doesnt describe what kind of trees is within the forest?

and ofcorse there is the question of do one knows the trees? if one keep avoid to describe the trees?

But this is really going down into the weeds and losing sight of what is. -----

May be it is not losing sight but not use to having a clear and sharp details discussion where things needs to be clear and not fuzzy?

no ego about it. -----

read the post, ego or not see if the signature is there. Ego is a habitual stuffs beyond mind or what one think or claim.

but this thread is worthless if there is no conclusion to the query.
Use the literal definitions if you need to, but “doing” is way more valuable. :slight_smile: ------

You are certainly respected and entitle to your opinion.

as in the study of any subject, detail Literal definitions are always a must for it is with the details lay the mastering.

to build a skyscrapper one got to know even the smallest screw and nut of it. That is mastery.

and there is no such thing as the conclusion of ONE and ONLY one TRUE SKYSCRAPPER in the reality.

most all the possible written answers are already here.----

You still didnt tell us if you are a Chen Taiji practitioner. :smiley:

50

[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;898257]So, do we have any videos of "jin’ ??[/QUOTE]

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=jmaPxa-eZss

falling step jin

51

most scientific advances aren’t born of theory but rather they are born of accidents and incidents that occur while looking for something else.

I can appreciate having some kind of intellectual understanding, but words are the most corruptible vehicle of teaching and subsequently the most useless form of understanding when it comes to martial arts.

there is a difference between talking about something and thinking you understood as opposed to actually physically being shown something and really intrinsically understanding.

I reiterate, there is more value in “doing” than in all the thought processes that follow or lead up.

One of the great aspects of shaolin kungfu for instance is Ch’an and it’s complementary state to martial arts practice.

No mind, just do.

This is key and will bring more understanding than mere words.

anyone can build castles in the sand, but these are not the foundations of real kingdom.

52

[QUOTE=Hendrik;898263]http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=jmaPxa-eZss

falling step jin[/QUOTE]

Ah, I see what YOU mean by “jin”.

53

most scientific advances aren’t born of theory but rather they are born of accidents and incidents that occur while looking for something else.------

I am not scientific advance, however we know in this world that from building a car to a skyscrapper, theoritical details is needed for the process of repeatable quality in quantity.

I can appreciate having some kind of intellectual understanding, but words are the most corruptible vehicle of teaching and subsequently the most useless form of understanding when it comes to martial arts. -------

the use of words are corruptive or not that is the choice of the user.

words are just for communication, the bottom line is how true and how clear and how experience the person who intended to pass the information.

there is a difference between talking about something and thinking you understood as opposed to actually physically being shown something and really intrinsically understanding. ------

Sure, there is a different between think and speculation and pure description of the subject.

as an example with the Short Jin and Shock jin, there is no need of thinking or speculation. just describe what is short jin and shock jin and the reality is there.

and ofcause, the issue is can one clearly describe what one experience? if not then either one has no clear experience in the details or one is not good at communication or one simple dont want to communicate.

I reiterate, there is more value in “doing” than in all the thought processes that follow or lead up. ----

There certainly have some truth in what you said but that is still a partial truth.

One of the great aspects of shaolin kungfu for instance is Ch’an and it’s complementary state to martial arts practice.

No mind, just do. -------

one certainly can qoute that but one got to describe what is no mind, how to get to no mind, and who is the master when there is no mind before qouting No Mind, just do.

Otherwise, one is just do a talking zen where the mind is using the qoutation for one’s ego shake but unconscious about it.

So, what is No mind?

This is key and will bring more understanding than mere words.

anyone can build castles in the sand, but these are not the foundations of real kingdom. ------

Sure,

but until you describe what is NO mind and how to get there.

Until then what different between you and those who of us who use intellecture mind trying to grasp the NO mind?

54

language and words are highly inadequate for what you are asking in relation to “no mind” and what it is as well as descriptives for concepts on how energy is working when we move through time and space.

therefore, i cannot tell you, but you can show yourself! :slight_smile:
I can indicate where a good point is to cross the river, but I, and for that matter, no one else can do the crossing of that river.

now, if we are talking about who taught what to whom, discussion is easy because it’s all just facts and figures. But deeper concepts cannot be described in the manner that you are asking. You are better off being physically shown or physically directed to the starting point and the knowing will be yours after undertaking the practice.

Theory is only inkling that is yet to be proven. Proof cannot be provided except by action and consequence. This is the engineer vs the architect idea. Ultimately, both depend on the builder, who may or may not have different ways of getting it done and it is the workers success or the consequence of their action that proves the architect or the engineer or both were right or wrong.

:stuck_out_tongue:

55

language and words are highly inadequate for what you are asking in relation to “no mind” ------

This is totally not true.

The fact are as the following:

The Buddha and Boddhisatva themselve describe the practice from “with mind” toward “no Mind” including the mile stones in great details and very clearly.

The purpose is so that people dont get misleading.

The following is the Chan teaching/ instruction since the Buddha’s time to present day, practice by the Chan Pratiach of the past, present, and future.

This is the process of how from MInd become NO Mind.

The Shurangama Sutra:

Initially, I entered the flow through hearing and forgot
objective states. Since the sense-objects and sense-organs were
quiet, the two characteristics of movement and stillness
crystallized and did not arise. After that, gradually advancing,
the hearing and what was heard both disappeared. Once the
hearing was ended, there was nothing to rely on, and awareness
and the objects of awareness became empty. When the
emptiness of awareness reached an ultimate perfection,
emptiness and what was being emptied then also ceased to be.
Since production and extinction were gone, still extinction was
revealed.

Now, have one reach the state of entered the flow? how far has one’s journey gone? have one attain the state of the Still Extinction?

If one doesnt even aware of these above but keep saying No Mind, forget about it, those are Talking Zen. Their No Mind, Just Do" is simply means they let thier HABIT to run their action. That is just totally off the mark of Zen. But get stuck in the ignorance of not even knowing what they are doing.

Thus, due to this ignorance, they cannot clearly describe every details because they are clueless. as for the Buddha and Zen Patriach they describe every details of the path.

and what it is as well as descriptives for concepts on how energy is working when we move through time and space. therefore, i cannot tell you, but you can show yourself! :slight_smile: ----

You are contraditing yourself.

You talked about NO Mind above. When there is NO Mind, what is energy? what is Time ? what is Space ? and what is Moving? are there such thing as energy, time, space, moving..?

You cannot tell me because you have never experience what is No Mind or you dont like to communicate or…etc

that is your freedom. Everything is ok with me.

I can indicate where a good point is to cross the river, but I, and for that matter, no one else can do the crossing of that river.----------

hmmmm.

Can one who dont even know what is a river indicate how to cross a river?
Can one who have never left the MIND into the No Mind experience shows others what is No Mind?

LEt’s get back to the topic.

could you explain your point on “long power= steady increasing push”

56

man I just skimmed the last few posts and STILL got a headache. Hendrick, do you ACTUALLY practice a martial art or are you just into reading about metaphysical crap?

57

man I just skimmed the last few posts and STILL got a headache. -------

read those partial differential physics equation or state variable control system matrix which describe force field and see which one will give you more headache. :smiley:

certainly no every subject is for everyone. But if one intend to get deep to the root, then partial differential equation and systems state characteristics matrix are un avoidable

Hendrick, do you ACTUALLY practice a martial art or are you just into reading about metaphysical crap?

Can one practice martial art without living and breathing and thinking?

Can one seperate practice martila art without eating?

What is not related?

So what the Heck is Jing or Jin for you if you are a martial artist?

58

I know jing as “vibrating energy”. Don’t get me wrong, it’s not that I don’t like intellectual discussion now and again…but there comes a point when it’s a moot point (like now) and after that people just talk to talk.

Instead of talking, I spend most of my time working on my techniques, fighting, engaging in hands on applications, etc. Yes, you have to talk a little bit to relay information, but your body knows more than you do on how to adapt to what you’re trying to accomplish. Most of the things like breathing – are autonomic. Meaning you shouldn’t have to think about it all that much (actually not at all).

When you run for example, your body breathes as it normally does until it reaches the precipice upon which it is no longer capable of efficient performance (that’s the threshold upon which one needs to improve). You go a little beyond that, but not too far, than call it a day. Next time, you go a little further, and a little further. Your body naturally adapts all the systems involved in the action, without any metaphysical thinking needed.

Same thing goes for fighting or any other physical endeavor. Remember that martial arts at it’s core–is fighting.

59

[QUOTE=Vankuen;898285]I know jing as “vibrating energy”. Don’t get me wrong, it’s not that I don’t like intellectual discussion now and again…but there comes a point when it’s a moot point (like now) and after that people just talk to talk.

Instead of talking, I spend most of my time working on my techniques, fighting, engaging in hands on applications, etc. Yes, you have to talk a little bit to relay information, but your body knows more than you do on how to adapt to what you’re trying to accomplish. Most of the things like breathing – are autonomic. Meaning you shouldn’t have to think about it all that much (actually not at all).

When you run for example, your body breathes as it normally does until it reaches the precipice upon which it is no longer capable of efficient performance (that’s the threshold upon which one needs to improve). You go a little beyond that, but not too far, than call it a day. Next time, you go a little further, and a little further. Your body naturally adapts all the systems involved in the action, without any metaphysical thinking needed.

Same thing goes for fighting or any other physical endeavor. Remember that martial arts at it’s core–is fighting.[/QUOTE]

Thank you for contributing Van!

60

well, the physics/physiology descriptions are all well and good, but when you add into the equation,“Yi Leads Ch’i” etc, things start to change.
I know from my study of SPM, that I can get good power from my strikes, good ging, etc.
BUT-when I have real intent-true desire to blast my opponent - this is when the true power comes out.
(and the hardest part is when doing two-man drills,doing this and just at the last nanosecond pull the strike from making contact)
When I don’t have this intent, my teacher can always tell.
“No. No power.”
“You didn’t get your power out”
When you play with another, you can feel this intent. You get that,“Holy sheet! He’s really trying to hurt me-That would’ve killed me, had it connected!” feeling.
There becomes a difference between a strike that while it most definately hurt your opponent, will not damage him, and one that will.
This intent, makes the difference.
I cannot explain it any other way. It is a feeling.
I know some of you can explain this in better terms.
So, have at it. What are your thoughts?

oh, BTW-I would prefer to hear from those who have experienced this exact thing and know what I am referring to, rather than those who sit on the sidelines and cast stones.