tai chi controlling chi energy

Not necessarily true .

Using the typical terms for brevity, the "external" route is more immediately applicable but refinement takes time whereas the "internal" route starts off as
more estoteric but after time reaches a level of combat application that is pretty scary

It's this end destination that interests me, not how big the engine was in th car I travelled in

 

My big issue with it is reliability. Unless you're already "there" and understand what you're looking at through one or the other practice, the "internal" route isn't very reliable. As can be seen in this thread it's very easy to get lost in the woo-woo woods. Being that the 'external' practice yields essentially the same results over the long term (assuming you have a teacher with a thorough understanding of the mechanics) I personally don't see a reason to even open that can of worms.

 

I think you are only in danger of getting lost in the Woo-Woo Woods (I like that term a lot, BTW) if you either (a) get duped by a teacher who is of the Woo-Woo variety, or (b) you want to get lost in the Woo-Woo Woods. Unfortunately, both (a) and (b) seem to be very common occurances.

However, there are teachers out there who teach genuine IMA and not a lot of Woo-Woo nonsense. I wouldn't dismiss IMA's just because of the other ones.

Edit: I want to come back to on the point about achieving the same reults, but I've got to dash or I'll be late for Taiji practise. Those trees won't hug themselves...

 

Oh yeah I agree that there are scary good ones but for someone who doesn't know what to look for I'd recommend something where there are fewer witch doctors is all. I mean sure, eventually someone sincere would find a genuine, sincere teacher but how far away and after how many visits to Yellow Bamboo type schools? And after how many in-person discussions on the subject with guys like Lou here? Can you imagine that?

 

Well I am trying to describe in ways you can relate to, have you read "Tai Chi Classics"?, read that and see if their description is clearer.

It is not a mechanical process that you can just imitate because I told you a trick technique.



Cheers

 

i have in fact read it.
im again however asking for YOUR interpretation of chi.

 

Why not? What about it makes it impossible to replicate upon instruction?
I understand that with practice one obviously gets better at something, but that doesn't mean it can't be performed initially.
I can teach someone to make an opponent feel much lighter and even enable that person to actually lift a measurably heavier opponent than he was able to before. This is because I know what must be done and I can see whether the person is doing it, and therefore I can correct him. With practice he will gain precision and the ability to adjust to the opponent and the effect will become greater, but there is an effect initially. How is this different, specifically?

 

I answered your question, you don't have enough experience or knowledge to understand it.

If I put the color red in front of you and said is that black or white, pick one, which would you pick?, you are color blind and can only see black and white.
There is color, you just can't see it.


Cheers

 

actually what you said was flowery crap rather than anything clear

he asked you what chi-eese is

 

Don't be so quick to condescend. One could infer many things about that post and it is fairly clear from it what your views are. We understand this. He's asking for you to come out and say in assertive, concrete terms, whether you believe A: chi is an actual force separate from the physical ones used in 'external' arts, or B: chi is a metaphor for physical forces.

Possibly you could say it's something else, but of course he'd expect you to explain that in equally tangible terms.
This isn't because people don't understand what you are saying. It's because you and many others regularly avoid making definite statements so that if a stance or assertion later becomes untenable you can just say "Well that's not what I meant" or "YOU just didn't understand me properly". This is a huge problem with every chi discussion ever.
People want you to say something definite so that it can be discussed in definite terms and so that the meaning or intent of what you say can't be obfuscated or backpedalled on later.

 

This beyond trolling and into the realm of moronic

Yes I have read the classics and yes my view remains te same. Now I read a translation of the classics admittedly...but the. I suspect so did you. The irritating thing is you are so arrogant yet have no reason or right to be

You cannot articulate
You will not state any level of lineage
Your theories are drivel
You cannot account for the fact the same things can be done "sans chi"
You are in essence posting nothing whatsoever of ANY value

So - your lineage is..?

 

GIRLS! break it up! this site rocks. I'm out.

Lou, a reminder of the TOS.

1.9 "MAP Bashing":
Threads/replies attacking Martial Arts Planet Policies will not be allowed. This policy document is not open for negotiation and membership of the MAP community is dependant on your compliance with it.
1.9.1 Further, any member found to be bad mouthing the Martial Arts Planet community at an outside location will be banned.
1.9.2 If you do not care for this community, you really have no business here anyway.

 

Watch the step. See you in a week.

EDIT: I should note, I see you still watching the thread, Lou. Please seek help.

 

OK , since you read the classics, what is chi ?

You don't know, because you didn't understand it.

So you just say it does not exist, because it does not make sense to you.



Cheers

 

If you are addressing the idea of quality control in martial arts, IMHO, for quality control, you need standards set by unbias, external bodies to measure against. In the martial arts, however, it comes under the responsibility of each lineage and/or organization to police themselves, so to speak. So, I serve to police the standards set in my organization in others, and they do the same to me. The thing is, only those high up or those appointed by a governing body have the authority. So I only have the authority to police my own students in reality and my instructor polices me and grandmasters police my instructor all the way down.

To go outside this authority and police others could be viewed as a challenge.

Here is the real deal of policing though. You have to police yourself!

Almost all the internal training I have received is from people that started hard-style martial arts and after many decades, transitioned into learning more internal martial arts. They say that it is possible to go an all internal route to martial arts and one teacher offers students the option to go hard-style and internal path, or go only internal training, depending on what goals they have.

The thing is that people don't stop learning, especially grandmasters, they are constantly learning and testing things out... many using students to help them keep learning. Grandmasters are the masters at stealing knowledge and retaining it.

The assumption that some seem to imply, that there are those that have learned it all and can pass that knowledge on is not a very good one, from my experiences with grandmasters in general. A better "assumption" would be that grandmasters believe in quality control first starting with policing themselves, then others. I go back to one incident told to me by one of my instructors that witness this decades ago. He was in a Tai Chi class and the instructor was a very large, maybe pushing 300 lbs person that was very good. Particularly in pushing hands, no one could move him and he would send people flying. The grandmaster was there observing, must have been in his 70s at the time. Small man, hundred some pounds. He was not happy with something he saw. He told the large man, instructor that he was doing it wrong. So they pushed hands to demonstrate what it was. It wasn't but a few seconds from start and the old man, grandmaster, strikes the large man, open palm in the torso (I recall it might have been something like doing CPR on his liver). The large man staggers back a few feet and then just collapses, unable to move.

After about ten minutes of just lying on the ground, the large man is able to get up. The old man asks if the large man wants more? The large man declines, he had enough.

What was the lesson? Don't know, would have to ask the grandmaster who has long since passed away. The thing was, the large man was throwing people around with pushing hands. This was considered wrong by the grandmaster. Maybe it was okay for beginners or intermediates, but at the level this instructor was supposed to be at, it was not right. It was not to throw people around, this technique, call it chi or whatever, was just to cause the body of the enemy to shut down, cause it to collapse instantly. There was more than leverage and timing involved. It was the "correct" way to do it.

I like the story because it just shows that even those that think they know "everything" don't. Those in the know don't pretend to know everything, they know what they do, but they never stop learning. They don't put down others for not knowing as much, they use others to help them keep learning, and in doing so, they pass on knowledge that may help set someone in the "right" direction.

 

Its no value to you because you don't understand it.

If I tried to teach calculus to a kinder gardener , it would not be of much value to them either .


Cheers

 

:zzz:
more metaphor and simile

 

I don't have a background in CMA and to be honest I'm pretty ignorant when it comes to them.

So could you please explain to me what, in your opinion, chi is?

A direct and non flowery answer would be appreciated.

 

Asking people to read the classics to get an elementary understanding of how tai chi works is a bit like asking a year six student to read Principia Mathematica so he can get a better understanding of basic maths.What you need are simple explanations in plain English,or any other language that you are both communicating in.Classical Chinese that has been translated into English is rarely the best form of communication.

 

He has explained what it is. Many many times.

You're starting to sound a bit like a cultist. Every skeptic, critic and questioner is met with "You just don't get it. It's above you."

You do not know what you are talking about and your response to any question which calls on understanding of the subject elicits vague musings deliberately void of anything you could be held to later and lashing out with false arrogance thrown up to hide an insecurity rightly borne of your poor understanding.
It's all a smoke screen, and everyone can tell. Can't you see why these questions are all geared towards getting you to put assertions out there? Can't you see that noone is taking what you say seriously and that throwing out more chaff will only make this worse? The stock response is "I don't care whether these people take me seriously", but that's smoke too. If you didn't care what went on in their heads you would've stopped talking to them long ago.