I have to accept this reply of yours as I cannot find anything to dispute about. I don't even say your first post about "cheating... fraud " is wrong, just a reaction and nothing more. I may have a background very different from yours and can believe in things many just dismiss with disdain. Believing means either take it or leave it. But I don't think I'm less critical or skeptical than you. Ok you question Huang, but I question Cheng Man Ching! Just not long ago I found the latest video clip about Master Cheng showing his ability to resist the push of four person. My comment is I have some simple knowledge of classical mechanics (meaning common sense). I cannot say more as I may be wrong. I have got the Chinese proverb now "Kong sueh lai feng pi you ying" literally (?) means if from an empty cave a wind comes, there is a reason. It seems the ancient Chinese had been talking about Qi and so it may be something. Again don't ask that I demonstrate. I have reasons not to doubt Huang too much :- 1) I've seen the man once before, just a man not too tall, but a little on the stout side then. 2) the Chinese proverb - many of his students regard him with respect and in no way that I know he may be grouped with charlatans. 3) how many of you posters here ever succeeded in gathering a group of ten man together to do fraud.
You are wrong in the former and right in the latter. I only have little knowledge. When a man has little knowledge, he cannot be devious. When his mind is empty, he has clarity. Having clarity, he sees the easy. What is easy is straight. What is straight cannot lie. About Jesus and flying masters they are just opinions and only in the Dark Ages was it a crime to have an opinion.
It's not a crime to have an opinion and no-one has said so. Something being 'just an opinion' however doesn't stop it from being silly or not well thought out. Someone having an opinion doesn't immediately make it worthy of respect.
Well, I reject the idea that it's bad to react. We be human.... and actually, we can react as humans, and later on, empty our minds as well - we can do both - controlled folly, if you like, but human we be, and it's neither a sin, nor is it saying much to say that we react. If we want truth, we have to ponder, and sift what we are given to look at. As for Chen Man Ching - I can't see why anyone thinks he is any good at all.
I really don't understand what you actually mean. Any typo like "I can't see why anyone thinks he is not good"? I am Chinese and can easily accept some things like Tai Chi. Most who do have some acceptance of Tai Chi do somehow accept Cheng Man Ching as a Master. Anyone who rejects him would usually reject all of Tai Chi as nonsense. Lets take your own father. You know him very well. If he were a master in Tai Chi and tells you about his fights with various karate, TKD, Shaolin masters who were defeated by him, you believe and knows his fighting skill is true. Cheng Man Cheng mentioned he had been challenged many times and his skill had never failed him. If what he said was true, then I cannot understand how anyone could say he was not good. The problem is we have to rely on the words of those who know him to find out about him. I know of no other way to know another person.
Then you need to consider the difference between what you know, what you choose to believe, and what is unknowable. I can't know anything about Chen Man Ching's fights for real - I never saw them, or a video of them. Did you? I can only go by looking at his level on video. It looks poor, in my view. Everything else is the he said she said.... There is no typo - I can't see what it is about his form play that makes people think he was any good. As for challenge stories, how many Chinese martial arts instructors have you heard talk about their losses? Not many - one or two special ones, but not many.
There was an opinion which at one time was considered silly by all people in all the lands except the fool who had the opinion. There was Eduard Boltzmann in the 19th century who proposed something called Kinetic Theory of Gas, etc which was only accepted after his death. At one time it was assumed that you could add velocity of light just like any velocity. How fickle is man!
Gravity is the natural force of attraction between objects with mass. Hardly. I'm pretty open minded. I even "believe" in chi and all that mess. However, evidence and fact produce results and I tend to believe in things that logically follow or have evidence to support them. Period. But I will listen to anyone with a cohesive argument. There are definitely grey areas in everything, but you can pretty much pick out what is true and what is fake using logic and evidence, so as to my opinion on these videos, here's how it works: It doesn't logically follow that these guys can actuallydo any of that stuff in the videos. There is no evidence that says they can actually do any of the stuff in the videos. And that pretty much clinches it for me.
I just cannot catch why you ask this. I heard in Christendom in the 7th and 8th century there was not much sunlight...and darkness was prevailing over the light... and the Lord God was not happy... I am not sure we're again into it as I hear a lot about the weather.
Well ... here goes! There once was a meister from Java , who frequented MAP's halls of palaver, expounding dynamics and movement mechanics, over chi's grip on the cadaver ... Heeheee ... now, what was that about banana's hey? Cheers and salam's amigo's! Krisno
Bottom line for me is "when I hear hoofbeats, I think horse NOT unicorn." This is not because I lack imagination, it is because I have trained for decades. regards koyo
Ah, the DARK AGES has absolutely nothing to do with the weather/sunlight/or a mythical man in a long robe. In the UK, there is a long gap in the archaeological period where all documents/books etc were destroyed by maurauding incomers to these shores. Because of this, it was coined the dark ages because we knew very little about our ancestors in this time, as opposed to the various stone ages/roman times etc. Again, please keep all references to lord god etc to the religion forum. :topic: sorry folks!
OK,forget carpentry-instead..... What definition(s) of ch'i are you using in relation to TC and/or other MAs? What does it -(or they)- do in relation to/with the practice of TC and/or etc ? Please answer these,as otherwise just using the term ch'i as in the quote below is meaningless. In post 276-(you're 1st,welcome to MAP)- you wrote: "What if ch'i is very criterion to differentiate a master from a novice." How does it differentiate them? You mention "mystical T'ai Chi masters".Define please. FYI-The foiling the push of-fill in number of people- is just aligning your body in such a way that the the steady,even pressure -(notice they don't do fast or multiple pushes)-being applied can be withstood in a relatively relaxed manner.That's about it ,a demo of basic alignment ability.Not very difficult to learn or practice. As to getting people together to commit fraud,there's mention in this thread how students may interact with their instructors,even unconsciously. WK is going to win the limerick contest.I guess most here have not pressure tested their ability to create humorous rhymes in a non-compliant setting.
What is Qi and what is meant by mystical Tai Chi. Before I answer, I have to talk about something else and hope this don't get deleted as "Off Topic" (My protest, Please ban all poetry contest here, only Cheng Man Ching do both poetry and Tai Chi). What is an electron. Yes everyone here will bash me if I deny "an electron". We can keep mum and hold an apple in our outstretched arm to answer "what is an apple". We can't hold an electron. Even showing or to proof things in the material world pose difficulty. Some things that we like to talk cannot be known, but may only be accepted based on trust. Take reincarnation. No one knows what reincarnation is. Most Buddhist may say they believe and give the reasons for believing but the reasons do not constitute a proof. A while ago somewhere someone dug out some dead-old-2500-year pali scroll which is confirmed through carbon dating to be the original Diamond Sutra by a disciple of the Buddha. I just don't want to hear! How can I know if he really did honestly recorded what he heard the Buddha said. Without trust, many things don't work. I have no knowledge of Qi. I have only read about Qi. Cheng Man Ching must have talked about it but I doubt anyone know Qi just after listening. At most we believe it is something or dismiss it as nonsense. Most who have been exposed to ancient chinese philosophy and religion would have heard about Qi, Ying-Yang, the Five Elements. Take it or leave it. They cannot be known like in knowing what an apple is. Say, hypothetically, that Old Wang employed the "mystical" Qi in the video and not alignment, etc. We cannot know and we prefer our pet explanations. Only Old Huang and those who know know. Take it or leave it. About mystical Tai Chi, who knows! I read a story that is recorded in an ancient Chinese poem and I think the dynasty and the name of the poet are known. The poet was invited to a banquet in the palace with the emperor. He was somehow deserving of having a wish granted by the emperor and he said he had heard of a certain general who is reputed to be a greatest swordsman of the time. He wanted to witness a performance of the swordsmanship of this general. It was granted. In the performance, the general held the sword, still inside its scabbard, and just flicked it. In an instant there was a brilliant light that flew out of the scabbard high into the sky (as usual, add like a dragon come to life). It was the sword and a while later the sword flew right back into its sheath. Believe or dismiss it ever happened. Don't bash me through another poem. Here is another of my speculation on the video that is far more palatable, but which by no means is any nearer to the truth. After a long time developing a healthy (or unhealthy) teacher-student relationship, everyone including the teacher got duped by themselves and all of them behave according to their pecking order. Those who need to prostrate will do so, those supposed to fall like a babe will do so. He who is to stand firm will do so. Who knows!
Slowwins... I am intrigued as to why you, as someone who does not practice Taiji, have such strong feelings towards Cheng Man Ching??? There have been and still are many many other TaiJi teachers who are also noteworthy. I have great respect for him because of his attitude to life, alcohol, students and Taiji. Also, as you have no experience of Qi, how do you percieve it to be, to behave?
No-one has dug up the 'original Diamond sutra' which would have been composed likely hundreds of years after the Buddha's death. Which further suggests you don't really spend anytime checking or thinking about the things you post.
