Figured I would chime in here and say a few things... While I don't really suffer from any "mental illness", one of the main reasons I started practicing Tai Chi is because I have ADD. It's gotten to the point where the past few years, it's been a major disruption in my life and has prevented me from getting a lot of things done that I've needed to get done. Being me, I opted to find an alternative to medication because I firmly believe that a lot of medications out there do much more harm than they do good. I only knew vaguely about Tai Chi when I first started considering it a viable option. Since I've been studying it (as of September of last year), I've noticed significant differences in my ability to focus. While my ADD is still something I battle, it's much easier to control than it was. It's simply something that will take time and won't be an instant fix. I wanted to also say something on this because I was a bit skeptical about some of the things we discuss in class concerning Chi. First off, by Western view, I believe he is talking about the difference in though of how things work between the Western world and the Eastern. Since beginning my study on Qi Gong to get a better understanding about Chi and how the system is possible, I've noticed the vast difference between the way we think in the West and the way they think in the East. In the West, we want instant results. We want science to provide answers that quickly remedy situations. As you stated yourself, we depend on science for answers. However, in modern medicine, when we get those answers they often come with effects that are equally as bad as those we are attempting to fix. You hear about them every single time you see a commercial on TV for a new medication... 50% of the commercial is all the side effects. Now, that's not saying that Chi is a cureall at all. However, science certainly knows that the body has a way of healing itself. Every time you get a cut, what happens? Your body heals it. That is a very loose example, but it's simply to prove that exact point. So lets look at Chi from the Western mindset; scientifically. Chi, in the scientific mind can be narrowed down to something we call Bioelectricity. Now I am not going to type out a whole school lesson, partly because I am still learning about a lot of it myself, and partly because I honestly just can't be bothered, but I suggest if you are truly trying to learn about what all this Chi stuff is, you look up some books by Dr. Yang, Jwing-Ming of the YMAA. Dr. Yang is a long time practitioner of martial arts as well as a scientist holding a PhD in Mechanical Engineering, so his approach is greatly influenced by the scientific theories.
I realize that there is a vast difference in thinking between the way westerners and easterners think, as I've been to Asia 4 times for almost a period of 3 years. But when someone makes a comment such as "medieval western view" it's doesn't illustrate the difference between eastern and western thought. It's a passive aggressive insult. He is suggesting that people who think like me are absolutely against Eastern medical practices, because of our "medieval western views." This is simply not true. I and like minded individuals are open minded to any practice that actually produces measurable, replicable results. For example, I believe in lot of acupuncture, which is a part of TCM, but I reject a lot of qigong practices because the claims the "experts" make have NOT produced measurable, replicable results. I have to say that while I see where you are coming from, I must disagree. While the general population may demand instant results, we also have scientists that work for years and/or decades on various scientific advances. As you said Science has shown us that the body has a way of healing it self, but more importantly it has also shown us HOW the body heals itself. The way the body heals itself is a process that does not involve chi, least of all in the spiritual sense. Your example of a cut healing itself is a poor one because there is already a scientific explanation that does not involve chi. If you narrow chi down to simply "bio-electric energy" then it does not fit in with the Taoist definition Chi as a spiritual energy. You also end up relabeling something that has already been observed by scientists and repackaging it a something more mystical. Take the sunset for example, many, many westerners think that a beautiful sunset is somehow proof of God, they think only God could make such a beautiful sunset. Yet a scientist will likely give you an explanation that does not involve God at all. Same with the cut. Have you ever wondered why acupuncture has been accepted by the western medical community but practices such as qigong have not been? Acupuncture has actually produced measurable results, while qigong (as well as many other parts of TCM) have come up short time and again. Did you also know that qigong is not in fact an ancient exercise as touted by most (if not all) the so called experts, but in fact a system of exercises compiled by the PRC Gov in the last 30 years or so? You also have to consider that of the idea of chi was/is incubated in a region of the world that is absolutely rampant with superstition, medical fraud and a population that just doesn't like to be proven wrong for fear of losing face. That last part is critical as I cannot count how many times I've been discussing something with a Chinese person and they've resorted to saying "You don't understand because you are a foreigner. This is the Chinese way of doing things." Or some such variation. Anyway, these all things that you should consider when you are thinking about Eastern idea's such as Chi.
White Panda- please could you expand on your statement that Qigong has been invented by the PRC in the last thirty years.
Osu, I don't know about ki, but I know about Chinese Hospitals: Chinese hospitals are the best in the whole world: just thinking of going, and I already feel better! You can quote me on that! Osu!
I had a thought and wondered if people cared to comment. As I get older I find that I look for a bit of a "boost" before I go to teach class and usually I will seek-out a strong cup of coffee or tea for that. From the Western POV the idea would be to use a "stimulant" that constricts blood vessels, raises BP and heart rate and gives an overall sensation of being able to teach the class without running out of energy prematurely. In like manner, when I have time, there are a number of ASANA-s or "postures" from YOGA which can do the same thing but require me to set aside time and space before class for them. With the caffeine I can pretty-much appreciate how I am getting a boost to my performance. With the YOGA postures the connection is not so clear. My experience tells me that the results between the two experiences is comparable. Thoughts? Best Wishes, Bruce
It could definitely help as a supplement to your medication. Just don't go off your medication because you're joining a tai chi class.
No. It was in the USA. Interesting, in my region, the Chinese culture is so remote. This is to say, they do not have a "China Town" per se' And, any large gathering is usually upon special events and very low-profile. If you are non-Chinese, you have to approach them with a sense of humility and gentleness. After the initial greet is established, they are most happy to speak with you on just about any subject, providing the English barrier is overlooked. (English is so hard for people to learn, it is really perplexing at times.)
Osu, I see... Why would you say that English is hard to learn 47MA? I think it is very easy compared to other languages. Osu!
From my conversations with many people who has English as a third or fourth language, they have informed me it was more difficult
Osu, Oh, really? That is interesting; it is not my experience. I presume you are a native English speaker, am I right? Osu!
Where I am, some say yes. But others from different parts on native English would say that I butcher the language
effects of caffiene comparible to the effects of meditation ? The rejuvinating effects of meditating can be likened to getting some sleep or to having a "power nap". We usually feel refreshed and energetic when we wake from a good sleep. In this case I would say the process is quite different. Meditators often experience a need for less sleep as their practice progresses. If you are using specific breathing technique in yoga you are quite likely to increase oxygenation over normal levels, which may well provide a heightened sensation of some kind. In this case it may be a little comparible to a stimulant like process.
Well we've had our differences over the history on this site before.. But I would just like to make a couple of points clear to you. 1. the current systems from authentic family lineage ARE demanding and combative. These include Chen, Yang, Wu, Wu Hao, Zhao Bao and Sun styles. FACT. 2. You bring up the same line many others do. Only this time instead of Fajin and stomps, you write "flipping and spinning". If you go and learn actual tcc from an authentic family lineage, you will soon learn that such things as flipping and spinning have nothing to do with the primary methods and strategy of tcc as to be incredibly irrelivent to the point you're trying to support with mentioning of such "evidence". FACT. 3. all the traditional theories, qi gong, esoterica, holistic methodology is not unique to tcc at all in the realm of cma. Qi gong and internal methods are just as prevelent in Shaolin or Bagua for example. So even though, for example the canon of Chen Xin is full of TCM and cultivation theory and esoteric methods it has no bearing whatsoever on the claim you're trying to support. Chinese culture is notoriously holistic, just because health and medicine was part of martial knowledge and systems in of itself it doesn't support the theory of "defanging" of tai chi chuan as made by many people and how it happened. FACT Usually Yang Cheng Fu gets blamed, so it's quite interesting to see the "blame" is getting shifted even further back to Yang Lu Chans (the invincable) teacher no less. Funny that several generations of Yang Family and their students actually made the martial reputation of TCC where it mattered after tcc had supposedly been de fanged by Yangs teacher. Good martial arts is not about flashy forms and flashy techniques. The infusion of qi gong principles and inner cultivation (nei gong), may well have elevated Chinese martial arts to a higher level of proficiency from where they were. As people get older the way they train becomes more refined and efficient and should reflect their past acheivements as well as their past abilities and current ones. It well known that masters such as Yang Lu Chan of tai chi famea and Dong Hai Chuan of Bagua fame both learned and mastered other systems of CMA. It's very common for there to have been "village styles" and for the young to practice. The ideal combat method employed by someone trained in tcc is a difficult skill to master and considered "high level" in the CMA community. The reasons behind this become evident the further down the road you go in trying to gain tcc combat skills. And if you have the requisite knowledge of CMA and TCC to understand the material and progressions within them. I absolutely not for one second take these academic guesses at the martial history of tcc seriously. For one there is not one peice of supported and serious evidence for it - it's all speculative. Collectively speaking nothing can be seen to be lost martially, fragmented definitely, but lost to us or "defanged", not really.
You know, this does raise a question, though, and its a question I have contemplated quite a bit these last couple of years. I'm going to use this opportunity to raise it here, Cloudz. Since you have characterized what I am doing as "academic guessing", I would appreciate knowing what citations, resources authorities, authors, practitioners etc etc you would accept as having a position not in keeping with your own but equally valid. The reason I ask is that there seems to be some tone in your postings that suggests that you have the definitive information on things TAI CHI CHUAN. For myself, I can't know everything about a given subject---even if I DID practice that art or style--- so I rely on the material of people better informed than myself. If Douglas Wiles, CHEN Xin, and Mark Chen among many others tend to agree on their conclusions ab out the history and nature of CHEN practice I tend to hold with those people rather than someone who is little more than a shadow on the other side of a keyboard. As far as speculation goes..... well....welcome to the crazy world of Martial Arts. Personally I don't see anything other than speculation on your part, either. Apparently you have things you enjoy believing in and thats OK in my book. The "facts", for instance, that you posit in your post are actually opinions framed as declarations. Nothing wrong with that except that perhaps you may want to believe that your opinions are somehow more weighty than any other person's, yes? Best Wishes, Bruce
You havn't done any academic guessing - the writers of the books you cited did it for you in effect. I have nothing against speculating or honest attempts at interperatation. But when you have conflicting information that casts doubt on certain interperatations I think it correct to point it out. Let's debate it, if you're up for it. The things I wrote are true to my mind, if you want to ask me specifically how I think I know x is true or correct (or as close to it as best possible), please do. If you want me to explain how knowing x casts doubt on y or z interperatation do that. Be more specific, and I'll try to honestly answer you. Which things I stated as fact do you think are "just opinions" as in I'm just making speculation..? These informed opinions are based on practicing and researching these arts and based on real experiences and observations. As well as direct learning from real teachers of these martial arts. Which specific things that I wrote or stated do you think lack credibility and on what basis? Who have been your teachers in tai chi chuan anyway, and for how long have you studied a lineage tai chi martial system ? Of course there are teachers who for whatever reasons focus their teaching away from certain things.. The real reason for this is not about lack of martialness actually or knowledge. The reason someone like Chen Xiao Wang for example mostly teaches form on his seminar circuit is because that's what his audience wants most of and that's what keeps his rice bowl running over. His son on the other hand Chen Ziqiang shows that he goes out and teaches the combat and application side of things foremeost. So it's hard to believe that what the son has is missing from the father - for example. I don't really get where you're coming from. That taichi chuan contains cultivation, qigong etc. doesn't stop it being a martial art. What is your point ? If you understand the holistic nature of the Chinese culture and traditional theory then health and martial culture stop being so mutually exclusive. it seems you want to believe that the health culture in taiji is incompatable with the martial or that it somehow inhibits or takes away from it. You want to believe that it becomes less of a martial art and more of a health art because these things are inherent in the system. This isn't true - it's supposed to be complimentary and holistic. These men of the pasts had certain beliefs about certain things, just like today we use our beliefs and sports science to enhance and make the best of training. It's what they did, way back when with their means and knowledge, theory etc. And this isn't exclusive to tcc in the cma world. So again I have to ask you to be more specific if you want me to expand and try to answer your scepticism and doubts about my point of view and what it's based on. ps. If you recall, when we discussed this before - I've never denied that taiji was promoted as a health art to the wider populace by the Republican government. This is widely documented and factual. These other ideas you've gotten eg about Chen Chanxing are based on what exactly ? I'm 100% sure if you went and practiced with one of the Chen inheritors today - let's say Chen Yu (Chen Fake is his ancestor) in Beijing you would 100% be in no doubt that Chen taiji is still a very demanding and combative art.. Just this kind of experience I think would turn much of your opinions around in no time. It's called "eating bitter" and it's still around believe it or not! Now.. I can't help but wonder how much of that these authors did to give the impression that taiji stopped being demanding and combative in Chen Chanxings time.. If this was really the case how did we arrive at the legacy of Chen Fake in Beijing for example ? Or are you suggesting that that is also "just speculation" on my part. Best wishes, George
