SLT Cin Gong and Qi Gong

[Phenix]

Often, we speak of Qi kung or Doing SLT/SNT as Qi kung.

Actually, there is a different between Qi kung and Cin (quiet) (physically still meditation) and Dong (move) (physical moving meditation) kung.

IMHO, the SLT/SNT is related to Cin/Dong Kung not Qi kung.
Certainly, Cin/Dong kung using the Qi/ medirians terminology, however, they are different kind of training.

[foolinthedeck]

this thread doesnt seem to be going anywhere? how are we to move it forward there is no question, just an answer. it fall to me as a fool to be foolish..

"Often, we speak of Qi kung or Doing SLT/SNT as Qi kung."

who are we? all wing chunners or..?

"Actually, there is a different between Qi kung and Cin (quiet) (physically still meditation) and Dong (move) (physical moving meditation) kung."

i'm not sure what u mean. when we do SLT, we dont move our legs, but we move the rest.. so its still qi gong isnt it, my sifu always siad that SLT was 80% wing chun and 20% qigong.

"IMHO, the SLT/SNT is related to Cin/Dong Kung not Qi kung.
Certainly, Cin/Dong kung using the Qi/ medirians terminology, however, they are different kind of training."

could you explain the terms you use a bit more?

[stuartm]

Hi again !

For your information, I will be holding a Chi Gung seminar for my students in May hopefully. It will be given by Sifu Mike Hart of the Chanquanshu school of internal arts. It will cover standing and moving, as well as some Daoyin Yangshen Gong.

If you are interested, email me on swanseavingtsun@yahoo.co.uk. It'll only be about £20 for the seminar.

Have a look at Mike's website on www.taiji4u.co.uk

Regards, Stu

[yylee]

This is my impression of Chi Kung and "Cin" Kung

Daoists put more emphasis on where the Chi goes, how to flow it here and there.

Buddhist meditation is also considered a form of Qigong by many, however the emphasis is more on the mind. Sort of pursuing the no-mind no-thought kind of state, "Chi" in Buddhist meditation is more implicit than in Daoist practice.

So I guess Buddhist style is more into "Cin" or the quietness training.

[cha kuen]

SLT isnt' chi kung.

[Phenix]

Originally posted by foolinthedeck


i'm not sure what u mean. when we do SLT, we dont move our legs, but we move the rest.. so its still qi gong isnt it, my sifu always siad that SLT was 80% wing chun and 20% qigong.



Wing Chun and Qigong are two different subjects analogy to Unix and operating system.

[Phenix]

Originally posted by yylee
This is my impression of Chi Kung and "Cin" Kung

Daoists put more emphasis on where the Chi goes, how to flow it here and there.

Buddhist meditation is also considered a form of Qigong by many, however the emphasis is more on the mind. Sort of pursuing the no-mind no-thought kind of state, "Chi" in Buddhist meditation is more implicit than in Daoist practice.

So I guess Buddhist style is more into "Cin" or the quietness training.

IMHO, it is not true. if you read Tao De Ching you know Cin is the key of Daoist. Both Daoist and Buddhist use Cin as a method of training. The Daoist said "entering to Cin" the Buddhist said "let go" they are both the same thing in the begining until a later state (read Surangama sutra if interested in the different and similarity).. Cin is the common path of both Buddhism and Daoism.
that is the key to enter into Samadhi.

As for Qi kung, qi kung is a new term which starts around 1900.

In internal art training, internal means "to go within", IMHO, there are two types of technics to "return to origin" when dealing with cultivation. one is the method of "transportation" of Qi. The other one is the method of " let go" and "forget" the Yee.
however, both has to based on capability of to be Cin's or quiet's .

Today, IMHO, most of the time, people define the practice of "transportation" is qi kung. this is a different practice compare with the ancient daoist way where Cin is place as the begining and key to advance. "Transportation " is practiced naturally after Cin is achive. thus, today, lots of people fall into "forcefull" use of Yee to "push" the qi for transportation catagory. this type of training can cause problem if the path forced is erro. as the cin training, it is a "reset" and let nature take its path training. so at the worst of Cin based training, one will not get the kung fu if one does it wrong, and no side effect as the transportation type.


as an example,
The Hung Gar iron wire cannot be SLT because SLT starts with Cin platform and iron wire doesn't.

Thus, SLT using the Lay Lau Hui Song.... type of Kuit. and Hung Gar iron wire application is different. SLT is a type of "reset" and let nature take its path type of training.

Different Tee (body of art) shows different young (application of art). One can use the same stance, hand shapes.... but it is different...

years ago, a Hung Gar grandmaster speak of WCK , saying something like Hung Gar has all WCK....in his own opinion, which imho it is absurd. he fails to understand the core of SLT and the details of internal cultivation. IMHO.

In additional, months ago when people post that the chan way link with "figthing". that also is a wrong path due to ,"no self" or entering into Cin is the key, "figthing or no fighting" is a differentitation mind. one doesn't enter into Dao or samadhi with concept of differentitation mind --- fighting. one enters into dao with cin.

thus, as the stanza in chan said
" figthing is a mind of win and lost
that is against dao
that give raise to the diffirentiation of me, you, race, and time
how is that can one into proper samadhi?"

as it also said,

" right or not right,
wrong or not wrong,
missed a spilt of inch will lost thousand of miles."

[dezhen2001]

Phenix said: Today, IMHO, most of the time, people define the practice of "transportation" is qi kung. this is a different practice compare with the ancient daoist way where Cin is place as the begining and key to advance. "Transportation " is practiced naturally after Cin is achive. thus, today, lots of people fall into "forcefull" use of Yee to "push" the qi for transportation catagory. this type of training can cause problem if the path forced is erro. as the cin training, it is a "reset" and let nature take its path training. so at the worst of Cin based training, one will not get the kung fu if one does it wrong, and no side effect as the transportation type. thats interesting... im only a beginner in both qigong and wing chun, but i know that in both when we train nothing is "forced". specifically in qigong there is no overt emphasis on "moving" the Qi around. instead we focus on relaxing and being clear in our movements... such things as in some movements in our qigong form - the eyes follow the hand or other things.

im not so sure what exactly Cin is, can you explain more? :)

very interesting - i enjoy reading your posts and understanding what little i can :)

dawood

[Phenix]

Originally posted by dezhen2001
thats interesting... im only a beginner in both qigong and wing chun, but i know that in both when we train nothing is "forced". specifically in qigong there is no overt emphasis on "moving" the Qi around. instead we focus on relaxing and being clear in our movements... such things as in some movements in our qigong form - the eyes follow the hand or other things.

im not so sure what exactly Cin is, can you explain more? :)


dawood

Most ancient kungfu starts with the training of entering into Cin.
which is similar to the Wu Chi Post of taichi. Some how, people called that qi gung. on the other hand, the transportation type also called qi kung. So, the definetion is not clear in the today....

"instead of we focus....."
that "we focus" is that trying to force state. or let it be?...:D

is that Cin?
or wanting to make something happen?
or somethng happen naturally after Cin?
different different in these details....:D

[dezhen2001]

ah i think its more clearer now... i just was unsure of the chinese terms :)

my qigong system i am learning, dayan (wild goose) qigong has many different methods. i know for example we spend time before doing the form just standing and being relaxed and clearing the mind (though not the zhan zhuang standing), as well as when we finish. Different position depending on the form.

"instead of we focus" that we focus is that trying to force state....:D

i just realised what i said! :D Not forced, just standing and let whatever happen happen :)

dawood

[Phenix]

Originally posted by dezhen2001
ah i think its more clearer now... i just was unsure of the chinese terms :)

my qigong system i am learning, dayan (wild goose) qigong has many different methods. i know for example we spend time before doing the form just standing and being relaxed and clearing the mind (though not the zhan zhuang standing), as well as when we finish. Different position depending on the form.

"instead of we focus" that we focus is that trying to force state....:D

i just realised what i said! :D Not forced, just standing and let whatever happen happen :)

dawood


good.
Now you have terminology to describe what your Tse sigung teaches...

[dezhen2001]

it can be very difficult though but thats what makes training so interesitng :)

dawood

[dezhen2001]

thanks now i understand a bit better :)

dawood

[Phenix]

Originally posted by dezhen2001
it can be very difficult though but thats what makes training so interesitng :)

dawood

if it is that easy then it is not SLT. lots and lots of details.
if it is not well define details how can one knows what is what. progress of not progress.

IMHO, i read somewhere about an old wck practitioner said " simplified WCK to more simple to be advance. " and later he also propose the idea of everything become just a tan sau. I disagree totally.

I belive, WCK is simple, direct, and clear because one is very clear about nature and the detail, but not simplified.
how to simplify Nature? that cannot be done.

[dezhen2001]

if it is not well define details how can one knows what is what.

i think to become very clear is the most difficult thing i have ever been doing.

IMHO, i read somewhere about an old wck practitioner said " simplified WCK to more simple to be advance. " and later he also propose the idea of everything become just a tan sau. I disagree totally.

i have heard this also, but i always understood it to mean that if you can understand what is natural and be clear with less, then its a good thing.

of course i know nothing about that as i am a beginner :)

dawood