Both sides of the coin

[JamesHFYofAZ]

I had a discussion with one of my Sihing's about viewing both sides of a coin and I thought I should bring this conversation out load.
I have noticed and viewed a lot of discussions here and found that all people are saying WC but from different views(understandings). I was wondering if I spoke aloud on this that people might see another view then there own next time they read through posts. Some say that, ones eyes aren't open to learning or that there just to narrow minded to understand. Granted that some due to ego can never admit to change or even except it openly, knowing that change is way to enlightenment. I see that even from them and there ignorant words of hate/jealousy/ego or what ever, I still learn. It may have not been what I was expecting from it but it was still learning, growing, making change within myself. So I thank most for there participation in all discussions regardless of your view of me. If any one know what the hell I am blabbering about let me know, cause I'm just trying to grow/ change/ understand the other side of the coin.
Just my starting thoughts as a growing seedling!;)

[Zhuge Liang]

Hi James,

You are absolutely correct. I would like to add that it's also a good idea to also consistantly turn an introspective eye towards oneself, to see if we aren't as narrowminded and ego-fueled as we think others are.

To draw from Taiji, suppose there are two students practicing push hands. One complains that the other is using too much strength. The other complains that his partner is resisting too much. Who's at fault? If the first guy weren't using so much strength, his partner would not have anything to resist against. If the second guy weren't resisting, the first guy would have nothing to apply his strength on.

Yes you can learn from other people's mistakes, but I think you can learn at least as much, if not more, from your own. In my experience, this practice is usually very humbling, but necessary if you are seeking growth.

Regards,
Alan

[kj]

Originally posted by Zhuge Liang
Hi James,

You are absolutely correct. I would like to add that it's also a good idea to also consistantly turn an introspective eye towards oneself, to see if we aren't as narrowminded and ego-fueled as we think others are.

To draw from Taiji, suppose there are two students practicing push hands. One complains that the other is using too much strength. The other complains that his partner is resisting too much. Who's at fault? If the first guy weren't using so much strength, his partner would not have anything to resist against. If the second guy weren't resisting, the first guy would have nothing to apply his strength on.

Yes you can learn from other people's mistakes, but I think you can learn at least as much, if not more, from your own. In my experience, this practice is usually very humbling, but necessary if you are seeking growth.

Regards,
Alan

Wow - this is so acute and accurate I can feel the pangs! True for me both in Wing Chun (like when I got dumped on my behind last night) and in life (such as when I find myself wanting to "correct" the faults of others - mote in my own eye, and all of that). Without fail, I learn the most through introspection and critical self-analysis. Need to learn a whole heck of a lot more too. ;)

Regards,
- kj

[JamesHFYofAZ]

This is exactly my point. We as humans see others and not so much self. In this thread I hope to understand not only self but help others see self as well, through there thought/posts.
I would like to add that it's also a good idea to also consistently turn an introspective eye towards oneself, to see if we aren't as narrowminded and ego-fueled as we think others are.
I opened with others because of the fact that it's easier for one to understand others and apply to self then understanding self and then applying what is learned(truth/reality).

To draw from Taiji, suppose there are two students practicing push hands. One complains that the other is using too much strength. The other complains that his partner is resisting too much. Who's at fault? If the first guy weren't using so much strength, his partner would not have anything to resist against. If the second guy weren't resisting, the first guy would have nothing to apply his strength on.
Now that's what I'm talking about! Who's fault, or is there even a fault? I see not only fault but learning as well. the growth of the body and mind as it experiences reality. Seeing someone grow through experience, seeing the level of understanding, or just seeing that reality is not yet seen.

Yes you can learn from other people's mistakes, but I think you can learn at least as much, if not more, from your own. In my experience, this practice is usually very humbling, but necessary if you are seeking growth.
This is a most important statement when learning ones self, Also understanding that mistakes are just misunderstanding in my view. I Hope that these post help other as well as self. Thanks for your inputs.

[Zhuge Liang]

Hi James,


I opened with others because of the fact that it's easier for one to understand others and apply to self then understanding self and then applying what is learned(truth/reality).

Interestingly enough, it is exactly opposite for me. I find it easier to figure other people out after I've figured myself out. But other than that, we are in agreement. Thanks for the thought-provoking thread.

Regards,
Alan

[Ernie]

interesting and soulful post

as for viewing '' wing chun '' or any other martial art ,
and the reason i don't get all huffy and linage orented is simple

first i only see individuals , point blank don't care who you trained with we are not animals tracing back are blood line has nothing to do with individual skill . you can use the old ''but you must find a real wing chun master speach'' but still has nothing to do with what you as a individual can do

second which feeds off the first is i only look through one filter [ body mechnics in motion ] speed timing power and adaptability

i don't listen i watch can't hide bad body mechanics no matter how pretty the wrapper is :D

then i look for how those skills are trained and developed and all this must apply to modern street fighting .

this way there is no emotion and i can learn something from anyone from anywhere and from any style .

just thought i would add my '' glasses'' to the post

[anerlich]

I think the sentiments expressed are admirable up to a point.

However, I am not a moral relativist ... if statements of a blatantly self serving, political, evil (on some level) or just plain ridiculous nature are made, I see no point in accepting them and trying to see where the other person is coming from or their POV.

Are you interesting in understanding September 11 from Osama Bin Laden's POV, other than from a strategy of being able to avoid or overcome him? Is empathy with him superior to abhorrence?

I prefer people to have strong opinions where important issues are concerned.

[Gangsterfist]

I agree with almost everything on this thread plus a few things.

A big part of this learning from others is perception. Perception is what we use to understand lots of things. Perceptions can be altered, bias, blinded, etc from what is really there. Understanding will only come through peseverence of gaining that knowledge. You have to want to learn to learn, or understand something different than what you are used to. The hardest part is unlearning what you have learned in the past.

I also agree with anerlich, if it gets really ridiculous I just walk away.

There has been bad blood since before my time in the martial arts I train with my lineage and another one from arguments that are pretty much outrageously ridiculous. Those who make big deals out of it and cling on to past are not advancing the art, and that well seems kind of crazy and illogical to me.

Ernie, I respect you because you are pretty much the wing chun realist of the forum (from what at least what I have seen). I am a big fan of using what works whether it be striking, grappling, kicking, chin na, ground fighting, weapons, whatever, and I train to deal and use all of it as well. I may not train big on somethings but I still train them for the basic knowledge.

FWIW, this is the internet and should not be taken that seriously anyways. If we all got together and had a nice camping trip where we could beat each other up and then share our philosophies around a fire at night we would probably get a better understanding of each other and perhaps also understand each view better. Or just fight each other till the death...

[Ernie]

gfist
Ernie, I respect you because you are pretty much the wing chun realist of the forum

hey man thank you ,
i don't try to be a realist , i just see everything as an extension from the same source [ human body ]
no matter what part of the world you are from or point in history you pick , it doesn't change much

but what has changed is our understanding on how to train and enhance our natural abilities ,

and also the jungle we fight in has changed a bit , people are smarter and more skilled

so there are no boundries , no things i must uphold , no taboo's just plain old me and my ability to adapt to the new jungle

:D

but that was really cool what you said

[JamesHFYofAZ]

Are you interesting in understanding September 11 from Osama Bin Laden's POV, other than from a strategy of being able to avoid or overcome him? Is empathy with him superior to abhorrence? Yes and no, the government has teams that do that type of Intel gathering. Know your aponents and know your self then you can learn to harmonize the two.
I prefer people to have strong opinions where important issues are concerned.
An opinion or a view point, this discution is on viewing other side of coin. But having a strong opinion is what biulds you, right! All this is my opinion regardless of wether you agree, thats what is so great about it!
To support this from another view, If you don't mind GF!

A big part of this learning from others is perception. Perception is what we use to understand lots of things. Perceptions can be altered, bias, blinded, etc from what is really there. Understanding will only come through peseverence of gaining that knowledge. You have to want to learn to learn, or understand something different than what you are used to. The hardest part is unlearning what you have learned in the past.
If one is locked in there opinion then they can not see the other side of the coin. On the other hand without an opinion or judgment one has no path of self learning. Just my views on all this, and thanks to all for there POTC(perceptions of the coin). I have learned just from this post alone.

[PaulH]

James,

I find enemies are one's best friends. They see faults honestly and tell them as they truly are while friends often hide unpleasant truth of oneself with soothing words and more white lies. To see both sides of the coin in the shadows of lie where truth resides, one should start to look more to the naysayers. There lays the path of true learning. Thanks for sharing.

Regards,
PH

[anerlich]

Yes and no, the government has teams that do that type of Intel gathering.

No kidding :o


Know your aponents and know your self then you can learn to harmonize the two.

Harmonize? Is that what "the government" (presumably you are talking USA government here, this IS an international forum) calls cluster-bombing Afghanistan, and then invading Iraq?

Are they "harmonizing" with all those dudes in orange jumpsuits down Guantanamo (sp) Bay?

Sometimes you can turn enemies into friends ... but the REALLY committed ones history has shown you have to exterminate. If you believe "Mastering Kung Fu", WC was originally a military art, designed not to "harmonize" with opponents but to destroy them.

If harmony is all important, why are you learning to fight?

[Gangsterfist]

Referring to 9-11 and the war in the middle east is a touchy subject with americans. I don't know how its viewed in australia, but here people get so fired up about it. The fact that the bush family had ties with the bin laden family before this happened seems really shady to me. However, this is not a political debate forum. I would like to keep politics out of kung fu conversations.

Wing Chun is a combat system, designed to kill. WC is also an art form. Its an art form, its part of the art of combat. Using it to kill someone is based off your personal morals. Using it for personal gain and unjustly hurting people IMHO is discracing the art.

BTW, we were bombing (the U.S. that is) Afghanistan back when clinton was in office.

I think he was referring to the budhist side of the art Anerlich. Wing chun is a budhist art so naturally some of the budhist philosophies will be transfered "traditionally" by training in it. So if your sifu is a traditional one you will probably get some budhist outlooks from training wing chun.

[John Weiland]

Originally posted by Gangsterfist
Referring to 9-11 and the war in the middle east is a touchy subject with americans. I don't know how its viewed in australia, but here people get so fired up about it. The fact that the bush family had ties with the bin laden family before this happened seems really shady to me. However, this is not a political debate forum. I would like to keep politics out of kung fu conversations.

It's bad enough when Andrew and other Aussies get the facts wrong, but where do you crackpots come up with these allegations? The Clinton administration's policy was regime change in Iraq and presumably the anti-internal combustion engine, Algore was too. At least that's what he said. Sheesh.


Wing Chun is a combat system, designed to kill. WC is also an art form. Its an art form, its part of the art of combat. Using it to kill someone is based off your personal morals. Using it for personal gain and unjustly hurting people IMHO is discracing the art.

You had it right with your first sentence above. Wing Chun is a very cruel martial art. Not "gentle" like some MA claim to be. No one can disgrace the true art, because so few even know it. :p


BTW, we were bombing (the U.S. that is) Afghanistan back when clinton was in office.

And Sudanese aspirin factories and Bosnian civilians, etc., etc. It's just that liberals/socialists get no criticism because by definition, they can do no wrong, either in America, Oz, or with that bunch of despots and tin horn dictators that constitute the U.N.


I think he was referring to the budhist side of the art Anerlich. Wing chun is a budhist art so naturally some of the budhist philosophies will be transfered "traditionally" by training in it.

More B.S. As Wing Chun evolved as a personal defense system, it didn't carry such baggage even if it was founded by a Buddhist.


So if your sifu is a traditional one you will probably get some budhist outlooks from training wing chun.
Wrong. I look no further than my own Sigung and Sifu to deny this statement. I have never heard anyone accuse Yip Man of being or acting Buddhist, have you? And of course, anyone who knows anything about Wing Chun knows that Yip Man was THE MAN when we talk Wing Chun, but not when we discuss religion.

Regards,

[Gangsterfist]

I don't get this Liberal media thing. Like only 3 companies own the media. Viacomm owning a big part of it. So it seems that these different branches of the same parent company are in direct competition with each other. However, I guess there will always be a yin and a yang to everything.

If you do not agree with my post that is fine, and you are more than welcome to your own opinion. Extreme conservative and extreme liberal media make up facts to better their part or view of the spectrum. So anything we see on TV or hear from a politican can be true or false for all we know. I have friends in the military so I hear from their perspective what has been happening and I hold a high respect for our soldiers. Their lives are on line whether they like it or not. I am anti-war, and a lot of people i know in the middle east right now don't want to be there.

I never met or trained with Yip Man, but I agree with you that he can be considered "the man" when it comes to wing chun. However, out of all the stories I have heard about him one comes into mind that is relevant to this topic. I have heard there is a missing set from the dummy form containing some wing chun kicks. The reason it is missing is because Yip Man thought it to be too brutal and never taught anyone. He once demonstrated it to some students and it apparently shattered the dummy leg. If wing chun was such a brutal combat system and budhist philosophy had nothing to do with it, how come Yip Man would exclude those sets of kicks? Then again this could all be myth for all I know.

So even if it has evolved from a true brutal instant kill combat system to a self defense system, it was changed by budhists with a budhist influence. That is my opinion whether you agree with me or not.

[JamesHFYofAZ]

No kidding No need for that, your view is your view and mine is mine.
Harmonize? Is that what "the government" (presumably you are talking USA government here, this IS an international forum) calls cluster-bombing Afghanistan, and then invading Iraq?GF said it best this is not about the government, But thanks for sharing your views of the USG.
Sometimes you can turn enemies into friends ... but the REALLY committed ones history has shown you have to exterminate. If you believe "Mastering Kung Fu", WC was originally a military art, designed not to "harmonize" with opponents but to destroy them. Harmonize with words creates friends, harmonize with ones enomomy within "combat"(This is the best word I could find for this sinario. I am aware that it is part of fighting def.) the enomy self destructs.this is done by giuding them through reality, harmonizing with there energies, and if one chose to kill then they also must except death. I do not learn to fight, because fight (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=fight&x=22&y=21)means that I wish to cause them pain or resist there attacking. I chose to allow them to realize there flaws in attacking T,S,E by seeing the harmony (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=harmonize&x=11&y=8) of Time, Space, and energy. But I see your point, thank you!
I think he was referring to the budhist side of the art Anerlich. Wing chun is a budhist art so naturally some of the budhist philosophies will be transfered "traditionally" by training in it. I was reffuring to Chan Buddist pholosiphies and not religion, just to clarify, thank GF. Seeing the reality of things through time, space, and energies. This is just one side of the coin, Heads up!

[planetwc]

Originally posted by John Weiland

It's bad enough when Andrew and other Aussies get the facts wrong, but where do you crackpots come up with these allegations? The Clinton administration's policy was regime change in Iraq and presumably the anti-internal combustion engine, Algore was too. At least that's what he said. Sheesh.


John,

The connection between the Bush Family (via the Carlyle Group and other business relationships) and the Bin Laden family and the Saudi Royal family is quite known and has been reported on in the mainstream press.

Given the amount of money and power the binladen Group, the family company has and it's interwined relationship to just about everything major built in Saudi Arabia, there is no doubt that every president, republican and democrat has met and worked with binladen family members from Jimmy Carter onward to the present--both while in office and while OUT of office. There is just TOO much money there for them to ignore getting a taste of.

But of course none of this really has anything to do with WCK, so it will be my last post regarding it.

[John Weiland]

Hi Dave,

Sure is different when you give it a context. The bin Laden family does not equal Osama and Quaeda. Europe would come grinding to a halt without Saudi oil, so of course, given the influence and prominence in the field, dealing with Saudi Arabia equates to dealing with some with unsavory connections. There is no love there for the West; just for its dollars, Yen, Francs, Deutchmarks, and pounds.

I bet if we took a poll on KFO, not one person would be pro war. But, most of us as martial artists, if we're honest are pro self-defense. I wouldn't have posted any more, but I couldn't resist your invitation.

Found any Wing Chun down your way? San Jose is still Wing Chun heaven for the friends you left behind. :D Sorry if you're feeling restive.

Too many rednecks in your new vicinity making you antsy? It's worse in the Bay Area. Everyone knows the problems with the wacked out left that we have as they try to trample everyone's rights to create a socialist Utopia.

All the best to Ellie.

Regards,

[anerlich]

Harmonize? Is that what "the government" (presumably you are talking USA government here, this IS an international forum) calls cluster-bombing Afghanistan, and then invading Iraq?

This was a statement of what happened, NOT a criticism of US Government Policy (with which, for better or worse, my government followed 100%).

My argument is with the pseudo-Chan doublespeak that equates bombing the crap out of your enemies with harmony. It may be the right thing to do, just call the spade a spade. Otherwise it's 1984 all over again.



"quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No kidding
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No need for that, your view is your view and mine is mine."

I agree there was no need for you to be so patronising and state the bleeding obvious. Anyone who reads newspapers knows that every government conducts intelligence operations.



GF said it best this is not about the government, But thanks for sharing your views of the USG.

I was detailing events that occurred in recent history. I shared no view on the US government. I proposed that sometimes it is morally correct to abhor and destroy your enemies, and so to some degree at least I have to go along with Bush's conduct here. I was not criticising US policy, just stating what happened.

[JamesHFYofAZ]

To all, this thread was not intended for government discussions, thanks for the view but lets bring it back to understanding other (wing chun/ kung fu) and or the other side of the coin.
Anerlich, Didn't mean to offend you in any way!
Lets talk about harmonizing with the enemy, not bombs or other countries, but with in a two person scenario. Let me give a scenario, fill free to add too it. First lets look at a verbal attacker-1- how do you handle some one attacking you with verbal threats on ones life or self? 2-How do you harmonize with that? 3-How do you turn that into understanding for the better? This is more or less what I was referring to as harmonizing. If you are content with ALL, and you attacker is not, how do you let him SEE, Understand, Realize his flaws? If we can get through this maybe we can discuss an attacker that is physically trying to affect you.
My view is- 1- A lot can be said about one who threatens another beings existence. The one threatening is not in reality, or is just upset with reality, or maybe a combination if both.
2- harmonizing with one that is not fully aware of reality or is confused because of his glimpse into reality, I would think one would have to all ready know his experience to share truth and enlighten the other, or help this one become real by sharing a similar view of his disharmony.
3- one, understanding for self better you would learn if you truly can harmonize with one that is not in touch with self or the reality that he is in or not in for that matter. Two, turning his glimpse of reality into understanding is a true task, let alone knowing if it was for his better or not is something he will surely let you know about. If ones attempt to harmonize verbally fails, well then, one must know home to harmonize on a physical level as well.
Just ones view of the coin.

[Chronos]

Someone's been drinking the Kool-Aid again. :rolleyes:

[yuanfen]

James sez:If ones attempt to harmonize verbally fails, well then, one must know home to harmonize on a physical level as well.
Just ones view of the coin.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The meaning of harmony escapes me.

[duende]

Originally posted by yuanfen
The meaning of harmony escapes me.

No doubt...

[yuanfen]

Sure I do not have a HFY POV.

[duende]

this thread was about opening your mind, not keeping it closed Joy...

[John Weiland]

Originally posted by duende
this thread was about opening your mind, not keeping it closed Joy...
So far then, you've failed in your purpose.

To be honest, I too don't understand how and why you've stretched the meaning of harmony in the way you have.

Perhaps you can clarify why you have chosen "harmony" to be used in the various fashions in which you have ascribed it meaning. Joy is merely pointing out that your usage is out of the mainstream definition.

Anerlich particularly made some apt points on this. Perhaps if you addressed the issues he raised, you'd see it from a more common Wing Chun perspective.

Regards,

[Gangsterfist]

This is what harmony litterally means in english.

har·mo·ny ( P ) Pronunciation Key (härm-n)
n. pl. har·mo·nies

1. Agreement in feeling or opinion; accord: live in harmony.
2. A pleasing combination of elements in a whole: color harmony; the order and harmony of the universe. See Synonyms at proportion.
3. Music.
1. The study of the structure, progression, and relation of chords.
2. Simultaneous combination of notes in a chord.
3. The structure of a work or passage as considered from the point of view of its chordal characteristics and relationships.
4. A combination of sounds considered pleasing to the ear.
4. A collation of parallel passages, especially from the Gospels, with a commentary demonstrating their consonance and explaining their discrepancies.

I got this from:

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=harmony

[John Weiland]

Wing Chun application is what happens when my personal definition of harmony is disturbingly out of balance in my current personal situation.

Regards,

[taltos]

Couldn't "Loi Lau Hoi Sung" be interpreted and seeking harmony?

After all, if they want to come in, you retain (allow them to come in). If they want to leave, you send away (allow them to leave).

Wouldn't using someone's momentum against them (i.e. cooperative energy) be combat in which the energies are in harmony (at least directionally)?

Just a thought...

-Levi

[Gangsterfist]

Could it not also be interpreted as a maxim for efficiency behind the system of wing chun?

By energies being in harmony, do you mean synchronized? If you are using somones energies against them I do not see how you are in harmony with them. You are simply using all their force against them, you are not using your own force at all.

Perhaps a better "dumbed down" version of what you are saying is needed. If you are referring to chan buddhism with the whole time space harmony theroy, then back it up with the philosophies behind it so everyone understands.

[duende]

1. Agreement in feeling or opinion; accord: live in harmony

Everyone has their own interpretations. Jame's usage of the term isn't that far a stretch imo.

[taltos]

Could it not also be interpreted as a maxim for efficiency behind the system of wing chun?

Sure. As I said earlier, everyone has their own opinions.


By energies being in harmony, do you mean synchronized? If you are using somones energies against them I do not see how you are in harmony with them. You are simply using all their force against them, you are not using your own force at all.

I can see that. I can also see that in order to co-operate with someone's energy, you have to be moving/expending energy as well. Otherwise they are doing their own thing, and you can't be operating alonside them (cooperating).


Perhaps a better "dumbed down" version of what you are saying is needed. If you are referring to chan buddhism with the whole time space harmony theroy, then back it up with the philosophies behind it so everyone understands.

It was just my opinion, and I didn't reference anything except the specific Kuen Kuit I was using for illustrative purposes only. As we can all see here, WC can be difficult enough to understand when two people have different views of the language used. I had and have no intention of bringing more linguisitic confusion into the mix by referencing something without explaining it or moving on before we have established a foundation.

I was merely sharing one of the many ways I personally see the word "harmony" as appropriate to my WC training. That's all.

-Levi

[JamesHFYofAZ]

Someone's been drinking the Kool-Aid again Its good stuff! What kinda cool aid are you drinken?
To be honest, I too don't understand how and why you've stretched the meaning of harmony in the way you have. no stretching just my opinions, as you obviously have yours.
Perhaps you can clarify why you have chosen "harmony" to be used in the various fashions in which you have ascribed it meaning. Joy is merely pointing out that your usage is out of the mainstream definition. who are you referring to. If look back on the posts, I never spoke to him about anything, just my POVs on things. Are you referring to HFY when you say YOUR, if so, no one stated HFY in these posts these words came from my mouth, the HFY have helped me understand a lot of thing. and I do owe credit to the system for that, but I am still the one talking about my understandings. The systems knowledge goes way beyond my own. It (my example of harmony) is in fact in the mainstream def, if ones eyes are open to knowing, growing, learning and flowing.
Anerlich particularly made some apt points on this. Perhaps if you addressed the issues he raised, you'd see it from a more common Wing Chun perspective. I have and did, in the past but its time to move forward, and "common" is no longer my goal, nor my point of conversating these posts. I have seen that side of the coin.
Wing Chun application is what happens when my personal definition of harmony is disturbingly out of balance in my current personal situation. I see your point and can say that this is a point of personal harmony, self harmony, but how about the harmony with others and your surroundings?
By energies being in harmony, do you mean synchronized? If you are using somones energies against them I do not see how you are in harmony with them. You are simply using all their force against them, you are not using your own force at all. Is that not a harmonies event, he will realize he was wrong, one just assisted him on the path.
Perhaps a better "dumbed down" version of what you are saying is needed. If you are referring to Chan buddhism with the whole time space harmony theroy, then back it up with the philosophies behind it so everyone understands. If I dumb it down for those who don't understand then how can it be philosophical and if one can't understand the above then philosophies are pointless because they will just become more arguments. I will try to be simplistic in words but I can only express what I know. Most of the posting have true intent behind them the others have been filled with spite and the are out to argue not grow, thats fine with me, it will be hard to argue with five elements of nature.
Thanks to all for there posts and to my fam. for expressing! Just another coin being tossed! Heads up!

[JamesHFYofAZ]

Good say my brother.

[Gangsterfist]

I just meant that not everyone may be familiar with that peticular philosophy or point of view. Saying something is in harmony because of energies being in harmony does not explain what you mean. If I do not interpret what you mean in your view I am going to apply the litteral meaning of harmony.

I don't think anyone was being spiteful, they just don't make the connection to your POV due to the fact there is not enough given information to make the connection. By dumbing it down I meant for you to explicate harmony, not just use the word.


I think if we were to use the litteral meaning here it would require 2 parties to agree upon the subject for it to be in harmony. Throwing someone on the ground using their own force against them does not transfer to the litteral meaning of the word harmony, unless the person being thrown to the ground agrees with the action as a learning experience and finds harmony in it. Some people might view it a different way when they get tossed around. Not to mention both parties (either in sparring or in fighting) are trying to defeat one another, so I see no harmony there.

As for people referring to HFY, and I am not by any means an expert, but your words are really not your own but plagiarized those of HFY. From what I have read and been told, what you say is very similar and were first brought to your attention by the HFY system. They have seem to be taken by you, and you seem to enjoy them. Which is a good thing, but they are still HFY based, and therefore not totally your own.

No one is attacking lineage here (from what I can tell) they just want a plain in english non-cryptic answer of what harmony you are talking about. To be honest at this point I am really confused what you mean as well.

[taltos]

Originally posted by Gangsterfist
To be honest at this point I am really confused what you mean as well.

As James's Kung Fu Brother, I may have some insights as to what he may be trying to say, or I could just offer up some of my own opinions/interpretions of what you may be looking for. Which would all belong ultimately to the creators of WC and the creators of the English language jointly, of course.

What exactly is confusing? I will do my best to put it in simple layman's terms, and try to not even be WC specific.

-Levi

[Gangsterfist]

Thanks Levi,

Just to get something on common ground could you please explicate the word harmony and use it in combat terms?

Explain how conflicting energies between you and an opponet are in harmony with one another, and use examples. That way I think I can better understand where he is coming from. I don't see any harmony because your opponet is never in agreement with you, they are trying to beat you.

[JamesHFYofAZ]

I just meant that not everyone may be familiar with that particular philosophy or point of view. Saying something is in harmony because of energies being in harmony does not explain what you mean. If I do not interpret what you mean in your view I am going to apply the litteral meaning of harmony. I am sorry but I can not dumb it down, I tried and I found that this is as dumb as it gets, Guy attacks, I use him to let him know he made a mistake (harmony). Just because he does not see it does not mean it isn't there. If I pond his face into the ground is that harmony? If I show him his mistake so that next time he does right, is that harmony? If He physically attacks then he has broken harmony, it is then my task to realign him with reality (harmony). I hope that helps.
Throwing someone on the ground using their own force against them does not transfer to the litteral meaning of the word harmony, unless the person being thrown to the ground agrees with the action as a learning experience and finds harmony in it. Some people might view it a different way when they get tossed around. That person will see there mistake and not do it again, or will get ****ed off. First one, I find that very harmonious indeed. " Good for you, realizing that that was a bad idea". Second, he chooses to avoid reality and continue on his path of self-suffering. He does not find harmony but I still tried (my harmony was never broken).
As for people referring to HFY, and I am not by any means an expert, but your words are really not your own but plagiarized those of HFY. From what I have read and been told, what you say is very similar and were first brought to your attention by the HFY system. They have seem to be taken by you, and you seem to enjoy them. Which is a good thing, but they are still HFY based, and therefore not totally your own. If you want to get technical then no word are my word, all I've learn is by others guidance and my own understanding of those guiding words, yes? But I stated
no one stated HFY in these posts these words came from my mouth, the HFY have helped me understand a lot of thing. And I do owe credit to the system for that, but I am still the one talking about my understandings. The systems knowledge goes way beyond my own. Point in case, please re-read if you don't understand! Hope that helps you see me! Bye for today& thanks for the chat!

[taltos]

Just to get something on common ground could you please explicate the word harmony and use it in combat terms?

Explain how conflicting energies between you and an opponet are in harmony with one another, and use examples. That way I think I can better understand where he is coming from. I don't see any harmony because your opponet is never in agreement with you, they are trying to beat you.

We've all seen the dictionary entry, so explicating the word again would be extraneous, with the exceotion of pointing out that it MAY BE THE CASE that James (I know it is the case for me) is using the word "harmony" not in the sense of the root "harmoni" meaning "articulation" or "agreement," but in the sense of the root work "harmos" meaning "joint" or "joined." But I digress.

Here's how "I" see the use of harmony in combat:

Harmony with one's self is (IMO) complete agreement in structure, intent, and energy.

Example: If I am stepping backwards in retreat while throwing a forward punch, I am not in harmony. There are conflicting directions and intents present.

Harmony with one's opponent is (IMO) cooperative structure, intent, OR energy.

Example: If you are stepping backwards in retreat, your energy is moving in that particular direction. If I step forward into the space you are vacating, I am directing my energy in the same direction as you. The result? You get more of what you were already doing, and I accomplish a goal (moving you backwards) without expending energy to "force" you to do it (I didn't push you backwards while you were stepping forwards, which would be direct conflict of energy).

It may be possible that the confusion in the definition is in applying a mental state of final result to the definition. That's not what "I" think of in the context of harmony.

Would I decide to be thrown to the ground? Probably not.

Would I decide to punch in a manner that would not allow contact? Probably not.

Would I throw a punch at an opponent? Surely.

If I was throwing a WC punch, would my elbow rise as I extended my fist away from my body? Yes.

If my opponent executed a tok sau or a gwat sau (in the specific context of coming from underneath my elbow and slapping it upwards), would they be cooperating with my already established upward elbow energetic? Yes.

"I" would consider the above example a moment in time when my opponent and I were in "harmony" in specific regards to the energy and direction of my elbow.

Please note that I only described ONE example so as to avoid any confusion or outside issues coming into play. There are certainly other definitions, as well as other examples.

I hope that helped clear things up.

-Levi

[Gangsterfist]

Originally posted by JamesHFYofAZ
I am sorry but I can not dumb it down, I tried and I found that this is as dumb as it gets, Guy attacks, I use him to let him know he made a mistake (harmony). Just because he does not see it does not mean it isn't there. If I pond his face into the ground is that harmony? If I show him his mistake so that next time he does right, is that harmony? If He physically attacks then he has broken harmony, it is then my task to realign him with reality (harmony). I hope that helps.

Okay, that makes more sense now. I see your point, before you were just saying harmony.

[John Weiland]

Wasn't this a continuation of the thread of using music with Wing Chun training? :D

[anerlich]

"My view is- 1- A lot can be said about one who threatens another beings existence. The one threatening is not in reality, or is just upset with reality, or maybe a combination if both.
2- harmonizing with one that is not fully aware of reality or is confused because of his glimpse into reality, I would think one would have to all ready know his experience to share truth and enlighten the other, or help this one become real by sharing a similar view of his disharmony.
3- one, understanding for self better you would learn if you truly can harmonize with one that is not in touch with self or the reality that he is in or not in for that matter. Two, turning his glimpse of reality into understanding is a true task, let alone knowing if it was for his better or not is something he will surely let you know about. If ones attempt to harmonize verbally fails, well then, one must know home to harmonize on a physical level as well.
Just ones view of the coin.
"

A view I cannot share.

I find this insistence on treating a potential threat to one's life as something that you can make go away if you just refer to it with different, hifalutin, words to be rather disturbing. Sometimes, unfortunately, you cannot bring people to the mental space you would like, but you have to go to their level and fight fire with fire.

Dressing such situations with warm fuzzy words like "harmony" in my mind is heading in the direction of the "Arbeit Macht Frei" signs over the concentration camps. Evil remains evil, conflict and discord remain conflict and discord, viloence reamins violence, no matter what sort of labels you try to nice or Zen-ify them up with.

Philosophical and religious principles, with pure motivation, are good things to live by ... but Wing Chun and other fighting (OK combat, sorry but it's just another word) systems begin in situations where those principles no longer apply.

"this thread was about opening your mind, not keeping it closed Joy"

Open-mindedness is good, but not to the point where one loses the ability for critical thinking, or the right to express it. Scepticism and disagreement do not necessarily imply a closed mind, either.

"Wasn't this a continuation of the thread of using music with Wing Chun training?"

Sure, I'm listening to Dieicide, Black Sabbath, Cradle of Filth and Napalm Death ;-)

[anerlich]

I have and did, in the past but its time to move forward, and "common" is no longer my goal, nor my point of conversating these posts. I have seen that side of the coin.

Actually, I feel that my point of view is further along the path and closer to the truth than yours. In my teens and twenties I was a keen student of Zen and Buddhism, but with a bit more experience, and after some mistakes, I can see that these are just more concepts and labels you have to leave behind to see unadorned reality.

So I've seen your side of the coin, but I've moved far beyond it.

Arrogant? Maybe, but read your own response to the other posters reference to what I posted. Then ask yourself who (else) is arrogant.

OTOH, maybe you think I'm just an ornery SOB who wants to kick your butt for implying my opinions are "common". I'm pretty happy with that too. In "harmony" with myself :cool:

[John Weiland]

Originally posted by anerlich

"Wasn't this a continuation of the thread of using music with Wing Chun training?"

Sure, I'm listening to Dieicide, Black Sabbath, Cradle of Filth and Napalm Death ;-)
What happened to Ted Nugent? :D

Regards,

[anerlich]

What happened to Ted Nugent?

"I have and did, in the past but its time to move forward."

[PaulH]

In the realm of morality, I side more with Anerlich's lucid posts. Evil is Evil. You don't harmonize evil; you fight it. Tail down I guess for the optimists among us.

Regards,
PH

[yuanfen]

The problematic nature of the concept of "harmony" advanced
by James and his supportive posters is also readily evident in
a "sifu" in my metro area,some months ago on this list/forum, challenging me to a fight (my place or yours) because in his judgement I "disturbed" his harmony. Shows the very subjective (even when interpersonal in a group) nature of the definition of harmony involved in the posts of James and his supporters.

I wouldnt hold Zen/Chan Buddhism responsible for it because
nowhere do I do know of Chan advocating violence based on a subjective concept. Original Chan rejects the the objective reliability of concepts by intellection.

Good wing chun hasa logic of it's own. One need not link it to Chan any more than to link Newtonian physics in a deterministic way to Christianity.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Andrew Nerlich is absolutely right about this...

There is an old saying that bears repeating:

Return Good for Good; but for Evil - return Justice.

At the Center of all religions, philosphies, and sciences (when esoterically understood) - there is a Core Truth shared by all of them.

That said...Joy just made reference to one such religion, Christianity, and I'll take this opportunity to quote from a book entitled MYSTIC CHRISTIANITY - as it bears directly on the conversation on this thread:

"Blessed are the meek; for they shall inherit the earth." (Matt.v:5.)

.....By these words Jesus sought to teach that those who had acquired the attitude of obedience to the Power of the Spirit Within them would become as Masters of the things of the earth. This message is frequently misunderstood by reason of the lack of perception of the Mystic meaning contained in the words.

The word "meek" does not mean that "I'm so meek and humble" attitude and expression of the hypocritical followers of form. Jesus never taught this - and never acted it. He was always the Master, and never sought to make of his followers cringing creatures and whining and sniveling supplicants. He asserted His Mastery in many ways and accepted the respect due him - as for instance when the vial of precious ointment was poured upon Him.

His use of the word, which has been poorly translated as "meek,'' was in the sense of a calm, dignified bearing toward the Power of the Spirit, and a reverent submission to its guidance - not a hypocritical and cowardly "meekness" toward other men. The assurance that such should "inherit the earth" means that they should become masters of things temporal - that is, that they should be able to rise above them - should become lords of the earth by reason of their "entering into the kingdom of heaven" within them......"

(P. 249). The book was written by Yogi Ramacharaka, and published by the Yogi Publication Society, originally printed in the United States in 1907.

[Phenix]

Victor,

Great point.

[duende]

Originally posted by yuanfen
The problematic nature of the concept of "harmony" advanced
by James and his supportive posters is also readily evident in
a "sifu" in my metro area,some months ago on this list/forum, challenging me to a fight (my place or yours) because in his judgement I "disturbed" his harmony. Shows the very subjective (even when interpersonal in a group) nature of the definition of harmony involved in the posts of James and his supporters.

Your mouth was obviously not in harmony with it's surroundings. Your ego was not in harmony with reality... need I say more... cause it appears you just want to sidetrack this thread.


Originally posted by yuanfen

I wouldnt hold Zen/Chan Buddhism responsible for it because
nowhere do I do know of Chan advocating violence based on a subjective concept. Original Chan rejects the the objective reliability of concepts by intellection.

Good wing chun hasa logic of it's own. One need not link it to Chan any more than to link Newtonian physics in a deterministic way to Christianity.

So tell me then... where does the logic for YOUR wooden dummy form come from??

[yuanfen]

Victor sez':
His use of the word, which has been poorly translated as "meek,'' was in the sense of a calm, dignified bearing toward the Power of the Spirit, and a reverent submission to its guidance - not a hypocritical and cowardly "meekness" toward other men.




------------------------------------

Good point Victor.
That is another side- an important one.

joy

Joy

[Phenix]

Harmony, in chinese buddhism, it is said, to shine together in harmony. Meaning embrace chaos and everyone's light to shine together.

However, to embrace chaos doenst mean to give in on evil.

As in the chapter 25 of the Lotus sutra, the chapter of Boddhistava of compassionate, it says " those cursing and hexing, with the action which cause others harm, recite the Kwan Yin Boddhisatva's name, she will return those evil to the performers"

Now a days,

there is so called hamony, such as some of the chinese communist practices, yours is mine and mine is mine. You follow my harmony.

There also, the old chinese dynasty emperor harmony. If you dont harmony with me, you are not in harmony. Because those emperor think they were God's Son. so everyone has to listern to them and " harmony " with them. otherwise, one will be punished in the name of not harmony

Are these harmony? Sorry no.


I think harmony can be reached if one study the spiral dynamic and Maslow.
Expanding one's view and truely see other's view. Nothing is so rigid and there is lots of things about communication in others term and value in order to have mutual understanding are needed.

But, that doesnt mean one can accept the rober's view or Hittle's view in the name of harmony. those are evil.

There is well define meaning in chinese term or chan buddhism and we cannot re define things as we like. Thus, the confusians or buddhist in old china. always refer what they say to scripture. that is an act of following the defination.

For example, the method of Chan patriach Hsu Yun lecture Buddhism with Surangama sutra, that is his favorite,He used the definetion within the sutra to explain the sutra teaching.

It is new age era.
now a days, everything changes. everyone is free to define the term in thier own way. so, what is harmony?depend on what one's needs for manupulation. It often is not harmony but chaos because everyone want others to "harmony" with them instead of finding out what is what and live in balance and embracing.

I think lots of people doesnt understand harmony at all because they never raise up to the 4th chakra consciousness. If one stays in the survive, tribal, or power control conscious. There is no way for one to see what is harmony. this is because in thier mind, either you win or I win, you stay alive or me, you in control or me, there are all just duality thoughts. until they see someday oh it doesnt has to be going you or me way. there is the 3rd way, the 4th ways....infinity of ways to get what one wants and satisfied everyone too. Nothing will change until this realization.

And after this realization, one will not go back to the either you or me way. because that is struggling, suffering, all the time.

See, it is not about esoteric teaching, it is about open the heart, the crown with lotus of ten thousands pendals or unlimited boundary of thinking. Not to squese into one corner and thinking the whole world must follow. I am the center of universal.

Until then how can one see another side of coin? if one live in a must choose only one side, either this side or the otherside. Only,when one sees a coin has more then two side. ie, 4th chakra consciouness. then, one can accept the other side and all side of the coins.

[redtornado]

Hey, this is a good thing to bring up!! I have this prayer that we say .... God grant me the sereinty to accete the things I cannot change, The corage to change the things I can, And the wisdom to know the differance.

this is the serenity prayer..

:) Well thanks Jeff

[taltos]

It seems that we are collectively focused on the concept of "Good" vs. "Evil" here in our concept of the word "harmony." Perhaps we could actually move into a more productive discourse by attepting to look at the context of the word in another light.

I posted this earlier, but it seems that we were all too caught up in a pointless argument, so I'll rephrase. I'm interested in what anyone has to say, and I hope this allows us to move out of the realm of ethical and religious discussions, so Sandman doesn't have to step in and remind us that this is first and foremost a WC forum. Interesting, though, that it was not "James and his supportive posters" who brought time/space/energy/Chan into this discussion, or even lineage names, but others.

And just for clarification, my two posts (concerning one possible interpretation of a Kuen Kuit and the one I will paraphrase below) are simply my own interpretations, and I am left wondering if, since I am not expounding the same personal interpretations as others, I am included in the very same "problematic nature of the concept of "harmony" advanced
by James and his supportive posters"? Chadhuri Sifu, would you be kind enough to let me know, either through PM or post, if my definitions, as previously listed, fit into your statement above? It was simply too vague for me to be able to adequately understand, and I would not presume to put words into your mouth or put you into a vague and ill-suited general catagory. I would greatly appreciate your clarification as it relates to myself individually. Thank you in advance.

I would also like point out that, while you are certainly entitled to your opinion and interpretation of past events, they cannot be ascribed, in spirit or in practice, to that individual's students, teacher, etc. with any degree of validity. I have personally met students of yours that I found to be wonderfully pleasant and gracious individuals, as well as those who left a lot to be desired and I would have trouble justifying giving the time of day. And neither of those are used as judgements on you. Your actions are your actions, and any feelings I may have about you and your behavior stem from your actions alone, and not those of your seniors, juniors, teachers, and students. I would hope that we all understand and practice this, but it unfortunately seems not to be the case.

That said, here again is another way to view "harmony." Please let me know what you think.

We all have access to the dictionary entry (from a previous post), so I will only add that it is possible that the word is being used not in the sense of the root "harmoni" meaning "articulation" or "agreement," but in the sense of the root word "harmos" meaning "joint" or "joined."

Here's how I see the use of harmony in combat:

Harmony with one's self is (IMO) complete agreement in structure, intent, and energy.

Example: If I am stepping backwards in retreat while throwing a forward punch, I am not in harmony. There are conflicting directions and intents present.

Harmony with one's opponent is (IMO) cooperative structure, intent, OR energy.

Example: If you are stepping backwards in retreat, your energy is moving in that particular direction. If I step forward into the space you are vacating, I am directing my energy in the same direction as you. The result? You get more of what you were already doing, and I accomplish a goal (moving you backwards) without expending energy to "force" you to do it (I didn't push you backwards while you were stepping forwards, which would be direct conflict of energy).

It may be possible that the confusion in the definition is in applying a mental state of final result to the definition. That's not what I think of in the context of harmony. It could be seen not as agreement in final result, but as momentary agreement in energy vector.

Would I decide to be thrown to the ground? Probably not.

Would I decide to punch in a manner that would not allow contact? Probably not.

Would I throw a punch at an opponent? Surely.

If I was throwing a WC punch, would my elbow rise as I extended my fist away from my body? Yes.

If my opponent executed a tok sau or a gwat sau (in the specific context of coming from underneath my elbow and slapping it upwards), would they be cooperating with my already established upward elbow energetic? Yes.

I would consider the above example a moment in time when my opponent and I were in "harmony" in specific regards to the energy and direction of my elbow.

Please note that I only described ONE example so as to avoid any confusion or outside issues coming into play. There are certainly other definitions, as well as other examples.

I hope that helped clear things up.

-Levi

[yuanfen]

To answer Levi's query if I understand it clearly. In a previous post he said"Couldn't "Loi Lau Hoi Sung" be interpreted and seeking harmony?
After all, if they want to come in, you retain (allow them to come in). If they want to leave, you send away (allow them to leave).
Wouldn't using someone's momentum against them (i.e. cooperative energy) be combat in which the energies are in harmony (at least directionally)?
Just a thought...
Levi"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Levi
Context means much. In the context above I see no problem with
the usage of the term harmony being to represent appropriate use of energy- a smooth and effective response
without overusage of resources or energy. An operational meaning.... leaving the issues of morality unresolved.

My critique was at using the term generally in all contexts. Thus normatively if I were attacked I would not call my response as
operationally harmonious. I would use the term self defense.
Harmony may eventually result if we later go for a beer.Tsing Tao, Singha, Negra Modelo, Taj Mahal... but we would be going
for tea if only abominations like Coors or Bud were available.
But too much Tsing Tao may result in disharmony for the community and the participants.

Context brings out a fuller meaning of terms IMO.

Joy Chaudhuri

[JamesHFYofAZ]

Anerlich,
I find this insistence on treating a potential threat to one's life as something that you can make go away if you just refer to it with different, hifalutin, words to be rather disturbing I said nothing of the emotional side, in that I would find it very disturbing that this attacker is out of control, not in reality, full of dis-harmony. I guess that it was not as vivid as it was in my mind, sorry about that, mate. I have noticed that you have a bit of animosity in your voicing opinion.
Philosophical and religious principles, with pure motivation, are good things to live by ... but Wing Chun and other fighting (OK combat, sorry but it's just another word) systems begin in situations where those principles no longer apply. This sound like kung fu, and in kung fu, one chooses to fight or chooses to use there mind in relation to defence. If someone says one is a little bee itch would one fight? I would ask why?. He's are attacking me and thats unjustified, but the words are still empty, I feel no hostility, I just try to see the distortion of reality. (thanks to the Grasshopper)
Actually, I feel that my point of view is further along the path and closer to the truth than yours. In my teens and twenties I was a keen student of Zen and Buddhism, but with a bit more experience, and after some mistakes, I can see that these are just more concepts and labels you have to leave behind to see unadorned reality. Change is good! Thanks for sharing.
Arrogant? Maybe, but read your own response to the other posters reference to what I posted. Then ask yourself who (else) is arrogant In the eye of the beholder. Again it's a shame you take such an approach to these view/opinions/perceptions. If I sound arrogant in my word that have no voice than I am, but at this time I will say I am not trying to be, just clarifying info. although,You don't need to take it that way either! Just another side of the coin. But I can't expect you to be understanding of such a lower form as my self, Right! Since you know so much about Chan Philosophy and how it pertains to this thread, enlighten me, because all you have done is throw back what is give and replaced it with an angered approach. If you say no then you approach is closer to my understanding then we seem to agree on. I hope that made since!
Joy,
The problematic nature of the concept of "harmony" advanced by James and his supportive posters is also readily evident in a "sifu" in my metro area,some months ago on this list/forum, challenging me to a fight (my place or yours) because in his judgment I "disturbed" his harmony. Shows the very subjective (even when interpersonal in a group) nature of the definition of harmony involved in the posts of James and his supporters. Stick to the Here and now, there is no need to try and dis credit anyone for any reason, even if you where the one provoking the situation as you are now! Keep you problems to your self and stick to the topic, if you don't like the topic, get out of the thread, if you don't want to do either then expect someone to say something. As for the Sifu that spoke to you and what I am speaking of is relevant to this how? That would make you the attacker. (Children, you can't take them any where!) Are you sure Your not the mouth boxer.;)
Victor, alway good to here your POV. Although not being a Christian or Buddhist, I see your view. I am more of a philosopher of life through understandings. It's hard to understand when the ones point fingers are not sharing but accusing. Just another look!

[taltos]

Thanks for your reply to my earlier thread.

Could you be so kind as to address the issues I raised just a few posts ago? I will rephrase and number the specific questions so as to avoid any confusion:

You made use of the general phrase "James and his supportive posters" in a previous post. I am James's Sihing, and thus a member of his Kung Fu Family. My previous posts were simply my own interpretations. Since I was not simply expounding the same personal interpretations as James, it would seem that I am not included in your vague generality. However, I would not presume to put words into your mouth or put you into a vague and ill-suited general catagory, so I would greatly appreciate your clarification as it relates to myself individually. Thus:

1. Am I included in your perceived "problematic nature of the concept of "harmony" advanced by James and his supportive posters"?

2. Why or Why Not?

As I also stated earlier, you are certainly entitled to your opinion and interpretation of past events and interactions with one particular person, but it seems contradictory to ascribe them, in spirit or in practice, to the students, teachers, etc. of that person with any degree of validity. I have personally met students of yours that I found to be wonderfully pleasant and gracious individuals, as well as those who left a lot to be desired and I would have trouble justifying giving the time of day (in the forms of a student some of my brothers and sisters and I used to practice with periodically while we were students at ASU, and a student of yours who grabbed my shirt and tried to fight me as I exited the restroom at last year's WC Friendship Picnic because of the issues between his Sifu and mine, just before you and the rest of your students left the event). Neither of those are used as judgements on you. Your actions are your actions, and any feelings I may have about you and your behavior stem from your actions alone, and not those of your seniors, juniors, teachers, and students. I would hope that we all understand and practice this, but it unfortunately seems not to be the case.

A while back, a trio of your students visited the kwoon I study in. I and a kung fu brother of mine recognized them, but my Sifu did not. At least two of them have been exposed to the Biu Ji Form (since they appear on your website playing the form), yet they decided to lie directly to my Sifu's face and claim absolutely no prior WC experience. My Sifu took the time to give them the same explaination he would give any non-experienced interested party that walks through the door, and they left. Would it be appropriate for me, and the participants on this forum, to assume that since students of yours had decided to ignore common courtesy and engage in simple, direct deception, that you also participate in those activities? I would say "no." I would say it would be more appropriate to judge you on your actions and words, and not on those of your students.

So:

3. Do you feel it is appropriate to judge a student by their Sifu?

4. Do you feel it is appropriate to judge a Sifu by their students?

I usually try my best to play by the rules. When I am involved in a conversation with someone, I usually let them dictate the intensity and depth pf the interation. Since you decided that it was appropriate and acceptible to not allow sleeping dogs to lie by dragging the past back into the here and now to use as some sort of commentary (I am still unsure of the point you were trying to make), it is certainly appropriate and acceptible for me to bring up these past events as well (even though you had already stated publicly that you do not keep track of your students as to what they do in their free time).

5. What exactly was the point you were trying to make by bringing up past events, events which have been settled and forgotten a long time ago by most of the parties involved?

Thank you in advance for your answers. I am sure they will go a long way towards clearing up the confusion that I (and perhaps others) have concerning your most recent posts.

If you do not feel that it is appropriate to share your answers publicly, I can certainly respect that. Feel free to PM me if that is the case.

-Levi

[Gangsterfist]

okay seriously bust out the thunderdome and we can settle this

Two men enter (or women so I am being PC here) and one man leaves....

[canglong]

originally posted by yuanfen
Context brings out a fuller meaning of terms IMO. have you ever mentioned this to hendrik.

[Phenix]

Originally posted by canglong
have you ever mentioned this to hendrik.

Which one? phenix, or jiglypuffs, or latios or pikachu?

jiglypuffs, jiglypuffs, ....... , sleep sweet, sleep sweet...... enter the non dual...sleep sleep...

[anerlich]

If someone says one is a little bee itch would one fight? I would ask why?. He's are attacking me and thats unjustified, but the words are still empty, I feel no hostility, I just try to see the distortion of reality. (thanks to the Grasshopper)

[sigh] throw me a line...

How can anyone let such an opportunity go ...

<distortion of reality>
James, you're a little bee itch, and so is the Grasshopper.
</distortion of reality>


I have noticed that you have a bit of animosity in your voicing opinion.

How frightfully perceptive of you. I'm not bound by your ideas of appropriate behaviour. And I find your lecturing and condescending tone annoying, hence the animosity.


In the eye of the beholder.

You got it.


Again it's a shame you take such an approach to these view/opinions/perceptions.

The shame is in the eye of the beholder. As I said, I think the views/opinions/perceptions contain inherent dangers, and I'm proud to treat them with the suspicion I feel they deserve. I think it's a shame you continue to promote them despite the wealth of good advice to the contrary on this thread.


If you say no then you approach is closer to my understanding then we seem to agree on. I hope that made since!

If you mean "sense", no it did not.

I don't particularly like the expression "Kung Fu family", either. Most cults tend to abhor authentic family ties and replace them with false bonds of their own. When I hear "my Kung Fu family", I keep hearing "Manson family".

I have a Sifu/coach and a bunch of friends I train with. And it's GREAT. I don't NEED or WANT another family.

Lots of people want to believe in things that just aren't there.

I'm outta here. This thread is going nowhere. If I want to listen to patronising and condescending lectures, and be subjected to poor amateur personality analysis, I'll go listen to the experts, politicians.

[yuanfen]

Chaudhuri Sifu
Thanks for your reply to my earlier thread.
(You are welcome)

Could you be so kind as to address the issues I raised just a few posts ago?

((No good deed goes unpunished?)
I will rephrase and number the specific questions so as to avoid any confusion:

( I am disinclined to spend much time except for some brief comments))

You made use of the general phrase "James and his supportive posters" in a previous post. I am James's Sihing, and thus a member of his Kung Fu Family. My previous posts were simply my own interpretations.

((My comments were limited to the self evident supportive posts-
I didnt list individuals and dont need to. I was discussing the meanings of "harmony"))

1. Am I included in your perceived "problematic nature of the concept of "harmony" advanced by James and his supportive posters"?

((Not intentionally. I was speaking to the subject))

2. Why or Why Not?

((See above))

As I also stated earlier, you are certainly entitled to your opinion and interpretation of past events and interactions with one particular person, but it seems contradictory to ascribe them, in spirit or in practice, to the students, teachers, etc. of that person with any degree of validity.

((Not much interpretation-the person's frustrations and challenge were clear enough in fairly plain English. I didn't hold anyone else
above or below responsible for it in the first place. That was not my point. Because of the use of the term "harmony" in the challenging posts I mention it as an example of the very subjective use of that term- and slingingthe terms carelessly))

I have personally met students of yours that I found to be wonderfully pleasant and gracious individuals, as well as those who left a lot to be desired

((The human condition. No cookie cutter involved. I dont accept everyone as a student these days-but people have their karma))

and I would have trouble justifying giving the time of day (in the forms of a student some of my brothers and sisters and I used to practice with periodically while we were students at ASU,

((Not sure who that would be and how much he/she really had learned))
and a student of yours who grabbed my shirt and tried to fight me as I exited the restroom at last year's WC Friendship Picnic because of the issues between his Sifu and mine,

((First I have heard of it- and I am shocked- would have intervened if I was right there ))

just before you and the rest of your students left the event).

((Got bored sitting around for an hour and a half or so and left. Expected to do chi sao by then-later understood that some chi saoed and shared forms after I left. Didnt have time to stay longer. I do lead a busy life))

Neither of those are used as judgements on you.

(( ?? Ok))

Your actions are your actions, and any feelings I may have about you and your behavior stem from your actions alone, and not those of your seniors, juniors, teachers, and students.

((I try to take full responsibility for my own actions in most contexts where free will is involved))

I would hope that we all understand and practice this, but it unfortunately seems not to be the case.

((Wait a second. Self described HFY folks are the main ones who seem to engage ina chorus on the forum. I have many top flight seniors-better than me-none to my knowledge post or are regulars on the net. There are others who have or do share the same teacher-there is no group think or group response. Individualists for the most part. I am on my own. Net forums give a distorted view of the wing chun world. I get bored and move on in different forums. I chose to remain in this forum thus far- because I do share from time to time and am curious how Leung Shun folks, Koo Lo folks, Womg Shon Leung folks, TST folks, Twc, WT folks and other lines approach wing chun and I pay close attention to when principles of motion and applications are discussed. Leung Jan and Ip man are gone so its an attempt to understand possible missing links in transmission and to keep up with the evolution of the art.
BTW
Many of Hendrik's comments have given me some unexpected insights. His wing chun is different from mine and our opinions not always the same...though some HFYers lump us together. Hendrik does a good job on his own-his style is his own. I do wish that he would comment less on HFY and folks who have HFY questions would ask them on the HFY site as HFY folks sometimes selectively direct. I choose to ignore Canglong's asking me in the old same old ad hominem kind of post in this thread whether I have mentioned context to Hendrik. I wish there was more discussion of "popular" wing chun))

A while back, a trio of your students visited the kwoon I study in.

((I had absolutely nothing to do with that))

I would say it would be more appropriate to judge you on your actions and words, and not on those of your students.

((I dont seek to be judged!))

So:

3. Do you feel it is appropriate to judge a student by their Sifu?
((No. People evolve))

4. Do you feel it is appropriate to judge a Sifu by their students?

((Depends on context. Sometimes- but generally no))

I usually try my best to play by the rules.
(??))

When I am involved in a conversation with someone, I usually let them dictate the intensity and depth pf the interation.

((If I am interested in the conversation- I try to pay attention to the topic on hand. But unforyunately martial arts conversations at low levels often end up with one up "man"ship(generic not sexist comment intended))

Since you decided that it was appropriate and acceptible to not allow sleeping dogs to lie by dragging the past back into the here and now to use as some sort of commentary (I am still unsure of the point you were trying to make),

((Sleeping dog analogy? I was illustrating the contradictions in the meaning of harmony))

it is certainly appropriate and acceptible for me to bring up these past events as well (even though you had already stated publicly that you do not keep track of your students as to what they do in their free time).

5. What exactly was the point you were trying to make by bringing up past events, events which have been settled and forgotten a long time ago by most of the parties involved?

((I dont keep track and they are responsible and liable for their own actions. Mine is not a military shop or a temple. If some decent values rub off on them- its my good fortune))

Thank you in advance for your answers.

((They may or may not be the expected ones- but cheers. Like JR I gotta run so no proofing. Sorry))

Joy Chaudhuri

[taltos]

taltos - Could you be so kind as to address the issues I raised just a few posts ago?
yuanfen - No good deed goes unpunished?

I am confused. Have I done something to offend you? Do you feel that my queries are somehow "punishment" for the "good deed" of your earlier post? You yourself said earlier "Context means much." Could you put that particular response into a proper context so that I can understand where you are coming from?


yuanfen - Not much interpretation-the person's frustrations and challenge were clear enough in fairly plain English.

Perhaps to you. I revisited the specific posts, and the "challenge" was actually an invitation to "test it." In my school, any time we partner up for anything that will meet with resistance (Chi Sau, Paak Sau Drills, Sparring), we refer to it as "testing" our Kung Fu. Could it be remotely possible that what he meant and what you heard were two different things, given this new context, which is so important and can bring "out a fuller meaning of terms"?


yuanfen - I mention it as an example of the very subjective use of that term- and slingingthe terms carelessly

I am still confused. What you actually said was that

the problematic nature of of the concept of "harmony" advanced by James and his supportive posters is also readily evident in a "sifu" in my metro area,some months ago on this list/forum, challenging me to a fight (my place or yours) because in his judgement I "disturbed" his harmony. Shows the very subjective (even when interpersonal in a group) nature of the definition of harmony involved in the posts of James and his supporters.

But then later you answered "No. People evolve" when I asked if you felt is was appropriate to judge a student by their Sifu. If it is not appropriate (by your own admission), why use a Sifu's behavior to make a point about a student? James's definition is his. My definition is mine. Yours is yours. Gangsterfist was unsure what my definition was, so he asked. He didn't use a completely unrelated incident to somehow make a validity claim on my post. He asked. I answered. We came a little closer to understanding where each other was coming from. I greatly respect that. I am still very unlear as to what exactly you were trying to say except that once, months ago, someone not involved in this discussion had what you feel is a different definition of "harmony." Is that relevant? I'm sure that there are posts out there somewhere that have different definitions of "harmony" as well, but ther are immaterial to this discussion. At least IMHO.


yuanfen - Self described HFY folks are the main ones who seem to engage ina chorus on the forum.

OK. I accept that you feel that way. Perhaps, though, it would not be necessary for me to respond when people use the term "those HFY guys" or "HFY group think" if such general and (by nature of my very existance) erroneous catagorization were not so frequently used. Perhaps we should all responded to individuals and did not make broad generalizations in the first place. As a frequent poster on this forum, it would be wonderful if you could set the bar on this.


yuanfen - they are responsible and liable for their own actions.

Truer words were never spoken. We are responsible and liable for OUR OWN actions.

Thanks again for your comments.

-Levi

[John Weiland]

Taltos is the latest HFY minion to post another one of their (HFY) tired attacks on Joy Chaudhuri because Joy dared to question their pompous posturing on the list of their nonsense notions that exaggerate their ersatz chan-lite insights of very simple concepts that make bigger molehills out of smaller molehills. This should stop.

Wading through all the HFY distractions makes reading the forum like a trip with with a brain-imparied Alice through the looking glass, except without the fun, cleverness, and humor of R.L.S.

If HFY members want to discuss among themselves and complicate their version of the art, that's fine, but I wish they'd stick to their own forum without being a rotting albatross around the neck of serious discussions and actual Wing Chun knowledge sharing.

Thanks for nothing for the valueless discussion of harmony. Those insights will dwell forever in the vault of worthless pseudophilosophy.

Take it somewhere else, boys.

[duende]

Weilland ...

maybe you can read, but your comprehension skills are lacking.

Here's a little news flash for you... It was Joy who posted a needless attack. Levi, was just trying to sort it out and not get bundled up in Joy's emotional issues.

This thread was NOT about lineage politics. But obviously, it always is for you. Just like obviously you like dwelling in the pit of psuedoscience. From that perspective, all philosophical discussion is worthless.

Talk about group think... You sound like some self-proclaimed meat-head leader trying to head a pack of mules.

[yuanfen]

Taltos-
I answered your questions in good faith.
Unclear that your questions were in good faith...per your "checkers" response. However-
Duende's latest post returns this thread to the same old same old
HFY related pit.
My mistake in responding- since it contributes to the uninformative HFY sludge in threads.
Victor me thinks is correct-best to ignore...

[Ultimatewingchun]

Joy:

It is best. It's a shame, though, because I think that HFY is a good wing chun system.

Unfortunately...so many of the HFY proponents who post on this forum are such children...that they ruin thread after thread.

Best to ignore them FROM THE VERY MOMENT that one of them posts something stupid.

[JamesHFYofAZ]

In my opinion this thread ended already thanks to all for there post and view, regardless of some being childish or others being real, some talk hot air and some talk heart. This thread has no more view being said just personal attacks. I for one am sick of mouths firing off and political attack on ANY families, that’s Childish. So for those that were seriously trying to understand and carry on an adult conversation, I thank you, they others can just fade!

[duende]

Joy,

You started the attacks. Be a man and face the music.

Weiland brought in lineage politics. But I see you choose to be ignorant of that as well.


Victor,

The shame is in your ability to jump to conclusions without any validity whatsoever. At least this time you didn't loose your temper like a little kid.... not yet I mean.

[taltos]

John Weiland,

Where exactly did I "attack" anyone? I asked some clarifying questions, and Chaudhuri Sifu answered. Quite quickly and graciously, I might add. It seemed to me we were beginning to understand each other. If my words were somehow "attacking," I would very much like to know how, since they were very much less charged that what is the norm here (on purpose) and no personal statements were made of any negative nature (again, on purpose). If you could point out where I erred, I will endeavour to avoid such errors in the future. If you are worried about wasting bandwith, I would welcome a PM.

Chaudhuri Sifu,

I do sincerely thank you for your responses. They went a long way to answering my questions. There is nothing I can do to display that they were in fact in good faith other than stating so and hoping that my past communications speak for themselves. I'm not sure what a "checkers response" is, but if you choose to participate further in communication with me (and not add me to the list to be ignored), but do not wish to "contribute to the sludge," I would welcome a PM. Understanding each other better can never be a bad thing.

Parlati Sifu,

Just trying to clear things up... am I, in your eyes, one of the "children" who "ruin thread after thread"? Were my questions something to be ignored due to it being "something stupid"? Again, in the name of bandwidth saving and lineage wars not flaming up, I would welcome a PM if you do not wish to post something publicly.

And so everyone is clear, here are my motivations for such questions:

1. Understand the other side of the coin (i.e. the other person's POV).

2. Not assume I understand, but ask clarifying questions when I do not so as not to be ill-advised and make sweeping generalizations.

3. Foster good will by showing proper respect to Sifus (by using their earned titles) and practicioners (by only speaking for myself and understanding that everyone else does likewise, on an equal playing field).

4. Ensure that I am not included in any vague generalities by avoiding the behavior other people respond negatively to.

If I have failed in ANY of these, I would very much like to know. There is no one I can't learn from, and I welcome the opportunity to better myself.

-Levi