The flow experience in Tai Chi Chuan

[Martin2]

Hello Taichi Friends,

here comes a little article.
Would like to know, what you think.

Greetings

Martin Bo****er
www.wu-taichi.com


The flow experience in Tai Chi Chuan
From Freya and Martin Bo****er

Tai Chi Chuan is often described as meditation in motion. With this feature, the simultaneity of physical action and the achievement of a meditative state of awareness, Tai Chi Chuan has become famous. This fusion of inner stillness and outer movement leads to a special feeling. One is in the here and now, highly concentrated. All the worries of everyday life are forgotten and it simply feels good. The own body, breathing and the change of movements are perceived without being focused on it. Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi saw this kind of inner experience also in artists at their work. He named this state „flow experience“ and investigated it in further studies.

First results of his study showed that many artists even without the prospect of wealth or fame invested a considerable amount of time and effort into their artistic activity. None of the rewards, which are used in the normal working life to motivate employees (money, recognition) played a role. There was also no external motivation. The artistic act was done for its own sake. The motivation must be found in the characteristics of the activity itself. Thus one speaks of intrinsic motivation.

In his further work Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi investigated, which inner experience takes place when it is activated by intrinsic motivation and what factors affect the intrinsic motivation. He made a study with 200 people, who spend a lot of time with intrinisic motivated activities, such as playing chess, rock climbing, dancing, basketball and composing. It showed that many participants described their experience as a optimal state, where the person is fully immersed in what he or she is doing, as being in a "flow". Thus Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi called it "flow-experience". The flow experience can be described in more detail with the following components:

The self and the activity become a unit
One is fully concentrated upon the activity
The thoughts move completely into the background
Enhanced perception of your own body and the environment
There is a sense of control of the current situation

In his further exploration of the flow experience Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi found the following conditions for the flow experience necessary:

Fitting of the skill of the performer and the challenge of the task (not too difficult - not too easy)
Clear task
Fast feedback on the activity

I think a flow experience can also often be observed in Tai Chi Chuan. The theory by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi now gives us hints how to reach the flow experience easier in the practice of Tai Chi Chuan. Here are a few suggestions:

Define a clear task before the training, e.g. I try to relax the shoulders.
I choose forms or movements which fit to my current physical and mental situation.
When practicing individual movements, I try to get a feeling for the movements and correct them if necessary.

In addition to improving one‘s own practice you can also modify the learning of Tai Chi Chuan in such a way that a flow experience can be experienced. Conditions are here:

The movements to be learned fit in their level of difficulty to the skills of the student.
The depth of the correction fits to the skills of the student.
The correction of a movement must be clearly defined.
There must be a fast feedback on the exercise by the teacher or by one‘s own feeling

The flow experience in the Tai Chi group is certainly something very special. Is it not often like this: The slower the movements, the greater is the inner experience and the faster the time runs.

[Scott R. Brown]

Hi Martin2,

Welcome to the board!:)

The “flow experience” is not solely experienced by those who are intrinsically motivated, as it appears to be defined in the article. Intrinsic motivation is not a requirement in order for the ”flow experience” to occur.

The “flow experience” is familiar to most or all high caliber athletes, although it is not limited to high caliber athletes, whether their motivation is solely intrinsic or not. On the other hand, all motivations are inherently intrinsic, that is, the motivation comes from within, which, by definition IS intrinsic. It is not how one defines or obtains their reward for the activity that is pertinent to the experience, but how much intellectual interference occurs. It is not the motivation that is important to the experience, but how the person approaches the activity in question.

If one focuses on “trying” to achieve the experience or even focuses too much on the actual activity, the experience is diminished.

It is not important whether the activity is easy or difficulty, but how much the descriptive mind interferes with the activity. When the activity may be performed without the intrusion of the descriptive mind the “flow experience” occurs as a natural consequence without any intending or efforting on the part of the person, that is assuming one is not doing their bills in their head, or occupying their mind with mundane matters while performing the activity. The only two prerequisites are, 1) the activity must be so familiar that muscle memory may accomplish the activity without intellectual interference and, 2) the mind is empty.

One must rely on muscle memory in order to perform the actions. Under this condition, the body knows what it is supposed to do; therefore one does not have to “think” about it. When “thinking about it” becomes unnecessary, the mind is free to be empty and the “flow experience” occurs on its own as a natural consequence. There is no “trying”, there is no “intending”, it IS “of itself”!

While it may be beneficial for the student to be aware that these types of experiences occur, it is detrimental to “try” to have the experience. When we “try” to have an experience our energy is focused on trying. “Trying” occurs in the descriptive mind. The descriptive mind interferes with the “flow experience”.

The “flow experience” will occur on its own in the fullness of time with the proper training and instruction. The student is better served by training muscle memory while developing the right frame of mind without actually pursuing the experience.

[Martin2]

Hello Scott,

great thanks for the answer. I learned a lot.
That's the reason why I came here.

Isn't it interesting, how much the flow-experience (a state of the mind) is connected to proper work with the body? And the is all gone when one concentrates on it.

People often ask me: Is it still interesting after 22 years to do the same form. I say: Yes and it becomes more an more interesting.

As you said, muscle memory is important and so after a while doing the form it becomes easier and easier to get into the flow.


Greetings

Martin2

[Scott R. Brown]

Hi Martin2,

Well to me, it is all the mind. Activity is not necessary in order to transcend the descriptive mind, but activity is a useful tool. Activities are just a means to an end. The use of activity as a tool to transcend the descriptive mind has a long history in both Taoism and Ch’an. Many Ch’an masters did not approve of sitting meditation, but preferred active Ch’an. Various activities such as the tea ceremony, flower arranging, calligraphy, martial arts, and the allegory in Chuang Tzu about the butcher are examples of action used to condition, or rather re-condition, the mind.

One of the reasons we relate the “flow experience” to activities is because the quality of actions are experienced differently when the descriptive mind is transcended during the practice of the activity. The change in the quality of the action makes the change in the condition of our mind more easily noticed. Therefore, it is easy to think it is the action that creates the experience; however the action is merely a device used to lull the mind into a non-descriptive state.

It is the non-descriptive state that is the goal. When we can carry this mental condition over into our daily life the quality of all our experiences are enhanced, not just the activity we used to re-condition our mind.

Hui-Neng teaches that all action originates in the mind, or more specifically, actions are conditions of mind. If this is true, and I have found it to be true in my own experience, then which action is used, or any actions at all for that matter, are inherently unimportant and unnecessary. That should not be taken to imply that actions cannot be engaged in, only that we should avoid clinging to an artificial form/action/activity as a necessary requirement. That is, we are to keep in mind that all actions are tools only and used of the fun of it according to our wishes and temperament. Error does not occur because we use an activity, but because we cling to the activity.

[Lucas]

could we call this "flow experience" zen/ch'an?

[Scott R. Brown]

Hi Lucas,

It isn’t exactly the same thing or some of our greatest spiritual teachers would be our best athletes and artists. They are not because they focus entirely on the activity and have no foundation for applying the principles to their daily life or even other activities, and many or most of them are not the brightest bulbs in the box either.

A non-descriptive experience does not automatically confer wisdom, an understanding of what is experienced, or an ability to express any insights gained. These require some kind of foundation for understanding the experience and applying it to daily life. However, it is an experience that one could use to deepen their personal and spiritual insights if they applied themselves to it and had proper instruction in order to translate and apply the principles and experiences to their daily lives. A transient experience may cause an interest in deeper explorations, but it does not confer wisdom.

Those who wish to achieve the “flow experience” within the context of gaining spiritual insights generally participate in activities where this is the intended focus, such as calligraphy, flower arrangement, tea ceremony, etc. These arts have a philosophical foundation and a specified focus designed to assist the student in applying the principles learned in the activity first and then, with experience, their daily life, and herein lies the big difference; most athletes and artists are applying the principles in the more limited context of gaining excellence in their field of endeavor and are not interested in applying the principles in order to gain personal insights and enhancing their everyday life.

[Martin2]

Hello you two,

deep insights - great.

I have put a link to this site on our internal wu-style board. So more people will find it.

Greetings

Martin

[mantis108]

Hi Martin2,

Well to me, it is all the mind. Activity is not necessary in order to transcend the descriptive mind, but activity is a useful tool. Activities are just a means to an end. The use of activity as a tool to transcend the descriptive mind has a long history in both Taoism and Ch’an. Many Ch’an masters did not approve of sitting meditation, but preferred active Ch’an. Various activities such as the tea ceremony, flower arranging, calligraphy, martial arts, and the allegory in Chuang Tzu about the butcher are examples of action used to condition, or rather re-condition, the mind.

One of the reasons we relate the “flow experience” to activities is because the quality of actions are experienced differently when the descriptive mind is transcended during the practice of the activity. The change in the quality of the action makes the change in the condition of our mind more easily noticed. Therefore, it is easy to think it is the action that creates the experience; however the action is merely a device used to lull the mind into a non-descriptive state.

It is the non-descriptive state that is the goal. When we can carry this mental condition over into our daily life the quality of all our experiences are enhanced, not just the activity we used to re-condition our mind.

Hui-Neng teaches that all action originates in the mind, or more specifically, actions are conditions of mind. If this is true, and I have found it to be true in my own experience, then which action is used, or any actions at all for that matter, are inherently unimportant and unnecessary. That should not be taken to imply that actions cannot be engaged in, only that we should avoid clinging to an artificial form/action/activity as a necessary requirement. That is, we are to keep in mind that all actions are tools only and used of the fun of it according to our wishes and temperament. Error does not occur because we use an activity, but because we cling to the activity.

Hi Scott,

Well put article as usual. Regarding activity, I think there is a difference between activity and empirical function, which I believe is the meaning that your are using for it. Activity, or in terms of Chinese - Dong, is necessary; while, empirical function (ie tea ceremony, flower arranging, calligraphy, martial arts, etc) is contingent. Our sensible intuition can not be without Qi or pure potential. This metaphysical reality needs activity (logical necessity) without activity Qi can not "become" anything even if there is intellectual intuition. To negate activity, we essentially render Qi as well as sensible intuition useless. Then intellectual intuition (infinite mind), which morality is quintessential, will remain at large a theory. If we were to argue intellectual intuition is at once transcendental and innate that is available to everyone, we must not negate activity. The oriental masters recognize that sensible intuition is need for understanding; therefore, we need not deny our senses but rather we practice to not let it clouds our infinite mind. As Chinese sages would say activity is a cling of self. It is like a dirty mount that bumped up on the flat dirty road. Without it, no shadow can be casted on the road. There is then no revelation of infinite mind; however, the self is just bumped up dirt so why cling on to it? ;)

Just a thought.

Warm regards

Mantis108

[Scott R. Brown]

Hi Mantis108,

If you are speaking about activity of the mind, as opposed to activity of the body, I agree totally. As Hui-neng teaches, when concerned with the mind, there is no body without use, and no use without body. There is no mind (body*) without its “activity of seeing” (use) and there can be no seeing (use) without a mind (body) that sees. According to Hui-neng, and I agree, Seeing IS mind and mind IS seeing, Dhyana IS Prajna and Prajna IS Dhyana.

What is important to remember is that, inherently, ALL activity, whether physical or mental, is the mind in action.

*For those unfamiliar with the concepts, Body, Form and Use are Mahayana Buddhist philosophical concepts used to demonstrate existence of a thing and to describe the relationship between substance and function. Body refers to a "things" substance, Form to its appearance, and Use to its function. The Mind has no form so there is no reference to Form when considering the Mind and its function. The function of the Mind is to see/perceive itself. When seeing occurs without obstruction/clinging we see into our inherent/essential nature and the essential nature of existence which is nothing but a projection of Mind. So essentially what Mind sees is itself. When it does this it also comes into being. Absent the act of seeing, Mind cannot exist and without existing there is nothing that sees. So mind and its function are One, not two. Dhyana = Mediation or the Meditative Mind, Prajna = insight/wisdom, unobstructed perception. Hui-neng asserts that the two are merely different aspects of the same thing. His philosophical opponents treated the concepts as a linear progression. First one meditates, then acquires insight. Hui-neng states that this attitude creates a duality that does not inherently exist which leads to the obstruction of clear perception.


The oriental masters recognize that sensible intuition is need for understanding; therefore, we need not deny our senses but rather we practice to not let it clouds our infinite mind.

I agree again. It is clinging that causes errors in perception and understanding, not the act of perception per se; having said that, one should not only avoid clinging to phenomena, but also avoid clinging to “not clinging” to phenomena as well.

Essentially our mind is reflected in the actions we perform whether physical or mental. That is to say, if we use our mind to see /perceive and what we see is our mind reflected in our actions, the act of perceiving reveals to us a reflection of our selves, our mind.

Action is mind! Seeing is perception of the mind that has acted. Life is like looking at ourselves in the mirror. When we gaze into the mirror we see ourselves in the reflection, when we perceive without clinging, we perceive the reflection of our mind as it essentially is, without obstruction.


As Chinese sages would say activity is a cling of self. It is like a dirty mount that bumped up on the flat dirty road. Without it, no shadow can be casted on the road. There is then no revelation of infinite mind; however, the self is just bumped up dirt so why cling on to it?

I am not sure if I understand you correctly here. Are you saying that “mental activity” causes clinging and it is this clinging that causes our conception of a separate self? Or that “when mind acts (sees), it reveals itself”, or “makes itself apparent”, or “brings itself into existence”?

I assert that a separate self both exists and does not exist at once at the same time. Clinging does not cause a separate identity to come into being. All we need do is choose to have a separate identity, while understanding it is both separate and not-separate at the same time according to our context and perception.

As an example, consider our daily relationships: At work I am both a worker, but also a supervisor; at home I am a husband and father. To my parents I am a son, to my brother and sister I am an older brother and a younger brother. To some of my acquaintances I am a friend, to others I am just some guy they interact with on occasion. In each of these circumstances I play a different social role that is essentially a different person based upon a universal archetype that I designate as ME. All are artificial constructs that serve a useful purpose. Each represents a portion of a personality/identity that transcends the limited roles.

I have no problem easily moving from one role to another unless I cling to one role over another. It causes problems if I behave in my father role to my boss at work or to my parents or friends. I am able to freely move from one role to another according to the context of the situation because I do not cling to any of them. I am a different person according to each context, yet also always the same person inherently.

I see this as no different then when I conceive of a “separate self” or of “no separate self”. It is clinging that causes an error in perception and understanding, not the conception of either a “self”, “no-self”, “both self and no-self”, and/or “neither self nor no-self”! We can just as easily cling to the conception of no-self and this would cause error in our perception and understanding just as clinging to a conception of a separate self does the same thing.

So we are free to be this or that, or none of the above as we wish. Clinging to any “thing” is the cause of error, not the existence of any particular self we pretend to be at any one time.

There is no inherent clinging in relation to physical activity, clinging is a quality of mind, not of physical action.

Separation of self from what is not-self is an arbitrary and artificial construct that both exists and does not exist depending upon ones perspective, but is not necessarily dependent upon clinging, although clinging does reinforce the artificial boundaries of self from not-self and therefore tends to reinforce clinging. That is, clinging tends to cause more clinging.

[Martin2]

here another intersting text about flow:

http://zenhabits.net/2008/06/guide-to-achieving-flow-and-happiness-in-your-work/

Greetings

Martin2