http://forum.kungfumagazine.com/foru...51#post1116351
Printable View
BTW, I doubt he'll understand a word you said Chris and it will be YOUR fault he's an idiot!:eek:
honestly, I'm not even interested in him anymore - he spews the usual, party-line "internalist" pablum; guys like him are a dime a dozen: if u don't agree wholesale with what they say, then u know nothing, etc., etc.; as usual, there's no middle ground - it's all or nothing w them: when u don't agree w their perspective on "qi" and whatnot, when u propose a view that doesn't fit their view, then it's clear u just don't understand "qi" at all;
anyway, i posted my perspective on standing practice, as per the OP; if someone wants to speak to that, either agreeing or critiquing it, that's fine, i am happy to talk specifics with them; otherwise, it's just pointless
when u "intend" a movement, there's a phenommenon called "pre-contraction", which is where u feel some increase in muscle tone of core stabilizers (e.g. - spinal mutifidi) in anticipation of movement; this correlates to something called the occulo-gyro-cephalic reflex, which is where you have a complex of various postural stabilizers priming for contraction based upon what direction ur eyes look - which correlates directly to the taiji principle of 'yi ngan ling san" - with the eyes, lead the body - suggesting that within practice of taiji, an intuitive understanding arose of the above mentioned reflex;
so the "point" is very simple - it is one way to practice core stabilization, focusing specifically on the pre-contraction phase - this makes a great deal of sense, since we know that when u lack that pre-contraction, and many people do, ur core stabilization is less efficient, and therefore, u do more "work" with peripheral phasics (hamstrings, superficial fibers of psoas, quadratus umborum, latissimus etc.) rather than proximal tonic muscles (deep psoas, transverse abdominals, pelvic floor, multifidi etc), and as such, u do things more "externally", using peripheral muscles to do the job of the more "internal" core stabilizers; (of course, there is a correlation to harmony of pelvic diaphragm, respiratory diaphragm and cranial diaphragm function, relating to the classically described locations / functions of the three dan tiins / elixir fields...:eek:); of course, functionally, if u wish to operate "internaly" (using minimal force / effort to move an opponent), u have to operate out of an optimally efficient core stabilization strategy - otherwise u aren't connected from head to toe (and if u look at how multifidi run from one spinal level to another, u can immediately understand how when they function they connect the entire spine as a single functional unit - it's quite amazing, actually); the yi quan paradigm is to practice unifying the body / mind complex in an incremental manner - standing symetrically, then asymmetrically, then moving linearly, then moving non-linearly (diagonals), then working with partners, opponents, etc.
see, yet another example of how various aspects "internal" practice can be readily described via biomechanics and contemporary understanding of anatomy / physiology; essentially, it's objective validation of the subjective empirical knowledge underlying it; it DOESN"T have to be all or nothing / one or the other - to preach the exclusivity of internal practice is the equivalent of putting ur fingers in ur ears and going "lalalalalala" - just because one person cannot describe internal practice from a biomechanical / physiological perspective doesn't mean it cannot be done at all - I mean, it took me over 15 years to get to this point with a great deal of study of various areas of knowledge (biomechanics, physioilogy, complex systems, tensegrity, osteopathy, motor learning theory etc.) to get here, plus I had to put in the time actualy doing the standing practice so that I had a direct experience of all of these things (usually the direct experience came first - afterwards, i would go out and research what was underlying it);
knowledge needs must evolve; to deny this fundamental fact is to propogate ignorance; people need to open their minds and be wiling to acknowledge that the standard party lines don't hold true anymore, that we have entered into an age of synthetic integration...
Pulling no punches I see TGY.:)
Fine...I disagree with you, your Master, your Master's Master, your Master's Master's Master, and the Horses you all rode in on! But only because you didn't go into enough detail. Perhaps if you would actually be more specific you MIGHT be able to convince me......
.......which I KNOW is your first, foremost and ONLY prioity in life!!
Because THAT is the only thing keeping me from pulling the trigger, that is, you keeping me entertained with EXcruciating detail!!!
Thank you.....and YOU are Welcome!
as regards the ORIGINAL post:
Eric makes an initial and valid proposition regarding standing meditation:
EJ responds with additional salient and, IMPE, an acutely accurate and useful comment:
HW 108 rejoins in his usual quasi-crytic manner (by referring to something but not delineating specifics), but he does correctly identify the ontological progression of solo to partner training:
Ozzy Dave contributes his personal experience, correctly identifying the aspect of training proprioceptors to establish "root", both statically (solo) and dynamically (resisted partner training):
HW108 then mentions correctly that standing practice involves more than just generation of root, which is also an excellent point;
so there was at least the potential for some productive discussion
of course, it was too good to be true, because then the thread got sidetracked by Robinhood playing the Internal Police:
later posts by him are in a similar vein - his going on and on and on at length pointing out how everyone else doesn't understand internal, but offering no evidence as to why they do not, nor substantiating in any way what gives him the purview to make such claims;
so i tried asking him some specific questions about standing practice, in the hopes that he would supply some substance rather than broad dismissive statements without substantiation; however, he ignored me, instead citing my posts as proof that I knew nothing; this clearly revealed his trolling as such, and after I called him on his bluff, he seems to have disappeared...no real loss there...
I then made a series of posts regarding the ORIGINAL TOPIC of the thread, going into rather specific detail about my thoughts on standing practice, both from my own persona experience and from the perspectives of both classical Taoist practice and contemporary anatomy / physiology / biomechanics; furthermore, I commented on another post, offering my take on why "intention" can be relevant to standing practice a la yiquan; lastly, I invited commentary, positive or negative, to address the specific points I put forth, in order to generate productive discussion;
and what do we get here in response? nothing; not a peep; not a whisper; no real discussion at all on the topic;
what gives?