Question about internal blocking

[Scott R. Brown]

Hi Chris,

Nice post! It is well said!

There is nothing wrong with separation, there is nothing wrong with direct experience, there is nothing wrong with philosophizing, etc. they are all merely different aspects of life. We train because it is fun, we live because it is fun, or because it just IS and there is nothing else we can do.

The quality of our experiences is affected by the perspective we have. The question is, are we consciously choosing our perspective or are we slaves to our conditioning? When we are slaves to our perspective our choices are artificially limited and we have no control over our experiences or at the very least, limited control. The quality of our experiences is affected by the principles we adhere to or do not adhere too. When we have a clearer or more complete perception our choices increase and thus our freedom. When we have clearer perception and more choices we may artificially impose limitations upon our perception as a matter of choice rather than as a consequence of conditioning over which we have no control. Under this condition, when we choose limitation, we are not limited to that limitation because we have made a free choice to do so and may thus freely choose not to do so at a later date. This occurs because we are not attached (not clinging) to our chosen limitation.

So, while we may say that to discuss these concepts is to artificially dissect existence into components that are arbitrary and are inherently non-existent, to do so provides a benefit that may enhance our overall experience. It is not the dissection of Tao that creates limitation of experience, it is clinging that limits experience. So clinging to the concept of separation by those who think separation limits experience, limits experience and actually creates as much separation or more than the original act of separating does. This is because we are separating without actually recognizing that we are separating. In this situation, the act of criticizing separation by separating separation from direct experience, IS the act of separation. The separation of phenomena is just as much a part of direct experience as the "direct experience" that is preferred. So, in this circumstance, the criticizer is guilty of behaving in the exact manner as that which he criticizes! The consequence is, he becomes a slave to his narrow perspective!

Clinging to "direct experience" is just as limiting as clinging to "separation of phenomena". It is the unrecognized clinging that creates the overall limitation, NOT the acts of "separating phenomena" or "direct experiencing".

At any rate it is doubtful that one may actually "directly experience" anything, because in order to have a "direct experience" there must be "the experiencer" on the one hand and "the experience" on the other which IS an act of separation! Therefore I contend that separation is inherent to reality from the beginning and is the natural state of Tao. Tao is both one and many, at once, at the same time, from eternity. This is so because without an experience and an experiencer there is nothing to experience and nothing to experience the experience. Without an experiencer and an experience nothing can be demonstrated to exist. Under this condition there is no experience and therefore no existence. So, it is through the act of separation that we can say, "we exist" and "have experiences"!

[cam]

So wordy!
How about Wuji goes to Taiji which returns to Wuji.
Or from the Transcendent the temporal comes into being, the temporal being the field of time which is in pairs of opposites. Underlaying that is of course the Transcendent.
The mind, the wind and the flag....well they all belong to the Temporal!

Dwelling on this, that's part of the Temporal as well!
Not that it helps!http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/foru...lies/smile.gif

[cam]

My my, it looks like I made a movement!
Really regurgitation, perhaps you should re-read the last couple of pages!

[Scott R. Brown]

Hi cam,

Chris does have a point, which is to feel free to criticize the argument or add your own point of view absent rude comments about the person or the manner of presenting the argument. That you do not like the manner in which a person posts is not germane to the discussion! It is a personal view we are not interested in.

The fact is simple experiences become complex when one is attempting to explain them. This is because on a BB there are many readers with different levels of education, age and ability to understand. The same thing explained numerous ways makes it easier to reach a wider audience. Also, an argument requires support for the premise. In philosophical discussions this frequently requires lots of words and illustration. It is the nature of the discussion. If you don’t like it, feel free not to participate.

You made a good point as well, “What about the traditional view that Wuji precedes Taiji in a linear progression?

The appearance of the linear progression of Wuji to Taiji etc. is an artificial construct of material existence. The physical world unfolds for us in a cause and effect manner demonstrating a linear progression. This influences the way our minds perceive phenomena. Thus we consider that something comes from, or causes other things. Wuji is noumenal, it is self-existent. That which is self existent does not participate in a linear progression. That which is self-existent contains all principles, at once, at the same time, at all times, from eternity!

While, for the purposes of discussion we may say that Taiji springs from, or originates from Wuji, in reality it coexists with Wuji from eternity. Remember that once Yin arises Yang spontaneously arises as well. One cannot exist without the other. Just so, Wuji cannot exist without something that is NOT Wuji. ONE does NOT actually exist until there is TWO. As I mentioned earlier, without something to perceive ONE it cannot be said to exist. Therefore, in order for ONE to exist, TWO must be coexistent with ONE, Thus while Taiji arises from Wuji, so does Wuji arise from Taiji, as Yin arises so does Yang, they arise together at once at the same time. You cannot have one without the other.

Keeping this in mind, Wuji does not actually preceded Taiji. They are exactly the same phenomena viewed from different perspectives, just as a glass of water filled half way is always a glass of water filled half way regardless of the value we impose on it as either half full (Yang) or half empty (Yin)!

[Scott R. Brown]

At the risk of being wordy, here is another way to look at it:

Referring back to the old woman/ young woman illusion, both women coexist in the same space at the same time. Just because one may perceive the old woman first and then at a later date discover there is also a young woman in the picture does not mean the young woman sprang from the old woman. They both were present at the same time from the start.

[cam]

Hey Scott, Chris, Please don't be offended,that was not my intention.
Without being too fawning I must admit that you two are probably some of the most educated among us, you are both better writers then myself.
For the sake of others who may not be at such a high level could you please make your posts a bit more brief, it may help in advancing your opinions!

Now I may be wrong about Wuji, though I have understood it to be that state that is neither is, nor is not; not rational or irrational, not up or down, not male or female and yet out of it comes all things.
BY all things maybe I should just say time, as time does not exist without forms, there is no passage of time when there is nothing for time to pass over!

In regards to the Old/Young woman painting, yes they are both present at the same time, they are a representation of taiji....wuji could be the canvas that this image is painted on, the canvas has the potential to be any painting

Now to the topic that started this thread, Internal Blocking.
MY teacher used to say that I had "dead arms" that the jing was trapped in my shoulders and not making out my fingertips, it was just his way of saying I was still too tense.

[Scott R. Brown]

Hi cam,

Thank you for your post. It made your intention more understandable and I appreciate that you took the time to explain yourself. I understand the tediousness of reading long and laborious posts. If they are made too short we run the risk of making more posts overall because points, at times, are not made clear enough when the posts are too short. So it is six of one half a dozen of the other at times. I can’t make any promises, but I will try to be more concise when I feel I can make my point in fewer words.

Concerning Wuji:

Your understanding is the same as mine and I like your metaphor of the canvas. I have used it myself at times. The thing is, Wuji is merely a word we use to describe a specific principle or phenomenon so that we may discern it from other phenomena. In reality it cannot be accurately described. Nagarjuna said something along the lines of, “It is NOT the one, it is NOT the other, it is NOT both and it is NOT neither!” It is beyond description; therefore we need to be careful we are not too confined by the arbitrary definition that we use for utility’s sake.

According to Hui-Neng, the essence of Mind (that is, the essential or fundamental quality of Mind) is “Mind knowing itself!” From the action of "Mind knowing itself” everything else spontaneously arises.

Hui-Neng refers to the action of “Mind knowing itself” as “Mind seeing itself”, but it really means “Mind perceiving itself”. This action of "Mind seeing itself" is the action of Wuji manifesting Taiji followed by the manifestation of Yin-Yang. However, we must remember that to say one manifests the other does not imply one happens before the other or even, necessarily causes the other. In fact, with the arising of Taiji, Yin-Yang spontaneously arises at the same time. This is because, once a quality arises that may be distinguished from Wuji, you have TWO, and thus Yin-Yang which is the archetypal illustration of TWO!

It is my contention that Wuji, Taiji and Yin-Yang are merely different aspects of the same thing, as is all of creation. What we perceive and how we perceive it is a matter of perspective, how we view “it all”. “Realization” then, is merely a change of the perspective of our mind that allows us to perceive reality with less obstruction.

[mantis108]

Hi cam,
...

You made a good point as well, “What about the traditional view that Wuji precedes Taiji in a linear progression?

The appearance of the linear progression of Wuji to Taiji etc. is an artificial construct of material existence. The physical world unfolds for us in a cause and effect manner demonstrating a linear progression. This influences the way our minds perceive phenomena. Thus we consider that something comes from, or causes other things. Wuji is noumenal, it is self-existent. That which is self existent does not participate in a linear progression. That which is self-existent contains all principles, at once, at the same time, at all times, from eternity!
...

I believe You have made an excellent explanation. The problem with "the traditional view that Wuji precedes Taiji in a linear progression" is that it is not necessarily traditional! This idea of Wuji precedes Taiji was found in a work, "Taiji Tu Shuo" (Explanation on the illustration of Grand Ultimate) by one of the progenitor, Zhou Dunyi, of the Neo Confucian school during the Northern Song dynasty. This has been disputed by different factions of the Confucianism schools that it resembles too much of the Daoist idea. Note that I use the term idea as it is meant to be in the noumenal sense as oppose to concept in the phenomenal sense. Most of the translations focus on conceptualizing as well as interpreting the relation between Wuji and Taiji in an attempt to analyze it in an objective manner. BTW, this "judgment" of the relation is synthetic a priori. That's where the problem arises. Chinese tradition of "understanding" is subjective. It favors the subject's action (ie feeling or a function of Ren) over thinking. Technically, there is no separated ontology and/or cosmology. It is in the form of ontological cosmology. We would say "Mind lives" or "Mind Creates" rather than "the Mind IS alive". Often people treats the "Taiji Tu Shuo" as an objective cosmology, which is to say it is a process of becoming that involves the concept of space-time. That's why there is a problem. To solve this problem, some would prefer to say Wuji is only logically precedes Taiji rather than in the temporal sense. But that is not accurate either. This is the reason that Kant's philosophical view helps to interpret Chinese ideas to a better degree IMHO.

[mawali]

Hui-Neng refers to the action of “Mind knowing itself” as “Mind seeing itself”, but it really means “Mind perceiving itself”. This action of "Mind seeing itself" is the action of Wuji manifesting Taiji followed by the manifestation of Yin-Yang. However, we must remember that to say one manifests the other does not imply one happens before the other or even, necessarily causes the other. In fact, with the arising of Taiji, Yin-Yang spontaneously arises at the same time. This is because, once a quality arises that may be distinguished from Wuji, you have TWO, and thus Yin-Yang which is the archetypal illustration of TWO!

These word are like Kryptonite to me!
Isn't it better to train hard in youth so as you get older the skill gets better with age. That is true internal!

training session schedule:
1. punching 200 times
2. Elbowing 200 times
3. Kicking 200 times
4. Doing your form 100 times
5. Jin and dao -30 times daily for each

Philosophy is for when you cannot do anything else!
only my 2 shillings!

[sanjuro_ronin]

These word are like Kryptonite to me!
Isn't it better to train hard in youth so as you get older the skill gets better with age. That is true internal!

training session schedule:
1. punching 200 times
2. Elbowing 200 times
3. Kicking 200 times
4. Doing your form 100 times
5. Jin and dao -30 times daily for each

Philosophy is for when you cannot do anything else!
only my 2 shillings!

Where did you come up with these numbers?

[Bob Ashmore]

And sometimes a cigar is just a cigar....
I try not to be as esoteric in my thought patterns as some postings here have gone. Does Wuji breed Taiji and does Taiji breed Yin/Yang... Is it tomato or tomatoe, potato or potatoe...? Is it time for lunch yet?
Talking about the origins or non-origins of philosophical constructs and whether the chicken came before or after the egg does take up time on a slow day, but in the end it doesn't really help you move.
When applying the concept: Wuji leads to Taiji, I only take it as far as what I feel inside of myself not as far back as the beginnings of the universe.
My goal in using these concepts is to give myself a mental picture of the stillness preceeding movement, then movement, but only as I feel it inside of myself.
In my internal concept of Wuji there is no movement of either energy or thought and phsyically, kinetically, I am still.
This standing still with as little internal or external movement on my part as possible is my own internalized concept of Wuji. One that I can feel, use, do, on a daily basis. It is my intent to be Wuji, so I get as close to it as I can.
In order to begin to move I have to leave this stillness. My internal concept of Wuji ceases to be dominant in my intent and my internal concept of Taiji commences. In my own internal and external frame of reference my Wuji turns into Taiji because my intent changes.

When I think of seperating Yin/Yang, Emtpy/Full, potato/potatoe...
There I go with food again, I must be hungry....
I only think of how that's going to help me move not about pie in the sky. By "filling" my left leg with body weight I allow my right leg to empty of its body weight, which frees me to lift it using my waist, I open my hip and extend it to the location of my intent, then I root and begin to fill it again.... Yin/Yang
My waist pushes with one side, pulls the other, sometimes in the same direction, sometimes in opposite directions.... Yin/Yang
My arms follow my waist movement, one filling, one emptying.... Yin/Yang
I do this over and over again and I am moving, into to move (taiji) leads to seperation of yin/yang.
When I'm done moving and return to Wuji all these intents to be Taiji is gone and my intent to be Wuji takes over again. I stop moving.

You see, I use these concepts as metaphors for what I'm doing, not as a philosophy that gives me a headache.

It's a viscious cycle just trying to keep all that, and much more, going on at once. But if I spent all my time trying to think of it as a univeral concept instead of an internal metaphor I would never have time to practice....
Speaking of which.......

[Scott R. Brown]

Hi mantis108,

Once again, thank you for your contribution. I had forgotten that in Chinese nouns are also verbs, thus phenomena may be “things” AND “events” at the same time. This is why learning from translations rather than original texts can make understanding more difficult.

Hi Bob,

Many years ago, when I first began my MA training, my instructor would admonish us to “Just Do It!. (This was long before Nike stole the slogan, LOL!!) My instructor’s intention was to get the students out of their heads and to quit “trying” so hard!” I teach my boys the same way, although I don’t use the same slogan. If you just let your body do it, without thinking so much about the action, the correct action will eventually occur on its own. It is important to remember that “the definition of a correct action” always follows from the “correct action”; it is not the other way around. The definition does not create the action; the definition follows “from” a correct action. The definition is a general guide only, not a fixed construct. It still takes some effort and thought in order to learn how to perform an action correctly, but not as much as most students bring to the action. We have a tendency to try too hard and this interferes with our progress.

You make a good point however, and I think it is the same point TaiChiBob is trying to make, which is, “It is important not to get so caught up in theory that we forget to DO!” Some people favor thinking and some people favor doing, but in truth, too much “thinking” interferes with “just doing” AND too much “just doing” interferes with thinking (proper understanding). As modeled by Yin-Yang, it is a balance between the two that provides optimal benefit.

You have noted that the principles under discussion here are applied by you in your practice. You are starting with an idea of what you think Wuji and Taiji are/mean and then attempt to apply those ideas to your practice, or actually you are attempting to apply your understanding of what you think those principles are to your practice. In order to practice in the most effective manner possible it is beneficial to have a comprehensive understanding of the principles you are attempting to apply. This understanding requires thought. A misunderstanding of principle will result in a misapplication of the principle in your practice.

In the beginning a student is given a definition by the instructor. The student then attempts to bring the action into line with the definition, this is the definition of a principle informing the action, but in time, after much practice, the action informs and deepens our understanding of the principle. However, if we confine our performance to a limited definition we inhibit deeper understanding of the principle.

[mawali]

Where did you come up with these numbers?

Haven't your teacher told you to do x repetitions then come back and talk to him?
My teacher was like that! If he wasn't satisfied, then he would tell us to go back and do the same thing again.

If the recommendations are too easy, then double or triple them to attempt to gain the maximum benefit. Too many will cause lactic acidosis and caue you to quit. Your long training schedule (what you did previously) should be a guide.

[Scott R. Brown]

Hi mawali,

These word are like Kryptonite to me!
Isn't it better to train hard in youth so as you get older the skill gets better with age. That is true internal!

Philosophy is for when you cannot do anything else!
only my 2 shillings!

One could also say, “Learn to think when you are young and you will gain wisdom as you age!”

Philosophy is not for everyone, not everyone cares about how things work or how things are. That is okay, but that does not mean there is no value in learning, thinking, studying, and philosophizing. “Just doing it” is a valuable experience, but understanding it and being able to explain it, helps others learn to “Just do it!” and deepens our own understanding.

Philosophizing is for whenever we want to gain a deeper understanding of underlying principles. The better we understand underlying principles the more effective we become in applying them to our lives, including our training!

[sanjuro_ronin]

Haven't your teacher told you to do x repetitions then come back and talk to him?
My teacher was like that! If he wasn't satisfied, then he would tell us to go back and do the same thing again.

If the recommendations are too easy, then double or triple them to attempt to gain the maximum benefit. Too many will cause lactic acidosis and caue you to quit. Your long training schedule (what you did previously) should be a guide.

Actually, all my coaches and teachers have drilled quality over quantity.
In boxing and MT we did rounds, never counted strikes at all.
In Kyokushin, as part of warm-ups in class you count out strikes, but never relaly paid attention to how much.
Rather do 50 good shots than 200 so-so,s, know what I mean?
I just asked because I was curious if it was a arbitrary number or one you came up with through experience.