Question about internal blocking

[Scott R. Brown]

An alive limb, or live limb possesses a small amount of nervous energy commonly referred to as Chi. It is easier to demonstrate than to explain. It is something that is clearly apparent when it is shown to another. The limb is filled with physically energy and appears to move with a focus or intent of mind. The limb is not tense, but neither is it devoid of energy or overly tensed, that would be a dead limb.

The nervous energy (nervous here means energy of the nerves, not anxiety) allows the limb, arm, hand, foot, fingers, etc. to display sort of a firm suppleness, without appearing or being overly firm or hard. The muscles are not tight, but they are in a tonic state. There is a sense of presence in the limb.

When a live limb moves it appears graceful and where it is supposed to be, as opposed to appearing to be moving in a haphazard and uncontrolled manner. The limb appears to have a conscious intent behind it that may be observed without actually observing the entire person. For example, it would be noticeable if all you saw was the hand moving in space as opposed to observing the entire body moving while focusing on the hand. The limb is not required be to moving however in order to observe its condition of liveness. It would be noticeable in a still photo as well.

A live limb is more responsive to its environment than a dead limb and thus moves quicker and hits harder because the antagonistic muscles do not impede its movement.

A limb empty of this energy, or too filled with energy, is a dead limb. A dead limb is both limp and floppy when it moves as a result of not enough nervous energy, or stiff and awkward when too much energy is present. There is a noticeable lack of proper physical control in a dead limb. It is weak and appears weak to those who are familiar with live and dead limbs. It is common in beginners because they have not developed the necessary nervous and muscle control in their limbs. It may be manifested by trying too hard or not trying hard enough.

A live mind is a mind that is relatively free of the obstruction of needless thoughts and anxieties. It is open and receptive without being passive, dull and empty. When speaking of an empty mind within this context it should not be understood to be a mind empty/absent of thoughts, but as a mind empty of fixation, grasping or clinging to thoughts, objects, things and stimuli. At the very least it is relatively empty of fixation, grasping and clinging. A live mind is alert and responsive to what is going on around it and is thus free of fixation or focus on only one thought or stimulus. Thoughts and stimuli are noticed but not held, grasped without release, by our attention.

A dead mind is fixed and inflexible. It grasps and clings to thoughts, objects, things or stimuli and is thus bound to those phenomena. A dead mind is dull and unresponsive or at least less responsive to changing circumstances because it cannot extricate itself efficiently from what it is grasping or clinging too. It is unable to respond spontaneously to stimuli and is thus slow to react to changing conditions. Think of it as if your hand grasping something. You must let go of what you are grasping before you can grasp something else. With the mind, when we have an emotional attachment to whatever it is we are mentally grasping, it becomes much harder to let it go and free our mind.

A live mind functions quicker and more efficiently, is more responsive to changing stimuli and more spontaneous than a dead mind.

I hope this helps!

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

The short version.. dead blocks are rigid and attempt to repel force by creating an immovable structure..

Live blocks are resilient "springy".. they absorb and deflect force..

As used here, block means to interfere with the intention of the force to cause harm..

My mentor would simply point out the difference when he observed it.. "yah yah live.. or.. no no dead"

Be well..

[SAAMAG]

Makes perfect sense guys! Thanks a million.

That sort of movement is something that has been a mainstream in all the gung fu forms that I've studied - Jingang Quan, Wu Xing Quan, Wing Chun, and of course Tai Chi...just honestly never heard of it called "live" vs. "dead" in any of the systems.

I've also seen it applied in what most people know as styles that are known for using physical force only, such as Kung jung mu sul, a with couple of Karate guys that I know as well.

Again, thanks for the elaboration. I appreciate it.

[HardWork8]

Makes perfect sense guys! Thanks a million.

That sort of movement is something that has been a mainstream in all the gung fu forms that I've studied - Jingang Quan, Wu Xing Quan, wing chun, and of course Tai chi...

And yet, even then you had no idea what I was talking about.

just never heard of it called "live" vs. "dead" in any of the systems.

You haven't practiced real kung fu either, but I won't hold that against you (as long as you refrain from giving advice on "kung fu").

AND, why then didn't make an educated guess during days and days of discusson and arguments with me in the other thread? The simple answer is that you didn't know what I was talking about.

And before you say but you didn't explain what you were talking about then here are some of my comments (not all directed at Vankuen] on the subject:

Feeling is feeling, but in the internal approach,feeling is more precise

an internal way of "feeling"uses detached/clear mind combined with "extreme" relaxation" without floppiness.

In chi sao or TCMA internal approach the "feeling" is different to that of lets say, Shotokan karate.

What I actually said is that without your internals your kung fu is incomplete

If you had known what I was talking about you would have guessed what was meant by "live" or "dead" blocking/striking. YOU DIDN'T AND NOW YOU ARE TRYING TO SAVE FACE BY SAYING THAT YOU KNEW ALL ALONG BUT SOMEHOW DID NOT MANAGE TO "GUESS".

What aspect of internal training can I hope to explain to someone such as yourself who has difficulty in understanding the fundemental difference between a Shotokan defense and an internal kung fu defense?LOL,LOL,LOL...

And here are some of Vankuen's "enlightening comments":

Saying that it is more live as opposed to dead doesn't mean anything

LOL....

All I asked for was detailed elaboration on how you,an internalist........are more skilled at sensing things over a shotokan stylist....

Here you are saying that you have no idea of how internal blocking concepts(including "liveness"), are different from external blocking such as those of shotokan. Yet in your answer to Scott R. Brown you seem to say,"hey, I knew all that but under a different name".
Now, we all know that YOU DIDN'T KNOW ANYTHING!

Sensitivity is just sensitivity

A punch is just a punch...LOL! There are internal punches and external punches as well, not forgetting that they can be live or dead. Confused? You won't be after a few years of real kung fu practice.

Here is another gem:

Redirection of force is just redirection of force

That just shows how much you know about the internals.

It (redirection of force), can be both offensive and defensive

I said this before and I will repeat again, redirection of force is a defensive movement, how you end it is up to you but to redirect force you need to receive it first and that means a force has to be unleashed against you. This means an ATTACK!

I've also seen it applied in what most people know as styles that are known for using physical force only, such as Kung jung mu sul, a with couple of Karate guys that I know as well.

You have seen all that, yet during many days of discussion you couldn't even guess? And you had to come to the internal forums for your answers? And even here ONLY ONE PERSON has given a valid answer.

Rather proves my point doesn't it?

Again, thanks for the elaboration. I appreciate it.

Don't thank him as he hasn't saved your forum skin yet!

Actually, for those of you who are interested here is the link that will open the door to Vankuen's vast knowledge of the Kung Fu Internals:
http://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/...t=50835&page=6

[HardWork8]

it's an interesting question; one way to answer it would seem to be to say that a "typical" closed fisted karate block (meaning something that uses part of a limb to create a barrier between an incoming attack and the defender's torso) constitutes a "dead" block, in the sense that once the contact has been made, there is no further attempt to capitalize on that contact

KEY POINT! so pay attention Vankuen. One needs certain attributes to "capitalize" on a block or even a blocked "live" punch. Hint, think Chi Sao training(among other things).

Vankuen, READ:

OTOH, if one contacts an opponent in such a way that one can then capitalize on that contact, then it would stand to reason that one is being responsive in a live, or perhaps a "lively" manner;

He is not talking about stopping the attack with one hand and "capitalizing" by hitting with the other. "Liveness" means using the same hand that has been blocked to continue the attack or by manipulating the blocking hand in an INSTANT!

Vankuen, does "fine tuned sensitivity" ring a bell? If you have forgotten then please check my comments in the Wing Chun thread.

Vankuen, I hope that you are taking notes.

so back to "liveliness": there is a certain resilience, a buoyancy to it; it is, to me, the manifestation of the balanced expression of "sung" and "peng", using the classical terms; that is, one is able to absorb and rebound almost simultaneously, reacting instinctively but not habitually, without the interference of "the judge" getting in the way

You can also add "STICKING" to the equasion.

now, his is not to say that this necessarily has relevance to fighting per se; it may, it may not,

Careful now, don't put your foot in it as you have been doing quite well up to here.

but as I have never directly observed nor experienced it in a situation of the sort, i cannot say (others might) -

I have observed it in demonstration again me and fellow pupils and I have trained it.
My sensitivity is nowhere near to that of my sifu's but when training/sparring a against a person who uses dead blocks/strikes one can see the advantages.

it does, however, seem to me a skill set that speaks directly to intrinsic properties of the human organism though,

I hope you are reading this Vankuen. Note that nobody has mentioned "Magical Chi Powers"(besides you in the other thread, that is!)

And we all know that you knew all that was being talked about but kept it to yourself just to test me (and the others)...LOL.

[SAAMAG]

Hey I see you're back!! On to ruin another thread with your trolling ways? Imply all you want partner, but these guys explained what you could not when asked over and over and over and over again. It was a simple answer too...like I said in the other thread you ruined...it was a matter of semantics.

[HardWork8]

Hey I see you're back!! On to ruin another thread with your trolling ways? Imply all you want partner, but these guys explained what you could not when asked over and over and over and over again. It was a simple answer too...like I said in the other thread you ruined...it was a matter of semantics.

It was a simple answer that you could not come up with. They however did come up with the same answer when given the same clues that YOU were given.

Then miraculously you said that you knew all along.

[SAAMAG]

Do you realize that you completely mess up the quotes when you get flustered? Take your time, breathe...a forum is asynchronous communication....you can take all the time you want.

[HardWork8]

Do you realize that you completely mess up the quotes when you get flustered? Take your time, breathe...a forum is asynchronous communication....you can take all the time you want.

EMPTY accusations will not get you off the hook.
It is you who messed up big time. I provided the clues and they solved the puzzle and YOU are attemptiong to jump on the bandwagon.

Stick to your kick boxing!

[SAAMAG]

Tell me again why you didn't solve the puzzle by answering the question out of the 20 times you were asked by a number of people? Because you wanted to sound high and mighty and were just parroting catch words that your sifu told you--without the understanding the meaning behind those words.

I admitted not knowing those terms, as they weren't used in any of my training, internal or otherwise. But when the practictioners of this forum simply answered the question, then I understood what they were getting at. It's still a common thing in any style of gung fu...what you believe about my understanding of the concept is irrelevant.

Don't taint the waters here too. Leave it alone now...if you want to continue your sherrade you can PM me.

[HardWork8]

Tell me again why you didn't solve the puzzle by answering the question out of the 20 times you were asked by a number of people?

Because it was not a puzzle. I did give enough info so that those who knew the concept of "live" as opposed to "dead" blocks/strikes could show themselves and they did. They WERE in the minority.

A point has been proved here.

Because you wanted to sound high and mighty and were just parroting catch words that your sifu told you--without the understanding the meaning behind those words.

If you have been reading my posts, which I presume that you have then even you should have grasped the fact that I know what I am talking about.

I admitted not knowing those terms, as they weren't used in any of my training, internal or otherwise.

FACE IT, YOU DIDN'T KNOW OF THE CONCEPTS EITHER! There was enough info there. Just the example that I gave comparing a Shotokan block and an internal block should have been enough.

But when the practictioners of this forum simply answered the question, then I understood what they were getting at.

THERE WERE TWO PRACTITIONERS WHO GOT THE ANSWER. ONLY 2 out of MANY WHO HAD NO IDEA!

There is a message there Mr Vankuen, open your eyes!

It's still a common thing in any style of gung fu...

WRONG! YOU ARE STILL TRYING TO HIDE.

If it was that common then there would have been more people capable of answering and verifying the concepts that I brought up.

what you believe about my understanding of the concept is irrelevant.

.
Yes, that is it deny that you had absolutely no idea about those concepts.

Don't taint the waters here too.

You are the one who tainted the waters in the other forum by associating my statements with "Magical Chi" and accusing me of spreading BS and nonsense. Maybe you should apologize.

I was talking about a valid concept that was VALIDATED here by other posters who know more than you.

Leave it alone now...

Leave it alone because it exposes you for what you are? That is a glorified kickboxer!

if you want to continue your sherrade

And you still try to discredit me.

you can PM me.

I have nothing to PM you about!

[Scott R. Brown]

Maybe he is actually shadowlin!

[Scott R. Brown]

only if he were also RonH and Hendrick as well...that would be some sort of super-symmetry proof right there!

honestly Scott, the way that these characters write their silliness with such absolute and absurd certainty, if it wasn't for you, TC Bob, Sanjuro, LKFMDC, LPS and a few others (apologies to fellow people-of-reason whose names I am temporarily forgetting in the moment of writing this), I'd almost start thinking that I was the one out of touch with reality (oh, just watch them capitalize on that comment, LOL, completely missing the sarcasm dripping heavily off of it...)

I know the feeling. It is too bad he had to bring his bad blood into this conversation.

[HardWork8]

to Vankuen:
dude, I thought your question was a good one, I offered you some general thoughts along those lines, please do not take HardOn's misrepresentation of my opinion as any sort of negative assessment of your perspective or inquiry

cjurakpt, I don't think that Vankuen took anything you said negatively.

to HardOn:
I don't know where you get off misappropriating my post as a means of backing up your polemic with Vankuen;

You misunderstand. No one misappropriated your post. You made some valid points on the questions Vankuen asked.

What you may have missed was that his questions were based on the concept of "live" as opposed to "dead" blocks/strikes introduced by me in a thread in the Wing Chun forums. These are concepts which Vankuen has not heard of or knows anything about. As a result he came here hoping to find out more and he did. That is all!

Of course, he then implied that these were concepts that he knew about....LOL!

of course no way to stop you from doing it, but it's totally inappropriate: make your own arguments, don't chop up my posts as a means of saving you time and effort

If you check out the relevant thread in the Wing Chun forum then you will see that the information that he used for his inquiry was provided by me. That is the same information that you and Scott R. Brown used to answer his query.

I was thinking about a reasoned response to your condescending attitude,

That condescending attitude was partly based on your own attitude towards me in other threads. However, getting back to the subject, the "liveness" of the various techniques does have combat applications.

but ultimately decided that telling you to go fu(k yourself was more appropriate
so go fu(k yourself

I think your sifu should wash that mouth of yours with soap.

[HardWork8]

honestly Scott, the way that these characters write their silliness with such absolute and absurd certainty, i

What silliness are you referring to? The fact that "liveness" and "sensitivity" have relevance in combat?