Joey Nishad Interviews Adam Mizner on learning Taijiquan!

[everything]

oof we have enough trouble with all the qi and jin vocabulary haha

[origami_itto]

It makes sense. It's all just different maps of the same territory. Hermetecists have the tree of life and taoists have the ba gua, etc.

The practice of any esoteric system leads to knowledge of self and for best results the body of lore and symbology needs to be meaningful for the individual.

Ultimately that means that advanced practice is entirely attuned to the individual practitioners psyche, which can vary within a culture, but varies drastically from culture to culture.

So a western mind has a lot to gain from using western systems to explore itself, while coupling nicely with eastern physical disciplines.

[cloudz]

yes..


I've gone that direction. I'm Greek(Cypriot) not Asian
Culture is a big deal.

I understood it fine, but now I understand it better. There's always more to learn and higher up the ladder to go.
martial arts and fighting are almost trivial

systems, styles
it's like seeing all the denominations of religions or mystical / esoteric traditions of the world.
it's a good analogy.

do what you gotta do, when you gotta do it.
that's all

Magus of Strovolos triggered me to explore seriously western esoterica and have found it a better fit going forward
having already spent over 15 years with esoteric buddhism and taoist systems of cultivation

internal martial arts
internal pugilism

it's the marriage of these things

internal; esoteric
external; exoteric

culture,
so far, so good

The main difference between Chinese internal and external MA is the External ones have the cultivation separate if they have it. Think Shaolin Monk..
The internal systems integrated it right in there; the forms for example, doubling as moving meditation. Whilst it need not be always practiced like that, it can be and all the classical literature tells it how it is.

I think it's a safe bet men Like DHC and YLC, were bang into it. It was like the " science" of the day. So why wouldn't a kind of "sports science" develop and be applied to martial arts. It would be stranger if it wasn't. It's what they knew. Stands to reason they would leverage the best "technologies" of the day to apply to their performance of martial arts and fighting.

And these dudes didn't stay young forever. Why not kill two birds.

Joey is a character, for sure.
He said something nice about my bag clip so he's in my good books

CHI POWAH YO
out

[origami_itto]

I find all of the traditions have something to offer in the way of perspective, if nothing else. Different humans faced with the same questions doing their best to work out the answers can expose a lot of the truth.

Different maps of the same territory. Breath, qi, pneuma, ether, etc

It's just when you get hung up on one thing or try to combine them too closely that things go a little wonky. The systems need the integrity of themselves.

What I find with "exotic" systems from foreign cultures is that my relationship is only ever intellectual. For the deeper more resonant spiritual work I have to fall back on the symbols and methods that are inculcated into my own culture.

When considering something in these contexts it's important to cleanse the palate so to speak between changing gears. Grab a new knife for the jelly since the one for the peanut butter is dirty.

What I mean is you take a concept you want to know more about, you have to consider it in the cultural and social context and framework that it is from and apply that understanding to the universe as a whole, THEN step back and approach the same concept from the perspective of the other cultural and social framework. Switching directly from one to the other taints them both since the nuance of meaning derives from the framework, not the translated term's dictionary meaning.

Yes, fighting is trivial. I don't study to fight, I study to manage conflict. Internally and externally. Through not-fighting, harmonizing and controlling instead of conflicting and contending.

Yes, looking up it's higher and higher, looking down it's deeper and deeper.

[robert]

I find all of the traditions have something to offer in the way of perspective, if nothing else. Different humans faced with the same questions doing their best to work out the answers can expose a lot of the truth.

Different maps of the same territory. Breath, qi, pneuma, ether, etc

Many people may be their culture, but not know it.

In De Anima Aristotle writes of the soul -

Our enquiry will begin by presenting what are commonly held to be in a special degree the natural attributes of soul. Now there are two points especially wherein that which is animate is held to differ from the inanimate, namely, motion and the act of sensation: and these are approximately the two characteristics of soul handed down to us by our predecessors.

Also it is not clear why the heaven revolves in a circle; seeing that circular motion is neither implied by the essence of soul (that form of movement being indeed merely accidental to it), nor due to the body: on the contrary it is rather the soul which causes the motion of the body.

Moreover, the soul is also the origin of motion from place to place, but not all living things have this power of locomotion.

Aristotle writes that it is the soul which causes the motion of the body, and that some of his predecessors held this belief as well. This idea was around until Volta and Galvani demonstrated that electricity triggered movement in muscles. Volta and Galvani are born 100 years or more after the historical development of taijiquan. At the time that taijiquan was first developed it is likely that people in the west would have attributed movement of the human body to the soul. The Chinese attributed motion to qi. The views are not so different. Aristotle also writes in De Anima -

But what is meant by constrained motions or states of rest of the soul it is not easy to explain, even though we give free play to fancy. Again, if its motion tends upward, it will be fire; if downward, earth; these being the motions proper to these natural bodies.

Aristotle associates motion to the elements as we see the Chinese do, although it is common in Chinese alchemical literature to see upward motion associated with fire and downward with water. FWIW.

[cloudz]

some of the most "powerful" training is with the elements, east or west.
earth, water, fire, air
I'll leave the last one out

the Chinese elements are a bit different of course - those I've never been keen on to be honest. But that maybe because I never got the right information or teaching. Of course it may be a big deal in the Heart mind boxing - of some lineages.

I did them in a martial context with my first teacher; but the esoteric (internal) way.. We would meditate on the element using a corresponding hand mudra. Then we would take what was generated mentally (the feeling) and train corresponding specific martial techniques. In this case with Bokken. With the exception of the last one.

I can definitely say hand on heart it helped the martial techniques we trained that way. It could be argued of course, " it's just in 'your head' "
well maybe, but where else lol?

Earth, water, wind, fire, (void). From the esotoric bhuddism of Japanese mountain ascetics. Influenced by Chinese bhuddism, shinto and Taoism basically.

I think that's a fair example of internal martial arts training. There are plenty more obviously across systems. They can vary a fair bit.
All these examples of body skills, or "jin tricks", I think are by products of certain training - the internal methodology (as applied physically) is premier for motor control training, more so on smaller and smaller scales - say micro movements for example. Maybe the internal systems do them well, or make more use of them etc .. The carry over is more important I would say. But it's not the truer meaning of "internal" as is often spoken of, as far as I can tell.

[Bao]

In De Anima Aristotle writes of the soul -

Our enquiry will begin by presenting what are commonly held to be in a special degree the natural attributes of soul. Now there are two points especially wherein that which is animate is held to differ from the inanimate, namely, motion and the act of sensation: and these are approximately the two characteristics of soul handed down to us by our predecessors.

Also it is not clear why the heaven revolves in a circle; seeing that circular motion is neither implied by the essence of soul (that form of movement being indeed merely accidental to it), nor due to the body: on the contrary it is rather the soul which causes the motion of the body.

Moreover, the soul is also the origin of motion from place to place, but not all living things have this power of locomotion.

Aristotle writes that it is the soul which causes the motion of the body, and that some of his predecessors held this belief as well. This idea was around until Volta and Galvani demonstrated that electricity triggered movement in muscles. Volta and Galvani are born 100 years or more after the historical development of taijiquan. At the time that taijiquan was first developed it is likely that people in the west would have attributed movement of the human body to the soul. The Chinese attributed motion to qi. The views are not so different.

Aristotle doesn't accept the "soul" in a religious meaning. He speaks about functions of the brain, body and nervous system, this is his interpretation of "soul". He says that soul doesn't exist without a body. In a religious meaning, the soul is not a bodily function or consequence, it belongs to another world or dimension. Similar to quantum theory. It doesn't exist according to physics. Physics and quantum theory don't match, and science haven't actually found any theory to bridge these two different "realities". The difference of course is that the "Quantum world" still belongs to the physical reality and can be measured, or confirmed by science. From a scientific standpoint Aristotle is correct and religion is just "theory" that cannot be confirmed, things that people for various reasons believe in.

I agree that in Chinese theory, especially in TCM, "Human Qi" is similar to the electricity and impulses that is passed from and to the brain and the nervous system, what "animates" the body. But then again, Qi is a much broader philosophical concept and "human Qi" is just one type of Qi, or one type of interpretations of Qi.

Again, if its motion tends upward, it will be fire; if downward, earth; these being the motions proper to these natural bodies.

Aristotle associates motion to the elements as we see the Chinese do, although it is common in Chinese alchemical literature to see upward motion associated with fire and downward with water. FWIW.

This is something I haven't noticed before. Interesting.

[origami_itto]

In De Anima Aristotle writes of the soul -

Our enquiry will begin by presenting what are commonly held to be in a special degree the natural attributes of soul. Now there are two points especially wherein that which is animate is held to differ from the inanimate, namely, motion and the act of sensation: and these are approximately the two characteristics of soul handed down to us by our predecessors.

Also it is not clear why the heaven revolves in a circle; seeing that circular motion is neither implied by the essence of soul (that form of movement being indeed merely accidental to it), nor due to the body: on the contrary it is rather the soul which causes the motion of the body.

Moreover, the soul is also the origin of motion from place to place, but not all living things have this power of locomotion.

Aristotle writes that it is the soul which causes the motion of the body, and that some of his predecessors held this belief as well. This idea was around until Volta and Galvani demonstrated that electricity triggered movement in muscles. Volta and Galvani are born 100 years or more after the historical development of taijiquan. At the time that taijiquan was first developed it is likely that people in the west would have attributed movement of the human body to the soul. The Chinese attributed motion to qi. The views are not so different.

Aristotle doesn't accept the "soul" in a religious meaning. He speaks about functions of the brain, body and nervous system, this is his interpretation of "soul". He says that soul doesn't exist without a body. In a religious meaning, the soul is not a bodily function or consequence, it belongs to another world or dimension. Similar to quantum theory. It doesn't exist according to physics. Physics and quantum theory don't match, and science haven't actually found any theory to bridge these two different "realities". The difference of course is that the "Quantum world" still belongs to the physical reality and can be measured, or confirmed by science. From a scientific standpoint Aristotle is correct and religion is just "theory" that cannot be confirmed, things that people for various reasons believe in.

I agree that in Chinese theory, especially in TCM, "Human Qi" is similar to the electricity and impulses that is passed from and to the brain and the nervous system, what "animates" the body. But then again, Qi is a much broader philosophical concept and "human Qi" is just one type of Qi, or one type of interpretations of Qi.

Again, if its motion tends upward, it will be fire; if downward, earth; these being the motions proper to these natural bodies.

Aristotle associates motion to the elements as we see the Chinese do, although it is common in Chinese alchemical literature to see upward motion associated with fire and downward with water. FWIW.

This is something I haven't noticed before. Interesting.

The core practice of sinking the (post natal) qi to the dantien is to unify it with the pre natal qi. They describe the post as fire and pre as water. When fire is under water it's refining the qi.

Union of kan and li, after completion, reversal of yin and yang, all speak to this idea. The pot of rice unifies the five elements. The ox plows the field.

[robert]

Aristotle doesn't accept the "soul" in a religious meaning. He speaks about functions of the brain, body and nervous system, this is his interpretation of "soul". He says that soul doesn't exist without a body.

In De Anima he doesn't write about the brain and thought and intelligence are attributed to the soul. He does write about the five senses and their organs.

There are two different characteristics by which the soul is principally defined ; firstly, motion from place to place and, secondly, thinking and judging and perceiving. Both thought and intelligence are commonly regarded as a kind of perception, since the soul in both of these judges and recognises something existent.

Thus, then, the part of the soul which we call intellect (and by intellect I mean that whereby the soul thinks and conceives) is nothing at all actually before it thinks. Hence, too, we cannot reasonably conceive it to be mixed with the body: for in that case it would acquire some particular quality, cold or heat, or would even have some organ, as the perceptive faculty has. But as a matter of fact it has none. Therefore it has been well said that the soul is a place of forms or ideas: except that this is not true of the whole soul, but only of the soul which can think, and again that the forms are there not in actuality, but potentially.

It's a different map. Aristotle narrows down the territory to the animate. Since the maps are different, they won't be equivalent, some may seem similarities, some may not.

[cloudz]

I lean towards Plato..
NeoPlatonism is pretty interesting.

[robert]

I lean towards Plato..
NeoPlatonism is pretty interesting.

I agree. I like Plato, although Aristotle takes some of his ideas and really nails them down.

[cloudz]

Just thought I would throw this out there; got this tip from another RSF'er some time back.
A great book for comparisons. The writer uses a lot of Taoist concepts and I think his main teacher was predominantly of that background IIRC.


The link and the blurb
https://www.amazon.com/Little-Book-Herc ... 0972190716

Using the Greek story of the Twelve Labors of Hercules, which outlines the progressive stages of spiritual development that spiritual practitioners in all spiritual traditions go through, this book presents full details on the step-by-step progression of the physical transformations that occur to practitioners. Whenever someone starts to consistently cultivate spiritual practice in a devoted way, there are physical changes that will occur to the human body. These physical transformations, called "gong-fu" in the eastern spiritual schools, are non-denominational signposts of spiritual progress. If you cultivate spiritual practice sufficiently then these phenomena will arise. If you don't practice correctly, they simply won't appear. Their appearance is a matter of proper devoted effort. These phenomena include such things as the awakening of kundalini (yang chi) within the body, the opening of the chakras and purification of the body's energy channels, hormonal transformations, the calming of consciousness, the experience of refined mental states described as "emptiness," and various other mental and physical phenomena. Normally people think these phenomena only occur to individuals following eastern cultivations traditions such as yoga, Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism, and Vajrayana. However, these phenomena that arise are totally non-sectarian and non-denominational. They equally occur to devoted spiritual followers within Judaism, Islam, and Christianity. If you cultivate spiritual practices sufficiently, these purification transformations will occur and if you don't cultivate meditation or other spiritual exercises, you will not experience them. Your religion has nothing to do with it. All genuine religious traditions employ cultivation practices designed to help you achieve a quiet mind. Because thoughts die down due to these practices, this resulting mental quiet is described as peacefulness, silence, cessation, calming, purity, and emptiness. Your mind empties of busy thoughts and so you begin to experience mental peace. When your mind quiets, proper spiritual practice requires that you remain aware during this experience rather than try to suppress thoughts from further arising. The practice of maintaining awareness while mentally quiet is called witnessing, observing, knowing, or introspection. As the mind quiets, you continue to watch your mental continuum but without attaching to it. The gradual calming of your mind results from successfully letting go of thoughts, and because your body’s life force (chi) and consciousness are linked, as you let go of thoughts you also drop the habit of clinging to the energies you normally feel in your body. With proper spiritual practice you learn how to detach from these energies and let them function without interference. Once you learn how to do this, your kundalini energies will arise and their natural circulation will start to transform your body. Those energies will open up your chi channels and chakras and transform your physical body, purifying it. As your chi purifies, so will your emotions and habit energies. As you progressively let go of your chi, it will also revert to its natural circulation which has been suppressed by errant thought patterns. Cultivating a quiet mind leads to your kundalini arising, those energies purify your channels and chakras, that purification leads to a greater degree of mental purity or emptiness, and the two components of body and mind reach ever increasing levels of refinement. This book presents full details on this step-by-step progression of transformations that occur to practitioners on the spiritual trail. It covers the meditation practices that successful adepts have traditionally used throughout history, and non-denominationally links the gong-fu experiences of these practitioners with the stages of the spiritual path and the ultimate quest for self-realization, or enlightenment.

[Quigga]

I've read it a couple years ago. It's a nice book but fails to warn you of the potential serious consequences you earn if you make mistakes with energy and Kundalini. Karma will kick your ass 100%. The mistakes aren't always straightforward.

[cloudz]

Yea, of course.

regardless of source; care, guidance and appropriate warning should be forthcoming.
some advise psychology and or psychotherapy alongside such practices and some methods are gentler, some can be harsh.

[Quigga]

Usually the power seekers will cling onto such information and wake up a couple years later wondering where it all went wrong.