Kevin Wallbridge on "The Cult of Mystical Ignorance"

Discussion on the three big Chinese internals, Yiquan, Bajiquan, Piguazhang and other similar styles.

Re: Kevin Wallbridge on "The Cult of Mystical Ignorance"

Postby I-mon on Thu Jun 15, 2017 4:21 pm

Very interesting and informative, thanks.
User avatar
I-mon
Great Old One
 
Posts: 2936
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 12:19 am
Location: Australia

Re: Kevin Wallbridge on "The Cult of Mystical Ignorance"

Postby Appledog on Fri Jun 16, 2017 3:47 pm

Hello! Originally I wanted to have a "cool post count" of 108, or something like that (something associated with Tai Chi) but that does not seem possible here. Therefore I am editing this post to point out that users here cannot delete their own posts. I do not understand why users have the ability to edit their posts but not to delete their posts.
Last edited by Appledog on Tue Aug 08, 2017 9:56 am, edited 1 time in total.
Appledog
Wuji
 
Posts: 941
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2017 9:39 pm

Re: Kevin Wallbridge on "The Cult of Mystical Ignorance"

Postby Kevin_Wallbridge on Sat Jun 17, 2017 10:01 am

I wasn't commenting on my own practice or what I feel or don't feel. I have had pretty good guidance. My late teacher was trained at the Nanjing Guoshu Institute and I did live in China for a year training only Emei Qigong (my spoken Sichuan dialect was still pretty sound at the time), 25 years ago. I have been teaching Qigong professionally at a Chinese medicine college for 20 years.

I don't want to get into comparing dick length here, yet you chose to critique my practice and read into it a psychological analysis, rather than just addressing the topic. I mean, if you are going to take shots at me at least use your real name.

I am not actually puzzling over this, that is why I wrote the blog in the first place. Much of the 小周天 is practiced as discussed is not sound in terms of Chinese medicine, and even "good teachers" are often ignorant of the things they talk about. I have seen good teachers and students of good teachers get Qigong sickness, that is what I wanted the essay to be about.

Seriously dude, its not like I spend my time huddled at my desk pondering the mysteries of Chinese martial arts, I train it. Didn't I write something one time here about the anti-intellectual argument trend in martial arts that equates classical knowledge to wasted time? Maybe it was back in the EF days when the topic of "was Sun Ludang a pussy" came up? :P
拳中龙象本能之学
Kevin_Wallbridge
Great Old One
 
Posts: 419
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 1:01 am
Location: Nelson BC Canada

Re: Kevin Wallbridge on "The Cult of Mystical Ignorance"

Postby wayne hansen on Sat Jun 17, 2017 12:11 pm

I can't see what comment you are complaining about
Don't put power into the form let it naturally arise from the form
wayne hansen
Wuji
 
Posts: 5660
Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 1:52 pm

Re: Kevin Wallbridge on "The Cult of Mystical Ignorance"

Postby GrahamB on Sat Jun 17, 2017 1:00 pm

I've practiced my heavenly circle 20 times while reading this thread, so it's been worth it :)
One does not simply post on RSF.
The Tai Chi Notebook
User avatar
GrahamB
Great Old One
 
Posts: 13554
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 3:30 pm

Re: Kevin Wallbridge on "The Cult of Mystical Ignorance"

Postby voidisyinyang on Sat Jun 17, 2017 4:48 pm

This is an excellent article on the small universe - thanks to Kevin Wallbridge. I did training mainly in this meditation when I was 29 years old, to finish my master's degree. That was year 2000. Since then I studied the science research of this small universe meditation training - that I compiled into a free pdf - https://www.pdf-archive.com/2017/04/10/ ... t-alchemy/

I also want to thank Kevin Wallbridge for doing free teaching. I trained but the energy became very strong. Then I wrongly overused the energy, as I was also doing research. So then a man who was a kungfu master in the 1960s and then trained as a medical qigong master http://guidingqi.com - he read my error long distance. He said - the energy is going up my front channel (and out of my skull). I had erroneously thought I was sending energy up my spine. Oops. No wonder I had so many problems.

So I realize this forum is for "weaponized" qigong as fighting training. I have to start over to rebuild the foundation of my energy. People may be interested in the pdf I created - there are lots of images and lots of science research - and it is based on the Shaolin training that the teacher I trained with did - http://springforestqigong.com -
voidisyinyang
Anjing
 
Posts: 106
Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2017 9:46 am

Re: Kevin Wallbridge on "The Cult of Mystical Ignorance"

Postby Appledog on Sat Jun 17, 2017 8:12 pm

Hello! Originally I wanted to have a "cool post count" of 108, or something like that (something associated with Tai Chi) but that does not seem possible here. Therefore I am editing this post to point out that users here cannot delete their own posts. I do not understand why users have the ability to edit their posts but not to delete their posts.
Last edited by Appledog on Tue Aug 08, 2017 9:56 am, edited 3 times in total.
Appledog
Wuji
 
Posts: 941
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2017 9:39 pm

Re: Kevin Wallbridge on "The Cult of Mystical Ignorance"

Postby Bhassler on Sat Jun 17, 2017 8:55 pm

[quote="Appledog"]Understanding the heart of the matter why on earth did you go through such a protracted discussion? In which, I might repeat, you never really answered the questions you raised, only pointed out that the door was towards attent and not intent?[/quote]

Um, Socratic Method? Ancient Greece? Foundation of western thought and civilization? No?

Okay, um....

Zhuang Zi? Seminal text of Daoism? Not that either?

Oh! I know! Creating a reasoned argument instead of resorting to logical fallacy? Okay, this is the internet, so it's definitely not that....
Bhassler
Great Old One
 
Posts: 3546
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:05 pm
Location: xxxxxxx

Re: Kevin Wallbridge on "The Cult of Mystical Ignorance"

Postby BruceP on Sun Jun 18, 2017 11:47 pm

Bhassler wrote:
Appledog wrote:Understanding the heart of the matter why on earth did you go through such a protracted discussion? In which, I might repeat, you never really answered the questions you raised, only pointed out that the door was towards attent and not intent?


Um, Socratic Method? Ancient Greece? Foundation of western thought and civilization? No?

Okay, um....

Zhuang Zi? Seminal text of Daoism? Not that either?

Oh! I know! Creating a reasoned argument instead of resorting to logical fallacy? Okay, this is the internet, so it's definitely not that....


Whoa! A rare appearance...
BruceP
Great Old One
 
Posts: 1953
Joined: Sat May 31, 2008 3:40 pm

Re: Kevin Wallbridge on "The Cult of Mystical Ignorance"

Postby charles on Mon Jun 19, 2017 7:11 am

Kevin,

I think the article is exceptionally well reasoned and written and raises some very important points regarding training.

I wish there were more such articles regarding "internal" training, articles that cut through much of the "mystical" rhetoric that abounds.

One of the interesting points that it raises is what place, if any, imagination and imagery, have in traditional training? I was taught, essentially, none, yet people often discuss their use of it in their training, often citing modern sports science, and its stated improvement in performance, in support of doing so.
charles
Wuji
 
Posts: 1727
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 1:01 pm

Re: Kevin Wallbridge on "The Cult of Mystical Ignorance"

Postby wayne hansen on Mon Jun 19, 2017 1:51 pm

Mind leads chi follows
Every move you make without an opponent is started by your imagination
Don't put power into the form let it naturally arise from the form
wayne hansen
Wuji
 
Posts: 5660
Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 1:52 pm

Re: Kevin Wallbridge on "The Cult of Mystical Ignorance"

Postby Bhassler on Mon Jun 19, 2017 7:48 pm

BruceP wrote:
Bhassler wrote:
Appledog wrote:Understanding the heart of the matter why on earth did you go through such a protracted discussion? In which, I might repeat, you never really answered the questions you raised, only pointed out that the door was towards attent and not intent?


Um, Socratic Method? Ancient Greece? Foundation of western thought and civilization? No?

Okay, um....

Zhuang Zi? Seminal text of Daoism? Not that either?

Oh! I know! Creating a reasoned argument instead of resorting to logical fallacy? Okay, this is the internet, so it's definitely not that....


Whoa! A rare appearance...


I was afraid that Kevin was too mature to resort to sarcasm and mockery, so felt it was my duty to pick up the banner and run with it.
Last edited by Bhassler on Mon Jun 19, 2017 7:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Bhassler
Great Old One
 
Posts: 3546
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:05 pm
Location: xxxxxxx

Re: Kevin Wallbridge on "The Cult of Mystical Ignorance"

Postby Appledog on Tue Jun 20, 2017 6:28 am

Hello! Originally I wanted to have a "cool post count" of 108, or something like that (something associated with Tai Chi) but that does not seem possible here. Therefore I am editing this post to point out that users here cannot delete their own posts. I do not understand why users have the ability to edit their posts but not to delete their posts.
Last edited by Appledog on Tue Aug 08, 2017 9:59 am, edited 3 times in total.
Appledog
Wuji
 
Posts: 941
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2017 9:39 pm

Re: Kevin Wallbridge on "The Cult of Mystical Ignorance"

Postby charles on Tue Jun 20, 2017 6:41 am

wayne hansen wrote:Mind leads chi follows
Every move you make without an opponent is started by your imagination


True, but not necessarily in the context we are discussing, the small heavenly orbit and cultivation thereof.
charles
Wuji
 
Posts: 1727
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 1:01 pm

Re: Kevin Wallbridge on "The Cult of Mystical Ignorance"

Postby Bhassler on Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:08 pm

Appledog wrote:
Bhassler wrote:I was afraid that Kevin was too mature to resort to sarcasm and mockery, so felt it was my duty to pick up the banner and run with it.


I prefer to stick with the mature crowd, but, to each his own huh?

Comparing what Kevin was doing to the Socratic method would be more appropriate if he eventually answered the questions he raised. Unfortunately Kevin's "perhaps" is worse than lukewarm, and his response when prodding for answers is worse than unexpected. So while it's true that "attent" has more to it than "intent", the fact that he never actually comments on things from the perspective of practice leaves me wanting more. Let's call this the second prod for discussion, and let's see if you can give any answer whatever, I'm just here to listen.

OTOH if sarcasm and mockery are all that you have, I guess it will have to do.


The reason you got sarcasm and mockery is because it was clear from your comments that you didn't take the time to understand what was written before offering your own criticism of it.

The article specifically addresses the meaning of the Chinese medical term commonly translated as "small heavenly circle", and Kevin provides academic and cultural context for *why* he believes the interpretation commonly given is inaccurate. It's not a training article. You suggested the author either hasn't trained enough or was trained incorrectly because he hasn't "felt" the small heavenly circle, when the major part of the article is pointing out that the small heavenly circle that is so happily spoken of in martial arts doesn't exist in Chinese medicine in a way that is at all similar to what's commonly talked about in MA. What you yourself do or do not feel in that context, and whether it is real or imagined, is largely irrelevant-- whatever it is you might be feeling, it is *not* the so-called small heavenly circle of Chinese medicine.

Is any of this relevant to training? Maybe or maybe not, but it is certainly relevant to understanding the cultural context of the taiji classics, which are ultimately more along the lines of scholarly articles than true training guides-- or rather, they are a scholarly treatment of experience gained through training. Without understanding the cultural background, any commentary on the "classics" is deeply suspect as anything other than the personal musings of an individual.

It's somewhat... odd that the IMA community is so adamant about formal teaching and correct training on the one hand, while those same people who insist on the necessity of right training blithely make up their own terminology for anatomy, approach ancient texts with no cultural or academic context, and invent pedagogy seemingly at random with no regard at all for the vast bodies of professional knowledge and experience readily available in any of those fields.

Discussion is similar to training-- if you want the real stuff, you have to earn it (general 'you' here, not speaking of anyone particularly). You can't get the real skills of fighting by reading books, and you likewise can't get meaningful discussion through physical training alone. You have to develop the gongfu of language, articulation, and logical structure.
Last edited by Bhassler on Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Bhassler
Great Old One
 
Posts: 3546
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:05 pm
Location: xxxxxxx

Next

Return to Xingyiquan - Baguazhang - Taijiquan

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests