RobP3 wrote:wayne hansen wrote:Rob you talk about your tai chi but I don’t think you have really told who your teachers were
I always get the impression that it is somehow connected with erle M
Am I wrong
I trained with Erle once. My full history is started around 1981 with John Ding at his very first class. He was then under Chu King Hung in London.
Trained with CKH at a couple of workshops. The JD switched to the Boston Chu's, so trained with Gin Soon quite a few times.
After 10-12 years or so , a group of us left JD and set up our own school. Continued to train with GSC, and hosted his son Vincent in the UK many times.
Also began training with Jim Uglow, largely in EM's Old Yang form
Over the next few years I went all over. So trained workshops with Chen Xiao Wang, George Xu, Yap Cheng Hai, and a few others whose names escape me.
Also hosted Ji Jian Cheng in the UK a couple of times, and had that session with EM too. Met most of the UK TCC crowd, the Watsons, Bob Fermor, Chris Pei, Peter Young (!) etc Oh, and Mike Sigman.
Also trained with people like Dave Turton, Peter Conserdine, Steve Morris, various pressure-point people, etc.
Met Vladimir in 2000 and Mikhail a year or so later.
Cheers
Rob
RobP3 wrote:
You say it's not empty force ?
There's no "force" involved"
"You say it with the conviction that I think it is... Is that true Rob? Think again.
"empty force" is specifically a cultural label attached to a psychological phenomenon."
This is not from that culture, and is explained entirely in psychological terms.
so it's not that I think what MR is doing is "empty force"; it is psychology
That's what I've been saying all along
- more to the point, a form of mind control.
It's just training, not turning people into zombies
This happens to be the exact same way I categorise Empty force; as psychological/ psychology - that plays out in the use of mind control techniques. Some aspects of these subconscious communications may remain unconscious amongst participants to various degrees.
I agree, that has been my experience. Which is why I am so confident in saying what we do is different
Some things have to do with rapport; we are always leading and following for example in our interactions. Even from the most simple basic principles of rapport. We find things like mirroring and matching, leading and following. Is it any wonder that the soft style interactions of Systema and tai chi lend themselves to situations where people rather choose subconsciously not break rapport they have otherwise been building up.
Yes, all part of the work. But that dynamic exists in any relationship, not just "soft" ones. That's then down to everyone being as honest as possible in training, and why everything has to be tested. But again, these are not separate "magic tricks" they are one thread of the overall work. All of these things you mentioned, and others, are important in dealing with conflict and confrontation.
There is obviously a lot more to this subject.
There is, absolutely
cheers
Rob
wayne hansen wrote:Rob did u ever meet a student of mine named Chris Greswell
He had a cousin who took over teaching from Chu
Don’t remember his name
I can see with your background why you sought out Systema
You certainly took the right path
RobP3 wrote: ...People react in different ways. The thing I hear a lot from both teachers is "be honest in your actions. Don't pretend" especially in the "softer" aspects of work. It's an important aspect of training.
Giles wrote:RobP3 wrote: ...People react in different ways. The thing I hear a lot from both teachers is "be honest in your actions. Don't pretend" especially in the "softer" aspects of work. It's an important aspect of training.
That is a very important and valuable tenet. For both students and teachers, and especially for teachers. Even more so when you're teaching some kind of martial art that incorporates 'deep relaxation' or 'softness' in some way (Tai Chi, Aikido, Systema and....??). Then you have to train cooperatively to some extent and 'play', otherwise most people will never overcome the basic startled-nerves, clenched-muscles responses and move into the interesting areas that lie beyond. As you say (well, I paraphrase), in such situations we all have to 'act' and 'play' and 'help each other' to some extent in order to experience and progress. Sometimes it can be a very fine line between 'honest and productive play' and 'unproductive, harmful pretending'. The potential for dishonesty and (self-)deception in this area is huge, above all for teachers. From intentionally manipulating others (of a suitable personality) to keep them small and in awe of you, and yourself on a pedestal, through to creeping self-deception if you stay in a warm and fuzzy comfort zone for too long. All of which will permeate to your students, too. So in addition to one's good intentions as a teacher (hopefully!), you need to keep being honest with yourself and about your own limitations and the limitations of the art. For me at least, that's a constant process, not always easy.
cloudz wrote:Ok, story time.. I guess. Some deeper background and backdrop becomes necessary. The Status Quo can be revisited at some point in the future perhaps. Indulge me.
First point is kind of the one I started with;
It's worth remembering that MR is a mystic, so while it is psychology; in current western terminology, his personal beliefs may involve similar ideas and concepts shared by all mystics..
I happen to be "a mystic" as well; I even practiced Hesychasm for a while.
Mystics are quite often, in my view, Universalists. Or should be..
In this case I will say categorically Chi is one and the same as Universal Christ.
People from both the eastern Dogma and the Western will no doubt argue against that position.
No problem, as well they might. This is no more or less than the Perennial Philosophy.
I'm just a follower of that philosophy.
It's nothing particularly mystical when you put it down to the subconscious and the underlying working of all Nature (Tao).
So not necessarily Supernatural but natural. A natural Science, A Social Science even. Dualistic categories are usually one of the first things a mystic needs to deconstruct in their mind.
But essentially It's learning to tap into the primordial stream of information.
Is how I would begin to frame it.
These guys reducing it to body tricks like Mizners Chi film does, do the whole world of Internal Arts a disservice. Martial or not.
Honestly I think how it's been integrated by Eastern martial schools is probably a worse outcome. All knowledge needs updating and integrating with new knowledge, it is 100% as simple as that. Hanging on to tradition and old writing as if it is sacred doesn't work long term. We wind up with a cultural and antiquated relic.
I describe it with "force" because it can have a powerful effect on people as history repeatedly shows.
In the 'ancient times' (lol) there were Mystery schools, both Eastern and Western.
And to some degree military training and know how mingled and crossed with "spiritual power".
The most famous perhaps from the East are the Ninja Clans; from which I was initiated. The stories are the stories and if we are to believe them; in my case a Japanese family moved to the UK in the 1950's who traced a lineage back, a long time, to something called the Blue Mountain Sect. Who in turn traced an origin story back to China.
My first teacher taught me stuff that literally transformed me into a Mystic. It was a kind of indoctrination I guess, his main method was teaching 108 precepts, 3 a week. To describe it as "work", it would be the basic work of transforming the mind I guess. To a certain way of thinking about the world. Nothing particularly sinister or dodgy. It was certainly Cult Like, but with nice benevolent people.
The most famous and successful Western order crossing Military and Mystery School boundaries would be the Knights Templar. Nothing resembling Eastern Martial arts really exists; where mind-body knowledge is integrated in a martial framework.
Today we have remaining things like Free Masonry of Western Mystery Schools, for example. Basically what would be considered at certain times coveted knowledge (the psychology and philosophy teaching).
The Gnostics got written out of Christianity for a reason. Because essentially Gnosticism put the 'power' in the hands of the everyday people.
Rather than the lucky ones who would normally be schooled in 'the mysteries'.
By my way of Reckoning; Jesus was simply another dude trying to spread power to the people.
Like other 'White Hat' Prophets and mystical teachers.
Like anything, knowledge can be used to good ends or dark ends. Suppressing it must be considered in darker territory at times.
It may not even be intentional as the road to hell can often be paved with good ones.
It's only really MR that puts on no touch demonstrations. I didn't get involved in this chat, to criticise or judge him. My goals are aligned with understanding things better; people, situations, myself. Martial arts and the activities there in are nice and fun and stuff. But real violence is abhorrent and men are capable of "evil" acts and activities. Personally I would choose away from no touch martial activities - however they get framed. No touch two person chi gung; yea actually why not. been there done that and it was a cool but essentially harmless thing. Not say psychological (psycho-somatic) martial arts displays are necessarily harmful, but i don't see the helpfulness rising above a breakdown of other martial exercises and drills/ methods and a teaching of straight up the psychology reserved for mentalists and hypnotists (today) essentially.
No doubt there's more to directly reply to. But let's all bask in the Status Quo for a while.
When neither side wants to budge, that's when you call the mediators in.
Returning to the Global story; In the East things stayed Holistic, martial arts systems took on ever more baggage from spiritual and religious systems. In the West however things didn't go that way. Aristotle and Plato is really where things kind of change and diverge for the West. That is a story for the ages !
Now we are left with a tale of two paradigms essentially - in my view at least.
Even still neither is the territory, they are both still maps.
But that is the typical thing a true Mystic would insist on.
In my assessment of what a true Mystic really is; or should be at least.
My teachers teacher (ninja dude) despite all his other learning and knowledge winded up telling stories in my latter years at the school.
Recently i have realised that's the direction I need to go, to write, to tell stories. For kids, for parents, for friends and for family. Integrate and practice and share martial arts a certain way alongside that. I imagine it to be very vanilla, something for everyone but not too bland, god forbid. Where Sciences and Arts meet and greet each other.
Peace be upon us.
cloudz wrote:Rob; ok I don't watch a lot of Systema these days, my recollection was of not seeing many others do it who are his students. I think I have seen other branches. But point taken it's more widespread.
again with semantics though, it seems your main concern. If we ask what he is teaching, we get an answer 'psychology'.
what is this psychology exactly ?
I kept going on about magic didn't I. Well illusion is another part.
Is it interesting that there are 8 types of magic. It is to me when you have been obsessed in the past with 5 elements and 8 gates
every king had a wizard.
Ninjas amongst other things were illusionists. In so much as they understood the science and learnt the arts to what suited their objectives.
the 8 types are.
abjuration
conjuration
divination
enchantment
evocation
illusion
necromancy
transmutation
Maybe it's a dick thing to say.. But if you are going to claim something is training "something"(psychology), it would be nice to get the substance rather than the dressing only.
It's hard though.. I imagine if you get the question why do you do it like that - with no contact at all; and it's hard to find substance beyond 'the mundane' (what others are training anyway). eg. sensitivity, awareness, evasion, timing, physical skills and so on.
when you put it like that; it just comes back to LARP, which you denied.
When we ask others to be honest with themselves, we need to follow our own advice right ?
Just saying.
Return to Xingyiquan - Baguazhang - Taijiquan
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests