Strong Legs

[Daniel]

Believe me, if this was a marketing ploy, I'd have have fleeced you guys already.... Yeah, come study with me ladies, I'm weaker than you are...

Really. How?


D.

Sarcasm. Oh yeah, like that´ll work.

[Scott P. Phillips]

Ox muscle vs. Tiger muscle. Tiger wins.
Weak structure vs. strong structure. Strong wins.
Static two-leg structure vs. Dynamic two-leg structure. Dynamic wins.
Force against force. Greater force wins.
Tonic (healthy) vs. Deficient (sick). Tonic wins.
There are many different animal "flavor" strategies of fighting, including borrowing force. Strategy vs. strategy, the better strategy wins.
None of that is in dispute.

In response to Doc Stier. Sometimes looking inconspicuous is the right thing. Sometimes looking like King Kong on steroids is the right thing.

I am talking about actual weakness. Cultivated dynamic natural weakness. Not pathetic, deficient weakness. I'm open to debate about what the precept of "practicing weakness" actually means. It's probably not softness as others have pointed out. I think it is more basic than all that. Like "practice honest speech," the easiest way to do that is to just not talk. Honesty is the default position, weakness is too.

DeusTrismegistus says:

Now in regards to cultivating weakness. My opinion is that this doesn't relate to actual weakness but the feeling of weakness. Often the position that feels strongest is weaker than the position that feels weak. This is because people equate strong with muscle use so the position that uses the most muscle to move or maintain feels strong because there is more effort. The position that is actually stronger feels weaker because it requires less effort for the same effect. So developing weakness means abandoning the idea of perceived strength and instead using the positions of perceived weakness. It also means not relying on the strength of the limbs but learning to relax the limbs so they can be free to move. This feels weak to most people but allows the energy to transfer from the torso to the limbs. Similarly with stances you must learn to hold them with the least amount of effort. The more you feel like you are not exerting yourself in a stance the stronger it is. By relaxing and being weak in the muscle we gain strength through alignment and structure [note from Scott: It's more than just alignment and structure, it's qi and shen too], unless we cultivate weakness this is not going to be felt. We also have more potential energy as the more flexed a muscle is to maintain a position the less room it has to explode to produce force for a strike, so by maintaining a position with the minimal tension we gain more power, this is enhanced by the stronger our muscles are, a stronger muscle will require less flexion to maintain the same force, or a stronger muscle can relax more.

Am I contrasting the feeling of weakness vs. the feeling of strength? Does developing potential power (shi) require letting go of what you think works? Letting go of what feels strong? Discovering constant lively effortless motion through embracing weakness? Yes, that is what I'm saying, I think you've got the method right! And sure once you have great potential power I guess you could increase your muscle size and get more out of it but.... and here is the rub....why would you??? If you've truly got that down, you're probably already undefeatable.

The Daoist view which inspired the creation of the internal martial arts--and thus my bigger point--posits that the purpose of cultivating weakness is to demonstrate that humans are fine the way they are. The desire for strength arises naturally from conflicting emotions (fear-insecurity) brought on by some sort of deficiency. It is a natural survival response which is triggered in otherwise safe happy people when they chronically waste qi or damage jing.

The only way to find out if what I'm saying is true (or not) is to try it yourself. I'm not really trying to convince anyone here. I'm just saying, hey, it's a possibility...if just one person gets something out of it, that's cool, if not, that's cool too.

[johnwang]

Train leg strength - "sweep":



Train leg strength - "knife hook":

[middleway]

Oh, I saw your point and wasn't disagreeing - I think the material strength of the organs in the leg matter too. But I am trying to say you still need a good deal of muscular strength to hold an arc even within Scott's narrow definition, and the more you have once your shape is correct, the more stable your arc.

IMO, it's the essence of the point. Structure and material strength alone is not good enough. You need raw muscular strength to maintain a structure when in reality you are dealing with dynamic forces from many directions.

Then we are in agreement.

[johnwang]

If your opponent is about your level, it's very difficult to borrow force. Sometime a SC match can last for an hour because nobody wants to make any commitment. Strength is very important in this situation. It's better to have strength and not have to use it than have to use strength but don't have it.

[bailewen]

I'm curious just what the hell Scott actually does mean by "weakness". It's pointless to pull up a list of dictionary definitions like on the last page because first of all, Scott's blog is called "Weakness With a Twist. That "With a Twist" part, I would think, makes it pretty obvious that he is not using the word in the 100% conventional manner. Secondly, as his argument is supposedly based in old Daoist traditions, there's obviously a translation issue here and no one here knows what actual Chinese term he is interpreting as "weakness". Rou? Ruo? Ruan? Xu? 柔，弱，软 and 虚 respectively. I for one, have no idea what he is driving at or how literal he is trying to be.

For the most part, I think Scott is off his rocker but he's adding to the conversation in an interesting way so what the heck. Just one more spice in the soup.

[jonathan.bluestein]

Strength training = injury? I disagree.
Incorrect strength training is what leads to injury! I've been training in a weightlifting gym for 3.5 years and have been injury-free by properly warming up both generally before practice and locally for the exercises themselves, and working hard on proper stretching. Guess my Xing Yi training helps a lot as well. Anyhow, most people in our gym who're injured got to this state by playing soccer or basketball. Almost no one suffers serious injury from weights among the amateur crowd, and those who do are usually either prolonging non-treatment of minor injuries and/or performing exercises incorrectly and without proper guidance.

I think much of what you describe as "natural strength" is re-learning to use the nervous system efficiently. The ability to do so doesn't necessarily justify ignoring the potential benefits of strength training, which are numerous.
1. Strength training isn't necessarily equal to massive hypertrophy. Depends on the kind of training you apply. A friend of mine who started powerlifting 2 years ago somewhat doubled his strength on many levels and exercises, yet dropped about 15lb in muscle mass (same body fat).
2. Strength training is your so called "natural strength", yet it's much easier and faster to get stronger using this method. It also has functional benefit to your life from the first week, which cannot be said of many things.
3. The medical benefits are well known.
4. Bear in mind that the human body dies once it looses about 40% of its young lean muscle mass. Generally speaking, the more muscle mass you can maintain into old age, the better you are, not considering other influences as martial arts training and genetics.
5. Reference to the impact of proper weight training in just a year (mid-page, DEXA machine data table):
http://www.tmuscle.com/free_online_arti ... ngth_myths

Want another argument for strength? I've got one. His name is Alex. He's the guard at my gym. He's a 120kg 1.85 russian gentelman. The guy was a pro powerlifter in the past. He could lift most people over his head and through them around. He's so thick I suspect most people wouldn't have the force to truly hurt him, even martial artist whom I respect for their skills. You say "who needs strength"? Well, Alex proves otherwise, by his mere existence. ^_^ Because he's huge and thick, his problem is solved. :-P

My powerlifter friend btw have very slim legs although he does a lot of leg work, with my legs being much thicker and bigger though I lift less than him, and work my legs only once a week besides doing Xing Yi. Leg size owns a lot to the genetic factor. Someone mentioned Montague going down on some Taiji teacher who had thick legs. That could be just genetics at work, not necessarily "incorrect training".
Leg size also has a habit of sticking with you if you once were heavily into leg work. My father used to be a pro soccer player in his teens. He later was in the special forces in the Israeli Defence Force. He had enormous legs and great leg strength up to 20 years after he quit playing soccer from just playing tennis once or twice a week. This is something common with many once pro athletes who had a strong leg base.

Personally I train weighted pistols and heavy deadlifts once a week. I feel that it helped a lot with some aspects on my Xing Yi (Swallow form and the likes), but also made it more difficult to stay relaxed in Zhan Zhuang. I do it because I like it. Erector Spinae muscles aren't getting near enough stimulation for their potential by Nei Gong training, and most weight training. The deadlift is perfect for that purpose. Good muscle mass in this area PROTECTS FROM bulging and herienated discs, and can PREVENT pain and suffering for some people who already have these issues.

In regard to using brute force - since it takes some 10 years to get REALLY GOOD at IMA, you have 10 years of only partial protection. You can easily find yourself in tight spots were brute force could save the day. You shouldn't strive to use it, but it never hurts to have some!

Now, there are also limits to the so called "natural strength". Lets ignore emergency situations for a sec, when life&death enables people to do the extraordinary (mother lifting car to save baby bla bla bla). I once read some online biography of a Taiji master (think it was Feng Zhiqiang). It was written that while working in a factory, some 500lb thing fell and he caught it from above his had and landed it down. I say BULLSHIT. These sort of things might be good as fairytale stories for people who've never lifted serious weights in their lives. No known tradtional Taiji master could do that. Hell, I bet most of them could even press their own bodyweight overhead with a barbell. Any of you know an IMA teacher who can lift a car? Deadlift 400lb? Do a pullup with his own bodyweight attached to his waist? Sure they can't. It's usually not within the limits of that "natural strength" that is so sought after. Children aren't a good example for relative strength. Lets see some adults do these things...

Somatai - I find it interesting that what you call "chicken leg" in xylhq is very different from what we call "Chicken Leg" in Xing Yi Quan. I our case it refers to the way the rear leg follows the front leg very quickly during rapid stepping, as there's a spring between them, and the rear leg is trying to stick to the front leg as quickly as possible once the front leg starts moving forward... It's not s specific stepping pattern, but rather a stepping trait common to many techniques.

I concur with ChiBelly on the muscle claims.

In regard to the calves of the mountain guys in China - calves respond well with hypertrophy for many people by doing lots (hundreds-thousands) of repetitions. I once had much bigger calves because I used to do boxing and jump rope for 30 min at a time.

DeusTrismegistus -
It is not true that for hypertrophy you necessarily have to train the 12-15 rep range and work to failure. These are very old notions from the bodybuilding world that are not acceptable nowadays. Training to failure isn't usually recommended any more. It is also known that many people would benefit best for hypertrophy from the 6-8 rep range. It depends on the exercise, personal genetics, and "training age" and experience.
I concur with the claim that women usually have an easier time learning the proper mechanics of IMA, especially Taiji Quan.
You describe the exact leg-genetic claim I wrote of earlier in this message.

[Scott P. Phillips]

Bailewen asked which character for weakness. I am claiming that whatever term was used, prior to 1900, it would have been a clear reference to these seed texts, so a dictionary would just be functioning as a sloppy commentary. Might as well go straight to the commentary. The Xiang'er Precepts are still the most basic precepts taking by Tianshidao & Zhengyidao Priests.

Page 49 of Early Daoist Scriptures. All terms are taken straight from the Daodejing:
http://books.google.com/books?id=qngJspoY3TMC&lpg=PA76&ots=ByZRPi6nYf&dq=xiang'er%20precepts&pg=PA49#v=onepage&q=xiang'er%20precepts&f=false

Xiang'er Precepts--http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xiang%27er

And in Chinese: http://www.guoxue.com/xstj/lzxez/lzf.htm
or here http://www.wenhuacn.com/zhexue/daojiao/dianji/xiangerzhu.htm

In the Daodejing the term commonly translated as weakness is 弱 (ruo), but it is often paired with softness 柔 (rou).

[Doc Stier]

Referring to the Taoist Classics may provide further insights regarding Taoist concepts of self-cultivation, especially the "cultivation of stillness" and the "preservation of weakness", as these relate to what has been discussed on this thread:

"Those who embody the teachings of Tao are quiet and easy, yet meet with no impediments.
Pliant in action, they can yet be firm; yielding, they can yet be strong; adapting themselves to circumstances as they change, they still hold fast to the fundamental part of the Doctrine, and are able to effect great things by small means.

When those who are said to be strong in action encounter changes of fortune, or meet with sudden emergencies, or find themselves compelled to prepare for misfortune, or to ward off troubles, their strength is never inadequate, and their antagonists are invariably scattered. Adapting themselves to the transmutations of nature, they choose their times for action, and therefore they are invulnerable.

Therefore, those who wish to preserve their resolution, must maintain it by means of gentleness; and those who wish to preserve their force, must guard it by means of weakness. When gentleness is persevered, it will lead to resolution. When weakness is persevered, it will lead to strength. It is possible to foretell the future well-being or woe of any given person, by watching to see what his constant practice is.

Force can only be successful in combating what is weaker than itself. It cannot overcome anything which is equally strong. But weakness can overcome what is far stronger than itself. The strength of weakness cannot be estimated!

Thus, when soldiers are fierce, they will eventually be annihilated. When wood is hard, it will be easily snapped in two. When the skin of a drum is hard, it will soon crack. The teeth, which are stronger and harder than the tongue, decay first. Therefore, weakness constitutes the substance of life, and strength is associated with death."

Hung Lieh Chuan by Huai-Nan Tzu
http://www.sacred-texts.com/tao/ttx/ttx09.htm

[everything]

This guy:

is pound for pound "strong enough". Standing next to many of his opponents, he certainly looks weaker:






He even looks mentally weaker. So maybe he has figured out "weakness". Clearly he is stronger as far as the results go.

Doing 2-3 minutes of groundwork is enough to decide on whether one's legs are "strong enough". I don't know how you decide if you're "weak" enough.

[I-mon]

awesome sculpture!

[bailewen]

Bailewen asked which character for weakness. I am claiming that whatever term was used, prior to 1900, it would have been a clear reference to these seed texts, so a dictionary would just be functioning as a sloppy commentary. Might as well go straight to the commentary. The Xiang'er Precepts are still the most basic precepts taking by Tianshidao & Zhengyidao Priests.

Page 49 of Early Daoist Scriptures. All terms are taken straight from the Daodejing:
http://books.google.com/books?id=qngJspoY3TMC&lpg=PA76&ots=ByZRPi6nYf&dq=xiang'er%20precepts&pg=PA49#v=onepage&q=xiang'er%20precepts&f=false

Xiang'er Precepts--http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xiang%27er

And in Chinese: http://www.guoxue.com/xstj/lzxez/lzf.htm
or here http://www.wenhuacn.com/zhexue/daojiao/dianji/xiangerzhu.htm

In the Daodejing the term commonly translated as weakness is 弱 (ruo), but it is often paired with softness 柔 (rou).

First of all, I was half expecting that you were not working from a single character but at least from some sort of overall concept that you perceived in the texts somewhere. That being said, I have not found, so far, where any of the texts referenced support your concept. Consider this a sort of peer review. You've got this theory and I'm game to hear it. It seems vaguely resonant with things I have heard so far but just a vague resonance, a thematic connection, hardly validates your theory, especially where martial arts are concerned.

disclaimer: I have not read all the way through the links presented yet. Maybe I'll find something farther down the line.

The only use of the word "ruo"/弱 that　comes to mind off the top of my head in the Dao De Jing is in the 3rd verse where it is used specifically to refer to intent or to "willpower". In this case, it does not even mean "weakness" at all but rather simply means to decrease. And what is it suggesting one should decrease? It says to decrease the willpower or the determination of the common people. And why decrease it? So that they will not revolt. It say that you should actually stengthen them physically and weaken them in terms of their desires. The relevant text reads:

是以圣人之治，虚其心，实其腹，弱其志，强其骨。
(It is the way that the safe governs. Empty their hearts(of desires) and fill their stomachs. Weaken their resolve and strengthen their bones (ie. their health)
常使民无知无欲
Make it so that the common people know nothing and want nothing.

Dao De Jing - verse 3. My own translation.

In this case, it seems clear to me that "weakness" is only in the mind where in the physical realm, strength is called for. The other Chinese text you referenced, http://www.wenhuacn.com/zhexue/daojiao/ ... gerzhu.htm, again, it speaks mostly of desires and little of physcial strength or weakness. I am unable to see how this builds your case.

The first verse referenced: 则民不争，亦不盗。“不见可欲，使心不乱 is, like the previous one I translated, about how to govern a country. It is paraphrasing the previous lines of the same verse

which read ( have bold printed the parts excerpted by your link):

不尚贤，使民不争, Do not award riches and honors and you will prevent the common people from fighting with each other
不贵难得之货，使民不为盗 Do not place high value on possesions that are hard to obtain, and you will not cause the common people to become thieves.
不见可欲，[b]使民心不乱 Do not place objects of desire in peoples view, and you keep the common peoples hearts at ease.

Again, my own translation. I welcome any specific suggestions as to where I misunderstand the text. The other link you presented: http://www.2maomao.com/blog/tao-te-ching-03/ again, it only speaks of decreasing desire and where physical strength is concerned, actually argues the opposite of what you have been saying.

Perhaps you could elucidate on the Xianger precepts and what you find there that you feel supports your argument? In chapter 3 of the Dao De Jing, I'm just not seeing it.

[Ian]

What's with quoting laozi anyway? He had some nifty ideas, but was he even a martial artist?

I agree with the point that MA and IMA can become obsessed with creating stronger legs, which of course isn´t useful, that just means you´re stuck on a level in the training and can´t quite shift out of it. That you need good leg-strength, connections, structure, spine-connections, liuhe, connective tissue/tendon-work, stable lower jiao, a kang that is alive, songkua, the shift-points in the feet, the ankle-connections and the deeper liuhe between toes, legs and hands and arms, and the ability to change smoothly and fast in the legs etc. is a bit of a given.

Hi Daniel,

I'm trying to work on most things in that list, but what do these mean?

-stable lower jiao
-a kang that is alive
-the shift-points in the feet
-the deeper liuhe between toes

Any clarification would be appreciated

[Scott P. Phillips]

Bailewen,
While the terms used in the Daodejing 2400 years ago are mostly still in use, the means come to us through the commentaries. There are many uses of weakness in the Daodejing, but more importantly the Xiang'er precepts were a distillation of the text into precepts that people could follow--and some still do. The author of the Xiang'er does seem to have had military leadership experience, from other recent studies (see the Journal of Daoist Studies).
The Huainanzi, which Doc Stier provided above is also a perfect example. In fact Roger Ames believes that the text above is essentially a prose version of the Daodejing written about 200 years later. What's above is actually the preamble to the Huainanzi and is beautifully translated in Yuan Dao, Finding One's Way to the Source, by Roger Ames, with Chinese texts included. There are full copies of the Huainanzi on line too. The Daodejing (through memorization and its commentaries) and the Huainanzi are the two most central Daoist texts.

I believe the Chapter you quote is dealing with both the social and physiological consequences of conflicting emotion brought about by not seeing things as they actually are. It can also easily be read as instructions for practicing zouwang. The text known as a "seed scripture" jingzi, represents a transition from one era to another in which the secret teachings of kings become the basis for daily cultivation.

[bailewen]

While the terms used in the Daodejing 2400 years ago are mostly still in use, the means come to us through the commentaries.

A commentary is just another dudes opinion on what the original means. Whenever I have the ability to do so, I prefer to work with the original text weather it's the Dao De Jing or the Torah. Commentaries are filters. Useful at times but not the final word in any case. I've heard of the Huainanzi in passing before and this conversation makes me want to go look it up now (depending on the level of the language) but still...if you are going to cite the Huainanzi commentaries, you're going to have to be more specific. Nothing in the links you posted explains your point.

I believe the Chapter you quote is dealing with both the social and physiological consequences of conflicting emotion brought about by not seeing things as they actually are. . .

No. Actually, that was the chapter you linked. I would never quote that chapter in reference to this discussion as it does not seem relevant. I merely followed the links that you posted. The chapters from the Huainanzi paraphrase that chapter. I posted above both the original Chinese and also my translation. The excerpt you posted by way of link is nearly character for character the same. The differences are shown by what was not bolded. The bold print parts are the same.

both the social and physiological consequences of conflicting emotion brought about by not seeing things as they actually are. It can also easily be read as instructions for practicing zouwang. The text known as a "seed scripture" jingzi, represents a transition from one era to another in which the secret teachings of kings become the basis for daily cultivation.

That's a hell of a stretch. I posted my own translation. It's pretty explicitly a teaching on governance. Now this could be interpreted as a metaphor for governing your own self...and I often think of it this way. The Dao is fractal. It looks the same at every scale. But back to this whole "weakness" thing. You still haven't really presented any original text that suggests this is refering to physical weakness. Even the mental weakness described in the passage you linked, basically says that if you just keep people dumb and fat, they will be at peace. More flatteringly, you could say it is advise to any potential rulers/corporate managers/etc., that when peoples basic needs are met, they will not be overly concerned with abstract values and pretty much keep to themselves and do their own thing saving you a lot of trouble. It advocates a lasse faire approach to governance.

Setting aside the debate over wether it shold be seen as a guide on governance vs. as a guide to self cultivation (I can see both sides), where does it describe your concept of weakness? It's your own reference after all.