Martial Development

You can pay the money, and take the class, just like everyone else. And if you don't like these terms, then GTFO and STFU. Is there anything wrong with this response? Too suspicious maybe? How about if Lebron James refused to come over to your backyard for a game of horse? What would that prove? Well, if you're a basketball legend in your own mind, I guess it proves everything. I once challenged the Amazing Randi to recite the alphabet, and he never responded. Can you explain that, Sherlock Holmes? Um...prove it? Here is exhibit A for your case.

Martial arts history isn't worth the paper it was never written on. And Bagua doesn't have a patent on spiraling motion. If you want to credit a source for that, you'll have to go back to Og the Caveman. Since martial arts history doesn't require evidence, I'll just go ahead and assert that there is no way that Aikido was derived from Baguazhang.

I don't know much about Sai Baba, but I remember the outline of a funny expose I read about him years ago. A reporter went undercover as a spiritual seeker. Sai Baba gave him a "special" and "personal" mantra to practice, with the instruction that is was not to be shared. The reporter decided to share the mantra regardless, and then found that other people had been given the exact same story. He felt cheated--but who cheated who? Did the seeker believe that he was special? Is it Sai Baba's fault that the seeker was only as special as everyone else, that is to say, not special at all? And who sets the rules for how spiritual teachers should conduct themselves (among consenting adults), anyway? Is it Hollywood? The Vatican? Congress?

The answer to #2 is also no, IMO. Push hands is about deception (among other things). If your partner is bad, they may want to appear good, and vice-versa. As a general rule of thumb, you can't measure the skill of someone with more skill than you.

Good story. I knew a traveling Qigong master who was asked to see a local man in dire straits--dangerously, hysterically happy. Treatment? While the patient was laughing, the master snuck up behind, and just smacked him silly! He had lots of great stories like this. When seeing patients in his local office, he would sometimes drag out his laptop and play the mp3 love theme from Titanic while staring at them from across the room.

To paraphrase the Daodejing: it is better to be loved than to be feared, and better still to remain hidden in plain sight. Honestly, one is better off without the attention of violent and unstable strangers, be it warm or otherwise.

Two good videos. The first two, I mean. I shouldn't comment on the last two.

I carry a tactical spork at all times.

I stand by my statement, that you can't make a fair rule against spam without providing a definition. To call something "spam" in 2010, is merely to say you don't like it.

I see nothing more than a failure by the moderators to set clear, consistent and prominent guidelines for the members to follow. And at this point, to do anything other than fix those guidelines would be an inappropriate response. Let's not start "counting pieces of flair" here, mmkay? -bXHPqj3NcI

Avatar tells people what they want to hear. Does that make it a great film? Or propaganda? The planet's pagan natives are simple and pure. Yeah, they are kinda spiritual in a non-specific, non-threatening way. Yet they possess neither sufficient wisdom nor power to repel a tiny army. And Lo! A lone Caucasian appears, to lead them to victory! He sacrifices himself for the people, only to rise from the dead at the closing credits! It's a story we've never heard before!

Well, let's see what you know... Have you given your house, or your car, or your job, or your wife to beggars? No? But you are offering to sacrifice all that for the secrets of inner power? No again? OK, but you can criticize those who have made those sacrifices--because they are, in your view, too greedy? Sure! And that's what you know!

So many people come to these forums asking for access to information, and offering nothing meaningful in return. Like spoiled children. When that doesn't work, they cunningly debate "how things ought to be" while hoping for the same result. Others give up, immediately or after a few months of futile practice; and having no discernible abilities themselves, half believe they've officially seen it all, while the other half wants to ensure that nobody rises above them. Through struggle and sacrifice, some get injured. A few get the skills, and only then realize they actually wanted something else! How many of these characters actually know themselves? If they don't know, then why even bother to ask them? Destiny!

Demons are not a problem, aliens are not a problem, government spooks and their technology are not a problem, and the world's denial of their existence is not a problem. Your inability to live your life regardless, is your one and only problem. . . . That, and maybe reading this forum. Seriously, some of these folks are totally crazy!

Yes, probably a good idea to see a professional rather than, or in addition to seeking help from the Internet. In the meantime, you might ponder the relationship between your idealism and "demonic forces". Consider their stances towards the world-as-it-is. Many of the "successful" New Age idealists today are psychotic. It's just that they are also rich, so nobody cares. Unfortunately, you are not rich, so...

I'm sure that is the only method Hume really knows (or thinks he does), so he talks about it, and leaves the rest for someone else to talk about. That would be wise. Unintentionally so, maybe, but I'll take it regardless. I'd guess half of the people who now feel compelled to stand up for Buddhism, know no more about real Buddhism than Hume does, and even less about Christianity. So should we be angry with them too? Or is it OK to speak out of turn, if you are insisting that everything is equal?

How could someone who intends to learn from a book themselves, condemn him for this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vajra_Mushti

It could be argued they are two sides of the same coin..... or two faces of an object with many different sides to it. That only works on paper. If it were true, then James Randi would have more gongfu than all the people on this forum. It isn't remotely true. Really? Why exactly do we need to do that? Why do we need to go digging through their manure pile for a lonely piece of grain, as if that were the last meal in town? Everybody who does that has a complex.

A few weeks ago, Drew Hempel kindly agreed to an interview for my site. I have published the last of it today. Please enjoy... http://www.martialdevelopment.com/blog/qig...mpel-interview/ drew_hempel_spring_forest_qigong.pdf

I heard it right, but it ain't right. Searching for truth (my impression of the common agenda here) is NOT the same thing as trying to expose frauds. These folks consider themselves to be the watchmen of the martial arts world, but they do not enjoy being watched themselves! In the words of Geoff Thompson, "a stabber rarely shows and a shower rarely stabs." It is just another funny contrast between the real world and the world of Bullshido, where nothing is real unless it is proven on multiple forum members.

Circle of Iron: Bruce Lee's Lost Movie The levels in the tower correspond to the spiritual obstacles in Lee's original vision and script.

I haven't finished learning the systems I inherited. When I have done that, maybe I'll start thinking about how I want to change them. When I've done that, maybe I'll start thinking about how this new system can be communicated accurately over the Internet. After all that is done, I'll be happy to contribute to your project, maybe. Right now I'm kinda busy. Hey, why not just do the whole project in Esperanto? Then it will be oh-so-unique, and everyone will flock to learn it!

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200911/brownlee-h1n1