doc benway

I'm not completely clear on what you're trying to say. When you refer to "fully embracing this very personal and limited experience," are you referring to our mundane life experience in general, to the experiences of awakening in and beyond meditation, or to all of the above, or to something else? When you say "instead of trying to escape" do you mean that spiritual practice is an escape from mundane life experience or am I misinterpreting you? I would like to respond but I want to be accurate. Thanks

My answer would be yes and no. Yes because, if we assume the objective of spiritual traditions is to guide people to explore their own nature and the nature of reality, this seems to be a common objective. Presumably they are encouraging us to explore the same territory, ultimate reality. But... No because no tradition, no concept, no paradigm can capture the essence of what we are, the "truth." So when spiritual traditions give answers and explanations about "truth" they are necessarily always missing the mark; perhaps some get closer than others but none can fully capture or explain reality, only offer descriptions and approximations of varying accuracy. Each tradition is different insofar as they re using different languages and practices because that is all they are, that is all they have to offer. The "truth" you are looking for, that which traditions are attempting to indicate, is not the map, not the menu, and there is no tangible or formulable construct that is "it." Furthermore, when we have deeper experiences and understandings of "truth," what we are experiencing is unique to us as individuals insofar as our experience is that of loosening and releasing boundaries and obstacles to a fuller and deeper experience of "truth." As long as we are alive and inhabiting our particular set of sensory organs and human vehicle, we will always experience the "truth" through our particular individual lens, even when we get a glimpse of something far more pervasive and profound than this limited body, mind, and spirit. So it's not quite accurate to say it is the same among traditions or individuals. In the tradition I follow, "it" or "absolute truth" is un-imputable, unbounded, not subject to categorization or definition of any kind. The closest we can come to an "understanding" is the very personal and individual experience of the unfabricated nature of our own being but as soon as we think we get it, categorize, or name it, we've already deviated and fabricated something that is artificial. In the deepest, purest experience of the nature or essence of truth, we are still present to some degree, whether it is the sensation of the cushion, the breath, the visual field, there is always at least an atom of something personal and human present. If you think otherwise, that is just another thought, in my opinion. It is a really interesting area of discovery during meditation. Oneness would not be an acceptable answer for truth because, at least according to Advaita Vedanta, Bön and Buddhist praxis and theory, it can be relatively easily disproven as the absolute mode of being. If oneness was the true mode of existence, once one person became enlightened everyone else would be instantaneously enlightened as well. At least that's one of the arguments against oneness as the ultimate "truth." If we are "one" then having an experience of that would give me access to the thoughts and feelings of everyone else who had made similar contact. Clearly that is not the case. This is one reason why the word non-dual is often used in place of oneness. The other reason is that the concept of oneness has a degree of inherent limitation and that which is "truth" is generally considered to be without any limitation whatsoever. The experiences that give rise to the sense of oneness or nonduality as the abiding mode of being feel the way they do because we, as limited beings, are experiencing a release of some aspect of that very limitation, a transcendence of that particular obstacle to a fuller and more pervasive sense of our selves. This can be very profound, ecstatic, even destabilizing or deeply disturbing for some. Different individuals experience such transcendence in different ways because what we are experiencing is not "it" but simply the release of our unique and personal obstacles, our boundaries, that prevent us from being closer and closer to "it." Not sure if any of that makes sense but it's fun to chat about "it" once in a while.

I was not aware there have been so many deaths linked to Hof's teachings. Also had no idea about his personal demons. When I learned tummo, it was taught in a very cautious manner with all participants being closely monitored by several monks throughout the retreat. I always felt Hof was a bit careless with the way he presented these teachings to the general public. They can have profound physiological effects and not everyone is suited to the practice.

I have a close friend in Asheville. He and his family are OK. They have shelter but no power or water. The area is devastated.

I think ignorance on these subjects is arguably a great strength! There is nothing that detracts from and obstructs experiential practice like intellectual labeling and analysis. Feel what you feel, pay close attention to that, and trust in it! Connecting to our Mother Earth has great potential for developing qualities of many kinds. Label them this or that if you must, it helps communication, but keep practicing, be fully open to your authentic experience, and trust in it.

I'll offer an alternative perspective. I think there can be great value in commentary, particularly when someone is reading a translation of an ancient work coming from an unfamiliar culture and society. While the core text of the DDJ certainly is approachable and can potentially speak to anyone at any given time, I also think it is deeper than what any one of us can fathom. Some of the depth and breadth of the text can be limited by not having a clear or even rudimentary understanding of the cultural and societal context. I am currently involved in a group, slow read of a long, classic historical novel reading one chapter a day. There is public discussion and commentary going on for each chapter. While this is a historical novel and not the Dao De Jing, it certainly is pervaded by philosophical and spiritual ideas. In fact, the author was involved in translating the Dao De Jing into his native language and it shows throughout the writing. I find that I am getting a far deeper and broader appreciation and understanding of the story and the author as a result of seeing how others interpret the readings. Many things come up that I would never have considered myself. People from the author's country of origin and those more familiar with the historical context have revealed a different view of actions and characters. So while I think there is great value in studying the ancient classics on our own and interpreting the original, if we speak the language, or our preferred translation, I would not personally disregard commentaries out of hand. I do think it is important not to attach too much importance or authority to a commentary but I also feel it is equally important to not attach too much importance and authority to any writings, even the core classics. Each of us needs different and unique things at different times along our paths. It can be an obstacle to get too hung up on any particular writing, even something as amazing as the DDJ, if it is not speaking clearly to us. At times I find it important to simply. step away and remain open to the possibility that the work will make more sense when I am ready to see the meaning and revisit it in the future.

It's a small world. Gamel and I trained together in Shorinjiryu karate under Kaicho Watanabe Shunji in the 1990's. This was before he discovered Wing Chun and after I'd left Wing Chun so we never crossed paths in the Wing Chun kwoon. He was a state trooper at the time and a powerful dude and knocked me on my ass and halfway across the dojo on more than one occasion! His timing was impeccable and he had a long range. I was only able to score on him by getting in close but it was hazardous! I'm also from Grandmaster Cheung's lineage. My teacher was John Clayton. When I was in his school I was one of very few people who had a car, so I was recruited to pick up Grandmaster Cheung from the train station or airport when he'd visit for seminars. I had the good fortune to get to know him a bit and train with him - what a powerful martial artist he was! He loved ribs and greens and sweet potato pie and we'd have to take him to one particular barbecue joint in North Ave in Baltimore. It was one of the few times I felt safe hanging out on North Ave - it was a rough area in those days. Doing chi sao with GM Cheung was a revelation and listening to his stories about training with Yip Man and Bruce Lee was really inspiring, I was totally star struck. I still have the mook jong I bought from him in the 1980's though I don't train with it lately. ... Now I'm feeling inspired to set it up again! This post is bringing back some wonderful memories, thank you! I'd be interested too if anyone comes across these. I have GM Cheung's book and my notes from training with Master Clayton but never heard of this teaching. I haven't trained with my teacher for over 30 years but I still practice Sil Lim Tao regularly

Is this beautiful to you? If not, what is?

Sure, what makes you think “all the systems do Fajin the same way?” In my experience, while there are definitely important similarities, different systems emphasize different training methods and techniques which lead to different expressions of fajin.

I guess you are not very familiar with xingyiquan. Each technique has a name and an association with one of the five elements or twelve animals…

I guess all of the punches in the solo forms and 2 person sets are simply training tools and we’re not allowed to use those in a fight. Interesting point of view.

This means it is not unique to taijiquan.. at least that is how I use the word unique.

Agreed, we just need to practice really, not worry so much about the theory, whether it be ATP or force vectors. But in some sense we do need to understand how it is acquired (eg how to practice properly) and how to explain it (the practice). This is why I don't think it's necessary to worry about magic. We do the practice, we see the effects. It does not violate any laws of physics although sometimes it can be shockingly effective. More often than not that is a consequence of the perfection of timing, targeting, and taking advantage of the opponent's vulnerability. I once had a student ask me to demonstrate fajin after class. I did ji at maybe 25% of what I thought would be full power and knocked him back about six feet onto his back. I hit him harder than I expected although he was fine and really appreciated the experience. Part of it was that I was on the spot in front of a class - that gets the juices flowing... Feeling it is critical to learning what it's really all about and what direction to take your training. One method my teacher recommended is to line the walls of a small room with mattresses and practice on each other.

So we agree, fajin is not unique to taijiquan. Wing chun training does develop jin. At least I learned such methods. I studied with a student of William Cheung, Bruce Lee's kung fu brother. There may be lineages who don't share that part. Some can be secretive. Standing is necessary to cultivate 鬆 I'm not referring to leverage, I'm referring to the mind-body connection that allows us to cultivate a solid and powerful structure with minimal stiffness and maximum fluidity and responsiveness. You can feel this when pushing hands with someone who stands a lot. You can also feel it when receiving a strike or block from a xingyi or bagua practitioner. Fajin isn't only immense, it is also explosive. Yes, pushing hands is one way to practice these skills but they also develop from sensitivity and song. We also practice these in san da drills. There are analgous jin in xinigyi and bagua as well as yiquan. They take different forms, eg xingyi animal forms, bagua palm changes, etc... Yes, also from circle walking, palm changes, two person partner drills in taiji, xingyi, and bagua, sticking hands in wing chun, standing postures, etc... Agreed

Interesting to read this discussion of fajin. One thing worth mentioning is that fajin is not unique to taijiquan. It is a core technique in xingyiquan, yiquan, bajiquan, liuhebafa, baguazhang, and even wing chun. Slow motion forms are primarily found in taijiquan. On the other hand, each of these arts places emphasis, to varying degrees, on standing meditation of one sort or another. I haven't studied all of the above arts but I have trained in taiji, xingyi, bagua, and wing chun. In my own experience, standing is one of the most important ingredients in developing fajin, as well as other jin, eg. coiling, pushing, folding, hidden, wave, revolving, and so on. It seems this is because standing cultivates song, a strong yet flexible and responsive structure along with mind-body integration. Standing can also be a wonderful method of healing the body. In my experience, the power of fajin comes from the proper development of the body, listening and sensing skills, timing, whole body coordination through the waist and kua, rooting skill, and perhaps most of all, awareness, which underlies all of the above. Of course breathing is important but once one develops proper breathing habits, the breath should be forgotten, eg. allowed to breath itself. As important as breathing is, too much attention to it can be limiting or a distraction. In my opinion and experience, there is nothing magical about jin, nothing that can't be explained by physics and careful observation. The most difficult part is having the patience and persistence in practice as there are no short cuts.

My general approach is to be quiet and listen for a while. I truly want to understand others' perspectives. If I think it is worthwhile, eg they are interested and willing to listen, then I'll present my perspective. If I don't think they're really interested in hearing and considering an alternative position I will usually disengage. I have no interest in escalating. Opinions just aren't that important.

While I don't want to discourage you, I would not recommend starting with something like spontaneous qigong. Practices that are rooted in spontaneity are the most vulnerable to our feelings of self-consciousness and to distraction. For true spontaneous movement to express itself the mind needs to be calm and comfortable, resting, alert, and very open. The one technique my internal martial arts teacher suggested I always do in private was a spontaneous movement practice. While I've played around with it a bit in public, on the beach, it is indeed difficult to really let go and be fully open and sensitive in such circumstances, at least for me. I think it's better to focus on a set pattern of movement as an anchor to the attention when the surroundings have a tendency to distract.

My martial arts relationship started in grade school, about 50 years ago. I studied a Japanese style for several years, Shorinjiryu. During my college and graduate years I studied Wing Chun. When I hit ~ 40, I began my study of taiji, xingyi, and bagua - mostly taiji, and have stuck with that for the past 20 years. At this point I’ve given up any real martial training and just focus on taiji form practice and some qigong. I also try to keep up the circle walking and occasionally revisit some of my earlier styles. My main motivation now is health and fitness. Anymore I run and walk more than practicing martial arts to be honest.

I think it is something we need to approach based on our level of comfort. If the feelings of self-consciousness interfere with the ability to relax and concentrate, I would practice inside. I have gotten to the point where I am comfortable practicing qigong, zhan zhuang, and internal martial arts forms in public, I even meet up with some others and practice pushing hands occasionally in public. I recommend you practice early in the morning or after sundown as it could help with the embarrassment. Over time, as you feel more confidence in and benefit from your practice, you may be more comfortable practicing in front of others. The most important thing is to be able to really engage and focus on the practice.

One caution I want to mention is to be aware of the possibility that this sort of practice may become an abstraction, a spiritual bypass. It is easy to think we feel unconditional love and compassion for "all sentient beings" at an intellectual, conceptual level. Far more challenging to actually feel that way in the heart, in the gut, especially with people with whom we have emotional history. There are too many practitioners who love all sentient beings with all of their heart but won't talk to an estranged sibling, or get very emotionally reactive to a parent or child or an ex. One suggestion I have is to focus this sort of loving-kindness practice on those closest to us first, then it tends to be more genuine and it leads to more meaningful and tangible positive change in our lives. Start with people we really love unconditionally, or at least with fewer conditions. As we get better at it and it feels more natural, we can then extend the practice to those who challenge us, even to those we despise. The key for me is empathy. Once we can release the reactivity and feel open and warm with our family and friends, especially those who set us off, and with ourselves; it's relatively easy to love strangers, all sentient beings, but it doesn't necessarily work the other way around.

Hanging out here one might reasonably conclude the ultimate goal of neidan is to piss off Dao Bums!

Chemistry is cool, so is physics!

Here is an excerpt from one of CP's papers that has a nice discussion of the mechanics of fajin: https://medcraveonline.com/IJCAM/a-scientific-perspective-of-neijin-internal-strength.html#:~:text=Explosive release of,liveliness of maneuverability. For me, his description of the mechanics is in line with my experience and shows a clear synthesis of physics and neuroscience in examining taijiquan and neijin magic.

I studied taijiquan with CP Ong in the Washington DC area for a time. CP is a dedicated practitioner and disciple of Chen Xiaowang and Chen Zhenglei and a great guy. His background is in mathematics and he is committed to examining the mechanics of taiji techniques and effects. Check out this link with his publications, you may find some of them interesting: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Cp-Ong-2

One thing I've learned is that it is one thing to have an insight and another to put it into words and practice. Yet another to share it with someone who does not have an appropriate frame of reference to easily understand. Your "teacher" friend, could have had a deep and penetrating insight and still struggle to contextualize it and find it's proper place in their practical affairs and metaphysics. Insight is instantaneous but how it informs and manifests in our lives can play out in many ways over time, at least that has been my experience and observation. On the other hand, they may be trying to find a connection in admittedly disparate paradigms without that insight which would likely lead to a mess...