doc benway

You can also call it Ting Jin 聽勁 Listening Energy

Thanks for posting that video Immortal4Life. I did get the reference to Yi. I have to say, however, that we need to take such video demonstrations with a very large grain of salt (and I recognize that this is not why you posted it). Much of the "fajin" in that video was the younger student making the older master look good. He was being a good demo partner, not an opponent. You cannot really know if what you are seeing in a video is fajin or not. You can certainly feel the difference, however.

And by then, you no longer need them! Thanks for that...

All that means is that his method of no-method didn't spark in you a journey of self discovery. That's OK. It did for me. Similarly, I do not get excited by the endless debates in Buddhism and all the dogma. But again, that's just me. Buddhas are Buddhas and heroes are heroes mostly because of distance. We are all human. Even deeply realized humans bring their human traits, weaknesses, and unique characteristics along with them in life. So Krishnamurti, being very intellectual, expresses his realization in a dry, intellectual, and detatched way. Ramana, being loving and joyful, expresses his in a very loving way by directly communicating love and one-ness. UG Krishnamurti, being a curmudgeon, expresses his in a cranky, depressing way. Osho and Gurdjieff, being opportunists, expressed theirs in that way through control, and so on.... All men who saw beyond the veil to some degree or other, IMO, but humans nonetheless. I daresay that had Gautama lived in our century, we would all think of him very differently. We can guess at what Gautama, Lao Zi, and Jesus may have been like as men (if in fact, they existed) but one thing I think is for sure, they would probably surprise us. I feel that it is exactly because we know the contemporary "spiritual leaders" as the men they are (were) that they are nothing more than that.... yet.

It's good to hear that we are more or less on the same page, we usually are. And I agree with your characterization of the subtleties and purpose inherent in the "trappings" in every religion. They're generally there for a reason, although sometimes the reasons are lost in time. Anthony Demello tells a wonderful story about this, too long for me to recall or repeat here. Trappings and ritual are not necessarily a bad thing, nor necessarily a good thing. Sadly, they are more often a security blanket than a stimulus to spiritual growth. IME, it is the student who determines the ultimate success or failure, not the method. The astute student will succeed with any reasonably credible method, or no method. The poor student is unlikely to succeed under any circumstances. My main point, however, was a cautionary one - it is a slippery slope to accept as truth, something that is offered by the guru. Then one gives up the responsibility for doing the work. If something cannot be personally, independently verified, probably best to just say "I don't know" Better to not know than to believe, IMO.

That would have been antithetical to his message. His message was that there is no method, no path to truth. His message was exactly the message of Gautama Buddha, minus the methodology. See the mind for what it is, do not attempt to use the mind to understand that which is beyond the mind, do not accept what the guru tells you as truth, see the truth directly through diligent self investigation. No problem for me.... you?

Do you really think that every Buddhist does the work? Even most? I'd buy some at best. People are fundamentally lazy. Most don't have the patience or perseverance to "do the work." Most are looking for a spiritual environment where they can feel comfy and secure and meet friends and so on. They want to be told everything will be OK if you do x, y, and z, and if you say this prayer and light this candle you will be fine. To the extent that one has personal experience with the Bardos of dying, dharmata, and becoming, they are actuality. To the extent that one has accepted concepts proposed by religious doctrine, it is dogma. And this is not limited to the Bardo states. I agree that one of the most beautiful aspects of Buddhism is that absolutely everything should be personally investigated and experienced first hand before accepted. This is why I consider Jiddu Krishnamurti the consummate Buddhist. His message is exactly the message of the Buddha, minus the trappings. Look at your thought and see it for what it is. Don't accept any dogma or teachings unless you can personally verify them. He never made any attempt to name or discuss whatever it may be that is beyond thought - he always left us to do the work. Unfortunately, most people are too lazy to do the work. They would rather believe than experience.

I'd like to second that. When I started to explore Daoism, I found the classics to be impossible to comprehend. It still takes time and patience for me to penetrate what is being offered. I love how Osho talks about Lao Zi, Zhuang Zi, and Lie Zi in his books. He refers to Lao Zi as a radical and very challenging but also as "the master key."

2. I agree with mythmaker. Song is critical to sensitivity. Too much tension and there is no sensitivity. Song is not "really just relaxation of the muscles." Then you would be flaccid and collapsed. It is a very complex relationship between mind and body where the muscles are as relaxed as possible while still maintaining the buoyancy and roundness of posture that is necessary. Song is one of the most difficult things to perfect. It also has to do with the fourth dimension, time. Vigilance is necessary but there is more to Ting Jin (sensitivity) than vigilance. 3. To start later and arrive earlier has more to do with Yi and one Qi than anything else.

I have to disagree. Yi is in every Tai Ji Classic except one. In Xing Yi Quan, Yi refers to the martial intent that is expressed through the Xing or form. It's used very differently from Tai Ji Quan.

Many thanks for the wonderful compliment. I love Tai Ji Quan and get very passionate when I talk about it. Yi is one of the things that makes Tai Ji Quan what it is. The masters would say that if you are not using the Yi to guide the Qi then you are not doing Tai Ji Quan. It is said "use Qi instead of Li, and use Yi instead of Qi." Yi 意 has always been defined by my teacher as "mind of intent" - it is our conscious awareness and intention. The reason that every Tai Ji Quan style has slow motion forms is to develop the integration between the Yi, the Qi, and the body. In the beginning, you learn the physical movements and all you should concentrate on is getting the movements correct with good posture, natural breathing, proper footwork, and so on. Once the basic physical movements are comfortable and accurate, usually after 1 -2 years, you can start working on integrating the Yi. Yi is talked about extensively in the Tai Ji Quan Classics. One of the basic techniques that defines proper form practice is to learn to "use the Yi to guide the Qi." I find this very tough to describe in words but I'll try. First you learn to focus your attention on different areas of the body, internally. Most start at the lower dan tian as it is the easiest. Once students can feel the lower dan tian, I'll teach them to feel 氣沉丹田, Qi Chen Dan Tian, that means the Qi returns or sinks to Dan Tian. Once this can be experienced the student is ready to begin to use the Yi to lead the Qi. It is a matter of using your awareness to feel and guide the Qi as it moves through the body during practice of the form. It can only be done when you are relaxed (鬆 Song), quiet (靜 JIng), and moving naturally (自然 Zi Ran) which is why these three characteristics are said to be the requirements of proper Tai Ji form practice. Over time, you develop a very heightened awareness of the Qi moving in the body and using the Yi to guide it becomes second nature, almost automatic. Sort of like moving your index finger. I decide to move my finger and it moves - no hesitation. I don't have to think about it really, I have the intention to move it - voila, it moves. Eventually, the Yi controls our physical movements in Tai Ji Quan in this way. First very slowly in the form. Then it must be brought into pushing hands and, eventually, self defense practice. The other component to this is Daoist meditation techniques, neigong. Daoist methods are designed to develop a high level of skill at working with the Yi. So my teacher has always said that until you practice Daoist meditation, your Tai Ji Quan skill will be limited. It is only through higher levels of development of the Yi through meditation that the higher levels of Tai Ji Quan can be accessed. I agree with this based on my own experience. The classics also talk about making the Qi in the body continuous - one Qi. That is, there is an awareness throughout the body of the Qi which is unbroken. Combining the Yi, which is instantaneous control, with the Qi, which is continuous throughout the body, is what creates very fast reaction time and seemingly superhuman speed. It's not magic, it's practice and patience.

I know this wasn't directed at me but I'd like to toss something out there. Try bringing that same quality of open-ness and awareness in the present moment into relationships. Try this the next time you are with someone you are in a relationship with (spouse, lover, close friend). Try to let go everything you think, assume, know, or take for granted about that person. Be with them as if with a stranger - not literally, you don't need to pretend you don't know their name for example. But recognize that we create an image or a story in our heads about people and then we assume that the image is what that person is. Do you know what I mean? So really look at them. Look at things you usually ignore - her knees, her ears, her back, hair, clothes, whatever. And really listen to his/her voice, not just the words. Is it deep, scratchy, nervous, sexy? Really pay attention to everything about that person that you can, and everything around you, and also how you feel inside, and what your thoughts are doing. It's difficult and takes a lot of practice but you may be very surprised. You may feel like you are meeting this person for the first time. And you are! I do the same with nature, when I'm driving, with my work. It's a very different experience of life. The way our minds work is to create images. We then make decisions and behave in a certain way based on those images. So I meet someone and within seconds, I think I know that person based on their gender, age, race, appearance, etc... This is an important survival skill but it is not effective in establishing and maintaining relationships. And we similarly create an image of ourselves. So my relationship with you really doesn't exist. My image of myself interacts with my image of you in my head and I call that a relationship. If you learn to really let go of these images, stories, and preconceptions, then you will make a true connection - with nature, with other people, and most importantly, with yourself. There will be real relationship. That is the basis of love.

When I consider the size of the universe and the number of stars and planets it contains, I suspect there is plenty of intelligent life out there. In terms of why we have not yet found evidence or made contact, I have no clue. The truth remains to be seen. Question - given the "footprint" we currently have in the universe, how close would another civilization of our level of technological advancement need to be to detect us?

Excellent point. I wanted to emphasize that Tai Ji Quan is not necessarily about being physically faster or stronger. When you train the Yi to guide the Qi, then you can be pretty fast because the Yi moves faster than light.

Ahhh, but there's the rub. I don't know what I'm trying to convey. It is unknowable. I just create an image then capture that image in a word. I have no idea what that represents - I think I know because I've been conditioned to accept the image as a suitable substitute for whatever it represents. But when talking about things like emptiness, there is no knowing.

Perhaps a better word would have been emptiness or void.... that was the intent. In the end, just words.

Tai Ji Quan can definitely improve speed and reaction time, especially if you combine it with Daoist meditation techniques. In addition, it's important to see that I do not have to move faster than my opponent to "launch later, arrive sooner." Often I simply need to move more efficiently. So, for example, i see (or feel) my opponent begin to attack my left side with his right arm. But I also know that my right arm is in a position to attack his left side. So I may be able to neutralize his attack by striking his vulnerable side before he fully executes his attack. No matter how fast I am, there is always faster. No matter how strong I am, there is stronger. So I think it's important to see how to be efficient, rather than faster or stronger.

If you come across the pond and DON'T get in touch, I will be seriously hurt!

I agree with you. To call it an illusion is holding onto a view, an image, a definition of what life is. It implies that I think I know something about the nature of being. That is false. Best to just smile. Hehehe!

I agree with you. I wonder if it is also possible to be both - can we look at the world as fresh and interesting and yet bring our wisdom, experience, and practicality to the situation whenever necessary? I don't think it's either/or. I think it is finding the balance of both and being skillful in this. Still - your experiences with "love" and the way I'm using that word are different so discussions regarding relationship and love are tricky.

Dogma is the established doctrine of a religion. Religionists take their dogma very seriously, I assure you. Tibetan Buddhists are very dogmatic when it comes to the bardo states and all such constructs surrounding death and transitions. All of this is laid out in great detail. You may say this is not dogma or dogmatic but I think that would be disingenuous. Then again, the way our minds work is such that what I believe is truth, what you believe is dogma. Why do we take life and death so seriously? I think there should be equal measures of seriousness and levity. Because in the end, it is all an illusion anyway, isn't it?

There is a difference between being childlike and childish. Childlike is to maintain the wonder and curiosity of the young. It does not mean to give up the wisdom and experience of maturity. Being childish is more along the lines of immaturity and irresponsibility. One of the most fundamental characteristics of the Daoist sage is to be childlike, as such she is closer to the Dao. It is our conditioning and images that takes us away from our nature.

Or non-localized attention although that is very challenging and I can only manage it for very short bursts.

Which is that?