ChiDragon

When the terms were used such as "internal" or external" in martial arts, the implication was actually referred or emphasized to the inside or outside the body. In this case, the purpose of Chi Kung is to enhance the function and physical structure of the body without any external instrument. Therefore, it was classified as internal practice(內功, Neigong). However, if the practitioner use something to pound on any part of the body or vice versa, then it would be classified as external practice(外功, Weigong). Edited to add: PS.... Kung Fu is classified as external because of the fast movement techniques which cause fatigue due to the exhaustion after practice.

The inhale/exhale aspect is only about breathing. It is only part of the Chi Kung process. It seems that someone only has a minute or no knowledge about the cultivation of Chi Kung and its purpose. Perhaps there were too much misleading information out there. The notion of "internal" is really not emphasized on inhalation. The main idea is really about the cultivation of the "internal" of the body rather than breathing. Indeed, breathing is only an aiding process to get to the final result "inside" the body. The "inside" is the real thought for the "internal" of the body.

The books were burnt and scholars were buried alive. The only book that was not burnt is the Yi Jing(易經) because there was no political contents. For sure we don't know was the original of the TTC burnt or not. Certainly, there is no sight of it.

I would like to think that the truth is my truth but not my own truth. Knowing the truth will guide me through a proper path to know what the fallacies are. Knowing my own truth will lead me to self destruction.

I have his book: A complete guide to Chi Kung. IMO This book has good information and he did an excellent job in translating the Chinese terms. He may look old but his voice sound pretty healthy to me. I wouldn't judge the book by its jacket. I would use his book as a good reference. So far, I think he is the most knowledgeable person about Chi Kung as a westerner. He knows what he is talking about. In the back of the book, it says he studied and practiced Chinese medicine for over twenty years.

What is that mean.......???

Based on this definition, Chi Kung is all internal and there is nothing external about it.

It didn't make it any clearer but worse....!!! No wonder it was so confusing because people are believing anything online is true and thought it was gospel.

No sex at all, ascetic and celibate.

Chi Kung(氣功) is to learn how to breathe properly for the body to function most effectively. When one can learn to breathe until the breath has "sunken to the low dan tian(氣沈丹田)" or abdominal breathing, it was considered to be that one has been reached the goal of the ultimate method of breathing. Once the goal of Chi Kung was accomplished, one can start the Neigong(內功) practice. Neigong is to increase the internal body strength. Hence, Chi Kung is the prerequisite for Neigong. One cannot go to the Neigong stage without the know how of Chi Kung.

No, my guess is that the original copy of the TTC was burnt by 秦始皇(The emperor of Qin who unified China). Those are not burn were buried underground in somebody's grave. However, we can only try to prove that a complete copy was written before Zhuang Zi by digging into the historic classics.

May I ask what kind of physical or mental activity were you doing in those early hours....???

No problem, it was my pleasure and you are welcome!

Chapter 2, only, in all the versions after the MWD-B version. For examples, Heshang Gong(河上公), Wang Bi(王弼), and Fu Yi(傅奕).

Of course, the Guodian version is much older than both the Mawangdui versions. Please note that all the versions have the character 盈, except Chapter 2 was changed. Thus the significance of the older versions will reveal the authenticity of the TTC.

One wouldn't be surprised how significant that the unearthed copies of both MWD-A and MWD-B were to native scholars. For example, if there is a most knowledgeable scholar about the Tao Te Ching, then it would be Mr. Chen Ku Ying(陳鼓應). Chen Ku-ying, born in 1935, people of changting County, Fujian province. Taiwan University philosophy department and Graduate Institute of philosophy. Former Taiwan University Professor of philosophy and Professor of philosophy at Peking University, United States, University of California, Berkeley, campus researchers, Czech Charles University, visiting Professor, East Asian Department, There is a phrase in Chapter 2 of all other versions, except MWD-A and MWD-B, has been bothering him for years. 高下相傾: High and low(levels of class) are mutually lean toward each other. In MWD-A and MWD-B: 高下相盈: High and low are mutually encompass each other. 盈 is the only character that was change in all other versions of the TTC because of the emperor name taboo. Most of the people just took it for granted and came up with ambiguous interpretations. However, it was not the case with Prof. Chen Ku Ying. After the unearthed copies of MWD-A and MWD-B. it had been cleared up the air for Mr. Chen Ku Ying and put his mind at ease. He had corrected his received version of the TTC by restoring the character 盈 in its rightful place. Note: The high and low were referring to the two different level class of people.

Yes, the Seal Script, that was what I meant by script. At least, it was in written form which indicates what had been said within a time period. It can be used to compare as reference in the future. Right now, there is a modern received version which had been corrected by incorporating all the errors found by the past and modern scholars in a logical manner. As a matter of fact, the modern Received Version was using both the MWD-A and MWD-B as reference and baseline for the corrections by the knowledgeable native scholars. The idea was that both versions were the oldest copies of the TTC and accumulated less errors in its time. Any version after that would have had been picking up more errors which was introduced by future scholars.

The script was used is very important. At the time, it had established a baseline and cut off the oral communication of what had been said before. At least we know where do we stand, at that time, with the TTC. For example, since the MWD-A was written down on silk to prevent from further contamination and confusion, it will lock in whatever was said in the past. Anything after that we can compare it with MWD-A. As with the MWD-B, we knew it was copied and revised from MWD-A during the Han Dynasty for sure. Furthermore, any version after both MWD-A and MWD-B had indicated that they are still holding the integrity of the fundamental concepts, even though, with a few minor alterations.

Let me look into that.....!!! PS.... I would buy that all other documents were written based on the Yi Jing(易經), but not from Zhuang Zi. PPS..... Instead of using the styles of the characters, let approach it with the writing style of Lao Zi. The way of his expression with words. Of course, one can say anyone can imitate his style of writing. However, it may be so but to make everything to be consistent with his thoughts from chapter to chapter and thought for thought might be difficult.

This is called 蒃書(seal style) which the MWD-A of the TTC was used. This 隸書(official style), originated in the Han Dynasty, which the MWD-B of the TTC was used. FYI....... There were 81 chapters in the MWD-A and MWD-B. Besides, Zhuang Zi was written in other styles than the previous two. Hence, both copies of the TTC could not and cannot be produced from the philosophy of Zhuang Zi(庄子).

I doubt that he had a thorough research in "It was said that people took his philosophy and put it into a book from whatever material they had from the man (or people) himself." Otherwise, he wouldn't have had made such generalization. IMO Even one who doesn't read the Classics would be able to come up with a conclusion, more precisely. Indeed, it can be determined based on the style of the characters that was used for each document.

oh.....yeah He is going to rewrite the Chinese history pretty soon.

Sorry for the belated response. It seems like there is a fallacy in the OP. I would like to clarify why people get light-headed when start learning Chi Kung from books without know the basic fundamental principle about breathing. Chi Kung is the ultimate method of breathing but one must know how to get there. The goal of Chi Kung is to train oneself to be able to do deep breathing constantly without being light-headed or any other symptoms. At the beginning of Chi Kung practice, some people have problem with breathing which cannot do AB right a way. However, they need to learn to breathe slowly and progressively deep down to the belly. For those who don't know, it is impossible for one to jump right into deep breathing without getting some kind of abnormal symptom like light head and high blood pressure. The light head was caused by a large amount of oxygen rushed into the brain all the sudden. Thus the brain gets more oxygen than it needs, that is why one gets light headed. The high blood pressure was caused by the poor circulation due to the abnormal breathing rhythm at the time.

Some people were making the assumption that some of the chapters of the TTC were written after Lao Zi's death. Actually, the Tao Te Ching was written way ahead of Zhuang Zi's time. Later, Zhuang Zi has cited the TTC with more elaborated explanations on the principles of Tao than Lao Zi did. Another words, Lao Zi defines Tao; and Zhuang Zi explains the principles of Tao.

No, I don't see any added value in the Concubine version(Fu Yi). In the Fu Yi version, both characters 盈 and 滿 were used. Also, Fu Yi used lots of phonetics which doesn't change the original meanings of the phrases. On some phrases, Fu Yi changed a few character which may or may not change the original meaning of the phrases. In Chapter 20, the original phrase: 如嬰兒之未孩(seems like an infant hasn't been laughed yet.) Fu Yi's version: 如嬰兒之未咳(seems like an infant hasn't been coughed yet.) From a scholar's point of view, the Fu Yi version seems has lots of errors.