WHAT DO YOU THINK?

[effilang]

Because I feel like it.

 

That is the lack of honor and integrity within a Martial Artist. To knowingly take advantage of someone less capable, for the sake of satisfying "personal feelings".

 

We do not study the Martial Arts (internally or externally) to "show off" or be "offensive" aimlessly. It is the first rule thought in any respectable school...

Edited January 3, 2010 by effilang

[Sloppy Zhang]

That is the lack of honor and integrity within a Martial Artist. To knowingly take advantage of someone less capable, for the sake of satisfying "personal feelings".

 

We do not study the Martial Arts to "show off" or be "offensive" aimlessly. It is the first rule though in any school...

 

The second I wrote that I knew you were going to say that (no offense, but that's the kind of cut and paste response I've seen everywhere from all kinds of, no offense, frauds), and that's not the message I wanted to convey, which is why I immediately changed my answer.

 

Honestly, your answer wants to make me puke. That type of answer is what is used as an excuse for everything under the sun.

 

"Do you spar?" "No because we want to keep the honor and integrity of these killing techniques."

 

"Do you compete?" "No because we want to keep the honor and integrity of these real techniques."

 

Yang Luchan competed, his son, Yang Banhou competed. The Chens traveled all over the place and competed. Research any number of internal martial arts masters, they ALL participated in REAL fights, on the "street" or in the "ring", in PUBLIC matches that were viewed by MANY against real challengers who could actually test their skills (as opposed to a bunch of out of shape students who don't know what they are doing) Do you think that they had less honor and integrity than a bunch of fat, out of shape people going around spouting that nonsense?

 

Again, let me reiterate that I have the utmost respect for martial arts and the martial artists who practice them.... but it is a sad fact that statements such as your have brought DIShonor to the martial arts, and have compromised their integrity.

 

Earlier you talked about a doughnut maker and an archer, and how they can't compete because they believe two different things. Well an MMAist believes he can fight and competes and so his fighting techniques have integrity. An IMAist also believes he can fight, so should be able to match the same standard, NO EXCUSES.

Edited January 3, 2010 by Sloppy Zhang

[goldisheavy]

A brute man can damage someones liver with a punch.

 

A likewise brute man, who studied the internal arts can not only cause the same damage with a physical punch, but also heal that liver afterwards and balance it's energy and reduce the side effects of that damage.

 

One is only cultivated internally, the other externally. If a man believes with all his heart that he makes the best donuts in the world, while another believes with all his heart that he is the best archer in the world. You can't expect to put both of them in a ring, give one guy donuts and the other guy a drawn bow and expect the baker to win, just because he has STRONG intent and belief. Is is WHAT you believe in also and what you practice that matters and internal power to me, is greater than external.

 

The limited extent to which the every day MMA professionals' mind is cultivated, only goes as far as the intent they have trained over the years to help the mind overcome the body and push the muscles harder.

 

Water need not go through the still rock, but simply envelops it and streams around it effortlessly. The rock may believe to be strong and unmovable, with big muscles and a strong mind to push those muscles further and harder against the water, but the water cares not of this... and soon enough the rock is eroded.

 

This is a very naive understanding of what I actually said. A man who makes doughnuts understands that they are not intended for fighting. The intent of a doughnut is to enjoy food and maybe to fill your belly.

 

Another way to look at it is to define winning. If you take the doughnut guy's idea of winning, winning is when there is something tasty in your mouth. In that case, after eating 1 arrow, the archer will lose the fight. And a doughnut guy will eat his doughnut and win. Do you understand now?

 

Of course if winning is defined as getting the body of your opponent pierced, then the archer will win. It's not just the strength of the belief, but it's quality that matter. The intent matters. Are doughnuts intended for fighting? For winning battles? What if you feed someone a poisoned doughnut? Can the archer defend against this possibility? There are lots of subtleties in this.

 

So if you go back and try to re-read what I said, but with real understanding this time, I think you'll benefit.

[effilang]

The second I wrote that I knew you were going to say that (no offense, but that's the kind of cut and paste response I've seen everywhere from all kinds of, no offense, frauds), and that's not the message I wanted to convey, which is why I immediately changed my answer.

 

Those emotions and ideas that arise first tend to be the most sincere. Those there after, are just to please the world.

 

I take no offense. I am flattered that you assumed i hold true to such respectable creeds.

These are words i will teach my children and hope they have the insight and wisdom to pass it onto theirs.

 

And i hope they "copy and paste" it till the end of time.

[Sloppy Zhang]

Those emotions and ideas that arise first tend to be the most sincere. Those there after, are just to please the world.

 

I take no offense. I am flattered that you assumed i hold true to such respectable creeds.

These are words i will teach my children and hope they have the insight and wisdom to pass it onto theirs.

 

And i hope they "copy and paste" it till the end of time.

 

Read my edited post, I included what I initially planned to write, but erased at the last minute, if you want to see some emotions and ideas that arise first.

 

There's not much more that I can say. I have said the same things in other threads in the past. I can't do much more.

 

All I can say is that, I've been involved in martial arts nearly my entire life. I have met some great people along the way, very skilled and awesome, trustworthy, and honorable people one could ever hope to meet... but I have been the victim of any number of martial arts frauds, and I have been put out thousands of dollars to afford schools and traveling to schools so that I could find, and learn from, the "real deal".

 

The kind of stuff you are saying is the same thing those frauds say. In the end, as they say, the proof is in the pudding. Martial arts masters of old routinely proved their metal. You cannot imagine how surprised I was when I compared what some of my martial arts instructors said to what some of the founders and top students of those arts said.

 

There is no comparison. You have to fight. Period. If you don't fight, you are kidding yourself, and worse, you are fooling others. There is no honor or integrity in that AT ALL.

Edited January 3, 2010 by Sloppy Zhang

[goldisheavy]

This reminds me of a quote I read in Pavel Tsatsouline's book:

 

A man asks, "Who is stronger, a whale or an elephant?"

 

Reply: "Where? On land or in water?"

 

There is no such thing as being absolutely stronger. All types of contests depend on conditions. Some of these conditions are subtle, the ones in the mind. They are powerful and real conditions and very few people understand them. But don't delude yourself: even someone who doesn't consciously study the conditions of their own mind, still has those conditions working for them subconsciously. So someone who has mastered their own mind does not get an automatic win.

 

There is a reality even higher than this, but in the higher reality there is no fighting and no contests are even possible, so it's not worth describing the higher reality in a thread about fighting contests.

[effilang]

This is a very naive understanding of what I actually said. A man who makes doughnuts understands that they are not intended for fighting. The intent of a doughnut is to enjoy food and maybe to fill your belly.

 

Another way to look at it is to define winning. If you take the doughnut guy's idea of winning, winning is when there is something tasty in your mouth. In that case, after eating 1 arrow, the archer will lose the fight. And a doughnut guy will eat his doughnut and win. Do you understand now?

 

Of course if winning is defined as getting the body of your opponent pierced, then the archer will win. It's not just the strength of the belief, but it's quality that matter. The intent matters. Are doughnuts intended for fighting? For winning battles? What if you feed someone a poisoned doughnut? Can the archer defend against this possibility? There are lots of subtleties in this.

 

So if you go back and try to re-read what I said, but with real understanding this time, I think you'll benefit.

 

You are looking at the donut but only see through the hole and are missing the donut itself ...

Whether it is a donut or not.

 

The point which you didn't get (and the only point i was trying to convey), is that the power of "intent and belief" alone does not predict who will yield and who will overcome, but it is "what" they believe in.

 

Two people can believe just as strong in something they hold true, but in a battle one man goes home and the other does not.

 

I will leave it to the imagination for you to decide who that man or "thing" or "concept" is, because ME... i have already made my points and have nothing more i can say without reiterating the same points.

 

I respectfully decline from this conversation.

 

Much love & blessings _/\_

 

PS: Sloppy Zhang: I did not say a martial artist does not compete. They compete on defined levels eg: External vs External, Internal vs Internal - Not external vs internal, for money or publicity or "personal" feelings.

It is a matter of responsibility and integrity and appreciation of skill and the pursuit of skill.

 

To become better at a certain skill or craft you have to learn (in this case practise or fight) with someone who is either EQUALLY as good at the same skill OR... BETTER.

 

So, feeling all great about your power and stepping into a ring against an external martial artist with a skill that can only be acquired through internal practice, which you're clearly aware overcomes the external opponent, well, is just showing off and not the point of martial arts - certainly not on a personal and spiritual level, maybe for financial reasons if you're down on your luck, sure knock yourself out. It is hardly honorable though and you aught to stop as soon as possible. But thats a matter of integrity.

Edited January 3, 2010 by effilang

[goldisheavy]

In the end, as they say, the proof is in the pudding. Martial arts masters of old routinely proved their metal. You cannot imagine how surprised I was when I compared what some of my martial arts instructors said to what some of the founders and top students of those arts said.

 

There is no comparison. You have to fight. Period. If you don't fight, you are kidding yourself, and worse, you are fooling others. There is no honor or integrity in that AT ALL.

 

I agree with this 100%. Even if you don't care about your own life, and thus don't feel any danger by staking your very life on a delusion, it is still just silly. We need to be honest about what we are doing. If anything, spiritual people, and people who cultivate any kind of qi, should be even more honest than normal, not less.

 

But while we don't see any internal artists in an MMA match, do we see any MMA guys in a leitai tournament? As it stands, there is really no civil way to resolve this issue. That's why if you must know the answer, simply must know it and cannot accept not knowing it, you have no choice but to fight (with full intent to do harm) any and all internal artists you come across who make amazing claims about their invincibility or whatnot. Since internal artists will often refuse to fight in a civil manner, the only way you can get an answer about their ability is to punch them straight in the head. And frankly, if you know any internal artist that makes loud and consistent claims, I think they deserve to be knocked out.

 

The point which you didn't get (and the only point i was trying to convey), is that the power of "intent and belief" alone does not predict who will yield and who will overcome, but it is "what" they believe in.

 

Actually it does predict. You just don't know what it means. You have no idea what a belief really is and how it manifests.

Edited January 3, 2010 by goldisheavy

[mjjbecker]

Yeah after I wrote it I kinda realized it was pointless.After all this is a forum on which we discuss fa-jing, people jumping over houses,putting Mike Tyson under, also the beneficial health effects of qi-gung.If it works for those things why not fighting? It's just before embarking onto a path[internal arts] I'd like some certainty about the results of said path, especially when the internal arts can take years to have mastery.And since I already know how to fight wasting time on developing chi fighting effects which might not work on strangers is losing time and delusional.

 

Experience is king yet it doesn't always have to be your experience, after all I don't need to contract hiv to know its treadful effects.Parents,teachers give others the benefit of their wisdom based on experience yet somtimes a child will not listen only to realize later that the parent was correct.A path of experience based upon definite results, like modern western disciplines is what I seek. I know there is no ultimate fighting art it all depends on circumstance/time-ha! maybe the chi -fighting effect is the same. If so, given the nature of the claim it can only be proven subjectively and demonstrated objectively.SoI get your point.The question on a internal arts forum would be tai-chi versus bagua! Just kidding.

 

By the way, o greater font of knowledge my threads aren't endless...actually only 25-30!

 

'Endless' is a figure of speach, as I am sure you know. Quality, not quantity is the issue here. As I am sure you know, and as I pointed out, this has been discussed before. The information is on other threads, but you have to invest the time to seek it out.

 

There are no certainties. What works for one may not work for another. Everyone has their own life to lead. That is why personal experience is fundamental here. Yes, we can get knowledge from others, but we can really only LEARN from our own experience. REALISATION, not knowledge, is the goal.

 

The HIV comparison is not relevant and you know it is not. Context.

 

Other peoples experiences are all well and good, but ultimately a person has to go out and find their own 'truth'. You can waste a lot of time trying to follow what someone else said, and then find out it is the wrong path for you. I know, I've been there and done that. In life, you can only find peace by following your own heart, even when it is very difficult at times.

 

Qi, internal arts, external arts, etc is not the point at all either. YOU are the point. YOUR path is the point. My path is mine, your path is yours. Follow your heart, find what Michael Lomax calls the wu wei. Be yourself as fully and truly as you can be. Look for what resonates with YOU. Forget about chasing power. If it is meant to be it will come to you.

[gendao]

Again I ask: so why don't they?

The most powerful qigong masters generally become healers, not martial artists.

 

Because by the time you reach that level, you have no interest in fighting or pissing contests anymore. Instead, you prefer to do something constructive with your power (like healing or just focusing on your own spiritual self-development). Ultimately, it becomes all about YOU, not others and the outside "virtual reality."

 

Put it this ways - if you can open meridians and heal the human body - "qi" punches become child's play...

 

Of course, I've long had an interest in martial arts and would still love to see a "qi vs athletic technique" match. But unfortunately, the more qualified a qigong master is at winning such a match, the less likely they are to engage in one to prove it. And meanwhile, the converse may be true as well, lol.

 

Also, currently most of the advanced qigong masters are in their 50s or older & typically un-Americanized Chinese (so may not follow Western sports broadcasts, if they don't even know English). This demographic simply generally has no personal interest in professional ringfighting. Most of them probably haven't even heard of Brock Lesnar or know what MMA is. And younger qigong masters are much rarer - because qigong got suppressed and went underground during the Cultural Revolution in China, younger people are more interested in pop culture anyways and also have less patience. And appreciable development takes thousands of hours, even for those who are interested.

 

But maybe a new generation Western fighter trained in qigong with something to prove might come up one of these days and do it. Sort of like a Wim Hof of martial arts. Actually, I'll bet if Wim Hof knew martial arts, he could probably kick some ass with the amount of gong he's accumulated. Who knows?

Edited January 3, 2010 by vortex

[Guest paul walter]

There is a reality even higher than this, but in the higher reality there is no fighting and no contests are even possible, so it's not worth describing the higher reality in a thread about fighting contests.

 

 

Go ahead-this is of course what conflict resolution is all about, though those caught up in the paradigm of conflict wouldn't know it. All those involved in the violence of assertion through martial arts or whatever simply seek the state that promises to come after the act through obliteration of the imaginary opponent (which in reality is themselves). The imaginary peace of being the strongest, of being 'whole' and impervious is the motivating factor for conflict based prowess so it should be the basis of all discussion. Paul

[goldisheavy]

Go ahead-this is of course what conflict resolution is all about, though those caught up in the paradigm of conflict wouldn't know it. All those involved in the violence of assertion through martial arts or whatever simply seek the state that promises to come after the act through obliteration of the imaginary opponent (which in reality is themselves). The imaginary peace of being the strongest, of being 'whole' and impervious is the motivating factor for conflict based prowess so it should be the basis of all discussion. Paul

 

Well, you pretty much described it.

 

If you have insight into an unbroken nature of intent, and into the effortless nature of intent, then there is no more fighting, no resistance to overcome, no struggle, and all actions are only ornamental (as opposed to functional).

 

To understand the unbroken nature of intent, ask yourself this in your contemplation:

 

When does my intent begin? When does it end? (Do this with a real example. For example pick up an apple and ask yourself when did intent to pick up an apple appear? When did it end?)

 

This, when you complete this contemplation, will erase the intent boundary within time.

 

To erase the intent boundary within space, you have to contemplate:

 

"Where does my intent end and another person's intent begin?"

 

After you finish this contemplation, you'll remove imaginary intent boundaries across space.

 

In that case, you'll see that intent has no boundaries in it whatsoever. Not in time and not in space.

 

Then you have to consider whether or not it is true that intent must overcome some kind of resistance. Eventually you will see that there is no way that resistance can manifest external to intent. That's the case due to interdependent nature of all phenomena. This contemplation, when completed, will open the effortless nature of intent to your being.

 

And then you are done fighting forever, or at least, for as long as you want. Since you are not stuck in this state (or in any other state) you can return to a vision of separateness and brokenness if that pleases you more.

 

People fight because of two ideas: they perceive external resistance and they perceive discontinuity within the field of intent by differentiation "my" intent from "other" intent, as well as "my this" intent from "my that" intent. Without such imaginary perception fighting simply makes no sense. Who is fighting what? How can you fight if everything is effortless? Fighting is characterized by struggle in addition to conflict after all. Conflict comes from the imaginary discontinuity of intent. Struggle comes from the imaginary perception of resistance or inertia that is to be overcome.

 

Now, when you contemplate this, do not be lazy. Do not simply use the conclusions I put here. Forget my conclusions. Start with the questions I posed and reach your own conclusions in an honest process. This process may take you a very long time to finish, but if and when you do, it will be authentic. But if you ask "Where does my intent begin and another person's intent end?" And then without real contemplation, just answer to yourself, "Ah, the answer is 'nowhere', because goldisheavy said so on the forum", then you are lying to yourself. Don't waste your time unless you truly mean to contemplate this on your own. I give my conclusions as something that I've earned the right to say, because I have contemplated these issues for real, on my own, outside the scope of books, religions, lineages and other edifices of error. I can say it. But if you don't reach the same conclusions honestly, on your own, through your own work, you have no right to parrot them after me. Of course you can say what you like, but you'll be deceiving yourself if you repeat my conclusions without having gone through the effort and rigor of real contemplation.

Edited January 4, 2010 by goldisheavy

[enouch]

'Endless' is a figure of speach, as I am sure you know. Quality, not quantity is the issue here. As I am sure you know, and as I pointed out, this has been discussed before. The information is on other threads, but you have to invest the time to seek it out.

 

There are no certainties. What works for one may not work for another. Everyone has their own life to lead. That is why personal experience is fundamental here. Yes, we can get knowledge from others, but we can really only LEARN from our own experience. REALISATION, not knowledge, is the goal.

 

The HIV comparison is not relevant and you know it is not. Context.

 

Other peoples experiences are all well and good, but ultimately a person has to go out and find their own 'truth'. You can waste a lot of time trying to follow what someone else said, and then find out it is the wrong path for you. I know, I've been there and done that. In life, you can only find peace by following your own heart, even when it is very difficult at times.

 

Qi, internal arts, external arts, etc is not the point at all either. YOU are the point. YOUR path is the point. My path is mine, your path is yours. Follow your heart, find what Michael Lomax calls the wu wei. Be yourself as fully and truly as you can be. Look for what resonates with YOU. Forget about chasing power. If it is meant to be it will come to you.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Well...the HIV comparison is somewhat relevant since you,Santiago, and Ya Mu have warned others about the dangers of improper energy practices.In the same vein that a teacher warns students about the dangers of unprotected sex.Goldisheavy caught that.That said, everything else you wrote is wonderfully crafted and kinda profound.