standing meditation is overrated?

[Yoda]

Great thread!

 

Extremely cool on the skull plate thing too.

 

I've always suspected that there's a huge ocean of information about standing that isn't in circulation yet and the above post supports that suspicion.

 

Standing is so powerful that it can be harmful and I don't think any one approach or sequence is a one-size-fits-all would work for everyone.

[thaddeus]

 

 

While we were learning standing we were briefly told about how by twisting the tendons around the arms it is possible to open (or was it, it helps open) the skull plates. Skulls of practitioner with skull plates not perfectly sealed have been found. Chia has one in his meditation center, too. To show all this Bruce sometimes moves his skull plates. Before he always asks for the doctors in the room to come near and then tell if they skulls are effectively moving. I have seen this 2 times, and both times the doctors said, "yes it is happening, it shouldn't but it is". I suppose this is the kind of technique you don't want to teach around.

 

Funny to be talking about this now...last night I had the distinct feeling my skull was going to burst open..i was thinking about the skull plate thing...

 

Now let's go to Xing Yi. I have a book (not here, you have to trust me on this) about one of the main master from Xing Yi. At the beginning of the century he changed the hand position in San-Ti, from extended out, to fingers pointing up. This because he said the first is better for fighting, but it disperse too much energy. Since people were now practicing San ti for health, the change made sense.

 

That was none other than Sun Lu Tang.

 

Speaking about how to develop Fa Jin. Yes he showed us that position. It was at the end of the fifth day and I was cooked, and not particularly interested in that. It was a sort of tree position (oh my god, now you will assume that everything is a modification of the tree position ), but the hands were twisted. I am not going to describe the way the hands were twisted, but if we meet or you IM me I shall be happy to tell you were you can find a picture of it. The info was given as an answer to a question from an advanced student: Ralph Herber, who was hosting the event. If you contact him you could probably ask more details, as he was suggested from Bruce to actually try this out. For me it was all way above my hair.

Fair enough. The training I was exposed to was more about using the standing posture to connect the fingers to the toes. Fajin is a store/release mechanism using the ground connection, so was curious to see how a specific posture fit into that training.

When Bruce teaches spiralling he usually takes the students one by one and assigns to each a personal position that is supposed to balance his personal imbalances or just bring the person easier to the next level of the practice. I haven't done the course (is considered not a basic one) yet, although by now I am eager to do it. But I have seen people practicing in their personal postures, and believe me, you do have a wide variety over there.

 

I hope you realise, sir, that science is based on reproducibility and measurability. In standing this would mean having a statistical significant set of people willing to stand for about an hour a day, for many days, if not months. All this while you need personal corrections OR you need to take a group of people who already practice taoist arts and know how to stand. Those people would make the whole test fairly inconsistent as any 'unaverage' result might be attributed to their strangeness. Also when you make a double blind you need to have an equivalent body of people who are not doing the practice, but believe they are. This is not easy too, as if you take practitioners, they know how to stand. And if you take non-practitioners, and place them in a wrong standing position for 1 hour a day they would probably develop a structure too. So you would only test for the specific effect of a posture and not for the general effects of standing.

 

Of course you could measure Bruce or other masters before and after a session of standing, and this has been done. I remember the measurement taken on Chia before and after doing the sounds. But what does this tells us? Just that this particular person had those measurements. Considering the level of control that those people have on their body even I wouldn't sign that the reason is in technique alone, unless I personally trusted that they would not alter the state of their bodies in other ways (also physical, like squeezing an organ). So we would have to stand on trust. A fairly unstable base for a scientific test, you would agree. And not significantly different from where we started.

 

Does all this say that standing has no scientific base? Yes, indeed, for now it does.

Does it say that standing will never have a scientific base? No, maybe one day we might find a way to test for all those things. And then we will know. In the meantime we have to use anedocte and instructions from people who supposedly are more knowledgeable than us in it. And to conclude, and I am speaking here as a scientist, Science does not cover the whole of reality, and never will. And I have no problem with that. Do you?

Thanks,

Pietro

 

Edited to add calculation.

There can be alot of excuses not to backup claims. I never said it was easy. The point wasn't to make every claim stand up to a double blind perfect scientific study, but to just weed out some of the obvious nonsense. Some things would be simple to test without alot of rigor.

I don't need a scientific study to tell me if i touch something hot I can get burned. But if someone claims certain postures are going to connect psychic channels and give me miraculous powers or make me certifiably insane, well, i'd like to see something to back it up. Even a story about a crazy brother in law who did embrace a twig instead of tree and lost his eyesight. Otherwise state it's a belief and take it from there. And sure, one can counter with arguments about faith and parent/child/teacher/disciple trust, etc. I'm not talking about that so much.

I agree though..cool thread..

T

[Cameron]

After a little thinking I think it is inappropriate for me to recount what some teachers told me privately or have people doubt there teachers or just presume to know myself to begin with. Practice and follow what you think is right and true and let others do the same is better IMO.

Edited February 4, 2006 by Cameron

[thaddeus]

The real problem here is not that the practices themselves don't have tremenndous health benefits(I have not had to see a doctor in over 5 years since doing qigong standing, except for knee surgery, I was a sickly child and was in the Dr's office many times a year when I was younger) but that most advanced qigong teachers don't seem to be able to get together and do these scientific studies.

Although they don't say anything outright, I get the feeling there is a level of arrogance and mistrust between the top or atleast most well know qigong people. For example, and Pietro I heard this from another qigong teacher who told me Bruce got almost all his Baguazhang and qigong from the late Master Kenny Gong and wrote in his book that he was training in China with Liu that same summer he was in NYC training with Kenny Gong.

You here these things and go " Hmm, ok, well either Bruce is lying or Kenny Gong's top student is lying"

hmmm, i didn't really want to mention this, but I heard from many diverse sources about BK's 'history'. Even that video where he pushes the student is doctored up (frames are deleted to make it look more spectacular), it might still be on his website. This is related to my point, even though what you say is 90% true, it's the 10% exaggerations that taint your whole message and ruin your credibility.

 

Then you here comments like bruce saying there are 200 postures or whatever and each one has special powers or whatever and this doesn't vibe at all with what Ken Cohen's teacher, BP chan, was talking about. He just taught embracing the tree mostly and said the reason most people don't get to 'higher levels' of kung accomplishment is lack of patience. Not because they don't have the secret posture that opens your channels to your brain but lack of patience to practice for years and years.

<snip>That is exactly what Cohen teaches using 4 postures(embrace the tree being 1 of them)

 

I learned 4 from Mr. Chan. The first was 'hold the camera' as if holding a camera infront of the third eye, then the embracing tree, laogong pointing to opposite nipple, then lower near the navel and finally at the sides..

Is this what Ken is teaching?

I have detailed notes from when I was training there...

T

[Cameron]

Yes, Thaddeus those are exactly the 4 Ken teaches. But instead of 'hold the camera' he will say imagine your arms are resting on top of a beach ball. Or imagine your holding a beach ball at your chest height, etc.

[Cameron]

If your interested in wang zhang zhai translated works Li Jiong has some at Yiquando.com

Edited February 4, 2006 by Cameron

[allan-in-china]

Then you here comments like bruce saying there are 200 postures or whatever and each one has special powers or whatever and this doesn't vibe at all with what Ken Cohen's teacher, BP chan, was talking about. He just taught embracing the tree mostly and said the reason most people don't get to 'higher levels' of kung accomplishment is lack of patience. Not because they don't have the secret posture that opens your channels to your brain but lack of patience to practice for years and years.

<snip>That is exactly what Cohen teaches using 4 postures(embrace the tree being 1 of them)

 

I agree, the only secret I have learned is there are no secrets, only patience.

 

What I have read about Wang Xiangzhai is he started standing practice from when he was about 8, and practiced for many hours a day for decades. Then he reached what has been translated as his enlightenment through martial arts. I've read, what he described for standing practice was basically put you arms in any position in front of your chest and stick with it, he didn't really seem to have any specific postures.

 

I've been taught briefly by an Yiquan practitioner over here to put my arms in front of my chest and stay there, he didn't say anything about more than one posture, he showed me one and one only.

 

I believe the big secret is taking one practice and running with it.

 

There may be postures that open channels in your brain or whatever, but who cares? Just pick 1 (or 4?) and stick with it. Chances are the two people's comments don't vibe because (I'm guessing, I've had no contact with either) BP Chan was aiming for enlightenment and Bruce's teacher was interested in special powers. I personally prefer enlightenment, the rest are just toys to play with...

 

Although I could be completely wrong...

 

Allan

[Cameron]

More interesting stuff. In any case, yes I basically agree Allan and will stick with my 1 posture for now. If it was good enough for BP Chan it is good enough for me.

 

Not that I don't value Pietro's views but calling a system incomplete that a master like BP Chan taught others is a little of guru worship IMO(in this case beleiving your teacher and his 200 postures are the 'real deal' and others are incomplete).

Edited February 4, 2006 by Cameron

[Pietro]

BP Chan was aiming for enlightenment and Bruce's teacher was interested in special powers.

 

I am sorry, but what do you know about what was Liu interested in? A lineage holder, by definition is a person who has the responsability to pass the whole information of a particular taoist sect to the next generation, this to avoid it being watered down as time goes by. This requires those people to know to know all aspects of the art, even those they might themselves not be interested in, or might not be releavant for this historical time.

 

Also why do everybody keep on speaking about the 'special powers'. WTF! By my understanding maybe 50 of the 200 postures were adressing that. You would still have 150 postures for the rest.

[Pietro]

More interesting stuff. In any case, yes I basically agree Allan and will stick with my 1 posture for now. If it was good enough for BP Chan it is good enough for me.

 

Not that I don't value Pietro's views but calling a system incomplete that a master like BP Chan taught others is a little of guru worship IMO(in this case beleiving your teacher and his 200 postures are the 'real deal' and others are incomplete).

 

Hello Cameron,

I ignore what BP Chan teaches, but let's try not to confuse things, especially what each of us has said, since we are so lucky to have a record. What I said is :

 

...If I were in a Tai Ji school and they were not teaching ZZ I probably would change school. There is also a way to practice Tai Ji where you stay in each definite posture between 5 and 15 minutes, and in each passage posture between 1 and 5. The details are in ...

 

This sais nothing of the 200 postures, which is a system in itself. If BP Chan teaches Tai Ji starting from standing good for him and for his students. If he only teaches 4 postures, that's good, better than teaching only 1. I DID not say that only if you learn the whole 200 postures can you learn Tai Ji. That is simply false. But it is true that most of the position (all?) in Tai Ji, and most of the postures are one and the same thing.

Thus,

if your teacher only teaches 4 postures, but then teaches you to stand in various Tai Ji postures to develop the position, here you go, you are having the postures (some, not all 200, as you don't need them all to learn Tai Ji), just with another name.

 

If the teacher does not teach standing in the various postures, AND does not teach any but 4 postures, I do have doubts on the system. This regardless of how famous the system is. And not beacuse my teacher said so and so, but because of what I felt, and I am feeling growing in me, daily, from when in November I started to integrate those extra information.

 

If this makes you feel better, good. If it doesn't, amen. After all we are following different teachers for a reason and it is an old truth that every martial art student honestly believes his school to be the best. If we didn't we would change school. And thus still be in the school we believe is the best.

[allan-in-china]

I am sorry, but what do you know about what was Liu interested in? A lineage holder, by definition is a person who has the responsability to pass the whole information of a particular taoist sect to the next generation, this to avoid it being watered down as time goes by. This requires those people to know to know all aspects of the art, even those they might themselves not be interested in, or might not be releavant for this historical time.

 

Also why do everybody keep on speaking about the 'special powers'. WTF! By my understanding maybe 50 of the 200 postures were adressing that. You would still have 150 postures for the rest.

 

Pietro, no offense intended, I put the notes "I'm guessing, I've had no contact with either" in front to indicate exactly that. I have no idea what Liu was interested in. I can only guess by what he taught...

 

And I only have a very basic knowledge of what he taught, I am only guessing from what has been presented in this thread.

 

This is only based on my belief that clear qi channels doesn't equal enlightenment. Which as I was saying could be wrong.

 

And your point that he has the responsibility to pass the whole information of a sect to the next person is very correct.

 

I have read Bruce's book on the internal arts and was impressed, it was one of the reasons I started studying them. I also read his opening the energy gates in the body and it doesn't really appeal to me. I'm not saying it is incorrect, I'm just saying it isn't my cup of tea...

 

The standing is good, but I don't believe in focusing on individual acupuncture points, I'm more of a believer in one focus, and the rest cleans itself up, and that is what I've been taught and what has worked for me...

 

Let me say one more time for the record that, it is what works for me, and that doesn't mean it is true for everyone.

 

The thing that most appeals to me about the one focus rather than 200 postures is it's simple. And complex things confuse me.

 

I can imagine the 200 postures would only be usable once you had actually got your mind out of the way. I think anything that brings the mind too into the picture is dangerous, because how can you know which posture you need to do next??

 

My belief is just relax into the one posture and let the rest happen naturally, anything more complex and my brain can't handle it...

 

But I can imagine Bruce and his teacher are much closer to enlightenment than me, so what do I know?

 

I'm sorry if I upset you.

 

Anyways, Cameron, I found that Wang Xiangzhai book I was looking talking about it's called "the tao of yiquan" by jan diepersloot.

 

He started xingyiquan when he was 8, when he got up in the morning he would start standing, his uncle (and teacher) Guo Yunshen would get up later, and if the floor was not sufficiently wet from perspiration Wang would have to stand until Guo was satisfied the floor was wet enough.

 

I'm not sure how or when he became "self-realised as a martial artist" but it was at or before he was 28. So about 20 years... Although he kept getting better after that, but by that stage he had at least had some sort of breakthrough.

 

The book says: Wang Xiangzhai mentioned that there were many different types of standing stances, but his idea was to take the essence and combine them into one calling it the universal stance.

 

Allan

[Yoda]

One of the reasons that standing is so confusing is that WXZ taught everyone differently. (I forget if I got this from one of Jan's books or an online article)

[Cameron]

Pietro BP Chan is dead and I never studied with him. He is Ken Cohen's teacher. I don't think my teacher is better than yours and actually I wouldn't say I have one primary teacher or school as you do right now. The idea that others are incomplete and yours is the truth is what I have a problem with. I never said my teacher is the best and Bruce is not. I have never met Bruce and would not presume or guess at what he knows and what his level of kung accomplishment or enlightenment for that matter.

 

It is good you respect and follow your teacher and his system. Just when you say comments like ' Emrace the tree by itself is not standing meditation" (Yes, you did say this a few posts back) that shows a level of arrogance where you are projecting your teachers beleif about any practice onto some other teacher. Embrace the tree definetly is a major tool of training used by qigong teachers for many reasons and I would object to anyone saying it is not a complete or full system by itself indenependent of your ideas to create more postures out of Tai Ji.

 

There is nothing worng with creating more postures and being creative but I would not say that is the truth and sticking to one posture is not the truth.

[Pietro]

[Cameron]

Pietro obviously you are a passionate student of Taoism to put so much into these posts my ONLY issue with you is your comment "embracing the tree by itself is not complete". If you had said " Embracing the tree by itself, did not open my blockages, I learned many more ways from Bruce which did open my blockages, this way was better FOR ME". My only thought at that point is great, Pietro seems to be on the right track.

 

I like you and think you have a tremendous amount of knowledge to share but instead of saying " Bruces practice worked great for me, check him out", or " Bill Bodri's stuff really is working great for me, check it out if you want" You have to come with " Not only what I have learned from my particular teacher in my particular school is correct, in fact these other schools are incorrect and not the truth, and you are in effect wasting time with other schools".

 

I don't think Master BP Chan shared your views on standing and neither do I but I am totally fine with that. I am glad you found a teacher that has helped you, however when you say 1 posture isn't enough(embrace the tree) and claim it is the truth FOR OTHERS that may be false.

 

From my perspective, I have gone into more deep standing meditations when I only do 1 posture. All my channels wide open? Hell no! But I practice every day and don't think I need to do the special techniques so much as be patient, do some meditation and retention(another practice your teacher doesn't really emphasize, I don't personally agree with that stance but am not going to presume he is wrong, maybe it works for him..or you).

 

Also, I don't think if Eric and I ever met in person we would dislike eachother. I always liked people I met from Long Island and my aunt lives there probably we would get along just fine. That was just a weird time and he was/is going through crazy times. I wish him, and you, good wishes.

Edited February 5, 2006 by Cameron

[GrandTrinity]

I think the key is to not be so still in the posture but to move around more and so making your body vibrate. Then when you hold still, you vibrate.

 

Yes, there are many postures and techniques and ways of standing/meditation, I think it comes down to how to balance this with yoga (gaining the wisdom mind) and tai chi, and thats what it "comes down" to more...but I do not know, that just my two cents. Standing med is important, but definetly can be overdone!!!!!!!

 

"You know how Chia has the ethical position of keeping nothing for himself, and teach everything? Well Bruce has the ethical position of teach pubblicly only material that is safe."

[thaddeus]

 

I don't think Master BP Chan shared your views on standing and neither do I but I am totally fine with that. I am glad you found a teacher that has helped you, however when you say 1 posture isn't enough(embrace the tree) and claim it is the truth FOR OTHERS that may be false.

 

From my perspective, I have gone into more deep standing meditations when I only do 1 posture. All my channels wide open? Hell no! But I practice every day and don't think I need to do the special techniques so much as be patient, do some meditation and retention(another practice your teacher doesn't really emphasize, I don't personally agree with that stance but am not going to presume he is wrong, maybe it works for him..or you).

 

I'm not exactly sure how we got into the 1 vs 200 postures. But it seems to me unlikely there are just 200 postures. How many different forms can water take? only 200? Since it is unlimited, it makes sense that you can practice only 1 posture. Within 1 posture should be the unlimited...it's like the whole 'see the world in a grain of sand idea'.

T

[Pietro]

I'm not exactly sure how we got into the 1 vs 200 postures.

 

Oh, that's easy. We got into the 1 vs 200 postures because my teacher said standing was part of an old bigger system which comprised 200 postures. And I (silly me !) refered back. I then also said how 1 single posture was not enough because out of practicing a single posture I had problems. I then added wood to the fire by adding that each end position of the movements in Tai Ji could be taken as a posture, and then completed the work by pouring gasoline saying that different postures had different effect, like rising the energy, lowering it, sending it to a certain organ or dan dien, or out from a certain place. Of course that is all a differentiation of the One. But how useful is that?

- "You just do the One posture for 3 months, closing your practice with the One posture. You then work for another year on the One posture until you are able to send the energy to the liver and then from the liver, changing posture from the One posture to the One posture you send it to the heart. But this time you use the One posture to close your practice"

Edited February 6, 2006 by Pietro

[Cameron]

Then I basically said Pietro's views are valued but his " 1 posture not enough" philosophy may be true for him and not the entire human race.

 

Comprende?

[DanC]

I Personally think seated meditation is much better, I have been reading some of Master Hua Ching Ni's

work and he is a big believer is seated emptiness mediation, in his book he states that 20 minutes of

pure emptiness meditation done properly is better then 2 hours of exercise for your energy.

For me nothing has worked better then emptiness meditation for clearing my mind and clutivating Chi.

 

Daniel

[Cameron]

Every modern qigong master I can think of does seated meditation. Ken Cohen, Bruce Frantzis, Michael Winn(just some of the more mainstream guys) all have strong meditation practices they teach with qigong being the 'excercise' component. Cohen says emptiness meditation is the most important spiritual practice and standing is the most important qi practice. Bruce does his dissolving stuff from seated and standing postures I think. Winn has all those alchemy formulas from Chia/One Cloud/"Celestial lmmortals" etc etc.

 

I don't personally like saying one practice is "better" or "worse" even if I tend to agree with you.

[Pietro]

Every modern qigong master I can think of does seated meditation. Ken Cohen, Bruce Frantzis, Michael Winn(just some of the more mainstream guys) all have strong meditation practices they teach with qigong being the 'excercise' component. Cohen says emptiness meditation is the most important spiritual practice and standing is the most important qi practice. Bruce does his dissolving stuff from seated and standing postures I think. Winn has all those alchemy formulas from Chia/One Cloud/"Celestial lmmortals" etc etc.

 

I don't personally like saying one practice is "better" or "worse" even if I tend to agree with you.

 

 

Yeah, I would agree. I often heard that if the aim is the spirit tha seated is more efficient. If you are instead working on the body, than standing is much better. Nevertheless I sometimes find some deep seated blockages when I stand that I just don't have the inner strength to deal with them while standing (I would faint), so I seat and still work on the physical body.

[Pietro]

Then I basically said Pietro's views are valued but his " 1 posture not enough" philosophy may be true for him and not the entire human race.

Precisely! And that's where we disagreed, with me claiming it is an objective fact, and Cameron saying a subjective one.

[allan-in-china]

Precisely! And that's where we disagreed, with me claiming it is an objective fact, and Cameron saying a subjective one.

 

Yoda, WXZ did teach his students different postures, but I think they all followed his basic rule arms in front of the chest. In fact this is the reason that I think to study this it is necessary to have a good teacher, you can do the generic embracing the tree, but when I met an Yiquan practitioner (a Mr Yu, he is very famous in China, but doesn't speak English so I would imagine he is unknown outside of China) he actually taught me a to hold a position based on my body (he looked me over and moved my arms to the right point), and that form seemed very effective for me. But I imagine if someone else was taught then they would have a different optimum position for them.

 

Refering back to your original post, I think with standing some seated meditation (emptiness probably most suitable) may be required to actually really absorb the energy. But with time your body can take more.

 

Standing meditation is great if your desire is to become a good martial artist, but if you are looking for more of a meditation side (enlightenment/immortality) then seated meditation is more effective.

 

Pietro, let me first say I'm not trying to add wood to the fire here, I am actually quite interested in your perspective because you have a teacher in this style. Originally what I intended to say was: this form (200 postures) probably isn't intended for enlightenment or probably is intended for specific effects (special powers seems to be loaded words around here!). Whereas just standing in one position and forgetting is more intended for enlightenment.

 

When I say specific effects I mean activating certain meridians or making the energy move in a certain way. This to me seems it could be helpful for treating certain sicknesses/diseases or whatever, or to achieve certain aims, but enlightenment seems to be more of a letting go, and becoming present.

 

My understanding of this is standing in one position is enough to get the essence of standing, and then you can just relax and let the rest happen naturally. I had a teacher who basically only did standing in one position (he had probably practiced for about 20 years), who was a very good martial artist and had a very developed personality. He told me, when standing the best experience is just being.

 

Although if you stabilised certain postures for long enough I can imagine you still may experience that being, in my experience though moving energy this way, then that way, then that way, just slows down actually getting good at something.

 

Also I have to disagree with standing is necessary for tai chi chuan. My teacher's teacher is considered one of the top tai chi chuan practitioners in China and does no standing, my teacher is his top student and does no standing - just want to clarify these guys do push hands, and have real skill, not beautiful empty forms. My taoist teacher has also said that standing was introduced to tai chi chuan recently because people now move too fast when they do tai chi and so don't get the real feel for it. Although in China there are a million different stories about everything, so who knows who is right.

 

As far as I know, Zhang Sanfeng, and Yang Chengfu probably the two most famous tai chi chuan people in history did no standing.

 

I'm interested in your views on this.

 

Allan

[Pietro]

Yoda, WXZ did teach his students different postures, but I think they all followed his basic rule arms in front of the chest.

Others I have seen the ones with the hands in front of the kidneys, hands on the side with palms facing out, and of course all the ones working with heaven energy or with the upper tan tien have the hands high above the head. But for most of them I have no idea what their effect would be and no desire for now to be my own guinea pig.

 

In fact this is the reason that I think to study this it is necessary to have a good teacher, you can do the generic embracing the tree, but when I met an Yiquan practitioner (a Mr Yu, he is very famous in China, but doesn't speak English so I would imagine he is unknown outside of China) he actually taught me a to hold a position based on my body (he looked me over and moved my arms to the right point), and that form seemed very effective for me. But I imagine if someone else was taught then they would have a different optimum position for them.

This sounds extremly similar to what Bruce does when he gives the personal position during spiraling workshop. Ahime, no spiraling in Europe in 2006.

 

Refering back to your original post, I think with standing some seated meditation (emptiness probably most suitable) may be required to actually really absorb the energy. But with time your body can take more.

 

Interesting. At the moment I am doing my last 5 minutes back with the hands by the side, but with the palm facing down. I didscovered this position when I was trying some minutes on each posture of the beginning of Tai Ji, and interestingly after 5 minutes in this position I feel PERFECTLY OK with the energy. I feel so normal I can sit in front of a computer, chat, have a shower, or do anything I normally would not do immedialtly after a session. That was a little breakthrough. But I might see if some sitting helps / is-helped.

 

Standing meditation is great if your desire is to become a good martial artist, but if you are looking for more of a meditation side (enlightenment/immortality) then seated meditation is more effective.

I really think you need to have them both, but of course the different amount will vary, as you say.

 

Pietro, let me first say I'm not trying to add wood to the fire here, I am actually quite interested in your perspective because you have a teacher in this style. Originally what I intended to say was: this form (200 postures) probably isn't intended for enlightenment or probably is intended for specific effects (special powers seems to be loaded words around here!). Whereas just standing in one position and forgetting is more intended for enlightenment.

 

When I say specific effects I mean activating certain meridians or making the energy move in a certain way. This to me seems it could be helpful for treating certain sicknesses/diseases or whatever, or to achieve certain aims, but enlightenment seems to be more of a letting go, and becoming present.

 

My understanding of this is standing in one position is enough to get the essence of standing, and then you can just relax and let the rest happen naturally. I had a teacher who basically only did standing in one position (he had probably practiced for about 20 years), who was a very good martial artist and had a very developed personality. He told me, when standing the best experience is just being.

 

Although if you stabilised certain postures for long enough I can imagine you still may experience that being, in my experience though moving energy this way, then that way, then that way, just slows down actually getting good at something.

 

Of course standing can be used as therapy, and as a base for spiritual practice. For the rest, I am too ignorant to speak. Sorry.

 

Also I have to disagree with standing is necessary for tai chi chuan. My teacher's teacher is considered one of the top tai chi chuan practitioners in China and does no standing, my teacher is his top student and does no standing - just want to clarify these guys do push hands, and have real skill, not beautiful empty forms. My taoist teacher has also said that standing was introduced to tai chi chuan recently because people now move too fast when they do tai chi and so don't get the real feel for it. Although in China there are a million different stories about everything, so who knows who is right.

 

Just a clarification. When you say that your teacher's teacher does no standing, do you intend that it does no standing now (and you are unsure about the past), or that he never did standing?

 

The truth, at this point, is that I don't know. I have seen the effect that standing is having on my body. I have seen my desire to do Tai Ji go to sleep, as I feel that, for now, I would not be able to do it with the same structure that I have in standing. I have heard my teacher speak about the 200 postures, and it makes sense to me from a health POV, but I also realise that therapy is (objectively ) a necessary stage in the quest for enlightenment. I know balancing my sexual energy is important in going on, and I don't think I can do it without building my deep yin. When I asked how to do that I was told to stand in a posture. Are there other ways? Probably, but I don't know them: there are many forms of therapy.

I read the book about the power of internal martial arts and study with his author. He never denied anything from that book. You know the book, and over there it describes the steps that a tai ji man goes through. I also have seen many people allegedly being very good. And sometimes hiding information. In China there is a big tradition about needing to be a disciple to be taught the real thing. And Bruce told us that the only reason why he can teach us some things is because he was adopted in a traditional way as 'son' from his last teacher. If he was a disciple he would have been tied by promises. Have you considered going back from the village where Tai Ji was coming from? Going back to the roots might at this point clarify.

 

Still, I would say, keep on studying with your teacher and keep your ears open for different bells.

 

As far as I know, Zhang Sanfeng, and Yang Chengfu probably the two most famous tai chi chuan people in history did no standing.

 

Zhang Sanfeng is a mythological figure, and not everybody even agrees if he really existed or not. So I would not take him as an historical test case. Regarding Yang Chengfu, if you want I could ask Bruce, next time that I see him, if he knows (thinks, believes) that he was doing standing.

 

Also people might to a practice when they are young and not when they are old. That is true also with standing. So the fact that he did not do it when he was old and famous does not say much.

 

Allen, I am happy you joined this strange group of Taoists on the net, and maybe one day I might go to China, and you might be of much help, or we might just meet and have a chat. I tried to answer as much as I could, but my knowledge is very limited, and I only see my teacher twice a year, when I also have to compete for his time with about 40 other students. Still I am happy for your questions.

 

Pietro