no, not trying to prove or disprove anything other than my point that constructs need not apply in order to 'get' these principles.

so I notice you didn't address this in your counter:
"In a sentence, it will never happen if you do not start with building up an AWARENESS of your 'chi' circulation to a degree where you can consciously circulate the chi deep into the tensed up muscles while moving around doing the sanchin kata and change the way they feel and behave."

I don't know eyrie, I think the fire went out on your torch to my 'strawman'. If thats not telling me 'believe in Chi or you can forget it' ...then I dont know what does.

and I'm fine with how people view and feel about things, harlan made it clear that she didn't want participation in the thread if it changed the way I was nudging it. I came to the realization that I'm trying to pursue something tangible, just as harlan is...I'm just deciding to look at it from a different angle - namely the physical application angle.
and if it does indeed have physical application, then it's perfectly legitimate to choose to look at it that way.

you are kindof right that I'm sometimes dismissive of beliefs just because they are beliefs...thats my flaw in some of my arguments. and you're right, who knows maybe someday science will discover pathways they didn't 'see' before. absolutely possible.

so I appologize if I offended anyone. but I would like to keep the conversation in terms of measurable benefit. and in order to do that, no I don't need to prove/disprove chi ...I just need visual aid to see someone do on video what you are suggesting is a 'first rung' to understanding this topic. I know if I could do it, I'd snap a 10 second shot for you to see what I'm talking about. The 10 seconds would tell me more than 10 pages of this thread.

until then, I really can't visualize it as anything other than theory. who knows...it might be the same as what I'm already training and therfore don't need to ask about it at all.

If you're going to quote something I said, then make sure I said it in the first place. The quote you highlighted is BP's...

Like I said, if the word "qi" circulation bothers you, don't use it. I think other substitute imagery is just as useful. BP used the word, because it is something he is comfortable with from his cultural context. I am Chinese, so I can appreciate the context as well. Doesn't mean I believe or disbelieve in it. That's a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT logical argument. So, although he's using the term "qi circulation", I understand perfectly what he means, even though I wouldn't use it.

Let me ask you this instead.... just watching all the different people on YouTube doing sanchin - ones from the Fujian Crane traditions vs the various karate traditions, can YOU tell the difference? Can you see what's going on INSIDE?

Same with standing (zhan zhuang) exercises... can you SEE what's happening? Beyond merely "standing"?

How is a video going to help???

All BP and I are saying is that you are already practising this stuff - whether you realize it or understand it (or NOT). Just because someone uses a different term to describe what is being practiced doesn't invalidate the practice. Does it?

And all I have been saying is look at the core principles. Use whatever definitions or terms that work for you. The core principles are few, but they are exactly the same thing - different variations.

iggy, I consider you a friend...thats why I'm not going to let you get away so easy

I know that was BP who I quoted...but you asked me:

Quote:

---

Since when did anyone here say anything about "belief" or believing in any of this???

---

and I assumed BP's words also fall into the 'anyone here' category. whew...another strawman evades certain death by chiball. lol sorry, had to throw some humor in.

Quote:

---

Here's a little experiment to see if you understand the "first rung"...

If you have a suspended heavy bag... walk up to it, place your hands on it and walk out forward until the bag is hanging at 45 degrees. Hold it there for 10mins without letting your deltoids burn.... if you can do that then try throwing the bag out forward WITHOUT MOVING your shoulders or arms.

---

THAT'S what I want to see on video. The bag on the chest I understand...I've done it before - it teaches you to lead with your hara while using gravity to sink thru the balls of your feet. thats a good exercise and I think I'd be surprized how many internal artists don't even understand that much on a physical level.

but the next part of throwing the bag has an external and visualy measurable effect....thats what I'd like to peep a clip of. can ANYONE on the planet do that 'first rung' as you described? is the question I'm calling out. If no one provides a clip of that, then I'll realize this whole conversation was just an esoteric intellectual examination of theory.

the question of can I tell from someone doing Sanchin? yes. to some extent I can. have a look at the feeding crane version sometime.

my guess is we won't get a clip in this thread. which would mean there is no 'first rung' that I'm not understanding.

but the good news is that I still see benefit with internal arts in terms of short-range power generation and evasion technique. yay! a happy ending!

Ask Dan to show you the bag thing...

appreciate your thoughts. I think however someone best gets a feel for improved/efficient dynamics, and if they can impress that vision in application, then it is valid for them. and no, they aren't necessarily frauds, but it's naive to think there aren't any either.

your points 1, 2 & 3 you are finding work for you, and thats all that matters. I might be wired differently - I can't give something 'a chance' that I really don't believe in by ignoring what I feel is being true to myself. and I assume everyone does the same...where we differ is our 'truths'.

for example:

your points: the terms you use are physics terms...pressure, current, force, energy ...etc. they have real meaning to me since I've studied them and how they are used in strict western physics definitions and use. when they are used in way you refer them to, they sound like impressions you have of whats going on - and if it helps you then it's valid. It's not for me to judge that (although as eyrie correctly pointed out my flaw in my often doing so ).

since I take terms like that literally from the way I think and the way I've been educated (engineering-no surprize there), then I have to accept it as the persons impression rather than 'fact'. and thats ok too. I get that. I try to visualize their impression they are trying to describe and then translate it into my own accepted visual.

[add] just re-read and it sounds as if I'm giving the impression I know all of the biochemical and physical goings on in the body ...I don't nor claim to. I'm just saying my impression is different (not more or less valid) when using those terms.[/add]

for instance, I know what you are saying about your 'magnitism' point. but have you read the studies on it? I have. and there is currently no basis (in science) for believing anything you've written in terms of magnatism as it relates to the human body - I see it as psudoscience - but I allow to read what people such as yourself write and try to realize it's your impression of whats going on. thats cool, but I can't accept it to be applied to myself while being honest.

have you heard of Kirlian photography ? it suppossedly is a photographic measure of chi/auras/EMF etc. but after detailed studies it is proven to actually be a very sensitive recording of moisture. knowing this, can I honestly still look at a kilarian photograph the same way? no, because my awareness of it has changed.

Bottom line is, this subject is a measurable cause and effect after training it for a certain length of time. efficient short-power can be demonstrated....as can it's claims. for those who are beyond the first rung of understanding it should be a peice of cake to demonstrate the effect at will. until then, like I said, I respect people's impressions, but they remain theoretical at best.

I think I'm going the correct route and following my instructor's lead....and I know he hits hard at short distances without using language to build constructs of it - the constructs are personal, feel how you will about it...meanwhile, "just go like this".

BTW, I'd like to see a vid about the bag trick too. I know you said the shoulders don't move, but do the legs or anything else move? I'm just wondering if you are claiming that the bag moves by force dirrected only by internal movement without external movement, or if I missed something. Making a claim is a lot different than discussing theory or training methods. I want to see someone do this, because I must not be at the 'first rung' yet. I sure can't do it. The next step would be no touch ko, lol.

Maybe you need to re-explain it before we start expecting a fantastic vid from ya.... unless you really are going to show something like this...

I don't claim to teach the stuff... nor that I know everything there is to know about it. But I can show someone how to use the body in certain ways that would defy logical explanation. I try to explain as best I can... (without using the word "qi", usually in terms of physics, bio or visual imagery), but sadly I'm not entirely there myself.

Which is why I'm contributing to this thread, in the hope that someone more experienced can point out the discrepancies and maybe a few pointers.

On the bag "trick"... think ground force and pressure...

PS: Obviously SOME movement is involved, even required. The question is HOW MUCH and how obvious to the casual observer.

yep...just train.

Quote:

---

PS: Obviously SOME movement is involved, even required. The question is HOW MUCH and how obvious to the casual observer.

---

I look at how much the bag moves in comparrison to how much the person moves. if it's a 1:1, then it's not special - a toddler could do it. If you move the bag twice as much as you have to move, then you're starting to get something interesting.

eyrie, let me ask you...if you can't do the 'first rung' of the test you offered me, and the other gentleman giving advice admittedly is just starting his internal 'journey'...what else is there to say on the subject? both of you need to train it more.

I'd say the thread is ALL theory unless someone is willing to show a clip. ...but I think I found what I was looking for - that I'm training the right way for what I'm trying to attain....I just need to train it more.