Moderators: nyang, Dvivid, Inga
pete5770 wrote:wpgtaiji wrote:
As to your search, .......
For people searching for truths, ................. like pete, and get no results because there is no way that method could give results, they paint the whole thing in a negative way.
I think you misunderstand me. I'm not, nor have I ever been, searching for Qigong or it's truths
or fallacies. All I'm saying is that it hasn't been shown to me or proven to my satisfaction and I'm not about to spend what time I have left in this life chasing Bigfoot simply because a "true believer" says I should. It's up to the "true believer" to provide proof of existence to me before I'll help out by lacing up my hiking boots, shouldering a heavy pack, and heading for the pacific Northwest.
Brian wrote:Hey Pete.. I know you have outlined before your Taiji training, and you have mentioned having done some Qigong...what I would like to know is what type/style of Qigong have you studied (Zhang Zhuang Standing set, White Crane Hard/Soft, Shi Ba Shi, Ba Duan, Wild Goose, etc) and how long did you study them for. Also do you have a regular regime of Qigong, do you study/train with a teacher now or are you relying on memory in order to continue? When was the last time you had your Qigong corrected by a bona fide teacher?
You see, I'm worried that you either have not had correct training in a particular set of Qigong and/or have strayed from the correct method by not having a teacher (a good one, that is!)
Just trying to understand where you are coming from in relation to your quest for 'proof', because maybe the proof you need is in the correct usage and structure of your own Qigong training.
pete5770 wrote: Hasn't everyone done some Qigong? You can't go to any kind of Tai Chi class or gathering without someone leading the group in a bit of Qigong. Does it even matter what the names are? Not that I remember them.
How long did I study them. I wouldn't call it study. More like a bit of warmup before we got into the long form.
"bona fide teacher(qigong)" is something of an Oxymoron to me. I did the exercises, and still do, whenever they are presented at a class, but only for the stretching / warmup value.
Last but not least "I AM NOT ON A "GUEST FOR PROOF". BIg letters because I've said this before.
To be honest I'm not sure I would bother with it even if proof was forthcoming. Everything about it so vague, cloudy, and unclear that I'm just not interested. Everyone tells me I should take an active interest in politics and religon. Both of them bore me to tears. Same thing with listening to someone go on about Qigong.
I will say one thing about Qigong. All I ever hear is how it will help heal everything from A to Z.
This being the case it is probably only a matter of time before it becomes completely discredited
due to the constant barrage of hype about it. If the Qigong community doesn't somehow put a stop to all that hype things will get really crazy and the claims of wonderous benefits and healing
will get way out of hand and then the bubble will burst. People will only swallow so much. It may be good and going great guns now but nothing lasts forever. I see it approaching real "fad" status right now. You might say that the rise AND fall of Qigong is upon us.
pete5770 wrote:Brian wrote:pete5770 wrote:I'm not supposed to write about or question Qigong anymore, so mellow is the word.![]()
Agghhh!! it's no good...your compliance is un-nervingly boring....you are released from your promise....go! be controvertial....seek the proof you so desperately need!!!!
![]()
Ok, but I'll back off for a while. Would anyone care to comment on my idea that I should move on(from Yang style) to Wu(hao) style. This has been in the back of my head for quite some time. and I've sort of convinced myself that it is the natural progression of the Tai Chi art. From the somewhat hard and expansive Chen style it progressed to a softer, more internal than external
Yang and Wu. Then Wu Yuxiang advanced it to the next level with his smaller, more precise more compact form. It's almost as if Tai Chi were heading towards no movement. This, no movement, or very little movement, idea intrigues me very, very much. Whether this is a real
concept or just wishful thinking doesn't deter me from possibly delving into Wu(hao). However, it would seem that instructors are few and far between. At least where I live. More than a few Wu(Yang variation) people around but...... I believe I can transition between the two with not to much trouble as my Yang style has been getting smaller and smaller over the years, but my confidence in learning a NEW style from a video is, well, there is nothing like having someone look over your shoulder. Plus I have this fear of becoming the self taught man. You know, "The self taught man has a fool for an intructor and an idiot for a student." Anyway, anyone out there
who is a Wu(hao) practitioner that may have a word of wisdom or two for me?
pete5770 wrote: Do I have any believers in my idea of Wu(hao) being right in line with the logical progression and refinement of Tai Chi as it moves through the ages? Anyone????
pete5770 wrote:I believe things do get "better" as time progresses. As people with better educations(Wu Yuxiang) take up the study of things(Tai Chi) they find better and easier ways of making things work.
I think Tai Chi has been going toward "smaller", for lack of a better word, since it's inception, and Wu(hao) is the current manifestation of this. Without even trying my Yang Tai Chi has gotten "smaller" or more compact. My hands rarely leave my sight or peripheral vison these days, an important element in self defense. I notice this to be somewhat true with Wu(hao) practicioners in videos I have watched.
The question I ask myself is "is it really necessary to be large and expansive to generate the 4 ounces of force?". The answer is no, it takes but a touch. Wu(hao) seems to be headed in that direction and that's what intrigues me.
Brian wrote:pete5770 wrote:I believe things do get "better" as time progresses. As people with better educations(Wu Yuxiang) take up the study of things(Tai Chi) they find better and easier ways of making things work.
I agree that in general most things improve as we refine them, but you have to be very carefull when choosing, otherwise you end up with rubbish.I think Tai Chi has been going toward "smaller", for lack of a better word, since it's inception, and Wu(hao) is the current manifestation of this.
It would be a natural evolution for your Form to become more compact irrespective of the style..as you progress and learn, you lose the larger movements, refining all the time, so that you generate the same power but with less effort and movement.The question I ask myself is "is it really necessary to be large and expansive to generate the 4 ounces of force?". The answer is no, it takes but a touch. Wu(hao) seems to be headed in that direction and that's what intrigues me.
All styles, practiced correctly and in accordance with the basic Concepts, should be heading in that direction..not exclusively Wu(Hao).
BTW...I not sure what part of the US you are in, but if it's near SF in California, then heres a link to a Wu(Hao) school:
http://www.wuhaotaichi.com/index.html
Qigong doesn't even offer that much. perhaps it's because there is nothing to show.
brer_momonga wrote:I don't think anyone is really threatened by your questions, just concerned that your statements appear to be written out of context.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 28 guests