Occupying the opponent's center

Louis Swaim · Post by **Louis Swaim** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 7:42 pm

Re: “. . .intent of movement rather then the movement itself.”

I’m just struck by the incoherence of this. The “intent of movement” is the intent to MOVE, unless it is the intent to do something else. Yi is not something separate from physical movement; it is what informs and imbues movement.

In the Conscious Movement thread I quoted Jane Geaney’s helpful remarks on “yi” from her book _On the Epistemology of the Senses in Early Chinese Thought_ (2002, University of Hawai’i Press):

“The Chinese character yi is frequently translated as ‘idea,’ which . . . might give the unfortunate impression of something like representative mental ideas. . . . Yi is better translated as ‘intent’—in the sense of something external and manifest in movement. This is apparent because the Xunzi attributes ‘intentionality’ to a dance:

‘The intent [yi] of the dance joins with the way of heaven. . . . How can one know the intent of the dance?—The eyes do not themselves see, the ears do not themselves hear, and yet the order of the bowing, raising the head, crouching and stretching out, advancing and retreating, slowing down and speeding up is such that none of it is not modest and controlled.’
(Xunzi 20/37-39)

“Thus, yi is not an internal mental picture at all. As in the orderly movement of the dance, yi is a manifest and measurable *tending* or movement.”
—Geaney, pp. 37, 38-39.

Take care,
Louis

bamboo leaf · Post by **bamboo leaf** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 8:24 pm

(Re: “. . .intent of movement rather then the movement itself.”
I’m just struck by the incoherence of this. The “intent of movement” is the intent to MOVE, unless it is the intent to do something else. Yi is not something separate from physical movement; it is what informs and imbues movement)

Kind of the point of practice to be able to separate this. At lest in my teachers and my own work. Please refer to the first posters post. In other words, before the actual movement reaches the hand or what ever part, one is able to sense and either preempt it or empty it. This is one way, another is to lead it or move it out directly causing the other to move.

This is what Teacher Wie is talking about. Yi is very much separate from physical movement and is trained as such by some including me. But no matter, my posting was in answer to the posters questions and offering a possible idea of what is happening and how to find it in ones self. If its useful then okay, if not also okay.

Bob, regardless of what you have found others including myself may have experienced found something different that accords with most of the clips I have posted and in much of what is written if one has that perspective.

Louis, You can quote, cite or reference, but none of them or you apparently can do what is shown or have felt it.Otherwise you would know and your mind would be changed. Teacher Ma, and Teacher Wie, both show the same actions one more directly then the other. I see no differences except maybe in level. Touching or not it’s the same process at work.

Just sharing some thoughts, nothing more. Much of this is also why I don’t post to much or share to many thoughts on it.

chris · Post by **chris** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 8:34 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>...When I said I have disproved this, I meant just that.
I have asked three supposed "Masters" who claimed to be able to do this to do it to me.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If you are serious about logical proofs, I recommend you spend some time studying the logical fallacy. Your argument contains a number of them.

Empty force (i.e. with an air gap) has been performed on video dozens of times. Check YouTube. Chris Crudelli showed it on BBC a few years ago. There was a public demonstration advertised on this very message board, just a few short weeks ago! Did you attend?

-----
Chris
Martial Development

Kalamondin · Post by **Kalamondin** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 8:36 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>
Training to understand and feel the intent of movement before the movement happens. First in your own body then after a while in another’s. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm learning to read people's intention more and more clearly...but I still really get stuck on what to do about it.

I think this is where dissolving the ego is the next logical step for getting to emptiness. Whether I'm afraid or angry or worried, it's always this aspect that I feel gets in the way of me being able to respond from a place of emptiness. MYJ once corrected me: you have to be still inside although the outside is moving and he manifested this so clearly that I was able to read the energetic template, as it were, of what he was doing, and experience it for a few moments. Everything was silent and still, and even though we were doing moving step (which is still hard for me), I felt like the whole system was unified and effortless...then I got excited about being still and lost it. I think that's the closest I've been to experiencing your ocean image below, which really spoke to me:
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>
The ocean has crest and troughs yet there is no gap in its surface. It matches the air and wind exactly at the same time and same direction. This is what is meant by joining and following. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

...
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>
Look again and watch his eyes. He is leading the others intent, and useing his own. Following is leading, leading is following. Before the others movement is manifested he leads it out. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

OK, I am totally blown away by this level of skill. Nothing else to say about it though, other than WOW!

Thanks for the clips, I'll be mulling them over.

Kal

Kalamondin · Post by **Kalamondin** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 8:47 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>
The whole body is transparent and empty, one forgets about oneself and is non-active - this high level starts from learning to soften hands and wrists. Every step and every move should be completely guided by the principles of boxing movements, and only later one can gradually attain the level of complete relaxation, transparency and emptiness.)
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

One fascinating thing about the degree of emptiness manifested by the masters in these clips is how still they themselves are. They seem both solid and immovable, and yet completely transparent in that you can tell the qi must be moving through them effortlessly in order to transmit force with so little--an such casual--external movement.

I see a little more of the wave-like aspect from watching these--it's almost like the guys trying hands with the masters are waves casting themselves up against a wave-breaking wall and being thrown back with the force of their own energy. What mastery of the small circle to take that in, turn it back, and augment it without too much visible momentum-building. OK, I'm done geeking out for awhile, back to work.

Kal

Louis Swaim · Post by **Louis Swaim** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 8:49 pm

Greetings boo,

Re: “. . . but none of them or you apparently can do what is shown or have felt it.Otherwise you would know and your mind would be changed.”

Apparently you know me well enough to know what I can do, what I feel, and what I know, even though we’ve never met. Well done!

Take care,
Louis

Bob Ashmore · Post by **Bob Ashmore** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 9:10 pm

Guys,
Don't get yourselves all twisted up, I'm not knocking anyone here and neither is anyone else.
I said these types of parlour tricks are uber-cool. I even said I would like to be able to do them myself. So no worries.
All I'm doing is telling you what I've seen, felt and experienced for myself and it is apparently the opposite of your experience.
I thought enough of these kinds of things that I felt they merited some real life research, so I did that. My conclusions were not the same as yours.
They don't have to be.
Now, you guys have your belief in this type of thing and that's looking pretty unshakable, and that's great. Rock on. Tell us all about it. No one's taking that away from you or trying to stop you, at all.
Post away, discuss, have a ball. We're here to do just that and to learn from and about each other. That's the point, that we hear about different points of view and discuss them.
I believe we're in the "discussion" forum, are we not?
What you have run into here is someone who has done his homework already and made his decision about the idea of being able to berak the laws of physics and make someone fly away without you doing a single thing but "thinking" them out. I decided you can't.
What? You thought everyone in the world is going to believe in this just like you do? Of course not. Not everyone believes in a lot of things millions of others beleive in every day, all day long, worldwide. The only time that's a problem is when civilized people can't agree to disagree.
Train this type of thing, believe in it deeply, enjoy yourselves doing so. That's what life is all about.
Besides...
Just because I find it ludicrous doesn't mean it is. Does it? Certainly not any more than your belief in it could make it seem less so for me.

Besides, if everyone on here agreed all the time, how boring would that be?

Bob

bamboo leaf · Post by **bamboo leaf** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 9:14 pm

My last posting on this.

One can only know from what is posted.
My only intent was in trying to provide some answers based on my own experiences, not to take away from others.

Kal,

I think you have enough to consider and work on just reading from your latest postings. Good luck in your journey.

JerryKarin · Post by **JerryKarin** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 11:47 pm

I haven't looked at the clips yet but I think I have seen some similar video. I wonder if in some cases the pusher isn't causing the pushee to jump backwards. How that might be done is certainly beyond my level of skill or experience but it doesn't seem inconceivable to me. In that case the objections Bob registered don't really apply since this is not a case of transference of force from one to another without movement, but rather in some way leading the other to push himself out.

JerryKarin · Post by **JerryKarin** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 11:54 pm

I will note that Yang Zhenji specifically pooh pooh's the notion of 'empty force' ie pushing someone without touching them. This apparently is not what the Yang family is doing in their art.

Yuri Snisarenko · Post by **Yuri Snisarenko** » Fri Sep 15, 2006 2:44 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by JerryKarin:
I will note that Yang Zhenji specifically pooh pooh's the notion of 'empty force' ie pushing someone without touching them. This apparently is not what the Yang family is doing in their art.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Jerry, what do you think about Wu Tunan's story regarding song of kongjin? According to him he got it from Yang Shaohou. He stated that Yang Shaohou knew the method of training it. This song was published in the book written by Wu Tunan's disciple (this info is from that book).

Kalamondin · Post by **Kalamondin** » Fri Sep 15, 2006 4:14 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Re: “. . .intent of movement rather then the movement itself.”

I’m just struck by the incoherence of this. The “intent of movement” is the intent to MOVE, unless it is the intent to do something else. Yi is not something separate from physical movement; it is what informs and imbues movement.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hi Louis,

I have to disagree with you on the above, but only on the part "Yi is not something separate from physical movement" It is now possible to measure brainwave activity called an "action potential" that begins about 1.5 seconds before movement. This measurable activity occurs even if the test subject only imagines moving (e.g. imagines picking up a glass). This is why just visualizing doing things can have a direct effect on the ability to do things.

I usually perceive in people an intent to move before they do so. Sometimes I experience it as a wave of energy that washes through me (huh!) a split second before they change course and launch an attack. Part of why I'm so appalled at not being able to counter this new Yi to Yi business is that I'm used to "reading" a little bit in advance of what happens physically and now my safety zone of that split second is gone.

I did like the thought of intention being part of a larger dance.

Regards,
Kal

yslim · Post by **yslim** » Fri Sep 15, 2006 4:29 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Bob Ashmore:
Yslim,
I know you believe what you are saying is true, but it has simply never been backed up by fact.
If you don't move physically, you are not going to move your opponent.
I understand that the movement can be minute, so minor as to be nearly neglible, but you still move.
The problem with your scenario is that it doesn't take into account simple physics.
Without an action, there can be no reaction.
What you are trying to describe would be classified as magic; point your finger and he flies away, or more simply, no movement produces movement. It just doesn't happen that way in the real world.
If I ever meet the Master who can point his finger at someone and make them fly out, then I'll buy it. I haven't met him yet, and I've tried.

If you're comfortable believing that people can perform real magic, go with that. I wouldn't wish to shatter anyones belief system. But...
Take it with a grain of salt.

Now, don't for one moment think I'm saying that there aren't some pretty wild and wonderful things in this world. Because I'm not.
I have known some Masters who could send me flying without the tiniest APPARENT motion. It sure doesn't look like they moved at all.
But when asked, every single one of them has explained to me that they do indeed move. The movements are small but very well aligned so that the reaction they produce appears to be miraculous.
So I know that it's going to be easy to believe this can be done. Looking at it, it sure appears to be that way.
But to a man they have all freely admitted that they do move.
Anyone who tries to peddle that they don't is perhaps being less than truthfull with you.

Maybe this will help:
If someone sells you a diamond watch for ten cents, chances are you're buying a watch that's not worth a nickel.

Bob

Bob<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hi Bob

I did not mean to have any disagreement with you on this subject of body movement or no movement into such a detail. You are so right there have to be a movement no matter what. the mistake was mine as I was thinking about something call 'internal shi, (or internal movementfor for lack of right word)) one already setup in the physical body and "expressed through the "external shi (the physical body movement for lack of right word)and by the time the opponent saw this external shi and make his "move first" the opponent is already finished(defeated). That was what our Teacher told us "you finished" before we got close enough to land our punch.There were times I swear to it that I could felt and to recalled the times when big ocean wave just about to hit me and just can't get away from it(hind sight).And our Teacher was stood there pointing his finger at all the spaces I did not cover. And before I really touch his hand I just knew I was finished. If I was luck I try to use 'that- coming-at-me-internal-shi's chi" and barely touch on his coming hand, the external shi to bounced backward with few funny 'Taiji hops' without fall flat on my butt. Few times I need to to bounced backward before I been touched and if I don't or too late I knew I will fall hard.He was being kind to me to even let me to do that. so I can come back for more.It was because I was in a linear space and the wave came at me in VOLUME spaces. That was what happened to Kal's experienced for got stucked and Kal was resisted (can't help it)to this "undetected fullness" of internal shi with chongding in volume of his opponent. That is why Kal can not move. The movement I referred to was an internal one. Of course the breathing is a movement (the lungs for sure) as the chongding (central equiolibrium?) expanding for Taiji. It is how to use this expanding movement(at least one of them)open and close that give some wonderment to Tasiji move without "appearance movement". And I was told that was what make the Taiji different than other. And since I believe it is so I had been practice the next level
"two body" stuffs. So only the external body movement I call it the body movement. I forgot this could cause some problems if I am not talking to myself.because I call the internal shi 'no move' as it is not for the eye to see ( kungfu eye excepted) but to listen. apparently I was not mindful enogh that we was talking about two different level of thing. Sorry about that.

It was Kal's problem been 'covered'to the point that he can not move that lead to this thread. One of many reasons was that his opponent could "see with kungfu eye" or "listen" where Kal had empty no chi area or spots. He will used his own chi to covered and/or attack those space as he wishes. Our Teacher will said to us when this happened, "you are all mine". Over and over he told us we were resisted. We all look at each other in scout honor we DID NOT RESISTED. Our ego spoke loud and clear.He then can copied each one of us how we did in his body and let us listen/feel the different between his and our. By able to listen what I did in his body give me a clear understanding what my 'target' is.Boy that sure help! But can I do it ? The answer is yes 'IF' I can melt-down my ego and lost my 'Edge' that could lead me to no 'physical hands and legs'...I am talking into the future,so I had better present in the 'moment of now.'

You was absolutely right if you "counted" the breathing and expanding the 'chongding' and the "undetected fullness" is a movement then I will rest my case. Because only the dead Taiji Masters can has no movement ( breathing for one thing)and at time could send many Chinese flying out the door when they see the dead master's spirit (shen?).

So sorry about my mixed up.

Ciao may WE all have a fong sung day
yslim

Kalamondin · Post by **Kalamondin** » Fri Sep 15, 2006 4:34 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>My last posting on this.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Bummer--but you're right, I think I do have enough to work on for a few months/years/lifetime. Thanks so much for your insights and sharing your experiences.

My best and highest regards,
Kal

Louis Swaim · Post by **Louis Swaim** » Fri Sep 15, 2006 5:11 am

Greetings Kal,

Re: "This is why just visualizing doing things can have a direct effect on the ability to do things."

I don't disagree. But the "visualizing" is of "doing things." It all takes place in the realm of meat, does it not?

Take care,
Louis