Xi feng,
Liked your responses to the 1490 posts on Jareks board. Good contribution here too. Hope you will be around on this board more.

Thanx qui... always nice to realize there are (a minority of) martial artists out there who can see past the trees in front of them and actually get a glimpse of the forest which surrounds them.

As you (in England) have often shared your knowledge of Chinese parables and lore... here is my contribution (from China) with a few words of wisdom from an English poet.

"A little learning is a dangerous thing; drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring: there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and drinking largely sobers us again." (Alexander Pope)

In life - and in martial arts...

The nice thing about teaching parables is that they can be interpreted from many angles (as with the Old and New Testaments or the Tao Te Ching).

Perhaps, the swordsman in the story mentioned in an earlier posting simply took pity on the obviously untrained man holding a sword in front of him...

Perhaps, it's only a story...

Qui,

Jimmy died on Valentine's day 1991 and is burried in Newport beach /Costa Mesa.He had a large funeral. I have dedicated a large amount of time to recording the sutras he used in training and kung fu in general, I would not knowingly disrespect him. His teaching helped me to be succesfull on financial and social levels. They also helped me develope the couage to break away from the crowd, develop a unique self definiton and adventure in the third world.

I do not think your question is disrespectful. I think it shows carefulness. Ask what you will, I am here to learn and discuss. I am not special, I am who I am.

Choi Li Fut and Choy li ho fut hung are a bit differnt. And Choy li fut and Choy li ho fut hung practiced in a San soo style is very differnt.

Xi,

Beautiful quote.

My teacher used to say "little knowledge is dangerous knowledge."

C&C

MHW

I've seen the schedule for Tim's classes and read his "Philosphy" page. His focus is purely on the physical dynamic inherent to successful application of techniques. He states no personal moral view, and claims no responsibility for his students ethics. In effect, that makes him a "coach," and not a shifu (sifu)... according to the paradigm of this thread.

Does anyone know of any teachers who have a coherent moral philosphy, besides random quotes from philosphers ancient and overquoted? I'm not asking for Aristotle. I just want to know where I can read up on some things.

Is there some sort of a moral outlook in XYNeigong book? I think I skipped the introduction the second and third times I read it.

Tim,

In answer to your questions:

First, I'll decline to respond to your dramatic question about fights in which I've been involved. Whether or not I'm a bad ass street fighter is irrelevant to our conversation.

Reply. I am not seeking to find out whether or not you are a “bad ass.” My point is that the human body and life is something special (sacred?) and one must not disconnect from his actions. When training you should realize you are training to kill. By realizing this, daily, one comes to grip with the possible consequence of his future actions. If you have ever been a street fight you have learned some invaluable lessons most of which cannot be learned in the studio. I am not just talking technique here. At some point in your life, you will engage in self-examination. Hopefully you will ask your self, why did I fail? Because if you are not fighting to protect (or liberate other from oppression, - gotta be careful about that one, as my teacher said, “Don’t be quick to stop a fight, the person getting beat-up might deserve it.”) you have failed as a humanitarian. You are a loser, even if you did more damage to that person than he did to you.”

I couldn’t disagree with you more as far as saying that whether or not you have fought on the street is relevant to our conversation. Maybe it’s not relevant to your conversation but if you review the posts, I think it is very relevant to our conversation.

Practicing martial art without gaining the perspective of street fighting is like living without ever having children. The experience changes you.

"Can you use what you know for more than fighting? Please answer at least that question."

Of course. Everyone that practices martial arts (even the competitive ones) are engaging in a type of self-cultivation (whether they understand it directly or not). Any student that has the discipline to put in hours of hard training, work with his fellow students and listen to his teacher is concurrently developing his character, whether the teacher quotes the Dao De Jing or not.

"The kung fu artist was most likely the community doctor, pharmacist, nutritionist, psychologist / counselor, arbitrator and spiritualist. It is common knowledge that this art came from monasteries. Do you think the monks were not practicing personal development, character building and moral and ethical studies. Surely you know this."

Wow. The Kung Fu artist (until about 70 years ago) was most likely to be a professional soldier, bodyguard, convoy guard or thug (although in the Nineteenth Century, a small percentage of Chinese martial arts teachers did also practice "jie gu," or bone setting. A very few of them were actually trained doctors of TCM).
With all you learned from Jimmy you know that the actual name of the art of Kung Fu San Soo, "Choy Li Ho Fut Hung" are the names of the families (not monks) that developed the various aspects of the style (with "fut" or "Buddha" refering to the psychology of the art). All martial arts associated with Chan temples in China were originally brought in by fighters, not created by monks. Fighters that shave their heads and hide in temples are not "monks." Buddhist monks are pacifists.

To be sure, questions are not really questions if you know the answers.

Reply: I respectfully disagree with your all-encompassing view of kung fu artists. Did you keep a notebook as Jimmy suggested? Of course, warriors learned fighting technique. But in China, being a warrior was the occupation of the lower class, in direct contrast to Japan, where the Samurai were an elite warrior class. Social advancement in China was done through scholarly exams. I was told that the books held by our great teacher contained acupuncture, acupressure and massage technique, techniques for healing the organs, numerology, psychology etc. along with hand form and hand-to-hand technique.

One day, Jimmy had just opened up for day class and I was waiting outside. We walked in, I sat down on the bench next to the door, and he showed me an exercise that allowed one to have a complete bowel movement. To this day, I have never come across any of the other students or seen this exercise anywhere else. The point is that a kung fu artisit is in search of completeness, not only fighting technique.


A kung fu artist’s intimate knowledge of the body, and how to damage it, naturally leads to the study of how to heal it. A man’s body is physiologically (or chemically) ready to receive various parts of the vast art of kung fu at different times though out his life pursuit of “completeness.” There were many kung fu adepts who sought nothing more than to create harmony out of disturbance, and if one has inner positioning (inner kung fu) his participation in life is one of encountering disturbance and eliminating it in order to create balance, on and off the matt, physically and mentally.

As far as “choi li ho fut and hung” go, I did not say they represented monks. Three of those words represent families and two of them represent aspects of training, and one of those is the aspect of the mind, which should also include psychological and philosophical development if you are seeking completeness. If you are interested in fighting arts or martial arts which s admirable, the psychological and philosophical development is not very important, according to you (now, it’s my turn to make assumptions).

One last thing - As far as the Tao Te Ching is concerned, Taoism originated with the indigenous Chinese and to practice an ancient and authentic kung fu art is a practice of Taoism to some degree whether you realize it or not.

One more one last thing (this is like a “sarpee” in Costa Rica – the last drink, that can never really be the last drink, because the real last drink is the one you drank before you died – Central American humor), cross training is cool. And if you have never fought in the street, it is the next best thing. But making a sport out of it: points, trophies etc is less than admirable, in my lesser opinion.

Fighting in the street to protect is admirable, but fighting to advance ones selfish agenda is - not so admirable.

Thanks Tim,

Great “posting?” with you.


“Reply: Besides self-defense and fighting skills, what do you practice it for? Personal development? If so, of what?”

I think you missed this one; I am interested in your opinion. Thank you.

C&C

MHW

Sorrel,

What is the Xyniegong book?

MHW

P. S. Post a email address and I will help with your request.

Mon Haw Woo,

Sorrel is referring to the book "Xing Yi Nei Gong: Xing Yi Health Maintenance and Internal Strength Development" of which I am co-author and translator (you should check it out, it's full of stuff like Jimmy's bowel movement exercise).

I have to agree that fighting in the street changes you. I guess what kind of changes occur will primarily be determined by how you actually did. We may have had different experiences.

You asked:

"Did you keep notebooks as Jimmy suggested?"

Yes.

"
"Besides self-defense and fighting skills, what do you practice it for? Personal development? If so, of what?”

Myself as a person.


"In China, being a warrior was the occupation of the lower class, in direct contrast to Japan, where the Samurai were an elite warrior class. Social advancement in China was done through scholarly exams."

Exactly, people of the lower classes weren't doctors, pharmacists, nutritionists and psychologists (jobs reserved for those with the means to learn to read. No student loans in old China). People of the lower classes learned martial arts to fight for a living, primarily because they had no other choice.

"If you are interested in fighting arts or martial arts which is admirable, the psychological and philosophical development is not very important, according to you (now, it’s my turn to make assumptions).

It's not that I believe psychological and philosophical development isn't important, it's that I don't believe it's my job as a martial arts instructor to preach my values to students that want to get into shape, compete in combat sports or learn how to fight in the street.

"One last thing - As far as the Tao Te Ching is concerned, Taoism originated with the indigenous Chinese and to practice an ancient and authentic kung fu art is a practice of Taoism to some degree whether you realize it or not."

A lot of things originated with the indigenous Chinese. So if I practice Kung Fu, am I also practicing Confucianism, archaic astrology and feng shui? (and if so, how come you don't quote Confucius too?)

I missed one other question:

"When was the last time you saw Heilo? A true gentleman and ambassador of good will, like Rorion."

I last saw Rorion a couple of months ago at the Copa Pacifica of BJJ. It was at this year's Copa that I had my first Black Belt superfight (I won. More competitive ego gratification. And nobody got hurt).

One more question for you:

Did you explain to Helio Gracie that the reason he never became a "great human" was because of his life long obsession with developing great fighting skill through non cooperative training and competition?

Or have you just singled me out because we have never hugged?

Look, it's dangerous to start generalizing about such a broad subject as the origins or tenets of Kung Fu - or most any other ancient Chinese subject for that matter.

Some Kung Fu styles have religious or philosophical origins.

Some are associated with a religion or philosopghy but did not originate from there. They simply adopted a religion or philosophy to better explain their principles and add crediblity to their art.

Some styles have family origins or stem from multiple family styles.

Some styles originate from roving vagabonds.

Some styles have military origins.

And, some began as a very eclectic mish-mash.

The reason the internal guys gained so much credibility in the early 1900's was because (some) they were literate and that appealed to the upper class. This is as opposed to the illiterate tough guys, body or merchant guards, soldiers, etc. that Tim mentioned. But, read your Chinese history again, most emperors did not take up the practice of martial arts.

Martial artists then competed much as they do now and there are plenty of accounts of challenge matches to prove it. Also, the idea of a martial artist back then in old China being a refined gentleman is really something from a Shaw Brothers movie. Most were not and the ones that were became famous for it.

I don't really know what the argument is on this thread. Basically if you train martial arts hopefully you'll have developed your character to a degree where you don't abuse your skills. But martial ability and self development don't necessarily and haven't always gone together, unfortunately.

Sure, competition isn't real fighting. Nobody ever claimed it was. And sometimes, especially in the modern day, you get involved in a violent altercation despite doing everything possible to avoid it. Or you choose to get into an altercation to help out someone who looks like they are trying to avoid it and some ••••••• won't let them (read bully here).

And sure it changes you. So does competition. So does training and self development. Nobody's arguing that. What I can't understand is why this thread has been going in this direction for so long. This is all common sense if you ask me.

According to numerous posts on this chat board, many of the posters here, and especially Tim's group, living in the greater LA area (a considerably violent place) both compete and have been in a street fight in a place where a gun can materialize at any moment in the hands of any adolescent gang-banger.

And, as for the guys from Tim's group that I have personal experience training with, they seemed a skilled,well balanced and intelligent group. So what's all the BS about?

- Erik

Tim,

I am not signaling you out (as far as hugging goes, it's a Latin thing) and I am just saying things as I see them. Hoping to learn something new from the participants and participate.

I never said Hielo was not a great person, (your good at the assumption thing, try reading a little closer and without the competitive mind set) I do not know him well enough to have an opinion. For all I know, both of you may be great humans. However, in my opinion, being great people and great teachers are different. You can be a great person and not be a great teacher, in my narrow definition. It is my opinion that great teachers teach the human side of the arts. You don't have to agree with me. We can agree to disagree. However, there is a difference between teachers who develop their students to fight and those whose education can be used for more than fighting. Or do you agree to disagree?

Kwan Yin was the goddess of grace who exemplified graceful movement, gracious behavior and extending undeserved favor. Along with Kwan kung, (benevolence and advancement) the two represent the virtues kung fu artists should strive for.

Tim are you engaged in a struggle for rightness, or are we communicating openly? I said being a WARRIOR was an occupation of the lower class, not being a “kung fu artists” (who were revered for benevolence). Please try not to puts words in my mouth, as it corrupts the dialog.

Confucianism and Taoism are like comparing apples and oranges. Both are Chinese, but so are noodles and falconry.

And, yes you are practicing Feng sui as both kung fu and Feng sui are arts of placement. How you position yourself and your co practitioner is important, I will assume you agree.

I will check it out your book. Where can I get it? Who is the publisher?

Oh yeah the "my self as a person" answer delivers little insight. We should all be learning and I would like to learn from your motives, or reasons for training, beside fighting or competing, if you have any? You do not have to have reason for training other than you like to, just curious. My neighbor Dave Carter (You might remember him from El Monte, the one without the front teeth) never had any reason for training other than fighting. We all have the right to like what we like.

Of course, I am opinionated, isn’t that what these boards are for, but I am not trying to be offensive.

Take care,

C&C,

MHW

J.Erik, great post. I agree with you 100%.

MHW, Tim is a great teacher. In my opinion, he is a great teacher because he understands the nuances and intricacies of the martial arts techniques and is able to "teach" that to his students. Not, because he teaches us how to live. He teaches us what we pay him to do which is to teach martial arts. Tim is a kungfu and grappling teacher, period. He is not a religion, philosophy or ethics teacher. I think you must make the distinction. Kungfu is just another martial art- It seems to me you think kungfu is something more than that.

Tim is also a great human being.

Okay, I think I've just figured out the crux of this thread.

EITHER:

MHW is under the impression that Tim is not living up the the role of Spiritual Leader that a Kung Fu Master must assume. If that's the case brother I'm afraid you're preaching to the wrong choir. His credentials and skill are beyond question and, let's face it, all he's missing is a robe and bowl. I mean, the guy trains like a maniac, sets aside one day a week for his family, doesn't even eat bad unless it's a "pizza for health" day, has what, 2 beers a year and when he was in Bangkok he didn't even party - he trained. Plus, he's about as even tempered as a monk. And to top it off, he's read and studied all of those Chinese source materials that everyone is quoting from in their original language, along with Chinese history and many other subjects that we have to wait for a good translation to read.

OR:

You're saying that a Kung Fu Master should take on the role of spiritual guide as well, in order to be a complete Kung Fu Master.

Here's my take on that. Assuming that most of us come from a somewhat almost pseudo normal, as far as normal goes, family life, we should have learned our manners, morals and ethics at home. These are developed at school and in our immediate environment. By the time we're adults most well-adjusted humans have sorted out the basic do's and don'ts of life. We've figured out our personal and immediate social values and the need to adapt when necessary.

As an adult if you want to go beyond morals and ethics into a more spiritual outlook on life there are many good sources for inspiration. If you relate more to a Taoist view of life then go with it. If Buddhism makes more sense to you then there's plenty of teachers and source materials for you and likewise for most spiritual paths.

I'm a practical guy. If I want the best source for no bullshit martial arts then I go to Tim. If I want the best source for spiritual development and guidance then I research what's available and go there. And likewise for any other pursuit from accounting to auto-mechanics. Find the best source possible for the topic you're interested in. It's practical and makes good sense. Where anyone got the idea that a Kung Fu teacher is the absolute best source (or should be) for spiritual guidance, medicine, poetry or whatever else I'll never know. Of course, ther are modern day Martial Art teachers who have mastered other arts (Zheng Manqing is a good example) but they probably learned those topics from various good sources rather than from their Kung Fu teacher. I guarantee you that Zheng Manqing most definitely did not learn medicine, poetry or painting from Yang Chengfu. He did learn his incredible skill at Taijiquan from him, however.

Look MHW, if that's the kind of Martial Art instructor you want to be, more power to you. But it's not what everyone is looking for in today's specialized world. You have to make allowances for different characters. There's never only one right way. Some people want an effective no B.S. approach to a well-rounded fighting system and are willing and prefer to go elsewhere to study spiritual pursuits, medicine, massage or whatever. Basically it's a generalist or specialist approach. Neither is right or wrong. It's an individual choice.

- Erik

MHW... Tim's (and Dan Miller's) XingyiNeigong book is excellent - I highly recommend you find a copy - I'm sure you will enjoy it, in many ways, for the knowledge and information they have presented.

Most, not all, of your past spirtual Martial Art Masters from China were a bunch of mind comtrolling let me keep my thumb on you jack-asses.

We even have many of these types today. The only difference is they are now money grubbing mind contolling jack-asses.

Erik,

Again - awesome post. Hope my participation helped to stir the pot. However, this topic has drifted too far into personal territory and it seems that it’s taking on a "dead horse" quality.

It's not my intention to critique anyone. I have my opinion, that’s it amigo.


MHW is under the impression that Tim is not living up the role of Spiritual Leader that a Kung Fu Master must assume.

Reply: My opinions are not about any One person.

You're saying that a Kung Fu Master should take on the role of spiritual guide as well, in order to be a complete Kung Fu Master.


It’s not about being a complete kung fu master. It’s about adding positive aspects to society (And the more the better). That’s the message. Instructors are in a good position to do that, if they choose to or not, it’s their decision.

Look, it takes a lot of dedication just to run this web-site. And the list of Tim’s accomplishments are impressive, just the one’s you have mentioned. I have nothing but respect for anyone who dedicates themselves to any ancient concept, especially kung-fu (as there is little money in it) even if they couldn’t fight themselves out of the proverbial wet paper bag.

Dedication and time spent is the constant that can be used to evaluate anybody’s production, in any field (Not if you make money at it or if the public approves.) Picasso could hardly sell anything. Was he not a painter? Whether one likes it or not, isn’t reasonable criteria.

One’s legacy lies in production, which reflects effort. Effort is what keeps us from nature’s negative bias. Effort is constructive; it builds. I have put considerable effort into my posts. I have offered my perspective to further self-examination, and I found some great feedback on this site.

Tim and the people who took their time to examine the things we talked about exposed some good points and genuine interaction. Getting your perspective and others, was insightful.

I am richer for it.

I salute you all with the closed fist of determination and the open hand of acceptance.


Confidence in Character

MHW

MHW,

We've come full circle. You yourself say that your message is basically;

"It’s not about being a complete kung fu master. It’s about adding positive aspects to society (And the more the better). That’s the message. Instructors are in a good position to do that, if they choose to or not, it’s their decision."

The thing is teachers like Tim, the Gracies and countless others are already doing just that; if not by proselytizing definitely by example.

Good thread but a bit long winded to arrive at this.

- Erik

Mon Haw Woo,

The Nei Gong book is available through Unique Publications (the group that publishes "Inside Kung Fu Magazine"). You might be able to find it in the larger bookstores. All the copies I had are given away, or I would send you one.

This has been a great thread, call me competitive and less than emperor like, but I enjoy "debating" almost as much as fighting.


Everyone else,
My thanks to everyone who contributed here, especially Eric with the outstanding posts on Thai martial arts (dude, you should write a proper article for the Asian Journal of Martial Arts).

Hugs all round,

Tim

Mon Haw Woo,

Piccaso sold alot of his art while he was alive.

Craig

Thanks Tim,

Happy to. How do I get started?

- Erik

Tony Blauer has been quoted here previously for reality fighting. Below is a small excerpt. What do you think?

Here's how the system evolved:

Pain, Fear of Pain & the Flinch

In 1988 while working on an isolation drill, something unique occurred. Pain. Impact. Swelling. Fear. The drill was called the 'Sucker punch drill' and it blended verbal aggression, natural stances and any sucker punch. The defender had a mouthguard and ''no' offensive choices other than maintain a non-combative natural stance and he could evade, block or jam, but not strike. The aggressor (wearing 16 ozs. gloves) was allowed to taunt, gesture, point and launch a solo shot anywhere on the body at any time. That's it. The aggressor was allowed to encroach (in other words, there was no 'sparring' distance established) and the threats could be anything from any situation (money, mugging, bar room, etc.). This forced the defender to engage the aggressor cognitively and verbally without establishing any sparring-type rhythm. It also served to distract the defender from concentrating on the physical tools exclusively.

The drill was fantastic because true sucker punches are surprises even when your 'spider-sense' is picking up danger. Further, the learned muscle-memory style blocks and interceptions were mostly ineffective at extreme close quarters and especially with the verbal distractions (just like in real-life). With the verbal, the risk of impact, what resulted was natural 'startle-flinch' reactions to the suddenness and proximity of the attacks. The overwhelming conclusion was that sport trained skills, no matter how theoretically vicious or effective (against a consenting opponent, or ice or bricks and boards) did not readily appear when the opponent controlled the distance and time of attack. This drill and the research that ensured was huge springboard moment in the evolution of training for real fights vs. sport fights. What resulted from this innovative drill back in 1988 spawned the SPEAR System™ and inspired an entire martial movement towards more realistic training and tactical choices.

This and the following 3 posts were moved from a duplicate thread under Concepts - SysOp

Any sudden surprise movement can cause what we refer to as the 'startle/flinch' response. Sudden movement startles the emotional controls in our brain and causes the body's inherent protective mechanism to recoil from the danger (physiologists have termed this the withdrawal reflex). This action is evident in anyone (even trained warriors) and varies proportionally to levels of awareness or preparedness. But what is most important is to note that the startle/flinch moment is natural and human, it has nothing to do with skill or lack of; it is a behavioral response.

Why its not taught in other styles is simple. Virtually all martial arts of today including most of the modern eclectic systems are based on ancient and/or conventional styles. While many of these systems are very effective and well researched, their arsenals are generally based on complex motor movement. Further, most training evolutions are based on an ancient SOP (Standard Operating Procedure) where training and fighting was based on codes and ritual and specific rules of engagements dictated when, where and how fights took place. This explains why battles became duels, duels became challenges, and challenges became competition. This process creates consent, awareness and preparedness, therefore the combatants are able to adopt stances and create space prior to the proverbial trumpet call.

There has also always been an emphasis placed on winning with good form and using techniques from within the style. Putting this perspective puzzle together, one can appreciate why modern drills and training are still very structured.

Consider this: A boxer doesn't shuffle in a ready stance at an ATM machine to withdraw money. A Ju Jitsu player doesn't walk his dog lying on his back, A Tae Kwon Do player doesn't order Big Macs from a side stance, is this making sense? Real attacks occur when you are out of your arena. And all people flinch. The magic of the SPEAR System is that we show you how to make that work for you.

Good stuff. The article points out the importance of using all different types of realistic training drills.

Having opponents actually attack you with all types of unconventional methods without warning is a very useful sparring drill.

Tony Blauer has long been an advocate of "realistic" training with non-cooperative, full contact sparring practices as the most important method of acquiring realistic fighting skills.

We like that.

Thanx for the link rumbrae...
I just read the .pdf file on SPEAR...

"Always move towards and through the opponent..."
"...maintains forward pressure and has the options to strike..."
"... demands an equally explosive movement towards the threat..."

As a XingYi player... this sounds alot like the principles I have trained in... to anticipate and quickly deal with the initial flinch reaction then move towards the threat, in a linear fashion and strike quickly to disable the opponent.

Also, his "... close quarter muscle memory..." is seen in another expression in sports - aka the development of "motor engrams".
It is the repeated practice of the wu quan (5 fists)in XingYi that enables the body to develop motor engrams. The Xing and Yi can then occur without conscious thought - the form and intent combine instantly - and the resultant stike(s) should prove effective in the situations Blauer envisions.