# Sorry for my ignorance



## silatman (Jun 25, 2005)

Where does Falung Gung and Yoga come into the internal arts? Are they just other forms of Tai Chi?


----------



## Matt Stone (Jun 25, 2005)

Falun Gong is a religious doctrine couched heavily (and poorly hidden) in a qigong exercise program.  The Falun folks believe they will achieve supernatural powers if they practice their exercises.

Do a search on google for Falung Gong.  They have their own website somewhere...


----------



## clfsean (Jun 25, 2005)

Yoga is a good complement to MA & I guess can be viewed as a qigong type of activity. 

Falun Gong/Falun Dafa... whole other issue.


----------



## dmax999 (Jun 26, 2005)

Not sure this is entirely correct, but...

The idea of chi came from India before China, not sure if it originated there or not.  Yoga is an Indian art used to cultivate chi, or what ever their word or meaning of it is.  Da Mo came from India to China to teach the Chinese these exercises (It may not have been called yoga at the time but was probably very similar)  Da Mo did not teach martial arts at all, just exercises to physically strengthen the monks and improve their health.

The Chinese adapted these theories of chi and applied them to fighting systems.  Tai Chi is one of the most prominant martial arts derived from these teachings.

Tai Chi could be thought of as Yoga changed so it can be applied to a fighting system.  Though if you take that last sentence literally it would be wrong, because it takes the ideas yoga is based and turns it into a martial art not the specific positions or movements.  Yoga is not a martial art in any respect whatsoever.

There are differences between how yoga and Chinese systems believe chi works, and that stems from their common orgin being thousands of years apart.

Hope this is somewhat correct and helpful to your understanding.


----------



## brothershaw (Jun 26, 2005)

If I remember correctly the original form/style tai ji / tai chi was created from several other pre existing martial arts styles, much later on this splintered into the various versions existing today.


----------



## Matt Stone (Jun 27, 2005)

brothershaw said:
			
		

> If I remember correctly the original form/style tai ji / tai chi was created from several other pre existing martial arts styles, much later on this splintered into the various versions existing today.



Taijiquan, in all its incarnations, has far more to do with the older Shaolin derivative styles than it does with Yoga...  Many of the classical Taiji postures are found, unchanged, in Shaolin forms as well.  Taiji most certainly did not come about as a result of yogic study.  Even the creation myth of Taiji, attributed to Chang San-feng (known to be false, but widely circulated nonetheless), is one of combat, not meditation.

Certainly Da Mo brought yogic practices with him (as well as martial arts; I forget the name, but he was known to have been adept at an Indian empty handed system as well as yoga and meditation), but it wasn't the first exposure the Chinese had to meditation or the concept of qi.  

Qi and qigong are far less important to the study of Taijiquan than they are to yoga.  Taiji is a fighting art that employs the use of qi; it is *not* an exercise art that is applied for fighting.


----------



## brothershaw (Jun 27, 2005)

I find it very interesting that you seem to downplay  qi and qigong development in regards to its importance to tai chi. I agree that many people today are into tai chi more for health etc. and arent really learning the martial aspects however I have been under the impression the ability to utilize chi etc. was an integral part of the style.


----------



## clfsean (Jun 27, 2005)

Matt Stone said:
			
		

> Taijiquan, in all its incarnations, has far more to do with the older Shaolin derivative styles than it does with Yoga... Many of the classical Taiji postures are found, unchanged, in Shaolin forms as well. Taiji most certainly did not come about as a result of yogic study. Even the creation myth of Taiji, attributed to Chang San-feng (known to be false, but widely circulated nonetheless), is one of combat, not meditation.


Very true. Shaolin Ssu is only about 60 Km as the crow flies from Chen Village across the Yellow River. Some of the earlier Chen records talk about their practice of Cannon Fist (Pao Chui) coming from Shaolin.



			
				Matt Stone said:
			
		

> Certainly Da Mo brought yogic practices with him (as well as martial arts; I forget the name, but he was known to have been adept at an Indian empty handed system as well as yoga and meditation), but it wasn't the first exposure the Chinese had to meditation or the concept of qi.


There were boxing styles like Hong Quan (Red Boxing) around the Shaolin area before the Da Mo legends. What Da Mo brought was supposed to aid the monks there in their more austere practices of meditation. 



			
				Matt Stone said:
			
		

> Qi and qigong are far less important to the study of Taijiquan than they are to yoga. Taiji is a fighting art that employs the use of qi; it is *not* an exercise art that is applied for fighting.


Bingo...


----------



## pete (Jun 27, 2005)

Matt Stone said:
			
		

> Qi and qigong are far less important to the study of Taijiquan than they are to yoga. Taiji is a fighting art that employs the use of qi; it is *not* an exercise art that is applied for fighting.


matt, i agree with the second statement, but may be misinterpreting the context of the first. looks contradictory ???

i'd argue that removing or lessening the importance of qi work in tai chi chuan would turn it into or move it closer to being an 'external' art. it would be akin to lessening the importance of physical conditioning to a shaolin art. 

pete


----------



## Matt Stone (Jun 27, 2005)

You can have great "soft" technique, and do no qigong, and have great skill.

You can have great "qi", but poor technique, and all the qi in the world won't change the fact that your technique sucks...

Qi and qigong supplement and reinforce.  They are by products and secondary practices, not the primary focus.  That would be similar to saying that loading a rifle is far more important that actually firing it and paying attention to the things that go into good marksmanship...  

Qi is very important, but it "can" be done without.  I'm not saying to do without, I'm saying that technique is far more important...  The importance of qi has been overdone by the new age tree huggers who want to learn the martial art of non-fighting...

*Note the character next to my name...  it is "qi," so it'd be odd of me to completely downplay it's importance, don't you think?*


----------



## pete (Jun 27, 2005)

i think i understand where you are going with this, but still cautiously disagree.  

you speak in definite terms, so i give you credit for being more knowlegeable than me.  i question your statements based only on the training and knowlege i've had the opportunity to gain thus far, and may learn something from this discourse as well.

my understanding is tai chi is about balance.  your example of having great technique but no qigong: you may have great skill (kung fu) but not great tai chi.  the converse is less likely, since you really cant have great qi with poor technique, but if you did, it would still be poor tai chi.  example 1, may be able to defend against external forces (attackers) while example 2 may be able to defend better against internal forces (disease), but in both cases there is a lack of balance.

the martial element can't be done without qi and still be called tai chi.  just as your 'tree huggers' can't to tai chi without the martial technique.  its about balance.  

pete


----------



## brothershaw (Jun 27, 2005)

Matt Stone said:
			
		

> You can have great "soft" technique, and do no qigong, and have great skill.  (true)
> 
> You can have great "qi", but poor technique, and all the qi in the world won't change the fact that your technique sucks...  (true)
> 
> ...




This post is very clarifying of your views.
TO use your own  example you need bullets and a rifle and need to be able to shoot it well. If you can execute the techniques but dont have " internalization" lets say, you are missing the point of tai chi since its supposed to be martial AND have the internal aspects.
In other words if you are practicing an internal style, but still dont have the internal aspects whats the point? ( I dont say this in the context of a person learning the system, but in reference to a so called teacher level person)

YEs some people do overemphasize the chi side, because basically they dont want to go through the work of learning the martial aspects


----------



## Matt Stone (Jul 1, 2005)

brothershaw said:
			
		

> This post is very clarifying of your views.



Someone said that Taiji was about balance...  Fine.  Use the taijitu, the yin/yang diagram, to visualize this.

The Yang is the physical skill, the dot of Yin is the _qi_ that empowers the technique.  The Yin is the internal work, the expression and purpose of which is the dot of Yang.

Qi is not the be-all-end-all goal and purpose of Taiji.  It is a fighting art that was along long before the "health" aspects of Taiji were popularized.  But examine the diagram I've described above.  To me, at least, that is Taiji.


----------



## brothershaw (Jul 1, 2005)

I agree qi is not the end all or be all, but also as you posted qi and technique should go hand in hand for tai chi.


----------



## jkdhit (Jul 6, 2005)

http://falundafa.org/


----------

