Xingyi Addict - form is emptiness and emptiness if form...

[Xue Sheng]

OK this may prove I have a real addiction issue here :uhyeah:

Ever since I read “form is emptiness and emptiness if form” in “The Xingyi Boxing Manual: Hebei Style's Five Principles and Seven Words by Jing Yunting" it has intrigued me greatly so I looked to find out if it was from any place else of just something Jing Yunting wrote. I found that it comes from the Heart Sutra which is a Mahāyāna Buddhist sutra. Now Hebei Style Xingyiquan is not considered a Buddhist style, it is considered an internal style and tends to be associated with Taoism (but that does not mean it is Taoist either). It could be that Jing Yunting was a Buddhist and he felt it applied or he could have read it in the heart sutra since it was published in China during the time he lived and again he felt it applied but I was still trying to figure it out. I then came across this by Shunryu Suzuki in his book Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind

Avalokiteshvara said: "Oh Shariputra, form is emptiness, emptiness is form; form is no other than emptiness, emptiness is no other than form." We need not go into the details of their discourse, but we can examine this statement about form and emptiness, which is the main point of the sutra. And so we should be very clear and precise about the meaning of the term "form."

Form is that which is before we project our concepts onto it. It is the original state of "what is here," the colorful, vivid, impressive, dramatic, aesthetic qualities that exist in every situation. Form could be a maple leaf falling from a tree and landing on a mountain river; it could be full moonlight, a gutter in the street or a garbage pile. These things are "what is," and they are all in one sense the same: they are all forms, they are all objects, they are just what is. Evaluations regarding them are only created later in our minds. If we really look at these things as they are, they are just forms.

So form is empty. But empty of what? Form is empty of our preconceptions, empty of our judgments. If we do not evaluate and categorize the maple leaf falling and landing on the stream as opposed to the garbage heap in New York, then they are there, what is. They are empty of preconception. They are precisely what they are, of course! Garbage is garbage, a maple leaf is a maple leaf, "what is" is "what is." Form is empty if we see it in the absence of our own personal interpretations of it.

But emptiness is also form. That is a very outrageous remark. We thought we had managed to sort everything out, we thought we had managed to see that everything is the "same" if we take out our preconceptions. That made a beautiful picture: everything bad and everything good that we see are both good. Fine. Very smooth. But the next point is that emptiness is also form, so we have to re-examine. The emptiness of the maple leaf is also form; it is not really empty. The emptiness of the garbage heap is also form. To try to see these things as empty is also to clothe them in concept. Form comes back. It was too easy, taking away all concepts, to conclude that everything simply is what is. That could be an escape, another way of comforting ourselves. We have to actually feel things as they are, the qualities of the garbage heapness and the qualities of the maple leafness , the isness of things. We have to feel them properly, not just trying to put a veil of emptiness over them. That does not help at all. We have to see the "isness" of what is there, the raw and rugged qualities of things precisely as they are. This is a very accurate way of seeing the world. So first we wipe away all our heavy preconceptions, and then we even wipe away the subtleties of such words as "empty," leaving us nowhere, completely with what is.


Finally we come to the conclusion that form is just form and emptiness is just emptiness, which has been described in the sutra as seeing that form is no other than emptiness, emptiness is no other than form; they are indivisible. We see that looking for beauty or philosophical meaning to life is merely a way of justifying ourselves, saying that things are not so bad as we think. Things are as bad as we think! Form is form, emptiness is emptiness, things are just what they are and we do not have to try to see them in the light of some sort of profundity. Finally we come down to earth, we see things as they are. This does not mean having an inspired mystical vision with archangels, cherubs and sweet music playing. But things are seen as they are, in their own qualities. So shunyata in this case is the complete absence of concepts or filters of any kind, the absence even of the "form is empty" and the "emptiness is form."

If I am now understanding what Jing Yunting meant when he wrote Form is Emptiness, Emptiness is form, it appears that I am over thinking this whole thing and it comes down to what Shunryu Suzuki wrote

Form is form, emptiness is emptiness, things are just what they are and we do not have to try to see them in the light of some sort of profundity

Which makes sense to me knowing what little I do about Xingyiquan and its directness… Which all really comes back to what my second Xingyiquan sifu said “Shut up and stand, I don’t want to hear it” :uhyeah:


Here is The Great Prajna Paramita Heart Sutra for those who are interested

THE GREAT PRAJNA PARAMITA HEART SUTRA

Avalokitesvara Bodhisattva doing deep Prajna Paramita Perceived the emptiness of all five conditions, and was freed of pain.
O Sariputra, form is no other than emptiness, emptiness no other than form;
Form is precisely emptiness, emptiness precisely form;
Sensation, perception, reaction and consciousness are also like this.
O Sariputra, all things are expressions of emptiness, not born, not destroyed,
Not stained, not pure; neither waxing nor waning.
Thus emptiness is not form; not sensation nor perception, reaction nor consciousness;
No eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, mind;
No color, sound, smell, taste, touch, thing
No realm of sight, no realm of consciousness
No ignorance, no end to ignorance
No old age and death, no cessation of old age and death
No suffering, no cause or end to suffering, no path
No wisdom and no gain. No gain-thus
Bodhisattvas live this Prajna Paramita
With no hindrance of mind--no hindrance therefore no fear
Far beyond all such delusion, Nirvana is already here.
All past, present, and future Buddhas live this Prajna Paramita
And attain supreme, perfect enlightenment.
Therefore know that Prajna Paramita is
The holy mantra, the luminous mantra
The supreme mantra, the incomparable mantra
By which all suffering is cleared. This is no other than truth.
Therefore set forth the Prajna Paramita mantra,
Set forth this mantra and proclaim:
Gate Gate Paragate Parasamgate Bodhi Svaha!

 

[mograph]

I think that once you "get it", you find that words can't explain it.

 

[blindsage]

Words are meant to relay common experience, or ideas that can be related in some way to common experiences. If the person you are speaking to doesn't have an experience that relates to your use of words then the words will have no meaning. That's why an intellectual understanding of something like Santi standing based on book learning bears little relationship to an understanding based on the physical practice. If you don't have the experience, the words have little meaning.

 

[seasoned]

Very good points all. It is hard to explain a feeling. The deeper the art the more you need a competent teacher to show the way. But even then......

 

[mograph]

Words are meant to relay common experience, or ideas that can be related in some way to common experiences.

Indeed.
All definitions are relative, or comparative. "It's like this", right?

There seem to be different levels of instruction in the CMA:
1) move your thing as I do, or place your thing here ("drop your elbows")
2) feel as if you're doing this ("feel as if sand is flowing from one leg to another")
3) be like this thing you've seen ("be soft like the willow")
4) do this thing that sounds impenetrable to the beginner, but not to those who've experienced it ("sink your qi")

The last one, I think, can be restated as a #2, then when the student hears a #4, he/she relates it to the #2. Eventually, when the student "gets it", being asked to "sink your qi" might be like being asked to smile.

But yes, a common experience (communication) is necessary for words to work. More practice?

 

[Xue Sheng]

Indeed.
All definitions are relative, or comparative. "It's like this", right?

There seem to be different levels of instruction in the CMA:
1) move your thing as I do, or place your thing here ("drop your elbows")
2) feel as if you're doing this ("feel as if sand is flowing from one leg to another")
3) be like this thing you've seen ("be soft like the willow")
4) do this thing that sounds impenetrable to the beginner, but not to those who've experienced it ("sink your qi")

The last one, I think, can be restated as a #2, then when the student hears a #4, he/she relates it to the #2. Eventually, when the student "gets it", being asked to "sink your qi" might be like being asked to smile.

But yes, a common experience (communication) is necessary for words to work. More practice?

Agreed, which leads me back to a good sifu generally knows what you are ready to understand (learn) before you do.

But staying within Xingyiquan

Xingyi being big on 3 has 3 levels of students and 3 levels of instructor all referring to 3 levels of skill and understanding. Or at least that is what I seem to be understanding based on training and reading.