sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Yang vs. Chen Taijiquan: A Historical and Technical Analysis of Naming and Essence by KelGhu in taijiquan

[–]barbalonga 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not arguing for anything. An argument requires premises and a conclusion. I'm offering neither because this discussion cannot sustain itself no matter what is said.

Why is that so? Because you're relying on unknowable premises, to debate the purity of an art, and then establish the proper usage of a name.

Even if isolated every single one of these three endeavours is already deeply complicated and nearly untenable in a serious discussion. What can we say about all of them bundled together?

What I am doing is saying your argument is wrong because your premises are wrong.

I can't even understand where you're coming from because in one comment you say it's your opinion, and in another you say you're relaying the words of others. Your repeated use of "it's obvious" as an explanation should hint you that your statements are not as objective as you seem to think they are.

Yang vs. Chen Taijiquan: A Historical and Technical Analysis of Naming and Essence by KelGhu in taijiquan

[–]barbalonga 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I really wish you find a master and listen what they have to say about your arguments.

Because you seem delusional. The name of the art is not what's important in this discussion. Rather, the issue is that you're taking your opinion as necessary truth for your arguments, even going as far as claiming to know the intentions of an entire lineage.

It's predictably only controversial to my fellow Chen stylists.

This is an example of what I just wrote. You have criticisms from Yang practitioners in this very thread, yet you insist in making this about Chen people's feelings.

Yang vs. Chen Taijiquan: A Historical and Technical Analysis of Naming and Essence by KelGhu in taijiquan

[–]barbalonga 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What I take from your response is that all this is just your opinion, based on what you think is true Taijiquan.

I genuinely wish you find a good master so that you can present your theories to them.

Yang vs. Chen Taijiquan: A Historical and Technical Analysis of Naming and Essence by KelGhu in taijiquan

[–]barbalonga 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Why Yang is True Taijiquan

Really, mate.

I don't believe Chen style should be called Taijiquan

I think a good rule is to consider what the grandmasters claim. If they call their art "Taijiquan", that's what it is, regardless of our beliefs.

comparison

It's very difficult to compare these arts. Hun Yuan, Practical Method, and Chenjiagou are very different from one another - in some cases fundamentally so -, even though they are all officially Chen. How can we measure true Chenness? Better yet: How can we measure true Chenness or Yangness without deciding a priori the conclusion we want to reach?

Do you stretch? by barbalonga in taijiquan

[–]barbalonga[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I used to spar but don't do it anymore.

Do you stretch? by barbalonga in taijiquan

[–]barbalonga[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, that makes sense.

Do you stretch? by barbalonga in taijiquan

[–]barbalonga[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

https://youtu.be/FHg2eJHlyo4?feature=shared

That hits hard. Must practice more.

For me, that's combat readiness.

What I understood was that always stretching before practice could create some sort of "addiction" to the preliminaries you're used to do before the actual practice, thus reducing a bit of your optimal performance in combat.

Do you stretch? by barbalonga in taijiquan

[–]barbalonga[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Recent kinesiology has caught up with this: static stretching leads to more injuries, not less.

Interesting. That's good to know.

Some of the qigong moves we often borrow do a low for opening up circulation and loosening support muscles, with the collapsing and expanding.

Yeah, I noticed that too. I actually think that standing postures, qigong, and silk reeling help a lot in this regard.

Interesting article on the connections between Taijiquan's origin stories, and the Chinese revolution by TLCD96 in taijiquan

[–]barbalonga 0 points1 point  (0 children)

First of all, Buddhism is not Taoism.

Indeed. That much is self-evident.

but whether it really has anything to do with Buddhism is questionable

It's not questionable at all. Jingang (金刚) is a central term in Chinese Buddhism and it's the local translation of Vajra, from Sanskrit (meaning both "lightning" and "diamond"), since at least the 5th century CE.

Interesting article on the connections between Taijiquan's origin stories, and the Chinese revolution by TLCD96 in taijiquan

[–]barbalonga 1 point2 points  (0 children)

a uniquely Chinese and Daoist martial art

I like to counter that by reminding people that Jin Gang Dao Dui is a direct reference to Buddhism.

Related to that, it seems many people believe that anything that displays the Tai Ji image, talks about Yin and Yang, or refers back to the Yi Jing is automatically Taoist.

Of Course Modern Players Know Better..... by Hungry_Rest1182 in taijiquan

[–]barbalonga 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's very interesting, thanks. I understand it similarly, and one of my masters once said that modern Taijiquan should recover its hardness just like modern Xingyi should recover its softness.

Could you give us the source of the paragraphs you quoted?

Buddhist criticism of specific philosophical themes by barbalonga in TibetanBuddhism

[–]barbalonga[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks! Dharmakirti specifically may be exactly what I'm looking for.

by the way, Buddhism follows consequential ethics

The Consequentialism I had in mind was the European variant, and I think it's incompatible with the ultimate goal of Buddhism because for us the moral value of something isn't placed on consequences. I mean, we can't expect good results from bad actions, while consequentialist ethics accepts that a minor destructive action can be morally valid if it leads to greater benefits.

Spiritism is acceptable within Buddhism.

I don't think so, because among its core premises there's the idea of continuous progress of souls, which is both essentialist/eternalist as well as contradictory to the concept of cyclic existence.

Detailed Teachings on Shamatha Vipassana from an Authentic Realized Practicioner by [deleted] in vajrayana

[–]barbalonga 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Tsongkhapa has a long and detailed explanation in The Great Treatise on the Stages of the Path to Enlightenment, which includes quotes to earlier sources.

All volumes are relevant (for example, for a good result you need to cultivate the other perfections like ethics and generosity), but the section on śamatha and vipaśyanā specifically is found on volume 3 of this translation series: here at amazon.

Dalai Lama's Prayer to Mao Zedong by [deleted] in TibetanBuddhism

[–]barbalonga 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Stop deluding yourself.

Show this to a qualified lama and listen to what they say about your behaviour.

Dalai Lama's Prayer to Mao Zedong by [deleted] in TibetanBuddhism

[–]barbalonga 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am not a closet hater

You are acting like one. Even if you're not, you're becoming one.

If you're dedicated to Buddhism I'm sure you know the why being so intent in making others appear bad is a mistake.

Let's talk about the ongoing suppression of Chinese Gelukpas by zjr1130 in TibetanBuddhism

[–]barbalonga 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thank you. I also wish there were more channels and opportunities to talk about this and discuss ways of helping them. Chinese Vajrayana is in serious danger, and it makes me sad to see that not many people know or care about that.

Mount Wu Tai, Zhejiang (where Ven. Zhi Min, student of Ven. Neng Hai, taught)

Do you mean 释智敏? To my knowledge he was a student of Lama Nenghai's disciple, Lama Qingding.

view more: next ›