Quote:
Keith Larman wrote:
... there is a difference between helping someone understand something esoteric about the nature of reality through metaphor or things like Zen Koan and then trying to explain how something is done physically and what "mechanisms" are in play to allow that to happen. We can talk about "ki" in almost mystical terms or we can talk about ki as in physical energy (or actually quite a few other things as well).
|
My point actually is to not split that up. I am convinced that the texts I have in mind, be it daoist texts of internal alchemy or certain texts of Ueshiba, connect information about the nature of reality, about how to live (or become immortal) and about how something is done physically in the very same sentence.
And I think this is characteristic for the used language. And is needed because of the underlying philosophy/spirituality: You can understand the spiritual nature or reality via physical practice. Body work is the vehical of enlightenment. Not only breathing, but using your limbs and core in certain way leads to philosophical knowledge and spiritual awakening ...
Quote:
|
However, that doesn't mean the entire domain under discussion is vague or imprecise for that reason. Some is without question vague and imprecise because we lack a vocabulary which adequately explicates what's happening.
|
I think most of the language is very precise. Problem is, it does not match our habits. We are not used to deal with certain terms and ways of thinking. But that is true for every foreign language we encounter.
Quote:
|
... I don't have an answer to the question when a teenager asked me "Okay, yeah, but what does that *really* mean?" I want that answer.
|
I think a worldview that only acknowledges something as *real* when it can be expressed in westen, scientific language or when it does fit into a westen, scientific paradigm does not meet the standards of the texts I have in mind. Nor does it - in my eyes - help to pass on a budō or an art like nei gong.
I think that given language is not deficient in the way it lacks the scientific knowledge of our age but it is adapted to it's content.
So when I put qi in my fingertips that does really mean that I put qi in my fingertips. I can do it, it happens, uke can feel it and is affected by it.
When a student asked me some time ago about what qi is , I gave him some qi gong exercises ...
Quote:
|
And I think we know vastly more about physiology, psychology, physics, etc. and as a result we are better situated now to hopefully expand the vocabulary some and maybe offer a better understanding.
|
It is my actual experience that those very old texts know a lot more then "we" do today.