STANCE TRAINING AND MENTAL CLARITY

Baguamonk1 advises in our Discussion Forum that stances are unimportant in Chinese martial arts, whereas we regard stances to be of paramount importance. The picture above shows Sifu Ronan Sexton and other course participants practicing the Single Leg Stance during an Intensive Shaolin Kungfu Course.

The following discussion is reproduced from the thread Dispelling Ignorance and Untruths: A Case Study of Baguamonk's Posts started in the Shaolin Wahnam Discussion Forum on 25th September 2006.

Stance training if performed correctly is excellent for training mental clarity.


Sifu Jordan Francis

Jordan Francis

Sifu Jordan Francis
Instructor, Shaolin Wahnam England
8th October 2006

African cake making and rocket producing

Baguamonk1,

This is the start of another series of posts not just to show the ignorance and untruths of Baguamonk1's latest post, but also to help Shaolin Wahnam students to develop mental clarity and to understand sound kung fu philosophy.
Your latest post (Post 47) is quoted in full, and is commented upon by instalments. Please note again that your post is quoted in full, not selected in bits here and there. In other words, my comments are directly on what you actually said and in its whole context.
So, citing your own admission, please see (Post 17) of The Benefits of Internal Force are not just for Combat and Post 24 of this thread) please don't start acting like an ass again by repeatedly saying that you did not say what is quoted, or that you were quoted out of context.

Originally Posted by Baguamonk1

Some of the stuff is just wrong or still being misquoted

Can you please pin-point which stuff is wrong or misquoted? You are in the habit of making wild and unsupported allegations. For once, can you be specific? Just cut and paste those parts you believe are wrong and misquoted. In this way we can have a meaningful discussion. Otherwise you are just saying untruths again.

It is interesting that you say some of the stuff is misquoted. Do you actually know that all the quotations are from your own words, and are quoted in full? How is it then that they are misquoted or quoted out of context?

Originally Posted by Baguamonk1

If you have read, or seen any of Bruce's material, you would know that he had some understanding of Chinese philosophical aspects and how they tie into the martial arts. You would also know that he did in fact emphasize spiritual cultivation, and there is even pictures of him practicing some basic ZZ postures. And that his bad habits began towards the end of his life.

This is another example of wild, unsupported statements. Without supporting with evidence, such as quotations from Bruce Lee's material, you could as well say that Bruce Lee or any Tom, Dick or Harry had some understanding of African cake making and how it tied into producing rockets. Of course, this example is outlandish, but it shows how irresponsible you can be by making wild statements without substantiation.

Originally Posted by Baguamonk1

In fact he was one of the first to publicize, and promote the philosophy behind the arts, and how they tie into real life. Well definitely not the
first, but perhaps one of the more recent and popular advocates.

Do you realize the innate contradiction in your statements above? Here your writing is clear, with one exception, but your thinking is not. The exception is the confusion over what the pronoun "they" refers to. Does it refer to publicizing and promoting, or to the arts? If "they" refers to the arts, what arts do you mean?

But more serious is your unclear thinking . You mentioned that Bruce Lee was one of the first, and then you said that he was one of the more recent advocates. Can't you see that this is a self-contradiction?

Let me make it easy for you to understand. Suppose there were 10 advocates, and we line them from 1 to 10, 1 being the first and 10 being the last in time of the advocates. If Bruce Lee was one of the first, he would be number 2 or 3. If he was one of the more recent, he would be number 8 or 9.

Moreover, the fact provided by you was wrong. It is well known that Bruce Lee's philosophy on his martial art was vastly differently from the established philosophy of Wing Chun or of Chinese martial arts in general.
For example, Bruce Lee himself said:

There is nothing better than free-style sparring in the practice of any combative art.

Quoted from "Bruce Lee's Most Famous Quotes" at

http://www.fightingmaster.com/master...#On-sparring


In contrast, established Wing Chun maxims advice:

The body follows the movement of the hands. The waist and the stance move together. Complement the hands with posture to make good use of the
centerline.

Quoted from "Maxims of Wing Chun" at:

http://www.wcarchive.com/articles/ma...s_of_Wing_Chun

Can you see the difference between the combat philosophy of Bruce Lee and of established Wing Chun principles? Bruce Lee advocated free-style fighting, whereas established Wing Chun principles advocate fighting with specific forms, which are not free-style.

Further dispelling of ignorance and untruths will follow.

__________________
Jordan Francis
Shaolin Wahnam Bristol Bournemouth
http://wahnam.blog.com/

Stance training if performed correctly is excellent for training mental clarity. Why it it so? It is because one has to clear his mind of all thoughts during stance training. When his mind is clear of all thoughts, it means he has mental clarity. Hence, if he has practiced stance training correctly for six months, he would have trained mental clarity for six months.

Jordan Francis Sifu Jordan Francis
Instructor, Shaolin Wahnam England
9th October 2006

Stances and Mental Clarity

Originally Posted by Baguamonk1

I did not mean to say you don't need stances to defeat a lesser skilled opponent, I meant that it does not have to be picture perfect. I already clarified even more on the same thread (and even on this one).so I don't see another reason for it.

This is another good example showing lack of mental clarity , and also where you could benefit much if you have some patience to follow my explanation.

You did not exactly say the following words, “You don’t need stances to defeat a lesser skilled opponent”, “kung fu stances are useless in fighting”, or “using stances in combat is less effective in free sparring”, and we never said you did. But your posts in this and other threads imply what we say is your ideas about stances.

Let me give you an example to make things easier. Suppose Tom said, “I don’t enjoy eating cake. It makes me sick.” Basing on what Tom had said, you commented, “Tom doesn’t like cake. It made him unhealthy.”

Now, Tom turns at you accusing, “Baguamonk1, I didn’t say I didn’t like cake. I didn’t say it made me unhealthy.”

Moreover, you came to our forum to praise Kaitan in a thread which debates whether Kaitan’s Tai Chi Chaun or Wahnam Tai Chi Chaun is closer to the original Tai Chi Chuan . It is significant that you came in not during the debate but long after the debate was over with overwhelming evidence that Kaitain’s Tai Chi Chaun was vastly different from original Tai Chi Chaun all its important aspects.

One major issue in this Tai Chi Chuan debate concerned stances. Kaitain was of the opinion that using Tai Chi Chaun stances in combat was less effective than bouncing about as in Boxing. We in Shaolin Wahnam are of the opinion that using stances is crucial in Tai Chi Chuan as well as all other styles of kung fu.

It is quite clear to anyone with mental clarity to see that in this context and basing on what you have written in this and other threads, you are of the opinion that stances are not effective in fighting, irrespective of whether your opponent is more or less skilled than you. Using the analogy mentioned earlier, if the debate was whether eating cake was healthy, it is quite clear to anyone with mental clarity that Tom was against eating cake, even though he might not have said this in exact words.

I would not quote here, but rather leave the pleasure and benefit of finding your own appropriate quotes in your posts. This will be a useful exercise on mental clarity.

On the other hand, if after reading our explanations you have changed your mind and now consider stances are very important not only in solo training but also in combat, please state so clearly.

By the way, stance training if performed correctly is excellent for training mental clarity . The golden rule in stance training is to relax.

__________________
Jordan Francis
Shaolin Wahnam Bristol / Bournemouth
http://wahnam.blog.com/

LINKS

Dispelling Ignorance and Untruths: A Case Study of Baguamonk1's Posts

Courses and Classes