Your method is killing you!

Forgive me all for lashing dead horses from back on May 10th: I have been away a bit. While I certainly agree that the tendency toward dogmaticism is a problem that oneshould watch out for, I find the vulgar language totally uncalled for. Everybody has a rightto express themselves here. You don´t have to read the mail if you don´t like it. Just erase it!

As well, reading through these last few mails, there seems to be a confusion in the language. I think each has its place and purpose. It is merely that one must clarify what he wants to do or accomplish and deal with each in its own context. When you start crossing these lines, you accomplish little. Could that be associated with that expression you Yanks have of "cutting off your nose for spite of your face".......or something like that? And, yes, I agree: Alfred, your notes are definitely not too long!

I recently did a Yiquan workshop with Fong Ha where his approach to 'standing' was more about determining what's YOUR natural comfortable posture rather than following a rigid set of 'rules' or alignments set by another person. I realize that the standard alignments are necessary to some degree but it was extremely freeing to practice standing with him in this way.

Def in agreement about William's comments [YAWN]...seriously? William, shut. the. fuck. up. Anyways...Its nice to hear someone actually challenge and/or disagree with what's being taught by certain instructors. One of the most frustrating & annoying aspects of training with Bruce is people's willingness to blindly follow EVERYTHING he says and never question anything he teaches. The postural issue is a BIG one and this discussion, especially the input from senior teachers/practition ers and bodyworkers is extremely helpful! (Alfred~ your posts are NOT too long, I'm learning tons from your comments. thanks).

Well with regards to William, I suspect he read my post as a sycophant to have up come up with his comments. I hope it is understood that my post was meant as a help.

I think you've hit the nail on the head, Alfred, with your comments about the musculature of the yao/kua. And yes, lordosis is a real threat in our culture. Thanks for your input.

I want to acknowlege William's comments and I agree that quite often folks get involved in ego matches and cut downs. I am not trying to engage in such. I am acctually very excited to be in this conversation. These postural and functional movement issues are very facinating to me. That being said I would like to continue with some other thoughts that I have had.

Most of the lower back issues that I see in my practice involve a hyper lordosis or swayback. Many of the things that we do in our modern lifestyle as well as some sport activities conspire to create this posture. The area most usually affected is the L4-L5 juncture which naturally has more curve than the others. This results in an anterior tilt to the pelvis.

Our practice of holding the pelvis posterior or tucked under and pressing the lower back out in some ways corrects this, even overcorrects.

In many therapeutic settings clients will be taught to exercise/engage their abdominals so as to bring balance to the pelvis. One thing that is often overlooked and yet essential is the Psoas and the illiacus and their role in balance and power. So many people have adaptivly shortened psoas. Quite often this comes from sitting too much.

If you tighten abs and hold the pelvis tucked then the spine will usually align correctly but now it is compressed and locked. The abs and the glutes and the deep six rotators are all in a lockdown struggle against the QL and the Illiopsoas group. Now what you have is good posture but no mobility.

What we want to create is proper structure with mobility. In this the pelvis is mobile and can tilt forward and back as needed. Our objective is to have a L4-L5-sacral region that feels "floaty" and loose. This way we can create wave motion that emminates from pelvic rocking and transfers smoothly through the spine picking up more power as it travels.

We want the pelvis to be mobile so that it can feel and follow and adjust to outside influences. Then when needed it can lock down and then release. There is more, like I said this is a subject that facinates me, but I will shut up for now as this post has run very long.

................WELL! I guess I haven´t been gone quite SO long after all! But that would only add to the waste on this site, and as we know, people do like to waste time and say things rather contra....well !

Ellen... I like what you said, but how do you really feel ?

I recently did a Yiquan workshop with Fong Ha where his approach to 'standing' was more about determining what's YOUR natural comfortable posture rather than following a rigid set of 'rules' or alignments set by another person. I realize that the standard alignments are necessary to some degree but it was extremely freeing to practice standing with him in this way.

Def in agreement about William's comments [YAWN]...seriously? William, shut. the. fuck. up. Anyways...Its nice to hear someone actually challenge and/or disagree with what's being taught by certain instructors. One of the most frustrating & annoying aspects of training with Bruce is people's willingness to blindly follow EVERYTHING he says and never question anything he teaches. The postural issue is a BIG one and this discussion, especially the input from senior teachers/practition ers and bodyworkers is extremely helpful! (Alfred~ your posts are NOT too long, I'm learning tons from your comments. thanks).

Well with regards to William, I suspect he read my post as a sycophant to have up come up with his comments. I hope it is understood that my post was meant as a help.

I think you've hit the nail on the head, Alfred, with your comments about the musculature of the yao/kua. And yes, lordosis is a real threat in our culture. Thanks for your input.

I want to acknowlege William's comments and I agree that quite often folks get involved in ego matches and cut downs. I am not trying to engage in such. I am acctually very excited to be in this conversation. These postural and functional movement issues are very facinating to me. That being said I would like to continue with some other thoughts that I have had.

Most of the lower back issues that I see in my practice involve a hyper lordosis or swayback. Many of the things that we do in our modern lifestyle as well as some sport activities conspire to create this posture. The area most usually affected is the L4-L5 juncture which naturally has more curve than the others. This results in an anterior tilt to the pelvis.

Our practice of holding the pelvis posterior or tucked under and pressing the lower back out in some ways corrects this, even overcorrects.

In many therapeutic settings clients will be taught to exercise/engage their abdominals so as to bring balance to the pelvis. One thing that is often overlooked and yet essential is the Psoas and the illiacus and their role in balance and power. So many people have adaptivly shortened psoas. Quite often this comes from sitting too much.

If you tighten abs and hold the pelvis tucked then the spine will usually align correctly but now it is compressed and locked. The abs and the glutes and the deep six rotators are all in a lockdown struggle against the QL and the Illiopsoas group. Now what you have is good posture but no mobility.

What we want to create is proper structure with mobility. In this the pelvis is mobile and can tilt forward and back as needed. Our objective is to have a L4-L5-sacral region that feels "floaty" and loose. This way we can create wave motion that emminates from pelvic rocking and transfers smoothly through the spine picking up more power as it travels.

We want the pelvis to be mobile so that it can feel and follow and adjust to outside influences. Then when needed it can lock down and then release.

There is more, like I said this is a subject that facinates me, but I will shut up for now as this post has run very long.

There's still time to do so............... ....WELL! I guess I haven´t been gone quite SO long after all! Armando

"You don´t have to read the mail if you don´t like it. Just erase it!"

Surely you realize the irony of this statement...perhaps not.

"I find the vulgar language totally uncalled for."

Uhhhh, see above.

"Could that be associated with that expression you Yanks have of "cutting off your nose for spite of your face"....... or something like that?"

You Yanks...how parochial.

"It is merely that one must clarify what he wants to do or accomplish and deal with each in its own context. When you start crossing these lines, you accomplish little."

You mean you absorbed little. The problem lies in your comprehension. And did I mention you added little (or nothing) to the current discussion beyond your typical bitch session?

Forgive me all for lashing dead horses from back on May 10th: I have been away a bit. While I certainly agree that the tendency toward dogmaticism is a problem that one

should watch out for, I find the vulgar language totally uncalled for. Everybody has a right to express themselves here. You don´t have to read the mail if you don´t like it. Just erase it!

As well, reading through these last few mails, there seems to be a confusion in the language. I think each has its place and purpose. It is merely that one must clarify what he wants to do or accomplish and deal with each in its own context. When you start crossing these lines, you accomplish little. Could that be associated with that expression you Yanks have of "cutting off your nose for spite of your face"....... or something like that?

YES! Bernie is exactly right! Expanding mingmen is the proper way of forming the connection to the ground, NOT tucking the tailbone. Thanks. Bernie repeatedly drummed into my head never to use the word "tuck" because he said that that would cause people to contract in a way that was harmful to them. He would say to roll the pelvis slightly forward. After taking BK's Energy Gates, I had been trying to continually tuck and had actually lost range of movement in the sacrum which I had to work back into for proper spinal motion. Of course, Bernie also taught about extending the mingmen back as does BK in Bend the Bow. I've done some of the Hanna Somatics floor exercises for getting the spine back into shape after getting slammed from behind by a truck at a stop sign. That happened twice in three years. I told folks I wasn't going to stop any more because it was too dangerous. Those exercises got all the trauma from the whiplash out in under a year. Physical therapy was $50 a pop, twice a week, and not covered by my cheap insurance. The used book was under ten dollars and

intergrated other body movements more clearly as well. It was a deal.

The body has a natural curve in the lumbar area and to force this curve to flatten by tucking the coccyx under is to defeat the body's inherent design function. I think it is fine to push out the lumbar, particularly in motion. But, in my opinion students hear the words wei lu zhong zheng and translate it as tuck the tailbone. Why? Why is this neccesary? Power? I don't think so. I also think that constant squatting builds the yao/kua in ways that westerners can't experience. AS far as xan xiong ba bei, I think geek neck is an understatement. I've seen (and had) a lot of kyphosis.

I take your point the xan xiong ba bei can be practiced in a sloppy way and become a geek neck with a dash of kyphosis. I'm curious to hear more about the second statement "As well, do NOT, when standing in zhan zhuan wei lu zhong zheng. This is contraindicative for westerners who are used to constant squatting." (I know you meant, "not used to squatting"). This seems like a question of method, whereas the first point is more about how people misunderstand and practice the principle.

IME, standing and trying to achieve the internal alignments that I've learned from Bruce and the senior instructors has given me a more unified sense of my body and in turn, it has been a rewarding challenge to learn how to apply them to moving forms.

As far as natural posture and shen fa go, it depends....you are always going to be trading "natural posture" for the way you choose to use your body. Depending on what and how much you practice, you might be choosing a high degree of adaptation and move away from what is natural (see Wolf's law and Davis' law -- bone and soft tissue, respectively, remodel according to the forces imposed on them). This is why an NFL linebacker will never win the Kentucky Derby -- at least not as a jockey.

I agree with you that the question of health should be paramount and that should inform the choice for 99% of people.

Thanks for bringing up these practice red flags, though. Always helpful to discuss.

I would definitely add three cents to it to make a nickel! Although I do think one should always have the brain functioning and alert........like a sword, it has two edges: and you can either (as someone once said) cut off the boil of ignorance and darkness, or decapitate oneself. I strongly dislike dogmatism, but I think too "open" a mind just produces fiddle-faddle which is, finally, obstructive of really deep and substantial development. Armando Like many others, I have followed this thread with interest and found valuable and substantive comments on it. I came to BKF's lineage after studying with several other teachers and my only regret is that I didn't land here sooner. While experience has taught me that it's important to maintain an attitude of critical inquiry in any internal school, the fact is that the corrections I have received from the current head of the school, and all of the instructors who have generously offered up their insights, have only been positive and helpful and my practice has been immeasurably enhanced.

While every teacher in the world can be subjected to valid criticism, I always find it curious, and a little sad, when people with tangible skill and a positive reputation turn around and criticize the methods or the teachers who gave them the foundation for that skill and reputation.

Just my two cents.

Fantastic note! Balanced and clear and I agree almost totally with you. But, again, sometimes people have language habits that are simply inadequate in certain situations, but they try to make do.........and just slough over the moments and incidents where it doesn´t seem to work so well. These persons may have valid things to say, but just do not know how to express themselves well........except to people who are on that same "habit-wave length". And there are others who can participate "there", but are also able to function in other types of environments. Both may be very valuable......but one sometimes has to have handy their handy-dandy Captain Midnight de-coder.

I have learned hard lessons about shelving critical thinking and swallowing teachings and practices, and I am too old and cynical to buy into personality cults. As I said, valid criticisms can be leveled at every teacher, and I don't think Kumar walks on water.

I don't claim to have high level skills for good reason, but I have some skill, and some discernment about what constitutes good teaching, and good methods. That said, Kumar's teachings have enhanced my practice which in turn enhances my life. His methods are in fact superior to any others I have experienced. And I'm pretty sure they're not killing me.

I haven't had the pleasure of making Buddy's acquaintance, though I've heard him mentioned by many Energy Arts students in the short time I've been involved, and have gathered that he invested a great deal of time and energy studying with BKF and developed tangible skill. Among those that I've heard speak of him, he has a good reputation as a skillful martial arts practitioner and teacher. In short, people I respect, respect him....

Having studied with and left a number of schools and teachers in my wake, I trust that he (Buddy) has valid reasons for no longer being "in the fold", but I'm not curious about or interested in those reasons, because I have valid reasons for currently being in the aforementioned fold.

So Buddy, to answer your question in response to my previous post: "Why is that, Bruce?"

Let me ask who you would be, and what level of skill you would possess if you'd never studied with Kumar?

Isn't this a man and a method you've received immense value from? Isn't this a man and a method you owe a substantial percentage of your internal arts skill to? Isn't this a man and a method that has played an important and positive role in your life? And even if you have valid criticisms, isn't the title of the thread a bit of melodramatic hyperbole? What damage have you suffered from following his training methods?

I may have it all wrong, and I apologize if I do.... but I find your criticisms curious and sad that's all. Like I would find it curious and sad if someone said, "My father loved me and he raised me to be a good man, and when he died he left me a fortune..... But I go to his grave and piss on it every day because goddamnit, he didn't buy me the bicycle I wanted when I was ten."

Well, I really did not want to say anything negative to "touch you off" - it seems to be so easy to do so - but it is nice to know that I am not the only one you feel the need to insult because of such a superior sense that you never have to give a damn. Your detailed reply.....well, at least you sort of tried!......was really weird and pathetic and irrational. What is your problem, Buddy? Why don´t you finally grow up? You say some very good stuff sometimes, and have obviously had a lot of good experience and capacity, so why do you still have that necessity to use that to slap people in the face. It really is rather infantile. Pity you do not want to really be a part of the human race. It is pretty nice a lot of the time.

Sigh. I am not usually given to explaining my motives nor caring about other's opinions. I simply cannot be bothered to be interested in the countless reputations I might gather. As most who know me understand, I have a very rich and fulfilled life.

"Isn't this a man and a method you've received immense value from?"

All the skill I have ever gained has been my own gongfu. A teacher can only point the way. Kumar pointed A way. Not the way. I have seen the good and the bad. I've weighed both and the results should be obvious.

"Isn't this a man and a method you owe a substantial percentage of your internal arts skill to?"

See above. ALL my skill comes from my own practice and research. There is information. From this, with practice, can come knowledge. Skill is an entirely different matter.

"Isn't this a man and a method that has played an important and positive role in your life?"

Important yes. In both directions. Positive? We wouldn't be having this dicussion if that answer was not also obvious. There are many stories and tales I am not willing to tell. Some I have elsewhere. If these sordid issues interest you they can be found.

"And even if you have valid criticisms, isn't the title of the thread a bit of melodramatic hyperbole?"

Hmmm. You might think so. Your opinion about this doesn't matter to me one way or the other. And since words have actual meanings, you'd have to define your use of 'hyperbole' here.

"What damage have you suffered from following his training methods?"

My physical issues may have a number of causes, I don't know. That does not negate the fact that the method seriously violates quite obvious kinesthtic principles. Let's not make this about personalities.

"I may have it all wrong, and I apologize if I do.... but I find your criticisms curious and sad that's all."

And I am not without experience with such passive aggressive clap trap. " Like I would find it curious and sad if someone said, "My father loved me and he raised me to be a good man, and when he died he left me a fortune..... But I go to his grave and piss on it every day because goddamnit, he didn't buy me the bicycle I wanted when I was ten."

I cannot buy into your "curious and sad" mindset. Take what I say, or leave it. It doesn't matter to me. I'm not your teacher so we owe each other nothing. You've heard from those who know me, some who have learned from me. Beyond that I have nothing to offer you. My thoughts and teachings stand for themselves. React as you will to them. But please, leave the psycho babble out of it for me. I'm immune.

Fair enough, good luck with all that. Sigh. I am not usually given to explaining my motives nor caring about other's opinions. I simply cannot be bothered to be interested in the countless reputations I might gather. As most who know me understand, I have a very rich and fulfilled life.

"Isn't this a man and a method you've received immense value from?"

All the skill I have ever gained has been my own gongfu. A teacher can only point the way. Kumar pointed A way. Not the way. I have seen the good and the bad. I've weighed both and the results should be obvious.

"Isn't this a man and a method you owe a substantial percentage of your internal arts skill to?"

See above. ALL my skill comes from my own practice and research. There is information. From this, with practice, can come knowledge. Skill is an entirely different matter.

"Isn't this a man and a method that has played an important and positive role in your life?"

Important yes. In both directions. Positive? We wouldn't be having this dicussion if that answer was not also obvious. There are many stories and tales I am not willing to tell. Some I have elsewhere. If these sordid issues interest you they can be found.

"And even if you have valid criticisms, isn't the title of the thread a bit of melodramatic hyperbole?"

Hmmm. You might think so. Your opinion about this doesn't matter to me one way or the other. And since words have actual meanings, you'd have to define your use of 'hyperbole' here.

"What damage have you suffered from following his training methods?"

My physical issues may have a number of causes, I don't know. That does not negate the fact that the method seriously violates quite obvious kinesthtic principles. Let's not make this about personalities.

"I may have it all wrong, and I apologize if I do.... but I find your criticisms curious and sad that's all."

And I am not without experience with such passive aggressive clap trap.

" Like I would find it curious and sad if someone said, "My father loved me and he raised me to be a good man, and when he died he left me a fortune..... But I go to his grave and piss on it every day because goddamnit, he didn't buy me the bicycle I wanted when I was ten."

I cannot buy into your "curious and sad" mindset. Take what I say, or leave it. It doesn't matter to me. I'm not your teacher so we owe each other nothing. You've heard from those who know me, some who have learned from me. Beyond that I have nothing to offer you. My thoughts and teachings stand for themselves. React as you will to them. But please, leave the psycho babble out of it for me. I'm immune.

You know Bruce Hayden so well? No? Then why the presumption..............again!I have been fortunate to study with a number of world class teachers for many years. Luo Dexiu and Victor DeThouars to name two. Perhaps you should get out more.

Fair enough, good luck with all that.
Sigh. I am not usually given to explaining my motives nor caring about other's opinions. I simply cannot be bothered to be interested in the countless reputations I might gather. As most who know me understand, I have a very rich and fulfilled life.

"Isn't this a man and a method you've received immense value from?"

All the skill I have ever gained has been my own gongfu. A teacher can only point the way. Kumar pointed A way. Not the way. I have seen the good and the bad. I've weighed both and the results should be obvious.

"Isn't this a man and a method you owe a substantial percentage of your internal arts skill to?"

See above. ALL my skill comes from my own practice and research. There is information. From this, with practice, can come knowledge. Skill is an entirely different matter.

"Isn't this a man and a method that has played an important and positive role in your life?"

Important yes. In both directions. Positive? We wouldn't be having this dicussion if that answer was not also obvious. There are many stories and tales I am not willing to tell. Some I have elsewhere. If these sordid issues interest you they can be found.

"And even if you have valid criticisms, isn't the title of the thread a bit of melodramatic hyperbole?"

Hmmm. You might think so. Your opinion about this doesn't matter to me one way or the other. And since words have actual meanings, you'd have to define your use of 'hyperbole' here.

"What damage have you suffered from following his training methods?"

My physical issues may have a number of causes, I don't know. That does not negate the fact that the method seriously violates quite obvious kinesthtic principles. Let's not make this about personalities.

"I may have it all wrong, and I apologize if I do.... but I find your criticisms curious and sad that's all."

And I am not without experience with such passive aggressive clap trap.

" Like I would find it curious and sad if someone said, "My father loved me and he raised me to be a good man, and when he died he left me a fortune..... But I go to his grave and piss on it every day because goddamnit, he didn't buy me the bicycle I wanted when I was ten."

I cannot buy into your "curious and sad" mindset. Take what I say, or leave it. It doesn't matter to me. I'm not your teacher so we owe each other nothing. You've heard from those who know me, some who have learned from me. Beyond that I have nothing to offer you. My thoughts and teachings stand for themselves. React as you will to them. But please, leave the psycho babble out of it for me. I'm immune.

Time to do what?............oh, I forgot: you don´t speak English so good............

There's still time to do so...

............ ....WELL! I guess I haven´t been gone quite SO long after all! Armando

"How would Huntley and / or Brinkley do it ?"

But that would only add to the waste on this site, and as we know, people do like to waste time and say things rather contra....well !

Ellen... I like what you said, but how do you really feel ?

I recently did a Yiquan workshop with Fong Ha where his approach to 'standing' was more about determining what's YOUR natural comfortable posture rather than following a rigid set of 'rules' or alignments set by another person. I realize that the standard alignments are necessary to some degree but it was extremely freeing to practice standing with him in this way.

Def in agreement about William's comments [YAWN]...seriously? William, shut. the. fuck. up. Anyways...Its nice to hear someone actually challenge and/or disagree with what's being taught by certain instructors. One of the most frustrating & annoying aspects of training with Bruce is people's willingness to blindly follow EVERYTHING he says and never question anything he teaches. The postural issue is a BIG one and this discussion, especially the input from senior teachers/practition ers and bodyworkers is extremely helpful! (Alfred~ your posts are NOT too long, I'm learning tons from your comments. thanks).

Well with regards to William, I suspect he read my post as a sycophant to have up come up with his comments. I hope it is understood that my post was meant as a help.

I think you've hit the nail on the head, Alfred, with your comments about the musculature of the yao/kua. And yes, lordosis is a real threat in our culture. Thanks for your input.

I want to acknowlege William's comments and I agree that quite often folks get involved in ego matches and cut downs. I am not trying to engage in such. I am acctually very excited to be in this conversation. These postural and functional movement issues are very facinating to me. That being said I would like to continue with some other thoughts that I have had.

Most of the lower back issues that I see in my practice involve a hyper lordosis or swayback. Many of the things that we do in our modern lifestyle as well as some sport activities conspire to create this posture. The area most usually affected is the L4-L5 juncture which naturally has more curve than the others. This results in an anterior tilt to the pelvis.

Our practice of holding the pelvis posterior or tucked under and pressing the lower back out in some ways corrects this, even overcorrects.

In many therapeutic settings clients will be taught to exercise/engage their abdominals so as to bring balance to the pelvis. One thing that is often overlooked and yet essential is the Psoas and the illiacus and their role in balance and power. So many people have adaptivly shortened psoas. Quite often this comes from sitting too much.

If you tighten abs and hold the pelvis tucked then the spine will usually align correctly but now it is compressed and locked. The abs and the glutes and the deep six rotators are all in a lockdown struggle against the QL and the Illiopsoas group. Now what you have is good posture but no mobility.

What we want to create is proper structure with mobility. In this the pelvis is mobile and can tilt forward and back as needed. Our objective is to have a L4-L5-sacral region that feels "floaty" and loose. This way we can create wave motion that emminates from pelvic rocking and transfers smoothly through the spine picking up more power as it travels.

We want the pelvis to be mobile so that it can feel and follow and adjust to outside influences. Then when needed it can lock down and then release.

There is more, like I said this is a subject that facinates me, but I will shut up for now as this post has run very long.

Boy, Muddy, you just do not learn! First, go back to grammar school and try seriously to learn a little English. Then try a few vitamins or something so that you make things function. And then work on that anti-human chip you always have on your shoulder.

"You don´t have to read the mail if you don´t like it. Just erase it!"

Surely you realize the irony of this statement... perhaps not.

"I find the vulgar language totally uncalled for."

Uhhhh, see above.

"Could that be associated with that expression you Yanks have of "cutting off your nose for spite of your face"....... or something like that?"

You Yanks...how parochial.

"It is merely that one must clarify what he wants to do or accomplish and deal with each in its own context. When you start crossing these lines, you accomplish little."

You mean you absorbed little. The problem lies in your comprehension. And did I mention you added little (or nothing) to the current discussion beyond your typical bitch session?

Forgive me all for lashing dead horses from back on May 10th: I have been away a bit. While I certainly agree that the tendency toward dogmaticism is a problem that one

should watch out for, I find the vulgar language totally uncalled for. Everybody has a right
to express themselves here. You don´t have to read the mail if you don´t like it. Just
erase it!

As well, reading through these last few mails, there seems to be a confusion in the language. I think each has its place and purpose. It is merely that one must clarify what
he wants to do or accomplish and deal with each in its own context. When you start
crossing these lines, you accomplish little. Could that be associated with that expression you Yanks have of "cutting off your nose for spite of your face"....... or something like that?

And, yes, I agree: Alfred, your notes are definitely not too long!

I recently did a Yiquan workshop with Fong Ha where his approach to 'standing' was more about determining what's YOUR natural comfortable posture rather than following a rigid set of 'rules' or alignments set by another person. I realize that the standard alignments are necessary to some degree but it was extremely freeing to practice standing with him in this way.

Def in agreement about William's comments [YAWN]...seriously? William, shut. the. fuck. up. Anyways...Its nice to hear someone actually challenge and/or disagree with what's being taught by certain instructors. One of the most frustrating & annoying aspects of training with Bruce is people's willingness to blindly follow EVERYTHING he says and never question anything he teaches. The postural issue is a BIG one and this discussion, especially the input from senior teachers/practition ers and bodyworkers is extremely helpful! (Alfred~ your posts are NOT too long, I'm learning tons from your comments. thanks).

Well with regards to William, I suspect he read my post as a sycophant to have up come up with his comments. I hope it is understood that my post was meant as a help.

I think you've hit the nail on the head, Alfred, with your comments about the musculature of the yao/kua. And yes, lordosis is a real threat in our culture. Thanks for your input.

I want to acknowlege William's comments and I agree that quite often folks get involved in ego matches and cut downs. I am not trying to engage in such. I am acctually very excited to be in this conversation. These postural and functional movement issues are very facinating to me. That being said I would like to continue with some other thoughts that I have had.

Most of the lower back issues that I see in my practice involve a hyper lordosis or swayback. Many of the things that we do in our modern lifestyle as well as some sport activities conspire to create this posture. The area most usually affected is the L4-L5 juncture which naturally has more curve than the others. This results in an anterior tilt to the pelvis.

Our practice of holding the pelvis posterior or tucked under and pressing the lower back out in some ways corrects this, even overcorrects.

In many therapeutic settings clients will be taught to exercise/engage their abdominals so as to bring balance to the pelvis. One thing that is often overlooked and yet essential is the Psoas and the illiacus and their role in balance and power. So many people have adaptivly shortened psoas. Quite often this comes from sitting too much.

If you tighten abs and hold the pelvis tucked then the spine will usually align correctly but now it is compressed and locked. The abs and the glutes and the deep six rotators are all in a lockdown struggle against the QL and the Illiopsoas group. Now what you have is good posture but no mobility.

What we want to create is proper structure with mobility. In this the pelvis is mobile and can tilt forward and back as needed. Our objective is to have a L4-L5-sacral region that feels "floaty" and loose. This way we can create wave motion that emminates from pelvic rocking and transfers smoothly through the spine picking up more power as it travels.

We want the pelvis to be mobile so that it can feel and follow and adjust to outside influences. Then when needed it can lock down and then release.

There is more, like I said this is a subject that facinates me, but I will shut up for now as this post has run very long.

Time to be gone so lone, Army,. And it's so well, not so good. Who doesn't speak English so well? Ah, irony.

Time to do what?....... .....oh, I forgot: you don´t speak English so good........ ....Well enough to read the same old tired passive aggresive, Army. But you are well conversant with that as well.

Did you not see where I can't care about others opinions Army? Yours more than others. Please see your previous ironic reply. Why can't you learn from your own advice? Odd.

Well, I really did not want to say anything negative to "touch you off" - it seems to be so easy to do so - but it is nice to know that I am not the only one you feel the need to insult because of such a superior sense that you never have to give a damn. Your detailed reply.....well, at least you sort of tried!...... was really weird and pathetic and irrational. What is your problem, Buddy? Why don´t you finally grow up? You say some very good stuff sometimes, and have obviously had a lot of good experience and capacity, so why do you still have that necessity to use that to slap people in the face. It really is rather infantile. Pity you do not want to really be a part of the human race. It is pretty nice a lot of the time. It is so interesting to see that you can never respond to criticism, even sort of academic stuff, without plunging your ego into it so personally, always with that necessity of personally insulting people. You have enough years on you! Grow up awready!

"I cannot accept such a self anointed behavior lacking respect for the teacher one has learnt from nevertheless not accepting that he also is a human being having perhaps his problems and weaknesses which such thoughtless criticism whom you critisize does not put in consideration. "

First of al,l I could not possibly care less what accept or not, you are unimportant to me. Secondly, once again you create a stupid straw man and rail against that, typically. If you had the ability to read what was actually there, instead of what you chose to interpret, you have seen that my criticism was with the method and not Bruce. And I do nothing with out thought, son.

"The second point in a similar behavior towards me not having the luck easily meeting BK lacks similarily the foundations. The training materials of BK give a certain access to the practice especially by the tapes and videos. Denying that and how real transmissions and initiations work also without the presence of teacher but in such materials may hint that such person lacks a real understanding of such processes where a respect towards the teacher beyond all criticism you may have and utter is helpful"

Horse shit. Everything Bruce has ever taught must be learned live. To even insinuate that you could begin to understand the subtly and complexity of such work demonstrates how clueless you truly are. BTW, my studying with Bruce was not luck, I moved across a continent to do so.

"So dear Buddy it may well be that you missed certain important points in your career so interesting your remarks are for me"

That may be, but you are incapable of judging that. You are clearly just another keyboard dilettante.
A someone very wise once said, "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt". You may want to study up on that one.

I cannot accept such a self anointed behavior lacking respect for the teacher one has learnt from nevertheless not accepting that he also is a human being having perhaps his problems and weaknesses which such thoughtless criticism whom you critisize does not put in consideration.

The second point in a similar behavior towards me not having the luck easily meeting BK lacks similarily the foundations. The training materials of BK give a certain access to the practice especially by the tapes and videos. Denying that and how real transmissions and initiations work also without the presence of teacher but in such materials may hint that such person lacks a real understanding of such processes where a respect towards the teacher beyond all criticism you may have and utter is helpful.

So dear Buddy it may well be that you missed certain important points in your career so interesting your remarks are for me.

"But in the meantime I doubt if this criticism of Bruce is really a valid one."although this:

"though having never had an instruction on the basis of BK."
sort of renders your criticism totally invalid. Perhaps you should only speak of things you actually do know, young Skywalker.

I follow with a certain interest this discussion knowing the points by Mantak Chia and his pretension not shared by Juan Li as I could be seen in their demonstrations that this rounding of the back with a breast drawn inwardly is not the last word of effective fighting and a demonstration of the flexibility of no resistance in Tai Chi.

Surely I like also very much criticism as a means for learning something. But in the meantime I doubt if this criticism of Bruce is really a valid one.

BK as you know was badly damaged by a car accident and it is a wonder that he could recover for again fighting and training others. But in a restricted way as a surely very quick but waddling Buddha as he calls it due to the style and restrictions of his accident and perhaps some blocks he did not work in the meantime as a human fault if you like.

So I wonder indeed that his back is rather bowed having not such dropped shoulders for freeing the neck and shoulders for a upright head nearer to a lower practice extending the head even forward having not sufficiently worked the neck.

Normally in his style and teaching the spine should be very movable beginning already with rolling down and then up the spine for making it movable not to speak of the sung or song of letting go the whole structure downwards for getting the real one through certain imbalances caused this way as I learned by the discussion strig and experienced myself though having never had an instruction on the basis of BK.

That you may get kyphosis or lordosis this way is likely and should be considered.
So I was rather astonished after having made much crane neck exercises and turning of the head in circling the body in a Tibetan Qigong of Lama Fofu how stiff also in the spine and neck I am in reality by using the unblocking massage techniques of Dr. Baolin Wu of the 9 Dragon Gate Qigong of the Dragon sect. There is still an impressing cracking of the discs to be worked through for getting the full movability in all directions in the head, neck and chest region not to speak of kwa what I have not worked out yet like leg, knees and feet.

I think one teacher cannot cover up all aspects so that this obviously more beginners level of BK restricted by his car accident and being older now do not alter his great merits having introduced the water method and many interesting movements and parts of good breathing methods.

you brought up several points in your post but the essential message I think is that we have to be aware of not making any technique an end in itself. A technique is not the ultimate answer.

For example, after studying with BKF I learned NEVER to hyper extend an arm or a leg or almost any joint really. Later studying with new teachers I observed in some of the forms a lot of hyper-extension and that disturbed me initially because I felt that was wrong and in some ways an inferior qigong practice. Later I understood that the hyper extending in some of the forms have a reason and actually after performing the form itself I felt really good! So where is the right and wrong? The form is the form. It's also possible that I misunderstood BFK and took the rule of never hyper extending into basically everything! (my fault)

On the other hand it's true that if one has a bad back, hyper extending the knees for a particular routine is a very bad idea. I would appreciate if a teacher mentions other ways of practicing the same form in case of pre existing injury. (BKF seemed to warn us a lot in more specific instances)
As students and practitioners/ teachers we are also becoming more educated though trial and errors and more exposure to other methods as well. So I think that questioning the methods is good, our way of learning them, and where we are with our bodies to begin with. The latter is more difficult because awareness seems to come up within us more gradually and it's also part of our ongoing learning process.

In general I regard the Alexander technique as a pre-technique, we need to know what a normal body and use of the body in motion and stillness is first in order to learn something new.
A good example of this pristine body use is almost in any kid that has not started school yet, or watched already too much television. If you have the opportunity to observe one, go for it peace.

PS: You mentioned something about your ankles and feet I have trouble understanding, would you care to explain a little more? Will talk more about Alexander technique tomorrow or soon anyway:) !