Wu Wei Do?

[battlefields]

*fingers crossed*
I am hoping he replies in the worst way possible so there is lolz.

[IMightBeWrong]

*fingers crossed*
I am hoping he replies in the worst way possible so there is lolz.

I'm hoping he explains how "Wu Wei" is a foundational aspect of the martial arts. I'm also expecting that he'll provide some dull and completely redundant arguments about the differences between sport and street fighting.

[battlefields]

Precisely what I meant, zaohu. I'm also looking forward to the strawmen, insults, threats, ad hominem arguments and diversionary tactics. I've been cruising all day for lulz.
*fingers crossed*

[Dak]

*fingers crossed*
I am hoping he replies in the worst way possible so there is lolz.

he won't. It has been 3 days since his last response, and there have been two people asking him bluntly about lineage.

[Sri Hanuman]

He was the founder of Taoism, supposedly, which was originally rooted in the philosophy of Confucius according to my College World Religion textbook (I love electives). Although, technically, yes that would make him an early Taoist.

And probably not, but that is the most accepted source for the Tao Te Ching.

I'm by no means claiming to be an expert, but one of my bizzare hobbies happens to be reading. My reading list on Taoism:

Taoism was at no point rooted in Confucianism, the two are in many ways polar opposites, unless you count the later Complete Reality sect (And in some ways the Orthodox Unity/Celestial Masters sect, which incorporated a lot of ceremonial and religious elements) and it's off-shoots, which incorporated Buddhism and Confucianism into their philisophy.

Taoism is almost as old as Chinese culture, arguably originating from China's shamanic practices as much as anything else. Confucianism formed around the Warring States period (if I am not mistaken, that is,) right along the same time the Tao Te Ching (supposedly) came to public view, and was viewed as one of the more prominent (if not extremely vague and obscure) treatises on Taoism.

However, Taoism is by no means revolved arount the Tao Te Ching, and the accredited author Lao Tzu may either have been an invented person to whom many things were attributed for the sake of added credibility, or several people whose actions were attributed to a Lao Tzu, again, for the sake of building the myth. Not an uncommon practice in early China.

Sorry for the long-winded response, just my $2.

[IMightBeWrong]

I'm by no means claiming to be an expert, but one of my bizzare hobbies happens to be reading. My reading list on Taoism:

Taoism was at no point rooted in Confucianism, the two are in many ways polar opposites, unless you count the later Complete Reality sect (And in some ways the Orthodox Unity/Celestial Masters sect, which incorporated a lot of ceremonial and religious elements) and it's off-shoots, which incorporated Buddhism and Confucianism into their philisophy.

Taoism is almost as old as Chinese culture, arguably originating from China's shamanic practices as much as anything else. Confucianism formed around the Warring States period (if I am not mistaken, that is,) right along the same time the Tao Te Ching (supposedly) came to public view, and was viewed as one of the more prominent (if not extremely vague and obscure) treatises on Taoism.

However, Taoism is by no means revolved arount the Tao Te Ching, and the accredited author Lao Tzu may either have been an invented person to whom many things were attributed for the sake of added credibility, or several people whose actions were attributed to a Lao Tzu, again, for the sake of building the myth. Not an uncommon practice in early China.

Sorry for the long-winded response, just my $2.

Long-winded it may be, but its interesting and new information is always welcome. I'll have to look further into that, my world religion teacher may have been off on some things (probably history, since he was focused on beliefs of each religion more than anything).

As for the Tao Te Ching being "vague and obscure", its actually a pretty darn interesting read. A lot of its tough to understand, but some of the philosophy just seems to make sense.

[bjjgame]

I got this response today:

Finally someone asking better questions...

First off guys my intentions with Wu Wei Do are honorable. My blogs are just rants essentially where i vent about stuff noone cares about...until now i guess. In reality i'm a nobody in the martial arts world when compared to all the other styles out there. I just teach a sunday martial arts course once a week..so all this attention is kind of out of the ordinary for me and not really deserved to be honest. The only reason i'm responding is because i like where this topic is now headed...into Taoism, before it was just pointless chatter about "is he qualified" etc..which when you look at it from my perspective is just kind of babble since noone should care about a small town instructor like myself in the first place. Here is the first post i want to address..by whoever posted it.

These guys seriously call their Style Wu Wei Do? And they're martial artists? I don't see how "Doing Without Doing" is a good name for a fighting style, especially since its a concept taught by Lao Tzu who was a peaceful Confucian philosopher and and not a fighter.

My response:

My idea about Wu Wei Do and well put "Doing without Doing" is exactly that. Effortless self defense, you are correct Lao Tzu was not a fighter but because i do follow the Tao i felt it necessary to express his teachings and others such as Chuang Tzu etc into my own teachings. Remember, we do alot of eastern philosophy study to better ourselves and the world around us in our class..it's not just about fighting. This could be confusing but when you think of a self defense situation, a real one, it's better to relax and have a clear mind during it..in the attempt to make it effortless by training the body and the mind in class...so ya "Doing without Doing". I know someone corrected you about him being Confucian, but you have the right idea. So think of it in terms of someone just attacked you, but because you have been training your body and your mind ...it becomes effortless action..natural reaction to easily take control of the situation by using the techniques you feel the most comfortable with and by keeping a clear and open mind. That was my idea behind it's name and i probably explained it better on the "Wu Wei What?" portion of the website for forgive me.... and although it is all "different" that's kind of the point.

The Second post i'd like to address:

"So what i did was put together all of the techniques i enjoy and that i believe are viable in REAL fighting...NOT MMA."

I'm interested in this idea. What process, principles, experience, or philosophy did you use to determine what is effective in real fighting? In the interest of full disclosure, I'm 33 years old and have not been in a fight since I was about 13, so my judgement on "real fighting" is not grounded in experience.


My Response:

The process was simple, to evaluate everything i have learned from all of the martial arts i studied and continue to study and weed out the unviable flashy stuff that would most likely not work in real fights (like Dillman stuff LOLOL) so dissassembling what i learned and putting it back together with stuff that is reliable which anyone could really do if they took the time to think about it. Alot of martial arts instructors teach stuff to people that really just gives them a false sense of security and ends up getting them punched in the teeth and unconscious..saying WTF? I mean that's pretty much the idea behind bullshido.com aimiright? Weeding out the unviable crap ppl teach and calling them out. This concept i totally agree with...mc dojo's create little kids with black belts and that bothers me.

To shorten this, the principles and experience and philosophy comes from my personal life experience and truthfully i have been in alot of real fights, just look at the scars on my face LOL. So i took what worked in those encounters and my life experience to determine what would work and what wouldn't, but it is an unending process, one which will take me my entire life...but i feel is necessary.

Finally about my BJJ lineage since noone cares about anything else i've done LOL. When i lived in Colorado years ago teaching snowboarding i spent years training under Carlos Guitterez (hope the last names spelled right) he was out there from brazil and claimed to train with the Gracies which i didn't doubt due to his ground skills. After i moved back to wisconsin i ended my bjj training because although "rolling" is fun it's not very realistic..everytime i would "roll" with someone i would think to myself "Wow if this was a real fight this would be over already"..because of course striking and other attacks are not allowed during "rolling"...thus i moved on in my martial arts training. I do not claim to be the best grappler in the world, but i also don't need to because my stand up has actually saved my ass in more real fights than my ground work...so i commend those who train in only bjj but in truth you have to train in stand up as well to be a well rounded fighter.

I don't have alot of time on the internet due to my new baby being born last week, if i offended anyone with my blogs forgive me i really didn't expect anyone to care about what i was saying but now that you do i will keep it on topic with Wu Wei Do and less MMA. I try to promote the best i can on the internet but i just don't have the time to fully explain everything on my site so that everyone can be satisfied with an answer about all my techniques...

in closing..

I appreciate the questions..the good ones. I have no problem answering something that isn't just blatantly rude and that has a point to it. Try to keep it on topic though please, which is "Wu Wei Do and what it is and it's philosophies in training"...like i said earlier i do not teach BJJ or TKD. Wu Wei Do is a hybrid art of alot of different art forms so everything will be different..from grappling to striking etc. So please keep the topic polite and constructive....


I gotta run for now

Janik

[Sri Hanuman]

Long-winded it may be, but its interesting and new information is always welcome. I'll have to look further into that, my world religion teacher may have been off on some things (probably history, since he was focused on beliefs of each religion more than anything).

As for the Tao Te Ching being "vague and obscure", its actually a pretty darn interesting read. A lot of its tough to understand, but some of the philosophy just seems to make sense.

Unfortunately for the Tao Te Ching, it's very obscure even by Chinese standards.

You can never get an authoritative translation, only an interpreter's interpretation at best. And even much of that would be based on personal interpretation and the commentary which came with the text :(

The problem with the archaic dialect used in the Tao Te Ching, was no punctuation, no active, passive, singular, plural, or mood distinction. Hard to say where one statement ends and another begins, and a period in one place would naturally change the meaning of the whole statement, accounting for myriads of different translations.

Another issue, is that each ideogram can have several meanings, thus each statement can be translated in many different ways. Yet another reason for so many translations and obscurity surrounding the text.

If you want to learn more on these specific topics, read Livia Kohn's Lao Tzu and his Tao Te Ching, or Holmes Welch's Taoism, The Parting of the Way.

Definitely ask the instructor about his credentials. If he insists that Taoism originated from Confucianism, that's just poor scholarship on his part.

[IMightBeWrong]

Unfortunately for the Tao Te Ching, it's very obscure even by Chinese standards.

You can never get an authoritative translation, only an interpreter's interpretation at best. And even much of that would be based on personal interpretation and the commentary which came with the text :(

The problem with the archaic dialect used in the Tao Te Ching, was no punctuation, no active, passive, singular, plural, or mood distinction. Hard to say where one statement ends and another begins, and a period in one place would naturally change the meaning of the whole statement, accounting for myriads of different translations.

Another issue, is that each ideogram can have several meanings, thus each statement can be translated in many different ways. Yet another reason for so many translations and obscurity surrounding the text.

If you want to learn more on these specific topics, read Livia Kohn's Lao Tzu and his Tao Te Ching, or Holmes Welch's Taoism, The Parting of the Way.

Definitely ask the instructor about his credentials. If he insists that Taoism originated from Confucianism, that's just poor scholarship on his part.

If I run into him around campus, I'll ask him about that. My World Religion class was the semester before last, but that's one thing I particularly remember learning. I still have my notes from there, actually. I'd just have to dig them out.

I've got a couple of Tao Te Ching copies, one a shamballah and the other a barnes & noble classics copy. They're different, but not overly different. I'll look into Livia Kohn's book sometime soon, and possibly the others later.

[Sri Hanuman]

If I run into him around campus, I'll ask him about that. My World Religion class was the semester before last, but that's one thing I particularly remember learning. I still have my notes from there, actually. I'd just have to dig them out.

I've got a couple of Tao Te Ching copies, one a shamballah and the other a barnes & noble classics copy. They're different, but not overly different. I'll look into Livia Kohn's book sometime soon, and possibly the others later.

Check out Bill Porter's version as well.
He tries his best to keep to the original text (while keeping it coherent in as much as possible.)

PM me as well, if you like, or check out ref. material from my web site. I'll have a section on Taoism up in a few months, if time permits.