First off, let us approach a tough argument. For myself, I recommend isometrics in replacement of even proper weight-lifting - as an absolute. However, proper weight-lifting - not the meatroid kind - is quite beneficial. It also has some isometric properties, as you have to focus very specifically on slow movements and proper form.
The two reasons for this advice are first - that I feel isometrics are more beneficial, and that second - without a seasoned trainer - it is hard to do proper weight-lifting without avoiding doing weight-lifting improperly and getting badly hurt. Isometrics can be dangerous, but weight-lifting is far more dangerous.
However, even though I am so absolute - it is "not always so," and there are many benefits to good weight-training. Further, there are certain physiques that respond better to weight-training than others. For me, even a very consistent weight-training practice did build strength and endurance, but did almost nothing but build just a small amount, while isometrics changed my life.
Weight-training is usually more beneficial to people who begin with a stockier build, as the muscle-mass they already have responds better to the practice. Try out what seems good to you. Further, understand that world-class athletes today usually combine isometrics with weight-training. This is fine in most cases. However, remember that world-class athletes have world-class trainers. It really is good to see both a doctor and at least do a consultation with a seasoned trainer (sadly, expensive) before beginning any kind of exercise routine.
Further, anyone should do some strength exercise and some cardiovascular exercise if they are to maintain good health. If you are very ill like me, then you need to be very moderate, but you need both practices as part of your life. You do not have to be working my own plan to do these things.
My own regimen is not exactly spot-on today, and I have had to cut out many of my isometrics exercises because the intensity is too great for my physique - as I am simply too ill. Alright, let me start with an ordered list of principles for an isometrics routine, and then I'm going to check on three books that I recommend for those beginning a practice at borders.com and see if I'm remembering them right, and if they are still in print. I may have to save a draft if things get difficult, but I'll find three books that will be worth owning for you - dear readers. The list.
1. You need to know your limits. The urge is to exercise too hard, and then to give up and just lay around. Stay moderate and pay attention to how you feel. If you feel like you're about to faint, its because you're about faint! Pay attention to your body when you exercise!
2. You do isometrics slowly. A true isometrics routine is very intense and builds a sweat and a great deal of shaking in the muscles. However, it is not safe to do quickly. There are tons of reasons, and the big two are that isometrics stretch both the tendons and the muscle fibers, and therefore you must not snap your limbs during the exercises. You can bust a tendon or a muscle in a way that means - it is over for that tendon or muscle.
3. The goal with isometrics is to move between positions with control. In most hatha yoga schools, they do not teach this at all. In hatha yoga, doing the asana develops strength and flexibility, and in some cases endurance, but the body control comes through moving between positions in a very controlled manner. It is very dance-like when done properly, and is also a very good training for dance. I do not strictly teach hatha yoga, but it is the largest influence on my own study and understanding of isometrics. In Pilates, this control is given a great deal of lip-service, but few of the Pilates exercises - some of them considered fundamental - can be done with enough slowness to allow for such control.
Okay, so I'll list the books next, and then we'll go into some things about the books, and I have another idea for an article about isometrics on my platter. My Dad sees a doctor today and will arrive at perhaps - 11:30 or so - and I'm going to go spend most of the day at Dad's. I may use his computer or simply nap-a-lot, but I will certainly consider doing more public blog work if another activity doesn't call to me in the evening. I'll save a draft, we'll list the books and just go over those very quickly, and then I need a break. Then the next article, and then - a split in the day's activities.
1. The Inner Guide to Yoga: A Guide to Yoga Philosophy for the Contemporary Practitioner. Michael Stone. ISBN: 1590305698. The major problem with choosing a book is that there were either academic-type books that are way too abstract for most people, or books filled with a bunch of chump. This isn't a sterling example of a good yoga philosophy book, but it is the best out of those I searched that I'm aware of and that isn't an academic-style philsophical text. It is generally good-form for someone practicing hatha yoga to at least have some awareness of yoga philosophy, and so I include this one here as part of good form. Also - a yogi should generally be a vegetarian - in the traditional sense of a, "yogi." The conservative Hindu diet is a lacto-ovo-vegetarian diet, and as a hatha yoga practitioner that is the traditional diet. We will talk nutrition in an article, and vegetarianism requires a great deal of explanation.
2. Total Pilates. Malcolm Muirhead. ISBN: 1571458018. This is a very nice standard book on the revisions of Pilates that have been made to make it more accesible to the general public. The only problem is that many of the exercises use fast motion to build intensity. It isn't that the exercises are without merit, but a better way of approaching isometrics is to build intensity through slow, flowing control. Still - it is an interesting book to try.
3. Essential Yoga, An Illustrated Guide. Olivia H. Miller. ISBN: 0811841154. This is the real hatha-yoga-book winner. It contains almost no theory or philosophy, but clearly sets out asanas and provides excellent basic routines. There are some asanas in the book that I would suggest that no one should practice, but most of the book is quite realistic in its expectations, and again - the book is quite clear as to the asana forms. It is definitely the best guide to the asanas in English, even if it doesn't have a potentate title or format. It is also still in print. I checked all three books, and they are all still in print.
So I break for just a few moments longer, and then I will return with another article, and then I'm going to need to rest for a while, and will also be going to my Dad's house until sometime later this evening.
Friday, January 9, 2009
Isometric Exercise, Part 1, Introductory Problems
I decided that since people get very excited about martial arts that I would start by talking about martial arts and then making a segue into isometric exercise, and yes - the two are more than related. I want to do a bit of my own martial arts biography, re-visit some self-defense questions a bit more in-depth, and then we'll make the segue that will lead to our first official isometrics article. I want to be careful about how I approach this, and I'm not giving any instructions as to how things will be done, but I will offer some introductory thoughts and some books you might read, and we'll just have to see how your own yellow-brick road goes.
When I was young I was a student at a Seibukan Karate school for maybe six or seven years. Very young, maybe 7 to 14. Seibukan has a reputation for being very traditional and also very reputable, although checking a school carefully is a necessity. My Sensei was very good with kids, and he taught a traditional style of Okinawan Karate with no fluff or glam, and the workouts were very tough for someone my age to endure, but I loved the school.
The humor of it all is that I learned left/right orientation, how to keep my shoes and athletic bag tidy, some discipline with exercise, how to pay attention - and I had a basic idea of how to fight. This was no big deal in almost any way! I obtained a 3rd degree green belt, and was held back from a junior brown-belt, although my next three months would probably have seen me achieve one. However, we moved at the time, and there was no such school where we moved next, and I didn't take martial arts for quite a long time.
Here is the next thing. I wanted to take Wing Chun. I knew that Bruce Lee was no good idol, but I had read some about the actual martial art and was attracted to it. Wing Chun can be taught ethically in the states, but the Bruce Lee-mystique and the fact that Wing Chun is a very harsh martial art mean that 8 or 9 out of 10 schools must be avoided entirely.
I made a mistake with one of those 8 out of 10 schools, and it cost my Dad and I a lot of money getting out of the mess of that mistake. Dad loves me, even though he gets very unhappy with me - and this was a good reason to be quite unhappy with me. I love my Dad as well, and we had a frank discussion yesterday that hurt him quite a bit, but he was frank with me and I was frank with him, and that was a good thing for us both to go through.
We will get back to Wing Chun in just a moment, and we will say "Hello, yellow brick road!" However, let us talk about self-defense now. There are semester or quarter term courses in self-defense at a local University or community college nearly everywhere in the states today. They generally teach some very basic techniques in case someone makes a grab for you in some way.
Further, you can carry that very small buck-knife - remember very small, for your own good! - and a can of pepper spray if you feel you need it. John "Leatherface" Gacy would be screaming on the blocks of a parking garage after a good shot of pepper-spray in the face, so don't scoff at the idea. It is legal and can be a big help if you need it.
Alright, so we'll make our way to our segue. In general - whether in self-defense or in combat - your body knows exactly what to do to defend itself, and that is the place to train yourself. In the NAMA taught in the military, that is the basic idea, for both special-ops and standard military. The special-ops are taught more, but the idea behind NAMA (its techniques are guarded information, but this isn't) is simplicity, efficiency, and something that can be taught in a very short period of time. Time is money, and even special-ops doesn't have need for much more in terms of such training. Think about what that says!
So we arrive at Wing Chun. The tale goes that a Buddhist convent in North China was undergoing a persecution, and that the martial art was developed by a nun named Ng Mui during that period. I know Wing Chun pretty well, and it does seem like it would be a fit for almost any female anatomy. So - this tale may be true - or at least partially true. Further, Wing Chun is a combat-art, and it is a very strikingly efficient and deadly martial-art. It can be taught legally and ethically, but you are not likely to find such a school.
The other characteristic of Wing Chun, is that unlike any other martial art I have ever studied, it is incredibly counter-intuitive. You are training the body to do things it would prefer not to do in an emergency situation, and both self-defense and combat are emergency situations. You are hyped on your own adrenaline, and in a moment of dangerous crisis.
So normally I would say - just toss the whole bag - as it is too counter-intuitive to be practical. However, there are some things I learned in my Wing Chun mistake that I believe are worth saving. However, I really don't have any urge to start a true martial-arts form. There are three reasons why. First, those who don't serve in the military can get by on a self-defense class, a very small buck-knife and pepper spray, and second, I am not in military service and will never see combat.
The third is that by getting in my pink leotard - LOL! (not a good mental image) - and hitting the yoga mat, practicing hatha yoga and Pilates, I learned more about martial arts than in 7 years of Seibukan and by watching and training Wing Chun - in my expensive Wing Chun mistake. I also spent some time watching videos of Wing Chun forms, and hath yoga and Pilates were still better.
If I had someone ask me about martial arts, I would tell them "Get a yoga mat, and hit the mat." What happens to the body in isometrics is that it develops an awareness of itself, and when a crisis occurs, your body responds simply and efficiently because of this awareness. Other than a self-defense class, I would tell you - very radically - that if you want to know how to fight, you hit a true isometrics routine and forget about any martial arts school in the country. People shouldn't have to fight, but when they do - an isometrics program is an unbelievable motivator to the human body.
This isn't to say that ethical boxing or wrestling isn't amazing, or that there aren't benefits to going to a reputable martial arts school - where they teach a martial art with no glitz and glam and you pay your fees. However, it is the isometrics that will change it all. I would love to teach what I know to students about isometrics directly, but I would have to consult a lawyer first, and that isn't reasonable in my life at this point.
Last thing on this issue: Isometrics are meant to strengthen, develop flexibility and endurance, and increase muscle control and develop body awareness - not turn you into a killer. I have decided that a couple of pieces of Wing Chun that go against the grain of our normal reactions are worth training the muscle and nerve fibers in as part of an isometrics program. However, I'm including them as part of achieving those goals of isometrics I listed above, and not to train Wing Chun - or even further - to make someone a killer.
Remember, inevitably any work requires some fees, and you have your own yellow-brick road to pave. We move on to the next article, and I wish I didn't have to be such a wet-blanket. However, life is not about being the biggest harda--. They wash those types of guys out of special-ops, because they are dangerous. Think about what that says!
When I was young I was a student at a Seibukan Karate school for maybe six or seven years. Very young, maybe 7 to 14. Seibukan has a reputation for being very traditional and also very reputable, although checking a school carefully is a necessity. My Sensei was very good with kids, and he taught a traditional style of Okinawan Karate with no fluff or glam, and the workouts were very tough for someone my age to endure, but I loved the school.
The humor of it all is that I learned left/right orientation, how to keep my shoes and athletic bag tidy, some discipline with exercise, how to pay attention - and I had a basic idea of how to fight. This was no big deal in almost any way! I obtained a 3rd degree green belt, and was held back from a junior brown-belt, although my next three months would probably have seen me achieve one. However, we moved at the time, and there was no such school where we moved next, and I didn't take martial arts for quite a long time.
Here is the next thing. I wanted to take Wing Chun. I knew that Bruce Lee was no good idol, but I had read some about the actual martial art and was attracted to it. Wing Chun can be taught ethically in the states, but the Bruce Lee-mystique and the fact that Wing Chun is a very harsh martial art mean that 8 or 9 out of 10 schools must be avoided entirely.
I made a mistake with one of those 8 out of 10 schools, and it cost my Dad and I a lot of money getting out of the mess of that mistake. Dad loves me, even though he gets very unhappy with me - and this was a good reason to be quite unhappy with me. I love my Dad as well, and we had a frank discussion yesterday that hurt him quite a bit, but he was frank with me and I was frank with him, and that was a good thing for us both to go through.
We will get back to Wing Chun in just a moment, and we will say "Hello, yellow brick road!" However, let us talk about self-defense now. There are semester or quarter term courses in self-defense at a local University or community college nearly everywhere in the states today. They generally teach some very basic techniques in case someone makes a grab for you in some way.
Further, you can carry that very small buck-knife - remember very small, for your own good! - and a can of pepper spray if you feel you need it. John "Leatherface" Gacy would be screaming on the blocks of a parking garage after a good shot of pepper-spray in the face, so don't scoff at the idea. It is legal and can be a big help if you need it.
Alright, so we'll make our way to our segue. In general - whether in self-defense or in combat - your body knows exactly what to do to defend itself, and that is the place to train yourself. In the NAMA taught in the military, that is the basic idea, for both special-ops and standard military. The special-ops are taught more, but the idea behind NAMA (its techniques are guarded information, but this isn't) is simplicity, efficiency, and something that can be taught in a very short period of time. Time is money, and even special-ops doesn't have need for much more in terms of such training. Think about what that says!
So we arrive at Wing Chun. The tale goes that a Buddhist convent in North China was undergoing a persecution, and that the martial art was developed by a nun named Ng Mui during that period. I know Wing Chun pretty well, and it does seem like it would be a fit for almost any female anatomy. So - this tale may be true - or at least partially true. Further, Wing Chun is a combat-art, and it is a very strikingly efficient and deadly martial-art. It can be taught legally and ethically, but you are not likely to find such a school.
The other characteristic of Wing Chun, is that unlike any other martial art I have ever studied, it is incredibly counter-intuitive. You are training the body to do things it would prefer not to do in an emergency situation, and both self-defense and combat are emergency situations. You are hyped on your own adrenaline, and in a moment of dangerous crisis.
So normally I would say - just toss the whole bag - as it is too counter-intuitive to be practical. However, there are some things I learned in my Wing Chun mistake that I believe are worth saving. However, I really don't have any urge to start a true martial-arts form. There are three reasons why. First, those who don't serve in the military can get by on a self-defense class, a very small buck-knife and pepper spray, and second, I am not in military service and will never see combat.
The third is that by getting in my pink leotard - LOL! (not a good mental image) - and hitting the yoga mat, practicing hatha yoga and Pilates, I learned more about martial arts than in 7 years of Seibukan and by watching and training Wing Chun - in my expensive Wing Chun mistake. I also spent some time watching videos of Wing Chun forms, and hath yoga and Pilates were still better.
If I had someone ask me about martial arts, I would tell them "Get a yoga mat, and hit the mat." What happens to the body in isometrics is that it develops an awareness of itself, and when a crisis occurs, your body responds simply and efficiently because of this awareness. Other than a self-defense class, I would tell you - very radically - that if you want to know how to fight, you hit a true isometrics routine and forget about any martial arts school in the country. People shouldn't have to fight, but when they do - an isometrics program is an unbelievable motivator to the human body.
This isn't to say that ethical boxing or wrestling isn't amazing, or that there aren't benefits to going to a reputable martial arts school - where they teach a martial art with no glitz and glam and you pay your fees. However, it is the isometrics that will change it all. I would love to teach what I know to students about isometrics directly, but I would have to consult a lawyer first, and that isn't reasonable in my life at this point.
Last thing on this issue: Isometrics are meant to strengthen, develop flexibility and endurance, and increase muscle control and develop body awareness - not turn you into a killer. I have decided that a couple of pieces of Wing Chun that go against the grain of our normal reactions are worth training the muscle and nerve fibers in as part of an isometrics program. However, I'm including them as part of achieving those goals of isometrics I listed above, and not to train Wing Chun - or even further - to make someone a killer.
Remember, inevitably any work requires some fees, and you have your own yellow-brick road to pave. We move on to the next article, and I wish I didn't have to be such a wet-blanket. However, life is not about being the biggest harda--. They wash those types of guys out of special-ops, because they are dangerous. Think about what that says!
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
The Outline for the Work, Plus Some Title Fun
Let me start with the title problem. I like, simply, "the work," for what I'm putting together, but there is a need in life to disambiguate, and so I was scrapping around in my notebooks looking for a title. Obviously - the T.D. Lake System - a bit cumbersome, although my name will be on it - and I wanted something with a ring to it, but I also wanted something at least within some realm of reason.
My realm of reason is not the usual one, but some of the titles I came up with that had a nice ring were overly potentate. I mean - so potentate that I was giggling in my scrap-books. I meant to list at least one or two of the more glamorous ones, but I can't find the scraps at the moment.
So I've settled on a title for the moment. It is plenty potentate, but makes a nice working title at the time, and if something better comes along, this particular working title hits the trash-can. So, the current title is, "The Work of Completion." RAHR!!!
Alright, so we've got a basic outline. What I'm currently calling, "The Work of Completion is going to be a total plan of life. There are going to be rubrics for the practices, but certain parts are going to need a mentor. That causes legal issues and so on, but the idea stands to some degree. Also, the "Work of Completion," is meant to be non-sectarian, so that it really doesn't inculcate a belief system, and allows those who do have a traditional belief of some sort to determine either, "aye," or "nay."
It is inevitable that a lot of my own - bluntly - "ideology," - makes its way into this piece of work, but the goal is not to make disciples of some ideology. The "Work of Completion," is a set of practices, and is meant to be done regardless of whether you believe in those sets of practices or not. All that is required is a desire to do the practices, and then to actually do the practices.
I wouldn't consider it a moral flaw not to desire to do the practices. In fact, I think it's very likely that very few people will find this piece of my work very alluring to themselves. Still, for those who might, I'm putting it in order. This piece of work is all work I've done myself, and represents my set of life practices. Further, if mentorship in the "Work of Completion," becomes possible, then I would expect that the mentor would be doing the practices they are teaching the student in their own life.
Further, the idea would be to be practical. For example, if you do your affirmations once a month, that won't fly. However, if you are making 4 or 5 days a week, then you don't need to look for a scourge for your back. You are on the right track. More consistency would be much better, but 4 or 5 days a week will fly.
Alright, so the basic outline looks like this:
1. Affirmations. (!!!)
2. Goal Setting.
3. Cardiovascular Exercise.
4. Nutrition Guideline (GUIDELINE PEOPLE! GUIDELINE! NO ONE EATS BY MATH!)
5. Diary Practice.
6. A Musical Instrument. (It's not even really about having any skill with it, I'll describe this later.)
7. A sketchbook. (Again, you don't have to be Ramos or do art-rendering. We'll talk more here as well.)
8. Isometric Exercise. (You'll see. This is the most complex part, and not even near done. Years away from being done. It's also not the hardest part to do. See #1 for that. I also need a good artist-for-hire to do diagrams so that people can see what they need to do, rather than just read a rubric. Also, you may think Yoga and Pilates is for pink-leotards, but you just wait and try to get out of bed after your first go at a true routine. Bloody Mary's do not help, as you hurt too bad to reach for the wodka and clamato juice. There is a martial-arts tie-in, and I'll discuss it, but that isn't the point of the exercises. More here later.)
9. Centering Meditation. (I'll make this point straight out. Centering meditation is ridiculously easy to learn, hard to make a habit, and very hard to gain any skill with. The goal is to learn to make an orderly collection of a scatter-brain. That is all the goal is! The problem is that a good centering skill takes at least a few years of consistent practice to achieve. Further, some people - for no explicable reason - people who are competent in other areas of their lives - are, "centering retards." They can take a decade or more to learn to center. This is not a moral flaw, but it means that this system requires a great deal of dedication if one means to get the full benefits out of it.)
10. A textual study of some text worthy of textual study. (I'll list some suggested texts, and we'll go over how the study is going to be done. Again, you don't have to become a scholar of Cyrillic, but you're going to read something with some consideration as part of the plan besides Brian Lumley. Oh man, story to tell on the "Mirror," blog. I'm guilty to have that book in my home.)
So those are our basic points. The most difficult and important part - again - is the affirmations, and my intent is that no one do any of the other components of the "Work of Completion," without the affirmations component. The hardest part to learn is the isometric exercise, and the centering-meditation is the real long-haul and the real tedious part.
Another thought is that people might want to alter my own work on this, and while I think most people will just ruin my hard work - someone else might have something important to say on this. Also - if my work is not wholly censured by a religious tradition, I imagine that a religious tradition might try to integrate the work I've done in their own fashion.
I have no problem with these kinds of permutations of my work, with the understanding that from point 1 to point 10, what I'm laying out requires some dedication, stability, maturity and responsibility. What would really vex me is if someone draws the isometric exercises right out and leaves the rest behind - but I can't command anyone on the issue. People are really funny when it comes to isometrics, from - pink leotard to - fighting like a raging tiger. RAHR! I look forward to my maker's revelations about the abuses my teachings about isometrics produce. As I noted in my diary, that component represents to me - "a road of golden bricks - all with my baptismal name on them - yawning at the abysses of hell."
Even saying that my system isn't done, any of these practices are good for a person, though require some care, and there are already good books in publication about all of them. When my own system is done, there will still be other books available on the same topics, and see if you find something you prefer if my own work has no allure to you. Also, if you find the stuff alluring and decide you need to tap out as you are in a bad wrestling pin with the system, then be a big boy (or girl) and discontinue the practices. The intent for the mentorship portion - if it becomes possible - would be to avoid cult abuse and to support and guide a student without swindling their assets or trying to chain them to your leg. Intended, but very likely to be disobeyed.
I think we're going to do one at the "Mirror," blog, and then I might do a real preliminary isometrics talk here - not even a rubric of any kind - but talk about isometrics in general, and some martial arts talk. (Did I do that yet? I've had an article planned for over a year. I may have to check my archives.) Alright, so I'm going to break for a minute and then we'll get to some real grisly leper horror (Necroscope and the Hellbound Heart, in specific.) This is more than RAHR! I love horror books though, and there are a couple of mysteries there in my mind - as well. Onward to the WC, another cup of Gwyd's House Blend (coffee grounds are a good sign in coffee) and then I shall return with horror-leper pron. (Pron being quite fitting in this context.)
My realm of reason is not the usual one, but some of the titles I came up with that had a nice ring were overly potentate. I mean - so potentate that I was giggling in my scrap-books. I meant to list at least one or two of the more glamorous ones, but I can't find the scraps at the moment.
So I've settled on a title for the moment. It is plenty potentate, but makes a nice working title at the time, and if something better comes along, this particular working title hits the trash-can. So, the current title is, "The Work of Completion." RAHR!!!
Alright, so we've got a basic outline. What I'm currently calling, "The Work of Completion is going to be a total plan of life. There are going to be rubrics for the practices, but certain parts are going to need a mentor. That causes legal issues and so on, but the idea stands to some degree. Also, the "Work of Completion," is meant to be non-sectarian, so that it really doesn't inculcate a belief system, and allows those who do have a traditional belief of some sort to determine either, "aye," or "nay."
It is inevitable that a lot of my own - bluntly - "ideology," - makes its way into this piece of work, but the goal is not to make disciples of some ideology. The "Work of Completion," is a set of practices, and is meant to be done regardless of whether you believe in those sets of practices or not. All that is required is a desire to do the practices, and then to actually do the practices.
I wouldn't consider it a moral flaw not to desire to do the practices. In fact, I think it's very likely that very few people will find this piece of my work very alluring to themselves. Still, for those who might, I'm putting it in order. This piece of work is all work I've done myself, and represents my set of life practices. Further, if mentorship in the "Work of Completion," becomes possible, then I would expect that the mentor would be doing the practices they are teaching the student in their own life.
Further, the idea would be to be practical. For example, if you do your affirmations once a month, that won't fly. However, if you are making 4 or 5 days a week, then you don't need to look for a scourge for your back. You are on the right track. More consistency would be much better, but 4 or 5 days a week will fly.
Alright, so the basic outline looks like this:
1. Affirmations. (!!!)
2. Goal Setting.
3. Cardiovascular Exercise.
4. Nutrition Guideline (GUIDELINE PEOPLE! GUIDELINE! NO ONE EATS BY MATH!)
5. Diary Practice.
6. A Musical Instrument. (It's not even really about having any skill with it, I'll describe this later.)
7. A sketchbook. (Again, you don't have to be Ramos or do art-rendering. We'll talk more here as well.)
8. Isometric Exercise. (You'll see. This is the most complex part, and not even near done. Years away from being done. It's also not the hardest part to do. See #1 for that. I also need a good artist-for-hire to do diagrams so that people can see what they need to do, rather than just read a rubric. Also, you may think Yoga and Pilates is for pink-leotards, but you just wait and try to get out of bed after your first go at a true routine. Bloody Mary's do not help, as you hurt too bad to reach for the wodka and clamato juice. There is a martial-arts tie-in, and I'll discuss it, but that isn't the point of the exercises. More here later.)
9. Centering Meditation. (I'll make this point straight out. Centering meditation is ridiculously easy to learn, hard to make a habit, and very hard to gain any skill with. The goal is to learn to make an orderly collection of a scatter-brain. That is all the goal is! The problem is that a good centering skill takes at least a few years of consistent practice to achieve. Further, some people - for no explicable reason - people who are competent in other areas of their lives - are, "centering retards." They can take a decade or more to learn to center. This is not a moral flaw, but it means that this system requires a great deal of dedication if one means to get the full benefits out of it.)
10. A textual study of some text worthy of textual study. (I'll list some suggested texts, and we'll go over how the study is going to be done. Again, you don't have to become a scholar of Cyrillic, but you're going to read something with some consideration as part of the plan besides Brian Lumley. Oh man, story to tell on the "Mirror," blog. I'm guilty to have that book in my home.)
So those are our basic points. The most difficult and important part - again - is the affirmations, and my intent is that no one do any of the other components of the "Work of Completion," without the affirmations component. The hardest part to learn is the isometric exercise, and the centering-meditation is the real long-haul and the real tedious part.
Another thought is that people might want to alter my own work on this, and while I think most people will just ruin my hard work - someone else might have something important to say on this. Also - if my work is not wholly censured by a religious tradition, I imagine that a religious tradition might try to integrate the work I've done in their own fashion.
I have no problem with these kinds of permutations of my work, with the understanding that from point 1 to point 10, what I'm laying out requires some dedication, stability, maturity and responsibility. What would really vex me is if someone draws the isometric exercises right out and leaves the rest behind - but I can't command anyone on the issue. People are really funny when it comes to isometrics, from - pink leotard to - fighting like a raging tiger. RAHR! I look forward to my maker's revelations about the abuses my teachings about isometrics produce. As I noted in my diary, that component represents to me - "a road of golden bricks - all with my baptismal name on them - yawning at the abysses of hell."
Even saying that my system isn't done, any of these practices are good for a person, though require some care, and there are already good books in publication about all of them. When my own system is done, there will still be other books available on the same topics, and see if you find something you prefer if my own work has no allure to you. Also, if you find the stuff alluring and decide you need to tap out as you are in a bad wrestling pin with the system, then be a big boy (or girl) and discontinue the practices. The intent for the mentorship portion - if it becomes possible - would be to avoid cult abuse and to support and guide a student without swindling their assets or trying to chain them to your leg. Intended, but very likely to be disobeyed.
I think we're going to do one at the "Mirror," blog, and then I might do a real preliminary isometrics talk here - not even a rubric of any kind - but talk about isometrics in general, and some martial arts talk. (Did I do that yet? I've had an article planned for over a year. I may have to check my archives.) Alright, so I'm going to break for a minute and then we'll get to some real grisly leper horror (Necroscope and the Hellbound Heart, in specific.) This is more than RAHR! I love horror books though, and there are a couple of mysteries there in my mind - as well. Onward to the WC, another cup of Gwyd's House Blend (coffee grounds are a good sign in coffee) and then I shall return with horror-leper pron. (Pron being quite fitting in this context.)
Sunday, January 4, 2009
Re-evisioning my own vision
"Everything must be re-thought." Elias Canetti
I made a major breakthrough with my work this past week, and actually, even though this cross-blog threatens to be serious, the whole thing is absolutely hilarious. I knew from pretty far back - I hope I mentioned it in the last article - that the affirmation was going to be the central focus of this part of my work that I'm setting out. This piece of my work that I'm setting out threatens to be serious for me, and so we'll sort of go through the rather hilarious process that it took to get to a reasonable affirmation practice for this work. The affirmations component of this piece of my work is pretty near perfect, although if I don't die too quickly I may make it more perfect yet!
First off, most people are too sophisticated for affirmations, but you would be incredibly surprised at both how incredibly difficult and also incredibly life-changing it can be to say some rather important things in the mirror to yourself. Let's be really pink-bunny: Dare yourself to say, "I love you," looking yourself in the eye in the mirror, or, "I deserve love." It may be that you are too big of a pink bunny to match the dare, rather than too sophisticated to practice a pink-bunny practice like affirmations. Match the dare, no one will ever know you were so pink - unless you tell them.
So I had started with these philosophical affirmations. The problem with philosophy very often, is that you need a great deal of "philosophical legalisms," in order to get philosophical specifications, and these legalisms have a way of multiplying themselves ad infinitum. Ask anyone who has even taken a 200 or 300-level philosophy class and applied themselves to a term thesis. If you were to qualify specifically enough, you would have a 20-page term thesis that included one majestically specifically-qualified sentence. Refer yourself to a work by Hegel, his "Logic," being a sterling example, or some of the more obscure passages of Kant. Kant is a worthwhile philosopher, but is best read on an overdose of ephedra. We'll skip any more of that for the moment - and I thank goodness for that too - and we'll move on to the first of the breakthroughs.
It occurs to me, sometimes minimalism works better, and it might be possible to reduce the abstraction of this mess in my scrap-books to something a bit less unweildy. One has scrap-books to do scrap-work in, and thank goodness there are both scrap-books and trashcans, and that not everything I write shall be presented before creation - engraven in stone tablets - behind a great cloud of majestic fires. So as I work on the scraps, I keep writing - this is unweildy it isn't working - and so I come up with something. The pronoun "I," and a single verb tense. Two words that make a complete sentence in the English language, though Hegel's "Logic," cannot even explicate even the identity function without nearly 23 pages of crenelations for posterity.
So, I sit down, and I start scrapping about these I-verb sentences. Nearly 36 hours of work - no joke - later - and I mean 36 hours of work and not of time where I rested - I had listed well over 400 possible affirmations without nearly stopping to move my pen unless I was forced to puff on a cigarette, swig coffee, or pass out for a nap. It then occurs to me - this is also rather unweildy and is not going to work. This is going to create a trashbag full of dumpster-trash. So I write down - "Where do I simplify?"
I tried to whittle down to 28 affirmations, got caught up into several hundred affirmations again - this was a weeks' worth of total charlatanry - and finally I realize something. From the Bible and Moses' burning bush, "I am a being who is." Pretty abstract translation of the concept, but that is pretty much what that text says. The next piece was from Plato - his separation between the world of being and the world of becoming - "I am a being who becomes. (or changes?)" So I scrap-book a bit more, and I think of the philosophical concept of ultimate value. What would be the ultimate value? Perfection. I think it through and come up with, "I am a being who becomes perfect."
Alright, so, now I go back to the original I-verb sentence concept, and we have now, three and only three of what I am calling:
The Three Primary Fundamental Affirmations of the Work
1. I am.
2. I become.
3. I perfect.
So now, believe it or not, the fundamental piece of this work is done. That is all she wrote. There are two longer lists, one of 23 affirmations - and one of 12 negations - that are secondary to the affirmation practice I am laying out, but that is all she wrote as to the essence of my work. I have been practicing saying these three affirmations when I pop into the restroom and freshen up. I'll tell you, I am not too pink-bunny to understand how difficult affirmation work can be, and I am starting to see the value of simplicity ever more, but these three simple statements have caused me some more-than-average pain over the course of perhaps the last 5 or 6 days.
This is powerful material. I am quite proud - and actually - I'm not too pink-bunny too admit I'm also very terrified. So the heart of the work is complete. A being who exists, a being who becomes, and a being who perfects. I'm going to poke fun at my foolish self more in the next article at this site, but I need a short break and just a bit of down time to center the crenelations just a tad. More to come, on one or the other of my cross-blogs.
I made a major breakthrough with my work this past week, and actually, even though this cross-blog threatens to be serious, the whole thing is absolutely hilarious. I knew from pretty far back - I hope I mentioned it in the last article - that the affirmation was going to be the central focus of this part of my work that I'm setting out. This piece of my work that I'm setting out threatens to be serious for me, and so we'll sort of go through the rather hilarious process that it took to get to a reasonable affirmation practice for this work. The affirmations component of this piece of my work is pretty near perfect, although if I don't die too quickly I may make it more perfect yet!
First off, most people are too sophisticated for affirmations, but you would be incredibly surprised at both how incredibly difficult and also incredibly life-changing it can be to say some rather important things in the mirror to yourself. Let's be really pink-bunny: Dare yourself to say, "I love you," looking yourself in the eye in the mirror, or, "I deserve love." It may be that you are too big of a pink bunny to match the dare, rather than too sophisticated to practice a pink-bunny practice like affirmations. Match the dare, no one will ever know you were so pink - unless you tell them.
So I had started with these philosophical affirmations. The problem with philosophy very often, is that you need a great deal of "philosophical legalisms," in order to get philosophical specifications, and these legalisms have a way of multiplying themselves ad infinitum. Ask anyone who has even taken a 200 or 300-level philosophy class and applied themselves to a term thesis. If you were to qualify specifically enough, you would have a 20-page term thesis that included one majestically specifically-qualified sentence. Refer yourself to a work by Hegel, his "Logic," being a sterling example, or some of the more obscure passages of Kant. Kant is a worthwhile philosopher, but is best read on an overdose of ephedra. We'll skip any more of that for the moment - and I thank goodness for that too - and we'll move on to the first of the breakthroughs.
It occurs to me, sometimes minimalism works better, and it might be possible to reduce the abstraction of this mess in my scrap-books to something a bit less unweildy. One has scrap-books to do scrap-work in, and thank goodness there are both scrap-books and trashcans, and that not everything I write shall be presented before creation - engraven in stone tablets - behind a great cloud of majestic fires. So as I work on the scraps, I keep writing - this is unweildy it isn't working - and so I come up with something. The pronoun "I," and a single verb tense. Two words that make a complete sentence in the English language, though Hegel's "Logic," cannot even explicate even the identity function without nearly 23 pages of crenelations for posterity.
So, I sit down, and I start scrapping about these I-verb sentences. Nearly 36 hours of work - no joke - later - and I mean 36 hours of work and not of time where I rested - I had listed well over 400 possible affirmations without nearly stopping to move my pen unless I was forced to puff on a cigarette, swig coffee, or pass out for a nap. It then occurs to me - this is also rather unweildy and is not going to work. This is going to create a trashbag full of dumpster-trash. So I write down - "Where do I simplify?"
I tried to whittle down to 28 affirmations, got caught up into several hundred affirmations again - this was a weeks' worth of total charlatanry - and finally I realize something. From the Bible and Moses' burning bush, "I am a being who is." Pretty abstract translation of the concept, but that is pretty much what that text says. The next piece was from Plato - his separation between the world of being and the world of becoming - "I am a being who becomes. (or changes?)" So I scrap-book a bit more, and I think of the philosophical concept of ultimate value. What would be the ultimate value? Perfection. I think it through and come up with, "I am a being who becomes perfect."
Alright, so, now I go back to the original I-verb sentence concept, and we have now, three and only three of what I am calling:
The Three Primary Fundamental Affirmations of the Work
1. I am.
2. I become.
3. I perfect.
So now, believe it or not, the fundamental piece of this work is done. That is all she wrote. There are two longer lists, one of 23 affirmations - and one of 12 negations - that are secondary to the affirmation practice I am laying out, but that is all she wrote as to the essence of my work. I have been practicing saying these three affirmations when I pop into the restroom and freshen up. I'll tell you, I am not too pink-bunny to understand how difficult affirmation work can be, and I am starting to see the value of simplicity ever more, but these three simple statements have caused me some more-than-average pain over the course of perhaps the last 5 or 6 days.
This is powerful material. I am quite proud - and actually - I'm not too pink-bunny too admit I'm also very terrified. So the heart of the work is complete. A being who exists, a being who becomes, and a being who perfects. I'm going to poke fun at my foolish self more in the next article at this site, but I need a short break and just a bit of down time to center the crenelations just a tad. More to come, on one or the other of my cross-blogs.
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
Introduction to "the Work"
First, G.I. Gurdjieff was not a very virtuous man. He was really kind of a demon. However, he was a fabulous teacher of modern dance, and his only problem was that he couldn't "stay paid," teaching modern dance. He was a charismatic cult leader, he was a thief, a con-man, and there really isn't too much good that you can say about the man at all. However, what Gurdjieff understood was pedagogy, and his understanding was so deep that this understanding defies what we know ought to be real. It touches on something mysterious.
What Gurdjieff did is mix his real concepts about pedagogy with a lot of fluff and noise. The reason was that his concepts about pedagogy are the very opposite of what you want to tell people if you want to "stay paid." The real concepts Gurdjieff taught are harsh, unappealing, and directly state that you are going to have to work incredibly hard if you want to succeed as a student of what Gurdjieff called, "the work."
Most of his best material has disappeared - again - because if you want to stay paid, the basic message you send people is, "You're already as good as you need to be, you don't need to work, and look out for number one and only number one." The real Gurdjieff teaching was, "You begin as my student as nothing but a mass of flaws and lies, you need to work harder than you can imagine working if you are to succeed as my student, and not 'be utterly selfless,' but instead, 'you don't even know who number one is.'"
Now if we break down that troublesome set of statements, we are going to have a lot of philosophical talk to do, so I want to start with a concept that Gurdjieff told every one of his students, and a concept, as freeing and wonderful as it is, that his students almost never followed, choosing instead to love the fluff and the noise and get scammed for everything they owned. This is the fundamental rule of "the work," which I am recasting in a different mold. I am not a demon, and I would even consider myself virtuous, but this material is painful. It is painful to me to consider what this all might mean, even as a fairly experienced teacher of the work.
Let us leave that portion of the work behind and look at our fundamental rule, which any student of the work must never, ever forget or the work will fail. However, everyone slips and falls, and if you fail, it is most likely not going to be a catastrophe. Still, the fact remains that when you fail at the work, you have failed at the work, and forgetting this first premise is the most common cause of failure, even for myself as your erudite teacher of the work.
Axiom 1 of the Work: I will believe no statement, teaching, or existence of any kind to be real unless I have verified the truth of that statement, teaching, or existence to be real by my own experience.
Think of an example of a common problem with people who are immature in their own beliefs. You beat them at an argument, and then the next thing out of their mouths is, "So what do you believe?" As a teacher of the work, the most direct statement to make at that point is, "What do you know to be true for yourself? - because what I believe may be useless to you." It isn't always good to be so direct in the work, but sometimes a stunner is a good idea. A gentler touch is usually better, but when things get hot, a stunner often does the work necessary.
Think of the famous Milgram's psychology experiments. People commited what they believed to be a heinous crime, even though it was faked, because someone told them to do it. When the 57 people in the study were questioned afterwards, the basic response was, "Someone in authority told me to commit the crime, so it wasn't a heinous crime in my mind." Not one of those 57 people involved in the study defied the authority figure who told them to commit this faked heinous crime more than even a little, and all believed they were actually commiting the crime. That experiment is now considered unethical and cannot be repeated, but the basic message is, people don't want to be free, they want to be told who to be, what to believe, and how to behave. This leads us to our next basic principle.
Contrapositive Axiom 1 of the Work: I want to be told who to be, what to believe, and how to behave. I do not want freedom, and this is a characteristic human trait. This is an orientation that is antithetical to the work.
I include myself as a member of that previous affirmation, even as your erudite teacher of the work. This is part of the work as well. Those two principles are to be used as affirmations. I generally strongly suggest that the student look themselves in the eyes in the mirror as they say these axioms as affirmations. Remember, this isn't a "get paid," teaching. This is a teaching that requires painful experiences and is very unappealing because of what it not only says about you, but also because of what it says about - me.
The other thing about the work is that in my own version of it, you do not teach the work unless you are doing the work. Period. If I expect someone to look themselves in the eyes and tell themselves in a certain way, "I'm a liar. I want a chief because I'm too weak not to have one," and to experience the kind of psychological anguish that is almost certainly going to cause, then my opinion is that I better be looking myself in the eyes and saying the exact same thing. I better put up and show up or stop teaching the work. Period.
This is going to lead to our next basic principle of the work, which I developed more on my own, and might seem to be disconnected from the previous two axioms. It is a new development in the train of thought, but it isn't entirely disconnected entirely from the axioms that came before.
Axiom 2 of the Work: There is no difference between myself as a student of the work and my teacher of the work. There is no difference between myself as a teacher of the work and my student of the work.
These three axioms tie up most of the work, although some development is necessary to untangle all of the inevitable psychological knots in anyone's character. However, there is one more axiom and this is really important to me, and this is to avoid both problems with a student and with myself as a teacher. I believe that no matter how "yang," one is required to be - no matter how combative - the goal is to be a healer, and so we arrive at Axiom 3 and the end of this article.
Axiom 3 of the Work: As a student of the work, my teacher of the work has no right to cause me any pain for destructive reasons. As a teacher of the work, I have no right to cause a student any pain for destructive reasons.
These four affirmations once a day are now all I require a student to do for the first month they work with me at the work. I never charge a dime, although a breakfast out by donation doesn't hurt. All they have to do is do what I ask, and that is, trust your own experience, recall that you are looking for someone else to answer your questions and not yourself, that you are my teacher as well as my student - and the transverse, and that neither of us have a right to try to break each other to pieces, as painful as the work may turn out to be.
The work is always incredibly painful, and the first month is the worst. I often directly ask if the student wants to quit when they are obviously in pain, and they usually admit they think they need to quit. That is ethical mentorship. The person is not my slave. I consider them an equal in the work, even though I have all of this experience and they don't have that kind of experience. Those four affirmations once a day and an attempt to stay aware of what those affirmations might mean is all that I ask in that first month, and I never invite myself to a free breakfast.
I'll be back at one blog or the other, but I'm going to eat a little food and break for a bit.
What Gurdjieff did is mix his real concepts about pedagogy with a lot of fluff and noise. The reason was that his concepts about pedagogy are the very opposite of what you want to tell people if you want to "stay paid." The real concepts Gurdjieff taught are harsh, unappealing, and directly state that you are going to have to work incredibly hard if you want to succeed as a student of what Gurdjieff called, "the work."
Most of his best material has disappeared - again - because if you want to stay paid, the basic message you send people is, "You're already as good as you need to be, you don't need to work, and look out for number one and only number one." The real Gurdjieff teaching was, "You begin as my student as nothing but a mass of flaws and lies, you need to work harder than you can imagine working if you are to succeed as my student, and not 'be utterly selfless,' but instead, 'you don't even know who number one is.'"
Now if we break down that troublesome set of statements, we are going to have a lot of philosophical talk to do, so I want to start with a concept that Gurdjieff told every one of his students, and a concept, as freeing and wonderful as it is, that his students almost never followed, choosing instead to love the fluff and the noise and get scammed for everything they owned. This is the fundamental rule of "the work," which I am recasting in a different mold. I am not a demon, and I would even consider myself virtuous, but this material is painful. It is painful to me to consider what this all might mean, even as a fairly experienced teacher of the work.
Let us leave that portion of the work behind and look at our fundamental rule, which any student of the work must never, ever forget or the work will fail. However, everyone slips and falls, and if you fail, it is most likely not going to be a catastrophe. Still, the fact remains that when you fail at the work, you have failed at the work, and forgetting this first premise is the most common cause of failure, even for myself as your erudite teacher of the work.
Axiom 1 of the Work: I will believe no statement, teaching, or existence of any kind to be real unless I have verified the truth of that statement, teaching, or existence to be real by my own experience.
Think of an example of a common problem with people who are immature in their own beliefs. You beat them at an argument, and then the next thing out of their mouths is, "So what do you believe?" As a teacher of the work, the most direct statement to make at that point is, "What do you know to be true for yourself? - because what I believe may be useless to you." It isn't always good to be so direct in the work, but sometimes a stunner is a good idea. A gentler touch is usually better, but when things get hot, a stunner often does the work necessary.
Think of the famous Milgram's psychology experiments. People commited what they believed to be a heinous crime, even though it was faked, because someone told them to do it. When the 57 people in the study were questioned afterwards, the basic response was, "Someone in authority told me to commit the crime, so it wasn't a heinous crime in my mind." Not one of those 57 people involved in the study defied the authority figure who told them to commit this faked heinous crime more than even a little, and all believed they were actually commiting the crime. That experiment is now considered unethical and cannot be repeated, but the basic message is, people don't want to be free, they want to be told who to be, what to believe, and how to behave. This leads us to our next basic principle.
Contrapositive Axiom 1 of the Work: I want to be told who to be, what to believe, and how to behave. I do not want freedom, and this is a characteristic human trait. This is an orientation that is antithetical to the work.
I include myself as a member of that previous affirmation, even as your erudite teacher of the work. This is part of the work as well. Those two principles are to be used as affirmations. I generally strongly suggest that the student look themselves in the eyes in the mirror as they say these axioms as affirmations. Remember, this isn't a "get paid," teaching. This is a teaching that requires painful experiences and is very unappealing because of what it not only says about you, but also because of what it says about - me.
The other thing about the work is that in my own version of it, you do not teach the work unless you are doing the work. Period. If I expect someone to look themselves in the eyes and tell themselves in a certain way, "I'm a liar. I want a chief because I'm too weak not to have one," and to experience the kind of psychological anguish that is almost certainly going to cause, then my opinion is that I better be looking myself in the eyes and saying the exact same thing. I better put up and show up or stop teaching the work. Period.
This is going to lead to our next basic principle of the work, which I developed more on my own, and might seem to be disconnected from the previous two axioms. It is a new development in the train of thought, but it isn't entirely disconnected entirely from the axioms that came before.
Axiom 2 of the Work: There is no difference between myself as a student of the work and my teacher of the work. There is no difference between myself as a teacher of the work and my student of the work.
These three axioms tie up most of the work, although some development is necessary to untangle all of the inevitable psychological knots in anyone's character. However, there is one more axiom and this is really important to me, and this is to avoid both problems with a student and with myself as a teacher. I believe that no matter how "yang," one is required to be - no matter how combative - the goal is to be a healer, and so we arrive at Axiom 3 and the end of this article.
Axiom 3 of the Work: As a student of the work, my teacher of the work has no right to cause me any pain for destructive reasons. As a teacher of the work, I have no right to cause a student any pain for destructive reasons.
These four affirmations once a day are now all I require a student to do for the first month they work with me at the work. I never charge a dime, although a breakfast out by donation doesn't hurt. All they have to do is do what I ask, and that is, trust your own experience, recall that you are looking for someone else to answer your questions and not yourself, that you are my teacher as well as my student - and the transverse, and that neither of us have a right to try to break each other to pieces, as painful as the work may turn out to be.
The work is always incredibly painful, and the first month is the worst. I often directly ask if the student wants to quit when they are obviously in pain, and they usually admit they think they need to quit. That is ethical mentorship. The person is not my slave. I consider them an equal in the work, even though I have all of this experience and they don't have that kind of experience. Those four affirmations once a day and an attempt to stay aware of what those affirmations might mean is all that I ask in that first month, and I never invite myself to a free breakfast.
I'll be back at one blog or the other, but I'm going to eat a little food and break for a bit.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)