Oh dear... a tantrum. Some people have a very hard time dealing with the fact that not everybody in this world is of the same view. I have shared my opinions and I'm more than happy for anybody who disagrees to have theirs; beyond that, this discussion is juvenile. Grow up. *this guy actually sends me a private message with the same text as his previous post... hilarious*
No trolls here! Hi Guys, I thought I should drop a line just in case any one thinks I am just a troll. Thanks for the inputs and thoughts. Please don't get narky over a very simple question. I feel bad when I see conflict like that. Don't forget that Tai Chi is a binomial manifestation of 'tao' (ying / yang), which is all encompassing and inclusive - so please live and let live. No, I am not a Taoist by practice or religion - just a non-confrontational kind of person. Certainly do not want to kill people with funky techniques, though interested from a martial knowledge perspective (later - when I am mature eough mentally and martially not to want to kill people - during road rage etc.) As for the choice I actually made, I am sticking with the CMC guy. I went to a guy who was supposedly teaching Yang 108, and have been accredited by the Chinese Martial Art to be at some level (5 or 6) but he was crap, only concerned about making money - bad choice on my behalf I must admit. Then I sought out an instructor of CMC style, this gentleman probably is not the best of his peers within CMC, but I think for what is worth, at least this guy has been doing this for over 20 years and was only accepted as a formal disciple after 6 years of training (converted from external styles). And through a mailing list the CMC instructor, I found out the Yang 108 dude was also learning from this CMC guy... ) I guess one of the things that have drawn me to learn from the CMC style is the fact that people are only allowed to teach after a panel / committe of CMC instructors in Taiwan has accepted the recommendation of his / her respective Shifu (most of which are still direct disciples of CMC) and these 3rd generation (if CMC is first generation) have passed Committee's vote. These instructors are accredited by a certificate and can be checked with CMC in Taiwan (which I did). The other things are their theory suits my personality (yielding and deflection) and the fact that they reference their form and martial arts principles back to the Taoist classical theories. Again a personal thing where I think a tool, which Tai Chi is, should serve a purpose. I still want to learn it from a martial perspective, so I was quite particular about asking the CMC gentleman to show me the difference between Jing and muscular pushes - which he did without reservation. I must admit his Jing is not strong (still pushed me back a fair few steps - not bad for a approx. 70 y.o. guy), but I think at least he knows what it is and is able to lead me to it. I would be interested in learning the full force of Fajing from someone like Chen Xiao Wang later when I have the fundamentals down pat. Currently doing one on one. I must say that I am very impressed by this gentleman's detail in teaching the forms. He would teach me the form slowly. During the lesson, one look at what I am doing and he is already aware of my weight shifting is not 100% or too weak in the knees, despite that fact that I wear fairly loose clothing. I suspect he knows through hearing me place my foot down. He certainly does not ask me to skimp on the zhan zhuang (20 min for each posture at 100% using left and right, 50% and the 70/30. He is also particular about the fundamentals of 'song' correct posture, basis of breathing theory in application to contact with other people, classical TC theories, and form as applied to the CMC forms. He is also particularly informative about the applications of the form from a biomechanical and modern perspective (proabably William C.C. Chen influence). Syd, thanks for your information. Your points are valid. 1. You are right in saying CMC is a propagator of 'invest in loss'. That is the very basis of his TC theories. A very taoist thinking in the sense that through losses do you learn your mistakes and try to attain a better way to use and direct your Jing. I think the CMC theory is based on the idea that if you do not make a mistake to allow others to infiltrate your defence then you are half way to winning a battle, since you can better focus on 'listening' to their Jing and finding the other party's flaws. 2. As for CMC's short form, he did simplify it to 37, but he would teach it the traditional way - namely spending about 3 to 6 months on each form. He only started to teach it very much more simplified (not so particular about being spot on) when he found that the American audiences in NYC are time deficient and not interested in learning it the proper way. 3. You are also right in saying that he was lazy. CMC was a lecturer / professor in chinese calligraphy, chinese painting, chinese philosophy and a renowned chinese medicine practitioner. He was teaching all those things until his death. So he probably did not have that much time to devote to TC. 4. He only learnt TC from YCF for a short time (only 6 compared to the Yangs who spent over 20 years per generation) because he cured YCF's wife. As for how much YCF taught CMC, we can only speculate. This speculation is valid for all current forms of TC though - as you know, the Chinese were and are not the most open and generously sharing kind of people (I know, because I am - so please do not send irrate posts telling me I am a racist P)). 5. CMC form is very different to the other Yang based forms. I am not sure why. Just a joke - maybe because he got bopped on the head while young, so he needed special forms. Seriously though, I am guessing because CMC is an accomplished doctor and quite a cluey guy (a lecturer by 18 y.o. is cluey by my standards - especailly if you consider the times he lived in) and thinks there are things that he can modify in his master's forms to suit his needs (not necessarily better, I don't know). Will keep you guys posted on this point as I learn more. So please keep firing questions to me privately or on posts, I'll get them clarified. 6. TC practitioners in China do not know of CMC TC is quite understandable. Probably because this branch is very localised in Taiwan and selected circles in the US. I think it is also a function of China being a relatively insular country in terms of information in the past, and the current masters are relatively older people who are not able to access the info available in the cyber space. 7. As for how good CMC actually was, I think his track record of converting external style students to TC, by beating them, speaks for itself. Some of the best English literature available on the Tai Chi and the classics are done by his disciples. 8. Chen Xiao Wang visited Taiwan in the 90's and was not disparaging of the CMC style, so I guess that is a good sign. Cheers, Tigger
I'm just catching up with this thread -- please note that "dummies" and "turd" are both examples of name-calling, and not allowed here. Let's keep the discussion at a civil level -- take a deep breath and count to ten before writing your replies, if necessary. I would like to think that the Tai Chi Chuan topic is above trollish name-calling and petty bickering. Thank you for your cooperation.
Why nobody knows Chang Yiu Chun? Maybe is an invention of Erle Montaigue. GT3 - only EM says that it is the Yang Lu Chan form. Syd - I practice the "original" Yang Cheng Fu TJQ and I respect CMC and his TJQ (he was a real martial artist and not a babbler as many today)!
As far as I know, Cheng Man Ching's modification benefited Huang Sheng Shyan to become a famous CMC Taiji practictioner in Asia. Here's his evidences; Video evident 1 Video evident 2 Video evident 3 But most importantly, I feel that the understanding of TCC and its application, is to keep healthy, and have a wonderful way of life. And what can you gain if you become a top fighter or Taiji Master? Can you dodge bullets or escape death?? :love:
I am almost reluctant to post this as this discussion seems to be getting nowhere. CMC taiji for the lazy? ok that is not necessarily a direct quote, but if you do one round of the CMC form with a low posture, taking around 15 minutes to complete, or even do the CMC form 2 times on the trot with a sunk posture and then tell me it is for the lazy. My thigh muscles beg to differ. The CMC form should not be disparaged for the reduction in posture count. The Beijing sanctified form is only 24 postures, in fact almost all styles suggest learning a short form first to form a foundation. In regard to fighting ability. My teacher can get the better of me every time (and I like to think that I am as awkward as I can possible be). His senior students are also able to 'get' me as well. The important thing is priciples, not styles. Sticking, adhereing, following, redirection, substitution, rooting, etc. Unfortunately it is true that there are far too many airey fairy charlatans out there going on and on about the chi and energy without looking toward the other vital aspects of the art. They are in almost all styles, it is just that the CMC style has been around in the west for longer. Too many people suffer the dillusion that once the form is learnt they can go off and start their own school without ever learning the real priciples behind the art. What is boils down to is a question of whose art is the better? This was once asked of my teacher to which the reply amounted to was this: The better martial artist would win regardless of style. A highly skilled judoka will trash a novice aikido styist, a poorly trained yang stylist will be beaten by a well trained CMC stylist and vice versa. It is not the art that is at fault but the practitioner. "Invest in loss" The fearlessness to suffer loss. By not being bothered about losing I was able to better understand what was going on in push hands. Now I do not lose anywhere near as much as I am able to feel what is going on. Without investing in loss I would be concerned that we could develope the sumo-esque competition push-hands approach. The fact that there are weight divisions to this highlight the separation it has from the real art where weight should be immaterial. I study the CMC style and feel no need to do more postures, I just do more forms. As to fighting ability? I don't know, I have lived in Glasgow or 15 years and never been in a fight, so what's the point? We are studying application principles though. To finally finish this post. let us not get too bogged down in whose style is better. Whose language is better? What colour is better? and so on. Let's just hope that whatever style you practice, you get all that you want from it.
Vr, well-written!!! Hmmm... it's really hurt the thigh muscles and the worst part it requires you to relax at the same time. I remember taking my first Cmc Taiji last decade ago, I was required to do all these to develop a good foundation for the forms. But more emphasis should be placed on correct "sitting" of the "Kwa"(hip). So that to have a better balance and body mechanics... Vr, I wondered can you kind enough to elaborate on the "real princples"?? regards
Sad, but all too true. I've heard of people touting themselves as instructors after as little as five weeks of classwork. As to CMC's fighting ablility, both he and his students have shown skill in defeating those outside as well as inside the art. William C.C. Chen comes to mind, as well as the above-mentioned Mr. Huang. Every art, however, seems to have such stories about the prowess of their founder/seniors/instructors. In the end, if you like what you're practicing, go with it. IMHO, of course. Randy Strausbaugh
CMC might not have emphasised the martial side of his form, but if you really cannot find a whole book of martial ideas in his form you really must be looking in some very strange places. I suggest you look again.
No online clips that I know of, sorry. He does sell videos of his short form, long form, and sword videos on his website here. Hope this helps. Randy Strausbaugh
Well what I was trying to say was that simply doing the movements isn't it. Ideas that I work with are: Rooting and establishing my connection with the ground, this includes holding postures as well as the popsickle exercise (standing in a rear stance and folding and opening the kua that makes you look like your doing a wierd dance, two minutes of that and you know you've been working). Relaxing. Trying to maintain constant flow throughout the form, with no stops and starts. Relaxing. Maintaining fullness in the form, by this I mean not 'wilting' the first sign of which being the collapsing of the fingers, if you do not maintain the beautiful lady's hand how can the energy flow? Of course this is not to be mistaken with over extension. This form, for me, has more to do with personal enjoyment than external appearance, so overtly expansive and flowery movements take away from the practice and do not add to it. Relaxing. Basically all these things are in CMC's books and are backed up in numerous other text's (the classics, Tai Chi Ta Wen, Tai Chi Touchstones, etc) I also feel that you cannot get the 'it' from taiji without doing Push-hands as this is something that has helped my form immensely, without this sort of training how would I know how relaxed I am? Also practicing sword and fencing as well as Da Lu all feed back on each other to help me improve in all the other areas of practice. These are a couple of ways that I have used to practice the form: Doing the form and pausing every time the weight is 100% to check that I was actually 100% and not 97ish% (goes against the constant flow idea but a useful exercise never the less, also leaves you knackered!) Doing the form as slowly as possible (try to keep the flow though). And finally: This is for when I am feeling pretty worn out and it's a cappucino form (or maybe espresso, take your pick), doing the form focussing on the energy entering the headtop, after a round of this I am always recharged. There is nothing secret about what I do, but it does seem that too many people do not see what they are missing from their practice.
Thanks Vr, you are most kind to share wif us your insights, and many would benefit! Btw how "relax is relax", could u explain a little more through your training?? Umm... "focussing" sounded concentrated intent, don't u feel heavy?? Why would you focus?? Just curious, hope you won't mind!
The feeling of relaxation comes, for me, from becoming more sensitive in my push hands. If I am even a little tense my partner will feel that, and act upon it. I can feel this in my fellow students, but when I go up against my teacher he is able to read my direction and deal with it. I need to become more stealthy so that my partner cannot 'hear' what I am doing. All these sensations I try to take into the form. "Focussing" apart from the spelling error, I could have said, visualising; thinking about; or with that idea in my mind, but not putting too much mental strain into it, only about four ounces!
Cheng Man-ching Hello all, Just discovered this forum roaming about looking for swords. What a wonderful, broad-based resource for all Martial Artists. Well done! Regarding Professor Cheng, he was the goods, the real thing. If these thread comments I have read are sourced from rumor or hearsay then they are merely empty, baseless opinions. They are superfluous and should be disregarded by all. Especially by their authors, whether you think him mediocre, a fraud or a god. If those comments, which attempted to detract, are from anyone who was actually exposed to him personally, then they are from actual creepy persons with a much more sinister agenda and should also be ignored. I knew him and all his senior students from the Shr Jung Center era. He was the initial source of taiji for me and after his death I continued to study intensely with Fred Lehrman, Tam Gibbs, Ed and Natasha Young, Maggie Newman, William Chen, Ben Lo, Abraham Liu and later, sword, with T.T. Liang. I mention these people, not to drop names (maybe some of these names are meaningless to most and not worth dropping anyway... Ed who?) but to punctuate how very few of his progeny actually apprehended his teaching. Which is the primary source of energy for his detractors. The Cheng lineage seems to have produced hoards of Lao Shr’s “teachers” or at least those who lay claim to that lineage. Even so, of these hoards, most came away with little more than the “form”. Most did not hear, or in his own words, “trust” his teachings. Those who posted previously, that regard principles above “form” or especially above “style” [read: Chinese family name] are spot on course to the treasure, that the “map” that the form is, promises. Many maps can lead to this treasure (although some never will) but it’s that treasure, not the map, that is the ultimate prize. This treasure is the manifestation and execution of these principles, naturally and unceasingly, in one’s body. Cheng Man-ching did that. His skill was impeccable and mysterious. There was no change in his body when he started doing form and stopped doing form. His movement in and on the world became and was his form. This is the treasure. Once obtained, the map has no more meaning or usefulness. This is what is meant by “the form is empty”. What are these principles that almost no one trusted? There are 10. The first and most important three: Mostly, as Vampyre Rat stated, relax, “song”. (Yo VR!) And the REAL sticker here in terms of trust, was: Relax completely, not relax “until”. Relax... until the point of impact. Relax... until you issue power. relax until......bla bla bla. Nope. Just relax right the way through the whole thing and don’t stop relaxing. Hard to do, certainly hard to trust. And few did and few acquired the power and skill that comes only from that. But song doesn’t really even mean “relax” like Europeans/Americans think of it. Song means “loose”. “Throw all your joints wide open,” he’d say. Suspend your limbs as a tree extends its branches. With vitality, but without tension. Perfectly responsive to a breeze and absolutely still in the calm. Instantly, without preliminary, capable of yielding and at the same time constantly providing no impediment to the propulsive force and effortless power that one can then access through the second principle: chen. To Sink. Chen only occurs as a product of song. In fact, they arise together. One can only, fully, sink and surrender to gravity and thus “root” to the earth through relaxing, loosening, letting it go. Peter Ralston comprehensively includes the statement “relaxing the ego”. Once done, one can “bottom out” and cleave to the floor. Not through effort, but through its very opposite. Thus making a contiguous connection through which the immense power of the elastic recoil of the “sinews” finds its way up through the body and into the hands by executing - - - Liu-He. Liu - He. Six-together, What the Professor called “Mass Integration”. The more familiar, and WAY more simplistic or cryptic than it needs to be: Coordinate the upper and lower. Mass integration is what tidal waves do with drops of water and hurricanes do with puffs of air. The six? Ankle-wrist; knee-elbow; hip-shoulder, one piece. None of these three, by themselves, or partially done, will create any power or force, whatsoever. However, training these into your body until you are imbued with their simultaneous natural occurrence makes you very difficult to punch and it allows you to issue “qi”. This “qi” issued smoothly: a pretty spectacular “uproot”. Issued “like an arrow”: will pop a sternum right the **** off the ribs and crush the heart... in the blink of an eye (if that’s your cup-o-tea). Cheng Man-ching taught these (and more) internal principles of Taijiquan. All Taijiquan, if it is Taijiquan. He was the real thing. These are not my words or teachings nor were they his. They are, like the tenents of Chinese medicine, treasured gifts from the ancients to be protected from distortion or concealment, accurately preserved and passed on. Yang, Chen, big single-whip, little single-whip, forward incline, bent/straight back leg, techniques, styles ????? These things are completely superficial and have absolutely nothing to do with it. But then, what do I know. — all the world is sharp and clever... ... I alone, am dull and stupid. (LZ) Keep up the fine work. in preservation of the arts, Shanzi
