Shanzi. Great to hear from somebody with a direct connection to the subject matter. I realized I commented on this thread nearly a year ago and was interested to re-visit the discussion. I should add that I have seen fit to supplement some of my statements only in regard to those who have studied the CMC system and balance the healing, and most importantly the combat applications. To those IMA's who fall into this category you have my respect. My comments regarding CMC and statement that he was lazy in his training, were directly quoted from CMC when discussing his early days when training and the means by which he changed the Yang forms he learned. It is also true and factual that the Yangs have openly stated that CMC Taijiquan is not Yang Style Taijiquan but something altogether different. I am but a messenger of an open statement by the Yangs themselves. Yang Cheng Fu stated that if his forms were changed beyond what he himself had ammended then it was no longer Taijiquan. hence the Yangs did not and do not consider CMC Taijiquan, let alone Yang style. In fairness the CMC schools in my part of the world get little or no respect in combat terms because the full extent of their combat training involves single and maybe double push hands as the pinnicle of combat training. I have friends who attended some of these schools and classes and have been lectured by these students regarding the fact that all you need in combat is push hands! These very same students were then trounced in a way that push hands was shown to be laughably inadequate. Push hands is but a method of training and not for fighting. At the very least this is what I have been taught and I think it's correct. Now having said all this, my experience of CMC schools in the U.S/U.K is absolutely zero and there may well be gentemen and ladies of high skill who have developed their Taiji beyond the training of push hands. Many of the people who train in the CMC system who I know from these fora, I like a great deal. I see the mutual love and pursuit of IMA and in that sense we are all brothers and sisters and have something to learn from one another. Things can often become bogged down in dry debate and I have learned that lineage is meaningless, it is the man that makes the art. In closing I want to say that if there are any CMC practioners who were offended by the quotes from CMC himself and the Yangs themselves, that I provided, then I am sorry for that as it was not my intention to offend your system or it's teacher. Rather, somebody asked a question and I provided what knowledge and information I had at my disposal. I would be more than happy to meet, if the opportunity arose, with any number of the CMC pracitioners at this forum for an opportunity to be proved wrong about my understanding of the school in the spirit of learning and sharing. Best regards, Syd.
It is hard to ignore some things that are said, but for the most part they are only words and are unlikely to really change my mind. It can be too easy to read things slightly out of context, or just get the wrong feeling from them when no offense was meant. It is a hard thing to do, particularly when it can be such a touchy subject. If you want to hear more about CMC's life you should read 'Steal My Art'. TT Liang paints a very different picture of CMC than that which is in most of the books out there. For me, I too think he had it. But I also think he was a human being with all the failings that come with that package. Reading that book made me realise that he was not 'godlike'. It made his abilities seem that little bit more achievable. Having had opportunity and good fortune to have gone to workshops with Ken Van Sickle and Wolfe Lowenthal (apologies for the name drop) I know that there is a whole lot of skill out there within the CMC taiji community. as an aside, I think that it is a 'failing' of taiji in that there is not a grading system, for the sole reason that it can give a very definite marker for those who are allowed to teach, and those who are incapable of doing so but still running classes. Although there are some teachers who offer teaching certificates, stating permission for them to open a school. Problem with that comes when you read 'Steal My Art.' TT Liang used to give certificates to some students just so as they would bugger off and leave him alone! You always hope that martial arts, taiji in particular, would be above petty rivalries and politics; but we seem to be the worst of the bunch! It's hard to find a style that someone doesn't have a beef with. You then have to ask yourself; is the criticism valid? What is the basis of that criticism? Is it true for the whole style or just sections of it? By answering some of these questions for yourself two things will happen. Either your 'faith' in your own style will be strengthened through this 'struggle'. Or, you will move on to a new style that better suits your requirements from the art. People have differents tastes and what you find delicious, will not necessarily please the next guy. To each their own.
This statement by Yang Chen Fu is pretty ridiculous... its like saying that I have amended weight lifting and if it is changed any more then its not weight lifting... I know YCF was considered the top of his game but statements like that are plain idiotic... (sorry for the acerbicism but I have a cold and felling grumpy... )
Hi Shadowdh, I think the YCF comment should be placed in context. I feel that there is a bit of the marketing head coming into play there. I am sure that he did not view every other style as gibberish, in fact I believe that he knew a lot of other stylists. He even trained in Chen village I think (saw a quote saying that anyway). You just have to say that my stuff is the only true stuff. All others are mere shallow imitations. The usual thing. You can't imagine coca cola saying that their drink is 'it', but pepsi's quite nice too. hope you're feeling better soon! You could always try the two hat's cure: place a hat on the end of the bed. Go to bed with a bottle of whisky. Keep drinking until there are two hats. Sleep it off.
Well I think it's a matter of context. Yang Cheng Fu had changed his grandfather, Yang Lu Chans forms. What he was trying to say was that since he had altered those forms from their original combat perspective, removing the explosive fajin and leaping kicks, to do so any further would alienate the art so far from it's original potency that is would no longer resemble Taijiquan. It was a court poet, who, upon observing Yang Lu Chans Hao Chuan coined the phrase Taiji in order to describe the Yang Style. I would think that Yang Cheng Fu might know what he was talking about. This is another reason the Yangs do not consider Chen Style Taijiquan either. It was a phrase used to describe Yang Lu Chans art alone. You only have to look at the attitudes of the general Martial Arts communities and the general public in regard to Taijiquan to get an idea of what has happened to a once great Combat Art. I think in this context, the man was right. I don't know how many schools I have visited who teach Taiji as only a moving meditation and nothing more. The watering down of Taijiquan into something more akin to a slow dance without any preservation of it's inherent combat skill sets is sad indeed. It's bigger than all of us, but I do feel it's up to those of us in the west to rectify this attitude and bring Taiji back into balance. Oh, I doubt very much that YCF made any statements out of a need to create a marketing ploy. It's well known that the only real reason Wu style became a known name was because of a famous incident when YCF was teaching an official and refused to give face and lose in a push hands match! The official was so ****ed off he decided to take lessons in future from Wu to stick it to YCF and went about promoting the great WU style within his circles as petty revenge. Wu style was only what Yang Lu Chan had taught that branch and was essentially Yang Style. Now if YCF was a man obsessed with promoting his art it would make sense to give the official face and lose would it not?
Thus YLC's form is the only true taiji and therefore YCF's form is not taiji... if that is the case... so he should not call his amendments the only taiji... a bit of self aggrandisement methinks... I agree with your point that sooooo many schools/classes today teach only the soft side with no yang... I am so glad I have found a Shifu that teaches the martial too... Oh and I agree with MAS... well said...
Well thats a case of personal perception. I think YCF knew that his modified form was taking YLC's Taiji as far to the softer side as he could without it losing the principles of that system altogether. He stated clearly that to ammend his grandfathers system any further would constitute a departure from Yang Taiji. I think thats pretty self evident. As for self aggrandisement, thats subjective.
Taijiquan can not be modified. This art was not invented, designed, constructed or created. The principles of taijiquan are ambient. They were already there. Taiji was discovered. The principles of yin and yang as represented graphically by the tajitu and their interactions as represented graphically by the wuxing and the bagua antidated life on this planet. Styles, family names, postures, footwork.... these are all just so much upholstery and have absolutely nothing to do with it. Personal perception, how uncomfortable one feels, the petty soap opera of its history have nothing to do with it. Anyone who doesn't get this, doesn't get what taiji is. Getting this, allowing taiji to be what it is, will propel you toward true apprehension. Taiji is unique in martial arts because of this. All that other stuff gets dumped on top of taiji because all that other stuff matters a great deal in the other martial arts. That is, until they reach their apex. Then, in effect, they become taiji too (pun intended). shanzi
Apprehension? You mean Taiji will propel me towards feeling a constant fear of the unknown? Really? You only have to travel to any number of schools around the world to see how it has been watered down and how the principles are butchered in theory and in practice. Your talking about Taijiquan as a philosophical/essence/ideal and confusing that with the physical practice which encompasses those ideals. The two are symbiotic in theory, yes, but they are mutually exclusive in practice. Many people have neither one or the other. I know a great many people who would disgree with that view, I myself am one of them. Your suggestion that it arrived ex nihlo is simply incorrect. It may have been discovered but it didn't foist itself upon mankind from the ether. They are physical as well as philosophical and theoretical. Still, I think I'll stick to what the Yangs constituted as Taijiquan, I don't think they felt postures and footwork are so much furniture. I understand the principle of what you say here but I think the Yangs got what Taijiquan is all about.
Sty, Did Ben Franklin invent, or discover electricity? Apprehension? You mean Taiji will propel me towards feeling a constant fear of the unknown? This is kinda funny, I think he meant appreciation, but yes Sty, the good book does say something along the lines of "fear of the lord is the beginning of wisdom". I think that you are missing the point about what Shanzi is saying. I think that what he is trying to get across to you is that what makes Tai Chi work is a set of principals that have always been there and are used to varying degrees is all sorts of ways. Tai Chi is simply a system of training those principals, the outward expression matters less and less. Of course there are people who bicker and argue about how to best manifest these principals, but they are missing the point as well. whatthehelldoIknowMartialartsnobout!
I think comprehension is the word he was looking for,but hey, we got the message, right? I agree that the priciples behind the art have been around for ages waiting for someone to apply them correctly. The thing is that there are so many ways of applying them correctly. So many ways of understanding what is going on. That's why we have so many different styles out there. Taiji is not stagnant. It is alive in constant movement, in balance. It has 'evolved' from its earliest days into a wide variety of things. Different people have taken the art to heart and as their skill increased, so too did their understanding. In some instances, this lead to a change in their own practice that did not totally adhere to their teacher's teaching. It is these differences that lead to the various different styles we see today. This art was 'invented' by people. Human beings, with all the faults that human beings have. Not one of them was 'perfect', but they did the best they could. Through their efforts this wonderful art came to fruition. Unfortunately these people could not get the students they wanted. Some of these students thought that after a short period of study that they were now masters. These 'masters' then taught others all they knew (which was little), and so the rot began. Is it the masters fault that their students taught without permission or ability? Could they control this? I believe CMC had 'it'. But I also believe that there are a lot of his students out there wouldn't know 'it' if 'it' came and booted them in the ****. This is also true of other styles, CMC style does not have the monopoly in this. Thankfully there are also students of CMC who did study hard, who did take in the teaching, who do have skill in TJQ. It is these people that keep the good name of CMC going. They maintain the high standards that we should seek in TJQ. This is why I believe that particular styles are not relevant. You should be taiji in all actions throughout the day. Waiting for a bus, walking down the street, sitting at a computer writing on discussion forums. The principles should be applicable to everything. Think I've rambled on a bit longer than I intended, so I'll stop.
I think that you Syd summed it up rather nicely on a different thread: I just love it when people agree
Martial Arts Snob. Firstly I'll assume that Sty is me? While I am messy sometimes I'm not a pig. Then again my Chinese Zodiac sign is a Pig, hmmmmmm. Electricity was already obvious and manifest in the ether; since the dawn of mankind human beings saw it's power during thunderstorms. The ability to comprehend, harness and capture that lightning in a bottle took some manner of genius in application. A means by which to harness it and use it required invention as well as understanding, Taijiquan is the same only it was not so obvious as electricity. The men who developed the martial and healing postures of Taijiquan and the means by which to physically manifest and express those prinicples, let alone espouse and comprehend them were indeed men of great inventiveness ... the same can be said of Dim Mak. I do indeed get what he was saying but within the context of the discussion it was an idealised view which neglected other important factors that I found it necssary to point out, thats all. I did say that I understood his post in principle, and on that limited basis agree with the sentiment. Preaching to the converted; I agree with the above but Shanzi was neglecting and pushing aside a few too many important elements which are relevent to the complete picture of what Taijiquan is; so I made sure to point that out. It may have been splitting hairs but for me it was half the head. I do believe that Taiji eventually becomes your own, you become it and it becomes you but personal expression of the principles are so slight that these unique flourishes should in no way depart from the essense of the forms and what is contained within them. You are either doing Taiji or not, if you abandon the correct form as stated in the classics then you are no longer doing Taiji but something else, that is what Yang Cheng Fu was reffering to and I agree. You can't say that the forms and footwork are furniture for you might as well do a whacky jig in your backyard for 30 mins and call that Taiji too! So you see while I comprehend the semantic argument within the context of the idealised philosophy I don't see this as any reason to abandon the very necessary physical principles which must be adhered to in order to bridge the gap between the two worlds ... Yin and Yang. It is almost as if within Taiji as an art there is Yin and Yang philosophically and physically. The Principles of Taijiquan as a theoretical and philosophical discussion are Yin and the physical adherence and expression of those principles are the Yang ... without either you cannot have Taijiquan. That is what I am saying. I apreciate that but the context of what I was saying did not abandon the physical principles that I have outlined above. I don't say forms are useless and have no meaning or purpose, or that keeping the back verticle and the shoulders rounded etc are obsolete because I have become formless in theory! We didn't agree ... though I agree with myself.
We don't agree, nobody agrees. Like it or not that's the legacy of tai chi. How can we take the art seriously if not even the converted agree what we're talking about. No doubt about it - tai chi needs an O-Sensei. Until an individual comes along who is good enough to redefine what tai chi is (whether or not he fights in UFC like everyone complains about), our opinions will drift further and further apart.
Point taken, but I don't think the situation is that dire either. I would gladly sit down for an afternoon of discussion and an ale with a Taiji practitioner from any branch of Taiji over other martial artists; our disagreeance is not a mighty rift but rather couched in the nuance of it's essence. I think the issue is that Taijiquan contains more complexity than other MA's. The complexity is philosophical, historical, metaphyiscal, conceptual and physical. Taijiquan is like trying to bag air ... how do you do it? And yet it is done. Taijiquan tends to naturally attract people of a more cerebral bent anyway and I think that philosophical discussion and analysis is a natural and healthy byproduct of our interaction with eachother and our art. I think it's much easier in other arts to just join up and go hit something without too much thinking about the philosophical, historical, metaphyiscal, conceptual and physical aspects of that art. Taijiquan is by it's very nature a deep art. People who paint in the impressionist style may disagree about the nuance of their art but that doesn't mean they aren't bonded by their love of painting. I take Taiji just as seriously whether somebody agrees with me or not. If there were no discussion of Taiji at all, that would be worse in my opinion. Tibetan Monks all agree that they are Tibetan Buddhists but a common practice among them is to spend many hours of the day debating what it is and what it isn't. I think an art that allows a healthy forum for discussion is a healthy art. Taiji has it's O-Sensei's it's just that some people disgree with O-Sensei; Yang Lu Chan is my personal idea of an O-Sensei. The principles of the art that he laid down, however they have come down from him are a good enough mission objective for me and I do my best to stay on the path. We are not drifting apart, we are drifting together.
ap·pre·hend: (from Latin apprehnsus, past participle of apprehendere, to seize). v. ap·pre·hend·ed, ap·pre·hend·ing, ap·pre·hends v. tr. 1. To take into custody; arrest: e.g. apprehended the murderer. 2. To grasp mentally; understand: e.g. a student who apprehends the significance of a broad vocabulary. 3. To become conscious of, as through the emotions or senses; perceive. ap·pre·hen·sion: The ability to apprehend or understand; to own the understanding. ... apprehensive may also mean: fearful or uneasy anticipation of the future; dread. Oneself is seized. But not in the usage above. comprende? True taijiquan is dying in the world, along with true Chinese medicine. They are both in desperate need of these piercing and penetrating discussions lest they lapse into the dilute or worse, oblivion. Devoid of these original guiding ideas, both these arts are deteriorating into mere birds sounds, which anyone can mock, yet no one apprehends. Short of these elaborations done here, I fear that might be their fate. Well done Syd, Snob, gt3 and Rat. Never stop. I was trained in: "well, sounds good. Can you make it work?" My posts are offered up from direct physical experiences of taiji manifesting effortless power based exclusively on the classical principles. If they have value or permit an insight to some, then great. If not, then great. What I have acquired is not in jeopardy. Maybe reading some Peter Ralston would be fun. Taiji yields its secrets slowly. Progress comes in paper-thin sheets and is measured in decades. .....and, charlatans abound. "There is nothing you can do with enlightenment except give it away" Keep it ever flowing, boys! shanzi
