Neutralization (Hua Jin)

Discussion in 'Internal Martial Arts' started by IMAS, Jun 11, 2013.

  1. Rebel Wado

    Rebel Wado Valued Member

    Interesting information.

    I don't know really anything about most of the terminologies used in this thread. However, I do have an analogy for neutralization. It goes something like this.

    In a river you can place a very sharp sword with blade facing upstream. A leaf floating down the current passes the blade and is cut cleanly in two. On a windy day, the current changes direction and a floating leaf may deflect off the side/flat of the blade. To cut the leaf on a windy day, you must rotate the blade as the current changes, to face different directions.

    On the other hand, you can put a big round rock in the river. The current will try to go around the rock. Even on a windy day, with the direction of the current changing, a floating leaf will try to follow the current and go around the rock. You do not have to rotate the rock for this to happen.

    The blade represents the external energy (hard) and the rock represents the internal energy (soft). On a calm day, you can predict the current and lead with the blade... the leaf is cut in two and you can sit on top of the rock. On a windy day, you may be blown off the rock, you instead hang on to the rock... and you may not be able to turn the blade fast enough as the current changes direction so you place the blade beside the rock... when the leaf flows around the rock, it meets the blade and is cut in two.

  2. IMAS

    IMAS Banned Banned

    I am sorry about the terminologies as the MOD should warn people about using non-English words.

    In any case, thank you for your analogy.
  3. Simon

    Simon Moved on Admin Supporter MAP 2017 Koyo Award

    Im afraid that's incorrect.

    The use of non English terms and the need for a translation is clearly stated in the ToS.

    It's your duty to read those ToS. :D

    Just saying. :)
  4. IMAS

    IMAS Banned Banned

    Hello feng, thank you for your interesting input but you heard from the MOD please explain and translate your terms.
  5. IMAS

    IMAS Banned Banned

    Hello feng,

    From your suggestion, is the following interpretation sounds okay to you?

    In the Treatise of Taijiquan, there is a distinction between sticking and evading. This is where the springiness of the Taijiquan is all about. If your hand is like a spring then your hand will stick to the incoming force when in contact. After sticking to the incoming force you follow the direction of the incoming force (utilize your weight to reduce the incoming force) and redirect it into a circular path (big of small circle depended on your ability). Once the energy of the opponent is gone you can grab, push, punch kick, etc. Actually, the 4 oz is the springiness of your hand and not using 4 oz to deflect a thousand pound. So, it is very important to understand or comprehend the use of strength.

    So the Taijiquan neutralization model is something like this:

  6. El Medico

    El Medico Valued Member

    We're allowed to use system specific terminology within forums dealing with those systems.If MAP didn't allow that there would be no Judo forum.

    Anyway, if "chi" is translated to "squeeze" or "press", or "p'eng" is translated to "ward off" it doesn't make the terms themselves any more meaningful to someone who doesn't know what they mean in the context of those systems

    If Feng has to actually explain the meaning of every one of those terms he'll be writing it out all day.
  7. Rebel Wado

    Rebel Wado Valued Member

    I wasn't intending my post to ask for translation of terms... I was just saying, I don't understand the terms much because I'm more of a beginner in internal martial arts.

    What I am more used to is starting off with external movements and internalizing them... so the process or methods for internalizing movements... not the terminology.

    No need to translate terms specific to the subject that the majority of internal stylist would know.
  8. YouKnowWho

    YouKnowWho Valued Member

    It doesn't matter if people use the abstract terms as long as it can be mapped on the combat reality. What I would like to know is how will you be able to neutralize your opponent's push when he

    - pushes your neck, and
    - hooks your leg at the same time.

    Is the principle "neutralization" over rated?

    [ame=""]Chang_inner_hook - YouTube[/ame]
    Last edited: Jun 19, 2013
  9. Rebel Wado

    Rebel Wado Valued Member

    We are now talking my language... "principles".

    I don't know the principle of neutralization except that it can be interpreted in different ways. Perhaps I would say that is a "specificly used interpretation of the principle of neutralization overrated?"

    To my understanding, the principle of neutralization is to neutralize the opponent's delivery system. For example, if I can punch and kick and grab my opponent... my opponent can also punch and kick and grab me. So I want to neutralize the opponent's ability to punch and kick and grab me. I do this by enforcing some kind of control over the opponent.

    Everything beyond this is just an interpretation of how to neutralize. In other words, the methods for neutralization are the interpretations of the principle... they may represent the principle but they do not define the principle.
  10. YouKnowWho

    YouKnowWho Valued Member

    Finally we are using plain English that everybody can understand.

    To me, if I can use my left hand to grab on my opponent's right wrist, and my right hand to grab on his left wrist, I can neutralize his force before it is generated.

    It's better to prevent a problem from happening than to let it to happen and fix it afterward.
  11. Dan Bian

    Dan Bian Neither Dan, nor Brian

    Neutralisation has its place - it's down to training, experience and intuition as to when the practitioner should yield, neutralise etc..
  12. YouKnowWho

    YouKnowWho Valued Member

    It's better to

    - force your opponent to commit (such as a quick pull or shake), and then
    - borrow his force and attack.

    You have to "give" before you can "take". In other words, in combat, the "push" is usually a move after "pull". To neutralize an incoming "push" is not realistic in combat if you can't neutralize the "pull" first.

  13. El Medico

    El Medico Valued Member

    If not speaking merely of the concept/theory of neutralization there are specific mechanical things one does in things like TC and PK which are the "how" of neutralization. If not executed in this fashion it isn't neutralization in the context of what those systems mean by the term.

    So yes,within those systems the method does define the principle. At least as defined by the so called "internal" CMAs which is what this sub forum is about,and are pretty much where the term as used in the contemporary martial world stems from. A Judoka could "neutralize" me and my attack, but he may or may not be using some,all,or any those methods. If not,then regardless what he does to me it's not true neutralization. Again,in the context of the systems which are responsible for the term being used in the contemporary martial world.

    The only CMAs I know of which make a point of speaking of neutralization with the meaning of neutralizing the opponent's incoming force are a few of these "internal" CMAs which basically do the same general thing to actualize the principle. A principle which these systems defined, at least in regards to using the term.

    The idea can be applied to lots of things by anybody. But it's like people who study a little TC and integrate the concept of yielding into their systems. I'm not saying they're not doing something which can certainly be called yielding according to the Oxford dictionary,nor denying usefulness.Just saying most often they and their students ain't actually doing what systems like TC means by yielding. And what systems defined the technical term "yielding"?

    So a lot of these principles... it really is tech talk. In the context here of CMAs. And what other systems spoke of neutralization in theory or technique as a common term in the past ?

    Mr. W-if you're crushing my neck and scooping my foot,well I'm supposed to neutralize before you get those. In theory depending what happens one could possibly use neutralization technique (pretty small!) if you do something to make it available-in theory. Maybe if my name was Chen,Fa-kor.
  14. Rebel Wado

    Rebel Wado Valued Member

    Methods are relative to context and situation. Principles are universal.

    One of my instructors had told me years ago that when martial techniques were passed down from generation to generation in a family, the specific technique were only taught to those considered worthy (e.g. family). The principles, however, were recorded (e.g. written down).

    So for example, a family scroll might say something about how it was important to understand the "Principle of neutralizing energy/force" but the only way to learn the method taught in the family was during face-to-face hands on training.

    I have no problem in discussing methods and the proper way to execute a method of neutralization... however, when people think the method (interpretation) defines the principle, I think maybe they need to get out more and cross-train.

    Back to principles... to me, the most simple interpretation of neutralization is to offer a path of least resistance that improves your position.

    And it is not in CMA internal arts only, the same principle applies to blending... the principle of "Ai" in Aikido.
    Last edited: Jun 20, 2013
  15. IMAS

    IMAS Banned Banned

    What do you mean by if you can? People here have lots of problems in grabbing an incoming punch.
  16. YouKnowWho

    YouKnowWho Valued Member

    We had talked about this before. I'm talking about grabbing before the punch starts. You can also punch 1st, when your opponent try to block your punch, you try to grab his wrist. For example, you throw a right hook at your opponent's head, if he dodges it, you have to throw it again. If your arm contact with his arm, you "slide" your arm along his arm and achieve you grabbing.
  17. IMAS

    IMAS Banned Banned

    To my understand of issuing force is to generate some sort of explosive power, and it does not work if it is not under compression or when there is a lack of exertion. It is just like gunpowder, it only generated a flare if ignited without compression. Therefore the two persons must come to a equilibrium position before one of them issue explosive force. If you are moving away from your opponent then you will not be in a position to use explosive force.
  18. IMAS

    IMAS Banned Banned

    Thank you for your patience, so you can grab a punch. Well, in this case two punches.
  19. YouKnowWho

    YouKnowWho Valued Member

    I didn't say grab a punch. I said grab the arm. If you are willing to give up your striking ability by extending your arms close to your opponent's hands, it's not that hard to do.

    If you keep your hands closer to your head in an on guard position, it's will be much harder to do.
    Last edited: Jun 20, 2013
  20. feng

    feng Banned Banned

    Tai Chi neutralization power(Hua Jin)

    Hello, IMAS:
    Thanks, actually it is a long story to explain, but Sticking is Nian lian Jin. Following is Zou Jin. Redirecting also is Zou Jin. Because following will buffer and tilt the opponent's attack direction(redirection). Those Jin all are the parts of Hua Jin(neutralization power). Retaliating I think should be Na Jin and Fa Jin, Na Jin simply means the way how to grab the opponent's arms, Fa Jin simply means send out energy to throw the opponent's body out :)

Share This Page