Hello Taiji Butterfly, Please don't feel like you have to avoid the discussions. I, for one, am interested in hearing the wide variance of opinions from all of the members here. Onto the topic, I agree with what has been said, that standing practice helps to develop speed and movement, when practiced hand in hand with moving excercises, form for example, along with such things as walking excercises, pushing hands (both fixed step and "free"). But it always comes back to standing. If you can't maintain the connection whilst standing, then you simply won't maintain it during movement, slow or fast. In regards to cardio vascular excercise; I believe that partnered work is the perfect method of developing C.V. endurance related to martial art practice. To my mind, running/sprinting makes different demands on the bodies endurance than a freestyle push-hands session or sparring session would do. Many regards, Yin-Yang Boxer
I'm not making a fight with you Jkz. I'm just challenging your pov and raising points within the thread. Get over whatever your past perceptions of me may be. I have. Anyway, thank you for finally answering my points (albeit somewhat impolitely) Responses: I am in no way advocating 'standing only' (where the heck do you get that idea?) and certainly believe other practises are vital. But I do consider standing to be a 'foundation practise' that helps develop power and the way you deliver that power - technique/application is just channelling/applying said power. One without the other is pointless imo "That's just mystical crap." So, a question: do you believe, therefore, that Taijiquan should be translated as "Mystical Crap Boxing" then? It is called Taiji because it uses the principles of Yin and Yang within its external development (boxing strategies and techniques) and internal (health/energy/mind) development. You obviously understand the former, but (sadly) seem to deny the latter. I think that's most unfortunate - it is especially reflected in your stroppiness here imo lol My own personal experience has been that I have very quick reactions and quick movements that has arisen from mainly slow forms practise and, over the last few years, standing-type practises. Go figure. Anyway, I only discovered this when I started seriously practising fast MA applications about 14 years in. According to Taoist thought, Yin will inevitably become yang and vice versa but both are influenced by the will. The examples you site are, of course, incorrect, because they do not accurately portray yin and yang and are over-simplified. Allow me to illustrate: The person who "just stays in bed all day" will initially have lots of energy (from natural resting) but when they don't get up that energy, not being used, will become inertia and fatigue as a result. Energy must move or it stagnates. If you studied the TCM side of Taiji you would know this. The body should move and rest, this is its Tao - one who does not follow Tao will become sick. "If you want healthy lungs, have a cigarette" well, the capacity of the lungs may well expand, but I fail to see how putting poisons into that expanded capacity would equate with Yin/Yang polarity, however following that line, the influence of smoking creates a growth reaction (improved capacity at an early stage - lots of top athletes and dancers smoke ime) then a healing reaction - smoker's cough etc then cancer when the stagnation sets in and the healing process of the body goes wrong. In conclusion, the person who smokes becomes a non-smoker because they die! "If you want to win friends and influence people, be horrible to them." I don't know about winning friends, depends what type of friends you want, but influencing people certainly results. Again I fail to see how this applies to Yin and Yang specifically, but I guess the horrible behaviour will spur people to oppose you and stand up for justice perhaps? Hmmm I think I espy a topical metaphor... Well that's rot isn't it? You yourself have mentioned that people 'lose it' in a real fight. People rarely fight the way they train in reality and this isn't necessarily a good idea anyway is it? Training is about influencing the way you fight and developing stuff that is useful generally in fights - what happens in real ones is never set ime Of course you should test out and learn to apply whatever you develop, but I find balancing plenty of standing with any partner work keeps me balanced and helps stop aggression and pointless resistance in my attitude to my opponent. My view of training is: it is exactly that - training. Fighting is something else. Training is order. Fighting is chaos. Bruce is an unfortunate example to choose to talk about fitness really though isn't he? He died in his early thirties - possibly (we can never know for sure) as a result of either his full-contact sparring practises or extreme training practises. I'm a fan of Bruce Lee btw but I think he serves as an example of why long slow development is a good idea unless you need quick development for some reason! Your comment about 'there is no neijiquan' is utterly pointless imo There is, but you just don't want to practise it. Your choice, but stop trying to dictate to those of us who do! You sound like a blind person ranting that the sky isn't blue :cry: :Angel:
Thanks for the support - so am I. It seems others are not tho... I will continue to voice my opinions regardless of how much I am bullied.
Hello TJB, Good job too I fully agree with what you said, training is training, fighting is a different kettle of fish. Personally, I have found that by practicing standing immediately before partnered work, my performance in concert with a partner improves, ie; my balance is better, my steps are swifter and firmer, my arms are softer and firmer and my mind is more focused. I'm interested to find out how this will apply "long-term", but in the here and now, I will continue to make standing practice both the beginning and end of my training sessions, with movement in the middle. Stillness to movement to stillness. Yin/yang flow baby! Many regards, Yin-Yang Boxer
I think Middleway is correct. One of the important aspects of standing is about learning the first principles of movement! IMO the concept of Taici (taiji), Yin and Yang, Kosong and Isi are very important if not crucial to a refined understanding how the body works in relation to gravity. This concept is not mystical crap, rather it is an imaginative way to communicate a concept that could otherwise be difficult to grasp. It is true that martial prowess can result without resort to the methods of internal skill, however generally the proponents are not practicing an internal art. (Having said that, all people do to some degree practice internal method whether they know it or not!) All the people here (I believe) are practicing an internal art, while it is a martial art, for many it is more about learning the nuances of body mind integration. Fighthing prowess might (or might not) be a by the way product. It is more important I think, that people discover the principles of integrated movement within the mind-body sphere ... and that has positive ramifications when in a confrontational environment. I think that this is an interesting discussion in that it exposes some of the new ideas about the practice of an internal art and it's description using the language of the past (Yin=Kosong, Yang=Isi) and how it is approached by some in a Western context. The question I ask though ... is it necessarily still the same animal? Salam, Krisno
In response to TJB's post: This seems to be a contradiction to me - you want me to change the record - implying that you have heard what I have to say before - but don't know my opinions? You did also say: To be fair, I could say that I don't recall your opinions changing much either... Considering you posted your questions at 1.29 pm (I was writing my response to Krisno at the time) and I answered them at 4.35 pm, I hardly think your "finally" quip is warranted. My life does not revolve around you - I've been working all day - 2 hours teaching, followed by a web design meeting, followed by nearly 8 hours of video editing... It's certainly starting to look that way, the way most people seem to practice it. You know we won't agree on this. imo lol - I think this thread speaks for itself TJB about who has been getting stroppy with who and who likes trying to bully who. Taijiquan is not a Daoist art though and the concept of Yin and Yang is not exclusive to Daoist thought. There is no TCM side of Taiji - it's a fighting art. Some people with a strong agenda have simply tried to claim that they are intrinsically linked when they are not. Again - we won't agree on this, but I can drag out all the same old martial arts historians' quotes yet again for the benefit of any newcomers if you like. Or maybe they can just use the search facility. I've said the best anyone can hope for is something like 80% efficiency. I'm very calm in real fights. Fighting is not chaos to a trained fighter - he / she should be in their element, if they have trained well. I do wish every martial artist was Bob Orlando. There aren't many around like him.
This sums up how much you know about the origins and principles of Taijiquan imho... (clue = 0) My teacher (who learnt in China): "There is no Taoism without Taiji and no Taiji without Taoism" Tian Yin Jia, son of Tian Zhaolin: "Taoism and Taijiquan are inseparable" I'll take their word above the PRC's doctored history books any day of the week ta very much. This is correct, however the Taoists did develop Taijiquan (and Baguaquan) using the taiji principle imo - which is what I was talking about [Xing yi is something else tho] I'd love to see your level of calm in one of these 'real fights' you're so fond of bragging off about Jkz - as it seems to me you can't even keep your cool in an internet forum!! lol Finally, like all the bullies I've ever met, you're great at dishing it out, but you don't really like being slapped back do you? Anyway, don't worry too much as I'm going back to my extended absence from this forum for a spell, so you can strut around bragging unhindered for a while Take care :Angel:
I think you are the only one losing their cool around here, TJB - just compare my first post to yours. Subsequently, you've been throwing personal insults and jibes around like anything.
p.s. Tang Hao's myth busting work pre-dates the PRC as it was written in the 1930's. Feel free to read attached article which makes clear that the source of many misconceptions regarding Taijiquan originated in the book Taijiquan Classics (1912), edited by Guan Baiyi.
Thanks for the pdf. Ontopic, I think standing practice got its part as does moving. I do universal post (tree hugging posture)before and after TCC sessions and I feel more calm and relaxed then if I'd just stop there and then. Standing is good practice, since we're supposed to achieve stillnes in movement. How are we supposed to be calm and relaxed while moving if we can't even do it standing still. As for standing practice making one faster since yin leads to yang... that one makes no sense to me. It's just to extreme of an example for me to accept, I mean why do I do plyometrics and heavy weight training if I can just stand there and get the same effect? I think this is where musclememory comes into play. Like someone else said, when push comes shove we're gonna react like we trained. If we only trained slow and/or standing it'd only make sense to assume that we'd react slow. Since repetition is the mother of learning I'll keep training with a of slow and fast training, including standing/static postures. I think both JK and TJB have a wealth of information to share, so dont stop your debating as long as it's constructive. Thanks for all the info from everyone in this thread sofar.
Interesting article. Especially this bit (my emphasis): which when placed next to this statement... ...makes it look like you really don't check your sources as closely as you should eh? On that note - I withdraw once more :woo:
Ah - you failed to notice his use of quote marks then. You might need to read his other works too. This one is quite good. Edit - there is also an all-important footnote to the point you quoted, which you omited - [4]:
TJB- I think the most important thing to recognise is that whoever turns out to be correct over this or that issue - for me Taijiquan is nothing more than a martial science based on concepts of differentiation. For you it seems to be more of a way of life, a philosophy. You seem to be more of a sinophile than I am - you seem to respect TCM. I've had a lot of TCM and acupuncture and have not found it to be as effective as Western medicine, personally. You respect qigong where I think it is nonsense. You seem resolutely disparaging of the PRC where I think that even if it is purging authentic or traditional superstitious cultural baggage from Taijiquan, that would be a good thing - a progressive move. I believe though that the truth will ultimately emerge that Taijiquan was originally nothing more than a fighting art - one that has subsequently got a bit sidetracked. I am interested in Daoist philosophy, but of the three major classics to choose from, Zhuangzi is probably my favourite. It corresponds most closely to my Chen-informed notion of Taijiquan, which is that there is no qualititive judgement with regard to Yin or Yang qualities. Taijiquan is not a soft style - it is an integrated hard and soft style. It is not an internal style - it is an internal and external integrated style. It is not a Yin style - it is a 50% Yin, 50% Yang style. It's training methods are not limited to slowness and stillness, but also equally embrace speed and power expression. But the link between Daoism and Taijiquan is tenuous anyway - I have been told so by two of my teachers - one of whom is himself Chinese and a student of the head of the Chen village - Chen Zhenglei. The other trained in Taiwan. In fact almost all of my teachers have pointed out that Chinese martial artists and people in general combine to varying degrees - aspects of Daoism, Buddhism, Confucianism, Communism, folk beliefs and Westernisation in their world view. Furthermore, Chen villagers are certainly not limited to Daoist thought any more than you are limited to Christian or Western secular thought. The Chen village moral code contains more Confucianism than anything else and Zheng Manqing also described himself as 80% Confucian and only 20% Daoist. See how much room for variation there is in our approach? At times I am closer to Confucius and Mencius than to Laozi, because I believe they advocate more positive moral ideals. So the truth is, that even if my sources turn out to be incorrect - even if I turn out to be completely wrong about the history of Taijiquan - I don't care. For me it can never be anything other than a form of military science. Even if this is a reductionist or limited view - I still don't care. I will continue to practice the way I do. I will forever refuse to practice qigong, because I am opposed to it. Someone recently posted a link to a Xingyi site where the practitioners allegedly made us of "dark jin" (which I assume is somewhat akin to dark rum, but makes you more depressed ). Even if they are great fighters and could beat me to a pulp or even kill me, I would never myself make use of "dark jin". I believe it is crucial to stay away from darkness. I think it is always wrong to go against the common good to further one's own ends. If "authentic" Taijiquan does genuinely contain the taint of occultism in its methodology, then my version has removed it. Maybe I will ultimately have to call my practice "secular Taijiquan" or "culturally neutral Taijiquan" or maybe even "Unitarian-Christian Taijiquan" or "Liberation Theology Taijiquan" - maybe I'll have to call it something else entirely - I don't care. I currently call it "Martial Tai Chi" because it deliberately sets itself apart and advocates a position that all manifestations or intellectualisations of Tai Chi / Taiji theory must relate directly to figthing ability and all secondary benefits should serve that purpose. It is an art that entirely focuses on the fist and when and how to use it, or not. It is not quite the same thing as Taiji quan because the current mainstream understanding of that is not what I do. Taijiquan martial science is for me, nothing more than a part of my martial journey. I could just as easily use a different methodology and arrive at exactly the same or similar martial ability. It is not that precious. It is not that unique. The big problem I see around here is that some people have bought the lie that it is sacred. I'm not interested in "Taijiquan - the religion" because that part of my life is already covered. If that ultimately means that Taijiquan becomes closed to me, I will go elsewhere. Now I think that the most constructive thing for us to do is not discuss the art with each other. Perhaps we could both simply contribute our views to threads without commenting on each others comments. Or, if you would prefer, I will cease to contribute around here. You were here first after all. I'd be very happy to go and leave you to it, because I do not have the time, inclination or morale to get into so many slanging matches. Again I must urge you to read my first post on this thread. I'll concede that I handled the matter clumsily, but I really only intended to point out that Taijiquan is a martial art of Yin and Yang in equal measure. This view is quite in keeping with many Chen style practitioners. Standing alone is not enough and I never once implied that you stated that it was.
Another awsome post Jk, Your posts are always informative and thought provoking, please dont stop posting just because TJB.
FYI, Bruce Lee died as the result of an allergic reaction to a prescription painkiller (not his prescription, unfortunatly) that he took.
1.) get your facts straight: cerebral edema is not an allergic reaction http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_Lee#Death_by_.22misadventure.22 2.) if your facts aren't straight don't try to be smart 3.) Nobody is 100% sure what caused Bruce's death, only one thing is sure: he died young when he was supposed to be "the fittest man in the world". My own view is he was living out of balance ie fit outside but screwed up inside. Price of glory. Better to disappear. :Angel:
Thank you That is the main version I'd heard too. Whether it is true or not, I think comments such as: are sick and disrespectful and comments like: Are quite a good indication of who the bully is around here.
TJB Snarky? I wouldn't think so ... Hehe ... well I guess this type of communication can happen on the Internet ... but to be fair (after reading some of JKZ's posts) ... JKZ I do find some of your posts to be rather aggressive with regard to other opinion ... and despite oodles of information to back up your views, it is still opinion . As an ex recon man, in my opinion Taiji (on it's own) as a "martial science" has limited currency in today's "combat environmet" ... so the argument that Taiji (as a whole) should be pursued as a "military science" is quaint to say the least. In fact I wouldn't advocate any one style of martial art as a basis for an individual's arsenal for unarmed combat. As I keep saying, undiluted aggression coupled with adaptive method wipes the floor every time. Having said that silat taici has some principles that are valuable for any sort of movement, be it fighting or walking to the corner store If anyone is serious about combat then they need to look at the century in which they live. Otherwise take any martial art for what it is, a mix of history, a pinch of martial philosophy and an opportunity to explore one's self the way one would wish in one's own way. Let's not all get our knickers in a twist :Angel: Salam, Krisno
