Oh, I see, you call it Colon. Is knowledge of the Jingluo integral to how your style is taught/practised?
HI my apologies for talking out of my backside you are all correct. There is no direct link other then Chen Pan-ling having studied under Yang Shou Ho, like Erle's teacher Chang Yiue Chun. It's the forms which are similar! When Erle introduced the 'Old' Yang way back in the 80's everyone said he had made it up and that the Yang family had no such form! However, with publication of Chen Pan-ling's book, it was made apparent that there was another form. The form is almost identical to ours where postures are concerned with some difference in execution and sequence. However, Chen did modify it somewhat and he tells you that in his book. Chen was a historian of the martial arts and a part of the Chinese establishment until the onset of communism. He was highly respected by all. The second person to blow the 'lid' so to speak was Douglas Wile, another historian, who clearly states that the Yang family had a secret long form with explosive leaps, shouts and stomps which was performed in a matter of minutes... obviously this proves nothing, but I am more interested in what my teachers teach rather than history. Thanks for the heads up guys.
Yes, nearly very strike taken from our Taiji form (at an application level) is to a point located on a meridian, which further entwines it with TCM. However it is not same as acupuncture only the points are the same.
CPLs book was published in 1963 - which is some time before the 80s. He died in 1967. Some people want to believe Erles stuff and some people are not bothered, I quite like it myself but I don't think it has any more claim to being 'teh r3ALz' than other styles. There is a lot of marketing with Erle - why he translates 'Dim Mak' as 'Death Touch' for instance, it really translates as something like 'Cavity Press' - not nearly as exciting.
Well.. my advice would be to take a look at the CPL form for yourself. The book is excellent and you can get a video of its performance along with the book from Rochester Tai chi. (US) A few similarities are there, but also a lot is different.. I found it pretty inconclusive of anything to be honest. No sign of the fajin.. Lots of other moves must have been taken out also, You'd have to watch it really.. And if that old form was taught my YSH it was only one of many. . What is evident is that a lot of forms and practices were passed on. That can be evidenced through public records of the cirriculums that were taught by Ban Hou and Shao Hou.
Hi, I know he got a lot of pressure from his publishers about how stuff should be published and marketed etc... hence a lot of the hardline stuff.
Does anyone know of any other styles of Taiji that incorporate meridian theory into their practice. Or taiji teachers (in the London area) who are acupuncturists also?
This Wang Peisheng book goes into meridians etc. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Wu-Style-Ta...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1203095785&sr=8-1 BUT, I have to say that if you are a student of Liming Yue, you might wish to heed the advice of his teacher Chen Zhenglei who specifically stated that you do not need to think about meridians at all.
Hi JKZ, no actually I'm not one of his students, nor am I a Chen practitioner, I was just invited to a couple of workshops he was holding by someone who is (very good they were too). Also, I agree with what CZ says about it being unnecessary to know about meridians with correct practice, in terms of opening them and getting energy to flow. My interest lies in the acupoints' potential as targets and the effects that can be (or are claimed to be) had from striking them. I dare say many styles and systems teach vulnerable areas on the body, I am just interested in cross referencing these and other less obvious ones with the TCM model I am currently studying. Part of my course requires a "points portfolio", a series of 12 points that one studies in depth, and I think martial applications may be an area which has not been extensively researched (at my college, anyway). As far as 'Death points' go, I remain open minded and would be more interested in learning where they are in order to avoid them, just in case. However, if anyone can offer to teach me the Spock Death Grip, I'd be all ears - pointy ones, in fact. :Alien: PS. Anyone know how Dillman knocks his students out? I remember seeing a video of a demo once, but I think the crucial bit was cut and just showed them being revived.
I think this is quite a useful online resource: http://ecdearing.com/docs/JudoAtemiPressurePoints.pdf
It's a shame when discussions like these between fellow practitioners result in so much bickering, if those involved don't get the irony of this in light of the meaning of Internal Martial Arts then it's not worth mentioning. Sadly there is likely more bitching and back biting within Taijiquan than just about any other system ... what ever happened to the concept of leading by example and showing the benefits of your system by the fruits of your actions, words and deeds? In any case, I have been training under Erle's system for many years now and have also trained with other masters of their art and I have always settled back with what Erle teaches. It might be of interest for people who question Erle's art to read this little section by Paul Brecher on a recent trip to China and how it relates to what Erle teaches and how others within China verify it. Paul also names names and has photographs of many of these same people found in his free PDF book PT2. http://www.taiji.net/research.html I wish all those here who practice our great art the very best!
Well, true in one sense, but on the other side of the yin/yang, those who practise falsely, and promote false ideas for personal benefit only, also have to be spoken about. Learning isn't just about learning what's right - the smarter you are, the more you advance yourself but cutting through great swathes of BS. In fact, we are not all brothers in this great art of Quan - some are terrible charlatans who rely on wu de preventing their exposure.
Good luck tracking them all down and bringing them to justice - why focus your energy on all that? If you have found what is real and true and know the difference, I'd be spending all my time there instead. You get the teachers you deserve. Try reading the article.
I am my own Master, as we all are - and we all do, truly, get the Master we wanted, even if it isn't the one we deserve. It won;t fall to me to track down the charlatans - they will simply ebb to the shadows, where they belong, as wider awareness of the truth grows. As for reading the article, I have no interest in Erle Montaigue.
It's not Erle that's important but the facts in the article pertinent to the Taijiquan Erle teaches - comments about his Yang Style by Yang Cheng Fu's youngest son etc but I can see why detractors would rather not read these things - it's a tough habit to break.
All the senior Yangs of his time were defeated by their friend, Wang Xiang Zhai, so that whole line of martial thinking is largely pointless. Adapt to superior understanding, that's all - not hide from it, not pretend it didn't happen. As for some Yang family member saying Erle is great - so what? Who says the Yangs are great? Where are their achievements? And yet again, you want me to believe someone is great because of words. If there are many words, many witnesses, of greatness, then sure - words are ok - but this nonsense of "Yang Cheng Fu's son says Erle is great." Who cares?
See, everything you accuse others of, you are the most guilty of. You accuse others of in-fighting, then the moment your view is challenged, you go straight to the man, and insult the man. You accuse others of having a hard to break habit of not listening to information, then when new information is given to you, you don't want to know. That's natural - we throw stones at mirrors. We all do that. Let's re-cap, because you've almost completed this round of obfuscation... We started with you saying taiji is martial. Then I said that there's no evidence of anyone being able to use it. Where we COULD have gone from there is you saying something like "Well, I can understand your doubts, but have you seen these videos...." Instead, what's happened is what always happens - you've attacked me. You've done that because you had to move the argument to a battlefield you could at least draw on. I mean, personal slanging matches are always draws. But to do that you moved us right off the point of whether there is any evidence of the effectiveness of taiji. Well done. So, when this round is done, a few hundred more words will have been added to the word count saying how effective taiji is. Oh, and some Chinese guy has said Erle is great. Well, Erle may be great - he certainly has a great deal of videos on Youtube. Tell me, Syd, out of all Erle's videos, which is the one where he actually uses taiji in a believeable, realistic way against a serious, non-compliant, well trained, non-student opponent in a rough and tumble match with real contact?
