There seems to be a certain amount of instability in the Chinese and English posture names in the hand form and the other forms as well). Much of this is understandable. As elegant as the hand form may be, its utilitarian purposes probably make change in the nomenclature inevitable. Nevertheless, choice of posture names can effect the spirit we bring to postures, where we direct our mental focus, and occasionally our interpretation of the required movements.
In another thread, I posed some questions about the name of our art and appropriate interpretations of what "postures" and "forms" are. Here I want to invite comment, whether pure speculation or authoritatively researched, about the posture names themselves, in Chinese and English.
Yu4 bei4 Shi4 (Preparation Form/Preparing/Prepare)
This is fairly straightforward. However, a variant name for this posture in other contexts is wu2 ji2 (no extremity/formlessness/Chaos), which might hint at the option of a more "formless" execution of the posture than "preparing" would suggest.
I also note that Cheng Man-ch'ing's short form (and perhaps other forms) begin with the heels together and the feet forming a 90-degree "v" before the shoulder-width, foot-parallel stance is assumed. Is anyone aware of any significance to this difference?
Qi3 Shi4 (Beginning (Posture))
Is there any particular reason why the "Beginning Posture" seems always to be counted as the second move in the form and not the first? I note that one of the regular contributors to this Discussion Group (I forget whom) seems to prefer the translation "Arising." Might this not be a translation that is more elegant, appropriate, and evocative of the arm movements than the apparently more popular and "traditional" translation of "Beginning"?
I have seen in at least one source the variant name tai4 ji2 qi3 shi4. Would this be better interpreted as "Beginning the practice of Taiji/T'ai Chi, the art" or "Arising of Taiji/T'ai Chi, the principle", with the implication that we should focus on beginning the separation of yin and yang? It would certainly be nice to know if I am supposed to be creating the universe by the second posture or merely beginning the active part of the form.
Lan3 Que4 Wei3 (Grasp the Bird's Tail)
This term was the subject of earlier posts, which I will not repeat here. The gist of them, however, seems to be that the term is probably linked to the Chen Style posture name Lan3 za1 yi1 (Lazily Tying Coat or Lazy about Tying Coat), but reflects an early Yang Family story about controlling a sparrow’s ability to take off from the hand through sensitivity to its initial sinking.
In Yang Cheng Fu's form, the term "Grasp the Birds Tail" refers to Ward Off, Roll Back, Press, and Push. Stuart Alve Olson in a translator's note to Intrinsic Energies of T'ai Chi Ch'uan makes the statement that Grasp the Bird's Tail originally referred to two separate moves (right and left) that followed the Beginning Posture and preceded Ward Off. Yang Jwing Ming's form book shows two such postures that vaguely resemble the beginning (right after the Beginning Posture) of a Ch'en form I was taught. Does anybody know anything about this?
Peng2 (Ward Off)
According to Louis, this term originally meant the cover of a quiver that was used on chariots in ancient China. I note that there is a homophonous word with the tree radical, rather than the hand radical, that means “shed.” This might imply that there was one spoken word in ancient Chinese that meant cover, which gave rise to different written characters with more specific meanings.
I have read that term “peng” is no longer used in Chinese outside of martial arts circles. Does anyone know if the term and concept are unique to T’ai Chi or internal martial arts?
Lü3 (Roll Back)
This term appears to be unique to T’ai Chi, but can anyone confirm this? I have found not found it in my dictionaries and have not found similar characters or homophones that are helpful. The closest I have come up with are “stroke/smooth out” as in “stroke a beard,” but written with unrelated character elements, and “shoe/walk on,” but written without the hand radical.
Ji3 (Press)
Although “Press” is the usual translation, might not “squeeze” be more appropriate? My interpretation of the use of this term as one of the eight primary jins is that it refers to squeezing two energy vectors together to product a third, forward-directed one. Any thoughts?
An(4) (Push)
Although “Push” is the usual translation, might not “press (down)” be more accurate. As far as I understand, this term does not describe the same action as “tui1,” which is the term used in the expression “tui1 shou3” (Push(ing) Hands).
Dan1 Bian1 (Single Whip)
Why “single” whip, and which hand holds the whip? I have usually heard that this posture refers to the action of the right hand in applying the hook hand, though this probably better describes Cheng Man-Ching’s form than Yang Zhen Duo’s. I have also heard that this describes the left hand, which is viewed as holding a bamboo or wooden horse whip, while the right hand would be holding the reins. Does anyone have better information?
Ti2 Shou3 Shang4 Shi4 (Lift Hand(s) Up Posture)
This is a simple name, except for the fact that I do not thing the hands really “lift,” as least as performed by the Yangs. I also wonder about the “up” (shang) part, does this refer to stepping up with the right foot, or simply reinforce the idea of holding the hands up in a lifting position?
Any thoughts?
Respectfully submitted,
Audi
Posture Names
Hi Audi,
Though I barely touch on your questions, I hope that the perspectives help.
The "Beginning Posture," or the "Arising," is the beginning posture in the Yang Style taught by the Tung Family.
The "Arising" is based on hexagram 35, the sun rising over the Earth, thus we face the East, where the sun rises, when we begin.
In the Tung/Yang set, the hands face each other as they rise, then at about shoulder height they turn to face down and away, as though the palms of the hands are running over a sphere which has the diameter roughly the distance between your armpits.
You wrote, "It would certainly be nice to know if I am supposed to be creating the universe by the second posture or merely beginning the active part of the form."
You and the rest of the universe are creating this moment together, so what's the problem?
You wrote, "...translator's note to Intrinsic Energies of T'ai Chi Ch'uan makes the statement that Grasp the Bird's Tail originally referred to two separate moves (right and left) that followed the Beginning Posture and preceded Ward Off."
This is still done in Tung/Yang style, 'Grasping the Sparrows Tail to the Right,' 'Grasping the Sparrows Tail to the Left,' and 'Ward Off' are the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th move.
You wrote about 'Lift Hand(s) Up Posture,' "This is a simple name, except for the fact that I do not thing the hands really “lift,” as least as performed by the Yangs."
In the Tung/Yang style the move is called 'Play the Harp' and especially following 'Slanting Flying' There is a lifting of the hands (and a dropping of the hands).
I refer you to the Tong Family history tape sometime, so you can see what I mean.
Single whip may refer to the act of holding the whipped cream on the beater away from a sibling.
David
Though I barely touch on your questions, I hope that the perspectives help.
The "Beginning Posture," or the "Arising," is the beginning posture in the Yang Style taught by the Tung Family.
The "Arising" is based on hexagram 35, the sun rising over the Earth, thus we face the East, where the sun rises, when we begin.
In the Tung/Yang set, the hands face each other as they rise, then at about shoulder height they turn to face down and away, as though the palms of the hands are running over a sphere which has the diameter roughly the distance between your armpits.
You wrote, "It would certainly be nice to know if I am supposed to be creating the universe by the second posture or merely beginning the active part of the form."
You and the rest of the universe are creating this moment together, so what's the problem?
You wrote, "...translator's note to Intrinsic Energies of T'ai Chi Ch'uan makes the statement that Grasp the Bird's Tail originally referred to two separate moves (right and left) that followed the Beginning Posture and preceded Ward Off."
This is still done in Tung/Yang style, 'Grasping the Sparrows Tail to the Right,' 'Grasping the Sparrows Tail to the Left,' and 'Ward Off' are the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th move.
You wrote about 'Lift Hand(s) Up Posture,' "This is a simple name, except for the fact that I do not thing the hands really “lift,” as least as performed by the Yangs."
In the Tung/Yang style the move is called 'Play the Harp' and especially following 'Slanting Flying' There is a lifting of the hands (and a dropping of the hands).
I refer you to the Tong Family history tape sometime, so you can see what I mean.
Single whip may refer to the act of holding the whipped cream on the beater away from a sibling.
David
-
Louis Swaim
- Posts: 1390
- Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 7:01 am
- Location: Oakland, CA
Greetings Audi,
As a prefatory remark, I would like to make a personal recollection about my first sifu’s approach to the taijiquan posture names. He barely mentioned them. For all I knew, the forms were all named “Do this.” He did tell us that he thought it was much more important to know the explicit details of the movements than to know the traditional names. In hindsight, I believe his rationale for this approach was entirely pragmatic. He didn’t want to clutter the interface with a lot of imagery from a remote culture in presenting the art to his American students. However, as I grew older, and as I learned and gained competence in Chinese, I grew curious about the names and terminology. I think that knowing something about the imagery and language of the art can enhance one’s understanding and appreciation of the whole.
With that in mind, I’ll try to share a little of what I’ve found on some of the questions you’ve raised. First, I’m of the opinion that “yubei shi” (preperatory position) is a relatively modern naming convention. It only appears sporadically as a form name in most early taiji books I’ve seen. Perhaps its earliest occurance is in Xu Yusheng’s 1921 _Taijiquan Shi Tujie_ (Illustrated Explications of the Taijiquan Forms). It also appears in Wu Gongzao’s form instructions accompanying the photos of Wu Jianquan’s form in the book first published as _Taijiquan Jiangyi_ (Principles of Taijiquan). The phrase is a convention for setting up the circumstances of the crucial “standing in stillness” that must precede the initiation of the form movements. Most early Yang style manuals I’ve seen begin with “taijiquan qi shi,” “taiji qishi,” or just “qishi,” but include language about the requisite preparatory dispositions under the heading of “qishi.” Yang Chengfu’s _Taijiquan Tiyong Quanshu_, for example, begins with “Taijiquan qishi” (beginning of taijiquan), but his narrative states, “This is the Taijiquan posture for preparing (yubei) to move.” He continues with very detailed elucidation of the requirements for stillness and calm that precede the initiation of the form.
You’re right that some traditions name this preparatory standing “wuji.” Sun Lutang’s version of taijiquan includes some of his own innovations in the naming conventions. His book, _Taijiquan Xue_ (Study of Taijiquan), is unique in that each form name ends with the character “xue,” (study, learn). Sun’s first form is therefore “wuji xue” (study of wuji). This is followed by “taiji xue” (study of taiji), and then by “lan zha yi xue” (study of lazily fasten cloak—Sun retains the older name), and so on.
As for the name “qishi” itself, this qi has a degree of polysemy, so it connotes initiation, a beginning, an origin, and rising up. As you imply, there are indeed cosmological overtones in this, rooted in wuji-taiji language of Wang Zongyue’s “Taijiquan Treatise,” which in turn is rooted in the nearly identical cosmological imagery of the Song neo-Confucian philosopher Zhou Dunyi’s essay, “Taijitu Shuo” (Explanation of the Taiji Diagram). That in turn draws upon the “Xici zhuan” (Appended Phrases) commentary on the Yijing (Classic of Changes). This commentary dates from somewhere in the late Zhou or early Han dynasties, and is the most likely locus classicus of the term and concept: taiji.
Here are some interesting thoughts from Dong Yingjie’s student, T.Y. Pang:
“Originally there was no name for the preparatory time in the set, and none for the ending time. But now to make the names complete the beginning is called ‘Origin of Tai Chi,’ and the ending is called ‘Back to Tai Chi.’ ‘Origin of Tai Chi,’ and ‘Back to Tai Chi,’ refer to Ultimate Origin, Non-Origin, a highly symbolic way of indicating that all is complete and new. But do not be trapped by all these words. A name is merely a name. Forget language, practice and understand.” (T.Y. Pang, _On Tai Chi Chuan_, 1987, Azalea Press)
In the Yang tradition, Lan Que Wei (Grasp Sparrow’s Tail) refers collectively to peng, lu, ji, and an. Yang Chengfu’s narrative (my rough trans.) on Lan Que Wei begins, “Grasp Sparrow’s Tail is the chief hand [method] of Taijiquan’s essence and application—that is, the so-called adhere, connect, stick, and follow (nian, lian, tie, sui) of push hands—to go back and forth without separating or severing (buli buduan). Hence the figure of speech “Sparrow’s Tail” refers to the hand and arm. Therefore we have the general term “Grasping the Sparrow’s Tail.” Yang’s narrative then continues with a detailed section on each of the four methods: “Lanquewei, pengfa;” “Lanquewei, lufa;” “Lanquewei, jifa,” and “Lanquewei, anfa.” So, each of the methods (fa) is conceived as a subset of Grasp Bird’s Tail.
As for the four methods: Peng (ward off); Lu (roll back); Ji (press); and An (push), it’s difficult to know how these specialized terms became a part of the taijiquan corpus. It’s equally difficult to justify the conventional translations. I think I posted some thoughts on the old board (archived somewhere here) on Lu. I think translating An as ‘push’ is particularly problematic, and it also points up one of the weaknesses of referring to movement subsets as “postures.” After all, An includes the motions of shifting the weight back prior to shifting forward with both arms and palms extending forward. How can we call this sequence a “posture,” and how can we call it “push?”
You’re probaby familiar with the “Songs of the Eight Hands” (ba shou ge), translated in Wile’s Touchstones book. The songs on peng, lu, ji, and an appear on pages 28-31. These are possibly very old formulae, and may comprise the first written record of oral tradition explaining these methods. I heard somewhere, for example, that these have been part of the Wu Jianquan lineage since the time when Quan Yu and Yang Luchan were martial arts tutors for the Imperial Guard in Beijing. So, I think these are important documents to be familiar with.
On danbian (single whip), my understanding is that this is a descriptive name, and that it refers to the action of the left arm/wrist/palm. As the forearm rotates in conjuction with the turning of the waist and the shift of the weight toward the left leg, the hand form changes from peng to an, and the expression of jin in the palm at the end of the ulna (from the feet, issued by the legs, governed by the waist, etc.), is rather like the action of a cracking whip. There is a variant of the name danbian which means “energy transformation” (dan as in ‘dantian’). T.Y. Pang notes this in his _On Tai Chi Chuan_ book, as well as a number of other movement name variants. He makes no pretense of knowledge about one being the source of the other, nor does he make reference to alleged “errors” of pronunciation being the source of these variants. He merely notes them as variants. Variations in names of places and things is actually a very common phenomenon in Chinese culture. I will note that the “single whip” name is found in early martial arts that likely preceded taijiquan.
That’s all for now,
Louis
As a prefatory remark, I would like to make a personal recollection about my first sifu’s approach to the taijiquan posture names. He barely mentioned them. For all I knew, the forms were all named “Do this.” He did tell us that he thought it was much more important to know the explicit details of the movements than to know the traditional names. In hindsight, I believe his rationale for this approach was entirely pragmatic. He didn’t want to clutter the interface with a lot of imagery from a remote culture in presenting the art to his American students. However, as I grew older, and as I learned and gained competence in Chinese, I grew curious about the names and terminology. I think that knowing something about the imagery and language of the art can enhance one’s understanding and appreciation of the whole.
With that in mind, I’ll try to share a little of what I’ve found on some of the questions you’ve raised. First, I’m of the opinion that “yubei shi” (preperatory position) is a relatively modern naming convention. It only appears sporadically as a form name in most early taiji books I’ve seen. Perhaps its earliest occurance is in Xu Yusheng’s 1921 _Taijiquan Shi Tujie_ (Illustrated Explications of the Taijiquan Forms). It also appears in Wu Gongzao’s form instructions accompanying the photos of Wu Jianquan’s form in the book first published as _Taijiquan Jiangyi_ (Principles of Taijiquan). The phrase is a convention for setting up the circumstances of the crucial “standing in stillness” that must precede the initiation of the form movements. Most early Yang style manuals I’ve seen begin with “taijiquan qi shi,” “taiji qishi,” or just “qishi,” but include language about the requisite preparatory dispositions under the heading of “qishi.” Yang Chengfu’s _Taijiquan Tiyong Quanshu_, for example, begins with “Taijiquan qishi” (beginning of taijiquan), but his narrative states, “This is the Taijiquan posture for preparing (yubei) to move.” He continues with very detailed elucidation of the requirements for stillness and calm that precede the initiation of the form.
You’re right that some traditions name this preparatory standing “wuji.” Sun Lutang’s version of taijiquan includes some of his own innovations in the naming conventions. His book, _Taijiquan Xue_ (Study of Taijiquan), is unique in that each form name ends with the character “xue,” (study, learn). Sun’s first form is therefore “wuji xue” (study of wuji). This is followed by “taiji xue” (study of taiji), and then by “lan zha yi xue” (study of lazily fasten cloak—Sun retains the older name), and so on.
As for the name “qishi” itself, this qi has a degree of polysemy, so it connotes initiation, a beginning, an origin, and rising up. As you imply, there are indeed cosmological overtones in this, rooted in wuji-taiji language of Wang Zongyue’s “Taijiquan Treatise,” which in turn is rooted in the nearly identical cosmological imagery of the Song neo-Confucian philosopher Zhou Dunyi’s essay, “Taijitu Shuo” (Explanation of the Taiji Diagram). That in turn draws upon the “Xici zhuan” (Appended Phrases) commentary on the Yijing (Classic of Changes). This commentary dates from somewhere in the late Zhou or early Han dynasties, and is the most likely locus classicus of the term and concept: taiji.
Here are some interesting thoughts from Dong Yingjie’s student, T.Y. Pang:
“Originally there was no name for the preparatory time in the set, and none for the ending time. But now to make the names complete the beginning is called ‘Origin of Tai Chi,’ and the ending is called ‘Back to Tai Chi.’ ‘Origin of Tai Chi,’ and ‘Back to Tai Chi,’ refer to Ultimate Origin, Non-Origin, a highly symbolic way of indicating that all is complete and new. But do not be trapped by all these words. A name is merely a name. Forget language, practice and understand.” (T.Y. Pang, _On Tai Chi Chuan_, 1987, Azalea Press)
In the Yang tradition, Lan Que Wei (Grasp Sparrow’s Tail) refers collectively to peng, lu, ji, and an. Yang Chengfu’s narrative (my rough trans.) on Lan Que Wei begins, “Grasp Sparrow’s Tail is the chief hand [method] of Taijiquan’s essence and application—that is, the so-called adhere, connect, stick, and follow (nian, lian, tie, sui) of push hands—to go back and forth without separating or severing (buli buduan). Hence the figure of speech “Sparrow’s Tail” refers to the hand and arm. Therefore we have the general term “Grasping the Sparrow’s Tail.” Yang’s narrative then continues with a detailed section on each of the four methods: “Lanquewei, pengfa;” “Lanquewei, lufa;” “Lanquewei, jifa,” and “Lanquewei, anfa.” So, each of the methods (fa) is conceived as a subset of Grasp Bird’s Tail.
As for the four methods: Peng (ward off); Lu (roll back); Ji (press); and An (push), it’s difficult to know how these specialized terms became a part of the taijiquan corpus. It’s equally difficult to justify the conventional translations. I think I posted some thoughts on the old board (archived somewhere here) on Lu. I think translating An as ‘push’ is particularly problematic, and it also points up one of the weaknesses of referring to movement subsets as “postures.” After all, An includes the motions of shifting the weight back prior to shifting forward with both arms and palms extending forward. How can we call this sequence a “posture,” and how can we call it “push?”
You’re probaby familiar with the “Songs of the Eight Hands” (ba shou ge), translated in Wile’s Touchstones book. The songs on peng, lu, ji, and an appear on pages 28-31. These are possibly very old formulae, and may comprise the first written record of oral tradition explaining these methods. I heard somewhere, for example, that these have been part of the Wu Jianquan lineage since the time when Quan Yu and Yang Luchan were martial arts tutors for the Imperial Guard in Beijing. So, I think these are important documents to be familiar with.
On danbian (single whip), my understanding is that this is a descriptive name, and that it refers to the action of the left arm/wrist/palm. As the forearm rotates in conjuction with the turning of the waist and the shift of the weight toward the left leg, the hand form changes from peng to an, and the expression of jin in the palm at the end of the ulna (from the feet, issued by the legs, governed by the waist, etc.), is rather like the action of a cracking whip. There is a variant of the name danbian which means “energy transformation” (dan as in ‘dantian’). T.Y. Pang notes this in his _On Tai Chi Chuan_ book, as well as a number of other movement name variants. He makes no pretense of knowledge about one being the source of the other, nor does he make reference to alleged “errors” of pronunciation being the source of these variants. He merely notes them as variants. Variations in names of places and things is actually a very common phenomenon in Chinese culture. I will note that the “single whip” name is found in early martial arts that likely preceded taijiquan.
That’s all for now,
Louis
Hi Audi, and All,
I don't have any specific answers to the good questions you've raised. But, I am interested in what Louis posted from Yang Chengfu's book that "Grasp Sparrow’s Tail is the chief hand [method] of Taijiquan’s essence and application". This implies that the change (from Lazy Tying Clothes, etc) is not a homophone error, or a mistranslation. Someone familiar with Chen style would have to answer whether their "Lazy Tying Clothes" holds the same 'essential' relationship to their hand methods. Sorry, I know that's a question. My only other observation would be another question, in this case about "ji." If, as many argue, it should be translated "squeeze," then who uses "ji" in a "squeezing" manner. Fwiw, I've heard it explained as "compress", as opposed to "press." I'm just wondering if there were anyone who used it, in terminology and application, in that way.
Best Regards,
Steve James
I don't have any specific answers to the good questions you've raised. But, I am interested in what Louis posted from Yang Chengfu's book that "Grasp Sparrow’s Tail is the chief hand [method] of Taijiquan’s essence and application". This implies that the change (from Lazy Tying Clothes, etc) is not a homophone error, or a mistranslation. Someone familiar with Chen style would have to answer whether their "Lazy Tying Clothes" holds the same 'essential' relationship to their hand methods. Sorry, I know that's a question. My only other observation would be another question, in this case about "ji." If, as many argue, it should be translated "squeeze," then who uses "ji" in a "squeezing" manner. Fwiw, I've heard it explained as "compress", as opposed to "press." I'm just wondering if there were anyone who used it, in terminology and application, in that way.
Best Regards,
Steve James
Hi Louis and Steve,
Thanks for your comments. They are all very informative and helpful.
Louis, your description of peng and an jin in the left "whip" hand in Single Whip really made a light bulb go off. I was looking at the video of Yang Jun doing this posture and trying to figure out what his left hand was expressing that I really did not feel in my hand. It was this very whiplike action, rather than a mere sweeping motion followed by a "push" with the edge of the hand.
Steve, although I have seen "squeeze" applications of "ji" that looked moderately convincing, my understanding of the word includes the sense of "jam or crowd." In this sense, I view ji as jamming a sideways power or energy back into the opponent.
By the way, I share the question about whether Chen practitioners see peng, lu, ji, and an as being emblematic in specific postures, or merely energies that come and go throughout the form.
Regards,
Audi
Thanks for your comments. They are all very informative and helpful.
Louis, your description of peng and an jin in the left "whip" hand in Single Whip really made a light bulb go off. I was looking at the video of Yang Jun doing this posture and trying to figure out what his left hand was expressing that I really did not feel in my hand. It was this very whiplike action, rather than a mere sweeping motion followed by a "push" with the edge of the hand.
Steve, although I have seen "squeeze" applications of "ji" that looked moderately convincing, my understanding of the word includes the sense of "jam or crowd." In this sense, I view ji as jamming a sideways power or energy back into the opponent.
By the way, I share the question about whether Chen practitioners see peng, lu, ji, and an as being emblematic in specific postures, or merely energies that come and go throughout the form.
Regards,
Audi
Hi Audi,
you wrote:
"although I have seen "squeeze" applications of "ji" that looked moderately convincing, my understanding of the word includes the sense of "jam or crowd." In this sense, I view ji as jamming a sideways power or energy back into the opponent."
I understand what you mean: that "squeeze" can be taken in the sense of "aqueeze into" a small space. The action of "crowding", though, is more subtle. IMO, "crowding" is something that can be accomplished with many movements. The first example you gave:
"My interpretation of the use of this term as one of the eight primary jins is that it refers to squeezing two energy vectors together to product a third, forward-directed one."
If you'd ask me to describe how the avove relates to "ji", I personally would compare it to the action of a sail. or the effect that occurs when one squeezes a bean out from between the fingers. But, those are not applications, just descriptions of how to produce a single "energy/force/effect" by the "squeezing" together of two others. I don't see it as "wedging" in or between something; though it is the result of it. Maybe Louis can give some background. We can ask, "If it's not "squeeze" as in "squeeze a ball," then why translate it as "squeeze" at all. Anyway, I'm interested in the unconvincing application of "ji" as "squeeze" that you mentioned.
Best,
Steve James
you wrote:
"although I have seen "squeeze" applications of "ji" that looked moderately convincing, my understanding of the word includes the sense of "jam or crowd." In this sense, I view ji as jamming a sideways power or energy back into the opponent."
I understand what you mean: that "squeeze" can be taken in the sense of "aqueeze into" a small space. The action of "crowding", though, is more subtle. IMO, "crowding" is something that can be accomplished with many movements. The first example you gave:
"My interpretation of the use of this term as one of the eight primary jins is that it refers to squeezing two energy vectors together to product a third, forward-directed one."
If you'd ask me to describe how the avove relates to "ji", I personally would compare it to the action of a sail. or the effect that occurs when one squeezes a bean out from between the fingers. But, those are not applications, just descriptions of how to produce a single "energy/force/effect" by the "squeezing" together of two others. I don't see it as "wedging" in or between something; though it is the result of it. Maybe Louis can give some background. We can ask, "If it's not "squeeze" as in "squeeze a ball," then why translate it as "squeeze" at all. Anyway, I'm interested in the unconvincing application of "ji" as "squeeze" that you mentioned.
Best,
Steve James
Hi Steve,
I do not think I am understanding your difficulty with the idea of "squeeze," as opposed to "press." As the name of the jin (power/energy), I think your idea of a bean or sail (plus the boat's keel) is correct.
As for "squeeze" as the name of an application, I think the reference to the form posture is to how we transform (hua) our opponent's energy after roll back. If the opponent attempts to avoid the effects of roll back (lu) by bending and twisting his or her left arm counterclockwise and turning to face us, we use "ji" to squeeze our arms together and squeeze or jam our opponent's arm back into their body, thus turning their rotational energy against them.
In the four-hand push hand set, we transform (hua) our opponent's roll back (an attempt to guide us around their center) into an attack, by squeezing our arms together and squeezing or jamming our arm against our opponent's and back into their body and center. This again makes use of their rotational energy.
As for my moderately convincing squeezing application, imagine that a close-in opponent uses his or her left hand to punch forward while simultaneously stepping forward with the left foot. You then use your left forearm and elbow to sweep and guide the punch to your left, while stepping forward with the right foot outside of your opponent's foot. You then reach around your opponent with your right arm and place your right palm on the opponent's back, while thrusting forward with the left palm heel below your opponent's sternum. You then use your right palm and forearm and left palm to forcefully squeeze your opponent's breath. Basically, your hands would meet to form the Ji or Squeeze/Press Posture, except that your opponent is now between them. Is this at least "moderately" convincing?
Audi
I do not think I am understanding your difficulty with the idea of "squeeze," as opposed to "press." As the name of the jin (power/energy), I think your idea of a bean or sail (plus the boat's keel) is correct.
As for "squeeze" as the name of an application, I think the reference to the form posture is to how we transform (hua) our opponent's energy after roll back. If the opponent attempts to avoid the effects of roll back (lu) by bending and twisting his or her left arm counterclockwise and turning to face us, we use "ji" to squeeze our arms together and squeeze or jam our opponent's arm back into their body, thus turning their rotational energy against them.
In the four-hand push hand set, we transform (hua) our opponent's roll back (an attempt to guide us around their center) into an attack, by squeezing our arms together and squeezing or jamming our arm against our opponent's and back into their body and center. This again makes use of their rotational energy.
As for my moderately convincing squeezing application, imagine that a close-in opponent uses his or her left hand to punch forward while simultaneously stepping forward with the left foot. You then use your left forearm and elbow to sweep and guide the punch to your left, while stepping forward with the right foot outside of your opponent's foot. You then reach around your opponent with your right arm and place your right palm on the opponent's back, while thrusting forward with the left palm heel below your opponent's sternum. You then use your right palm and forearm and left palm to forcefully squeeze your opponent's breath. Basically, your hands would meet to form the Ji or Squeeze/Press Posture, except that your opponent is now between them. Is this at least "moderately" convincing?
Audi
-
Louis Swaim
- Posts: 1390
- Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 7:01 am
- Location: Oakland, CA
Greetings Audi, and Steve,
From my own practical perspective, ji is a way of re-establishing and optimizing the effectiveness of your center-line trajectory when your peripheral point of contact with the opponent (in the wrist or forearm) has been been rolled back or deflected in such a manner as to make that point of contact "empty." With the “rear” palm, one presses one’s wrist or forearm, channeling from your centerline to the opponent’s centerline. It may be considered an instance of "seeking the straight in the curved."
How the character ji came to be used for the technique is an open question. It does have a verbal meaning of "to press" or "to push." It can also mean to squeeze, or to "be crowded." When you negotiate your way through a crowded market place in Taibei, or a financial district sidewalk at rush hour, or squeeze into a standing-room-only bus or train, perhaps you're doing something analogous to "ji"; that is, you are optimizing your walking trajectory and your central eqilibrium, while making constant adjustments to being jostled and turned by the surrounding crowd. (If you don't allow yourself to be turned by the crowd, you will be constantly bumping into people. This would be analogous to what is called "butting" in taiji theory.) The character ji consists of the hand radical (as do six of the eight primary taijiquan form/methods) combined with a component pronounced "qi" which etymologically comes from an image of stalks of grain gatherered up or "arranged" together in a field, and by itself means “parity,” "equalizing," or "sorting out." It might be thought of as a re-establishing of balance and an "arranged" equilibrium.
Take care,
Louis
[This message has been edited by Louis Swaim (edited 03-30-2001).]
From my own practical perspective, ji is a way of re-establishing and optimizing the effectiveness of your center-line trajectory when your peripheral point of contact with the opponent (in the wrist or forearm) has been been rolled back or deflected in such a manner as to make that point of contact "empty." With the “rear” palm, one presses one’s wrist or forearm, channeling from your centerline to the opponent’s centerline. It may be considered an instance of "seeking the straight in the curved."
How the character ji came to be used for the technique is an open question. It does have a verbal meaning of "to press" or "to push." It can also mean to squeeze, or to "be crowded." When you negotiate your way through a crowded market place in Taibei, or a financial district sidewalk at rush hour, or squeeze into a standing-room-only bus or train, perhaps you're doing something analogous to "ji"; that is, you are optimizing your walking trajectory and your central eqilibrium, while making constant adjustments to being jostled and turned by the surrounding crowd. (If you don't allow yourself to be turned by the crowd, you will be constantly bumping into people. This would be analogous to what is called "butting" in taiji theory.) The character ji consists of the hand radical (as do six of the eight primary taijiquan form/methods) combined with a component pronounced "qi" which etymologically comes from an image of stalks of grain gatherered up or "arranged" together in a field, and by itself means “parity,” "equalizing," or "sorting out." It might be thought of as a re-establishing of balance and an "arranged" equilibrium.
Take care,
Louis
[This message has been edited by Louis Swaim (edited 03-30-2001).]
Hi Audi,
You asked about my difficulty with ""squeeze," as opposed to "press."
I think it's the difference between "press" and "compress." It would be entirely acceptable in some connotations: i.e., as in a "juice squeezer" and a "juice press." But, in the case of the sail and keel, the concept seems to imply (at least) two "opposing" forces. Squeezing into a subway train just doesn't seem right, but it's not a big point because you might still interpret it in a way that makes sense to both of us. I'm not against the term "press." I just feel that translating "ji" as "Press" can be misleading, as much as translating "an" as "push" or even "withdraw, press down, push." I don't think we disagree too much at all.
You also gave some nice examples. They are good examples, but remember, I think it was you who said that they were unconvincing. I may be wrong, though. Anyway, I like them, fwiw. But, I'd ask. In Play Guitar, as described in YZD's book, what is the "energy" used in the application? Would it be one of the '13" (or
? or would it be another one?
Best,
Steve James
You asked about my difficulty with ""squeeze," as opposed to "press."
I think it's the difference between "press" and "compress." It would be entirely acceptable in some connotations: i.e., as in a "juice squeezer" and a "juice press." But, in the case of the sail and keel, the concept seems to imply (at least) two "opposing" forces. Squeezing into a subway train just doesn't seem right, but it's not a big point because you might still interpret it in a way that makes sense to both of us. I'm not against the term "press." I just feel that translating "ji" as "Press" can be misleading, as much as translating "an" as "push" or even "withdraw, press down, push." I don't think we disagree too much at all.
You also gave some nice examples. They are good examples, but remember, I think it was you who said that they were unconvincing. I may be wrong, though. Anyway, I like them, fwiw. But, I'd ask. In Play Guitar, as described in YZD's book, what is the "energy" used in the application? Would it be one of the '13" (or
? or would it be another one?Best,
Steve James
-
JerryKarin
- Posts: 1067
- Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 7:01 am
- Contact:
Hi All,
Something in Louis' post (pushing through a crowd) made me think of pushing through a field of high grass. I got a picture of someone holding something in front of them to meet the grass first, instead of getting grass in their face, and the grass could bend to either side, hence a split.
Another idea is that the right hand controls the vertical, while the left hand pushes forward, thus you have two different directions combining.
David
Something in Louis' post (pushing through a crowd) made me think of pushing through a field of high grass. I got a picture of someone holding something in front of them to meet the grass first, instead of getting grass in their face, and the grass could bend to either side, hence a split.
Another idea is that the right hand controls the vertical, while the left hand pushes forward, thus you have two different directions combining.
David
Hi All,
Not that it's necessary, but of course I accept Louis's interpretation of the various connotations for "ji." It is certainly possible that the practical application of the movement can be as various as the interpretation of the term. The last description, though understandable, is more difficult to reconcile, though:
"When you negotiate your way through a crowded market place in Taibei, or a financial district sidewalk at rush hour, or squeeze into a standing-room-only bus or train, perhaps you're doing something analogous to "ji"; that is, you are optimizing your walking trajectory and your central eqilibrium, while making constant adjustments to being jostled and turned by the surrounding crowd."
I think I understand, but as yet it's still difficult for me to make a conceptual link from this to "ji" in tjq. Granted that you know an encyclopedia more than I on the language.
Jerry pointed out some interesting comments by YZD. The "opposing energy" principle seems to apply here. But, of course, that doesn't mean anything. Look at the name. However, I checked in YZD's book (part on applications), and I noticed that the movement is translated "press forward." He is quite clear in what this means in application --by the picture. Although it's not exactly reminiscent to me of pushing through a crowd, the posture and (visible), intent seem confirmed in the name. Curious, I looked at "play pipa" and noticed that the hand positions are very similar to those in "press forward." The obvious difference is that it is a a "back stance." Oh well, just curious. Any comments?
Best,
Steve James
Not that it's necessary, but of course I accept Louis's interpretation of the various connotations for "ji." It is certainly possible that the practical application of the movement can be as various as the interpretation of the term. The last description, though understandable, is more difficult to reconcile, though:
"When you negotiate your way through a crowded market place in Taibei, or a financial district sidewalk at rush hour, or squeeze into a standing-room-only bus or train, perhaps you're doing something analogous to "ji"; that is, you are optimizing your walking trajectory and your central eqilibrium, while making constant adjustments to being jostled and turned by the surrounding crowd."
I think I understand, but as yet it's still difficult for me to make a conceptual link from this to "ji" in tjq. Granted that you know an encyclopedia more than I on the language.
Jerry pointed out some interesting comments by YZD. The "opposing energy" principle seems to apply here. But, of course, that doesn't mean anything. Look at the name. However, I checked in YZD's book (part on applications), and I noticed that the movement is translated "press forward." He is quite clear in what this means in application --by the picture. Although it's not exactly reminiscent to me of pushing through a crowd, the posture and (visible), intent seem confirmed in the name. Curious, I looked at "play pipa" and noticed that the hand positions are very similar to those in "press forward." The obvious difference is that it is a a "back stance." Oh well, just curious. Any comments?
Best,
Steve James
-
JerryKarin
- Posts: 1067
- Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 7:01 am
- Contact:
ji(third tone) is a common word in mandarin. My little pocket dictionary from the 70's, Xinhuazidian, defines the character with the following:
1.pressing and squeezing, as in "ji cow's milk"(milking a cow)or sqeezing (ji) toothpaste out of a tube.
2. Pressing against each other, shoving, as in "it's so crowded I can't squeeze (ji) over there".
3. Crowded and tight, hard to move around in, for example: "if ten or more people are in a room, it's too crowded (ji)"
IMHO, the form name means 'squeezing' in a general way (ie first definition) and involves the right arm coming back and the left pushing forward.
[This message has been edited by JerryKarin (edited 03-31-2001).]
1.pressing and squeezing, as in "ji cow's milk"(milking a cow)or sqeezing (ji) toothpaste out of a tube.
2. Pressing against each other, shoving, as in "it's so crowded I can't squeeze (ji) over there".
3. Crowded and tight, hard to move around in, for example: "if ten or more people are in a room, it's too crowded (ji)"
IMHO, the form name means 'squeezing' in a general way (ie first definition) and involves the right arm coming back and the left pushing forward.
[This message has been edited by JerryKarin (edited 03-31-2001).]
-
Louis Swaim
- Posts: 1390
- Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 7:01 am
- Location: Oakland, CA
Greetings,
I may have opened a can of conjectural worms in my personal ruminations regarding the application and naming of the ji method. To make amends, here’s a quick translation of a couple of points of analysis from Yang Zhenji’s book, _Yang Chengfu Shi Taijiquan_, p. 30:
~~~
2. The ji method is the employment of closing jin and long jin. Closing jin (hejin) is the two hands joining together producing one jin and applied on the opponent’s body. Long energy (changjin) is the entire body from the feet to the legs, then the waist, expressed in the hands and arms, and strung together into one jin, extending the waist and lengthening forth to issue.
3. A direct line of fajin. The method of ji is one of issuing force in a direct line. In Yang style taijiquan, when one issues, one “seeks the straight in the curved” with specific regard to the focal point of the opponent’s center line, seizing the opportunity and strategic advantage (dejideshi), and issuing jin along a straight line (zhixian fajin) rather than in a curved arc.
~~~
Take care,
Louis
I may have opened a can of conjectural worms in my personal ruminations regarding the application and naming of the ji method. To make amends, here’s a quick translation of a couple of points of analysis from Yang Zhenji’s book, _Yang Chengfu Shi Taijiquan_, p. 30:
~~~
2. The ji method is the employment of closing jin and long jin. Closing jin (hejin) is the two hands joining together producing one jin and applied on the opponent’s body. Long energy (changjin) is the entire body from the feet to the legs, then the waist, expressed in the hands and arms, and strung together into one jin, extending the waist and lengthening forth to issue.
3. A direct line of fajin. The method of ji is one of issuing force in a direct line. In Yang style taijiquan, when one issues, one “seeks the straight in the curved” with specific regard to the focal point of the opponent’s center line, seizing the opportunity and strategic advantage (dejideshi), and issuing jin along a straight line (zhixian fajin) rather than in a curved arc.
~~~
Take care,
Louis
Hi Louis,
Thanks, as always for the translation. I was especially interested in this section:
"2. The ji method is the employment of closing jin and long jin. Closing jin (hejin) is the two hands joining together producing one jin and applied on the opponent’s body. Long energy (changjin) is the entire body from the feet to the legs, then the waist, expressed in the hands and arms, and strung together into one jin, extending the waist and lengthening forth to issue."
In your (or anyone's) opinion, does the "Long energy" (chang jin( imply a movement (in any direction) or a static position?
Could you expand any on what you think is meant by "applied on the opponent's body"? Does "body" iow, imply "chest" as is the typical application?
Best,
Thanks again,
Steve james
Thanks, as always for the translation. I was especially interested in this section:
"2. The ji method is the employment of closing jin and long jin. Closing jin (hejin) is the two hands joining together producing one jin and applied on the opponent’s body. Long energy (changjin) is the entire body from the feet to the legs, then the waist, expressed in the hands and arms, and strung together into one jin, extending the waist and lengthening forth to issue."
In your (or anyone's) opinion, does the "Long energy" (chang jin( imply a movement (in any direction) or a static position?
Could you expand any on what you think is meant by "applied on the opponent's body"? Does "body" iow, imply "chest" as is the typical application?
Best,
Thanks again,
Steve james