Are you telling me that you are actually had encountered with people who advocate the "no force' doctrine? And you are not convinced, then I can understand.DPasek wrote:ChiDragon wrote:I guess you have not experienced the true nature of push-hands based on your descriptions of comprehension.
If your “true nature of push-hands” does not follow the laws of nature, then I agree that I do not understand.
I have pushed with numerous individuals, including teachers from the US, China and Taiwan, who advocate the “no force” doctrine.
I have not encountered anything that convinces me that this should be the approach taken in applying Taijiquan. Since I also study Chen style, and have not encountered a similar “no force” doctrine as advocated in many Yang style traditions, I also do not think that this can be used to define Taijiquan.
Solo Push Hands?
Re: Solo Push Hands?
A deep discussion requires explicit details for a good comprehension of a complex subject.
Re: Solo Push Hands?
Oh well, I tried. I do not know what else I can say.
Chen Xiaowang is using trained force (jin), but that force is consistent with nature’s laws concerning force. There is nothing in the video that a knowledgeable physicist could not explain. Chen's alignment is better than his opponents, allowing him to match their force, through his structure, and into the ground. Since the opponents cannot align their bodies as well, then they cannot generate more force into the ground than Chen can. The sum of force vectors through their bodies do not align as well as Chen’s, which leads to losses in their abilities to transmit force from the ground and against Chen.
When Chen turns at ~2:14, you can see that there was acceleration (even in the “stalemated” situation where the NET force is equal) since you can see the two opponents fall forward. If we agree that Chen is using jin here, then there is nothing here that indicates that jin defies the laws of nature. There has to be acceleration to produce force (F=ma; force equals mass times acceleration). Without “acceleration” there is no force. Chen does not fall forward when he turns because he, unlike his opponents, can balance his forward force with a return force from his front leg (he is using training, while his opponent’s force is raw and untrained).
If you had force meters under the feet of all of the participants, then you would see than the forces equal each other in these situations, just like you would have equal force at the point of contact between Chen and his opponents. You would also see the forces in Chen’s two feet match each other when he turns at ~2:14, allowing him to remain stable even when his opponents fall forward.
Consistent with what I tried to point out earlier, Chen is using much less EFFORT, but not less FORCE (his training – aligning the external forces of his opponents into the ground - allows him to match the opponent’s force in an efficient, trained way = jin).
Note that if you tried to use the same leg motion produced by the muscles in your body, but were doing it in outer space, then you would not generate the forward force like you do when standing on the ground. You push the ground and the ground pushes back with an equal and opposite level of force (every action has an equal and opposite reaction). In this case, the mass of the Earth is enormous compared to a human, so there is no noticeable movement of the Earth (F=ma, with such a massive “m” for the Earth, humans do not notice the “a” of the Earth when they push against each other).
In the video, Chen would not be able to generate the same amount of resistance force if he had his feet together. His forward force depends on the force from the ground. He would also not be able to resist like he does if he was standing on ball bearings...
Unless someone else wants additional details, I think that I am going to give up on this topic.
Peace.
Chen Xiaowang is using trained force (jin), but that force is consistent with nature’s laws concerning force. There is nothing in the video that a knowledgeable physicist could not explain. Chen's alignment is better than his opponents, allowing him to match their force, through his structure, and into the ground. Since the opponents cannot align their bodies as well, then they cannot generate more force into the ground than Chen can. The sum of force vectors through their bodies do not align as well as Chen’s, which leads to losses in their abilities to transmit force from the ground and against Chen.
When Chen turns at ~2:14, you can see that there was acceleration (even in the “stalemated” situation where the NET force is equal) since you can see the two opponents fall forward. If we agree that Chen is using jin here, then there is nothing here that indicates that jin defies the laws of nature. There has to be acceleration to produce force (F=ma; force equals mass times acceleration). Without “acceleration” there is no force. Chen does not fall forward when he turns because he, unlike his opponents, can balance his forward force with a return force from his front leg (he is using training, while his opponent’s force is raw and untrained).
If you had force meters under the feet of all of the participants, then you would see than the forces equal each other in these situations, just like you would have equal force at the point of contact between Chen and his opponents. You would also see the forces in Chen’s two feet match each other when he turns at ~2:14, allowing him to remain stable even when his opponents fall forward.
Consistent with what I tried to point out earlier, Chen is using much less EFFORT, but not less FORCE (his training – aligning the external forces of his opponents into the ground - allows him to match the opponent’s force in an efficient, trained way = jin).
Note that if you tried to use the same leg motion produced by the muscles in your body, but were doing it in outer space, then you would not generate the forward force like you do when standing on the ground. You push the ground and the ground pushes back with an equal and opposite level of force (every action has an equal and opposite reaction). In this case, the mass of the Earth is enormous compared to a human, so there is no noticeable movement of the Earth (F=ma, with such a massive “m” for the Earth, humans do not notice the “a” of the Earth when they push against each other).
In the video, Chen would not be able to generate the same amount of resistance force if he had his feet together. His forward force depends on the force from the ground. He would also not be able to resist like he does if he was standing on ball bearings...
Unless someone else wants additional details, I think that I am going to give up on this topic.
Peace.
Re: Solo Push Hands?
Here is the unbalance force formula for:
The muscular man vs Chen Xiaowang
F1m1 => F2m2
Under normal human condition, based on the ordinary strength, there is no way that Chen can overcome the opponent force. However, due to Chen's ability to generate the internal energy jin, so, he can break even with the counter force. THus, the formula becomes:
F1m1 = (F1 + J)m2
J is being the jin generated by Chen, in order, to balance the force equation. All the footwork is just for leverage; but the final outcome lies on the internal energy of a Tai Ji practitioner. One might called it "Tai Ji power".
PS This is not an argument. It's just a point of interest and clarification.
Peace
The muscular man vs Chen Xiaowang
F1m1 => F2m2
Under normal human condition, based on the ordinary strength, there is no way that Chen can overcome the opponent force. However, due to Chen's ability to generate the internal energy jin, so, he can break even with the counter force. THus, the formula becomes:
F1m1 = (F1 + J)m2
J is being the jin generated by Chen, in order, to balance the force equation. All the footwork is just for leverage; but the final outcome lies on the internal energy of a Tai Ji practitioner. One might called it "Tai Ji power".
PS This is not an argument. It's just a point of interest and clarification.
Peace
A deep discussion requires explicit details for a good comprehension of a complex subject.
Re: Solo Push Hands?
Another point of interest in the video at 20:00. Please note that Chen is standing on the Tai Ji pad with a slippy surface. What it means is that he did not rely on friction to stay put but he used a special technique called 千斤墜(thousand pound pendant). Another noticeable thing was that Wu Long was yelling and screaming while Chen is regulating his breath and not making a sound. Indeed, Chen was sinken his chi to the dantian to keep his poise.
A deep discussion requires explicit details for a good comprehension of a complex subject.
Re: Solo Push Hands?
Greetings all,
Imagine receiving a high-speed punch. Would you refer to receive it with big ball of plastic dipped in water, honey, or super glue, or would you prefer to receive it with a big ball of plastic filled with water.
As I think I have mentioned before, I have sometimes demonstrated peng-lu-ji-an with a Pilates ball. While I use some of the friction of the ball, there is no “pulling,”
I should make clear that I am not advocating that the opponent never gets pulled in push hands. In fact, in four out of our eight “standard” applications taught to beginners, the opponent should end up behind you. I am merely saying that Tai Chi energy is an expanding, pushing, resilient energy, and not a contracting energy.
Peng energy is linking pulling the links of a chain into tension with each other. Relaxing the chain and allowing the links to separate destroys this energy relationship.
Below is a YouTube link to Master Yang Jun, giving a lecture and demonstration on push hands. He speaks Chinese, but there are English subtitles. Please note, however, that although the translation is quite good, there are places where the English terminology used is not what we are generally familiar with. There is even an occasional “typo” in the Chinese text. Let me know if there is something you find particularly unusual or surprising just to check whether it is a translation issue, rather than a content issue. I am going to go with my translation, but I hope that will not be confusing. Occasionally I will put the actual text in brackets so that it is easier to follow along. (I should also make clear that my Chinese is extremely uneven. I need the speaking, the writing, and the English subtitles to be sure I understand what is going on.)
楊氏太極推手 楊軍 Yang Style Push Hands: Yang Jun
I think the entire video is worth watching, but want to draw attention to particular parts, in light of our discussion.
At time index 10:50, Master Yang talks about using soft to conquer hard and using hard [以柔克剛] and soft to supplement each other 剛柔相濟. Our Tai Chi should then have some hardness somewhere.
Immediately after, he says we should not try to accomplish this by “stiffly clashing against, stiffly pulling, or stiffly dragging.” I think his use of “stiffly” is important, but not essential. The Chinese words he uses for “clashing against,” “pulling,” and “dragging” are generally not used to describe applications.
At time index 13:51, he talks and demonstrates about not just using touch, but also sticking and adhering, and also peng jin [supporting inwardly]. Again, our method is not “zero jin.” By the way, later, the translation shows “walk.” This really should have been simply “go.” After this, Master Yang goes quickly though ward off, roll back, press [push], and push [press]. Notice that he is not doing this in a passive way or always as a counter to a technique, but simply initiates whatever technique he wants.
Around time index 15:13, he says to do the applications he just demonstrated, you need to have listening energy, sticking [touching] energy, an understanding of the opponent, and control of the opponent. He adds that if you do not have sticking [touching] and adhering, you cannot control the opponent. Again, our Tai Chi is not simply about passively following along looking for an opportunity, you want to be able to control the opponent.
Although the pressure may be equal with the opponent, you actually want to distribute it differently throughout your body. See time index 17:07. This is a case when simple physics does not capture the complexity of the human body.
The one place you can here something that might sound like “zero jin,” is around time index 34:13, here Master Yang explains that as we do the circling practicing, we do not want to actually show or reveal the jin, but simply imply it.
I hope this is helpful.
Take care and peace,
Audi
Perhaps, but consider the language below attributed to Yang Luchan, Wang Zongyuo, and Yang Chengfu with Paul Brennan’s translation. Note that Brennan seems consistently to translate jin 勁 as “power,” qi as “energy,” and li either as “power” or “force.”However, if one didn't know the difference, then he/she will be misled by the instructor who was using the bogus terminology to obfuscate the actual nomenclature. BTW The instructors use the incorrect terms doesn't mean that they are correct. To me, a good teacher should put all matters in their proper perspective and try not to mislead the students. Unfortunately, most student do respect their teacher and take the teacher's words as gospel.
In the preceding passage, jin is described as coming from the spine.練法須上下相隨，勁自跟起，行於腿，達於腰由脊而膊，而行於手指，周身一氣，用時進前退後，其勁乃不可限量矣
When practicing, it is necessary for the upper body and lower to coordinate with each other. Power [Jin 勁] initiates from the heel, goes through the leg to the waist, and from the spine then goes through the arms to the fingers. As long as it is a continuous process through the whole body, then when you apply power, whether advancing or retreating, the power [jin 勁] will be immeasurable.
In the preceding passage, li力is described as issuing from the spine using the same fa character [發] as in the term fajin 發勁, just in a different order. Based on this usage, I think saying fali 發力, has to have some acceptability for those practitioners that follow Yang Chengfu.蓄勁如開弓，發勁如放箭，曲中求直，蓄而後發，力由脊發，步隨身換，收即是放，斷而復連，往復須有摺叠，進退須有轉換，極柔軟，然後極堅剛，能呼吸，然後能靈活氣，以直養而無害，勁以曲蓄而有餘***。
Store power like drawing a bow. Issue power like loosing an arrow. Within curving, seek to be straightening. Store, and then issue. Power [li 力] comes [issuing 發] from the spine. Step according to the body’s changes. To gather is to release. Disconnect but stay connected. In the back and forth [of the arms], there must be folding. In the advance and retreat [of the feet], there must be variation. Extreme softness begets extreme hardness. Your ability to be nimble lies in your ability to breathe. By nurturing energy [qi 氣] with integrity, it will not be corrupted. By storing power in crooked parts, it will be in abundant supply***.
I prefer to leave qi 氣 untranslated, since I consider it a cultural term with no good English equivalent, but I can agree with some arguments that could support translating it as "energy." I personally do not like translating qi 氣 as "breath," since we have different requirements for the qi 氣 than for breathing in general. Using a similar word for both would be confusing for us.Again, it is a biggest mistake to translate ''氣 as 'energy'. The 氣 should be translated as "breath". Remember there is a famous phrase ＂氣沈丹田＂(sink chi to the dantian).
DP, I just realized that I never responded to your statement above. What you say is true. Water does have a sticking ability that can be used to pull. Many people take advantage of this to turn the pages of a book by first wetting a finger and using that finger to stick to and lift up the next page. I would assert, however, that this ability is very relevant for push hands.I also like the ideas that you try to convey with the water analogies, but to my understanding, water can pull, although to a lesser degree than it pushes. Water tends to have some sticky quality, which is why there is a film of water on hard surfaces prior to the water beading up (unless you have a surface coated with Rain X, or something similar).
Imagine receiving a high-speed punch. Would you refer to receive it with big ball of plastic dipped in water, honey, or super glue, or would you prefer to receive it with a big ball of plastic filled with water.
As I think I have mentioned before, I have sometimes demonstrated peng-lu-ji-an with a Pilates ball. While I use some of the friction of the ball, there is no “pulling,”
I should make clear that I am not advocating that the opponent never gets pulled in push hands. In fact, in four out of our eight “standard” applications taught to beginners, the opponent should end up behind you. I am merely saying that Tai Chi energy is an expanding, pushing, resilient energy, and not a contracting energy.
Peng energy is linking pulling the links of a chain into tension with each other. Relaxing the chain and allowing the links to separate destroys this energy relationship.
Above, we are told to hammer out the steel, not to contract it.運勁如百鍊鋼何堅不摧
Wield power like tempered steel, so strong there is nothing tough enough to stand up against it.
運勁如百鍊鋼即內勁，非一日之功也，日月練習慢慢磨練出來的，猶如一塊荒鉄，日日錘鍊，慢慢化出一種純鋼來，欲作刀劍鋒利無比，無堅不摧，太極練出來細而有鋼之勁，即鐵人亦能打壞，何妨對敵者為血肉之軀乎。
“Wield power like tempered steel.” This refers to internal power. It cannot be achieved in a single day. Practicing every day for many months, gradually work at it until it develops. It is like a lump of iron ore smelted and hammered day after day until gradually it is turned into pure steel, which if you then wished to use to make a sword, its edge would be the sharpest of all.
“There is nothing tough enough to can stand up against it.” Taiji practice develops a power that is delicate yet steel-like. It could break a man made of iron. So what defense would your flesh-and-blood opponents have?
Does a bow pull itself back into shape, or does it push against the string being drawn? Does a leather ball pull against a leg that kicks it, or does it only push?[/quote]如敵對手時，內勁如開弓不射之圓滿，猶皮球有氣充之。
When facing an opponent, internal power is like fully drawing a bow but not yet loosing the arrow, or like a leather ball filled with air….
My problem with “pulling” is that this suggests trying to store energy in straight parts and disperse it into the crooked/bent parts.氣以直養而無害勁以曲蓄而有餘
By nurturing energy with integrity, it will not be corrupted. By storing power in crooked parts, it will be in abundant supply.
This is an impressive display, which I have seen before. I have no problem crediting Master Chen Xiaowang with high mastery of jin, but would have difficulty saying that he was using a “zero jin” method.
You understand force but how about jin.
Please explain this! There are two men with different size pushing against each other with no speed involved. It is strictly rely on internal force (勁, jin).
Ref: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nAIDi5Nip64
Below is a YouTube link to Master Yang Jun, giving a lecture and demonstration on push hands. He speaks Chinese, but there are English subtitles. Please note, however, that although the translation is quite good, there are places where the English terminology used is not what we are generally familiar with. There is even an occasional “typo” in the Chinese text. Let me know if there is something you find particularly unusual or surprising just to check whether it is a translation issue, rather than a content issue. I am going to go with my translation, but I hope that will not be confusing. Occasionally I will put the actual text in brackets so that it is easier to follow along. (I should also make clear that my Chinese is extremely uneven. I need the speaking, the writing, and the English subtitles to be sure I understand what is going on.)
楊氏太極推手 楊軍 Yang Style Push Hands: Yang Jun
I think the entire video is worth watching, but want to draw attention to particular parts, in light of our discussion.
At time index 10:50, Master Yang talks about using soft to conquer hard and using hard [以柔克剛] and soft to supplement each other 剛柔相濟. Our Tai Chi should then have some hardness somewhere.
Immediately after, he says we should not try to accomplish this by “stiffly clashing against, stiffly pulling, or stiffly dragging.” I think his use of “stiffly” is important, but not essential. The Chinese words he uses for “clashing against,” “pulling,” and “dragging” are generally not used to describe applications.
At time index 13:51, he talks and demonstrates about not just using touch, but also sticking and adhering, and also peng jin [supporting inwardly]. Again, our method is not “zero jin.” By the way, later, the translation shows “walk.” This really should have been simply “go.” After this, Master Yang goes quickly though ward off, roll back, press [push], and push [press]. Notice that he is not doing this in a passive way or always as a counter to a technique, but simply initiates whatever technique he wants.
Around time index 15:13, he says to do the applications he just demonstrated, you need to have listening energy, sticking [touching] energy, an understanding of the opponent, and control of the opponent. He adds that if you do not have sticking [touching] and adhering, you cannot control the opponent. Again, our Tai Chi is not simply about passively following along looking for an opportunity, you want to be able to control the opponent.
Although the pressure may be equal with the opponent, you actually want to distribute it differently throughout your body. See time index 17:07. This is a case when simple physics does not capture the complexity of the human body.
The one place you can here something that might sound like “zero jin,” is around time index 34:13, here Master Yang explains that as we do the circling practicing, we do not want to actually show or reveal the jin, but simply imply it.
I hope this is helpful.
Take care and peace,
Audi
Re: Solo Push Hands?
Audi,Audi wrote:Greetings all,
.....Note that Brennan seems consistently to translate jin 勁 as “power,” qi as “energy,” and li either as “power” or “force.”
Audi
Thank you for taken your valuable time and patience to look into this matter. However, in Chinese, there is a big distinction between the two terms. If the actual characters were used, I have no problem to understand them.
Brennan translates jin 勁 as “power,” qi as “energy,” and li either as “power” or “force”, then I see he uses "power" for the translation of both. I see the inconsistency in his translation right away! How can you say that Brennan seems consistently to translate jin and li with different English words at different time.
A deep discussion requires explicit details for a good comprehension of a complex subject.
Re: Solo Push Hands?
I prefer to leave qi 氣 untranslated, since I consider it a cultural term with no good English equivalent, but I can agree with some arguments that could support translating it as "energy." I personally do not like translating qi 氣 as "breath," since we have different requirements for the qi 氣 than for breathing in general. Using a similar word for both would be confusing for us.Audi wrote:Greetings all,
Again, it is a biggest mistake to translate ''氣 as 'energy'. The 氣 should be translated as "breath". Remember there is a famous phrase ＂氣沈丹田＂(sink chi to the dantian).
Audi[/quote]
Audi,
Please note that I did not translate the character 氣, alone, as "breath." I had only translated its contextual meaning in the phrase "氣沈丹田＂(sink chi to the dantian)". I would translate it differently if it was used else where. As I had said before, it makes no sense to sink "energy" to the dantian. I have no idea where this "energy" was coming from. If "breath" was used, then I know and justify it was the air which came from my breathing. Can you justify how did you come to the conclusion that 氣 should be translated as energy? Besides using somebody else's translation?
A deep discussion requires explicit details for a good comprehension of a complex subject.
Re: Solo Push Hands?
Audi,Audi wrote:In the preceding passage, jin is described as coming from the spine.練法須上下相隨，勁自跟起，行於腿，達於腰由脊而膊，而行於手指，周身一氣，用時進前退後，其勁乃不可限量矣
When practicing, it is necessary for the upper body and lower to coordinate with each other. Power [Jin 勁] initiates from the heel, goes through the leg to the waist, and from the spine then goes through the arms to the fingers. As long as it is a continuous process through the whole body, then when you apply power, whether advancing or retreating, the power [jin 勁] will be immeasurable.
Audi
Well! I would question when I read some ambiguous factoids. If jin is described as coming from the spine, then it contradicts my understanding that jin was acquired for the diligently practice of Tai Ji Chuan; and Jin can be issued from any parts of the body.
Here are my questions:
1. How does the jin initiated from the heel during practice?
2. When do you apply power, before the jin was initiated or after the power was applied?
A deep discussion requires explicit details for a good comprehension of a complex subject.
Re: Solo Push Hands?
Hi Everyone,
Different practitioners use different language, according to their understanding and personal preferences. I have no particular objection to your using “breath” if it works for your practice. I know that some practitioners put special emphasis on breathing in their Tai Chi, and you have mentioned this on other threads.
The Association’s Tai Chi does advocate deep abdominal breathing, but this is not the main emphasis of what we talk about in connection with 氣沈丹田 (“sink chi to the dantian”). I would readily say that qi/chi and breath are connected, but hesitate to imply they are ever the same.
For a time, I think I was misled by the terminology of some folks into paying too much attention to breathing and not enough attention to other things. Once I corrected my approach, I had several major breakthroughs in ability. As I result of my own experience, I do not like to equate qi/chi with breath; however, if you have been taught differently and have traveled a different path, you should yield to your own experience with what works.
When I look at how qi/chi is described in many of the philosophies that have gone into Tai Chi and compare it with what physics says, it seems to me that “energy” and qi/chi have basically the same underlying idea, even though the two traditions come at it from very different directions.
Leaving the term “qi/chi” untranslated has the decided disadvantage of giving someone unschooled in Chinese philosophy little idea of what is being talked about and allowing them to fill the void with misinformation. Translating it with some term as “energy” and “breath” has the decided disadvantage of bringing in cultural baggage that is not present in the Chinese term and misleading the practitioners in another way. I can see arguments for any of the possibilities and would leave the choice to the particular practitioner or teacher and what works best for their approach.
To illustrate this issue, let me quote from Barbara Davis in her book The Taijiquan Classics: An Annotated Translation, pages 130-131. She is quoting from the “Exposition of Insights into the Thirteen Postures Shisan shi xinggong xin jue {十三勢行功心解}” with commentary from Chen Weiming and a note from herself.
When I received instructions in these matters, there was no emphasis on a distinction between jin and li, and so it is not important to how I practice this concept. In fact, I think what I recall hearing described was to “stick qi/chi to the spine”; however again, qi/chi per se was not the stress, but rather the technique itself.
If you follow Master Chen Man-Ch’ing [Zheng Manqing] or some other teacher for whom this distinction may be relatively more central to their teaching, I can understand why you might find the original phrasing problematic or “mistaken.” Since I was not taught with such an emphasis, I have no problem phrasing the concept using jin, li, or qi/chi. To each their own.
According to what I was taught, I should be able to issue jin with almost any part of the body. The external aspect of that jin should begin in the foot/heel and generally follow a particular down-to-up pathway through the body. This pathway will normally involve a particular usage of the spine, like the last bend of a whip that sends energy into the tip. I should develop and refine this ability through diligent practice of the form while loosening and extending the joints to work the stiffness out and refine the “iron” into “steel.” For me, there is no real contradiction.
Look at Master Yang’s lecture at index 26:50 to 27:30, he makes reference to the saying “borrow force [li] to strike force [li]” [send this action back] at index 27:17 and then pairs this with a reference to “jin methodology” [force][勁法 jin fa] at index 27:23. He does this to elaborate on a basic circling drill and to illustrate some of the meaning in one of the Ten Essentials (“be continuous without break”). On this particular occasion, he does not give a discourse on the difference between jin and li, but is simply trying to show you part of what would allow you casually to launch your opponent into the air in this particular situation.
As for the surface contradiction between saying the jin originates in the foot or heel and saying that you should issue jin from anywhere, I think this is simply one example of surface contradictions throughout Tai Chi writings. We are told to “find stillness in movement,” “sink the qi/chi to the dantian,” “let qi/chi permeate the entire body through the nine bends of pearl,” “use the mind to move the qi/chi,” “don’t put the mind on the qi/chi,” “be loose, but not loose,” “use the mind, but react spontaneously,” “use soft to conquer hard,” “use soft and hard to help each other out,” etc. On the surface, all the statements embody contradictions; however, all have their place in the coaching of the Tai Chi I have learned.
I think the writers of the Tai Chi classics and most masters use Chinese philosophy to coach there students. As coaches, they are using various methods and various approaches that might not be good from a philosopher’s point of view. Coaches are usually addressing specific problems, rather than constructing grand frameworks. They are trying to lead you through a gate. If you are near the gate, their instruction often makes more sense. At too great a distance, the instruction makes little sense.
I do not understand your questions or why you are asking them. As far as I understand it, the connection between jin and the heel/foot is addressed by multiple traditions and is not controversial. I don’t understand what I am saying that should provoke confusion or debate. To me, jin and “power” are more or less the same thing if used abstractly, and so I do not understand what you mean by: “When do you apply power, before the jin was initiated or after the power was applied?” Could you elaborate on your meaning?
I should make clear that I am trying to share my understanding, but not trying to tell anyone else how to practice. I only know how to define the Tai Chi that I practice and not Tai Chi in general.
Take care,
Audi
ChiDragon,Please note that I did not translate the character 氣, alone, as "breath." I had only translated its contextual meaning in the phrase "氣沈丹田＂(sink chi to the dantian)". I would translate it differently if it was used else where. As I had said before, it makes no sense to sink "energy" to the dantian. I have no idea where this "energy" was coming from. If "breath" was used, then I know and justify it was the air which came from my breathing.
Different practitioners use different language, according to their understanding and personal preferences. I have no particular objection to your using “breath” if it works for your practice. I know that some practitioners put special emphasis on breathing in their Tai Chi, and you have mentioned this on other threads.
The Association’s Tai Chi does advocate deep abdominal breathing, but this is not the main emphasis of what we talk about in connection with 氣沈丹田 (“sink chi to the dantian”). I would readily say that qi/chi and breath are connected, but hesitate to imply they are ever the same.
For a time, I think I was misled by the terminology of some folks into paying too much attention to breathing and not enough attention to other things. Once I corrected my approach, I had several major breakthroughs in ability. As I result of my own experience, I do not like to equate qi/chi with breath; however, if you have been taught differently and have traveled a different path, you should yield to your own experience with what works.
I am puzzled that you seem so opposed to this translation. On another thread, you seemed to be saying that you connected qi/chi with the cellular energy mediated by ATP. Wouldn’t that view make “energy” a good translation of qi/chi in support of your view?Can you justify how did you come to the conclusion that 氣 should be translated as energy? Besides using somebody else's translation?
When I look at how qi/chi is described in many of the philosophies that have gone into Tai Chi and compare it with what physics says, it seems to me that “energy” and qi/chi have basically the same underlying idea, even though the two traditions come at it from very different directions.
Leaving the term “qi/chi” untranslated has the decided disadvantage of giving someone unschooled in Chinese philosophy little idea of what is being talked about and allowing them to fill the void with misinformation. Translating it with some term as “energy” and “breath” has the decided disadvantage of bringing in cultural baggage that is not present in the Chinese term and misleading the practitioners in another way. I can see arguments for any of the possibilities and would leave the choice to the particular practitioner or teacher and what works best for their approach.
I am just quoting from the masters. My point was to show that even the masters and the classics are somewhat loose in their terminology and do not always rigidly distinguish between jin and li. If your approach to Tai Chi strongly emphasizes this distinction, I can see that you would find this bothersome.Well! I would question when I read some ambiguous factoids.
To illustrate this issue, let me quote from Barbara Davis in her book The Taijiquan Classics: An Annotated Translation, pages 130-131. She is quoting from the “Exposition of Insights into the Thirteen Postures Shisan shi xinggong xin jue {十三勢行功心解}” with commentary from Chen Weiming and a note from herself.
9.a Li (strength) is issued (fa) from the spine (ji).
9b. The steps follow (sui) the changes (huan) of the body.
Chen: Hold in the chest and pull up the back (bei) , so as to store the energy (shi). When issuing jin, li (strength) comes from the backbone (beiji), not just from the jin of the hands. The body moves, the stepping follows. Turn and change without becoming fixed [in one place].
Notes: Li is issued from the spine. Zheng Manqing argues that li (external muscular strength) is written by mistake here, and should instead by jin (internal force), which is desired in taijiquan practice.55 Ji specifically refers to the spine. Bei or beiji in Chen’s notes refers to the back. This line is often translated as “strength is issued from the back.”
When I received instructions in these matters, there was no emphasis on a distinction between jin and li, and so it is not important to how I practice this concept. In fact, I think what I recall hearing described was to “stick qi/chi to the spine”; however again, qi/chi per se was not the stress, but rather the technique itself.
If you follow Master Chen Man-Ch’ing [Zheng Manqing] or some other teacher for whom this distinction may be relatively more central to their teaching, I can understand why you might find the original phrasing problematic or “mistaken.” Since I was not taught with such an emphasis, I have no problem phrasing the concept using jin, li, or qi/chi. To each their own.
If jin is described as coming from the spine, then it contradicts my understanding that jin was acquired for the diligently practice of Tai Ji Chuan; and Jin can be issued from any parts of the body.
According to what I was taught, I should be able to issue jin with almost any part of the body. The external aspect of that jin should begin in the foot/heel and generally follow a particular down-to-up pathway through the body. This pathway will normally involve a particular usage of the spine, like the last bend of a whip that sends energy into the tip. I should develop and refine this ability through diligent practice of the form while loosening and extending the joints to work the stiffness out and refine the “iron” into “steel.” For me, there is no real contradiction.
Look at Master Yang’s lecture at index 26:50 to 27:30, he makes reference to the saying “borrow force [li] to strike force [li]” [send this action back] at index 27:17 and then pairs this with a reference to “jin methodology” [force][勁法 jin fa] at index 27:23. He does this to elaborate on a basic circling drill and to illustrate some of the meaning in one of the Ten Essentials (“be continuous without break”). On this particular occasion, he does not give a discourse on the difference between jin and li, but is simply trying to show you part of what would allow you casually to launch your opponent into the air in this particular situation.
As for the surface contradiction between saying the jin originates in the foot or heel and saying that you should issue jin from anywhere, I think this is simply one example of surface contradictions throughout Tai Chi writings. We are told to “find stillness in movement,” “sink the qi/chi to the dantian,” “let qi/chi permeate the entire body through the nine bends of pearl,” “use the mind to move the qi/chi,” “don’t put the mind on the qi/chi,” “be loose, but not loose,” “use the mind, but react spontaneously,” “use soft to conquer hard,” “use soft and hard to help each other out,” etc. On the surface, all the statements embody contradictions; however, all have their place in the coaching of the Tai Chi I have learned.
I think the writers of the Tai Chi classics and most masters use Chinese philosophy to coach there students. As coaches, they are using various methods and various approaches that might not be good from a philosopher’s point of view. Coaches are usually addressing specific problems, rather than constructing grand frameworks. They are trying to lead you through a gate. If you are near the gate, their instruction often makes more sense. At too great a distance, the instruction makes little sense.
Here are my questions:
1. How does the jin initiated from the heel during practice?
2. When do you apply power, before the jin was initiated or after the power was applied?
I do not understand your questions or why you are asking them. As far as I understand it, the connection between jin and the heel/foot is addressed by multiple traditions and is not controversial. I don’t understand what I am saying that should provoke confusion or debate. To me, jin and “power” are more or less the same thing if used abstractly, and so I do not understand what you mean by: “When do you apply power, before the jin was initiated or after the power was applied?” Could you elaborate on your meaning?
I should make clear that I am trying to share my understanding, but not trying to tell anyone else how to practice. I only know how to define the Tai Chi that I practice and not Tai Chi in general.
Take care,
Audi
Re: Solo Push Hands?
Audi,Audi wrote:Hi Everyone,
I am puzzled that you seem so opposed to this translation. On another thread, you seemed to be saying that you connected qi/chi with the cellular energy mediated by ATP. Wouldn’t that view make “energy” a good translation of qi/chi in support of your view?Can you justify how did you come to the conclusion that 氣 should be translated as energy? Besides using somebody else's translation?
When I look at how qi/chi is described in many of the philosophies that have gone into Tai Chi and compare it with what physics says, it seems to me that “energy” and qi/chi have basically the same underlying idea, even though the two traditions come at it from very different directions.
Leaving the term “qi/chi” untranslated has the decided disadvantage of giving someone unschooled in Chinese philosophy little idea of what is being talked about and allowing them to fill the void with misinformation. Translating it with some term as “energy” and “breath” has the decided disadvantage of bringing in cultural baggage that is not present in the Chinese term and misleading the practitioners in another way. I can see arguments for any of the possibilities and would leave the choice to the particular practitioner or teacher and what works best for their approach.
Audi
I was not opposing to translate 氣(chi) as "energy". My only opposition is that I cannot translate it as "energy" when ever I see it appears. I cannot make it as a universal definition as "energy". I cannot use "energy" as a blanket definition for 氣(chi) . However, I had emphasised many many times. Chi has many many meanings depends on the context as you had indicated in the "Chi" thread of the Tai Chi Theory and Principles section. I think you had done a great job in that manner.
Somehow, people just love to translate 氣(chi) as "energy". Since ATP is a form of bioenergy, I am no problem accepting chi as energy. However, now, I am abide by this definition as "energy" and cannot translate it as "breath" here. Do you see what I mean? I am trying to make things as simple as it can be without confusing the issue when possible.
Now, let's retract back to 氣(chi) was being translated as "breath".
In the Chinese language, breatinging is 呼吸(hu xi).
Where 呼(hu) is exhale and
吸(xi) is inhale. Hence,
呼氣(hu chi) is exhale the air and
吸氣(xi chi) inhale the air.
Here, I am abide by the definition of 氣(chi) as "air". Thus I cannot use it as "energy".
A deep discussion requires explicit details for a good comprehension of a complex subject.
Re: Solo Push Hands?
Hi Audi,
Regarding the OT on solo push hands, I remember reading somewhere about it. It goes something like this ;
When training solo, one must train as if there is a person in front of you. On training with partner, one must train as if there is no one in front of you.
I believe this is another level of TJQ practise. For me the second part is easier than the first (solo).
DPasek,
Audi,
Cheers,
UniTaichi
Regarding the OT on solo push hands, I remember reading somewhere about it. It goes something like this ;
When training solo, one must train as if there is a person in front of you. On training with partner, one must train as if there is no one in front of you.
I believe this is another level of TJQ practise. For me the second part is easier than the first (solo).
DPasek,
My explanation ; 4 liang of li is used (is enough) to generate a internal force to overwhelm 1000 jin.Why would they choose 4 liang rather than just 1 liang if it was only an idiom to represent a small force vs. a large force? It is reasonable to think that 1000 jin may just represent any large force, but why use 4 liang to represent any small force?
Audi,
The hands felt as heavy as Mt. Tai when they are place on the other party because 1) it is full of Qi (Energy). 2) one can also used Yi to "transfer" the weight of the issuer onto the other training partner/opponent weak point.如搭手如皮條搭在敵膊，所以我未用力，敵覺我手重如泰山矣，不用直力則巧力生，無濁氣者為純剛。
When crossing hands with an opponent, it is like leather straps have been hung over his arm. Even though I have not yet applied any force, he feels my hands are as heavy as Mt. Tai. By not applying direct force, a skillful power is generated. Being without corrupted energy [qi] is pure strength.
This passage is not translated correctly. Don't asked me , asked our resident expert, Louis.由着熟而漸悟懂勁由懂勁而階及神明然非用力之久不能豁然貫通焉
Once you have engrained these techniques, you will gradually come to identify energies, and then from there you will work your way toward something miraculous.
Ah , this one I can. Not FROM spine. Should be; Power initiates from heel, goes throught the leg to the waist and then from the spine, goes through the arms to the fingers.練法須上下相隨，勁自跟起，行於腿，達於腰由脊而膊，而行於手指，周身一氣，用時進前退後，其勁乃不可限量矣
When practicing, it is necessary for the upper body and lower to coordinate with each other. Power [Jin 勁] initiates from the heel, goes through the leg to the waist, and from the spine then goes through the arms to the fingers. As long as it is a continuous process through the whole body, then when you apply power, whether advancing or retreating, the power [jin 勁] will be immeasurable.
In the preceding passage, jin is described as coming from the spine.
Cheers,
UniTaichi
Re: Solo Push Hands?
Hi All,
Just do it. Empty mind. Don't think about it. Mindless (or Mindful), Unconsciously, are all training of the mind. The techniques and methods in TJQ are actually reversed compared to other art especially EMA. For the 2 other IMA of Bagau and Xingyi , the highest level is comparable to TJQ .
In martial art or any skill for that matter, we have to emphasize on the stage of ones development or level. What I am trying to get across is I am not implying that my ''level'' is higher. It is a word that can ''differential'' the subject matter. Eg. Ph w/o touching is higher level than touching. To ''just do it'' there are also various level and training to go with it.
Another eg. is '' lead in to emptiness'' We have to train using touch to non-touch. Touch is like you were holding/leaning against a pole, suddenly someone put it always.(Physical) . Non-touch is you wanted to leaned/hold but the pole is not there. (Energetic) .
The understanding of eg. Wang Zongyue's Treatise of TJQ will therefore be different when one goes through ones stage of development. Physical or Energetic have different explanation.
Other MA such as TKD or Karata have grading, white to black belt, 1st Dan to 9th Dan. On the whole they no problem explanning to their students. A Black or Blue belt can explain the techniques/method/etc, to those below their rank there is usually no problem to take it as it is. IN TJQ , it is very difficult because we do not have any idea which ''level'' people commenting are at. So at times we take the number of years as as indication but TJQ does not work that way. Good eg. Sun Lu-Tang and CMC.
Anyway, these few points are in addition to what Bob said on why we tend to talk past each other.
End of ranting.
Cheers,
UniTaichi
P.S. - Mindful - Awareness. / Mindless - Execution.
Seriously though, my practical use of my "empty mind" goes back to, once again, my time learning from Si Kung Eddie Wu.
One of the things that Si Kung Eddie taught me directly was to not think so much about what I was doing, just to do it.
My view is as stated quite a few time is that, Use Yi Not Li , is the true essence of TJQ. This last few days I have posted on a number of threads and most of them the skill that is required is the Yi(Mind) ."Don't think about it, do it" was something he said to me many times and is one of the few things I can honestly say he was able to teach me directly.
Just do it. Empty mind. Don't think about it. Mindless (or Mindful), Unconsciously, are all training of the mind. The techniques and methods in TJQ are actually reversed compared to other art especially EMA. For the 2 other IMA of Bagau and Xingyi , the highest level is comparable to TJQ .
In martial art or any skill for that matter, we have to emphasize on the stage of ones development or level. What I am trying to get across is I am not implying that my ''level'' is higher. It is a word that can ''differential'' the subject matter. Eg. Ph w/o touching is higher level than touching. To ''just do it'' there are also various level and training to go with it.
Another eg. is '' lead in to emptiness'' We have to train using touch to non-touch. Touch is like you were holding/leaning against a pole, suddenly someone put it always.(Physical) . Non-touch is you wanted to leaned/hold but the pole is not there. (Energetic) .
The understanding of eg. Wang Zongyue's Treatise of TJQ will therefore be different when one goes through ones stage of development. Physical or Energetic have different explanation.
Other MA such as TKD or Karata have grading, white to black belt, 1st Dan to 9th Dan. On the whole they no problem explanning to their students. A Black or Blue belt can explain the techniques/method/etc, to those below their rank there is usually no problem to take it as it is. IN TJQ , it is very difficult because we do not have any idea which ''level'' people commenting are at. So at times we take the number of years as as indication but TJQ does not work that way. Good eg. Sun Lu-Tang and CMC.
Anyway, these few points are in addition to what Bob said on why we tend to talk past each other.
End of ranting.
Cheers,
UniTaichi
P.S. - Mindful - Awareness. / Mindless - Execution.
-
global village idiot
- Posts: 142
- Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2016 9:31 pm
Re: Solo Push Hands?
I'm learning a lot in this discussion, but it raises a few questions for me.
Please bear with me - my point will take some time to build.
In the Army, we have a phrase, "Getting wrapped around the axle." It implies focusing so much on details we get stuck and miss the larger picture.
In reading the classics and their various translations (Brennan, Swaim, Liao and others), I've noticed several places where they're all saying essentially the same thing, but in different ways. I need not point any out here, because we can all look through the discussion and find several.
In my time in the Army, there's probably not a single task I've only seen presented one way in training - every instructor has his own methods, his own choice of words, his own experience he brings to the training session and his own perspectives on which portion of any task is important to remember. And yet, they're all teaching the same task, to the same standard of performance, under the same conditions.
Is it not the exact same thing with tai chi - that we have several different but more-or-less equally capable Masters teaching the same things in their own way? The challenge then, for us, is to see what they're all trying to point toward, and understand those points where they're saying the same thing in a different way.
Suppose you and I each write a treatise on how to fry an egg. You write " Flip the egg with the spatula when it's done on one side" and I write "Turn the egg over using your tool when the egg will withstand the force of turning." We're both saying the same thing in a different way. Now imagine some Chinese people 150 years hence trying to translate our different writing. One says, "Writer A said to use a spatula - we can't use a pie turner" while another argues "Writer B says use any tool but we have to determine how strong the egg white is before we turn it."
It's a juvenile example but I think this is what it comes to when we try to overanalyze EXACTLY what each author said, and assuming they all use the same terms in a uniform way. WE don't talk like this - why should we assume our ancestors did?
I sometimes think, as I read and practice, that what each of the authors are trying to communicate is something very simple but which requires a lot of effort. There's no mystery - no esoteric secret to puzzle out. Just work, concentration and an open mind to see that they're all saying the same thing, each in their own way.
gvi
Please bear with me - my point will take some time to build.
In the Army, we have a phrase, "Getting wrapped around the axle." It implies focusing so much on details we get stuck and miss the larger picture.
In reading the classics and their various translations (Brennan, Swaim, Liao and others), I've noticed several places where they're all saying essentially the same thing, but in different ways. I need not point any out here, because we can all look through the discussion and find several.
In my time in the Army, there's probably not a single task I've only seen presented one way in training - every instructor has his own methods, his own choice of words, his own experience he brings to the training session and his own perspectives on which portion of any task is important to remember. And yet, they're all teaching the same task, to the same standard of performance, under the same conditions.
Is it not the exact same thing with tai chi - that we have several different but more-or-less equally capable Masters teaching the same things in their own way? The challenge then, for us, is to see what they're all trying to point toward, and understand those points where they're saying the same thing in a different way.
Suppose you and I each write a treatise on how to fry an egg. You write " Flip the egg with the spatula when it's done on one side" and I write "Turn the egg over using your tool when the egg will withstand the force of turning." We're both saying the same thing in a different way. Now imagine some Chinese people 150 years hence trying to translate our different writing. One says, "Writer A said to use a spatula - we can't use a pie turner" while another argues "Writer B says use any tool but we have to determine how strong the egg white is before we turn it."
It's a juvenile example but I think this is what it comes to when we try to overanalyze EXACTLY what each author said, and assuming they all use the same terms in a uniform way. WE don't talk like this - why should we assume our ancestors did?
I sometimes think, as I read and practice, that what each of the authors are trying to communicate is something very simple but which requires a lot of effort. There's no mystery - no esoteric secret to puzzle out. Just work, concentration and an open mind to see that they're all saying the same thing, each in their own way.
gvi
The important things are always simple.
The simple things are always hard.
The easy way is always mined.
- from Murphy's Laws of Combat
The simple things are always hard.
The easy way is always mined.
- from Murphy's Laws of Combat
Re: Solo Push Hands?
Hi All,
Am posting it to bring awareness to other skill set that are practice in TJQ and in the hope that some would find it useful.
I am just sharing my limited knowledge and understanding about internal TJQ, at this point of time.
The phrase ''just do it'' is one of the ''secret'' training method of high level TJQ. Which consist of various level itself. Levels w/i levels. Usually the teacher were just said it once or twice. A lot of times, students just ignored it. They though it just an ordinary phrase, so do not ask the big Q ; How ? The answer will be based on the teachers' level. To some or maybe most teachers, it is actually just a phrase. ( I just want to cover all scenario here, not been disrespectful. My view has always been that all teacher at whatever level is doing their part to spread the art. I got my understanding from at least 7 teachers and through others eg. books, videos, exchange with other teachers and friends from various IMA style.)
Coming back. If you watch the video again at 4:25 , the teacher asked one of the guys to push the lady from the side. What the teacher instruction to the lady was '' don't care about him or don't mind him. Just sink your Qi.''
One can relate this to my 3rd quote above on training with a partner. That is ; take it as no one is there. I want everyone to notice the connection here. Some and I think most can understand if ""just do it'' is used, but ''don't mind him'' were be more difficult. They are actually the same.
The way to ''just do it'' is doing it in an unconscious manner. Let me give an eg. You see others, esp. lady or yourself flicking their hair back. It is done unconsciously in a relaxed, song hand movement and no force/jin whatsoever. It is just a movement done ''mindlessly'', ''w/o thinking or having to think'' . In the video, at 0:48 , the lady said that when she bounced the partner out, she did not used any force/jin ? (in other words, she feel that she need to) Teacher answer is ; It is actually because she did not used any force/jin that he was bounced out. This is perplexing, no jin yet he goes out.???
Actually, the teacher already explained it at the beginning 0.07. The partner reacted to the natural energy (that btw we all have to some degree or level) that was activated from her body due to her song/relax structure which has all the 10 essential of TJQ.
The type of training in the video is basic foundation when training this way.
Anyway, don't over-analyzed it. If possible try to do your 8 energies as above and see if there is more power.
That all for now.
Cheers,
UniTaichi
Am posting it to bring awareness to other skill set that are practice in TJQ and in the hope that some would find it useful.
I am just sharing my limited knowledge and understanding about internal TJQ, at this point of time.
Just do it. Empty mind. Don't think about it. Mindless (or Mindful), Unconsciously, are all training of the mind.
To ''just do it'' there are also various level and training to go with it.
https://youtu.be/x71OrrhTSAcWhen training solo, one must train as if there is a person in front of you. On training with partner, one must train as if there is no one in front of you.
The phrase ''just do it'' is one of the ''secret'' training method of high level TJQ. Which consist of various level itself. Levels w/i levels. Usually the teacher were just said it once or twice. A lot of times, students just ignored it. They though it just an ordinary phrase, so do not ask the big Q ; How ? The answer will be based on the teachers' level. To some or maybe most teachers, it is actually just a phrase. ( I just want to cover all scenario here, not been disrespectful. My view has always been that all teacher at whatever level is doing their part to spread the art. I got my understanding from at least 7 teachers and through others eg. books, videos, exchange with other teachers and friends from various IMA style.)
Coming back. If you watch the video again at 4:25 , the teacher asked one of the guys to push the lady from the side. What the teacher instruction to the lady was '' don't care about him or don't mind him. Just sink your Qi.''
One can relate this to my 3rd quote above on training with a partner. That is ; take it as no one is there. I want everyone to notice the connection here. Some and I think most can understand if ""just do it'' is used, but ''don't mind him'' were be more difficult. They are actually the same.
The way to ''just do it'' is doing it in an unconscious manner. Let me give an eg. You see others, esp. lady or yourself flicking their hair back. It is done unconsciously in a relaxed, song hand movement and no force/jin whatsoever. It is just a movement done ''mindlessly'', ''w/o thinking or having to think'' . In the video, at 0:48 , the lady said that when she bounced the partner out, she did not used any force/jin ? (in other words, she feel that she need to) Teacher answer is ; It is actually because she did not used any force/jin that he was bounced out. This is perplexing, no jin yet he goes out.???
Actually, the teacher already explained it at the beginning 0.07. The partner reacted to the natural energy (that btw we all have to some degree or level) that was activated from her body due to her song/relax structure which has all the 10 essential of TJQ.
The type of training in the video is basic foundation when training this way.
Anyway, don't over-analyzed it. If possible try to do your 8 energies as above and see if there is more power.
That all for now.
Cheers,
UniTaichi
Re: Solo Push Hands?
Hi All,
https://youtu.be/3jDP3sfJCuI
Another link below shows the skill set of CMC, Huang Xing Xiang taichi on PLJA , very interesting stuff;
https://youtu.be/oFA4ZDA-M2g
I found quite a few students of CMC and Huang XingXiang(Sheng Shyan) are able to manifest these skill set from various part of the world.
https://youtu.be/6j7GncB95HM
The above video shows Energetic ''leading into emptiness'' at 0.47 He also explained how it is done. He explained ''he connect with the other incoming force(qi), when the partner comes in, he empty himself, don't mind/care about him.'' That is use mind to cut off the connection. This also explained ''suddenly appear, suddenly disappeared'' Again, ''don't mind/care him'' is used here. I actually experienced this by accident and connect it to the phrase. It is one of my wow moments and I have plenty of that. In fact, most of my understandings are these way. This is also related to ''intend'' which I wrote on the intend thread few years ago. If one can ''get'' any of the this paragraph , you were look at things in a whole new way.
Try these out yourself to get a better understanding. It is not difficult. Eg. like Triangulation and using Yi to focus on one point of the other body. It would be better to try it with somebody with more sensitivity. A lady, your wife or someone practicing qigong who can feel qi energy. The sequence is first try it w/o triangulation and then with.
Cheers,
UniTaichi
The following video is a very good example of this skill at the 0.06 mark;如搭手如皮條搭在敵膊，所以我未用力，敵覺我手重如泰山矣，不用直力則巧力生，無濁氣者為純剛。
When crossing hands with an opponent, it is like leather straps have been hung over his arm. Even though I have not yet applied any force, he feels my hands are as heavy as Mt. Tai. By not applying direct force, a skillful power is generated. Being without corrupted energy [qi] is pure strength.
https://youtu.be/3jDP3sfJCuI
Another link below shows the skill set of CMC, Huang Xing Xiang taichi on PLJA , very interesting stuff;
https://youtu.be/oFA4ZDA-M2g
I found quite a few students of CMC and Huang XingXiang(Sheng Shyan) are able to manifest these skill set from various part of the world.
These suface contradictionary saying are dependent on how one is able to or what method one used to generate the qi/jin. I was with a master who taught us how to generate Qi from the ground and he called it Fa Qi when striking. At that point of time, I was puzzled as it should be Fajin but did not ask. But then it make sense because he is using/borrowing Qi energy from the ground. My understanding is there are at least 6 method/level of generating Jin/Qi/Shen.As for the surface contradiction between saying the jin originates in the foot or heel and saying that you should issue jin from anywhere, I think this is simply one example of surface contradictions throughout Tai Chi writings.
https://youtu.be/6j7GncB95HM
The above video shows Energetic ''leading into emptiness'' at 0.47 He also explained how it is done. He explained ''he connect with the other incoming force(qi), when the partner comes in, he empty himself, don't mind/care about him.'' That is use mind to cut off the connection. This also explained ''suddenly appear, suddenly disappeared'' Again, ''don't mind/care him'' is used here. I actually experienced this by accident and connect it to the phrase. It is one of my wow moments and I have plenty of that. In fact, most of my understandings are these way. This is also related to ''intend'' which I wrote on the intend thread few years ago. If one can ''get'' any of the this paragraph , you were look at things in a whole new way.
Try these out yourself to get a better understanding. It is not difficult. Eg. like Triangulation and using Yi to focus on one point of the other body. It would be better to try it with somebody with more sensitivity. A lady, your wife or someone practicing qigong who can feel qi energy. The sequence is first try it w/o triangulation and then with.
Cheers,
UniTaichi