Greetings,
It’s a quiet rainy day—a good day to do some translating—so I’ve done a rough translation of Yang Zhenji’s Important Points section from the Single Hand Push Hands section of his book, _Yang Chengfu Shi Taijiquan_, (Guangxi Minzu Chubanshe, 1993, pp. 172-173). One thing that I find interesting is his reference to split energy (liejin), which one does not often encounter in discussions of single-hand push hands. There are many good points to ponder here. I welcome comments, questions, or corrections on the translation.
~~~
1. Single-hand push exchange is the most basic of push hands methods. Its essential attribute is training the jin methods of an (push), peng (ward off), lie (split), etc., while simultaneously training huajin (dissolving energy). The entire process consists of push, ward off, split-dissolve, in a revolving cycle. The attack is push, the defense is ward off, dissolving energy is split, and the controlling mechanism resides in the waist, not in the hands. The push must push until it reaches its position; ward off must ward off completely. The waist leads the splitting hand, so that a retreat becomes an advance.
2. Single-hand push exchange is a cooperative practice between partners. It is a cooperative practice in accordance with prescribed movements. If one partner does not cooperate, it will be difficult to practice successfully.
3. In single-hand push exchange you must pay attention to “stick, join, adhere, and follow,” with both partners adhering to one another at the wrist. During changes [of direction] you must adhere and follow; the hands and wrists of the two partners must not part from one another. This [method] also includes training of sensing energy (juejin) for both partners. The intention must be focused in the area of the wrist; within sticking and yielding there is a flowing with the force of the transformations (shunshi zhuanhuan), not letting go or butting against, neither too near nor too far; and within “stick, join, adhere, and follow” you must accomplish whole-body movement.
4. Although the movements in single-hand push exchange are simple, you must implement all of the various requirements of taijiquan, including “an intangible and lively energy lifts the crown,” “contain the chest and draw up the back,” “sink the shoulders and drop the elbows,” loosen the waist and qua,” “sink the qi to the dantian,” and “use intent, not strength.”
5. A crucial idea is to employ whole-body jin. Implement the requirement from the boxing treatise: “rooted in the feet, issued by the legs, governed by the waist, . . .from the feet to the legs, then to the waist, always there must be complete integration into one qi.” No matter whether warding off, pushing, or splitting, in all cases the lower frame must be stable. When the root of the lower frame is firm and steady, then the jin arising from the feet will penetrate through to the waist, shoulders, arms, and transmit to the wrist, so that when you move there is no part of your body that does not move. The whole-body jin is governed in the waist and focused in one direction, and issued toward one point. In this context, “threading” is extremely important. If you do not employ threading [i.e., guanchuan: threading from joint-to-joint], it will only be local jin. If you employ threading, it will be the jin of the entire body. The old boxing classic expresses this as: “Once in motion, the entire body should be light and agile, and even more importanly, must be threaded together.”
6. In using the ward-off hand to bear the pushing energy while sitting back, the process contains the meaning of “attract the advance to fall into emptiness.” One partner advances, one partner sits back. Use the ward-off hand to attract the opponent’s forward advance. The “attract” here is not a case of your taking the initiative to retreat to the rear, but rather one of going with the force of the opponent and attracting his advance. Whatever amount the opponent advances, draw his advance in that same amount. When you have attracted the opponent to a certain degree where his advance has run out, then split and dissolve. Split can either dissolve or it can issue. If the opponent’s incoming force is too fierce, then follow that force and split forth, causing the opponent to lose his balance. However, this would exceed the requirements of the partnered, cooperative practice. When practiced as a drill for training push, ward off, and split-dissolve, you will always know to stop before going too far (shike er zhi).
~~~
Enjoy, and Happy New Year!
Take care,
Louis
Yang Zhenji on Single-Hand Tuishou
-
Louis Swaim
- Posts: 1390
- Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 7:01 am
- Location: Oakland, CA
-
Bob Ashmore
- Posts: 754
- Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2005 6:01 am
- Location: Frankfort, KY, USA
Louis,
As always, my heartfelt thanks for an excellent translation.
This is an excellent reinforcement of what Bill Wojasinski has been trying to teach us for some time. Since my head, at least, is made of rock I can't say it's sunk in completely, but Bill keeps plugging away at us and it has been beginning to come through slowly, even to me.
My practice group has been working on one armed push hands for the last few weeks, so this was a timely reminder to us of what we should be striving for in our practice.
Bob
As always, my heartfelt thanks for an excellent translation.
This is an excellent reinforcement of what Bill Wojasinski has been trying to teach us for some time. Since my head, at least, is made of rock I can't say it's sunk in completely, but Bill keeps plugging away at us and it has been beginning to come through slowly, even to me.
My practice group has been working on one armed push hands for the last few weeks, so this was a timely reminder to us of what we should be striving for in our practice.
Bob
Louis,
It seems that practitioners typically view split energy (liejin) as a two handed technique, so I can see why you are interested in the mention of it here in a description of a one hand push hand drill. My view on split (a force couple, or push/pull or absorb/project action) has been presented elsewhere on this forum, but I will give more details relevant to your translation here. Thanks for sharing your translation!
I view a one handed split technique as being fairly easy to do (and a fairly common technique, at least in the way I practice push hands and applications), but I usually use different parts of the one arm to apply it (e.g. one finger pulling and another pushing, or the hand pulling or pushing while the elbow does the opposite, etc.).
My understanding of the progression of skill in Taijiquan proceeds from large techniques to smaller applications of those techniques. Thus (to my understanding) a high level of skill would allow one to absorb and project simultaneously at a single point of contact (this can be demonstrated easiest by watching the effect of a rotational energy at the point of contact). This is the level of skill that I would think would be necessary in the exercise that you have translated which describes a single point of contact at the wrists. However, since this one hand push hand drill is considered "the most basic of push hands methods," I don't know why the author would mention an advanced application of the split technique here (perhaps my understanding of split energy needs to be modified?). Perhaps he is attempting to have the practitioner keep in mind both the defensive ("dissolving energy" and "when you have attracted the opponent to a certain degree where his advance has run out, then split and dissolve") and offensive ("if the opponent's incoming force is too fierce, then follow that force and split forth, causing the opponent to lose his balance") simultaneously (i.e. "split can either dissolve or it can issue").
In my own practice I have been attempting to implement an effective "spin force" (split or simultaneous absorb/project) at a single point of contact, with varying degrees of success. In the single hand push hand drill described, this "spin force" would come from the proximal part of the wrist that is in contact with the partner's wrist absorbing, while the distal part of the contacting wrist point projects. This would lead to a horizontal "spin force" if only the waist energy (actually "whole-body jin") were being utilized in this drill. A more effective technique would be to also add slight angles to the horizontal "spin force" by simultaneously letting the elbow drop slightly and the fingers slightly raise (using the point of contact at the wrist as the pivot) as well as a slight rotation of the forearm with the palm rotating to face slightly upwards (again using the wrist contact point as the pivot). While the basic horizontal "spin force" is fairly easy for the partner to counter (unless "the opponent's incoming force is too fierce") because all they have to do is rotate around their vertical axis, the complex angled "spin force" is more difficult to counter since it has multiple vector components and tends to tip the partner's axis.
DP
It seems that practitioners typically view split energy (liejin) as a two handed technique, so I can see why you are interested in the mention of it here in a description of a one hand push hand drill. My view on split (a force couple, or push/pull or absorb/project action) has been presented elsewhere on this forum, but I will give more details relevant to your translation here. Thanks for sharing your translation!
I view a one handed split technique as being fairly easy to do (and a fairly common technique, at least in the way I practice push hands and applications), but I usually use different parts of the one arm to apply it (e.g. one finger pulling and another pushing, or the hand pulling or pushing while the elbow does the opposite, etc.).
My understanding of the progression of skill in Taijiquan proceeds from large techniques to smaller applications of those techniques. Thus (to my understanding) a high level of skill would allow one to absorb and project simultaneously at a single point of contact (this can be demonstrated easiest by watching the effect of a rotational energy at the point of contact). This is the level of skill that I would think would be necessary in the exercise that you have translated which describes a single point of contact at the wrists. However, since this one hand push hand drill is considered "the most basic of push hands methods," I don't know why the author would mention an advanced application of the split technique here (perhaps my understanding of split energy needs to be modified?). Perhaps he is attempting to have the practitioner keep in mind both the defensive ("dissolving energy" and "when you have attracted the opponent to a certain degree where his advance has run out, then split and dissolve") and offensive ("if the opponent's incoming force is too fierce, then follow that force and split forth, causing the opponent to lose his balance") simultaneously (i.e. "split can either dissolve or it can issue").
In my own practice I have been attempting to implement an effective "spin force" (split or simultaneous absorb/project) at a single point of contact, with varying degrees of success. In the single hand push hand drill described, this "spin force" would come from the proximal part of the wrist that is in contact with the partner's wrist absorbing, while the distal part of the contacting wrist point projects. This would lead to a horizontal "spin force" if only the waist energy (actually "whole-body jin") were being utilized in this drill. A more effective technique would be to also add slight angles to the horizontal "spin force" by simultaneously letting the elbow drop slightly and the fingers slightly raise (using the point of contact at the wrist as the pivot) as well as a slight rotation of the forearm with the palm rotating to face slightly upwards (again using the wrist contact point as the pivot). While the basic horizontal "spin force" is fairly easy for the partner to counter (unless "the opponent's incoming force is too fierce") because all they have to do is rotate around their vertical axis, the complex angled "spin force" is more difficult to counter since it has multiple vector components and tends to tip the partner's axis.
DP
-
Bob Ashmore
- Posts: 754
- Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2005 6:01 am
- Location: Frankfort, KY, USA
Dpasek,
What you are practicing is certainly beyond me at this point...
However it's given me some avenues to explore so I'll be playing with the idea a bit in my practice.
However, if you read the Grand Masters treatise it clearly states that:
"The attack is push, the defense is ward off, dissolving energy is split, and the controlling mechanism resides in the waist, not in the hands. The push must push until it reaches its position; ward off must ward off completely. The waist leads the splitting hand, so that a retreat becomes an advance".
I don't know that the Grand Master had what you're saying in mind from what he says about "split" in this context. He seems to be relating "split" to the dissolving energies advance/retreat aspects.
Using two handed push hands, this would be more clear. The waist turning with the connected hands, one would be retreating, one would be advancing. The retreating hand would be dissolving energy, the advancing hand would be issuing energy to attack.
My limited understanding of push hands leads me to feel that this advance/retreat is still inherint in the single armed push hands that we're discussing. Just because the attacking arm isn't being utilized doesn't seem to negate the fact that the turning waist still imparts this advancing energy. You just don't apply it, it's still there.
At least, that's what my lowly brain comes up with from this.
A while back, there was a discussion with one of Eddie Wu's disciples on this board in which she kind of said the same thing. Just because you don't apply it, doesn't mean it's not there.
She was talking about single hand Push forms, such as Brush Knee and Push, as opposed to the double armed Push form, but then again so are we. We're just leaving one arm out of it for now, but that doesn't take away the splitting energy, it just means it's not being utilized at that moment.
I'm not saying you're wrong. There are SO many layers to the complicated onion that is TCC that need to be addressed, that we may be talking about two sides of the same coin.
My understanding of these things is limited, admittedly, but I did want to toss this out there and see how it holds up.
If I'm wrong, then I'd sure like to know it. Please, anyone feel free to explain to me why with good, constructive critiquing. I take no offense at such things.
How else will I learn?
Bob
What you are practicing is certainly beyond me at this point...
However it's given me some avenues to explore so I'll be playing with the idea a bit in my practice.
However, if you read the Grand Masters treatise it clearly states that:
"The attack is push, the defense is ward off, dissolving energy is split, and the controlling mechanism resides in the waist, not in the hands. The push must push until it reaches its position; ward off must ward off completely. The waist leads the splitting hand, so that a retreat becomes an advance".
I don't know that the Grand Master had what you're saying in mind from what he says about "split" in this context. He seems to be relating "split" to the dissolving energies advance/retreat aspects.
Using two handed push hands, this would be more clear. The waist turning with the connected hands, one would be retreating, one would be advancing. The retreating hand would be dissolving energy, the advancing hand would be issuing energy to attack.
My limited understanding of push hands leads me to feel that this advance/retreat is still inherint in the single armed push hands that we're discussing. Just because the attacking arm isn't being utilized doesn't seem to negate the fact that the turning waist still imparts this advancing energy. You just don't apply it, it's still there.
At least, that's what my lowly brain comes up with from this.
A while back, there was a discussion with one of Eddie Wu's disciples on this board in which she kind of said the same thing. Just because you don't apply it, doesn't mean it's not there.
She was talking about single hand Push forms, such as Brush Knee and Push, as opposed to the double armed Push form, but then again so are we. We're just leaving one arm out of it for now, but that doesn't take away the splitting energy, it just means it's not being utilized at that moment.
I'm not saying you're wrong. There are SO many layers to the complicated onion that is TCC that need to be addressed, that we may be talking about two sides of the same coin.
My understanding of these things is limited, admittedly, but I did want to toss this out there and see how it holds up.
If I'm wrong, then I'd sure like to know it. Please, anyone feel free to explain to me why with good, constructive critiquing. I take no offense at such things.
How else will I learn?
Bob
-
Louis Swaim
- Posts: 1390
- Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 7:01 am
- Location: Oakland, CA
Greetings DPasek,
Thank you for an interesting post! I find liejin one of the more difficult taijiquan terms to understand. I have seen the term applied in traditional manuals in various contexts for applications from the quan form, push hands, and dalu, but it is difficult to discern a consistent shape or configuration among them. To the best of my understanding, Yang Zhenji’s use of the term in the Single-Hand Push Hands context does imply the point of transition from defense to offense.
Your last paragraph describing “spin force,” “absorb/project,” etc., brings to mind the imagery of the taiji text from the group of texts said to have been transmitted by Yang Banhou, the “Secret Formulae of the Eight Methods” (Ba fa mi jue). Here’s my translation:
~~~
How do we unravel the meaning of liejin?
Rotating like a flywheel
Throw an object upon it
It will be cast out a great distance.
Have you not observed a whirlpool
Rolling in surges like spirals?
A falling leaf decending to its surface
Suddenly vanishes as it sinks away.
~~~
One thing I find fascinating in this text is the appearance of the term “flywheel” (feilun). The term has the same meaning in Mandarin as it does in English, of a heavy wheel that conserves and modulates rotational energy through inertia. I’m sure that the principle of the flywheel was understood very early on in China (certainly, for example, in the potter's wheel), but what I don’t know is whether or not the term “feilun” was a neologism—a term coined to translate the Western term for flywheel from texts on mechanics. Even if it were, it could certainly have been in use by Yang Banhou’s time. It’s very interesting to find what appears to be a reference to a property in physics in an early taiji text.
Take care,
Louis
[This message has been edited by Louis Swaim (edited 01-06-2006).]
Thank you for an interesting post! I find liejin one of the more difficult taijiquan terms to understand. I have seen the term applied in traditional manuals in various contexts for applications from the quan form, push hands, and dalu, but it is difficult to discern a consistent shape or configuration among them. To the best of my understanding, Yang Zhenji’s use of the term in the Single-Hand Push Hands context does imply the point of transition from defense to offense.
Your last paragraph describing “spin force,” “absorb/project,” etc., brings to mind the imagery of the taiji text from the group of texts said to have been transmitted by Yang Banhou, the “Secret Formulae of the Eight Methods” (Ba fa mi jue). Here’s my translation:
~~~
How do we unravel the meaning of liejin?
Rotating like a flywheel
Throw an object upon it
It will be cast out a great distance.
Have you not observed a whirlpool
Rolling in surges like spirals?
A falling leaf decending to its surface
Suddenly vanishes as it sinks away.
~~~
One thing I find fascinating in this text is the appearance of the term “flywheel” (feilun). The term has the same meaning in Mandarin as it does in English, of a heavy wheel that conserves and modulates rotational energy through inertia. I’m sure that the principle of the flywheel was understood very early on in China (certainly, for example, in the potter's wheel), but what I don’t know is whether or not the term “feilun” was a neologism—a term coined to translate the Western term for flywheel from texts on mechanics. Even if it were, it could certainly have been in use by Yang Banhou’s time. It’s very interesting to find what appears to be a reference to a property in physics in an early taiji text.
Take care,
Louis
[This message has been edited by Louis Swaim (edited 01-06-2006).]
'Have you not observed a whirlpool
Rolling in surges like spirals?
A falling leaf decending to its surface
Suddenly vanishes as it sinks away.'
I'm no physicist, but this second part of the text seems to describe centripetal force. Centrifugal and centripetal forces can be linked with Taijiquan's concept of opening and closing. That inward-operating rotational force can be very powerful but is often overlooked in favour of more demonstrative expressions of outward-moving effort
Regards.
Rolling in surges like spirals?
A falling leaf decending to its surface
Suddenly vanishes as it sinks away.'
I'm no physicist, but this second part of the text seems to describe centripetal force. Centrifugal and centripetal forces can be linked with Taijiquan's concept of opening and closing. That inward-operating rotational force can be very powerful but is often overlooked in favour of more demonstrative expressions of outward-moving effort
Regards.
-
Louis Swaim
- Posts: 1390
- Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 7:01 am
- Location: Oakland, CA
Bob,
I would think that the "the attack is push, the defense is ward off" would be associated with the "advance/retreat aspects" [i.e. shifting forward/backward] while the "split" is associated with the rotation of the waist after the retreat (after both the push and ward off have been completed fully as directed in the instructions). What I refer to as split (a force couple, or push/pull, or absorb/project, or spin force, or rotational energy) does not require either a shift forward or backward, but is frequently associated with the waist turn. I think that his statement that "the waist leads the splitting hand, so that a retreat becomes an advance" probably refers to the shifting back (retreat) in ward off transitioning through the split (waist turn) into the shift forward (advance) in push, although it is also possible to interpret this as meaning that during the split (waist turn) there is a transition from retreating to advancing within the split itself. Rather than being sequential (which I would interpret more as roll back followed by push, rather than split), I think he is probably referring to split as being a simultaneous energy of dissolving and/or issuing.
Your statement that: "Using two handed push hands, this would be more clear. The waist turning with the connected hands, one would be retreating, one would be advancing. The retreating hand would be dissolving energy, the advancing hand would be issuing energy to attack." is one possible application of split (and probably one more commonly understood as split by many practitioners) using two hands in push hands, but the text states that you could split to issue even in the single hand push hands being described ("if the opponent's incoming force is too fierce, then follow that force and split forth causing the opponent to lose his balance"). This is why I brought up the split being condensed to the point of contact as a possible interpretation.
Louis,
The flywheel image used to illustrate split energy is consistent with either two handed applications or single point of contact applications. An object thrown on the periphery of the flywheel (especially if it made contact with the flywheel at more than one point) would be more analogous to two handed applications of split energy, while an object thrown near the center of rotation of the flywheel could be analogous to the split energy being condensed to a single point of contact.
I too have long puzzled over satisfactory interpretations of the eight primary energies of Taijiquan, with split (and perhaps squeeze/press) being the most difficult to clearly define. So far, I am quite satisfied with the definitions that I posted elsewhere on this forum, but I am still open to revisions. I do not have the access to primary sources like you do, but it seems like there are several writings where the illustrations of the energies do not match quite ideally with my understandings of the energies. I would love to see more translations of the less commonly available texts on this topic. Your efforts are greatly appreciated!
Icini,
My understanding of (and definition for) split also includes both inward and outward rotational forces (from opening and closing).
DP
I would think that the "the attack is push, the defense is ward off" would be associated with the "advance/retreat aspects" [i.e. shifting forward/backward] while the "split" is associated with the rotation of the waist after the retreat (after both the push and ward off have been completed fully as directed in the instructions). What I refer to as split (a force couple, or push/pull, or absorb/project, or spin force, or rotational energy) does not require either a shift forward or backward, but is frequently associated with the waist turn. I think that his statement that "the waist leads the splitting hand, so that a retreat becomes an advance" probably refers to the shifting back (retreat) in ward off transitioning through the split (waist turn) into the shift forward (advance) in push, although it is also possible to interpret this as meaning that during the split (waist turn) there is a transition from retreating to advancing within the split itself. Rather than being sequential (which I would interpret more as roll back followed by push, rather than split), I think he is probably referring to split as being a simultaneous energy of dissolving and/or issuing.
Your statement that: "Using two handed push hands, this would be more clear. The waist turning with the connected hands, one would be retreating, one would be advancing. The retreating hand would be dissolving energy, the advancing hand would be issuing energy to attack." is one possible application of split (and probably one more commonly understood as split by many practitioners) using two hands in push hands, but the text states that you could split to issue even in the single hand push hands being described ("if the opponent's incoming force is too fierce, then follow that force and split forth causing the opponent to lose his balance"). This is why I brought up the split being condensed to the point of contact as a possible interpretation.
Louis,
The flywheel image used to illustrate split energy is consistent with either two handed applications or single point of contact applications. An object thrown on the periphery of the flywheel (especially if it made contact with the flywheel at more than one point) would be more analogous to two handed applications of split energy, while an object thrown near the center of rotation of the flywheel could be analogous to the split energy being condensed to a single point of contact.
I too have long puzzled over satisfactory interpretations of the eight primary energies of Taijiquan, with split (and perhaps squeeze/press) being the most difficult to clearly define. So far, I am quite satisfied with the definitions that I posted elsewhere on this forum, but I am still open to revisions. I do not have the access to primary sources like you do, but it seems like there are several writings where the illustrations of the energies do not match quite ideally with my understandings of the energies. I would love to see more translations of the less commonly available texts on this topic. Your efforts are greatly appreciated!
Icini,
My understanding of (and definition for) split also includes both inward and outward rotational forces (from opening and closing).
DP
-
Louis Swaim
- Posts: 1390
- Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 7:01 am
- Location: Oakland, CA
Greetings DPasek,
Very cogent remarks! I will have to investigate further the meaning of force-couple; my physics literacy is minimal. I find "split" to be a very unsatisfying translation of lie. I wonder if a better rendering would be "torque?" That strikes me as a common property in the various explanations of liejin that I've encountered.
Thanks for the thought-provoking comments.
Take care,
Louis
[This message has been edited by Louis Swaim (edited 01-07-2006).]
Very cogent remarks! I will have to investigate further the meaning of force-couple; my physics literacy is minimal. I find "split" to be a very unsatisfying translation of lie. I wonder if a better rendering would be "torque?" That strikes me as a common property in the various explanations of liejin that I've encountered.
Thanks for the thought-provoking comments.
Take care,
Louis
[This message has been edited by Louis Swaim (edited 01-07-2006).]
Hello,all
In my opinion, Jin is only one, not eight.
Why eight? It's because,in moving, the hands, following the jin spreading the whole body, are just in the different positions. And the different positions cause eight different effective attacks and defenses. After all, defense is attack.
If we want to throw the opponent off or hurt him, it's all about our intent and mind. Otherwise, interact with the opponent and let him always stay empty and imbalanced.
As for lie, any force, going that way, suddenly turns opposite way or turn different way, which cause something to break. Mayby, man won't break but get hurt or off.
In my opinion, Jin is only one, not eight.
Why eight? It's because,in moving, the hands, following the jin spreading the whole body, are just in the different positions. And the different positions cause eight different effective attacks and defenses. After all, defense is attack.
If we want to throw the opponent off or hurt him, it's all about our intent and mind. Otherwise, interact with the opponent and let him always stay empty and imbalanced.
As for lie, any force, going that way, suddenly turns opposite way or turn different way, which cause something to break. Mayby, man won't break but get hurt or off.
-
Louis Swaim
- Posts: 1390
- Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 7:01 am
- Location: Oakland, CA
Greetings,
For those interested, the Chinese term for force-couple is ou3li4 (or sometimes reversed as li4ou3). The Hanyu Dacidian definition is roughly: “Action on identical objects of equal size, and contrary direction, but not in in a straight line, is called couple-force. Couple-force can only cause an object to rotate, but cannot cause it to shift [position].” This sounded familiar to me, and I went back and re-read some materials in Ma Yueliang’s _Wu Style Taichichuan Push Hands_, translated by Wen Zee, and I confirmed in the Chinese version that in fact Ma used the term ouli, citing the standard physics definition. The English version of the book has that material on p. 23: “The role of ‘to couple’.” I also note that Wen Zee renders liejin as “twisting” on p. 17. That seems to accord well with “torque” as a provisional translation of liejin, rather than the ambiguous "split."
Another thing that strikes me about the phenomenon of force-couple is, as noted in the dictionary definition, it “can only cause an object to rotate, but cannot cause it to shift [position].” I think this accords with what we encounter in taiji technique. Well-executed push hands technique does not *directly* cause the opponent to spring back, stumble, or fall. Rather, it merely causes the opponent to rotate in such a manner that he or she loses equilibrium. The springing, stumbling, or falling is in fact caused by the opponent’s own struggle to regain equilibrium.
Thoughts?
Take care,
Louis
For those interested, the Chinese term for force-couple is ou3li4 (or sometimes reversed as li4ou3). The Hanyu Dacidian definition is roughly: “Action on identical objects of equal size, and contrary direction, but not in in a straight line, is called couple-force. Couple-force can only cause an object to rotate, but cannot cause it to shift [position].” This sounded familiar to me, and I went back and re-read some materials in Ma Yueliang’s _Wu Style Taichichuan Push Hands_, translated by Wen Zee, and I confirmed in the Chinese version that in fact Ma used the term ouli, citing the standard physics definition. The English version of the book has that material on p. 23: “The role of ‘to couple’.” I also note that Wen Zee renders liejin as “twisting” on p. 17. That seems to accord well with “torque” as a provisional translation of liejin, rather than the ambiguous "split."
Another thing that strikes me about the phenomenon of force-couple is, as noted in the dictionary definition, it “can only cause an object to rotate, but cannot cause it to shift [position].” I think this accords with what we encounter in taiji technique. Well-executed push hands technique does not *directly* cause the opponent to spring back, stumble, or fall. Rather, it merely causes the opponent to rotate in such a manner that he or she loses equilibrium. The springing, stumbling, or falling is in fact caused by the opponent’s own struggle to regain equilibrium.
Thoughts?
Take care,
Louis
Fred,
Your comment that "Jin is only one, not eight" is good, but I feel that dividing it into eight different types for clarification and study is valuable. This would be similar to dividing directions into North, South, East and West in order to better give travel directions. While all the directions (and sub-directions like SW, NE, WSW…) are related in some way (they all describe compass directions), and they are not necessary for giving directions (one could point and say "go that way until you come to a large oak tree, then turn to your left…"), I think that most individuals find compass directions to be useful.
Some practitioners describe the eight energies as being illustrations of the various ways that pengjin (ward-off or structural integrity) can be used or applied, and it is often stated that pengjin is present throughout the form and applications, so this seems to be similar to your viewpoint.
I feel that many practitioners try to view examples the eight energies in their forms and push-hands training as distinct applications, whereas I feel that most techniques and applications are combinations of the various energies. This is similar to the cardinal compass directions only describing a minority of the actual possible directions that you can travel in (i.e., one very rarely travels directly in the cardinal directions - we don't move like "Etch-a-Sketch" lines). Other ways of describing directions for martial arts include Right/Left/Front/Back/Up/Down and Frontal/Horizontal/Sagittal Planes. Again, these ways of describing directions or movements are useful, but they describe only reference points for the various possibilities of movement. I view the eight primary energies in a similar way.
Louis,
My description of liejin being a force-couple may not be particularly good if the definition of force-couple includes "action on identical objects of equal size" and "couple-force can only cause an object to rotate, but cannot cause it to shift [position]" as I, for example, consider throws to be examples of liejin. While this would still be an example of liejin, as I understand it, it would only describe a small subset of possibilities for this type of energy. Similarly, various terms commonly used for liejin (e.g. split, tear, rend, wring, snap, etc.) only describe specific subset applications of this energy. It would have possibly been misleading if Yang Banhou, in the "Secret Formulae of the Eight Methods" translated above, had not mentioned both the flywheel and the whirlpool, as readers then may not have considered both the inward and outward directions. One reason that I used so many terms to try to describe liejin (i.e., force couple, push/pull, absorb/project, spin force, rotational energy) is that I did not feel that I had a good enough single term to convey my meaning. "Torque" may be a good term to use for lie.
DP
Your comment that "Jin is only one, not eight" is good, but I feel that dividing it into eight different types for clarification and study is valuable. This would be similar to dividing directions into North, South, East and West in order to better give travel directions. While all the directions (and sub-directions like SW, NE, WSW…) are related in some way (they all describe compass directions), and they are not necessary for giving directions (one could point and say "go that way until you come to a large oak tree, then turn to your left…"), I think that most individuals find compass directions to be useful.
Some practitioners describe the eight energies as being illustrations of the various ways that pengjin (ward-off or structural integrity) can be used or applied, and it is often stated that pengjin is present throughout the form and applications, so this seems to be similar to your viewpoint.
I feel that many practitioners try to view examples the eight energies in their forms and push-hands training as distinct applications, whereas I feel that most techniques and applications are combinations of the various energies. This is similar to the cardinal compass directions only describing a minority of the actual possible directions that you can travel in (i.e., one very rarely travels directly in the cardinal directions - we don't move like "Etch-a-Sketch" lines). Other ways of describing directions for martial arts include Right/Left/Front/Back/Up/Down and Frontal/Horizontal/Sagittal Planes. Again, these ways of describing directions or movements are useful, but they describe only reference points for the various possibilities of movement. I view the eight primary energies in a similar way.
Louis,
My description of liejin being a force-couple may not be particularly good if the definition of force-couple includes "action on identical objects of equal size" and "couple-force can only cause an object to rotate, but cannot cause it to shift [position]" as I, for example, consider throws to be examples of liejin. While this would still be an example of liejin, as I understand it, it would only describe a small subset of possibilities for this type of energy. Similarly, various terms commonly used for liejin (e.g. split, tear, rend, wring, snap, etc.) only describe specific subset applications of this energy. It would have possibly been misleading if Yang Banhou, in the "Secret Formulae of the Eight Methods" translated above, had not mentioned both the flywheel and the whirlpool, as readers then may not have considered both the inward and outward directions. One reason that I used so many terms to try to describe liejin (i.e., force couple, push/pull, absorb/project, spin force, rotational energy) is that I did not feel that I had a good enough single term to convey my meaning. "Torque" may be a good term to use for lie.
DP
Hi all,
Yang Zhenji's description of the single hand drill brings to mind something I mentioned on another thread: the turning upward of the palm at the end of the retreat as the waist turns, often performed more as a hooking action by beginners. In my opinion, this is the Lie that Yang Zhenji is speaking of - the rotational movement of the waist and the upward turn of ther palm. So ward-off is maintaining the structure while moving back, Lie is rotating, and An is the push forward.
'When you have attracted the opponent to a certain degree where his advance has run out, then split and dissolve. Split can either dissolve or it can issue. If the opponent’s incoming force is too fierce, then follow that force and split forth, causing the opponent to lose his balance.'
Clearly, the split and dissolve is the small turn at the end, and as for the possibility (although he makes clear that this is not the point of the partnered excercise) of using split to issue - I see that in terms of using four ounces to move a thousand pounds. Increase the amount of rotation, or it's power at the right time, and in the right circumstance (the opponent coming in too fiercely) and the rotation can serve as to add a little energy to the opponents lunge to send him in the direction he is going after the neutralisation.
Also, regarding the quote:
'How do we unravel the meaning of liejin?
Rotating like a flywheel
Throw an object upon it
It will be cast out a great distance.
Have you not observed a whirlpool
Rolling in surges like spirals?
A falling leaf decending to its surface
Suddenly vanishes as it sinks away.'
I see this as referring to two different ways of using this rotational force in application. If we think of the form Parting the Horse's Mane, one application is to pull the opponent's wrist (pluck, or cai)with the top hand and then when their body is pressed against the bottom forearm apply lie and let go of the wrist to launch the opponent away. This is the fisrt half of the poem. Another way to apply the form is to set up the technique as before but not to let go of the wrist, in which case the forward arm with the rotation of the waist forces the opponent over your leading leg and into a takedown. This is the second half of the poem, the sucking down of the fallen leaf.
Hope this is of some use.
Rich
PS> Louis - please do post any more of Yang Zhenji's book you translate. It looks so far to be a very thorough book, and as ever your translation of it is thorough, considered and most illuminating. Thank you.
[This message has been edited by Rich (edited 01-10-2006).]
Yang Zhenji's description of the single hand drill brings to mind something I mentioned on another thread: the turning upward of the palm at the end of the retreat as the waist turns, often performed more as a hooking action by beginners. In my opinion, this is the Lie that Yang Zhenji is speaking of - the rotational movement of the waist and the upward turn of ther palm. So ward-off is maintaining the structure while moving back, Lie is rotating, and An is the push forward.
'When you have attracted the opponent to a certain degree where his advance has run out, then split and dissolve. Split can either dissolve or it can issue. If the opponent’s incoming force is too fierce, then follow that force and split forth, causing the opponent to lose his balance.'
Clearly, the split and dissolve is the small turn at the end, and as for the possibility (although he makes clear that this is not the point of the partnered excercise) of using split to issue - I see that in terms of using four ounces to move a thousand pounds. Increase the amount of rotation, or it's power at the right time, and in the right circumstance (the opponent coming in too fiercely) and the rotation can serve as to add a little energy to the opponents lunge to send him in the direction he is going after the neutralisation.
Also, regarding the quote:
'How do we unravel the meaning of liejin?
Rotating like a flywheel
Throw an object upon it
It will be cast out a great distance.
Have you not observed a whirlpool
Rolling in surges like spirals?
A falling leaf decending to its surface
Suddenly vanishes as it sinks away.'
I see this as referring to two different ways of using this rotational force in application. If we think of the form Parting the Horse's Mane, one application is to pull the opponent's wrist (pluck, or cai)with the top hand and then when their body is pressed against the bottom forearm apply lie and let go of the wrist to launch the opponent away. This is the fisrt half of the poem. Another way to apply the form is to set up the technique as before but not to let go of the wrist, in which case the forward arm with the rotation of the waist forces the opponent over your leading leg and into a takedown. This is the second half of the poem, the sucking down of the fallen leaf.
Hope this is of some use.
Rich
PS> Louis - please do post any more of Yang Zhenji's book you translate. It looks so far to be a very thorough book, and as ever your translation of it is thorough, considered and most illuminating. Thank you.
[This message has been edited by Rich (edited 01-10-2006).]
Rich,
Why, in the drill described by Yang Zhenji, is what you call "Lie is rotating" not actually roll-back (as is usually given for either the one- or two-handed versions of this drill)? What do you feel differentiates liejin from lujin? Isn't lujin also rotating (and "dissolving" if using Yang Zhenji's terminology as given in the text)? You're not implying that if only "the rotational movement of the waist" occurred without "the upward turn of the palm" it would be lujin, but with the upward turn of the palm it would be liejin, are you? Please clarify.
Essentially, I consider lujin to be rotating/diverting an opponent's energy such that it is directed around you, whereas liejin applies torque to the opponent's body (or body part). Since both often utilize the rotation of the waist (though there are exceptions, e.g. Hands Strum the Lute is an example of liejin being applied without requiring the waist to turn), they can easily be combined to various degrees into a single application, or they can easily be switched between each other as a sequence of applications during a single waist rotation.
I feel that your comment about "the turning upward of the palm at the end of the retreat as the waist turns, often performed more as a hooking action by beginners" is good, and that it is consistent with the last paragraph of my 1/5/06 post above. I feel that the palm turning up could result in either lujin or liejin, depending on how it is expressed/applied. I personally consider the hooking of the wrist backward to be unnecessary for effectively executing the technique, and I prefer to maintain the rounded shape of the arm such that the opponent would tend to "slip off" on a tangent whichever direction their force issues (toward the elbow or toward the fingers) without being able to obtain purchase (as the bent wrist could allow if not careful) for applying any techniques against me. The combination that I described in the earlier post of lowering the elbow and rotating the palm up has a "sealing" effect on the opponent's arm that puts your arm in a superior controlling position without telegraphing much to your opponent.
Thoughts?
DP
Why, in the drill described by Yang Zhenji, is what you call "Lie is rotating" not actually roll-back (as is usually given for either the one- or two-handed versions of this drill)? What do you feel differentiates liejin from lujin? Isn't lujin also rotating (and "dissolving" if using Yang Zhenji's terminology as given in the text)? You're not implying that if only "the rotational movement of the waist" occurred without "the upward turn of the palm" it would be lujin, but with the upward turn of the palm it would be liejin, are you? Please clarify.
Essentially, I consider lujin to be rotating/diverting an opponent's energy such that it is directed around you, whereas liejin applies torque to the opponent's body (or body part). Since both often utilize the rotation of the waist (though there are exceptions, e.g. Hands Strum the Lute is an example of liejin being applied without requiring the waist to turn), they can easily be combined to various degrees into a single application, or they can easily be switched between each other as a sequence of applications during a single waist rotation.
I feel that your comment about "the turning upward of the palm at the end of the retreat as the waist turns, often performed more as a hooking action by beginners" is good, and that it is consistent with the last paragraph of my 1/5/06 post above. I feel that the palm turning up could result in either lujin or liejin, depending on how it is expressed/applied. I personally consider the hooking of the wrist backward to be unnecessary for effectively executing the technique, and I prefer to maintain the rounded shape of the arm such that the opponent would tend to "slip off" on a tangent whichever direction their force issues (toward the elbow or toward the fingers) without being able to obtain purchase (as the bent wrist could allow if not careful) for applying any techniques against me. The combination that I described in the earlier post of lowering the elbow and rotating the palm up has a "sealing" effect on the opponent's arm that puts your arm in a superior controlling position without telegraphing much to your opponent.
Thoughts?
DP
DPasek,
"Why, in the drill described by Yang Zhenji, is what you call "Lie is rotating" not actually roll-back"
This is a good point, and I think it's a fine line here between lu, lie and cai. For instance, in the two-handed push hands drills, at this point one could execute a roll-back to the right (assuming Right foot forward) - now is this lujin, or is it liejin with added caijin? Or, for that matter, lujin with caijin, or indeed all three? I think this is largely a point of semantics and what is important is actual technique and application. I suppose if pressed, I would think of lujin to be involving a pulling action and a backward direction (and perhaps a compressing action at the elbow), while lie is torque based. Lie is often referred to when there are two forces in different directions. For example, if we think of an arm-bar technique where one holds the opponent's wrist and pulls it down and to the side while pushing forwards on the opponent's elbow, this would be described as lie. I believe Yang Chengfu has used this example. Lu is different in that it is all focused in one direction. I do realise though that a one-handed rotation lacks the bi-directional aspect of lie, and apart from seeing Yang Zhenji's description here I have not encountered that part of the single hand drill being named that way before. I shall ask my teacher about it sometime. My guess is that lu would involve a pull backwards (and then could get mixed up with cai!!)
Your third paragraph in your reply to me is spot on - the turning upward is NOT a hooking action but adds to the liejin, it maximises the turning force. But primarily it acts as a controlling action - without it, one could certainly dissolve and redirect, but the control is there to stop the opponent's hand coiling over the top to administer a sound whack in the face!
Regards,
Rich
"Why, in the drill described by Yang Zhenji, is what you call "Lie is rotating" not actually roll-back"
This is a good point, and I think it's a fine line here between lu, lie and cai. For instance, in the two-handed push hands drills, at this point one could execute a roll-back to the right (assuming Right foot forward) - now is this lujin, or is it liejin with added caijin? Or, for that matter, lujin with caijin, or indeed all three? I think this is largely a point of semantics and what is important is actual technique and application. I suppose if pressed, I would think of lujin to be involving a pulling action and a backward direction (and perhaps a compressing action at the elbow), while lie is torque based. Lie is often referred to when there are two forces in different directions. For example, if we think of an arm-bar technique where one holds the opponent's wrist and pulls it down and to the side while pushing forwards on the opponent's elbow, this would be described as lie. I believe Yang Chengfu has used this example. Lu is different in that it is all focused in one direction. I do realise though that a one-handed rotation lacks the bi-directional aspect of lie, and apart from seeing Yang Zhenji's description here I have not encountered that part of the single hand drill being named that way before. I shall ask my teacher about it sometime. My guess is that lu would involve a pull backwards (and then could get mixed up with cai!!)
Your third paragraph in your reply to me is spot on - the turning upward is NOT a hooking action but adds to the liejin, it maximises the turning force. But primarily it acts as a controlling action - without it, one could certainly dissolve and redirect, but the control is there to stop the opponent's hand coiling over the top to administer a sound whack in the face!
Regards,
Rich