David,
I would differ with you on one thing.
First, I do not allow my forward knee to "ever" go past about one inch or more past the vertical. I do not know if this is a factor that changes what you are saying.
I do not believe it is "dangerous" to keep the hips at the same level or distance from the floor, that one risks knee damage. If one allows the knee to cave inward, there is indeed a risk, but that is true, if you are "bobbing", or practicing at any height.
I practive very low at times. In the KP Yang style we would have three feet between the feet. I can step forward from this stance with no change in elevation of the hips. It took awhile to gain the leg strength to accomplish this. In stepping out from this the weight will center over the front leg. the knee will naturally shift towards the outside to be able to bear the weight. I am not concerned with this as it is the inward alignment where one will encounter problems. Now everyone is different. Each of have their own physical limiltations that one has to aware of, each of us is different.
Now if I do keep my hips the same distance from the floor, what is the other rule I am violating? Just wondering.
Nice talking to you,
Michael
[This message has been edited by Michael (edited 11-19-2003).]
Mind Intention in Taijiquan
-
Louis Swaim
- Posts: 1390
- Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 7:01 am
- Location: Oakland, CA
Greetings Psalchemist,
Further up in the thread, you asked Audi about the controversy regarding translating “wuxing” as “five elements.” I’m sure he has his own take on it, but here are a few thoughts. At one time it was fairly common to see wuxing translated as “five elements,” largely by analogy to early Greek thinking, I suppose. However, most sinologists have recognized for some time that “elements” is a flawed rendering. The use of the word “xing” never meant anything like “elements” in the sense of constituent materials or ingredients.
The character “xing” basically means, “to walk,” “to go,” and by extension, “action.” Some of the earliest uses of the term “wuxing” could therefore be translated, “five actions.” (That, by the way, is how my first taijiquan sifu explained the term to me.) A.C. Graham once proposed a plausible rendering of wuxing in some pre-Han texts as “five goings.” That is, it described the tendencies (or dispositions, to use one of my favorite words) of certain categories of material. Craftsmen would be conversant with the “going” of wood or metal, for example, in shaping products. Another rendering appropriate to that period was “five processes.”
The scholar John Major, who has worked intensively on the early Han compendium, the Huananzi, argues convincingly that the cosmology evidenced in that text, and which was well accepted by that time, calls for a slightly different rendering: “five phases.” The use of the word “phase” is likened to the meaning in chemistry, where a phase indicates a different state of the same material. Water, ice, and steam, for example, are different phases of the same substance. In the cosmology of the Huainanzi, the fundamental substance of everything is qi, and “wuxing” is a metaphorical or analogical way of interpreting and explaining the phases and interactions of this fundamental substrate.
The details, of course, are much more complex than my brief synopsis here. The important distinction I would point out between the proposed translations and the now-discredited “elements” is that they all (actions, goings, processes, phases) better capture the sense of “behavior.” The word “elements” rather evokes a picture of static characteristics. To put it in the terms of the philosopher Gilbert Ryle, early Chinese thinkers were more concerned with “knowing how,” than with “knowing that.” If one takes wuxing to be system of identifying and categorizing nature, it fails miserably. If one takes it to be a view of “how things work,” it’s a potent metaphor.
By the way, the same word, “xing” does appear elsewhere in the taijiquan context. For example, in the first line of the Mental Elucidation of the Thirteen Postures we have: “yi xin xing qi” (use mind/heart [to] move qi).
Take care,
Louis
[This message has been edited by Louis Swaim (edited 11-20-2003).]
[This message has been edited by Louis Swaim (edited 11-20-2003).]
Further up in the thread, you asked Audi about the controversy regarding translating “wuxing” as “five elements.” I’m sure he has his own take on it, but here are a few thoughts. At one time it was fairly common to see wuxing translated as “five elements,” largely by analogy to early Greek thinking, I suppose. However, most sinologists have recognized for some time that “elements” is a flawed rendering. The use of the word “xing” never meant anything like “elements” in the sense of constituent materials or ingredients.
The character “xing” basically means, “to walk,” “to go,” and by extension, “action.” Some of the earliest uses of the term “wuxing” could therefore be translated, “five actions.” (That, by the way, is how my first taijiquan sifu explained the term to me.) A.C. Graham once proposed a plausible rendering of wuxing in some pre-Han texts as “five goings.” That is, it described the tendencies (or dispositions, to use one of my favorite words) of certain categories of material. Craftsmen would be conversant with the “going” of wood or metal, for example, in shaping products. Another rendering appropriate to that period was “five processes.”
The scholar John Major, who has worked intensively on the early Han compendium, the Huananzi, argues convincingly that the cosmology evidenced in that text, and which was well accepted by that time, calls for a slightly different rendering: “five phases.” The use of the word “phase” is likened to the meaning in chemistry, where a phase indicates a different state of the same material. Water, ice, and steam, for example, are different phases of the same substance. In the cosmology of the Huainanzi, the fundamental substance of everything is qi, and “wuxing” is a metaphorical or analogical way of interpreting and explaining the phases and interactions of this fundamental substrate.
The details, of course, are much more complex than my brief synopsis here. The important distinction I would point out between the proposed translations and the now-discredited “elements” is that they all (actions, goings, processes, phases) better capture the sense of “behavior.” The word “elements” rather evokes a picture of static characteristics. To put it in the terms of the philosopher Gilbert Ryle, early Chinese thinkers were more concerned with “knowing how,” than with “knowing that.” If one takes wuxing to be system of identifying and categorizing nature, it fails miserably. If one takes it to be a view of “how things work,” it’s a potent metaphor.
By the way, the same word, “xing” does appear elsewhere in the taijiquan context. For example, in the first line of the Mental Elucidation of the Thirteen Postures we have: “yi xin xing qi” (use mind/heart [to] move qi).
Take care,
Louis
[This message has been edited by Louis Swaim (edited 11-20-2003).]
[This message has been edited by Louis Swaim (edited 11-20-2003).]
Hi Michael,
I agree that the forward foot should be kept in line with the toes. Even in the back foot the knee is kept in line with the toes dynamically (the thigh bone shares a dimensional line with the whole foot) even though it isn't vertically over the toe. Yes, hanging your front knee out over nothing is incorrect.
The reason keeping your hips always at the same distance from the floor is dangerous is because it can cause knee damage. It cannot be done without taking the forward knee past the forward toes, which puts undue stress on the knee.
>I practive very low at times. In the KP Yang style we would have three feet between the feet. I can step forward from this stance with no change in elevation of the hips. <
If you actually measure this, you will find that either the height changes or the knee rule is violated. This is the rule I meant.
> Now everyone is different. Each of have their own physical limiltations that one has to aware of, each of us is different. <
This is true and there will be slight variations in alignment accordingly. But the physical laws of nature remain the same.
In a bow stance, for example, right foot forward, shift your weight forward until your right knee is directly over the right foot's toes. Now...keeping the knee over the toes shift all of your weight to your right leg. Your right hip must rise. There's no getting around this.
> Now if I do keep my hips the same distance from the floor, what is the other rule I am violating? <
I'm not sure what you mean. I only mentioned two rules. One misinterpreted and one violated by "not bobbing up and down."
Nice talking with you as well.
David J
[This message has been edited by DavidJ (edited 11-20-2003).]
[This message has been edited by DavidJ (edited 11-20-2003).]
I agree that the forward foot should be kept in line with the toes. Even in the back foot the knee is kept in line with the toes dynamically (the thigh bone shares a dimensional line with the whole foot) even though it isn't vertically over the toe. Yes, hanging your front knee out over nothing is incorrect.
The reason keeping your hips always at the same distance from the floor is dangerous is because it can cause knee damage. It cannot be done without taking the forward knee past the forward toes, which puts undue stress on the knee.
>I practive very low at times. In the KP Yang style we would have three feet between the feet. I can step forward from this stance with no change in elevation of the hips. <
If you actually measure this, you will find that either the height changes or the knee rule is violated. This is the rule I meant.
> Now everyone is different. Each of have their own physical limiltations that one has to aware of, each of us is different. <
This is true and there will be slight variations in alignment accordingly. But the physical laws of nature remain the same.
In a bow stance, for example, right foot forward, shift your weight forward until your right knee is directly over the right foot's toes. Now...keeping the knee over the toes shift all of your weight to your right leg. Your right hip must rise. There's no getting around this.
> Now if I do keep my hips the same distance from the floor, what is the other rule I am violating? <
I'm not sure what you mean. I only mentioned two rules. One misinterpreted and one violated by "not bobbing up and down."
Nice talking with you as well.
David J
[This message has been edited by DavidJ (edited 11-20-2003).]
[This message has been edited by DavidJ (edited 11-20-2003).]
-
psalchemist
- Posts: 619
- Joined: Wed May 21, 2003 6:01 am
Greetings Louis,
Thanks for that valuable post.
You wrote:
<The character "xing" basically means "to walk", "to go", and by extension "action"...
<As "five goings". That is , it describes the tendancies of certain categories of material. Craftsmen would be conversant with the "going" of wood or metal, for example, in shaping products...
<"five processes"...
<"five phases"...likened to the meaning in chemistry where a phase indicates a different state of the same material. Water, ice, and steam, for example, are different phases of the same substance...
<"sense of behavior"...
<"how things work"...
Also,
<In the cosmology of the Huainanzi, the fundamental substance of everything is qi, and "wuxing" is a metaphorical or analogical way of interpreting and explaining the phases and interactions of this fundamental substrate.> Louis
Combined with:
<In the first line of the Mental Elucidations of the Thirteen Postures we have "yi xin xing qi"(use mind/heart [to] move qi)
Your presentation certainly clarifies the wrong impression I had of "moving" qi.
So, "yi xin xing qi" translated through the "curve", more literally interprets to use mind/heart to process qi, to transform qi, NOT to literally "MOVE" qi from one physical point to another....
Already, somehow, there is less 'manipulation' of qi involved, or at least a different kind...
That changes my perspective
Best regards,
Psalchemist.
[This message has been edited by psalchemist (edited 11-20-2003).]
Thanks for that valuable post.
You wrote:
<The character "xing" basically means "to walk", "to go", and by extension "action"...
<As "five goings". That is , it describes the tendancies of certain categories of material. Craftsmen would be conversant with the "going" of wood or metal, for example, in shaping products...
<"five processes"...
<"five phases"...likened to the meaning in chemistry where a phase indicates a different state of the same material. Water, ice, and steam, for example, are different phases of the same substance...
<"sense of behavior"...
<"how things work"...
Also,
<In the cosmology of the Huainanzi, the fundamental substance of everything is qi, and "wuxing" is a metaphorical or analogical way of interpreting and explaining the phases and interactions of this fundamental substrate.> Louis
Combined with:
<In the first line of the Mental Elucidations of the Thirteen Postures we have "yi xin xing qi"(use mind/heart [to] move qi)
Your presentation certainly clarifies the wrong impression I had of "moving" qi.
So, "yi xin xing qi" translated through the "curve", more literally interprets to use mind/heart to process qi, to transform qi, NOT to literally "MOVE" qi from one physical point to another....
Already, somehow, there is less 'manipulation' of qi involved, or at least a different kind...
That changes my perspective
Best regards,
Psalchemist.
[This message has been edited by psalchemist (edited 11-20-2003).]
Louis,
Very interesting, thank you one more time. You have described in words how I always "felt" was being described.
David,
I might not have made myself clear but we may have one more difference of opinion. I keep the shin of my front leg vertical. I come nowhere near my toes---ever. To do so is much more dangerous in terms of "combat" than one of structure.
In simple movement within the form, generally, rotating the "toe" outwards before moving forward takes care of knee dangers---that is unless one still allows the knee to cave in toward the inside.
To all,
Now for a related question. The rule about the hips being kept level.... I have heard it in numerous ways from quite a few people who know much more than me. However I often wonder if this "rule" actually applies to movement within an individual form, let's say a push from the back leg to front, and not transition movement. For a number of reasons it is more critical to maintain this in the use of a technique than it would be in following a retreating adversary. In transition one still stays rooted and one should stay "level" so to speak, but if a hip does rise slightly is that really breaking the "rules" in this situation? We have played with this thought in the past but am only now reminded of it here in this thread. We found that the rise in a hip during stepping is compensated by a slight sinking in the other hip. This maintains one's height above the floor, and does not seem to compromise one's root, which is what this rule is about.
So my question is, when does this rule (level hips) apply? ALWAYS, or just within an individual form? In the past we have discussed a good number of interpretations of "NO" leaning, how some believe that one never uses any muscle under any circumstances---that to do so makes the action not taiji, others see it as "use no more than is necessary".....
I would be curious as to what you all think.
[This message has been edited by Michael (edited 11-20-2003).]
Very interesting, thank you one more time. You have described in words how I always "felt" was being described.
David,
I might not have made myself clear but we may have one more difference of opinion. I keep the shin of my front leg vertical. I come nowhere near my toes---ever. To do so is much more dangerous in terms of "combat" than one of structure.
In simple movement within the form, generally, rotating the "toe" outwards before moving forward takes care of knee dangers---that is unless one still allows the knee to cave in toward the inside.
To all,
Now for a related question. The rule about the hips being kept level.... I have heard it in numerous ways from quite a few people who know much more than me. However I often wonder if this "rule" actually applies to movement within an individual form, let's say a push from the back leg to front, and not transition movement. For a number of reasons it is more critical to maintain this in the use of a technique than it would be in following a retreating adversary. In transition one still stays rooted and one should stay "level" so to speak, but if a hip does rise slightly is that really breaking the "rules" in this situation? We have played with this thought in the past but am only now reminded of it here in this thread. We found that the rise in a hip during stepping is compensated by a slight sinking in the other hip. This maintains one's height above the floor, and does not seem to compromise one's root, which is what this rule is about.
So my question is, when does this rule (level hips) apply? ALWAYS, or just within an individual form? In the past we have discussed a good number of interpretations of "NO" leaning, how some believe that one never uses any muscle under any circumstances---that to do so makes the action not taiji, others see it as "use no more than is necessary".....
I would be curious as to what you all think.
[This message has been edited by Michael (edited 11-20-2003).]
David,
As I said earlier, I may go past the vertical by an inch but not more---"always" does not exist. Here I am talking about bow stance not kicking.
People talk about not going past the toes, but that does not mean "to go" as far as the toes in bow stance. I see many experienced people with their knees very close to the toes, never past. Why? The "rule" does not say "Your knee should be above your toes, and not beyond nor behind. I think many people misinterpret this.
I have talked about this before. First, this structure of the nearly vertical shin in the front leg in bow stance allows for easier weighted shifts of the foot and stepping. Second, as we all know, if you "lean" in forward techniques like push and press etc (YAng not Wu here) there is a greater vulerbility to a pull the closer you get to the toes. So if you "lean" ( torso straight, but angled forward from the hip joints) forward in those postures, and your knee is between the vertical and the toes---don't have to go beyond them, I can and will, pull you out of your root. If you can resist it, is because you are pulling back, and not allowing structure alone to do the job for you.
That is my take on the forward knee in bow stance.
As I said earlier, I may go past the vertical by an inch but not more---"always" does not exist. Here I am talking about bow stance not kicking.
People talk about not going past the toes, but that does not mean "to go" as far as the toes in bow stance. I see many experienced people with their knees very close to the toes, never past. Why? The "rule" does not say "Your knee should be above your toes, and not beyond nor behind. I think many people misinterpret this.
I have talked about this before. First, this structure of the nearly vertical shin in the front leg in bow stance allows for easier weighted shifts of the foot and stepping. Second, as we all know, if you "lean" in forward techniques like push and press etc (YAng not Wu here) there is a greater vulerbility to a pull the closer you get to the toes. So if you "lean" ( torso straight, but angled forward from the hip joints) forward in those postures, and your knee is between the vertical and the toes---don't have to go beyond them, I can and will, pull you out of your root. If you can resist it, is because you are pulling back, and not allowing structure alone to do the job for you.
That is my take on the forward knee in bow stance.
Greetings all,
I am pressed for time these days and apologize if I have left any posts unanswered that were directed at me. There have been some tremendous discussions of late in which I would have loved to participate more fully. Life is made of choices.
I wanted to comment on and ask some questions about the issue of “bobbing.” As I understand the Yangs’ vision of Yang Style, they explicitly specify that the general postural height should remain level throughout the form, except for kicks, Needle at Sea Bottom, Golden Rooster, etc. I think this was actually the subject of one of the very first postings on this forum. I am unaware of how exactly posture height is supposed to be measured, or even if such precision is necessary. Does anyone know the answer to this?
Separately from the above issue, I also understand that the Yangs’ form explicitly does not involve horizontal spiraling of the hips during steping (rotating the Dantian?) in the way that is done in Chen Style. Beyond this, I am unsure about any specific requirements.
David mentioned that he has been taught that there are no exceptions to keeping the hips level throughout the form. It has never occurred to me to apply such a rule during kicks, and I believe that I do indeed tilt my pelvis during the kicks in order to increase the height of my foot. Does anyone have any comments or suggestions about this? Does everyone perform kicks with the pelvis level?
Louis, thanks for jumping in on the discussion of the meaning of Wuxing. You covered everything I was going to say, except for one thing. Somewhere on the Web I read that the “locus classicus” of the term “Wuxing” did not actually use these two words/characters in juxtaposition, but only in the same sentence or phrase, and that “Wuxing” was only an abbreviated references to the entire phrase. The implication was that the term itself had no real meaning at all outside of its use as a shorthand reference to the entire original passage. I cannot say whether or not this is true. Perhaps, you know.
On the issue of the knee going past the two, let me say that I think different traditions have different formulae for what this actually means. My understanding of the Yang Zhenduo’s position on this issue is as follows.
On pages 24-25 of Yang Style Taijiquan, Yang Zhenduo has three illustrations of different knee-toe positions. One is intended to show what is correct, and two are intended to show what is incorrect. He says:
“When you bend your left leg to form the left ‘bow step’, the knee and the toes of the left foot should be in a perpendicular line as in Fig. 1.
“In Fig. 2 the knee goes beyond the toes of the foot, which means the weight will be shifted too far forward and you will not be able to remain firm on your feet.
“In Fig. 3, the knee is behind the toes of the foot, which makes it impossible for your lower limbs to exert force.”
Take care,
Audi
[This message has been edited by Audi (edited 11-22-2003).]
I am pressed for time these days and apologize if I have left any posts unanswered that were directed at me. There have been some tremendous discussions of late in which I would have loved to participate more fully. Life is made of choices.
I wanted to comment on and ask some questions about the issue of “bobbing.” As I understand the Yangs’ vision of Yang Style, they explicitly specify that the general postural height should remain level throughout the form, except for kicks, Needle at Sea Bottom, Golden Rooster, etc. I think this was actually the subject of one of the very first postings on this forum. I am unaware of how exactly posture height is supposed to be measured, or even if such precision is necessary. Does anyone know the answer to this?
Separately from the above issue, I also understand that the Yangs’ form explicitly does not involve horizontal spiraling of the hips during steping (rotating the Dantian?) in the way that is done in Chen Style. Beyond this, I am unsure about any specific requirements.
David mentioned that he has been taught that there are no exceptions to keeping the hips level throughout the form. It has never occurred to me to apply such a rule during kicks, and I believe that I do indeed tilt my pelvis during the kicks in order to increase the height of my foot. Does anyone have any comments or suggestions about this? Does everyone perform kicks with the pelvis level?
Louis, thanks for jumping in on the discussion of the meaning of Wuxing. You covered everything I was going to say, except for one thing. Somewhere on the Web I read that the “locus classicus” of the term “Wuxing” did not actually use these two words/characters in juxtaposition, but only in the same sentence or phrase, and that “Wuxing” was only an abbreviated references to the entire phrase. The implication was that the term itself had no real meaning at all outside of its use as a shorthand reference to the entire original passage. I cannot say whether or not this is true. Perhaps, you know.
On the issue of the knee going past the two, let me say that I think different traditions have different formulae for what this actually means. My understanding of the Yang Zhenduo’s position on this issue is as follows.
On pages 24-25 of Yang Style Taijiquan, Yang Zhenduo has three illustrations of different knee-toe positions. One is intended to show what is correct, and two are intended to show what is incorrect. He says:
“When you bend your left leg to form the left ‘bow step’, the knee and the toes of the left foot should be in a perpendicular line as in Fig. 1.
“In Fig. 2 the knee goes beyond the toes of the foot, which means the weight will be shifted too far forward and you will not be able to remain firm on your feet.
“In Fig. 3, the knee is behind the toes of the foot, which makes it impossible for your lower limbs to exert force.”
Take care,
Audi
[This message has been edited by Audi (edited 11-22-2003).]
-
Louis Swaim
- Posts: 1390
- Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 7:01 am
- Location: Oakland, CA
Greetings Audi,
You wrote: ‘Somewhere on the Web I read that the “locus classicus” of the term “Wuxing” did not actually use these two words/characters in juxtaposition, but only in the same sentence or phrase, and that “Wuxing” was only an abbreviated references to the entire phrase. The implication was that the term itself had no real meaning at all outside of its use as a shorthand reference to the entire original passage.’
That’s interesting. I would be curious to know the source of that claim. I think it’s readily apparent that wuxing is a shorthand formula, and that it has had different meanings in different contexts, but I don’t recall seeing any reference to a ‘locus classicus’ for the concept where the characters appeared separately. If you’re interested, there’s a very good book by John B. Henderson, _The Development and Decline of Chinese Cosmology_ (1984, Columbia U.P.) that includes fairly exhaustive investigations into wuxing. According to Henderson, the earliest literary mention of wuxing was in the Hong Fan (Great Plan) chapter of the Shang Shu (Book of Documents). There, it does indeed appear as a compound phrase, and goes on to explain the attributes as “Water is said to soak and descend; fire is said to blaze and ascend; wood is said to curve or be straight; metal is said to obey and change; earth is said to take seeds and give crops.” Henderson indicates that while there is now considerable concensus that the Shang Shu probably dates to the later Western Zhou period (ended c. 770 B.C.), some scholars (including Needham) think the wuxing material may have been interjected into the Hong Fan as late as the second century B.C. But I think the direction of the wuxing formulation as it was developed in the Han (as five ‘phases’) pretty well shaped the way the formula was used in subsequent times.
Take care,
Louis
You wrote: ‘Somewhere on the Web I read that the “locus classicus” of the term “Wuxing” did not actually use these two words/characters in juxtaposition, but only in the same sentence or phrase, and that “Wuxing” was only an abbreviated references to the entire phrase. The implication was that the term itself had no real meaning at all outside of its use as a shorthand reference to the entire original passage.’
That’s interesting. I would be curious to know the source of that claim. I think it’s readily apparent that wuxing is a shorthand formula, and that it has had different meanings in different contexts, but I don’t recall seeing any reference to a ‘locus classicus’ for the concept where the characters appeared separately. If you’re interested, there’s a very good book by John B. Henderson, _The Development and Decline of Chinese Cosmology_ (1984, Columbia U.P.) that includes fairly exhaustive investigations into wuxing. According to Henderson, the earliest literary mention of wuxing was in the Hong Fan (Great Plan) chapter of the Shang Shu (Book of Documents). There, it does indeed appear as a compound phrase, and goes on to explain the attributes as “Water is said to soak and descend; fire is said to blaze and ascend; wood is said to curve or be straight; metal is said to obey and change; earth is said to take seeds and give crops.” Henderson indicates that while there is now considerable concensus that the Shang Shu probably dates to the later Western Zhou period (ended c. 770 B.C.), some scholars (including Needham) think the wuxing material may have been interjected into the Hong Fan as late as the second century B.C. But I think the direction of the wuxing formulation as it was developed in the Han (as five ‘phases’) pretty well shaped the way the formula was used in subsequent times.
Take care,
Louis
Hi Louis:
Unusually for me, I think I was able to find my reference for the "shorthand version" of Wuxing at the following link.
Here is the relevant quotation and a hyper link to the site.
<<Although the term is generally translated as "five elements", this is incorrect. The word Wu does indeed mean "five". But there is no simple translation for Xing. Translations such as "five elements", "five agents", "five qualities", "five properties" "five states of change", "five courses", "five phases" and "five elementals", are all used. As Master Joseph Yu explains
"Wu Xing" is actually the short form of "Wu zhong liu xing zhi chi" or "the five types of chi dominating at different times". Water dominates in winter, wood in spring, fire in summer, metal in autumn. At the intersection between two seasons, the transitional period is dominated by earth. It is customary in Chinese writing to summarize a longer phrase into a couple of characters. Sometimes the meaning is completely lost in the abbreviated form if the original phrase is not referred to. Wu Xing is one such example.
and
The names "water", "wood", "fire", "metal" and "earth" are only substances whose properties resemble the respective chi in the closest possible way. They do help us understand the properties of the five types of chi but they also mislead us if we take everything in the literal sense.>>
http://www.kheper.net/topics/eastern/wuxing.html
Do you happen to know from where the formula "Wu zhong liu xing zhi chi" is quoted?
Take care,
Audi
Unusually for me, I think I was able to find my reference for the "shorthand version" of Wuxing at the following link.
Here is the relevant quotation and a hyper link to the site.
<<Although the term is generally translated as "five elements", this is incorrect. The word Wu does indeed mean "five". But there is no simple translation for Xing. Translations such as "five elements", "five agents", "five qualities", "five properties" "five states of change", "five courses", "five phases" and "five elementals", are all used. As Master Joseph Yu explains
"Wu Xing" is actually the short form of "Wu zhong liu xing zhi chi" or "the five types of chi dominating at different times". Water dominates in winter, wood in spring, fire in summer, metal in autumn. At the intersection between two seasons, the transitional period is dominated by earth. It is customary in Chinese writing to summarize a longer phrase into a couple of characters. Sometimes the meaning is completely lost in the abbreviated form if the original phrase is not referred to. Wu Xing is one such example.
and
The names "water", "wood", "fire", "metal" and "earth" are only substances whose properties resemble the respective chi in the closest possible way. They do help us understand the properties of the five types of chi but they also mislead us if we take everything in the literal sense.>>
http://www.kheper.net/topics/eastern/wuxing.html
Do you happen to know from where the formula "Wu zhong liu xing zhi chi" is quoted?
Take care,
Audi
-
JerryKarin
- Posts: 1067
- Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 7:01 am
- Contact:
Greetings Psalchemist:
Let me take up your answer in your 11/16 post to my question about Single Whip. Sorry about all the “failing, failing.” The failures are on my part, as I try to explain something that I think the Yang’s and the Fu’s and many others do much better than me.
You described the points of your forward extension as follows:
<<- LEFT HAND :Outer palm...let's say the point which joins the base of the outer palm to the outer wrist.(the 'opening')
-LEFT TOES : (note, if extend knee too far forward this closes ankle)
[-LEFT KNEE : (over or behind toes)]>>
What you describe about the left hand seems about right to me. I am not certain about the exact location of the Jin point, but this seems close enough. I would be curious what point others use. The point I use can be described as follows. Make a fist with your left hand. Now press the little-finger side of the fist onto a tabletop so that the side of the little finger and the side of the palm contact the tabletop simultaneously. The fleshy part of the side of the palm heel that first contacts the tabletop is what I use as the Jin point.
If we take either your location or mine as the Jin point. In order to extend into this point, your wrist must flex the palm upward in order to prevent the point from “sawing” through the intended contact point with the opponent. If one does not do this, one is using one’s mind to impose an arbitrary configuration on the palm that does not comport with the energy usage. One is not keeping the wrist “song” (“loose”) enough to mold itself in response to how the Jin will move.
Equally, the fingers must extend in order to make this same point prominent and preeminent. If you allow the fingers to hang limply, you are deliberately preventing the Jin in your arm and palm from joining with the Jin in your fingers.
Consider your left elbow joint. If you are truly extending it through the same point, you cannot keep it as high relative to the hand as you would the right elbow in Fist Under Elbow or the left elbow in Strike Tiger Left, because keeping the elbow this hight would impart a circular path to the Jin coming from your shoulder. Instead, you must keep the tip of your elbow pointing almost straight down to the ground in order to match your energy usage, even though, for most people, this is a more difficult and more “tense” configuration to maintain. I would assert that the issue is to find the appropriate equilibrium within each joint and between each set of joints that molds with the overall intention for the Jin. All you do is extend through the Jin point in every relevant joint and let you limbs line up the way they want to.
Psalchemist, you also mentioned the left toes. I would argue that no one in fact “extends” through the left toes; otherwise, you would be trying to make your left foot skate across the ground. Of course, your left toes are one of the most forward parts of your body, but this does not determine the energy relationship.
On another thread, there is a dialog about the proper relationship between the forward knee and the forward toes. I would argue that, in practice, one does not memorize an appropriate stopping point and then shift your weight so as to reach and stop at this point. Instead, I would advise concentrating on how both legs push against each other (the rear leg thrusting/stamping and the front leg propping/deflecting the power up the spine). If you do this, you will find that if your knee goes too far, the connection between the legs gets weak. The left heel will begin to get light. The right leg loses a purchase for its pushing power. And the left knee must just sit there and can no longer push back into the structure.
If you are not sure about what I am talking about, go slowly, but try using a great deal of force between the legs as you slowly shift the weight. Continue to shift weight only as long as you can maintain strong controlled force in both legs and strong pressure directly between the soles for your feet and the floor. The amount of energy you use to “flex” your leg muscles is irrelevant, since this is a local activity and unrelated to the equilibrium between the legs you are trying to feel for. Once the sensation is clear to you, you can adjust how much energy you put into your legs to whatever is comfortable and natural for you, given that you should eventually be able to do this easily through 3 X 25 minutes of form practice.
Some criticize what I have stated above as deviating from the principle of economy that underlies the concepts of Wuwei and Taiji. To this let me make a few comments. Newton's theories of motion require that our forward force be balanced by a rearward force in order to prevent ourselves from going forward. I would assert that moving slowly and softly can mask this, but the physical requirements do not change. All I am asserting is that one must feel for this balance at every instant of the weight shift, rather than launching oneself and then having to guess how much energy the front knee will have to exert as a stopping force. For me, the essence of Taiji is dynamic equilibrium, not minimization of either Yin or Yang.
Let me also say that the dynamic equilibrium one finds within one’s own body will again have to change as an opponent introduces an outside force. Because of this, there is no purpose to refining and practicing an ideal equilibrium within oneself during form. My understanding of the Yangs’ form is that it is intended to develop a conscious feel for how your body generates and circulates Jin in response to your mind's directions, rather than practicing particular patterns that are intended to be translated unchanged into other circumstances.
With respect to your rear extension, you stated the following:
<<If by "rear" you include the diagonal, then I would say:
-RIGHT HAND:Knuckles and back of wrist(3" square?)...let's be more general then, back of hand and back of wrist joint(the opening)
-RIGHT FOOT:REAR HEEL(also opening)>>
My understanding of this posture (in the Yangs’ version, but not in many others) is that you are trying to direct energy in opposite directions, i.e., at a 180 degree angle. The only way you can form such an angle with your arms is to equally extend your chest and back muscles. One problem with doing this is that your chest muscles are generally not as strong as your back muscles in this configuration, and so this seemingly balanced posture will not in fact be inherently balanced. Another problem with a 180 degree angle is that it is a violation of one of the Ten Essentials, which says that you must “contain the chest and pluck out your back.” If you ignore your chest muscles and concentrate on extending your shoulder blades apart, you will find that a 135 degree angle (more or less) actually represents the maximum extension you can achieve across your back. Extending rearward becomes, in energy terms, an extension to the rear diagonal more or less in line with your rear leg.
By the way, I am not asserting that a true 180 degree extension is always forbidden. Such a posture exists in some forms, but I do not know enough about them to explain their preference.
As for the Jin point, let’s examine what would happen if it were in the back of the hand. If you can imagine someone leaning with all their weight onto the back of your hand, you will probably wince as you imagine the pain that this would cause in your bent wrist.
If you imagine the Jin point to be in your knuckles and think of this as a straight-on strike, you will have to tightly squeeze your wrist in order to support the Jin in your fingers. In my opinion, this will lead you down the path of the methods of “external” martial arts. For instance, you will also have to flex your thumb knuckle toward your body to support your fingers and keep the tips of the fingers and thumb tightly pinched together.
If you perform Single Whip as is done in Cheng Man-Ch’ing’s form, you will probably see the Crane’s beak as having a pulling and guiding action. In this case, the fingers can be more relaxed, since they will naturally curve in the direction of your hooking pull or in the direction of your adhering action. As you guide the opponent’s strike back out to the side, you will probably use the knuckles of the little and ring finger and extend your arm to the right to assume a horizontal curve that cannot anatomically be extended further. By the way, I, at least, use a different definition of “fangsong” (“relaxation”/”loosening”) in CMC’s form and so would not actually apply this thinking to performance of his form.
If you see the Jin point as being in the back of the wrist (which I believe to be correct for the Yangs’ form), you now must consider what to do with your fingers. Some forms pinch the tips of the fingers together, which I do not understand. In the Yangs’ form, my understanding is that you must simply extend and fold your fingers down and away from your wrist. If your wrist is flexible enough, your fingers will actually point back toward your body. The thumb also simply points downward, with the pad against the back of the fingers, rather than pinching against the tips of the fingers.
If you are extending your elbow through the back of your wrist, your elbow will naturally straighten. If you say to yourself: “Make your elbow straight,” you will run the risk of locking it. If you merely extend and loosen your joint through the back of your wrist, you cannot lock it. If you retain a deliberate bend in your elbow, you will be opposing the direction of your Jin and introducing a local element (unless of course, your retain something in all of your joints or deliberately change your Yi before reaching full extension).
As for side to side extension, I would argue that rounding the back and rounding the crotch maintain a counterbalancing sideward extension in a posture that otherwise has an extreme from-to-back extension. Of course, one also extends up through the crown of the head and down through the tailbone.
By bends, I was thinking principally of your elbows, wrists, and knees. I think I have already addressed the wrists and the right elbow and so will address the others.
If you eliminate the bend in your left elbow, you will find that you must either introduce a chopping vector that would be inconsistent with the extension in your other joints, or you must flatten the palm forward, as if pushing against a wall. This latter action is only possible if you extend through the center of your palm, rather than through the side of your palm heel. It leaves your wrist weak and exposed.
The fact that your left knee bends and your right does not is explained if you think of the two as forming a wish bone through the hip sockets. (I have Jerry to thank for this image.) As you pass the maximum stored Jin from your right knee to your left, the only natural stopping point is when you have exhausted the Jin in your right knee or something happens to move your Yi in another direction. For Form purposes, you go through the full range of motion and do nothing to “stop short.”
Whenever I mention extension, one could also read “loosening." Please also understand that extending in one direction necessitates “grounding” in the opposite direction. Solid and empty are in each joint, but also in each set of joints and in the posture as a whole.
I have only described extension in the context of the culmination of Single Whip; however, I would assert that one could go through the same analysis, joint by joint, at each of the articulation points of the postures. I count about six articulation points in Single Whip, where there is a major change in how the joints extend. I would also assert that the extension does not cease between the points of articulation, but rather continues smoothly at all times in “parallelogram” fashion or “accordion” fashion. At the same time you limbs should feel loose, they should feel collectively “locked” and “threaded” into the same energic dynamic. Extending one joint requires or allows another joint to extend. The joints “feel loose, but not loose.”
I hope all this is clear and helpful and explains why I assert that loosening the joints is intimately connected to Jin points and how you are using your Yi from moment to moment.
Take care,
Audi
Let me take up your answer in your 11/16 post to my question about Single Whip. Sorry about all the “failing, failing.” The failures are on my part, as I try to explain something that I think the Yang’s and the Fu’s and many others do much better than me.
You described the points of your forward extension as follows:
<<- LEFT HAND :Outer palm...let's say the point which joins the base of the outer palm to the outer wrist.(the 'opening')
-LEFT TOES : (note, if extend knee too far forward this closes ankle)
[-LEFT KNEE : (over or behind toes)]>>
What you describe about the left hand seems about right to me. I am not certain about the exact location of the Jin point, but this seems close enough. I would be curious what point others use. The point I use can be described as follows. Make a fist with your left hand. Now press the little-finger side of the fist onto a tabletop so that the side of the little finger and the side of the palm contact the tabletop simultaneously. The fleshy part of the side of the palm heel that first contacts the tabletop is what I use as the Jin point.
If we take either your location or mine as the Jin point. In order to extend into this point, your wrist must flex the palm upward in order to prevent the point from “sawing” through the intended contact point with the opponent. If one does not do this, one is using one’s mind to impose an arbitrary configuration on the palm that does not comport with the energy usage. One is not keeping the wrist “song” (“loose”) enough to mold itself in response to how the Jin will move.
Equally, the fingers must extend in order to make this same point prominent and preeminent. If you allow the fingers to hang limply, you are deliberately preventing the Jin in your arm and palm from joining with the Jin in your fingers.
Consider your left elbow joint. If you are truly extending it through the same point, you cannot keep it as high relative to the hand as you would the right elbow in Fist Under Elbow or the left elbow in Strike Tiger Left, because keeping the elbow this hight would impart a circular path to the Jin coming from your shoulder. Instead, you must keep the tip of your elbow pointing almost straight down to the ground in order to match your energy usage, even though, for most people, this is a more difficult and more “tense” configuration to maintain. I would assert that the issue is to find the appropriate equilibrium within each joint and between each set of joints that molds with the overall intention for the Jin. All you do is extend through the Jin point in every relevant joint and let you limbs line up the way they want to.
Psalchemist, you also mentioned the left toes. I would argue that no one in fact “extends” through the left toes; otherwise, you would be trying to make your left foot skate across the ground. Of course, your left toes are one of the most forward parts of your body, but this does not determine the energy relationship.
On another thread, there is a dialog about the proper relationship between the forward knee and the forward toes. I would argue that, in practice, one does not memorize an appropriate stopping point and then shift your weight so as to reach and stop at this point. Instead, I would advise concentrating on how both legs push against each other (the rear leg thrusting/stamping and the front leg propping/deflecting the power up the spine). If you do this, you will find that if your knee goes too far, the connection between the legs gets weak. The left heel will begin to get light. The right leg loses a purchase for its pushing power. And the left knee must just sit there and can no longer push back into the structure.
If you are not sure about what I am talking about, go slowly, but try using a great deal of force between the legs as you slowly shift the weight. Continue to shift weight only as long as you can maintain strong controlled force in both legs and strong pressure directly between the soles for your feet and the floor. The amount of energy you use to “flex” your leg muscles is irrelevant, since this is a local activity and unrelated to the equilibrium between the legs you are trying to feel for. Once the sensation is clear to you, you can adjust how much energy you put into your legs to whatever is comfortable and natural for you, given that you should eventually be able to do this easily through 3 X 25 minutes of form practice.
Some criticize what I have stated above as deviating from the principle of economy that underlies the concepts of Wuwei and Taiji. To this let me make a few comments. Newton's theories of motion require that our forward force be balanced by a rearward force in order to prevent ourselves from going forward. I would assert that moving slowly and softly can mask this, but the physical requirements do not change. All I am asserting is that one must feel for this balance at every instant of the weight shift, rather than launching oneself and then having to guess how much energy the front knee will have to exert as a stopping force. For me, the essence of Taiji is dynamic equilibrium, not minimization of either Yin or Yang.
Let me also say that the dynamic equilibrium one finds within one’s own body will again have to change as an opponent introduces an outside force. Because of this, there is no purpose to refining and practicing an ideal equilibrium within oneself during form. My understanding of the Yangs’ form is that it is intended to develop a conscious feel for how your body generates and circulates Jin in response to your mind's directions, rather than practicing particular patterns that are intended to be translated unchanged into other circumstances.
With respect to your rear extension, you stated the following:
<<If by "rear" you include the diagonal, then I would say:
-RIGHT HAND:Knuckles and back of wrist(3" square?)...let's be more general then, back of hand and back of wrist joint(the opening)
-RIGHT FOOT:REAR HEEL(also opening)>>
My understanding of this posture (in the Yangs’ version, but not in many others) is that you are trying to direct energy in opposite directions, i.e., at a 180 degree angle. The only way you can form such an angle with your arms is to equally extend your chest and back muscles. One problem with doing this is that your chest muscles are generally not as strong as your back muscles in this configuration, and so this seemingly balanced posture will not in fact be inherently balanced. Another problem with a 180 degree angle is that it is a violation of one of the Ten Essentials, which says that you must “contain the chest and pluck out your back.” If you ignore your chest muscles and concentrate on extending your shoulder blades apart, you will find that a 135 degree angle (more or less) actually represents the maximum extension you can achieve across your back. Extending rearward becomes, in energy terms, an extension to the rear diagonal more or less in line with your rear leg.
By the way, I am not asserting that a true 180 degree extension is always forbidden. Such a posture exists in some forms, but I do not know enough about them to explain their preference.
As for the Jin point, let’s examine what would happen if it were in the back of the hand. If you can imagine someone leaning with all their weight onto the back of your hand, you will probably wince as you imagine the pain that this would cause in your bent wrist.
If you imagine the Jin point to be in your knuckles and think of this as a straight-on strike, you will have to tightly squeeze your wrist in order to support the Jin in your fingers. In my opinion, this will lead you down the path of the methods of “external” martial arts. For instance, you will also have to flex your thumb knuckle toward your body to support your fingers and keep the tips of the fingers and thumb tightly pinched together.
If you perform Single Whip as is done in Cheng Man-Ch’ing’s form, you will probably see the Crane’s beak as having a pulling and guiding action. In this case, the fingers can be more relaxed, since they will naturally curve in the direction of your hooking pull or in the direction of your adhering action. As you guide the opponent’s strike back out to the side, you will probably use the knuckles of the little and ring finger and extend your arm to the right to assume a horizontal curve that cannot anatomically be extended further. By the way, I, at least, use a different definition of “fangsong” (“relaxation”/”loosening”) in CMC’s form and so would not actually apply this thinking to performance of his form.
If you see the Jin point as being in the back of the wrist (which I believe to be correct for the Yangs’ form), you now must consider what to do with your fingers. Some forms pinch the tips of the fingers together, which I do not understand. In the Yangs’ form, my understanding is that you must simply extend and fold your fingers down and away from your wrist. If your wrist is flexible enough, your fingers will actually point back toward your body. The thumb also simply points downward, with the pad against the back of the fingers, rather than pinching against the tips of the fingers.
If you are extending your elbow through the back of your wrist, your elbow will naturally straighten. If you say to yourself: “Make your elbow straight,” you will run the risk of locking it. If you merely extend and loosen your joint through the back of your wrist, you cannot lock it. If you retain a deliberate bend in your elbow, you will be opposing the direction of your Jin and introducing a local element (unless of course, your retain something in all of your joints or deliberately change your Yi before reaching full extension).
As for side to side extension, I would argue that rounding the back and rounding the crotch maintain a counterbalancing sideward extension in a posture that otherwise has an extreme from-to-back extension. Of course, one also extends up through the crown of the head and down through the tailbone.
By bends, I was thinking principally of your elbows, wrists, and knees. I think I have already addressed the wrists and the right elbow and so will address the others.
If you eliminate the bend in your left elbow, you will find that you must either introduce a chopping vector that would be inconsistent with the extension in your other joints, or you must flatten the palm forward, as if pushing against a wall. This latter action is only possible if you extend through the center of your palm, rather than through the side of your palm heel. It leaves your wrist weak and exposed.
The fact that your left knee bends and your right does not is explained if you think of the two as forming a wish bone through the hip sockets. (I have Jerry to thank for this image.) As you pass the maximum stored Jin from your right knee to your left, the only natural stopping point is when you have exhausted the Jin in your right knee or something happens to move your Yi in another direction. For Form purposes, you go through the full range of motion and do nothing to “stop short.”
Whenever I mention extension, one could also read “loosening." Please also understand that extending in one direction necessitates “grounding” in the opposite direction. Solid and empty are in each joint, but also in each set of joints and in the posture as a whole.
I have only described extension in the context of the culmination of Single Whip; however, I would assert that one could go through the same analysis, joint by joint, at each of the articulation points of the postures. I count about six articulation points in Single Whip, where there is a major change in how the joints extend. I would also assert that the extension does not cease between the points of articulation, but rather continues smoothly at all times in “parallelogram” fashion or “accordion” fashion. At the same time you limbs should feel loose, they should feel collectively “locked” and “threaded” into the same energic dynamic. Extending one joint requires or allows another joint to extend. The joints “feel loose, but not loose.”
I hope all this is clear and helpful and explains why I assert that loosening the joints is intimately connected to Jin points and how you are using your Yi from moment to moment.
Take care,
Audi
-
Louis Swaim
- Posts: 1390
- Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 7:01 am
- Location: Oakland, CA
Greetings Jerry,
I don’t recognize “wu zhong liu xing zhi qi” as coming from any obvious source either, but if the “liu xing” is as you read it: ‘prevalent, current, dominant,’ that’s comparatively modern language that would make the phrase suspect as one coming from early sources.
Interestingly, before you posted that, I thought the “liu” was “six,” making the phrase rather close to the phrase, “wu yun liu qi” sometimes cited as coming from the very early medical text, the Su Wen, the “Simple Questions” section of the Huangdi Nei Jing (Inner Classic of the Yellow Emperor), probably assembled in the early Han. However, according to Paul Unschuld, in his book, _Medicine in China: A History of Ideas_, “wu yun liu qi” was not a part of the original text, but was introduced into the text as commentary by a Tang Dynasty daoist, Wang Bing, whose version of the book came to be the accepted standard on into the Qing. The phrase stood for a conjunction of correlative concepts—five phases of circulation (wu yun), and six climatic influences (liu qi)—that Unschuld terms “cosmobiological.” This appears to be yet another case where commentary came to be mistaken for the source text, a common pitfall in the reading of classical texts.
All of that aside, I think there’s reasonable evidence that wuxing (both the phrase and the concept) is quite early in origin, one that became reasonably standardized in the Han.
Take care,
Louis
[This message has been edited by Louis Swaim (edited 11-24-2003).]
I don’t recognize “wu zhong liu xing zhi qi” as coming from any obvious source either, but if the “liu xing” is as you read it: ‘prevalent, current, dominant,’ that’s comparatively modern language that would make the phrase suspect as one coming from early sources.
Interestingly, before you posted that, I thought the “liu” was “six,” making the phrase rather close to the phrase, “wu yun liu qi” sometimes cited as coming from the very early medical text, the Su Wen, the “Simple Questions” section of the Huangdi Nei Jing (Inner Classic of the Yellow Emperor), probably assembled in the early Han. However, according to Paul Unschuld, in his book, _Medicine in China: A History of Ideas_, “wu yun liu qi” was not a part of the original text, but was introduced into the text as commentary by a Tang Dynasty daoist, Wang Bing, whose version of the book came to be the accepted standard on into the Qing. The phrase stood for a conjunction of correlative concepts—five phases of circulation (wu yun), and six climatic influences (liu qi)—that Unschuld terms “cosmobiological.” This appears to be yet another case where commentary came to be mistaken for the source text, a common pitfall in the reading of classical texts.
All of that aside, I think there’s reasonable evidence that wuxing (both the phrase and the concept) is quite early in origin, one that became reasonably standardized in the Han.
Take care,
Louis
[This message has been edited by Louis Swaim (edited 11-24-2003).]
-
psalchemist
- Posts: 619
- Joined: Wed May 21, 2003 6:01 am
Greetings Audi, all,
Returning to your November 15th posting which explained some of the differences between internal and external arts...
You wrote:
<When I punch Karate-style and when I punch Taiji-style, my mind is concentrated on completely different things. When I do the karate punch, my focus is on the precise spot in space where I will deliver the maximum amount of power with my muscles and momentum from my body. To the extent possible, I will be using a predetermined sequence of muscle movements. I need speed, distance and momentum.> Audi
Thanks for these descriptions, they represent the crux of my address here presently.
You continued to say,
<When I punch Taiji-style, my mind feels for where jin is stored in my body and traces a path to the target and then orders all this to release, like flicking a rubber band. Speed and distance are secondary considerations. There is no predetermined sequence of muscle movements.> Audi
To test my new understanding of these concepts...
Are you speaking of an 'automatic "gong" response' which has been developed through years of repeating correctly structured Taijiquan movement?
Back to "gong"...
Is this expression referring to the external, physical structure response which occurs from having established neurological pathways between the muscles and brain?
OR
Is this expression referring to the internal, jin structure response which delivers the energy to it's concentrated manifestation point?
Can I assume that "gong" is the development of both of these structures?
You also wrote:
<More importantly, the Taiji-style punch is an incomplete crippled thing without knowledge of how my energy is interacting with the opponent's at the moment of the punch. What allows me to punch without having my power reflected back at me or without exposing myself to my opponent's speed and power? How is my opponent double-weighted?> Audi
<My view of Taiji techniques can be viewed something as follows. All techniques have three parts. The first part is the most important and is supplied by the opponent, not by you. You provide the second part. You and the opponent combine to provide the third part only if the second part succeeds and is not transformed into something else by the opponent. You cannot perform the Taiji techniques without understanding how the opponent is manifesting energy because you have no control over the first part of your technique. You need the opponenets energy and mind intent in order to accomplish your techniques.> Audi
<My view of karate is radically different. The opponent is essentially a moving punching bag that occasionally punches or kicks back. You care nothing about your opponents mind intent or energy potential as long as you can predict where his or her limbs will be in space. Your object is to inflict damage or exercise control as rapidly and powerfully as possible using a predetermined set of techniques that you have drilled to perfection.> Audi
I acknowledge these vital distinctions and essential factors. I understand what you mean. Presently, however, I am more inclined to discuss and discern in particular the differences between internal and external arts as well as develop my comprehension of the internal mechanics itself, without excessive "interaction" complications.
So, disregarding push hands involvement momentarily...
From various sources of input, combined with your elaborations on "extending the joint" I have concretized some new theories(new for me, that is) on the subject of internal methods in comparison with external methods.
In condensed fashion, open for discussion:
External arts focuses on bringing the energy and force to the point of extremity (hand/foot), to the absolute detriment of the rest of the structure. In other words, when delivering a kick, all power in the limb is compromised in order to deliver this said power to the foot, the focal point.
While,in
Internal arts the structure is created by the extension of the joints, as you have described recently. The extension of the joints actually leads to the stable force throughout the body structure. The structure is not compromised to delivered energy as is in external arts. Delivering power conversely is intertwined with creation of sound structure. Both are accomplished simultaneously.
From what I can conceive, the external arts draw all the power that has been generated by momentum to the extremity of the limb and away from the limb, causing much force at the focal point , but also much weakness in the rest of the limb.
I am not sure I can convey this correctly...
Allow me to provide some substance with a concrete example...
In a Kung-fu strike, more precisely, let's say a circular spinning strike which contacts with the back of the fist...One is instructed, basically, to emulate a point of force at the fist itself, no real force running through the arm itself, momentum, speed and muscle being the operative elements. Consider a mace sphere at the end of a long chain for comparison and analogy sake, being swung in a wide arc. The mace, upon contact is indeed a very powerful entity. But it would be easily intercepted with a blow to the arm or elbow in it's route to the target, crumpling, bending and redirecting the trajectory off course and disturbing the outcome. The fist will be the very strong powerful, effective mace, but the arm would be the weak link of the chain. So, in essence, your kind of hoping the punching bag doesn't swing back when you execute this type of move in external arts.
In a similar circular strike in Taijiquan, for comparison, the structure does not suffer this same weakness. The structure is not compromised for the sake of directing the power to the manifestation point. In Tsi Feng Shi/Diagonal Flying for example,although all force is similarly directed towards the extremity (the hand), the structure of the remainder of the limb and the whole body has not been weakened, in fact it has been reinforced by this delivery through maintaining the correct internal structure.
I'm still not sure I've conveyed what I wished to convey, and it is only a certain aspect to be viewed on the matter.
I was hoping others might elaborate on the gist of this corner...
All comments welcome.
Thank-you,
Best regards,
Psalchemist.
Returning to your November 15th posting which explained some of the differences between internal and external arts...
You wrote:
<When I punch Karate-style and when I punch Taiji-style, my mind is concentrated on completely different things. When I do the karate punch, my focus is on the precise spot in space where I will deliver the maximum amount of power with my muscles and momentum from my body. To the extent possible, I will be using a predetermined sequence of muscle movements. I need speed, distance and momentum.> Audi
Thanks for these descriptions, they represent the crux of my address here presently.
You continued to say,
<When I punch Taiji-style, my mind feels for where jin is stored in my body and traces a path to the target and then orders all this to release, like flicking a rubber band. Speed and distance are secondary considerations. There is no predetermined sequence of muscle movements.> Audi
To test my new understanding of these concepts...
Are you speaking of an 'automatic "gong" response' which has been developed through years of repeating correctly structured Taijiquan movement?
Back to "gong"...
Is this expression referring to the external, physical structure response which occurs from having established neurological pathways between the muscles and brain?
OR
Is this expression referring to the internal, jin structure response which delivers the energy to it's concentrated manifestation point?
Can I assume that "gong" is the development of both of these structures?
You also wrote:
<More importantly, the Taiji-style punch is an incomplete crippled thing without knowledge of how my energy is interacting with the opponent's at the moment of the punch. What allows me to punch without having my power reflected back at me or without exposing myself to my opponent's speed and power? How is my opponent double-weighted?> Audi
<My view of Taiji techniques can be viewed something as follows. All techniques have three parts. The first part is the most important and is supplied by the opponent, not by you. You provide the second part. You and the opponent combine to provide the third part only if the second part succeeds and is not transformed into something else by the opponent. You cannot perform the Taiji techniques without understanding how the opponent is manifesting energy because you have no control over the first part of your technique. You need the opponenets energy and mind intent in order to accomplish your techniques.> Audi
<My view of karate is radically different. The opponent is essentially a moving punching bag that occasionally punches or kicks back. You care nothing about your opponents mind intent or energy potential as long as you can predict where his or her limbs will be in space. Your object is to inflict damage or exercise control as rapidly and powerfully as possible using a predetermined set of techniques that you have drilled to perfection.> Audi
I acknowledge these vital distinctions and essential factors. I understand what you mean. Presently, however, I am more inclined to discuss and discern in particular the differences between internal and external arts as well as develop my comprehension of the internal mechanics itself, without excessive "interaction" complications.
So, disregarding push hands involvement momentarily...
From various sources of input, combined with your elaborations on "extending the joint" I have concretized some new theories(new for me, that is) on the subject of internal methods in comparison with external methods.
In condensed fashion, open for discussion:
External arts focuses on bringing the energy and force to the point of extremity (hand/foot), to the absolute detriment of the rest of the structure. In other words, when delivering a kick, all power in the limb is compromised in order to deliver this said power to the foot, the focal point.
While,in
Internal arts the structure is created by the extension of the joints, as you have described recently. The extension of the joints actually leads to the stable force throughout the body structure. The structure is not compromised to delivered energy as is in external arts. Delivering power conversely is intertwined with creation of sound structure. Both are accomplished simultaneously.
From what I can conceive, the external arts draw all the power that has been generated by momentum to the extremity of the limb and away from the limb, causing much force at the focal point , but also much weakness in the rest of the limb.
I am not sure I can convey this correctly...
Allow me to provide some substance with a concrete example...
In a Kung-fu strike, more precisely, let's say a circular spinning strike which contacts with the back of the fist...One is instructed, basically, to emulate a point of force at the fist itself, no real force running through the arm itself, momentum, speed and muscle being the operative elements. Consider a mace sphere at the end of a long chain for comparison and analogy sake, being swung in a wide arc. The mace, upon contact is indeed a very powerful entity. But it would be easily intercepted with a blow to the arm or elbow in it's route to the target, crumpling, bending and redirecting the trajectory off course and disturbing the outcome. The fist will be the very strong powerful, effective mace, but the arm would be the weak link of the chain. So, in essence, your kind of hoping the punching bag doesn't swing back when you execute this type of move in external arts.
In a similar circular strike in Taijiquan, for comparison, the structure does not suffer this same weakness. The structure is not compromised for the sake of directing the power to the manifestation point. In Tsi Feng Shi/Diagonal Flying for example,although all force is similarly directed towards the extremity (the hand), the structure of the remainder of the limb and the whole body has not been weakened, in fact it has been reinforced by this delivery through maintaining the correct internal structure.
I'm still not sure I've conveyed what I wished to convey, and it is only a certain aspect to be viewed on the matter.
I was hoping others might elaborate on the gist of this corner...
All comments welcome.
Thank-you,
Best regards,
Psalchemist.