Single weightedness?
-
JerryKarin
- Posts: 1067
- Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 7:01 am
- Contact:
I take the taiji nomenclature to be metaphorical, and generally on the cosmic scale - yin and yang, etc. The upper and lower body are thought of as oppose-able halves whose movements can be modeled as opposing or unified rotation, opposing for ex in rollback the upper half can rotate relative to the lower. The waist then, in this logical rather than physiological model, is the midpoint separating the two oppose-able rotating halves. Awareness and use of movements involving this dividing line and the network of muscles that propel the opposition of upper and lower can help change the movements to, as Yang Zhenji is fond of saying, "more of the waist and less of the arms".
-
Louis Swaim
- Posts: 1390
- Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 7:01 am
- Location: Oakland, CA
-
Louis Swaim
- Posts: 1390
- Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 7:01 am
- Location: Oakland, CA
Greetings Jerry,
You have stated this splendidly. One could relate this metaphorical/logical interface to traditional Chinese medicine, which is notoriously imprecise with regard to anatomy. The imprecision is only an issue, however, when Western anatomical standards of form and function are applied. The native empirical approach to the body was not rooted in detailed description of the body’s organs and tissues, but rather viewed organs as integrated systems of influence whose functions are not necessarily clearly identified with their location or structure.
Take care,
Louis
You have stated this splendidly. One could relate this metaphorical/logical interface to traditional Chinese medicine, which is notoriously imprecise with regard to anatomy. The imprecision is only an issue, however, when Western anatomical standards of form and function are applied. The native empirical approach to the body was not rooted in detailed description of the body’s organs and tissues, but rather viewed organs as integrated systems of influence whose functions are not necessarily clearly identified with their location or structure.
Take care,
Louis
Hi Louis, Jerry, RonK,
fwiw, I do think it is a matter of language. I'm almost sure that the texts never read "lumbar vertebrae."
I have read the sources that RonK cited, and the logic in them seems sound. Among the examples cited where risk of injuries were noted, however, there seemed to be minimal correlation to YZJ's comments except through the language: i.e.,
"Ballistic Rotation.
Ballistic rotation movements of the spine that are quick and with little control have been cited as being a major cause of neck as well as low back problems because of the stress that they place on discs and other structures of the spine. This movement is truly contraindicated."
Because of the usual slowness of tcc as an exercise, imho, there should be greater concern about "micro-trauma" or gradual injury. However, the article --pardon the quote's length-- also reads:
"Some exercise leaders suggest that any spine hyperextension should be avoided. However, hyperextension is a natural movement and it is in the best interest of the biomechanics of one's spine to maintain this mobility. If such mobility is not maintained it will be lost2, 3.
Nevertheless, it is acknowledged that uncontrolled or ballistic-hyperextension movements of the spine are totally inappropriate because they can stress and damage the posterior aspects of one or more motion segments. But, “slow and controlled” hyperextension movements are appropriate for inclusion in exercise programs; in fact they are a prime element in the very popular McKenzie exercise therapy program for individuals with neck or low back pain4-6.
Nonetheless, it is important that spine movements are carefully taught and monitored by exercise leaders, for some individuals do not have a very good awareness (kinesthetic sense) of how they move and position their body parts when they exercise."
The last paragraph, imho, is the most important to this discussion. Anyway, I also posted a link to a medical site that discusses the various types of spinal injuries.
Best,
Steve James
fwiw, I do think it is a matter of language. I'm almost sure that the texts never read "lumbar vertebrae."
I have read the sources that RonK cited, and the logic in them seems sound. Among the examples cited where risk of injuries were noted, however, there seemed to be minimal correlation to YZJ's comments except through the language: i.e.,
"Ballistic Rotation.
Ballistic rotation movements of the spine that are quick and with little control have been cited as being a major cause of neck as well as low back problems because of the stress that they place on discs and other structures of the spine. This movement is truly contraindicated."
Because of the usual slowness of tcc as an exercise, imho, there should be greater concern about "micro-trauma" or gradual injury. However, the article --pardon the quote's length-- also reads:
"Some exercise leaders suggest that any spine hyperextension should be avoided. However, hyperextension is a natural movement and it is in the best interest of the biomechanics of one's spine to maintain this mobility. If such mobility is not maintained it will be lost2, 3.
Nevertheless, it is acknowledged that uncontrolled or ballistic-hyperextension movements of the spine are totally inappropriate because they can stress and damage the posterior aspects of one or more motion segments. But, “slow and controlled” hyperextension movements are appropriate for inclusion in exercise programs; in fact they are a prime element in the very popular McKenzie exercise therapy program for individuals with neck or low back pain4-6.
Nonetheless, it is important that spine movements are carefully taught and monitored by exercise leaders, for some individuals do not have a very good awareness (kinesthetic sense) of how they move and position their body parts when they exercise."
The last paragraph, imho, is the most important to this discussion. Anyway, I also posted a link to a medical site that discusses the various types of spinal injuries.
Best,
Steve James
-
RonKreshmar
- Posts: 41
- Joined: Sat May 10, 2003 6:01 am
- Location: Nanaimo, B.C.
Hi Jerry,Louis,Steve,
The metaphorical model and the physiological model do not need to be in conflict.
They often are, and when they are it is the body that pays the price not the imagery.
A particular model such as the one you describe will have its corresponding practice.
Another model, still metaphoric, will have different associations.
By putting the waist between the hips and the shoulders, which happens to be the usual location for the 'waist', ie. the narrower part of the torso above the hips and below the rib cage, the body is divided at that part and your roll back is done by turning the upper body relative to the lower.
When I put the 'waist' at the hip joint, and divide the body into legs,torso(hips to shoulders, and arms, my roll back is done with the hip rotator muscles at the hip joint. There is not turning of the upper torso relative to the lower, both turn at the same time.
The psoas muscles are anchored to the anterior/lateral portion of the entire lower spine. They separate from the spine at the 5th lumbar vertebrae and transverse through the pelvic girdle and insert to the inside of the thigh bone, the femur.
They, along with the ilios are the hip FLEXORS, the group of muscles that are the prime movers when you lift the thigh to the trunk or when you bend the trunk to the thigh.
As a quick aside, the farther in front of the AXIS of the HIP JOINT the upper body is, and the more extended the femur is behind the axis of the hip joint, THE MORE THE POSTURAL CONTRACTION OF THE HIP FLEXORS.
This is why leaning tenses up the lower back and why leaning is to be avoided. This beside the fact that leaning shifts the center of gravity relative to the hip joint which also functions as the fulcrum of a lever. And so allows one to be easily toppled by an opponent who knows when body is unstable.
The psoas muscle is not used for rotation along the vertical axis but for rotation at the horizontal axis of the hip joints.
As a matter of fact, it helps to prevent the lumber spine from twisting.
The spinal rotation begins at the Lumbar 5 and THORACIC 12 vertabrae, above the lumbar spine.
There is a difference beween hip flexion, the decrease of the angle between the femur and the pelvis, and spinal flexion. Spinal flexion is in fact simply the removal of the lumbar curve. Same word, "flexion", but different meanings with respect to different parts of the body.
Steve,
There are two issues, one is the matter of explosive torque, properly named ballistic movement.
The second is the issue of spinal ROTATION as such, so as to take the knowledge of how the spine moves and harmonize this with the metaphors, wheels,axles,scales, turning, etc. on which prescriptions of movement are based in Tai Chi.
Specific interpretations of the metaphors, eg if the waist is like an AXLE, result in very different movements.
If the axle is placed at the usual position called the waist, then you have the type of turning Jerry describes.
If the waist is placed at the hip-joint, you have an actual AXLE. There are different kinds of axles. The femur-hip articulation in one of its functions constitues a lever.
The leg is the base, the joint is the fulcrum, the hip, even though it doesn't look like the AXLE of a lever is one.
Any elementary text on bio-mechanics will have a full account of this because it is so important in all kinds of athletic activities.
Microtrauma is as important as ballistic trauma. Microtrauma is insidious and non-reversible in many instances.
I am aware that you care about these kinds of issues.
Because Tai chi movement are done slowly there is a belief that no damage results.
One reason for during thoracic rotation slowly is to not exceed the person's ROM.
At the first felt tension the movement should halt.
Those who believe that going beyond the tension while it is still active will end up inflicting damage while in pursuit of well being.
It is this sort of counterfinality, achieving opposite results to what is intended, that is important to deal with and prevent.
Any movement that results in applying ROTATIONAL movement to the lumbar spine, torque, is dangerous.
Yes, flexion/extension of the lumbar spine also requires care. That is another important issue besides spinal ROTATION.
Louis wrote:
"I would make the point that knowledge of anatomy and physiology does not guarantee kinesiological knowledge or kinesthetic awareness, which can more successfully be gained through training and experience."
Precisely. Knowledge of anatomy does not in itself give knowledge of human movement. For example, the topic of human locomotion is a hot topic in kinesiology. Lots of disagreemens about the role of the legs and the trunk in walking.
But knowledge of structure needs to be married to knowledge of function. This is precisely what kinesiology does with respect to parts of anatomy that have to do with human movement.
Kinesthetic awareness is relevant to the prevention of injuries. Yes, it can be trained, and is a part of kinesiology so as to apply general knowledge about range of movements to individual persons and their personal range of movement.
A unity of knowledge of general anatomy relevant to skeletal movement and proprioceptive kinesthesis is what is needed from the start.
It is this sort of knowledge that is ignored by many athletes including people doing Tai Chi.
If kinesthetic awareness so as as correct or prevent damaging movement is to be acquired through training and experience when this involves doing the movements without knowledge of what is happening, then often the knowledge comes too late. Comes after the damage is done and often is irreversible.
RonK
[This message has been edited by RonKreshmar (edited 05-13-2003).]
The metaphorical model and the physiological model do not need to be in conflict.
They often are, and when they are it is the body that pays the price not the imagery.
A particular model such as the one you describe will have its corresponding practice.
Another model, still metaphoric, will have different associations.
By putting the waist between the hips and the shoulders, which happens to be the usual location for the 'waist', ie. the narrower part of the torso above the hips and below the rib cage, the body is divided at that part and your roll back is done by turning the upper body relative to the lower.
When I put the 'waist' at the hip joint, and divide the body into legs,torso(hips to shoulders, and arms, my roll back is done with the hip rotator muscles at the hip joint. There is not turning of the upper torso relative to the lower, both turn at the same time.
The psoas muscles are anchored to the anterior/lateral portion of the entire lower spine. They separate from the spine at the 5th lumbar vertebrae and transverse through the pelvic girdle and insert to the inside of the thigh bone, the femur.
They, along with the ilios are the hip FLEXORS, the group of muscles that are the prime movers when you lift the thigh to the trunk or when you bend the trunk to the thigh.
As a quick aside, the farther in front of the AXIS of the HIP JOINT the upper body is, and the more extended the femur is behind the axis of the hip joint, THE MORE THE POSTURAL CONTRACTION OF THE HIP FLEXORS.
This is why leaning tenses up the lower back and why leaning is to be avoided. This beside the fact that leaning shifts the center of gravity relative to the hip joint which also functions as the fulcrum of a lever. And so allows one to be easily toppled by an opponent who knows when body is unstable.
The psoas muscle is not used for rotation along the vertical axis but for rotation at the horizontal axis of the hip joints.
As a matter of fact, it helps to prevent the lumber spine from twisting.
The spinal rotation begins at the Lumbar 5 and THORACIC 12 vertabrae, above the lumbar spine.
There is a difference beween hip flexion, the decrease of the angle between the femur and the pelvis, and spinal flexion. Spinal flexion is in fact simply the removal of the lumbar curve. Same word, "flexion", but different meanings with respect to different parts of the body.
Steve,
There are two issues, one is the matter of explosive torque, properly named ballistic movement.
The second is the issue of spinal ROTATION as such, so as to take the knowledge of how the spine moves and harmonize this with the metaphors, wheels,axles,scales, turning, etc. on which prescriptions of movement are based in Tai Chi.
Specific interpretations of the metaphors, eg if the waist is like an AXLE, result in very different movements.
If the axle is placed at the usual position called the waist, then you have the type of turning Jerry describes.
If the waist is placed at the hip-joint, you have an actual AXLE. There are different kinds of axles. The femur-hip articulation in one of its functions constitues a lever.
The leg is the base, the joint is the fulcrum, the hip, even though it doesn't look like the AXLE of a lever is one.
Any elementary text on bio-mechanics will have a full account of this because it is so important in all kinds of athletic activities.
Microtrauma is as important as ballistic trauma. Microtrauma is insidious and non-reversible in many instances.
I am aware that you care about these kinds of issues.
Because Tai chi movement are done slowly there is a belief that no damage results.
One reason for during thoracic rotation slowly is to not exceed the person's ROM.
At the first felt tension the movement should halt.
Those who believe that going beyond the tension while it is still active will end up inflicting damage while in pursuit of well being.
It is this sort of counterfinality, achieving opposite results to what is intended, that is important to deal with and prevent.
Any movement that results in applying ROTATIONAL movement to the lumbar spine, torque, is dangerous.
Yes, flexion/extension of the lumbar spine also requires care. That is another important issue besides spinal ROTATION.
Louis wrote:
"I would make the point that knowledge of anatomy and physiology does not guarantee kinesiological knowledge or kinesthetic awareness, which can more successfully be gained through training and experience."
Precisely. Knowledge of anatomy does not in itself give knowledge of human movement. For example, the topic of human locomotion is a hot topic in kinesiology. Lots of disagreemens about the role of the legs and the trunk in walking.
But knowledge of structure needs to be married to knowledge of function. This is precisely what kinesiology does with respect to parts of anatomy that have to do with human movement.
Kinesthetic awareness is relevant to the prevention of injuries. Yes, it can be trained, and is a part of kinesiology so as to apply general knowledge about range of movements to individual persons and their personal range of movement.
A unity of knowledge of general anatomy relevant to skeletal movement and proprioceptive kinesthesis is what is needed from the start.
It is this sort of knowledge that is ignored by many athletes including people doing Tai Chi.
If kinesthetic awareness so as as correct or prevent damaging movement is to be acquired through training and experience when this involves doing the movements without knowledge of what is happening, then often the knowledge comes too late. Comes after the damage is done and often is irreversible.
RonK
[This message has been edited by RonKreshmar (edited 05-13-2003).]
-
Louis Swaim
- Posts: 1390
- Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 7:01 am
- Location: Oakland, CA
Greetings Steve,
I concur with your assessment, and with the suggestion that Yang Zhenji’s instructions thoroughly conform with the sensible guidelines for spine movement that you’ve quoted. In fact, in the hopes of bringing some clarity to the issue, I will try soon to translate and post a brief passage from his book that shows the degree to which his methodology uses kinesthetic awareness as the proper standard for taiji instruction.
Take care,
Louis
I concur with your assessment, and with the suggestion that Yang Zhenji’s instructions thoroughly conform with the sensible guidelines for spine movement that you’ve quoted. In fact, in the hopes of bringing some clarity to the issue, I will try soon to translate and post a brief passage from his book that shows the degree to which his methodology uses kinesthetic awareness as the proper standard for taiji instruction.
Take care,
Louis
-
RonKreshmar
- Posts: 41
- Joined: Sat May 10, 2003 6:01 am
- Location: Nanaimo, B.C.
Hi Steve, Louis,
Steve,
When you quoted from the link you forgot to include the part about spinal ROTATION.
"Excessive and uncontrolled rotation movements of the spine (e.g., as in a “no” headshake) are of utmost concern.
As previously indicated, the greatest rotation exists between the first and second cervical vertebrae; however, there are about 9-11 degrees of rotation between the other motion segments of the cervical vertebrae.
In the lumbar region only 1-3 degrees of motion exist between each vertebra; here the restriction is due to the structure of the posterior portions of the motion segments (i.e., the facet joint).
If spinal rotation exceeds a joint’s physiological limits, the excessive stress may be placed on intervertebral discs, their supporting ligaments, and their neural and vascular tissue."
The headshake is relevant to the cervical spine.
Thoracic torso twisting is relevant to the thoracic spine and the LUMBAR spine because the torque is transfered to where there is very little tolerance for torque.
Solely with respect to spine ROTATION, the lumbar spine cannot twist itself. It is twisted through pelvic movement or through thoracic movement.
"Excessive" can mean too intense or too frequent.
So, "excessive" can also include microtrauma injury due to repeated movements.
Louis,
Looking forward to more from YZJ.
I responded on the basis of two exerpts.
Yours which dealt with the slight rotation in GBT. And then the interpretation of YZJ's directions at the other site.
Their interpretation was quite a bit different.
That was one issue.
The second one is simply the interpretation of the metaphors, eg. the waist as axle, which turns to the location of this waist.
The different styles place this "waist" at different parts of the body.
It is not a matter of indifference whether it is placed at the hip joint or just above the hips.
The bio-mechanics of these anatomical areas are totally different.
And the issue gets more complicated when the fact that there are different kinds of AXLES has to be taken into account.
Wu Chian style uses the hip joint but adds flexion of the hip joint and then also adds thoracic rotation. And has developed different ways in the North and the South.
Wu Yu Hsing style turns from the hip joint.
The torso moves in folds on the legs allowed by internal/external rotation of the hip joint.
Chen style, uses weight shifts, lateral movement of the hips, resulting in a sort of circumduction allowed by the hip joints, joined with abdominal contractions and breathing.
So, there is not ONE torso method, but a number of them. Each one distinctly different involving different bio-mechanics, different part of the body for their movements.
When we come to Xingy and Bagua things get even more interesting.
You wouldn't want to say that as long as they all use the "waist" then they are following the same principles?
Ron
[This message has been edited by RonKreshmar (edited 05-13-2003).]
Steve,
When you quoted from the link you forgot to include the part about spinal ROTATION.
"Excessive and uncontrolled rotation movements of the spine (e.g., as in a “no” headshake) are of utmost concern.
As previously indicated, the greatest rotation exists between the first and second cervical vertebrae; however, there are about 9-11 degrees of rotation between the other motion segments of the cervical vertebrae.
In the lumbar region only 1-3 degrees of motion exist between each vertebra; here the restriction is due to the structure of the posterior portions of the motion segments (i.e., the facet joint).
If spinal rotation exceeds a joint’s physiological limits, the excessive stress may be placed on intervertebral discs, their supporting ligaments, and their neural and vascular tissue."
The headshake is relevant to the cervical spine.
Thoracic torso twisting is relevant to the thoracic spine and the LUMBAR spine because the torque is transfered to where there is very little tolerance for torque.
Solely with respect to spine ROTATION, the lumbar spine cannot twist itself. It is twisted through pelvic movement or through thoracic movement.
"Excessive" can mean too intense or too frequent.
So, "excessive" can also include microtrauma injury due to repeated movements.
Louis,
Looking forward to more from YZJ.
I responded on the basis of two exerpts.
Yours which dealt with the slight rotation in GBT. And then the interpretation of YZJ's directions at the other site.
Their interpretation was quite a bit different.
That was one issue.
The second one is simply the interpretation of the metaphors, eg. the waist as axle, which turns to the location of this waist.
The different styles place this "waist" at different parts of the body.
It is not a matter of indifference whether it is placed at the hip joint or just above the hips.
The bio-mechanics of these anatomical areas are totally different.
And the issue gets more complicated when the fact that there are different kinds of AXLES has to be taken into account.
Wu Chian style uses the hip joint but adds flexion of the hip joint and then also adds thoracic rotation. And has developed different ways in the North and the South.
Wu Yu Hsing style turns from the hip joint.
The torso moves in folds on the legs allowed by internal/external rotation of the hip joint.
Chen style, uses weight shifts, lateral movement of the hips, resulting in a sort of circumduction allowed by the hip joints, joined with abdominal contractions and breathing.
So, there is not ONE torso method, but a number of them. Each one distinctly different involving different bio-mechanics, different part of the body for their movements.
When we come to Xingy and Bagua things get even more interesting.
You wouldn't want to say that as long as they all use the "waist" then they are following the same principles?
Ron
[This message has been edited by RonKreshmar (edited 05-13-2003).]
-
Louis Swaim
- Posts: 1390
- Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 7:01 am
- Location: Oakland, CA
Hi Ron,
You wrote, "I responded on the basis of two exerpts. Yours which dealt with the slight rotation in GBT. And then the interpretation of YZJ's directions at the other site."
Actually, I think it was the description at the other site that mentioned Grasp Sparrow's Tail. My post was a translation of a "point for attention" vis-a-vis Single Whip. Again, I don't know how closely the web piece reflects YZJ's actual teaching. It strikes me as synopsis and paraphrase, maybe gleaned through an interpreter.
I'll post something further later.
--Louis
You wrote, "I responded on the basis of two exerpts. Yours which dealt with the slight rotation in GBT. And then the interpretation of YZJ's directions at the other site."
Actually, I think it was the description at the other site that mentioned Grasp Sparrow's Tail. My post was a translation of a "point for attention" vis-a-vis Single Whip. Again, I don't know how closely the web piece reflects YZJ's actual teaching. It strikes me as synopsis and paraphrase, maybe gleaned through an interpreter.
I'll post something further later.
--Louis
-
Louis Swaim
- Posts: 1390
- Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 7:01 am
- Location: Oakland, CA
Greetings,
Here’s a brief translation from Yang Zhenji’s book, which demonstrates his concern with conveying kinesthetic guidelines for range of movement. This is one of his ‘points for attention’ following his detailed form instructions for rollback (lu). First I’ll just point out that Yang Zhenji uses specific verbs with regard to the waist. One is “dai,” which means “lead” or “guide.” He uses this as a general term for the waist’s leading of the movements of the body and limbs. Another verb is “zhuan,” which means turn—for turning of the torso, and another is “la,” which means “pull.” Pulling refers to those movements when the weight shifts without any particular turning of the torso. In each case the meaning is that the whole body follows the waist’s lead.
~~~
The waist in roll back has two turning movements and one pulling movement. During practice be careful that the rhythm (of these movements) is clearly manifested. In its leading of the two hands left and right, the range (fudu) of the waist turn must be appropriate (shidang). It must not be excessive, nor should it be insufficient. If excessive it will produce tension in the waist, and an attendant feeling of obstruction (bieqi, lit., ‘choking the qi’). If the leftward turn is insufficient, if will impair the setup of the following form, press.
—Yang Zhenji, Yang Shi Taijiquan, pp. 28-29
~~~
Ron,
You wrote: “You wouldn't want to say that as long as they all use the "waist" then they are following the same principles?”
Since I’ve not trained in any of the other styles you mention (except for some Bagua years ago), I’m not qualified to answer that question. It’s probably safe to say they use the waist differently, and interpret the principles differently. That’s not to say they aren’t following the same principles. Advocating leading with the shoulders, say, or with the chin, that would indicate different principles.
Chinese dictionaries (i.e., not Chinese-English dictionaries) identify the yao as the part of the torso “above the kua, below the ribs.” They also identify it as the location of the kidneys, but that’s a whole other discussion.
As an experiment, one could take a magic marker and a straightedge, drawing a horizontal line across one’s lower abdomen between the upper ridges of the pelvis, then draw a series of vertical lines from this base line upward. Now if you stand in front of a mirror, hold your pelvis steady, and turn your upper torso, the lines will move. Or, if like me you don’t like tattoos, just place your two palms on the lower abdomen, one above the other, and do the same thing. The skin moves, muscles move, and organs move. No matter where the spinal articulation occurs, there is movement in the yao.
Take care,
Louis
Here’s a brief translation from Yang Zhenji’s book, which demonstrates his concern with conveying kinesthetic guidelines for range of movement. This is one of his ‘points for attention’ following his detailed form instructions for rollback (lu). First I’ll just point out that Yang Zhenji uses specific verbs with regard to the waist. One is “dai,” which means “lead” or “guide.” He uses this as a general term for the waist’s leading of the movements of the body and limbs. Another verb is “zhuan,” which means turn—for turning of the torso, and another is “la,” which means “pull.” Pulling refers to those movements when the weight shifts without any particular turning of the torso. In each case the meaning is that the whole body follows the waist’s lead.
~~~
The waist in roll back has two turning movements and one pulling movement. During practice be careful that the rhythm (of these movements) is clearly manifested. In its leading of the two hands left and right, the range (fudu) of the waist turn must be appropriate (shidang). It must not be excessive, nor should it be insufficient. If excessive it will produce tension in the waist, and an attendant feeling of obstruction (bieqi, lit., ‘choking the qi’). If the leftward turn is insufficient, if will impair the setup of the following form, press.
—Yang Zhenji, Yang Shi Taijiquan, pp. 28-29
~~~
Ron,
You wrote: “You wouldn't want to say that as long as they all use the "waist" then they are following the same principles?”
Since I’ve not trained in any of the other styles you mention (except for some Bagua years ago), I’m not qualified to answer that question. It’s probably safe to say they use the waist differently, and interpret the principles differently. That’s not to say they aren’t following the same principles. Advocating leading with the shoulders, say, or with the chin, that would indicate different principles.
Chinese dictionaries (i.e., not Chinese-English dictionaries) identify the yao as the part of the torso “above the kua, below the ribs.” They also identify it as the location of the kidneys, but that’s a whole other discussion.
As an experiment, one could take a magic marker and a straightedge, drawing a horizontal line across one’s lower abdomen between the upper ridges of the pelvis, then draw a series of vertical lines from this base line upward. Now if you stand in front of a mirror, hold your pelvis steady, and turn your upper torso, the lines will move. Or, if like me you don’t like tattoos, just place your two palms on the lower abdomen, one above the other, and do the same thing. The skin moves, muscles move, and organs move. No matter where the spinal articulation occurs, there is movement in the yao.
Take care,
Louis
-
RonKreshmar
- Posts: 41
- Joined: Sat May 10, 2003 6:01 am
- Location: Nanaimo, B.C.
Hi Louis,
Thanks for the YZJ translation.
So, the yao denotes an area “above the kua, below the ribs.”
Great, then my horizontal line for torso rotation just above the hip joint in line with the center of gravity is in the right general area.
I do have a problem with YZJ's interpretation of the waist leading the movement of all FOUR limbs.
When he says "rather all involve the waist’s leading of the four limbs in rotations" this is an unusual take on,
"“It is rooted in the feet, issued by the legs, governed by the waist, and expressed in the fingers.”
The waist doesn't govern the feet and legs, does it?
In your example re the movements in the yao this movement is caused by moving the upper torso. The upper torso is leading, not the waist.
It is precisely this sort of tension that is eliminated by not moving the upper torso, by moving the whole torso from the hip-joint.
Sorting out what does what when the body moves is really difficult.
The pdf file that I posted a link to tried to address this issue for the medical community.
When I quoted from that other site:
“Yang Zhenji learned from his father that THE WAIST IS LOCATED JUST ABOVE THE HIPS. Because of this it can turn while the hips and knees remain fixed in place."
This was a false statement? When YZJ uses yao he is refering to the whole area between the kua and the ribs?
Ron
Thanks for the YZJ translation.
So, the yao denotes an area “above the kua, below the ribs.”
Great, then my horizontal line for torso rotation just above the hip joint in line with the center of gravity is in the right general area.
I do have a problem with YZJ's interpretation of the waist leading the movement of all FOUR limbs.
When he says "rather all involve the waist’s leading of the four limbs in rotations" this is an unusual take on,
"“It is rooted in the feet, issued by the legs, governed by the waist, and expressed in the fingers.”
The waist doesn't govern the feet and legs, does it?
In your example re the movements in the yao this movement is caused by moving the upper torso. The upper torso is leading, not the waist.
It is precisely this sort of tension that is eliminated by not moving the upper torso, by moving the whole torso from the hip-joint.
Sorting out what does what when the body moves is really difficult.
The pdf file that I posted a link to tried to address this issue for the medical community.
When I quoted from that other site:
“Yang Zhenji learned from his father that THE WAIST IS LOCATED JUST ABOVE THE HIPS. Because of this it can turn while the hips and knees remain fixed in place."
This was a false statement? When YZJ uses yao he is refering to the whole area between the kua and the ribs?
Ron
-
Louis Swaim
- Posts: 1390
- Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 7:01 am
- Location: Oakland, CA
Greetings Ron,
You wrote: “The waist doesn't govern the feet and legs, does it?”
I think that classically, yes, it does. When both legs are on the ground and the weight is shifting, the waist “governs” the exchange of empty and full throughout the process. The governing is a sort of feedback function. Furthermore, when one foot is off the ground and stepping (or as you said, doing ‘other stuff’), the waist plays a role in that too (psoas muscles!). Gu Liuxin wrote about this in the book he co-authored with Tang Hao, Taijiquan Yanjiu (Research into Taijiquan). Gu wrote, “This control of the turning transition in the legs and footwork is as though the waist allocates the refined inner strength (neigong) to the legs. This is what is meant by ‘The steps follow the torso’s changes’ (Mental Elucidation of the Thirteen Postures).” He goes on to quote Li Yiyu’s ‘Essentials of Practice of Form and Push Hands,’ “Above, the waist causes a mutual connection through the two arms, and below, a mutual according through the two kua and the legs.”
You wrote, “In your example re the movements in the yao this movement is caused by moving the upper torso. The upper torso is leading, not the waist.”
In terms of where the joint articulation occurs, yes. In terms of the whole sequence of movements in Single Whip described by Yang Zhenji, no. Temporally, the turning of the torso is an entailment of the waist’s lead. In the sequence, the waist turns with the kua, the kua stops, and the motion continues slightly in the upper torso.
My static magic marker example was just meant to illustrate that the yao moves concurrently with torso rotation, but in taiji movment, the torso rotation follows the yao’s lead.
You wrote: “It is precisely this sort of tension that is eliminated by not moving the upper torso, by moving the whole torso from the hip-joint.”
Why would torso rotation automatically entail tension? It’s natural movement. Isn’t that how we walk? Happens all the time. Moreover, Yang Zhenji specifically proscribes turning the torso to the point of tension.
As for the quote you cited from the other site, “. . .LOCATED JUST ABOVE THE HIPS. . . ,” I don’t recall reading anything directly from Yang Zhenji exactly like that. I think again that this may be paraphrase, or he may have meant that this is where the waist begins. I can’t know. The yao encompasses a lot. There’s a whole world going on there.
Take care,
Louis
You wrote: “The waist doesn't govern the feet and legs, does it?”
I think that classically, yes, it does. When both legs are on the ground and the weight is shifting, the waist “governs” the exchange of empty and full throughout the process. The governing is a sort of feedback function. Furthermore, when one foot is off the ground and stepping (or as you said, doing ‘other stuff’), the waist plays a role in that too (psoas muscles!). Gu Liuxin wrote about this in the book he co-authored with Tang Hao, Taijiquan Yanjiu (Research into Taijiquan). Gu wrote, “This control of the turning transition in the legs and footwork is as though the waist allocates the refined inner strength (neigong) to the legs. This is what is meant by ‘The steps follow the torso’s changes’ (Mental Elucidation of the Thirteen Postures).” He goes on to quote Li Yiyu’s ‘Essentials of Practice of Form and Push Hands,’ “Above, the waist causes a mutual connection through the two arms, and below, a mutual according through the two kua and the legs.”
You wrote, “In your example re the movements in the yao this movement is caused by moving the upper torso. The upper torso is leading, not the waist.”
In terms of where the joint articulation occurs, yes. In terms of the whole sequence of movements in Single Whip described by Yang Zhenji, no. Temporally, the turning of the torso is an entailment of the waist’s lead. In the sequence, the waist turns with the kua, the kua stops, and the motion continues slightly in the upper torso.
My static magic marker example was just meant to illustrate that the yao moves concurrently with torso rotation, but in taiji movment, the torso rotation follows the yao’s lead.
You wrote: “It is precisely this sort of tension that is eliminated by not moving the upper torso, by moving the whole torso from the hip-joint.”
Why would torso rotation automatically entail tension? It’s natural movement. Isn’t that how we walk? Happens all the time. Moreover, Yang Zhenji specifically proscribes turning the torso to the point of tension.
As for the quote you cited from the other site, “. . .LOCATED JUST ABOVE THE HIPS. . . ,” I don’t recall reading anything directly from Yang Zhenji exactly like that. I think again that this may be paraphrase, or he may have meant that this is where the waist begins. I can’t know. The yao encompasses a lot. There’s a whole world going on there.
Take care,
Louis
Hi Everybody,
There seems to be two different issues here. One is the issue of turning the spine correctly, and the other is the meaning of the words.
Simply because the lower half of the waist turn is still doesn't mean that it isn't an active part of a waist turn.
It's similar to holding a bottle still with one hand while unscrewing the cap with the other hand.
Ron,
During the last few years there have been several discussions about kinesthetics, including walking. Have you browsed the archive?
David J
There seems to be two different issues here. One is the issue of turning the spine correctly, and the other is the meaning of the words.
Simply because the lower half of the waist turn is still doesn't mean that it isn't an active part of a waist turn.
It's similar to holding a bottle still with one hand while unscrewing the cap with the other hand.
Ron,
During the last few years there have been several discussions about kinesthetics, including walking. Have you browsed the archive?
David J
-
RonKreshmar
- Posts: 41
- Joined: Sat May 10, 2003 6:01 am
- Location: Nanaimo, B.C.
Hi David,
Yes, one is an issue of knowing how and the other is an issue of knowing what. Knowing what is verbal, knowing how, in the sense of knowing how to do it, will require doing it.
When the lower half of the waist, the hips, based on the meaning of yao as both hips and lumbar area, is still, then if the upper part
TURNS, between the hips and the chest,it is through UPPER TORSO turning.
If the lumbar spine TURNS because the lower part is fixed it is because the range of momement of the upper spine has been exceeded and torque from that excess is being applied to the UPPER waist.
"Rotation between lumbar vertebrae reaches approximately only 0.03 degrees and lumabr discs are very suceptable to the effects of excessive rotational stresses (Farfan 1970)."
The lower part of the waist ROTATES on the FEMUR. The upper part of the waist because fused to the hips by the sacrum rotates along with the lower part BUT its ROTATION is passive. Its riding along with the pelvis is due to the THORACIC spine function to allow this rotation without rotating the LUMBAR spine on its own axis.
So, if the LUMBAR spine is made to rotate around its own axis it will be damaged if the turn exceeds .O3 degrees. A very small margin, with very damaging results if exceeded.
This is what THORACIC, upper torso does when it exceeds its own safe range of movement of about 11 degrees. 11 degrees is a very small arc. In normal walking it is not exceeded. That what it is designed for.
But if done in another activity, GOLF, is one the commonest ones, damage has to carefully avoided.
Steven mentioned that if one builds up the muscles in order to allow these skill type movements everything is ok.
YES. But, Tai Chi folks, don't spent time building up their lats, obliques etc. just to protect them from that iddy biddy little upper torso turning while doing the form.
Not even when some well meaning person says well YZJ says you got use this upper torso turning for explosive movements.
What this is similar to is holding a bottle still and screwing the cap ON, Not OFF, till the bottle is damaged.
Find a bottle that will only allow .O3 degrees of movement and turn it past the .O3 degrees. Use an empty bottle, no use waisting the contents.
This anatomy is difficult to figure out. Takes time.
In a different context, but related, I have permanently damaged my lumbar spine from doing SWEEP LOTUS too often and at too high an angle. The result is SCIATICA.
As it happens the femur is attached to the lumbar spine via the PSOAS. IF the range of safe motion of the PSOAS is exceeded it, during an eccentric contraction at that stage, will transfer all the torque, rotational force, to the other end, the LUMBAR spine.
It is this that has given me the time to find out what happened.
Take care,
Ron
Yes, one is an issue of knowing how and the other is an issue of knowing what. Knowing what is verbal, knowing how, in the sense of knowing how to do it, will require doing it.
When the lower half of the waist, the hips, based on the meaning of yao as both hips and lumbar area, is still, then if the upper part
TURNS, between the hips and the chest,it is through UPPER TORSO turning.
If the lumbar spine TURNS because the lower part is fixed it is because the range of momement of the upper spine has been exceeded and torque from that excess is being applied to the UPPER waist.
"Rotation between lumbar vertebrae reaches approximately only 0.03 degrees and lumabr discs are very suceptable to the effects of excessive rotational stresses (Farfan 1970)."
The lower part of the waist ROTATES on the FEMUR. The upper part of the waist because fused to the hips by the sacrum rotates along with the lower part BUT its ROTATION is passive. Its riding along with the pelvis is due to the THORACIC spine function to allow this rotation without rotating the LUMBAR spine on its own axis.
So, if the LUMBAR spine is made to rotate around its own axis it will be damaged if the turn exceeds .O3 degrees. A very small margin, with very damaging results if exceeded.
This is what THORACIC, upper torso does when it exceeds its own safe range of movement of about 11 degrees. 11 degrees is a very small arc. In normal walking it is not exceeded. That what it is designed for.
But if done in another activity, GOLF, is one the commonest ones, damage has to carefully avoided.
Steven mentioned that if one builds up the muscles in order to allow these skill type movements everything is ok.
YES. But, Tai Chi folks, don't spent time building up their lats, obliques etc. just to protect them from that iddy biddy little upper torso turning while doing the form.
Not even when some well meaning person says well YZJ says you got use this upper torso turning for explosive movements.
What this is similar to is holding a bottle still and screwing the cap ON, Not OFF, till the bottle is damaged.
Find a bottle that will only allow .O3 degrees of movement and turn it past the .O3 degrees. Use an empty bottle, no use waisting the contents.
This anatomy is difficult to figure out. Takes time.
In a different context, but related, I have permanently damaged my lumbar spine from doing SWEEP LOTUS too often and at too high an angle. The result is SCIATICA.
As it happens the femur is attached to the lumbar spine via the PSOAS. IF the range of safe motion of the PSOAS is exceeded it, during an eccentric contraction at that stage, will transfer all the torque, rotational force, to the other end, the LUMBAR spine.
It is this that has given me the time to find out what happened.
Take care,
Ron
Hi Ron,
you wrote:
"When he [YZJ] says "rather all involve the waist’s leading of the four limbs in rotations" this is an unusual take on,
"“It is rooted in the feet, issued by the legs, governed by the waist, and expressed in the fingers.” "
Hmm, I don't see why. Of course, it hinges on one's definition/interpretation of "governed." A "governor" is usually a "leader." And, even in your interpretation, the "legs" feet don't lead. W.C.C. Chen (iirc) does see the legs/thighs as the primary 'movers/turners/shakers.' Indeed, ime, most tcc theory requires that movement *not* be initiated or led by the upper body. (But, we can then debate what is meant by upper-body. The yao connects it to the lower body, but the yao isn't *it.* At least, imho.
You also wrote:
"The waist doesn't govern the feet and legs, does it?"
Well, yes it does. There was an example I considered giving a few post ago, but I thought it was unnecessary because of some of the other comments you made. That is: walking without an articulation at the approximate "center" of our bodies is inefficient, besides being awkward. Whatever we call that central region, if it does not move, the rest of the body won't. To step, one must must the waist to lift the foot. Flexing the leg muscles will not move one from a standstill. The waist, besides initiating the movement, also "governs" that movement. You can make a counter example of arm movements, but, if the waist doesn't move and the arms do, then it's just localized muscular power.
Further, you wrote:
"In your example re the movements in the yao this movement is caused by moving the upper torso. The upper torso is leading, not the waist."
I think this is, as David J. suggested, a matter of the fineness of the language. The "shoulders" should not lead any movements, and neither should the chest. I think, more importantly, that the "idea" or "intention" to move should not be located anywhere in the "upper" part of the body.
Well, according to the tcc theory that I am familiar with. Of course, there are other interpretations.
Best,
Steve James
you wrote:
"When he [YZJ] says "rather all involve the waist’s leading of the four limbs in rotations" this is an unusual take on,
"“It is rooted in the feet, issued by the legs, governed by the waist, and expressed in the fingers.” "
Hmm, I don't see why. Of course, it hinges on one's definition/interpretation of "governed." A "governor" is usually a "leader." And, even in your interpretation, the "legs" feet don't lead. W.C.C. Chen (iirc) does see the legs/thighs as the primary 'movers/turners/shakers.' Indeed, ime, most tcc theory requires that movement *not* be initiated or led by the upper body. (But, we can then debate what is meant by upper-body. The yao connects it to the lower body, but the yao isn't *it.* At least, imho.
You also wrote:
"The waist doesn't govern the feet and legs, does it?"
Well, yes it does. There was an example I considered giving a few post ago, but I thought it was unnecessary because of some of the other comments you made. That is: walking without an articulation at the approximate "center" of our bodies is inefficient, besides being awkward. Whatever we call that central region, if it does not move, the rest of the body won't. To step, one must must the waist to lift the foot. Flexing the leg muscles will not move one from a standstill. The waist, besides initiating the movement, also "governs" that movement. You can make a counter example of arm movements, but, if the waist doesn't move and the arms do, then it's just localized muscular power.
Further, you wrote:
"In your example re the movements in the yao this movement is caused by moving the upper torso. The upper torso is leading, not the waist."
I think this is, as David J. suggested, a matter of the fineness of the language. The "shoulders" should not lead any movements, and neither should the chest. I think, more importantly, that the "idea" or "intention" to move should not be located anywhere in the "upper" part of the body.
Well, according to the tcc theory that I am familiar with. Of course, there are other interpretations.
Best,
Steve James
-
RonKreshmar
- Posts: 41
- Joined: Sat May 10, 2003 6:01 am
- Location: Nanaimo, B.C.
Hi Steve,
This is what makes the classics so interesting as well as endlessly frustrating.
""“It is rooted in the feet, issued by the legs, governed by the waist, and expressed in the fingers.” "
Does the waist, the yao, govern both legs?
It is the fact that one leg is fixed, rooted, like a post, bearing all the weight of the body that allow the hips to pivot on the femur so as to let the other leg move in its swing phase.
How that moving leg moves while rotating in its hip joint is governed by the waist only in the sense that it provides the connection, and the muscles, and will impose a limitation on that moving leg's range of movement. But within those restrictions, the way the moving leg moves is due to intent.
In ordinary walking, no attention is paid.
But in martial arts where the moving leg can do all sorts of stuff depending on purpose, it is the mind that leads.
I appreciate your and everyone else's input.
Interpretations will vary.
I get a little bit troubled when it seems that different interpretations are held to make no differences that may be important.
My contribution to this thread is pretty well complete.
I wished to raise a red flag based on what was had been said at the time I posted.
And I was suggesting that re the classics when it comes to chosing what they mean that in making those choices some knowledge of anatomy, kinesiology, and yes, even, proprioceptive kinesthesis would be relevant.
This suggestion can be rejected.
At the beginning most of us learn just by doing what we are told. It takes time to see the relevance of all that other stuff to doing Tai Chi and even more time to learn it so as to apply it.
Ron
This is what makes the classics so interesting as well as endlessly frustrating.
""“It is rooted in the feet, issued by the legs, governed by the waist, and expressed in the fingers.” "
Does the waist, the yao, govern both legs?
It is the fact that one leg is fixed, rooted, like a post, bearing all the weight of the body that allow the hips to pivot on the femur so as to let the other leg move in its swing phase.
How that moving leg moves while rotating in its hip joint is governed by the waist only in the sense that it provides the connection, and the muscles, and will impose a limitation on that moving leg's range of movement. But within those restrictions, the way the moving leg moves is due to intent.
In ordinary walking, no attention is paid.
But in martial arts where the moving leg can do all sorts of stuff depending on purpose, it is the mind that leads.
I appreciate your and everyone else's input.
Interpretations will vary.
I get a little bit troubled when it seems that different interpretations are held to make no differences that may be important.
My contribution to this thread is pretty well complete.
I wished to raise a red flag based on what was had been said at the time I posted.
And I was suggesting that re the classics when it comes to chosing what they mean that in making those choices some knowledge of anatomy, kinesiology, and yes, even, proprioceptive kinesthesis would be relevant.
This suggestion can be rejected.
At the beginning most of us learn just by doing what we are told. It takes time to see the relevance of all that other stuff to doing Tai Chi and even more time to learn it so as to apply it.
Ron