Yang Family Tai Chi Discussion Board

Hi everyone,

A new poster here, nice to meet you all . Just wanted to share my own thoughts on how to Relax in Tai Chi, and would love to hear feedback.

Relaxation & Tai Chi: Muscles
Muscles that are under our conscious control are called voluntary muscles, and this is our Skeletal Muscles. In order to be in a relaxed state, we are teaching our skeletal muscles to not contract. We call this the Mind-Muscle Connection.

We are already aware of what it means to have some of our Skeletal Muscles to be in a Relaxed state. In daily life, we use skeletal muscles in pairs: when one muscle contracts, the other muscle pair will be relaxed. In other words, a muscle that is not contracted is in a relaxed state.

What if we could make both pairs of muscles relaxed? To me, having two pairs of muscles in a relaxed state is what we're aiming for in Tai Chi.

One of the Tai Chi principles is to not use Brute Force (拙力). We want to develop our Body Awareness to experience relaxed Skeletal Muscles. That is, we are reconditioning our mind to refrain from giving instructions to contract our Muscles in our body (i.e. abstaining from transmitting instructions through our Central Nervous System to our muscles). We are re-calibrating our Mind-Muscle Connection.

Many people unconsciously give instructions to our skeletal muscles to contract because we have been conditioned to stabilize our body with our muscles. As soon as our nerves transmits the signals to our Skeletal Muscles to contract, there is less room in our blood vessels, resulting in increased blood pressure and/or decreased blood circulation.

In Tai Chi, we want to increase our blood flow without contracting our muscles. How do we do this? There are some pre-requisites that we have to achieve first, such as having a Stable Body Structure. With a Stable Body Structure, we can effectively put our body weight directly onto our bones/skeletons, so that our Skeletal Muscles don't need to bear our body weight.

Conclusion

By being relaxed can we increase blood circulation. We can further leverage this by relying on Gravity to act on our body to increase our blood circulation.... though the prerequisite is that we have a Stable Body Structure... though this may be a topic for another time

Hoping to improve my Tai Chi with everyone else here, so looking forward to any feedback. I've attempted to elaborate my understanding here: http://www.dottaichi.com/lesson06.html

dottaichi,
Welcome.

And...
Close.
You are so much closer to how "Sung" works than anyone I've seen in a long time that I am flat out amazed.
Only one thing that I would say is "incorrect", not wrong that's something entirely different.
Here it is: "having two pairs of muscles in a relaxed state is what we're aiming for in Tai Chi".
Actually that's not physically possible, one muscle has to expand and the other has to contract. That's how it works, no way around it.
However, here's how I state it and have been able to show that it works to anyone I can actually touch for about three decades now:
"Only think of the expansion."
You can't stop muscles from contracting, simply not a physical possibility and it also flies directly in the face of Yin/Yang theory but we'll leave that discussion for another day.
What you can do though is keep it from contracting by using unnecessary tension, the way to do that is to only think about the side that is expanding.
The applicable statement here is: "Chi follows mind intent".
If you don't have the intent to contract using tension, then you won't.
The muscle will still contract, it has to, but without using unnecessary tension to do so.

Still...
Your theory is so close to correct that I have to give major kudos to your teacher.
Not many people are willing to teach that particular bit, mostly because almost no one believes them.
I have learned that the only way to "prove" that it works is...
To actually apply against the student using the method and have them try to actively resist.
They never can.
Even then...
Most people won't believe that what you're telling them will work, I've had many students who have laughed out loud at the very idea even after feeling it for themselves.
What can you do?
I just smile and move on.
Which is about all you can do.

Cheers,

Bob Bu Hao (and how!)

It was asked the students to be song(鬆) during Tai Chi practice. What it means is when an arm or leg was raised, the lifting force should be at a minimal. The muscles will be slightly contracted with no excess of force applied. In other words, all the forces in the body muscles are at minimal. It is impossible not to contract the muscles, in any way, while one is standing up. So, just relax and let the movements flow.

One moves too fast cannot achieve relaxation. The key to accomplish relaxation of the muscles is required by the slow motion in Tai Chi practice.

In regard to blood circulation, it depends on how strong the heart is. The blood leaves the heart through the arteries and return through the veins. A strong heart give a good squeeze to release the blood to the arteries. In this case, gravity is aiding the blood circulation. However, on the other hand, blood returning to the heart in the veins moving upward which is against gravity. In Tao Chi, when the legs muscles contract, it will aid the blood return to the heart more quickly. Indeed, this will help to reduce the stress of the heart.

Well, you have gone through a lot of work searching through modern knowledge for things that seem to support the ideas that you hold, but I think that you have a rather simplistic understanding of your sources, and a rather unrealistically idealized view from Taijiquan.

You are attempting to strengthen your ideas about “relaxation” in Taijiquan by proposing “To me, having two pairs of muscles [i.e., the flexors and extensors, e.g. the biceps and triceps] in a relaxed state is what we're aiming for in Tai Chi.” among other things. I realize that “Relax!” has become something of a mantra in Taijiquan, but this leads to a too simplistic an understanding for most practitioners, who probably only have a layman’s understanding of scientific disciplines like anatomy and physiology. I suspect that your explorations will only reinforce mistaken interpretations of what may actually be going on.

When thinking about organizing explanations of Taijiquan using modern knowledge, one should search as diligently for things that may be contrary to what is proposed, and not solely focus on finding apparent supporting information. Focusing on the latter only makes the information seem incomplete and unreliable.

For example, let’s assume that it is possible to be too tense, too stiff, using too much muscle... Since I think that likely all of us do agree with this, let’s move on. Next, one should ask, is it possible to be too relaxed, too slack, not use enough muscle? Are there negative consequences to being too relaxed? From your presentation, it does not appear that you have explored this side of the situation.

Even though I have not extensively explored the topic, there are things that I can point out, just from the limited knowledge that I have and off the top of my head. First, the most relaxed that we can get muscles to be would be by using anesthesia. For our purposes, let’s propose applying the anesthesia locally so that we remain fully conscious and alert. If the anesthesia relaxes both “pairs of muscles” in a certain place in our body, the muscles will relax without impairing the blood flow, and by extension, Qi flow (although this can be debatable – the arm is not dying, but it also loses its animating force even though the blood flow there could be increased due to the relaxation of the musculature... I do not know the Chinese viewpoint on how anesthesia affects Qi). However, the anesthetized part of our body would no longer function – an arm will hang limp, a leg could not bear one’s weight, etc.; it would certainly not be capable of receiving or neutralizing an opponent’s force, or deflecting that force...

“What if we could make both pairs of muscles relaxed?” Well, if anesthesia is an indicator, then we would collapse!

Now, I realize that most of us know of situations where it does not seem like one is using a lot of muscular strength; situations like when a wiry laborer produces a lot of force even though they may not have bulky muscles, or we have experienced something like the “unbendable arm” where it does not seem like we are using much muscular tension but can still negate forces applied to us. So what is going on? If it does not seem to be noticeable increases in muscular contractions that account for the resistance, then we end up guessing about other possibilities. Perhaps it is tendons and ligaments instead of muscles; perhaps it is Qi, perhaps intent, perhaps fascia...

If one cannot use the arm in the way that is expected for Taijiquan when that arm is anesthetized, then that indicates that something that is relaxed (e.g., muscles) under that condition is responsible for how we use our arms in Taijiquan. Local anesthesia does not seem to affect our mental functions, so “intent” is unable to explain our ability to hold our structure. Tendons and ligaments also seem unlikely, although there may be an effect on them from the anesthesia. Fascia also seems unlikely, although there are some muscle fibers within the fascia that would be affected by the anesthesia; the normally proposed mechanism is that fascia is like a stretchy web that may tend to resist being pulled out of position. What is left, and seems to be the most likely, is muscles!

If we rely on muscles to hold our structure, then how much “relaxation” is possible while maintaining our structural integrity? I know of a local TJQ practitioner who has such loose joints that she makes a perfect practice partner for qinna since she essentially cannot be hurt by trying to lock her joints. But she needed braces to aid in supporting her when she was young, and needed to go through intensive physical therapy to get to the point where she could function unaided. This was too slack/weak/relaxed for the muscles.

Under anesthesia, joints have a greater range of movement than when a person can use them under conscious control. This would seem to indicate that we are holding tensions that could be released for greater flexibility (i.e., greater relaxation). However, there is a necessary protective level of tension that we should retain in order to protect our joints from hyperextension and other injuries from having an excessive range of motion, especially when under load. I do not know what the minimum level of protective tension is needed, and it is likely less that the level of tension that most people retain, but it is not zero! We would not be able to function safely if muscle tonus gets too low.

I would love to better understand, in modern terminology, what is going on with properly applied TJQ principles, but I fear that your presentation is strictly one-sided, and not very useful for really understanding what is actually happening in TJQ. Better research into contrary possibilities would seem to be needed in order to make your presentation useful.

Is it possible to be too limp? Yep.
"Too limp" is the opposite of "too stiff" and Taiji theory applies here, telling us too much of either is less than desirable.
"Neither too much nor not enough" is the method we want to follow, since this applies to everything it should be clear that too much of either limp or stiff is not good, at the same time getting across the idea that we will need to apply some of both or we risk running into "not enough", which is also not good.

I've seen literally dozens of Masters and instructors from various schols who teach the idea of being too limp and why it's not desirable, however I do have to say that Yang Jun does it with the most panache of all of them.
His demonstration of "too limp" never fails to deliver the message.
And it's entertaining, every time.
I won't steal his thunder, so I'll just recommend to anyone who hasn't seen it that you attend one of his seminars and see it for yourself.

Greetings all,

This is a difficult subject to discuss and to understand. It is difficult first because different teachers seems to have a different understanding of what it is. It is also difficult because different teachers seem to have a different understanding of how to describe it. Thirdly, it is difficult because different teachers seem to have a different understanding of how to teach it. Lastly, it is difficult because for some the idea of “relaxing” is consistent with what they do in their daily movement and for others it is something quite different.

Hoping to improve my Tai Chi with everyone else here, so looking forward to any feedback. I've attempted to elaborate my understanding here: http://www.dottaichi.com/lesson06.html

After following the link and looking at the website, it seems to me that what results from this theory of relaxation is good Tai Chi and an effective method to teach it. However, my understanding of the scientific principles involved in my Tai Chi is closer to what DPasek and Bob have expressed.

It was asked the students to be song(鬆) during Tai Chi practice. What it means is when an arm or leg was raised, the lifting force should be at a minimal. The muscles will be slightly contracted with no excess of force applied. In other words, all the forces in the body muscles are at minimal. It is impossible not to contract the muscles, in any way, while one is standing up. So, just relax and let the movements flow.

Above is another view of what “relaxation”/鬆 entails. I think it is a widespread view that many people also use to achieve good Tai Chi.

In my view, the Association teaches a method that is different from both methods referenced above. I don’t want to discuss what is right or wrong or what is or is not good Tai Chi, but here is a link to a short interview with Master Yang says about “relaxation” that mls_72 shared a few years ago on the site : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aiv8QVISwI4

The entire interview is well worth listening to, but note in particular what he says and does around time index 5:11 and 6:14. I point out these moments because I think they most clearly express a method that is different from either “not contracting any muscle” or “using only minimal lifting force.” Again, I cannot say what way is right or wrong for all practitioners, but I do want to be clear about what is different.

Take care,
Audi

It is very important for a Taiji beginner to know what is song(鬆) on day one. Without going into a lengthy wordy explanation, it is much easier to ask the student to relax the muscle and pick up a five pound dumb-bell. If the student is proudly picked up the dumb-bell, then the student was not relaxed. It is because he was intentionally contracted the muscles to do so. However, if the student was fully relaxed, then the dumb-bell wouldn't have been able to be picked up. That is the difference between the states of relax and non-relax. It is just as simple as that.

Without the understanding of relaxation, the student will always be a karate expert or a boxer using brutal force in the movements. Relaxation can only be accomplished in slow motion as the basic requirement for Taiji. Here is another example of relaxation. If the teacher just rest the hands on the back of the student without pushing, then the teacher is in the song(鬆) state. If the teacher start pushing, then it is not in the song(鬆) state.

CD,
I have to disagree on your "weight couldn't be picked up if fully relaxed" statement.
Rather vehemently in fact.
I can lift five, ten, twenty, more pounds weights all day long and not use any unnecessary contraction to do so.
Relaxation and weakness are not equivalent in any way.
One can be fully relaxed and move a whole lot of weight...
If one knows how.
Being relaxed does not mean that you are incapable of doing things, it means you can move the energy and use it to do things without using unnecessary contraction.
It is a method that is very, very difficult to learn.
But not because it's hard to do, it's demonstrably not, it's hard to learn simply become almost no one believes it will work.
That is why most fail to learn it.

Yang Jun, in the video linked by Audi above, talks about "the whip" and how it's softness along the length of its thong allows a smooth and even transfer of energy to the tip.
That is a very good analogy, the very same one that was used by my teacher when I first learned the concept in fact.
However the softness of the thong of a whip is only part of the story, there is another part on every whip that it is, in fact, stiff and that part is also required to make an energy transfer to the tip work, it's called the "handle".
The handle is kind of like the Yang to the thongs Yin... okay there's nothing "kind of" about it, that's how it works.
You see, the handle on every whip is made out of material that is more inflexible than the braided leather (or other material, I'm going to use leather since it's the most common) used for the thong, it can be made out of plastic, metal, wood, or even stiffened leather, but it is not soft and flexible because it can't be, in order for a whip to work the handle must be stiff.
The thong is very soft and pliable/the handle is is not.
Yin/Yang.
Each is required and without one the other, by itself, is ineffective.
To continue with the whip analogy to TCC energy transmission, there is also a "waist" analogy built into nearly every whip and it comprises two parts, one is known as a "transition" while the other is knows as a "keeper". The transition usually has a braided leather knot but it is purely decorative, the transition itself is the part of the thong immediately after the handle ends and while it starts out quite stiff it becomes progressively less stiff as it eventually segues into the softness of the thong. The keeper is what is used to connect the handle to the transition and is commonly referred to as a "hinge".
Since the "waist" is also known as the "hinge" in a lot of TCC terminology, I find that term to be quite apropos for the whip/tcc analogies.
But I digress...
Which is not at all unusual for me.

Bob Bu Hao (and how!)

Bob Ashmore wrote: ↑Mon Jul 30, 2018 6:11 pm CD,
I have to disagree on your "weight couldn't be picked up if fully relaxed" statement.
Rather vehemently in fact.
I can lift five, ten, twenty, more pounds weights all day long and not use any unnecessary contraction to do so.
Relaxation and weakness are not equivalent in any way.
One can be fully relaxed and move a whole lot of weight...
If one knows how.

Bob Bu Hao (and how!)

I think the OP has the right idea about the muscle relaxation. I will say no more.

I just think that the OP is inaccurate, and needs more research and understanding to be scientifically intelligible. What is written could possibly achieve the desired result, but that does not mean that the explanation is necessarily correct.

As an example that I hope readers can experience on their own, let me describe something that is related to what the OP addresses.

1) Rest your relaxed arm on a table or desk and lightly touch your biceps with your other hand so that you can feel when it tenses.
2) Raise your arm above the surface so that it is no longer supported, and is freely in the air.

Most people well feel muscles tense even before the arm lifts off of the surface! This could indicate unnecessary tension being directed to the arm in order to command it to raise from the desk. In agreement with the OP, one can likely also pay attention to that increase in tension in the biceps, and mentally will the arm to raise while minimizing or eliminating that tension. Most can probably do so with a little practice. Now, what is actually lifting the arm “without tensing the biceps?” I do not think that the OP accurately explains it.

3) Alternatively, repeat #1, but this time lift your arm by thinking about extending the arm up rather than “lifting” the arm up.

Most people will likely find it much easier to raise the arm, without noticeable tensing of the muscle, using the method given for #3 than they could for #2. They would also likely find that if they fell the triceps rather than the biceps (or fell both at the same time), neither the biceps nor the triceps would feel like it increases in tension. What is the difference between #2 and #3? Is the difference explainable through the information given in the OP? If not, then the OP explanation is probably inaccurate. It seems like neither the biceps nor the triceps is increasing in tension, yet the arm can be raised! Does this mean that the OP is therefore correct? No!

CD,
As I've often stated, "to each their own".
If you feel that method works for you then by all means use it.
I find it to be "close but no cigar" but if you find it effective then so be it.
Many people find "close but no cigar" to be enough for them as they move forward, no reason why you can't too.

Dpasek,
I'm going to steal that lesson from you...
I mean borrow, that's it, borrow.
It allows the method to be demonstrated in a way that doesn't involve touching the student, so the "high level magic" angle can't be thrown back at you.
Thanks.

Bob Ashmore wrote: ↑Thu Aug 02, 2018 2:10 pm Dpasek,
I'm going to steal that lesson from you...
I mean borrow, that's it, borrow.
It allows the method to be demonstrated in a way that doesn't involve touching the student, so the "high level magic" angle can't be thrown back at you.
Thanks.

We try to learn from all sources, and I willingly give the information that I post on this forum (and elsewhere on the www), so you and any other reader is welcome to any information that they find useful.

CD will probably not agree with this, but I think the described method not only eliminates the “high level magic” aspect, but also the “it’s qi” explanation. Most people can successfully do this without any knowledge of, or cultivation of, qi energy. The explanation for what actually underlies this demonstration is beyond my abilities, but there are many mental factors and habitual movement patterns that appear to come into play. Sometimes just providing a fresh start/perspective/method is enough for a student to catch on to a concept. Putting the concept into practice, especially consistently and through randomly changing situations, is much more difficult!

Hi, all

"To each their own" is fine but it's only "to each their own". I am having difficulty to swallow if it contradicts the basic principles.

Bob Ashmore wrote: ↑Mon Jul 30, 2018 10:11 am wrote: CD,
I can lift five, ten, twenty, more pounds weights all day long and not use any unnecessary contraction to do so.
Relaxation and weakness are not equivalent in any way.
One can be fully relaxed and move a whole lot of weight...

As far as I understand, body energy will be generated only when the muscles are contracted. Therefore, one can pick up at least half of the body weight of each individual. Of course, some may pick up more not to mention about the importance of breathing. Let's look at weight lifting. Has anyone noticed that the lifter has a belt around the wrist. What is the most important thing that all lifters do before lifting the weights? Well, they take a deep breath and hold it with abdomen fully expanded. However, the belt around the wrist is to aid the abdomen to hold the pressure in place. The object of weight lifting is to hold the weights with the arms for a certain period of time. As soon the time is up, the lifters just threw the weight down on the floor.

Has one ever seen they lay the weight down on the floor slowly? No, they do not! Why they don't do that? It is because that the body energy had been exhausted and out of breath. It means the body is out of oxygen; and muscles cannot generate anymore energy to support the weights. In other words, the muscles were relaxed and weak and no longer able to hold the weights.

Sorry, Bob, I cannot hold you responsible to substantiate your claim.

CD,

Well, you can interpret the weightlifter’s belt however you want, but the standard understanding is more like the following:
“The pressure inside the abdominal cavity pushes on the spine to support it from the inside, while the core muscles in the abdominal wall and lower back push on the spine from the outside. This inside and outside pressure acts to stabilize the spine and reduce the stress it receives when lifting heavy weights.”

Dropping the heavy weight simply uses less energy, and that would be my interpretation of why it is dropped rather than lowered (especially in competitions). But again, you can interpret it however you wish.

Not all TJQ practitioners view energy as oxygen like you seem to. Paul Brennan gives a translation of a 1958 book by Xu Zhili here (the original Chinese is also included):
https://brennantranslation.wordpress.co ... -xu-zhiyi/

What makes it confusing is simply the issue of “moving energy” and “using energy”, and what exactly this “energy” is. This is because the previous generations who produced these texts did not really have any understanding of the body’s nervous system in terms of its material substance – nerve center, nerve fibers, nerve endings – nor of how it actually works. They always thought that a person’s movement was generated internally by a kind of “energy” or “spirit”. The common notion of “the internal training of essence, energy, and spirit” is based on such an understanding.
　　However, based on our knowledge of physiology, this use of “energy” has nothing to do with the breathing of air [氣 meaning either “energy” or “air”, as well as a few other things, depending on the context] and is instead a matter of the nerve fibers and nerve endings throughout the body. The movements of the body, as well as the actions of the organs, take place after receiving commands from the nerve center. Clearly to “use mind to move energy” simply means to use intention, and then when we add “use energy to move your body”, we can say that intention and movement have a master-and-servant relationship.
　　Previous generations considered “energy” to be something beyond the nervous system, and therefore they divided the process into two parts [mind moves energy and then energy moves body, instead of just mind moves body] as a method of explaining how movement occurs. This is a point that needs to be clearly understood right from the start.

DPasek wrote: ↑Fri Aug 03, 2018 7:29 pm CD,

Well, you can interpret the weightlifter’s belt however you want, but the standard understanding is more like the following:
“The pressure inside the abdominal cavity pushes on the spine to support it from the inside, while the core muscles in the abdominal wall and lower back push on the spine from the outside. This inside and outside pressure acts to stabilize the spine and reduce the stress it receives when lifting heavy weights.”

Dropping the heavy weight simply uses less energy, and that would be my interpretation of why it is dropped rather than lowered (especially in competitions). But again, you can interpret it however you wish.

Not all TJQ practitioners view energy as oxygen like you seem to. Paul Brennan gives a translation of a 1958 book by Xu Zhili here (the original Chinese is also included):
https://brennantranslation.wordpress.co ... -xu-zhiyi/

It doesn't make it true or a fact.

“What makes it confusing is simply the issue of “moving energy” and “using energy”, and what exactly this “energy” is. This is because the previous generations who produced these texts did not really have any understanding of the body’s nervous system in terms of its material substance – nerve center, nerve fibers, nerve endings – nor of how it actually works. They always thought that a person’s movement was generated internally by a kind of “energy” or “spirit”. The common notion of “the internal training of essence, energy, and spirit” is based on such an understanding.
　　However, based on our knowledge of physiology, this use of “energy” has nothing to do with the breathing of air [氣 meaning either “energy” or “air”, as well as a few other things, depending on the context] and is instead a matter of the nerve fibers and nerve endings throughout the body. The movements of the body, as well as the actions of the organs, take place after receiving commands from the nerve center. Clearly to “use mind to move energy” simply means to use intention, and then when we add “use energy to move your body”, we can say that intention and movement have a master-and-servant relationship.
　　Previous generations considered “energy” to be something beyond the nervous system, and therefore they divided the process into two parts [mind moves energy and then energy moves body, instead of just mind moves body] as a method of explaining how movement occurs. This is a point that needs to be clearly understood right from the start.”

Well, as I recall that you have claimed you are a biochemist. However, I am surprised that you are making such statements; and believe what had been said in the past generation without justification. No offense!

PS What I was hoping is that more scientific concepts and terminologies were used from a biochemist to substantiate the arguments.