NoSword wrote:So when taiji people (and others, but taiji seems to emphasize this most strongly) 'step into the ground,' this is the same 'zhuangji li' that a boxer uses to power a cross?
D_Glenn wrote:I don't really understand what you guys are talking about.
NoSword wrote:I have one question: the way I was taught, it was never entirely clear to me whether the wave starts at the feet ('stepping into the ground') or in the coccyx region. I have gotten results with both. I remember someone -- I think it was Somatai -- posting a video of a Western taiji teacher in Thailand talking about two "pumps" -- the foot and the dantian. I'm not sure if this was what he was talking about?
AK
Miro wrote:...(because as old principle says: Jin has root in the feet, goes through legs, is directed by yao and expressed by hands and figers...). We do it naturally with legs because we stand on the ground (or sit on the chair etc.). So actually it starts in dantian (also because everything starts in dantian) but if you say that it starts in feet, the answer is correct too (reminding me the old question "What is the difference between yes and no?").
However, it is possible to do it also directly from dantian straight up to the fingers, but that is much more difficult and if someone can do it, it is quite high level. It is similar like what cat does when falling on the back - it can turn its body without "grounding" so that it lands on legs. That is where groundpath theory is incorrect, otherwise it is correct too.
D_Glenn wrote:That passage was written by 李亦畬 Li Yiyu and while it may be true for Li Style Taijiquan it's incorrect as far as I'm concerned.
The Classic Taijiquan texts attributed to 武禹襄 Wu Yuxiang are what I've found to be accurate and Li Yiyu's writings actually contradict Wu Yuxiang's.
D_Glenn wrote:Starting from the premise that "Jin Begin's at the foot's root,..." is self-limiting. How could one ever advanced past the basics and move onto higher levels of skill?
D_Glenn wrote:In our style of Baguazhang we start learning from the beginning that "The mind (xin) is the commander and the waist is the banner (used to signal the troops)"
D_Glenn wrote:The Waist/ Dantian is the root and origin of all movement in Baguazhang. The legs have to be doing their own thing because they're almost always striking the opponent's legs. "Legs strike 70%, the arms strike 30%."
Miro wrote:D_Glenn wrote:That passage was written by 李亦畬 Li Yiyu and while it may be true for Li Style Taijiquan it's incorrect as far as I'm concerned.
The Classic Taijiquan texts attributed to 武禹襄 Wu Yuxiang are what I've found to be accurate and Li Yiyu's writings actually contradict Wu Yuxiang's.
I do not think so but because you did not write where you see contradiction, it is pointless to discuss it...
We do it naturally with legs because we stand on the ground (or sit on the chair etc.). So actually it starts in dantian (also because everything starts in dantian) but if you say that it starts in feet, the answer is correct too (reminding me the old question "What is the difference between yes and no?").
However, it is possible to do it also directly from dantian straight up to the fingers, but that is much more difficult and if someone can do it, it is quite high level. It is similar like what cat does when falling on the back - it can turn its body without "grounding" so that it lands on legs. That is where groundpath theory is incorrect, otherwise it is correct too.
Miro wrote:D_Glenn wrote:Starting from the premise that "Jin Begin's at the foot's root,..." is self-limiting. How could one ever advanced past the basics and move onto higher levels of skill?
I do not understand your question, sorry. I also do not understand why should it be self-limiting... In math, one starts with simple calculus and then goes to differential equations and so on. The same is in IMA. Of course you can not skip calculus and go straight to differentials...
Miro wrote:D_Glenn wrote:In our style of Baguazhang we start learning from the beginning that "The mind (xin) is the commander and the waist is the banner (used to signal the troops)"
However, I personally prefer to translate xin as heart and yi as mind (or even better as intention because heart is without intention), there is a big difference between them - heart is something we can not influence directly and consciously (or only after long special training) while mind is more conscious volition, especially in IMA. I still do not understand why so many translators translate xin as heart/mind and can not see so big difference between heart and mind...
Miro wrote:However, I personally prefer to translate xin as heart and yi as mind (or even better as intention because heart is without intention), there is a big difference between them - heart is something we can not influence directly and consciously (or only after long special training) while mind is more conscious volition, especially in IMA. I still do not understand why so many translators translate xin as heart/mind and can not see so big difference between heart and mind...
Miro wrote:And finally, with regards to the description of forces, thanks, it is good description, but I prefer description in those stolen notes from Yang family.
D_Glenn wrote:C.J.W. wrote:From the point of view of a native Chinese speaker who practices IMA, I feel the explanations above regarding various types of "jins"( or powers)are much more understandable than obscurely written Chinese classical texts
Thanks CJW,
There were originally some Chinese definitions that followed those but they were so cryptic that I just decided to write my own definitions based upon my practices and understanding.
~ viewtopic.php?f=3&t=14901&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=29
Miro wrote:I do not think so but because you did not write where you see contradiction, it is pointless to discuss it -
發勁要有根源, 勁起於腳根,主宰 於腰,發於脊骨,形於手指。
Issuing (Fa) jin requires an origin; Jin starts at the root of the foot; Is controlled by the waist; Issued (Fa) by spine; Shaped by the hands and fingers.
neijia_boxer wrote:i havent really followed this much but the exercise that Mike Patterson was showing and what Pa Kua Chang Master- Park Bok Nam taught called "Dragon Back" looks pretty much the same. I found this video online of the Dragon back exercise.
Return to Xingyiquan - Baguazhang - Taijiquan
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 119 guests