If I may ask , why splitting the silk?

[wiesiek]

Tom,
From my limited experience, "silk reeling" exercise teach - "how to go internal" in training.
For > master blaster set< league , -
- "silk reeling" exercise is preliminary , or you can name it no. 1, on lost scrolls. Then, they are internally connected.
so
You can split them, or not, from the same reason
or
I have sick dream about it.

[amor]

Tom,
From my limited experience, "silk reeling" exercise teach - "how to go internal" in training.
For > master blaster set< league , -
- "silk reeling" exercise is preliminary , or you can name it no. 1, on lost scrolls. Then, they are internally connected.
so
You can split them, or not, from the same reason
or
I have sick dream about it.

I don't understand either but ever heard, if it aint broke don't fix it? Too much political correctness shit going on here don't ya think! Whats the rush now everyone will have his day to die

[wiesiek]

..." added in an element of personal animosity..."
then
I have to acclaim, that all descriptions given in my post/s/ is my personal feelings portrait and
by any means does not reflect the actual description of any living person.
And
In addition I have to add:
have any personal animosity, even for the Yak, /Władimir Władimirowicz not included/

[Drake]

Silk reeling is for *balanced power*. From the center outward with the same amount of force.

[Wuyizidi]

Chansi jin 纏丝劲 is usually translated as "silk reeling force" in English. In Taiji quan people also talk about Chousi 抽丝 - silk pulling. Maybe this is due to improperly explained translation, but a lot of time these terms cause problems.

At a basic level, we can say in Taiji Quan we want to acquire this ability where we are basically like a ball, so that any incoming force, unless it strikes us perfectly at the center when we are immobile, will naturally be rendered harmless (the force doesn't go through our body as intended) as the ball rotates automatically as result of an uncentered force. So when we say circular force in martial art, we don't mean it exactly in the mathematical sense that it's two dimensional. And it also doesn't have to be a perfect circle in the mathematical sense either, it could be an oval, etc. So there are really all kinds of circular forces. It's always been that way in Chinese martial art, it's just that Chen Village masters gave one type of circular force - the spiraling kind, a really cool name.

We just need to keep in mind all styles of Taiji quan has spiraling force to start with, also that it's not the only type of circular force we need to use in fighting. So Chansi Jin is not a unique feature of Chen Style taiji any more than opening and closing is a unique feature of Sun Style, it's just that, based on personal preference of the master, those particular aspects of the art get emphasized more in those groups.

Chousi 抽丝 - silk pulling is something else. In Taiji Quan classic the famous phrase is "mobilizing force as if pulling silk". Why pulling silk? When silk worm leaves behind the cocoon, the cocoon is first boiled in water, so that it looks like this. As we can see the thread is very thin. To get it we need to pull it out using a very gentle even force.



If we use too big a force, it will break. Or if we accelerate at any point, it can easily break also. So from beginning to end, we want to use just enough force to pull it out, but not enough to break it. We must pay attention at all times, making sure we're using the minimal amount of force necessary.

Pulling silk then is about how we practice the form. Part of the "relaxed slow smooth even, centered upright settled comfortable" requirement. Practicing the form this way, like standing, will eventually help us shed all unnecessary force and tension. When that happens we can truly feel what it means to sink qi into the ground. Sink Qi to the ground doesn't mean we are solidly bracing ourselves against the ground, in fighting it means no matter what part of the body the opponent's force lands on, that part is CONNECTED with your feet, and by subtly changing our physical contact with the ground, we solve the problem not by moving the contact area, but with our legs. Same is true when we use force, we don't want to raise our hand with the shoulder muscle alone, we want other parts to participate, the correct feeling is that the force is coming up from the ground (feet). Hence the old martial art adage "fighting is 70% legs and 30% hands".

That is the methodology for acquiring certain abilities, it doesn't mean whenever we fight, we can only use force this way, that sudden explosive force is not something we don't use in Taiji.

So silk reeling is just a relatively newfangled name for a type of circular force, and silk pulling is one the five basic requirements for forms practice.

[charles]

So silk reeling is just a relatively newfangled name for a type of circular force...

"Not so much". At the risk of splitting hairs, a circle is a two-dimensional figure: a spiral is three-dimensional. At least in Chen style Taijiquan, the actions of "silk reeling" are three dimensional spirals rather than two-dimensional "circles". "Silk reeling", at least in Chen style Taijiquan, is a specific method for coordinating the parts of the body: in traditional lingo, of directing "qi" from the dan tian to the extremities and back to the dan tian. The specifics of the physical implementation vary somewhat from one practitioner/teacher to another. Regardless of what "silk pulling" may or may not be, I've not met a skilled Chen style practitioner who has ever mentioned it as part of their training method.



Despite what seems to be commonly believed by those outside of Chen style, tracing (circular) Yin/Yang diagrams with one's hands or feet has nothing to do with "chan si jin" or the development thereof.

There really is nothing mysterious about "silk reeling". It's very simple, really, at least in principle.

[Bao]

"silk reeling is just a relatively newfangled name for a type of circular force"

The way I look at it and IME, there are two different things in Tai Chi that is called "reeling silk". One is Twisting Silk Reeling which is a Chen Style specific concept with style specific exercises. The other one is just Silk Reeling and is more or less prominent in different styles.

In Chen Style, is about developing twisting "energy" with the dantian as center. A certain "quality" or "type" of strength is developed from unbroken, connected movement, supported from a strong base and center.

In Tai Chi in general, "reeling silk" has not much to do with twisting and circular movement at all. It's a way to practice drills and form with unbroken movement. When you practice form in a slow manner, you should move in a very, very careful manner. You should be aware of your whole body and the movement of every mm of your movement, just as you were physically reeling the thinnest, weakest silk thread from a silk coccoon (/pupa or what's it called in English). There's a very strong focus involved, so you don't tense up or shake, quiver or flicker. Every slight, unintentional movement ever so small, will break the silk thread.

This is IMHO the real meaning of "reeling silk", but Chen style has translated the same quality to mean a circular movement which involves twisting of the whole body. For tai chi in general, "reeling silk" is one or several ways to practice tai chi which is the real health art of tai chi, i.e., it's a muscular and neurological exercise which benefit the brain functions and the whole nervous system. For martial art, both methods of practice, the Chen style specific and Tai Chi general, are ways to develop real "quality of movement", something that the eyes of an uninitiated won't be able to explain, yet something that through diligent practice always will shine through whatever kind of movement the practitioner does, even from a straight punch or a simple kick.

[cdobe]

"Not so much". At the risk of splitting hairs, a circle is a two-dimensional figure: a spiral is three-dimensional. At least in Chen style Taijiquan, the actions of "silk reeling" are three dimensional spirals rather than two-dimensional "circles".

Actually a spiral is two-dimensional, although it is so often confused with a helix or vortex that some dictionaries see those as legitimate synonyms. They are not. It reminds me of people who call all different, clearly distinguishable connective tissues fascia. Clarity is lost, when speaking this way.
There are different kinds of spirals, but they are all "flat". When you add the third dimension it becomes something else. It is also important to precise in your descriptions. The actions themselves are not a spiral or helix. They could follow a spiral or helical path. Or, at least in your imagination, your tissues could wind around an axis, to become a helical structure, like a twisted towel.

[charles]

Actually a spiral is two-dimensional, although it is so often confused with a helix or vortex that some dictionaries see those as legitimate synonyms. They are not. It reminds me of people who call all different, clearly distinguishable connective tissues fascia. Clarity is lost, when speaking this way.
There are different kinds of spirals, but they are all "flat". When you add the third dimension it becomes something else. It is also important to precise in your descriptions. The actions themselves are not a spiral or helix. They could follow a spiral or helical path. Or, at least in your imagination, your tissues could wind around an axis, to become a helical structure, like a twisted towel.

Thank you for the clarification/correction.

In Chen Taijiquan, "stuff" is either twisted and extended then untwisted and retracted, or the opposite, twisted and retracted then untwisted and extended. Generally, actions are not planar.

[WVMark]

"Not so much". At the risk of splitting hairs, a circle is a two-dimensional figure: a spiral is three-dimensional. At least in Chen style Taijiquan, the actions of "silk reeling" are three dimensional spirals rather than two-dimensional "circles".

Actually a spiral is two-dimensional, although it is so often confused with a helix or vortex that some dictionaries see those as legitimate synonyms.

A lot of people disagree with your interpretation of a spiral only being 2D. In fact, it's defined in most dictionaries as also being 3D. A spiral is three-dimensional when talked about in most martial arts, not two-dimensional.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/spiral
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/spiral?s=t
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/spiral

[Steve James]

Fwiw, I think ya'll are talking about several different concepts of spiral at the same time. The universe is spatially 3D (or 4D, if time is considered). Nothing is 2D, not even an atom. However, cdobe's description of spirals as 2D is accurate for mathematics or geometry, where concepts are written or drawn on paper. So, for all purposes, a "spiral" drawn on a piece of paper is "2D" and there is a clear difference between a spiral and a circle: one being the description of a point that travels in space and returns to its origin -while maintaining the exact same distance from a center; and the other being the description of a point that travels with an ever increasing or decreasing distance from a center. Imo, it's the movement of the point that's important, not the geometrical difference between spiral/helix and circles/parabola.

In the world, take any length of rope and coil it flat on the ground. It forms a spiral. Pick it up from the center; it will form a spiral. Take it and wrap it around a cylinder; it will form a spiral. Now, in this sense, the difference between spirals and circles is that circles are always finite because they must be stationary. Once they are moving in space, even a circular movement will be a spiral.

[wayne hansen]

I think all styles use twisting of silk
It is just more obvious in Chen
Take the punch in back fist parry
Palm up on right hip
Palm down on delivery a basic example of twisting

[vagabond]

thanks, guys! i'm better at tai chi already!!

[cdobe]

Actually a spiral is two-dimensional, although it is so often confused with a helix or vortex that some dictionaries see those as legitimate synonyms. They are not. It reminds me of people who call all different, clearly distinguishable connective tissues fascia. Clarity is lost, when speaking this way.
There are different kinds of spirals, but they are all "flat". When you add the third dimension it becomes something else. It is also important to precise in your descriptions. The actions themselves are not a spiral or helix. They could follow a spiral or helical path. Or, at least in your imagination, your tissues could wind around an axis, to become a helical structure, like a twisted towel.

Thank you for the clarification/correction.

In Chen Taijiquan, "stuff" is either twisted and extended then untwisted and retracted, or the opposite, twisted and retracted then untwisted and extended. Generally, actions are not planar.

Thank you for your open-mindedness

[cdobe]

"Not so much". At the risk of splitting hairs, a circle is a two-dimensional figure: a spiral is three-dimensional. At least in Chen style Taijiquan, the actions of "silk reeling" are three dimensional spirals rather than two-dimensional "circles".

Actually a spiral is two-dimensional, although it is so often confused with a helix or vortex that some dictionaries see those as legitimate synonyms.

A lot of people disagree with your interpretation of a spiral only being 2D. In fact, it's defined in most dictionaries as also being 3D. A spiral is three-dimensional when talked about in most martial arts, not two-dimensional.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/spiral
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/spiral?s=t
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/spiral

The dictionaries record how people use these words. Many people have wrong ideas and concepts and it gets perpetuated until the mistake becomes "common knowledge". This is a spiral:

This is another one:


If you add another dimension it becomes a helix


Its projection is a spiral. Why would you insist on using the word spiral when another word describes your ideas more accurately?