Appledog wrote:phil b wrote:Appledog, Who did you study with?
Didn't I mention three times in the last three days I studied at Eddie Wu's school? Who's your teacher, where do YOU teach? Why is any of this relevant? I could literally make up names and it wouldn't make any difference.phil b wrote:Where do you teach?
You're welcome to drop by, I'm in Taiwan, let me know when your coming. You won't be the first person I met off the internet. Sometimes you make good friends, sometimes you don't, it depends what you want out of it I guess.You want to be taken seriously on here, stop trolling and answer some basic questions.
I prefer to be like windwalker. If you like it, or if you don't, I'm happy with where I am. How about you? Why should I take anything you have to say seriously? Why should anyone here trust anyone? Unless you've met in person and had a fight, anyone could be lying.
But then how do you know you're really doing tai chi, and not something else?
they don't want to do casual push hands they're living in another world from myself. I can't tell you what a joy it was to push hands with Henry Look and Wen Zee 25 years ago at the internationals.
Appledog wrote:Really? Chen Zhenglei said anyone who doesn't believe in "qi" isn't doing taijiquan. Given that Chen Xiao-Wang's own "five levels of kung fu" (see: http://www.shou-yi.org/taijiquan/5-leve ... -taijiquan) talks about qi extensively even in the first level though, I think your statement is probably in error. If CXW said that, can you provide a quote?
CXW told me that personally, along with the other people we were standing with. There was no misunderstanding and he is fluent in the English language. He was very clear about it. Feel free to ask him directly.
But I asked you why you think he wrote an article on the five levels of kungfu which mentions qi.
In his article he writes, "One may then achieve the stage of being able to use external movements to channel internal energy'. The first level kung fu thus begins with mastering the postures to gradually being able to detect and understand jin or force." This is pretty clear. If you are doing something else, how are you going to get past this first level of kungfu without learning how to channel the energy and understand jin?
charles wrote:Pick almost anything. Take the meaning of "double-heavy". Take the meaning of "peng". Take the "four ounces deflects 1000 lb" thing. Take the separation of Yin and Yang thing. Take the "release like an arrow from a bow" thing. And so on. What do these things mean? How does one implement them?
Those are just terms.
Can you give me an example where someone disagrees on the definition of double heavy?
I'd be sincerely interested if you could come up with an example. I can't find any, and I have a very extensive collection of Tai Chi magazine.
None of those squabbles involve the basic principles of tai chi.
You can take a CMC guy and a CXW guy and they do basically the same thing once you get into push hands.
And if they don't, they learn from each other.
I really think that if someone believes that another branch of the family "doesn't know shit" they are really selling themselves short.
I can't express how valuable it has been for me to look at a wide breadth of different tai chi styles.
Appledog wrote:Granted. But what are these alternate ways? I would absolutely love to know a way of explaining this to western people.
There very well may be an alternate way of explaining it -- why not? But how useful would it be, since this entire thing is based on mind-intent? From a practical standpoint, if you're not training the internal energy based on the fact you are a human being, and not using the mind based on the fact you are a human being, what precisely are you doing? I would love to see this written up somewhere. As it stands, it's a nice idea but I have never seen a practical implementation. I think it would be very useful to get (understand) this practical implementation.
I think the relevant question is how does ANYONE get past this first level of kungfu? By what specific practice does one achieve that? As the expression goes, "The map is not the territory". His 5 levels is a map. It doesn't tell you HOW to achieve those results anymore than the "Classics" do. The relevant question, the one he addressed in his statement, is whether or not one must coach what one does in terms of "qi". His answer was, "No". If you practice the right stuff, the right way, the right stuff will happen, regardless of what you call it or how you mentally conceptualize it.
The article does in fact tell you how to do it, no? For the first level, he says "If one is persistent enough and practices seriously everyday, one can normally master the forms within half a year. The inner energy, qi, can gradually be induced to move within the trunk and limbs with refinements in one's movements."
We are not left scratching our heads in vain at what he is saying.
I'm just asking for a clarification on which masters disagree over a definition of double heavy, because it's my contention that all of the top level people essentially agree with the basic principles of the art.
charles wrote:Do you have a copy of Jou Tsunghwa's book? If so, read what I previously suggested, what he has to say about "silk reeling". Then we'll discuss it.
yeah I have a signed copy. Jou tsung hwa.. jou tsung hwa...
http://www.internalgardens.com/biography-of-jou-tsung-hwa-root-of-internal-gardens-traditional-tai-chi-lineage wrote:The reason Jou became such a famous grandmaster of taiijquan is because he questioned everything he learned, and refused to conform to the status quo of taijiquan education during this era. After visiting and studying with a wide variety of teachers in China and Taiwan, Jou drew the conclusion that the art of taijiquan was becoming lost. Too much focus was put on the physical forms and too little focus on the founding principles of taijiquan, as elucidated in the Taiji Classics. This disconnect seemed to be the missing piece of the puzzle as to why so few modern day masters lacked the skills, stamina, health and martial abilities of the masters of old. At that moment of inspiration, he abandoned all teachers and took the Taiji Classics as his only teacher. He restructured everything that he had previously learned and practiced in taiji. He started all over again, focusing on what he believed to be the missing foundation of taijiquan. This was a lonely path with no support an little encouragement. Many scoffed at his decision. But Jou’s dedication led him to personal success and global fame for taking this step; for being the voice of taiji education that led people back to the deepest and most original of its principles. And as such, his growing abilities and deep thoughts garnered the attention of taiji masters and enthusiasts, who too, wanted “something more” than what was currently available to them in the tai chi community.
You get clued into certain things that normal students might never figure out. Nothing secret really just the parameters get pretty well defined. You hear certain things more often, and so they have a different emphasis I guess. When you hang around or learn from people who are merely good, you don't get the same emphasis because they don't really know, so you end up getting stuck at their level. To really get good you need to be clued into the big door pathway, and understand it. Once you get to a point, relatively early, you can technically figure it all out on your own. But having a teacher really helps, of course. Often when someone has poor instruction they get stuck on weird points. Like in how they talk or explain things, you can sort of sense it out when someone knows something or not, or they are bluffing, or just repeating what they read somewhere. I dunno, I guess I am just too used to "that way". One of the things I got clued into big time was that someone like me, esp. since I did not have a big name lineage, like learning directly from Yang Zhenduo or something, that I should be doubly thankful for the classics and manuals because they were like a spiritual teacher that I could learn from anytime. And that I should ponder and ponder over what was written there if I wanted to get good and maybe get into a lineage. The funny thing is, that's also what it says in the manuals. Famous masters have famous students.
If I never met my teachers I would say, being an inquisitive and open and willing kind of student, it would have taken me an extra ten years to figure out what I know now, but an extra ten on top of that to go pro/go public. There is a great deal to be said about the transmission of wude, of martial spirit. The correct flavor, the fire behind it. Giving that to someone is often more important than teaching them anything else.
GrandUltimate wrote:In the distant future, the archives of RSF will be the new Tai Chi Classics
GrahamB wrote:...and the 'extensive collection of Tai Chi Magazine' will become known as "the lost Tai Chi Classics".
vagabond wrote:Appledude - the stuff you're talking isn't good Kung Fu, it's bad epistemology. I suggest you drop the classics and pick up "eclipse of reason" by Max Horkheimer
Return to Xingyiquan - Baguazhang - Taijiquan
Users browsing this forum: johnwang and 102 guests