the rum soaked fist: internal martial arts forum

wayne hansen wrote:Every posture has the whole 4 energies ward off,roll back ,press and push.
The other 4 are just variations of first 4 done from the corners.

Why do you say that Wayne. My understanding is that the 4 corner jins are quite distinct from the 4 side jins.

Firstly Ron I am only speaking from a yang/Wu basis
It is something I can't really explain in writing it needs to be shown physically and felt by the opponent
Anyone who knows these 8 energies and their manifestations in the form with a little examination will work out what I mean
If your base is outside the yang tradition it might be quite different

C.J.W. wrote:As a native speaker of Chinese, I've always found the English translation "brush knee" to be quite off from it's original meaning. The character "摟" (lo3) in 摟膝拗步 (lo3xi1ao4bu4 'Brush Knee Twist Step') means to hold or keep something/someone close using your arms, which is completely different from the verb "brush" in English.

A Wu stylist I met in Hong Kong once showed me an application for it and said that, according to his teacher, it was mainly a quick takedown designed to temporarily trap the leg, and cause the opponent's lead leg to break right below the knee as he falls -- a nasty technique only taught to indoor disciples. (Again, secrecy in CIMA -- so what's new? )

While the move can certainly be applied in more than one ways, his application is by far the most logical and effective one I've come across so far.

There are two pronunciations of the character lou. When pronounced with the first tone it means 'draw towards' or 'gather'. That might be the origin of the English translation. While people nowadays mostly say it with the third tone, it might not have been the original pronunciation. Modern Chinese speakers (and their teachers) might use the more common version, simply because they are more familiar with it. The form movement, at least the very last part of it, matches the action described by the 1st tone pronunciation. The form movement is utterly useless for catching a leg. The beginning movement of 'Cross Hands' in Wu style would fit the action of scooping under a kick much better. The "brushing" movement is not a low deflection to the outside, but an inward circle, basically the opposite movement to Cloud Hands. The second half of the circle has An and Lü. The movement is most effectively used against the arms of the opponent in a grappling situation, not for catching legs from a long range.

Well said
I still say the 4 energies are in BKTS
Ward off
Roll back
Press
& push

cdobe wrote:

C.J.W. wrote:As a native speaker of Chinese, I've always found the English translation "brush knee" to be quite off from it's original meaning. The character "摟" (lo3) in 摟膝拗步 (lo3xi1ao4bu4 'Brush Knee Twist Step') means to hold or keep something/someone close using your arms, which is completely different from the verb "brush" in English.

A Wu stylist I met in Hong Kong once showed me an application for it and said that, according to his teacher, it was mainly a quick takedown designed to temporarily trap the leg, and cause the opponent's lead leg to break right below the knee as he falls -- a nasty technique only taught to indoor disciples. (Again, secrecy in CIMA -- so what's new? )

While the move can certainly be applied in more than one ways, his application is by far the most logical and effective one I've come across so far.

There are two pronunciations of the character lou. When pronounced with the first tone it means 'draw towards' or 'gather'. That might be the origin of the English translation. While people nowadays mostly say it with the third tone, it might not have been the original pronunciation. Modern Chinese speakers (and their teachers) might use the more common version, simply because they are more familiar with it. The form movement, at least the very last part of it, matches the action described by the 1st tone pronunciation. The form movement is utterly useless for catching a leg. The beginning movement of 'Cross Hands' in Wu style would fit the action of scooping under a kick much better. The "brushing" movement is not a low deflection to the outside, but an inward circle, basically the opposite movement to Cloud Hands. The second half of the circle has An and Lü. The movement is most effectively used against the arms of the opponent in a grappling situation, not for catching legs from a long range.

Yes "pluck" with the "brushing" hand, push with other hand in an "effortless" kind of motion. Being close in seems somewhat descriptive. That seems true of taijiquan range in general, though.

cdobe wrote:There are two pronunciations of the character lou. When pronounced with the first tone it means 'draw towards' or 'gather'. That might be the origin of the English translation. While people nowadays mostly say it with the third tone, it might not have been the original pronunciation. Modern Chinese speakers (and their teachers) might use the more common version, simply because they are more familiar with it. The form movement, at least the very last part of it, matches the action described by the 1st tone pronunciation. The form movement is utterly useless for catching a leg. The beginning movement of 'Cross Hands' in Wu style would fit the action of scooping under a kick much better. The "brushing" movement is not a low deflection to the outside, but an inward circle, basically the opposite movement to Cloud Hands. The second half of the circle has An and Lü. The movement is most effectively used against the arms of the opponent in a grappling situation, not for catching legs from a long range.

The first tone pronunciation is considered non-standard and regional. Replacing the third tone with the first tone is a feature of many Northern Chinese dialects, especially ones spoken in Shandong. (My own grandfather, who was from Henan, also spoke this way.) Since Taiji came from Northern China, it'd make sense that LouXiAoBu was originally pronounced in the first tone.

And the "draw towards" and "gather" definitions you provided are actually the same as holding or keeping something/someone close as far as native speakers of Chinese are concerned. To provide a clearer picture, "lou" is a verb most commonly used to describe the action of hugging, embracing, or holding a loved one in your arms. I'd be very surprised if another native speaker told me that there is a difference in meaning when the tone is changed, since the two pronunciations are simply regional variations of the same word.

The application I was shown does not involve catching a leg as shown in the original video clip. It's about applying An to a trapped lead leg and make the opponent take a nasty fall.

C.J.W. wrote:

cdobe wrote:There are two pronunciations of the character lou. When pronounced with the first tone it means 'draw towards' or 'gather'. That might be the origin of the English translation. While people nowadays mostly say it with the third tone, it might not have been the original pronunciation. Modern Chinese speakers (and their teachers) might use the more common version, simply because they are more familiar with it. The form movement, at least the very last part of it, matches the action described by the 1st tone pronunciation. The form movement is utterly useless for catching a leg. The beginning movement of 'Cross Hands' in Wu style would fit the action of scooping under a kick much better. The "brushing" movement is not a low deflection to the outside, but an inward circle, basically the opposite movement to Cloud Hands. The second half of the circle has An and Lü. The movement is most effectively used against the arms of the opponent in a grappling situation, not for catching legs from a long range.

The first tone pronunciation is considered non-standard and regional. Replacing the third tone with the first tone is a feature of many Northern Chinese dialects, especially ones spoken in Shandong. (My own grandfather, who was from Henan, also spoke this way.) Since Taiji came from Northern China, it'd make sense that LouXiAoBu was originally pronounced in the first tone.

And the "draw towards" and "gather" definitions you provided are actually the same as holding or keeping something/someone close as far as native speakers of Chinese are concerned. To provide a clearer picture, "lou" is a verb most commonly used to describe the action of hugging, embracing, or holding a loved one in your arms. I'd be very surprised if another native speaker told me that there is a difference in meaning when the tone is changed, since the two pronunciations are simply regional variations of the same word.

The application I was shown does not involve catching a leg as shown in the original video clip. It's about applying An to a trapped lead leg and make the opponent take a nasty fall.

While speakers from certain regions use it more often than others, I know someone from Hebei who likes to use it a lot, I wouldn't agree with calling it regional. In fact the 1st tone meaning is the older, classical meaning, with references going back to the Warring States period, while the third tone meaning is more modern. You can take a look here: http://xh.5156edu.com/html3/7908.html
The meanings are certainly similar, but not the same. To embrace someone and to gather firewood are definitely different actions.

Here is the relevant part from the Xinhua Zidian:

新华字典 wrote:详细解释： 搂
摟
lōu
【动】
(形声。从手,娄声。本义:引,拉拢)
同本义〖drawsb.overone'sside〗

1st tone Lou (Verb)
[...] Original/literal meaning: to lead/guide, to draw somebody over

Interesting. I wasn't aware of some of its meanings in ancient Chinese.

But I suppose you would agree that "brush" is not exactly the most suitable translation, and can be quite misleading to those who do not understand Chinese.

C.J.W. wrote:Interesting. I wasn't aware of some of its meanings in ancient Chinese.

But I suppose you would agree that "brush" is not exactly the most suitable translation, and can be quite misleading to those who do not understand Chinese.

I agree that it is not a literal translation, but I don't dislike the English rendering either. As G. B. Shaw said: "Translations are like women - if they are beautiful, they are not faithful; if they are faithful, they are not beautiful."

wayne hansen wrote:Well said
I still say the 4 energies are in BKTS
Ward off
Roll back
Press
& push

Assuming that you always meet your opponent with Ward off/Peng on contact you already have 3 of them. When you turn back to the front after the initial inside deflection there is Press/Ji. So yes, all of the 4 Jin are clearly there (and not only once throughout the motion).

I think you can derive the catch passing through to the transition in most BKTS forms. So if it's not exactly "there", it can be very close by!
So why not mix it in...

"there is no fixed technique"
Chen Pan Ling

My teacher (Yu Cheng-Hsiang) generally shied away from ascribing specific applications to form movements; he felt that "technique" was something that each individual needed to evolve for himself/herself. Form is form (according to Master Yu) and technique is technique. Every bit of the form should be practiced with rigorous exactitude, but the use of what one learns or derives is meant to be free. As for this movement, he once explained that this was how the practitioner moved aside his long tunic, so his next movement -- kick, step, punch -- would be unhindered the garment.

Just because a teacher does not teach combat applications does not mean they don't teach combat applications
Applications are the yardstick and path
It can be taught by complete and utter dedication to form but that is the hard way and the tardy end up miles from the destination

wayne hansen wrote:Just because a teacher does not teach combat applications does not mean they don't teach combat applications.

I have problem to understand your logic. Could you explain a bit more detail?

It seems to me as if you are trying to say:

- Just because I don't love you. It does not mean that I don't love you.
- Just because I am poor. It does not mean that I am poor.
- Just because I drop bombs on your country. It does not mean that I drop bombs on your country.
- ...

If this logic can make sense, the whole world can be in big trouble.