Eight Gates Internal Arts on August 10, 2014 wrote:I’ve seen this article linked to numerous times since it was put out on the web. It recently reared its head again.
I understand the central point that the author is trying to convey but there are big problems with the various models the author is trying to tie together. Weirdly, the author actually omits a final conclusive attempt to bring the models together, instead presenting various facts (sometimes out of context) and attempts to allow the reader to paint their own picture.
What follows is (mostly) a line by line reply, I have omitted the final section on Fascial Fitness, because my main issue is with erroneous conflation of terms, ideas and concepts between the emerging fascial research and the Chinese medical model. . . .
– Practice –“For internal martial arts practitioners (Tai Chi, Bagua, Xingyi, Yiquan, etc) like us, what does this mean for our own practice? How can we manipulate our meridians and thereby the fascial system through movement?”
The idea of “manipulating” the meridians is a misnomer, the same as the erroneous thinking that has evolved since all Chinese practices were placed under the umbrella term “qigong”. Mainly the excessive focus and emphasis upon “qi”.
I’ll turn to the late Master Feng Zhi Qiang to explain a little about qi;“Qi is a kind of driving force (Dong Li). For example blood circulation can be explained with the term “Qi”. Internal styles say: “exercise Intention (Yi), not Qi”, “when you use Intention, your channels will not be blocked”, “exercise Qi, not physical strength (Li); when you exercise physical strength, it will easily break”; “Intention should be focused on Spirit (Shen), not Qi; when it is focused on Qi, then Qi will become stagnant”.”
If your art uses the whole body, engages it, stimulates it, then you will be ‘awakening’ or ‘stimulating’ the acupuncture meridians.The same as you will be stimulating the Anatomy Trains, or the ‘muscles’ of the bio-mechanical model.
We can get into the fact that it is how a movement art does things that makes it differ from another movement art. And this is what arguably makes the Chinese arts, and or the “internal” arts different. That said, there are other methods that engage with and work with the body in similar ways, and whether or not they know about or care about ‘meridians’ or ‘channels’ the body will still be getting stimulated and changed accordingly.
Regardless of any changes in our view of the theory underpinning things, there shouldn’t be any change in how the art is being done, if it is being done correctly.
“We, probably more than anyone else, already use our fascial systems whenever we practice jibengong (foundational exercise) or via forms practice without many of us realizing it..”
Really? You use fascia more than other people? Yes there are movement modalities that are more muscle-centric, but there are a great many movement modalities that fit into current ideas and concepts of “Fascial Fitness”.“At the base level, everytime we were told to fang song (relax) what was our laoshi or sifu really trying to tell us?”
They were telling you to relax. Relaxation was a hallmark of old school strength training in the West, nothing esoteric or Asian about it.“I know, personally, it was a difficult concept for me to comprehend – movement without muscular activation – or movement without a reliance on overt muscular activation.”
Yes the latter, “without a reliance on overt [excessive] muscular activation”.“If the muscles were not to work, how was I moving my body through space? How were my arms ‘parting the horses mane’without my deltoids, pectoralis major and latissimus dorsi co-activating the movement required?
One word – Fascia”
Not really. This implies that the fascia alone can move the body. It can’t. Can we argue that fascia has a bigger role to play than we have been giving it credit for? Most certainly. But no-one in fascia reserach states or claims this. And you can’t jump from a relationship between meridians and fascia to how that somehow implies the fascia moves the body. Am I jumping the gun and being unfair? Maybe, lets continue and see…“It was my fascial network all along that was driving the movement.”
Hmm, are you sure? Lets review Dr Schleip’s understanding;“martial art teachers… worldwide who wish that we would sanctify their claims that [the small size] fascial contraction provides the explanation for their observed miracle powers.”
So it would seem that one of the world’s leading experts in Fascial research and a key developer of a fitness method based on engaging with the health of the fascial system, does not agree with many of the appearing claims by those jumping on the fascial bandwagon.“Fascia has long been neglected as just the ‘white packing stuff’ around our muscles – anatomy labs around the world have been in competition as to who can clear out the fascia best so that the muscles are left pristine for examination and study. In the last few years, there has been a paradigm shift in how we look at fascia and what it means for movement, health and dysfunction.”
Which is certainly a good thing.“The traditional model of the human spine was based upon the post-and-beam model of a skyscraper (Schultz, 1983) and the soft tissues (muscles, fascia, tendons, etc) were always regarded as just curtain walls or stabilizing guy wires. If we assume our bodies as non-living organisms, this may hold weight but as biological structures we are mobile, flexible-hinged, low energy consuming, omni-directional structures that can function in a gravity-free environment (Levin, 1995). Skyscrapers are immobile, rigidly hinged, high energy consuming, vertically oriented structures that depend on gravity to hold them together. Similarly, the lever model we have previously used to explain muscles and joints in the body is flawed. See below.
A load of 200 kg, (not unusual for a trained weight lifter), located 40 cm from the fulcrum requires a muscle reaction force of 8 x 200 = 1600 kg. The erector spinae group can generate a force of about 200 to 400 kg, a force of only one quarter to one half of that necessary. Even a weight of 25 kg would put an average man at risk of tearing his back muscles. Muscle power alone cannot lift moderately heavy loads close to the body or light loads extending out from the body, such as a fish on the end of a rod (Courtesy of biotensegrity.com)
The calculated forces of these actions would rip muscles, break bones and severely deplete energy stores (Levin, 1995). The model nowadays agreed upon which most closely resembles our bodies’ is based upon a
tensegrity model, a type of truss system, which is omni-directional so that the tension elements always function in tension no matter the direction of applied force (Fuller, 1975).
A balloon is a great example of tensegrity; the skin of the balloon is the ‘tension member’ pulling in, the air is the ‘compression member’ pushing out; replace a series of rubber bands in lieu of the skin and dowels for the air in the balloon and you have a classic tensegrity structure (Myers, 2012). If we substitute bones for the dowels and our fascial and myofascial membranes for the rubber bands/skin, that is the fascial integrity of our body.”
This however does not refer to or mention or discuss the problems that exist in trying to understand or explain the human body in terms of a tensegrity structure.” Understanding how tensegrity actually operates at the level of vertebrate anatomy has proven to be difficult to conceive. Bio-tensegrity theory is not superficial but it’s adoption has been. Many clinicians use the term in their practice without any comprehensive understanding of how it might actually work. The complexity of vertebrate anatomy demands a more complete and encompassing explanation-and must include the role fascia plays in seamlessly meshing the tensile elements with the harder, denser tissues….A topic worth examining is the contentious issue surrounding simple joint articulations such as the finger, toe or knee. The challenge takes the form of two related questions that must be addressed: can tensegrity describe the articulations of joints, and can it demonstrate that loads are carried by a continuous tensile net with the compressive elements floating inside it? In other words can we describe a means by which a linked series of compression elements is suspended and/or supported by a tensile net rather than acting as a compressive column guyed down by muscles, tendons and ligaments.” T. Flemons.
Can we say the old ‘Newtonian’ mechanical model is outdated and needs to change, yes for sure. But bio-tensegrity is not a perfect model either, there are flaws in its application as well, and these should not be overlooked in our eagerness to replace something and follow something ‘new’, and shiny, did I mention it was shiny?
Can these flaws be ironed out, hopefully, but we have to be honest and work to do so.“If we take a look at the drawing of ‘spiral Qi lines’ by Chen Xin taken from his book, Illustrated Explanations of Chen Family Taijiquan, what seem like random circular drawings around the body were possibly an early attempt to explain the concept of fascial integrity with what was familiar to Chen at the time – spiral Qi.
Chan Si
Chen Xin’s famous drawing from his book on Chen silk reeling, circa early 1900s
Illustrating the importance of developing the use of torque, a movement pattern also largely ignored in many (not all) “Western” approaches to movement for some time, is one thing. We could easily make an argument either way.”
Spiral qi? Interesting, because spiralling the qi does not yunqi (move qi) through the acupuncture meridians, which are longitunidal not spiralic in nature. So how does this illustrate or support the assumption that the Anatomy Trains and the fascial planes they depict are related to the acupuncture meridians? Further, in Myers model there are no trains spiralling the arms.
What is interesting here is that although Myers himself states that his model is not exhaustive, only illustrative of possibilities. I have seen many approach it is though it is a reflective of a our whole anatomy, a complete and contained system.“Essentially, the Anatomy Trains map provides a ‘longitudinal anatomy’ – a sketch of the long tensile straps and slings within the musculature as a whole….
Though some preliminary dissective evidence is presented in this edition, it is too early in the research process to claim an objective reality for these lines. More examination of the probable mechanisms of communication along these fascial meridians would be especially welcome.
As of this writing, the Anatomy Trains concept is presented merely as a potentially useful alternative map, a systems view of the longitudinal connections in the parietal myofascia. “ Myers (2009)
In personal conversation with my medical teacher he told me to explore the standing practices that involve spiralling to fully understand the jingjin from an experiential perspective. Yet when discussing using daoyin to correct structural issues, it was a different unrelated set of moving practices that was recommended most highly.“Another way to look at his drawings are a rather accurate ‘force-map’ for the major fascial connections in the body. A small excerpt from his book reveals his deep knowledge;
Coiling power (Chan Jin) is all over the body. Putting it most simply, there is coiling inward (Li Chan) and coiling outward (Wai Chan), which both appear once (one) moves. There is one (kind of coiling) when left hand is in front and right hand is behind; (or when) right hand is in front and left hand is behind….once Qi of the hand moves to the back of the foot, then big toe simultaneously closes with the hand and only at this moment (one can) step firmly…
It’s amazing to think that 100 years ago, Chen was already alluding to things we now know about integrated movement (connectivity of the big toe to the rest of the body) and kinetic awareness (left-right hand interplay).”
Well surely it is more a case of isn’t it amazing we are 100 years behind! in understanding the body. And what else did people in the past “know” that we keep overlooking in our arrogance that modern science understands things best?“These things play a big part in the new sub-science of Fascial Fitness, or in other words, how to train our fascia to be resiliant and elastic as to perform optimally and prevent injuries (Müller and Schleip, 2011).”
The rest of the article discusses the proposed principles of ‘Facial Fitness’ in relation to the martial arts. There is little point doing a line by line here.
Similarities between the two make sense, Chinese arts were developed in a culture and at a time when the body was viewed and experienced differently, they do not come from a ‘muscle-centric’ view.
But just as I have seen muscle-centric bio-mechanical explanations of the movements of the Chinese arts, are any of these models accurate?
So lets wrap this meandering blog post up.
The Chinese mapped and discussed the jingjin, ‘channels’ of a “neuro-myo-fascial” nature as far back as the Ling Shu Jing (part of the Huang Di Neijing). Although the exact nature of these is not readily clear solely from reading that text.
The jingjin were named after the acupuncture meridians which implies a relationship. Yet the pathway descriptions differ, the ‘directionality’ of them differs, and the cycle of qi through them also differs. So while there is a relationship, and superficial similarity they are clearly not the same thing.
Although modern research disseminating the relationship of inserting a needle to subsequent positive effects upon the fascia and related tissues is fascinating, it should be viewed within the bigger picture of Chinese medical theory. Which would imply an effect upon what the Chinese mapped and discussed primarily as the “jingjin”.
The jingjin, while omitted in early TCM for simplification, classically was the hallmark of the training for bodyworkers. This shows the importance and relevance of this aspect of the jingluo system over and above the acupuncture meridians when engaging and dealing with the body. And this is how such things were viewed and mapped in classical Chinese medicine.
Any discussion of the similarities between modern fascial research and the old maps and models of Chinese medicine, should surely then be more productive if it was focussed upon the jingjin and not the acupuncture meridians.
Although to reduce the whole jingluo system down to only the jingjin, would be to make the same error as doing so with the acupuncture meridians. The jingjin need to be viewed as the gateway into the bigger picture, not as a stand alone system.
That the differences between modern TCM concepts and ideas related to the nature of qi and the jingluo should be understood for what it is, and how it differs to Classical Chinese medicine. This should then be kept in mind when attempting to use TCM to explain arts that pre-date it, like the Chinese martial arts.
Finally, that the research into the role of fascia is valuable and fascinating and can be very helpful. Using something to better understand what we do is one thing, is not the same as changing what we do based on something else. Improving our understanding of fascia is important, especially if you’ve been ignoring it, but it isn’t the holy grail, as with anything it is simply a piece of the bigger puzzle or picture.
Lets not confuse ourselves.