A: What exactly are the details he was talking about?
C: The details he was referring to were feints and ‘tells’ – both with the hands and feet, and mentally too. Of course, there’s also shen guang long zhao (‘enveloping aura’?).
When you have these elements at your command things get more detailed, richer and fuller.
A: [Wang Xiangzhai’s disciple, now deceased] Ao Shi-peng once told me an anecdote that took place while China was in the thrall of ‘Qigong mania’ [in the 80s].
Ao asked M Yao about the ‘fa gong’ [external release of qi], and asked whether Yiquan could produce this kind of ability too. At first, M Yao was reluctant to talk about this kind of thing, but eventually, seeing that Ao wasn’t going to drop it, sighed and raised his hand.
Bear in mind that Ao and M Yao were separated by a dining table at this point. M Yao lifted his hand and made a very small fa li motion towards Ao’s face. Ao felt as if a large mass of paper had hit his forehead, it scared him witless. Have you ever come across this ability?
C: M Yao was always reluctant to talk about this kind of thing, even in his books he denied it existed in Yiquan.
His intent was not to lead Yiquan students astray.
Actually, the practice of Yiquan can develop this ability. M Yao told me about it in 1978.
That year, in order to study Yiquan with M Yao, I took sick leave dozens of times.
I gave up a lot of other things to practice Yiquan.
Student: Why is field strength commonly referred to as empty force?
Master Fung: Empty force is a direct translation of 'lin kong jin'. I'm not sure how the term originated....maybe its a reference to how using it feels? Anyway, I don't much care for the term empty force. It gives the idea that there is this separate energy that is being shot out at the opponent, which of course is not the case at all. Field strength does not exist independent of the other aspects of strength. Its not a technique or even a goal from a self defense point of view but more a by-product of proper training.
Student: Can field strength be used for self defense?
Master Fung: Yes, but not in the way you are thinking. Let me be very clear here, field strength is NOT useful for self defense independent of actual strength. In other words never think you're going to defend yourself by controlling opponents with field strength, that is just foolish.
Just the same as it's foolish to think that the increased sensitivity and strength that come with developing the field have no use in self defense, because they do. With field awareness the ability to intercept the opponents strength greatly increases, more leverage can be applied and the strength has a deep penetrating quality.
yeniseri wrote:No doubt that Yiquanzhuang is powerful but the theatrics of the student is usually quite diferent from the non student.
This is a great art especially when one has the mindset of conditioning and exposure from an excellent teacher!
Bao wrote:If you react to any kind of movement, someone acting directly against you, or something coming towards you, you should not practice to react by hopping, falling, or jumping around all over the place acting like a clown.
"wayne hansen" wrote
Windy How do I know something is bullshit
Simple practicing right method with good honest teachers and skilful partners who seek the truth not fantasy since 1973
The clips shown here are silly at the least and slight of hand along with exploitation of the gulliable
He had not expected this and in his heart knew that for all his Chen style attainment he just did not have anything close to what Master Wang just demonstrated on him.
So on the wrong side of fifty Master Wei set aside all that he had learned before and began to learn afresh from Master Wang.
Bao wrote:johnwang wrote:I agree that your opponent's punch may make you to respond. But 99.9% of the time, you will use body method, or footwork to dodge that attack. You will not fall down like a drunk person with poor balance.
Personally I can actually see value in no touch training, as in building sensitivity and awareness. But the highlighted words illustrates my own criticism. If you react to any kind of movement, someone acting directly against you, or something coming towards you, you should not practice to react by hopping, falling, or jumping around all over the place acting like a clown.
You should practice how to stabilize yourself or evade in a realistic manner. If someone pushes directly against my body, I sink down, stabilize myself. If you train to react against someone, or feeling someone's intent at a distant, your reaction should be the same, reacting by stabilizing and grounding yourself.
Then maybe the practice can have some value. But how some teachers making demos having their students hopping around, they do not only mock them, but Tai Chi-wise, they are teaching them bad habits that would back-fire against a good practitioner or in a real situation.
And I see similar things in Systema and Aikido as well.
The intention might be good or based on building ego, it doesn't matter really, but what many do is building bad habits.
johnwang wrote:Bao wrote:If you react to any kind of movement, someone acting directly against you, or something coming towards you, you should not practice to react by hopping, falling, or jumping around all over the place acting like a clown.
Agree with you 100% there.
If a teacher taught his students well, why haven't we seen a student to make his teacher to act like a clown? If a skill cannot be duplicated, it's not real.
My student can throw me because I taught her correctly. Should this logic also be able to apply to a Taiji teacher?
Bao wrote:I let my students throw my around as well.
Doc Stier wrote:I always wonder why any of these ongoing ..., no touch abilities, etc, even matter to anyone?
windwalker wrote:lots of comments on something you and others don't practice or do you ?
You and others do write about the yi, qi, shen ect.....a lot,, lots of writing
JW does show his work,,,kudos for stepping up...
Don't agree with many of his view points but do understand them having went through my own process...
For those not liking the demos, can always make or show those demos they like...
all are demos, training devices nothing more nothing less...
Doc Stier wrote:I always wonder why any of these ongoing debates about style comparisons, no touch abilities, etc, even matter to anyone?
There is never a consensus of opinion regarding such things and, at day's end, all opinions usually have absolutely zero affect on the quality of your own training regimen or on the practical benefits and skills derived from same.
That which is potentially possible and that which is most likely probable are generally not the same thing.
Return to Xingyiquan - Baguazhang - Taijiquan
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 88 guests