the rum soaked fist: internal martial arts forum

Strange wrote:i can do it, but it is not consistent
and i don't think i can do it in a real fight condition.

cool sounds interesting

luck in your training.

I don't speak Mandarin so thanks for that.

Strange wrote:ww, my 2 cents is that as far as martial arts is concerned
knowing/understanding with your brain is not enough, it's not like a math or legal concept
in other words: what is "know"? all the following are "know":
- i understand in my brain
- i understand and can do it when practicing alone
- i understand and can do it with my practicing partner
- i can apply it in a real fight situation

I think knowing and understanding are two different things. I think there are really three things - knowing, understanding, and doing. A person who has just learned the choreography of a form may not know about yin/yang separation. Watching this video they will know about y/y spearation, but they probably wouldn't understand it. If they had an instructor explaining it and showing what they are doing wrong, over time they may learn how to do it and once they learn how to do it they would understand it. Some things you will understand before you learn how to do it, but I'm not sure that's true in this case. I think there are quite a few things in taiji that you don't understand until you can do it.

I think he makes a good point in that video - ...unless you match what you believe to physical reality you still are not doing taiji. And, of course, as the video says: Only when you can actualize the yin-yang separation, have you entered the door. Just doing the choreography isn't taiji, you need to follow the principles.

many people think ima can be understood by the brain
for me, i have my doubts...cos i'm not like many ppl

I don't want my brain to mess up my training so I have no idea how much my brain know and understand. I want the body to know, understand and move.

robert wrote:I think knowing and understanding are two different things. I think there are really three things - knowing, understanding, and doing

A person who has just learned the choreography of a form may not know about yin/yang separation. Watching this video they will know about y/y spearation, but they probably wouldn't understand it. If they had an instructor explaining it and showing what they are doing wrong, over time they may learn how to do it and once they learn how to do it they would understand it. Some things you will understand before you learn how to do it, but I'm not sure that's true in this case. I think there are quite a few things in taiji that you don't understand until you can do it.

Both his explanation and what he does is different from many other schools. So here it's not only about doing something specific, but also about learning and practice something in a specific context.

His teaching methods are different, he tends to talk about body mechanics rather than qi, but I like that. I like what was posted in the thread about the kua from some of his writings.

robert wrote:His teaching methods are different, he tends to talk about body mechanics rather than qi, but I like that. I like what was posted in the thread about the kua from some of his writings.

Qi? Who ever mentioned qi? I couldn't care less about qi talk. Practically speaking, what is kept still, what is moving and what is separated and how, are the interesting parts. This is where this is different from many other schools.

Bao wrote:Practically speaking, what is kept still, what is moving and what is separated and how, are the interesting parts.

Yes, that is what I call body mechanics.

Bao wrote:This is where this is different from many other schools.

Are you saying that some schools don't teach body mechanics or that they teach different body mechanics?

"Just doing the choreography isn't taiji, you need to follow the principles."

i am not saying i disagree with you about knowing, understanding and doing
but in my opinion it is more applicable to traits like compassion, benevolence, loyalty. etc
in fighting arts, i think it is best to have a very clear and strict definition of "know"... like what is stated above.
else practitioners may get the wrong concept that they know, but actually they are doing dance moves.
and in this deluded state, they teach and propagate a wrong sense of "know"
and things become utterly nonsensical in very quick order

i think it is best to have a very clear and strict definition of "know"... like what is stated above.
else practitioners may get the wrong concept that they know, but actually they are doing dance moves.
and in this deluded state, they teach and propagate a wrong sense of "know"
and things become utterly nonsensical in very quick order

Agree.

In china, when asked if someone knows "understands" something, and they say yes.
Its expected that they can "do"

nothing was left to theory although one may not understand the theory
or even "know" the theory.

they can "do"

if not do, they would be made to feel it,
hopefully taining it until they really "know" it in the sense of doing.

robert wrote:Are you saying that some schools don't teach body mechanics or that they teach different body mechanics?

Do you actually believe that it's possible to teach tai chi without teaching body mechanics?

Bao wrote:

robert wrote:Are you saying that some schools don't teach body mechanics or that they teach different body mechanics?

Do you actually believe that it's possible to teach tai chi without teaching body mechanics?

It sure seems like there are some schools that only teach choreography. I think that is teaching taiji. If you teach a child to add and subtract you're teaching them mathematics.

The original question was really quite innocent -

Bao wrote:Practically speaking, what is kept still, what is moving and what is separated and how, are the interesting parts. This is where this is different from many other schools.

I'm not trying to be difficult, perhaps I'm just over looking the obvious.

what is kept still, what is moving - isn't this maintaining correct posture? If we look at the beginning of the video in the OP two guys are pushing hands and they don't seem to have any concern about postural requirements. CZH demonstrates correct posture and a common mistake - sticking the butt out. Are you saying that many other schools don't make postural corrections?

robert wrote:what is kept still, what is moving - isn't this maintaining correct posture? If we look at the beginning of the video in the OP two guys are pushing hands and they don't seem to have any concern about postural requirements. CZH demonstrates correct posture and a common mistake - sticking the butt out. Are you saying that many other schools don't make postural corrections?

No, I am not speaking about posture. I was referring to what he did practically speaking and he applies what he calls "bu dong", or not move, which is something completely opposite to what several other schools call bu dong. Here, his hand is moving against the point of contact. This what he does is yang against yang. Yin against Yang would be keeping the point of contact still and initiate movement with another part of the body, opposite of what he does. So I don't agree with his notion of separating yin and yang practically speaking.

OK, thanks.

Deleted