Avoiding double-heaviness

Discussion on the three big Chinese internals, Yiquan, Bajiquan, Piguazhang and other similar styles.

Re: Avoiding double-heaviness

Postby Jaspalfie on Fri Jul 13, 2018 5:19 pm

Bao wrote: I don't believe that "insubstantial" means "mind". There's no need to separate this from something else, it's already separated. The importance of mind is expressed differently.


I think I wasn't clear. I did not mean that insubstantial means mind, it isn't. The student must be able to identify and differentiate between the substantial and insubstantial as a starting point. After this is achieved the internal bidirectional movement is driven by intention simultaneously. To further clarify this statement and my previous post on this, I would add that this movement is not unidirectional, with intention in one direction and emptiness in the other which is what use of "double active" as a term would suggest. Instead of this, the nature of the "driving" intention is however different in insubstantial compared to the substantial in my understanding.

I think I'll draw a line under this. There are many different interpretations of Taiji theory and we don't even know if we are on the same page. Things will just get more confusing. I just added my interpretation to double-weightedness as people keep writing about body weight distribution and footwork etc when it has nothing to do with that at all (Of this I am 100% certain).

So in brief, if there is no bidirectional internal movement going on whether on one leg, two legs, moving, not moving, then there is double-weightedness. The weightedness refers to the sinking of the chi not bodyweight or movement of mass. This whole concept is core and fundamental in Taiji and needs to be trained from day one and not further down the line in training as some people have written. Core concepts and theory should not be swept under the carpet. Internal arts require internal training as well as the external movement. If this is absent how can it be an internal art irrespective of the outward appearance. I thought it best to keep this in focus.
Jaspalfie
Santi
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2017 11:36 pm

Re: Avoiding double-heaviness

Postby I-mon on Fri Jul 13, 2018 7:33 pm

Jaspalfie wrote:From my understanding double-weightedness has nothing to with weight. Its about maintaining the internal separation of the substantial and insubstantial and their opposite directions irrespective of what you are doing or what stance you are in. You can stand on one leg and still be double weighted if you cannot maintain those two opposite internal forces. This principle is related to internal control and not physical movement or distribution in weight so you also can be in movement and also double-weighted.


Thank you for this simple and useful definition.
User avatar
I-mon
Great Old One
 
Posts: 2895
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 12:19 am
Location: Australia

Re: Avoiding double-heaviness

Postby willie on Fri Jul 13, 2018 7:36 pm

I-mon wrote:
Jaspalfie wrote:From my understanding double-weightedness has nothing to with weight. Its about maintaining the internal separation of the substantial and insubstantial and their opposite directions irrespective of what you are doing or what stance you are in. You can stand on one leg and still be double weighted if you cannot maintain those two opposite internal forces. This principle is related to internal control and not physical movement or distribution in weight so you also can be in movement and also double-weighted.


Thank you for this simple and useful definition.


Not so fast, some of this person's posts are totally out there...I would just say NO!
willie

 

Re: Avoiding double-heaviness

Postby Jaspalfie on Fri Jul 13, 2018 9:16 pm

I-mon wrote:Thank you for this simple and useful definition.


No problem I-Mon but keep an open mind. I've just posted what my interpretation is from my understanding and is something that I can tangibly apply and feel in my training. As I've written in my other post, there are many different interpretations out there on Taiji theory and what I have written may run completely contradictory to something someone else has been taught or believes to be true. I may be completely and totally out there in my opinion, as willie writes, but I personally believe I'm closer to the truth than not.
Jaspalfie
Santi
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2017 11:36 pm

Re: Avoiding double-heaviness

Postby I-mon on Fri Jul 13, 2018 10:05 pm

Of course! I just appreciate it when people attempt to give clear definitions of concepts.
User avatar
I-mon
Great Old One
 
Posts: 2895
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 12:19 am
Location: Australia

Re: Avoiding double-heaviness

Postby Appledog on Fri Jul 13, 2018 10:42 pm

Jaspalfie wrote:Disagree that a beginner does not need to think about moving internal force and disagree that the concept of double-weightedness is not for beginners. I think it is essential that the beginner understands about double-weightedness and the fundamental importance of moving internal force in Taiji. Double-weightedness is not about where to put your weight in answer to your point about a good teacher and as I alluded to in my earlier post the form should not be taught to beginners in my opinion.
...
I think I'll draw a line under this. There are many different interpretations of Taiji theory and we don't even know if we are on the same page. Things will just get more confusing. I just added my interpretation to double-weightedness as people keep writing about body weight distribution and footwork etc when it has nothing to do with that at all (Of this I am 100% certain).


This is what I meant when I said we don't need people's opinions. You say you're 100% certain but how are you so certain? What you say reads opposite from how Tai Chi training is usually described.

"There are many different interpretations of Taiji theory and we don't even know if we are on the same page." We have to get away from this kind of thinking, it's at the heart of what is poisoning the community. Tai Chi is all one family, with some branches being more secretive or selective I should say in who they teach what. The old "one village's secret is the next villages's jibengong" idea. But it (tai chi) is all the same. There are corruptions, yes, that has arisen out of people trying to capitalize on Tai Chi's success by reforming their own martial art into Tai Chi. For example here's something sure to piss people off; anyone who mentions the concept of connecting to the ground or ground path or store and release along a ground path in tai chi is practicing a corrupted system. See? Just sit back and watch the fireworks. So I ask how you know, because knowing is sometimes a very difficult thing.

I would say the last thing we need now is people passing around interpretations about what beginners should be doing. Honestly, telling beginners to worry about moving energy is a terrible thing to do. Same thing with double weight, it's just a concept they can't understand. This isn't an opinion. People will get hurt if you train them this way.
Last edited by Appledog on Fri Jul 13, 2018 10:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Appledog
Huajing
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2017 9:39 pm

Re: Avoiding double-heaviness

Postby windwalker on Fri Jul 13, 2018 10:55 pm

Appledog wrote:
Jaspalfie wrote:Disagree that a beginner does not need to think about moving internal force and disagree that the concept of double-weightedness is not for beginners. I think it is essential that the beginner understands about double-weightedness and the fundamental importance of moving internal force in Taiji. Double-weightedness is not about where to put your weight in answer to your point about a good teacher and as I alluded to in my earlier post the form should not be taught to beginners in my opinion.
...
I think I'll draw a line under this. There are many different interpretations of Taiji theory and we don't even know if we are on the same page. Things will just get more confusing. I just added my interpretation to double-weightedness as people keep writing about body weight distribution and footwork etc when it has nothing to do with that at all (Of this I am 100% certain).


This is what I meant when I said we don't need people's opinions. You say you're 100% certain but how are you so certain? What you say reads opposite from how Tai Chi training is usually described.

"There are many different interpretations of Taiji theory and we don't even know if we are on the same page." We have to get away from this kind of thinking, it's at the heart of what is poisoning the community. Tai Chi is all one family, with some branches being more secretive or selective I should say in who they teach what. The old "one village's secret is the next villages's jibengong" idea.

But it (tai chi) is all the same. There are corruptions, yes, that has arisen out of people trying to capitalize on Tai Chi's success by reforming their own martial art into Tai Chi. For example here's something sure to piss people off; anyone who mentions the concept of connecting to the ground or ground path or store and release along a ground path in tai chi is practicing a corrupted system. See? Just sit back and watch the fireworks. So I ask how you know, because knowing is sometimes a very difficult thing.

I would say the last thing we need now is people passing around interpretations about what beginners should be doing. Honestly, telling beginners to worry about moving energy is a terrible thing to do. Same thing with double weight, it's just a concept they can't understand. This isn't an opinion. People will get hurt if you train them this way. If its not an opinion then what is it?
rule 19
windwalker
Wuji
 
Posts: 6951
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 4:08 am

Re: Avoiding double-heaviness

Postby willie on Fri Jul 13, 2018 11:56 pm

Appledog wrote:
Jaspalfie wrote:Disagree that a beginner does not need to think about moving internal force and disagree that the concept of double-weightedness is not for beginners. I think it is essential that the beginner understands about double-weightedness and the fundamental importance of moving internal force in Taiji. Double-weightedness is not about where to put your weight in answer to your point about a good teacher and as I alluded to in my earlier post the form should not be taught to beginners in my opinion.
...
I think I'll draw a line under this. There are many different interpretations of Taiji theory and we don't even know if we are on the same page. Things will just get more confusing. I just added my interpretation to double-weightedness as people keep writing about body weight distribution and footwork etc when it has nothing to do with that at all (Of this I am 100% certain).


This is what I meant when I said we don't need people's opinions. You say you're 100% certain but how are you so certain? What you say reads opposite from how Tai Chi training is usually described.

"There are many different interpretations of Taiji theory and we don't even know if we are on the same page." We have to get away from this kind of thinking, it's at the heart of what is poisoning the community. Tai Chi is all one family, with some branches being more secretive or selective I should say in who they teach what. The old "one village's secret is the next villages's jibengong" idea. But it (tai chi) is all the same. There are corruptions, yes, that has arisen out of people trying to capitalize on Tai Chi's success by reforming their own martial art into Tai Chi. For example here's something sure to piss people off; anyone who mentions the concept of connecting to the ground or ground path or store and release along a ground path in tai chi is practicing a corrupted system. See? Just sit back and watch the fireworks. So I ask how you know, because knowing is sometimes a very difficult thing.

I would say the last thing we need now is people passing around interpretations about what beginners should be doing. Honestly, telling beginners to worry about moving energy is a terrible thing to do. Same thing with double weight, it's just a concept they can't understand. This isn't an opinion. People will get hurt if you train them this way.


Appledog I'm proud of you, You finally got one right. LOL!
willie

 

Re: Avoiding double-heaviness

Postby Jaspalfie on Sat Jul 14, 2018 12:03 am

Appledog, you can be certain when you can apply the theory consistently in your practice. The problem is it is abstract. Would it make you feel better if I add that historically Taiji training was predominantly standing practice or very basic minimal movement practice with the trend of starting with form practice a relatively late addition to training methodology? In which case, what I am saying isn't opposite to traditional Taiji training. After all what are you doing when doing standing practice. The mind is not dormant. I'm not sure how you can hurt people training in that way.

I put things forward as an opinion out of respect to others on here and to promote discussion. Some who may have a different way of doing things, be it right or wrong, may get offended if I insist that what they are doing is incorrect because it is different to what I am doing. I'm not here to get into arguments with people. It's a waste of my time. Already I've got Willie flat slamming my opinion with a NO! in thats its wrong with no effort on his part to provide any discussion on what he thinks is wrong about it. I'm not upset at that so I'm not sure why you are upset that my opinion is different to yours even though I've given reasons to why I think its so.

If you want to talk about secrecy and being open, I think I've been very generous. I've pretty much let the cat out of the bag on what double-weightedness is to me in my understanding which has taken some time to get to. Do the readers here really deserve it? Its not been an easy journey with years of practice to just give it out on a plate? I guess you can lead a horse to water but you can't force it to drink. Time to go back to lurking methinks.
Jaspalfie
Santi
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2017 11:36 pm

Re: Avoiding double-heaviness

Postby willie on Sat Jul 14, 2018 12:15 am

Jaspalfie wrote:Appledog, you can be certain when you can apply the theory consistently in your practice. The problem is it is abstract. Would it make you feel better if I add that historically Taiji training was predominantly standing practice or very basic minimal movement practice with the trend of starting with form practice a relatively late addition to training methodology? In which case, what I am saying isn't opposite to traditional Taiji training. After all what are you doing when doing standing practice. The mind is not dormant. I'm not sure how you can hurt people training in that way.

I put things forward as an opinion out of respect to others on here and to promote discussion. Some who may have a different way of doing things, be it right or wrong, may get offended if I insist that what they are doing is incorrect because it is different to what I am doing. I'm not here to get into arguments with people. It's a waste of my time. Already I've got Willie flat slamming my opinion with a NO! in thats its wrong with no effort on his part to provide any discussion on what he thinks is wrong about it. I'm not upset at that so I'm not sure why you are upset that my opinion is different to yours even though I've given reasons to why I think its so.

If you want to talk about secrecy and being open, I think I've been very generous. I've pretty much let the cat out of the bag on what double-weightedness is to me in my understanding which has taken some time to get to. Do the readers here really deserve it? Its not been an easy journey with years of practice to just give it out on a plate? I guess you can lead a horse to water but you can't force it to drink. Time to go back to lurking methinks.


I had no choice but to say no, because what you are saying doesn't fit the higher level understanding.
In my opinion it's a huge mistake to introduce any kind of theories in the beginning stages or even speak about moving internal energy. That person will be forever damaged with a unlimited amount of interpretations that have nothing to do with taiji.
Last edited by willie on Sat Jul 14, 2018 12:17 am, edited 2 times in total.
willie

 

Re: Avoiding double-heaviness

Postby Jaspalfie on Sat Jul 14, 2018 12:36 am

willie wrote:I had no choice but to say no, because what you are saying doesn't fit the higher level understanding.


Would you be able to elaborate on the higher level of understanding?
Jaspalfie
Santi
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2017 11:36 pm

Re: Avoiding double-heaviness

Postby willie on Sat Jul 14, 2018 1:51 am

Jaspalfie wrote:
willie wrote:I had no choice but to say no, because what you are saying doesn't fit the higher level understanding.


Would you be able to elaborate on the higher level of understanding?


"not a flat side anywhere"
willie

 

Re: Avoiding double-heaviness

Postby Jaspalfie on Sat Jul 14, 2018 5:30 am

willie wrote:
Jaspalfie wrote:"not a flat side anywhere"


I’ve not mentioned anything about flat sides in my previous posts. I think if you have interpreted what I have posted before to have flat sides then I think you’ve not really understood what I have written.
Jaspalfie
Santi
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2017 11:36 pm

Re: Avoiding double-heaviness

Postby oragami_itto on Sat Jul 14, 2018 6:28 am

Jaspalfie I wouldn't worry too much about what Willie says.
He's paid so much money to the only guy on Earth that does taijiquan, his skill and understanding has gone so far beyond ours his wisdom just sounds like self promoting, ego driven, taking the boulder for the mountain, finger for the moon gibberish.

It will just confuse your lesser mind.
Last edited by oragami_itto on Sat Jul 14, 2018 6:29 am, edited 4 times in total.
"This principle is very obvious and requires no further elaboration."
-Yang Cheng Fu
User avatar
oragami_itto
Wuji
 
Posts: 1130
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2016 10:11 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Re: Avoiding double-heaviness

Postby willie on Sat Jul 14, 2018 6:41 am

Jaspalfie wrote:
willie wrote:
Jaspalfie wrote:"not a flat side anywhere"


I’ve not mentioned anything about flat sides in my previous posts.

I know that you didn't mention anything about that in your previous post, that's the point.
willie

 

PreviousNext

Return to Xingyiquan - Baguazhang - Taijiquan

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest