Origin of Taichi Explanation

[robert]

Robert: I have never said that CXW invented the term silk reeling. Silk reelng today is based on or understood, or what is meant by it is usually a set created by CXW.

My mistake, sorry. It seems like CXW, CZL, and ZTC each developed their own set so it probably depends on who a person studies with. The first set of silk reeling exercises I learned were FZQ's. FZQ's set is pretty elaborate. They could be a stand alone qigong set like the Taiji Qigong 18 set.

[robert]

Although i like the look o the Guangping Yang Taiji, bu it’s short history also seem a little suspect, with the stable boy learning the real stuff, while the Manchu military learning “simplified” stuff.

I like Kou's book, but never met him. I suspect most people who have studied Yang family taiji are familiar with the idea of drawing silk. It's in the Taiji Classics

Step as if near a cliff edge. Move energy (jin) as if drawing silk.
Store power like drawing a bow. Issue power like loosing an arrow.

and

Step like a cat. Move energy (jin) as if drawing silk.

and, of course, in The Art of Taijiquan Chen Weiming records YCF's Ten Essentials

9. THE MOVEMENTS ARE LINKED TOGETHER WITHOUT INTERRUPTION

In external styles of boxing arts, their strength is only the clumsy strength of acquired habit. Therefore there is a start and a stop, a continuing and an interrupting. It is when old force is spent and new force is not yet initiated that is the easiest moment for an opponent to take advantage of. Taiji uses intention, not exertion, and so from beginning to end, it is continuous without interruption, recycling endlessly. A primary text [Essays, part 1] says: “It is like a long river flowing into the wide ocean, on and on ceaselessly.” It is also said [in Understanding How to Practice]: “Move energy as if drawing silk.” These words describe a continuous flow throughout.

[wayne hansen]

Those that think Yang doesn't have silk reeling and silk pulling energy don't understand refined subtle energy,yang style or the energy mentioned

[Bao]

Hehe, I like your “controversial” ideas here.......

Ah,

I am sure most people believe that I am an ignorant moron.

But you know, a part of Daoism is about constantly trying to look at the world from different angles and question truth and reality.

So if you believe that Tai Chi has at least partly Daoist origin, you shouldn't treat it with too much respect. It's something you should play with and have fun with.

...Life is too short to take it seriously anyway....

Yes Yang has its own specific way, which from my limited knowledge I feel work more specific on ting-jin than what Chenshiquan does....

Know what you mean. Don't know if every Chen stylist would agree though...

The first set of silk reeling exercises I learned were FZQ's. FZQ's set is pretty elaborate. They could be a stand alone qigong set like the Taiji Qigong 18 set.

Like all of the stuff I've seen from him very much. He seems to have been a real powerhouse.

Those that think Yang doesn't have silk reeling and silk pulling energy don't understand refined subtle energy,yang style or the energy mentioned

Exactly

[charles]

Wow.

Let's start with this:

Anyway, I'd like to know what you/anyone here thinks of the SPP theory on the origins of the move after the "Jin Gang"move. Don't focus on the man - focus on the theory. Is it a ritualisitc expression from common theatre performance of "mixing the exlir of immortality"? (around 5.58) I mean, if not, what is it? It seems devoid of martial function. (There are various holes in the whole theory, especially the naming "Play the Pi Pa", which is from Yang not Chen, but let's not get into that). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAKBqB5vUeE

First, SPP's Chen style isn't great. What he is demonstrating in Xin Jia. If one is looking for origin theories, it would make sense to look for those in older "frames", such as Xiao Jia or Lao Jia. He's modified movements in his performance to match his fanciful theories. For example, "Because he's half bear, he drags his leg and then stamps his foot to expel yen spirits". I don't know of any bonafide practitioner who performs that movement dragging his leg. It's a step forward.

Shortly thereafter is the whole "playfully putting on his hat" thing. That, too, isn't how the movement is performed. It is a double arm lock, followed by double elbow strikes, then pushing into the opponent's chest or his forward hip. It's absurd to superimpose fanciful actions on martial applications he doesn't seem to be aware of. And so on, in his presentation. If he had the small details correct - or even the big ones for that matter - and then wanted to analyze THOSE, then his analysis might have some merit. As it is, it is nothing short of absurd.

Robert: I have never said that CXW invented the term silk reeling. Silk reelng today is based on or understood, or what is meant by it is usually a set created by CXW.

You've been corrected on that before. No one who knows the subject well believes that "silk reeling today" is a set of exercises created by CXW. (Nor do they believe that silk reeling is tracing Taiji diagrams with hands and/or feet.) Please stop repeating that. CXW didn't invent the circles on which the set of exercises is based. He didn't even invent the exercises. He popularized HIS particular sequence of exercises. There are other sets of sequences by other practitioners, including Feng, Hong, Zhu Tiancai and others. The underlying core that any of these exercises practice is the same. That core is what is silk reeling, chan si jin. That is different from any one set of exercises, chan si gong.


Whether or not the Chen style that is practiced now is fundamentally the same as the Chen style that was practiced in Yang Luchan's time no one knows. Debate it, look for new angles, till the cows come home. Doing so won't provide any further legitimacy to what cannot be determined. Endless speculation will not make it any more definitive. Push whatever agenda one has, with whatever perspective one wants to prevail, as much as one likes, but don't let us pretend that it is anything but that.

[Ian C. Kuzushi]

Anyway, I'd like to know what you/anyone here thinks of the SPP theory on the origins of the move after the "Jin Gang"move. Don't focus on the man - focus on the theory. Is it a ritualisitc expression from common theatre performance of "mixing the exlir of immortality"? (around 5.58) I mean, if not, what is it? It seems devoid of martial function. (There are various holes in the whole theory, especially the naming "Play the Pi Pa", which is from Yang not Chen, but let's not get into that). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAKBqB5vUeE

And if it is a hangover from some cultural/ritual use of movements, could it be that Yang style (and non Jingang styles) simply dropped the more theatrical elements in its creation? I think it opens the discussion up in exciting new ways.

I watched the video and I see you have read and reviewed his book, although there weren't any details of his work in the review which wasn't very helpful. Does he ever lay out evidence from primary documents or manuscripts that demonstrate his proposed connection between theater and taijiquan movements? He is making all sorts of claims including dance from India appearing in Chen village style. He does a lot of story telling, but gives no evidence. This leads me to then ask what makes him a historian (as he calls himself in the video). He doesn't seem to have any training and this seems to be reflected in a lack of any base line of scholarly rigor. The history that he does lay out is just a rough outline available on Wikipedia.

[GrahamB]

Thanks for that Charles - very interesting. I did say there were holes in the theory , which you've adequately exposed there In this case, (for me) it's more about 'not seeing the wood for the trees'. It's not the details he's presenting, which are lacking here, but the overal idea that westerners miss he cultural context of these arts. What everyday life was like in 19th century China. How people who lived then saw the world.

Ian. I don't want to get into attacking the man. I think that's a huge distraction from the message. I'm not a historian either, so I shied away from reviewing the book fully (and haven't read the 2nd yet). I think the main criticism is that theres a lack of evidence.

Some essays of interest:

Traditional Chinese Martial Arts and the “YMCA Consensus” - S.P.P
https://chinesemartialstudies.com/2017/ ... consensus/

Another Look at Ritual, Theater and Combat in the Chinese Martial Arts - B. Judkins
https://chinesemartialstudies.com/2020/ ... tial-arts/

That last one contains a review of Scott's book from somebody more qualified than myself. I think there are some good criticisms. Particularly:

"That is certainly a possibility, but lacking any sort of evidence about local oral traditions, this is fundamentally an argument from silence."

I should also post S.P.P's response to the review:

http://northstarmartialarts.com/blog1/2 ... of-my-book

"My friend Ben Judkins recently reviewed my new book Tai Chi, Baguazhang and The Golden Elixir, Internal Martial Arts Before the Boxer Uprising. Unfortunately, I believe he misunderstood it. The crux of his misunderstanding is with a theory I developed called the YMCA Consensus. "

However, I see one problem with his dates. Boxer Rebellion didn't happen until 1899, and Yang Lu Chan had already established "Tai Chi Chuan" in Beijing then by a good 30+ years - he died in 1872.

But I think there is a lot of truth in what he says, especially about westerners not understanding the cultural context and instead imposing their own.

[GrahamB]

And heads-up - I think we're going to do "The history of Chen Tai Chi" as a Heretics podcast episode in a couple of weeks. Should be fun - Damon will have his own unqiue take on it that I've never even considered before, I'm sure. He usually does. Will post here when it's done, and I think we are going to start putting things on YouTube as well, which might be easier access for some.

[Bao]

@Charles. I am not pushing any agenda. If we want to have a better understanding of history we should try to look at it from different angles and perspectives. When there is no proof for the most commonly accepted version of history, there is no reason trying to dig deeper or to look through facts and sources. We don’t know exactly how the history looks like.

What I don’t like, and it’s the same for Yang, Chen, Zhaobao, Wudang and others, is when people sell things using myths and unverifiable stories as it was the undeniable Truth. Who ever does this is dishonest, deceptive and probably knows very well that they use lies to take often quite big sums of money from people. From all these schools there are famous, admired masters, that might have great skills in their arts, but at the same time behave like sophisticated crooks.

What I’ve read from interviews with the leaders of Chen village tjq, I don’t remember exactly who said this but I can look it up (think it was CXW) is that there were no basic set of exercises for silk-reeling in Chen TJQ for beginners and that specifically CXW was asked to come up with a set of exercises. So according to this, CXW should have been the first to create a standardized set. Later others did their version.And this was called silk reeling exercises. This is what I have learned from Chen sources, of course I could be mistaken and got it wrong. If so, I would be happy to be corrected.

Of course there must have been different exercises earlier, every style have them. So basic silk-reeling should logically have been something taught early on. But jibengong vary a lot in most taichi styles, different from school to school, and there’s often not detailed body mechanics set as a standard and no standardized sets. So Chen stylists definitely do have an advantage, especially when it comes to beginners, who can start learning a structured set for detailed body mechanics right from the start. This is something lacking in most schools of other styles. So what they have done for Chen style with these different sets is a very good thing.

[greytowhite]

Bao you are correct, I heard something from Betty Dong last I got corrections on the silk reeling set. That Chen Xiaowang was asked to create the silk reeling set of exercises by the Chinese government. Unlike every other style - Chen Xiaowang did not have a set of basic exercises for his family kung fu - just the forms and push hands. Others may or may not have developed their own set prior to this - I can't speak on it, don't know.

[yeniseri]

I came across an interview with CXW and he stated, or words to the effect that Laojia always had silk reeling but it was he and some Chen members who explicitely created the silk reeling exercises as a way to drive home its part of keeping it within the form sequence. I can see that to the extent Feng Zhiquan and others of that caliber created their own version of sil reeling routines.
Has anyone (other than myself) seen at least some of the contributions of the other part of Chen Family i..e Li Family who was stated to be originators of the art. At some point in that relationship, Li Family went their separate ways but not much its written about them due to the gapign hole and the alleged 'secrets' that are in plain sight on origins of the past

[Trick]

What I’ve read from interviews with the leaders of Chen village tjq, I don’t remember exactly who said this but I can look it up (think it was CXW) is that there were no basic set of exercises for silk-reeling in Chen TJQ for beginners and that specifically CXW was asked to come up with a set of exercises. So according to this, CXW should have been the first to create a standardized set. Later others did their version.And this was called silk reeling exercises. This is what I have learned from Chen sources, of course I could be mistaken and got it wrong. If so, I would be happy to be corrected.
.

if this is right, then one can maybe argue about the chenshiquan perhaps not that long time ago was a bunch of ideas up for individual interpretation ...which so YLC understood and made it his own, and taught it to others to make it their own.....so by this what the tigers of chen village does today might look "quite"different from their tiger ancestors kungfu.........Perhaps the outer form is the basic practise, and the *ideas* were only given to the talented ones ?

[Bhassler]

Re: SPP

But I think there is a lot of truth in what he says, especially about westerners not understanding the cultural context and instead imposing their own.

There's a bit of irony, there. What criteria-- by any measure-- does SPP meet to qualify as an expert (or even informed layperson) on the cultural context of Chinese martial arts, either historically or in present iterations?
-He's not a formally trained scholar
-He's not a historian
-He neither speaks nor reads Chinese
-His own practice is unlike any acknowledged lineage of IMA
-His application/push hands demonstrations are... uninspiring

[greytowhite]

In case you missed it.

https://www.internalfightingartsblog.co ... rk-ch.html

[GrahamB]

Re: SPP

But I think there is a lot of truth in what he says, especially about westerners not understanding the cultural context and instead imposing their own.

There's a bit of irony, there. What criteria-- by any measure-- does SPP meet to qualify as an expert (or even informed layperson) on the cultural context of Chinese martial arts, either historically or in present iterations?
-He's not a formally trained scholar
-He's not a historian
-He neither speaks nor reads Chinese
-His own practice is unlike any acknowledged lineage of IMA
-His application/push hands demonstrations are... uninspiring

So what you're saying is.... he's just like you and me

But I did say, can we please stop focussing on the man - it just gets in the way of the ideas.