by Steve James on Tue Sep 25, 2018 7:50 am
The formula "hua, na, fa" was brought up earlier. The "Na" means seize, and it's the same as in "qin na." Of course, the word "seize" can denote something specific or it can connote more general ideas. It's just the difference between taking the word literally or associating it with other things. Balance is the same; it can be physical, mental, emotional, spiritual, and whatever else can be divided.
Making someone mad/angry is a strategy. Maintaining one's emotional balance is a strategy. The question I've been meaning to ask has been what the ultimate objective of the strategy was. That is, what's the goal of fighting at all? From that perspective, imo, all martial arts are the same, if they have the same goal. I mean, if two armies meet, they have the same goal/s (survive and/or destroy). Their strategies may have to differ, obviously. Btw, that brings up Suntzi's Art of War, which is extremely relevant because it's quoted from in the tcc "classics."
So, imo, most of this thread has been about tactics and techniques, not strategy, per se. From Sun's pov, a 250 lb tcc practitioner should not have the same strategy as his 150 lb opponent, or vice versa. However, they share a reasonably similar goal. At least, how do I stop the other guy from hurting me. Or, how do I hurt the other guy --which will stop him from hurting me. If the goal of tcc is something other, please elaborate. (Btw, it's fine if the goal has nothing to do with fighting).
Back to the formula, though. I first heard the formula 30 years ago from people associated with the Wu/Ng family tcc. But, it was "hua (neutralize), na (grasp/seize), da (hit/strike), fa (express/issue)." (I think Dmitri remembers some of those people from the old tcc list). Anyway, after the hua action, na, da, or fa can end the fight. Na can include anything from qinna (big or small). Da can include any from of strike (impact). Fa can be any issuance of energy, whether "push" or fajin.
Two points, imo, the specifically tcc part of the process is the hua (neutralization) aspect. I think it's possible to say that neutralizing the opponent is a great strategy. How it's done is certainly a tactic that requires skill, but might not necessarily involve anything more. It could mean fighting without fighting, if possible. Or, it could mean putting the opponent into a position where damage can be done safely (defanging the snake). Those are both strategies, but some would consider them contradictions, not definitions of "tcc" strategy.
"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."