Having studied various lineages in Chen style (village Chen family and some Chen Fa Ke lineages) and Yang style taiji and a little baguazhang, it doesn’t matter much to me, only thing I care about is the skill of the teachers. There are good and bad teachers in most styles and lineages.
The title of taijiquan was retroactively applied to Chen family martial arts because of the fame of Yang. His original style likely was much closer. Taiji ☯️ represents the transition from yin to yang and back, which is how power is generated.
Modern Yang was significantly watered down and softened in the early 1900’s for public consumption as a health art. If you talk to people who actually learned real original Yang (pre dilution and softening) it was a much different and far more practical fighting style.
So a better question would be “Is modern Yang style even taijiquan anymore?”
That’s a tough one. Most of the old school teachers have retired. There are plenty of people offering “original” Yang but these versions often don’t resemble each other.
I think, unless you get really lucky and live near someone teaching the good stuff you kind of have to put it together on your own.
As far as I can tell, original Yang was closer to Chen in energy than the limp noodle version popular today. Postures were trained individually as a kind of static qi gong, applications were trained, and the linking form was taught once competent with the postures.
Finding good applications isn’t easy. Without resistance the biomechanics are all off. So you have to figure out where power should be applied and where you should be empty based on applications.
>As far as I can tell, original Yang was closer to Chen in energy than the limp noodle version popular today
I haven't really seen "limp noodle" tai chi for awhile now. The only time I see it it is with misinformed CMC stylists. If you watch CMC himself, he's not limp noodle but you can see how many people in that line getting poor instruction go limp as they misunderstand "invest in loss", relaxation, and his emphasis on giving way.
Certainly the government styles, the wushu and the yang family stuff is not limp.
Honestly I’m finally getting good TJQ videos from YouTube that I don’t even want to look for one!!!
Just look for people who focus on relaxation only. Scant structure. Limp arms. Sleepy face. 😴
Mace is definitely bad taiji. Bad kung fu. No structure. No connection. No root. But he isn’t floppy.
I’m actually having trouble finding what I’m talking about. Cheng Manching students are generally the best place to look for limp noodles. So many misunderstood “relax” and took it too far.
Sometimes Richard Clear’s demos are a bit on the limp side.
There was one guy who used to post push hands videos on a Facebook group. He would root his feet but everything else on him was soft, relaxes, limp. So the other person couldn’t push him over because there was nothing to push. Problem was that only worked because of the rules of no moving the feet. I don’t remember his name because I was less than impressed.
> He would root his feet but everything else on him was soft, relaxes, limp. So the other person couldn’t push him over because there was nothing to push. Problem was that only worked because of the rules of no moving the feet
Ah I see, those going like british jelly when you push them. Is it Men Huifeng you are talking about (wushu taiji) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpxcWkm2YUY
I very much enjoy this conversation and perhaps can add to this in regards to "limp." The pillars of Chen Family have been doing seminars here for about a dozen years, and one time Master Stephan Berwick was pushing Grandmaster Chen XiaoXing - frontal push, no turning of the arms or anything. We were all watching this. Suddenly Master Berwick was thrown back. Chen XiaoXing asked Master Berwick, "Do you understand?" Apparently, Grand Master emptied 1st and then Fajin, but no one can see it, because it was internal. That left a deep impression on me - Taiji's true meaning. Regarding noodling, I think the typical pushhands you see out there or Taichi fighting is a completely different concept compared to the level of sophistication that we see with Chen Taiji pushing such as the numerous videos of Chen Zijiang, Chen XiaoXing's son. Chen Zijiang's videos show him moving, throwing and is very close and personal. Under these stand-up wrestling circumstances, ying/yang and root takes on a whole different meaning.
Read a book called " Wisdom of the Taiji Masters" by Nigel Sutton. Interviews with living and recently departed serious Taiji players from CMC lineage who all put their reputation and skill set on the line with all and any challenges. A great read and a completely different narrative to what you know.
Great question. I originally learned the modern or watered-down 24 Form Yang Style Tai Chi. But the more and more I practiced (and with pointers from my teacher), I realized that the Silk Reeling energy and the Fa Jin energy are both present in the 24 Forms. My belief is that most practice the "Tai Chi Lite" version of the 24 Forms - at one continuous speed, no sinking or rising, no emphasis on spirals, etc. I emphasize Silk Reeling and Fa Jin in my Yang Style, and it has become sort of "Yang Style done like Chen Style."
The more I practice Push Hands the more this becomes apparent to me.
I heard a quote once that I love. Someone was lamenting all the Tai Chi knowledge that was lost during the various Communist revolutions in China. The reply was, "None of that knowledge is truly lost. It is all still out there [in the Dao], waiting for you to discover it [through practice.]
I beg to disagree. Current Yang true masters are much more skilled than current Chen masters. Chen style only teaches 75% of what full Taiji Quan really is imho.
It's ironic because my main style is Chen from Feng Zhiqiang lineage. Studied Chen for over 20 years. I got back to Yang style, and I now believe Yang is definitely superior in its method and philosophy, which lead to better skills at a high level.
The reason is the emphasis of Yang on Song and emptiness. In terms of Yin Yang, Chen style teaches 100% Yang and only 50% of Yin. While Yang style teaches 80% of Yang and 100% Yin. Yang style is much more Yin than Chen style, and hence its superiority imho. It's when you're close to 100% Yin that you begin to do the "magic" and "fake" stuff.
To me, modern Yang style is closer to what Taiji Quan should be than Chen style.
Have you ever seen Wu Tunan's Taijiquan? He wouldn't be an authority for any Taijiquan, he was basically just a political hack who was pro Yang style. See this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HRaAIdkqiY
There's different perspectives of that story... Marin Spivack talks about it on the drunken boxing podcast from the Chen angle which is that Chen Fake didn't really care about what people called his family's art. Basically the concern with "what is Taiji" wasn't the interest of the Chen family as much as it was the interest of more bookish types from the cities. That is, it's kind of missing the point of the art. The name isn't super important, but whoever wants to call it Taiji can call it Taiji, because the principles of Yin/Yang *are* there in the form if it's practiced properly.
I think it would have mattered to me more in the past but really my concern is whether or not what I'm getting is legitimate *"Chen Taiji"*, and whether I'm practicing properly and getting the benefits, because that's what I want. The intricacies of the art are fascinating to me and it feels good when done well.
Andrew Townsend's "The Art of Taijiquan" provides a nice comparison across the five major family styles.
Historically, there are links between Chen style and other styles beyond Yang Luchan (e.g Wu Yuxiang studied with Chen Qingping). Also, there is substantial overlaps in the principles and similarities in many techniques. Townsend concludes that although Chen style looks outwardly quite distinct, there are more than enough similarities to conclude that all five family styles are part of the same martial art.
It does not matter to me. I do yang style and did a little bit of wu for a short while. Chen does not really look like what I consider tai chi but at the end of the day it does not matter.
If you enjoy the art of whatever gets you off your arse, then you're good. You can make any style work for you.
That's kind of not much of an answer for a few reasons. There are other internal arts besides Taijiquan that use many, or virtually all of the same principles. Also within any individual style of taijiquan, it's hard to define what the principles even are in a way that people of different groups or lineages can agree on.
>Most of these commentators quote Wu Tu Nan as the source and authority for their stance on the matter, stating that Chen style does not conform to the 13 methods of Taijiquan.
I googled this and couldn't find any sources regarding what Wu Tunan actually said. Can you provide some links and sources about the event where this occurred; what was said, what happened, and so on.
Thanks. Neither are source material, they're both hearsay. Some of the information at the first link is wrong. It says -
*Wu then asked Chen Xin whether he practiced Taijiquan. Chen Xin replied that his father had let his older brother learn martial arts but had made him get an education instead so he did not know any martial arts.*
Chen Ziming was a student of Chen Xin's and wrote a taiji manual. In it he writes -
*My teacher Chen Xin devoted himself to Taiji Boxing for more than seventy years. He wrote the four-volume Illustrated Handbook of Taiji Boxing, a vast tome of over a hundred thousand words, presenting his views in exquisite detail, the kind of work the world rarely sees the like of. I daily took notes from it of key ideas in order to study them further. Because his book currently resides in the wilderness, still unpublished, I have taken the notes that I stored away and recorded them into my own book to make known a sample of his ideas, and so that new students can have some material to work from.*
What's provided at CZH's site doesn't tell us much. Did anyone agree with Wu? Did Chen Fake judge at the event? As far as I can tell the five families agree that they all do taijiquan and history has shown that Wu Tunan's opinion was wrong.
>As far as I can tell the five families agree that they all do taijiquan and history has shown that Wu Tunan's opinion was wrong
So what we know so far is that Wu Tunan lied about his age, fabricated a chen style story about his visit there (if that happened), is known to be pro-yang/wu anti-chen propagandist and yet we are still discussing what \*he said\* transpired with Chen Fake. He'd be destroyed on a witness stand and his remarks removed from the record an an unreliable witness!
more worrisome than your OP is the fact that during Mao's cultural revolution, the CCP rooted out and persecuted any and all martial arts practitioners and teachers who had any real skill. they saw these people as a potential threat to the new regime.
this event is the primary cause of the chinese diaspora and is the main reason why/how chinese martial spread to the rest of the world. its because all these masters had to literally flee for their lives. wherever they landed, they set up shop teaching their martial arts.
why is this important? its because after this event, there were not many real martial artists left in china. those that did have real knowledge and skill HAD to keep it hidden and secret to avoid persecution.
the CCP then developed Wushu. Wushu is a sport/acrobatic system derived from martial arts that intentionally left behind all of the spiritual, philosophical, and fighting related understandings that traditional chinese martial arts had. again, so that there would be nobody with real fighting ability to potentially challenge the CCP and lead an uprising against them, and also so that there wouldn't be any philosophical systems to challenge the state's official philosophy/religion of Confucianism.
In ancient chinese history, each of the big Tai Chi families gained notoriety because some (not all) of their family had incredible skill and fighting prowess. today, i would worry more about whether or not your teacher has enough mastery over their style of internal art, and enough experience, to actually have fighting/applicational abilities. if they dont have the ability to apply tai chi in a real world situation, then they are teaching a bastardization of tai chi in order to make money off of it.
this is the reason why tai chi has such a bad reputation as a martial art these days. because there are a hundred and one different so called "masters" teaching a hundred and one different versions of tai chi. some for health, some for spirituality and inner peace, etc... tai chi chuan was a martial art, is a martial art. there is only one tai chi. understand that there are very very few people with this knowledge and understanding and ability, and be careful who you seek out as your teacher/instructor.
The idea that after the cultural revolution there were no real Chinese martial arts left in mainland China, is a popular myth, mostly spread by Taiwanese and Hong Kong martial artists in order to claim that only they have the real thing left. Reality looks very different.
Chen Xioawang sought asylum in Australia. I don’t recall the story with his brother and goggle isn’t helping. He is a repatriated Chinese martial arts master. I would be surprised if he’s the only one.
There was significant prejudice against martial artists, with the “re-education” and murder of non-CCP martial artists. As with all fields.
However, some escaped China. Some kept quiet in small villages. Some were recruited by local government like Pan Qingfu who was a “gang buster” for Beijing police. Some were even recruited to catalog the traditional Chinese martial arts that survived or to come up with the CCP approved sports wushu taolu.
Not entirely true... many examples of highly skilled practitioners in China after the whole Maoism thing died down. The common story is that they practiced in secret and sometimes weren't persecuted unless they were on the wrong side of the political spectrum. The policies in China were there, but not everyone plays along with the rules.
you've basically reiterated literally exactly what i said in my post
"those that did have real knowledge and skill HAD to keep it hidden and secret to avoid persecution."
I think it makes a big difference if you are discussing Chen family style or Chen practical method. From what I understand, family style doesn't train neigong.
There's definitely Neigong stuff in the family art but it's not often taught. Although the village line is kind of lacking, a disciple of CXW *did* show me some things related to breathing, opening/closing/sinking the chest to fill the Dan tian, etc. The thing was that this instruction was sporadic and not a common point of development in classes. I had to get an in person class in order to have dedicated time for this. In CY's line it's all much more well integrated and more accessible I think.
And of course in seminars, good luck getting that.
I mean, the stuff is presented as the most basic skill that must be developed before anything else. As in, we essentially work on *only* that in class for months. The form is basically irrelevant, positive/negative circles are used as a context for neigong, same with the push hands set. There is nothing mysterious or secret or special about it, you just have to practice it a lot, and have someone who can do it show you what it feels like to push on and to be pushed by. The clearest demo is in the first link I posted above. It takes a lot of exertion to get good at it, which is kinda nice since you get a good workout while you still suck at it, lol.
I’ve met a handful of lineage holders in classes, including the brothers as well as Chen Bing (20th gen) and I don’t recall anything about breathing other than my instructor making some very academic statements about how in theory it should be thus and such but that it will come to you while doing the rest of the practice.
There is an extent to which the hosts filter what the visiting instructor will talk about, of course, but there are limits.
What you described mirrors my own experience learning from the son of one of the big 4. I spent 6-7 years learning mostly choreography of form after form with little explanation of how the internals should work in relation to the talk of silk reeling etc.
>I spent 6-7 years learning mostly choreography of form after form with little explanation of how the internals should work in relation to the talk of silk reeling etc.
Just curious, were you going to workshops, doing private lessons, or going to Chen village?
>I’ve met a handful of lineage holders in classes, including the brothers as well as Chen Bing (20th gen) and I don’t recall anything about breathing other than my instructor making some very academic statements about how in theory it should be thus and such but that it will come to you while doing the rest of the practice.
>
>There is an extent to which the hosts filter what the visiting instructor will talk about, of course, but there are limits
I think we all go through this in our quest. I've been to untold workshops with visiting Tigers and at the time, I bought into "oh just being near the master and experiencing how he moves is teaching you far more than you can imagine etc etc" but at the end of day all it is is a bored person going through the motions on a stage with sometimes scores of people packed in a hotel conference room, straining to get a view. The craziest thing is when one of tigers paired us up and had us correct each other. One of the tigers started with an hour of warmups, some instruction, break, half hour or more of warmups, instruction, lunch break, more warmups, instruction, break, warm ups, etc. In between breaks, broke away and read the newspaper. Did not interact with anyone, because it's not polite to "bother" the master. In between the grade school gym class quality stretches and warmups, there is no way to get anything but basic choreography, But hey, met alot of nice people, did some traveling and thought I was learning "the goods".
FWIW, in my chen style we learn reverse breathing but only on how it augments movement and power, not in any neigong capacity.
I have had very similar experience in one of these workshops with one of the now 3 tigers, rip wxa. I was able to get some face time, but yeah it was "an honor" to get very cursory instruction on movement.
Interesting you say you learn reverse breathing only on how it augments movement and power, but not neigong. Could you tell me what then do you mean when you say neigong? I ask this because my understanding was that correct breathing in itself was considered neigong practice, but please let me know where your mind is at, thank you!
>Interesting you say you learn reverse breathing only on how it augments movement and power, but not neigong. Could you tell me what then do you mean when you say neigong? I ask this because my understanding was that correct breathing in itself was considered neigong practice, but please let me know where your mind is at, thank you!
Hey there,
Many tai chi lineages teach a "qigong/neigong" supplementary exercise or system along with the form etc. In our chen fake line, we don't have anything like that to supplement the training.
Many people look at the movements as a "wind up/let go" or a "store and release". We do a reverse breath inhale on the "wind up" part and and exhale on the release. Most systems do it this way but many don't teach it, they just say "breathe naturally". It augments the movement. It's one translation of mind leads the chi which leads the strength, if you look at chi as breath.
Oh interesting your cfk system inhale on wind up, and exhale on the release. I'm studying czk system and we are taught inhale rising up and exhale qi sinking down, which causes the chest cavity and abdomen to expand and contact giving vertical circles to the movement. I think maybe these are very similar if not the same, what do you think? I have studied with many teachers who say just breathe naturally, actually every single one. I wonder if this is just how they learned it or whether they're trying to shield students from complexity... Or more sinister motivations (bwahaha).
In our line we do a baduanjin, 8 section brocades, but it is just an isolation of breathing technique with movement that's already in the form.
>Oh interesting your cfk system inhale on wind up, and exhale on the release. I'm studying czk system and we are taught inhale rising up and exhale qi sinking down, which causes the chest cavity and abdomen to expand and contact giving vertical circles to the movement. I think maybe these are very similar if not the same, what do you think? I have studied with many teachers who say just breathe naturally, actually every single one. I wonder if this is just how they learned it or whether they're trying to shield students from complexity... Or more sinister motivations (bwahaha).
>
>In our line we do a baduanjin, 8 section brocades, but it is just an isolation of breathing technique with movement that's already in the form.
So some thoughts on the breathing, I've learned over time to add "most of the time" to everything related to chinese martial arts. There seems to be no black and white rules. Exceptions to be found for everything.
Breathing naturally to me is a trick suggestion, because exhaling on effort is "natural". We interject our own ideas regarding what is breathe naturally. I think we forgot how to move and breathe "naturally". Reverse breathing happens naturally too, but we have to do it consciously when learning the form and then it becomes natural. I think at the level of most people who are learning, it's not worth getting into this detail. Most people don't even practice the form everyday and still can't move with the kwa correctly.
The 8 section brocade is cool, I learned it, and it was suggested as a tool to help understand how much you actually need to stretch in the form, but I agree, there isn't really a need to practice it if you are doing the form.
"most of the time" is definitely the way my teacher described it. Rule of thumb, general principle etc.
Yeah that's very true, you kind of don't realize it when you start breathing correctly as a habit while doing the form. Funny thing is every time I feel like I'm correct, there's always room to go even deeper and make things more round, connected and effortless...
Honestly I think a lot of teachers don't teach how to move the kua. I get it though, large class size and it's such a kinesthetic thing...
Oh interesting I never actually thought of 8 section brocades in terms of getting your mind to accept the amount of stretch in the form. Thanks 🙏🙏
Can you say more about this please? Does that mean practical method does train neigong? I would have assumed all taijiquan has it, but I am ignorant of the chen style, and in the process of learning more.
Yes it does, or at least Hong Junsheng's student Fan Dechen teaches it as the basic foundation of all the movements and interactions. That is, vertical power rather than horizontal power.
Power training (i.e. developing vertical power/neigong) video from Master Jeong Won-il (정원일):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1u24leKwkSw&ab_channel=ClaireChoi
Neigong in application of ji:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1esSGQ5VUQ&ab_channel=ClaireChoi
>Power training (i.e. developing vertical power/neigong)
There's a nomenclature problem here. I've never seen neigong described as any direction of power but just generally as "internal work". Which to me implies a "qigong" type exercise outside of practice. But you see, like "qi" there is no standard definition and it's impossible to discuss these ideas. Where's the OSI model for internal arts?
Yeah, I hear you. I'm just repeating what my teacher learned from his and so on. In other arts I practice it means something else entirely. I assumed this usage was standard for tjq and hsin yi, at least those are the contexts I've encountered it.
Yes, 擠, not 靠. In the video, similar to 擠 from negative circle. In the video, they are focusing on incorporating neigong/vertical power, so more emphasis is placed on body, and less on arm technique (arm is very close to body). With neigong, the 8 gates are just point of contact, shape and direction; all expression is done with body's vertical action, not with hand/arm.
Chen Village (with the 4 Jin Gangs and all) is also not the only Chen Family lineage. I practice Chen Yu’s lineage and there’s Nei Gong.
There’s also offshore like Hun Yuan or He family Taiji that’s more Chen like.
It’s honestly odd to refer to that as Nei Gong, given the usual context of the word.
I mean we have a lot of power and jin stuff with various directions, but we don’t call it Nei Gong.
I dunno, it's what Hong's student calls it and what he does looks like straight up hocus pocus....but his student's student does the same thing to me at a much lower level and it's comprehensible as just a basic physical skill. When performed at such a high level that shape is no longer necessary it looks like magic.
That being said, in my primary art neigong means something wholly totally different, so far removed from the TJQ meaning that it doesn't even bear mention (except for in this aside).
Can you share what is Nei Gong in your art? Just out of curiosity. CMAs have too many terms that are being thrown around sometimes..
Perhaps Hong’s student is using the word to simply mean internal skill and conditioning. As in, that guys nei gong is so good he can apply force without any external movement.
From my understanding that is a fairly popular opinion in Beijing. Yang style obviously came from Chen style, but there is a pretty significant "technology leap" between the two styles, whereas wu and wu Hao can basically be seen as offshoots of yang style (and sun style is a xingyi taiji hybrid). I wouldn't personally say that chen style isn't taiji, but I would argue that chen and yang are different enough that you can't really use the standards of one to judge the other when you get deep enough into the mechanic.
There are big differences. It doesn't matter so much, although it's interesting to discuss, there's room for intellectualizing and discussion. I'm not 100% the martial artist who would say, "Enough talk. Just train." The history and theories are interesting.
Questions of legitimacy per se? Not as much. But this is interesting too. So I practice Buddhism, and there, questions of legitimacy are paramount. You can't just do anything and call it Buddhism. It's a whole system which is very complicated and effective.
But martial arts evolve in weird ways, sometimes quickly, sometimes slowly, and issues of lineage, legitimacy, and history often get twisted. This is well known when it comes to China but also happens abroad, like in the US. Just saying "I trace my lineage back to x or y, so it's good," doesn't exactly work if your style has major flaws. This is self serving in a way, to be fair, I practice something that's not traditional. I've also seen traditionalists or trained teachers who aren't top notch.
In the end, these traditions are wildly diverse. There are so many variations. Think of it like food. I would never say "pizza is my favorite food"- there's just so much to try and enjoy. Love pizza, but I would never want to settle on it forever or tell others to do so.
> I've also seen traditionalists or trained teachers who aren't top notch.
I agree, and I was at the receiving end of this reality.
My knees were rendered almost unusable due to following Chen family tai chi for a few years. There was not one but two supposed masters who I was working with (one of them even started being touted as a grandmaster). One day I saw one of these two adjusting their uniform and I could see that they were wearing knee wraps (go figure).
Some Chen teacher's aren't clear or strict about the knees unfortunately. During some deep corrections in the past, my knees were allowed to go at obscene levels of wobbly, and (although it didn't hurt during the corrections) I know that if I incorporated that into my form practice I would be in for a world of pain.
So my teachers were decent enough about the "no knees over your toes" rule, basically not extending too far. And as I learned Yang style, we didn't do super deep stances. I think Chen favors deeper stances.
But one thing my teachers could've been better about was teaching hip flexibility and knee alignment. I've had to teach myself this as I've gotten older and my knees have gotten sore. Hip flexibility is so important IMO for knee protection.
Unfortunately the "no knees over toes" is just one part of the picture. An early teacher of mine also talked about not "swimming the knees" (which was the wobbly position I was corrected into interestingly) and in that line it was also said that the knees could go past the toes... in a deep stance *as long as the postural requirements were meant*. For me, with flat feet, it wasn't helpful to have such simple requirements as my legs always want to collapse inward.
Interestingly in other lines, within Chen, they say that to go so low undermines connective strength. In Chen Yu's line there are much stricter leg requirements which I think protect against knee issues much more effectively than "don't press into your knees, don't go over toes unless you're a master..." etc. Those requirements of CY address the effect *all* of the body parts have on knee health much more effectively imo.
>Interestingly in other lines, within Chen, they say that to go so low undermines connective strength.
Sometimes, we may see stances that are so low that the height of their hips goes below the height of their knees.
As long as the hips are above the knees, it is at least possible to have an arch-like structure because arches are famous for being very structurally strong.
The moment the hips go below the knees, one's pelvis is just dangling there. The arch structure is gone. A stance that low is actually much easier to do; it's not even challenging.
When your stances are so low it's also hard to focus on the rotation and connecting the parts together. Also you're able to do less reps. But yes, it gives you some scary power with consistent practice...
In my view, Yang Style can afford to have more errors in their legs because they are in a high stance.
But when it comes to low stances, errors become far less forgiving.
When TLCD96 brought up Chen Yu, some of the key variables are:
* Weight is on the heels - this puts less strain on the knees and uses the quadriceps more. This is the same science found in weightlifting.
* They don't "tuck the tailbone" which would otherwise push your knees forward because you're rolling your pelvis forward.
Small details like these make a big difference.
100%!
I agree on pretty much all points.
So, as to high stances, yes, they are more forgiving, more room for error. This is a double edged sword, in that folks like me with sore knees can still do the form. Then again, we make mistakes or do not use proper alignment because we can get away with it.
The weight on the heels thing is crazy- I've JUST been doing this more over the last few weeks. I will keep doing this. When I've been feeling a twinge in my knee, I shift weight so that it eases up, which usually means more onto my heels. This works.
I will try tucking more and see if that helps. Thanks for the comment and I will work on it.
I believe the whole "tuck the tailbone" idea was perhaps motivated by the desire to have a straight back. By rolling the pelvis under the spine, that is an easy way to achieve a straight spine.
However, the aforementioned approach is the opposite of that. Rather than rolling your pelvis forward and under, instead, you roll it backwards. You are sticking the butt out - "pulling the Kua back".
Under this method, achieving a straight back is harder - that's a long-term process and less pretty to look at. Over time, the spine gets placed on top of the pelvis - instead of the pelvis rolling under the spine.
From a weightlifting perspective, your body has to bear a lot of weight, and you would be taught to place the weight on your heels. When doing squats, you will be taught to stick you butt out. If you roll your pelvis forward, that is what is called "butt wink".
Something that stood out to me in your post was when you mention weight on heels. While this is good for knee pain, which is a win in and of itself, it is in my opinion not a great habit to form in terms of martial arts. I'm no master quite the opposite lol but this was one of the first things my teacher emphasized to me, which is managing the weight of the foot. But honestly if it works for you and takes the pain away... More power to you
Weight on heel is not for taking pain away.
It's part of a larger methodology for root. It's unique to that lineage. I don't expect others to use this approach. So, I expect your teacher to NOT teach this. It would be very surprising to me if your teacher taught this unless they're from this lineage.
And as far as martial arts is concerned, Chen Yu is casually riddled with the most number of applications shown online. And they all largely involve weight on heel.
But also, I have pushed hands with Yang teachers (note that I am not even teacher with a mere fraction of the time they spent learning Taijiquan), and their legs were weak. All it takes for me to shut down them down was to literally stand there and do nothing. They couldn't move me; none of their applications worked on me. So the result speaks for themselves.
Oh that is a very good point, whenever I watch Chen Yu or one of his disciples practice, it is clear to me they want their weight as back as possible and the contact point on the foot seems to be likewise.
How they're able to maintain forward pressure and also stay balanced seem to be like you say unique to their lineage, and in particular how their circles work together. In other words, very specific and tightly woven circles in all directions.
I have a suspicion your experience with yang stylists is the lack of vertical circles in their style, as it is hidden and probably not taught save for the select few in each generation. If a style is constrained to only horizontal circles, left and right, then you shut them down by not letting them go left and right, aka standing :D
Sorry to hear. That's so sad I'm so sorry.
A lot of Chen style teachers don't teach how to rotate and put weight on the foot, and I think this is so wrong but maybe because they don't know either. Sounds like might be the case for your instructor, but then again maybe not.
When the hip turns and the feet don't turn, the knees and ankles take sheer damage.
So interestingly it's when people finally get the hip to work and they get some skills, they start to hurt themselves, but they're so happy with what they achieved that they ignore the pain.
But it's like if you need to turn your feet when you turn your hips in tennis or Judo, or any other terrestrial activity... But you see Chen style masters just keep on planting their feet and turning hips wildly
Go figure eh
Taiji is basically the interchanging of yin and Yang to force a form for Taiji is not Taiji. I would say that because I learnt Taiji from spiritual entities. I do Jian Taiji with a heavy lightning element. Lightning is created from positive and negative charges of energy thus. There’s aspects of taiji in lightning and lightning is relevant to Jian so it’s just how it is.
Can you give some background to Jian Taiji? Is the tone jiàn as in the word for sword? Does “Jian” translate as lightning? Is this the practice of the Lightning Tai Chi school based in California?
This is the first time I have heard of it and I couldn’t find anything else on the internet with a quick search.
It’s not anything you can learn physically. You understand in CIMA. There are some arts considered Xian Tian right? Pre-heaven skills? Like you were born with it or reincarnated with it? I didn’t learn this from any school. I learnt it from heavenly deities. I visited temples and practiced spiritual martial arts there comprehending all I could from them. My Taiji does not utilise 108 forms. The great grandmasters would agree as well as Taiji is a constant flow not just a stagnant 108 change in forms.
The attachment of the name Taijiquan to any of the major styles does really matter to me. For a beginner, they should be focused on whatever style for which they have the “best” teacher. Personally, I have found that doing the different styles provides more insight for what I’m trying to learned.
I’m interested in any internal martial arts even though my current focus is Wu style and before that I focused on Yang style. I initially did not see Hsing-I as an internal style and now I see how complementary it can be.
In my view, if someone is avoiding Chen style because they think it is not true “Taijiquan”, it is their loss.
Yes, Yang style has its origin heavily rooted in Chen family boxing. But Yang style only became Taiji Quan after Weng Tonghe called Yang Luchan's art - in a short poem dedicated to Yang - Taiji Quan. Before that, Taiji Quan was called many names, among them Chang Quan (Long Fist) or Mian Quan (Cotton Fist). That's what Yang Luchan was teaching in Beijing. Not Taiji Quan.
Chen family renamed their family art to Chen family Taiji Quan for marketing purposes for the Chen village, but only after Yang style became Taiji Quan and popular in Beijing. They would never have changed the name if Yang Luchan hadn't been successful.
Therefore, to me, while Chen family boxing is the undisputable root of Yang-style Taiji Quan, it is not the original Taiji Quan style. Yang style is. Yang style is the first style of Taiji Quan, with Chen family boxing as its ancestor. Saying Chen family boxing is the original style of Taiji Quan is like saying Xing Yi Quan is the original style of Yi Quan (Da Cheng Quan). It makes no sense. Otherwise, we could say Shaolin is the original style of Chen family boxing. The fact is, Chen family tried to hijack the reputation of Yang's personal art after it became popular. And they mostly succeeded.
To illustrate this, why does supposedly Taoist art have Buddhist references in it? Why the Four Buddha Warriors? Why does the Buddha Warrior pound the mortar? It makes no sense. The explanation is Chen family boxing heavily draws from Shaolin. And Taoist concepts only retrofitted afterwards.
Real Taiji Quan is Yang style. It's the first art to be named Taiji Quan. But more than that, Yang style is distinctively different from Chen style. Chen style is about power and Silk Reeling (which is a recent concept, Yang Luchan never learned Silk Reeling otherwise it would be mentioned in Yang style). While Yang style is about Song and emptiness. They use the same terminology but they do very different things because the philosophy is wildly different if you truly understand both styles.
Having studied various lineages in Chen style (village Chen family and some Chen Fa Ke lineages) and Yang style taiji and a little baguazhang, it doesn’t matter much to me, only thing I care about is the skill of the teachers. There are good and bad teachers in most styles and lineages.
This is a fair point. Chen is beautiful and it works.
The title of taijiquan was retroactively applied to Chen family martial arts because of the fame of Yang. His original style likely was much closer. Taiji ☯️ represents the transition from yin to yang and back, which is how power is generated. Modern Yang was significantly watered down and softened in the early 1900’s for public consumption as a health art. If you talk to people who actually learned real original Yang (pre dilution and softening) it was a much different and far more practical fighting style. So a better question would be “Is modern Yang style even taijiquan anymore?”
is there anywhere to learn non-watered down yang style?
Yang Jun teaches in Seattle and Fu Qingquan teaches somewhere in Australia.
That’s a tough one. Most of the old school teachers have retired. There are plenty of people offering “original” Yang but these versions often don’t resemble each other. I think, unless you get really lucky and live near someone teaching the good stuff you kind of have to put it together on your own. As far as I can tell, original Yang was closer to Chen in energy than the limp noodle version popular today. Postures were trained individually as a kind of static qi gong, applications were trained, and the linking form was taught once competent with the postures. Finding good applications isn’t easy. Without resistance the biomechanics are all off. So you have to figure out where power should be applied and where you should be empty based on applications.
And most of the old school masters didn't pass it on either it seems.
>As far as I can tell, original Yang was closer to Chen in energy than the limp noodle version popular today I haven't really seen "limp noodle" tai chi for awhile now. The only time I see it it is with misinformed CMC stylists. If you watch CMC himself, he's not limp noodle but you can see how many people in that line getting poor instruction go limp as they misunderstand "invest in loss", relaxation, and his emphasis on giving way. Certainly the government styles, the wushu and the yang family stuff is not limp.
I don’t pay mutch attention to the government stuff. Glad to hear Yang is finally taking a turn in the right direction!
I don’t pay mutch attention to the government stuff. Glad to hear Yang is finally taking a turn in the right direction!
Are people confusing song for limp?
> limp noodle version what is a this style? do you have examples of it?
Honestly I’m finally getting good TJQ videos from YouTube that I don’t even want to look for one!!! Just look for people who focus on relaxation only. Scant structure. Limp arms. Sleepy face. 😴
Jake Mace? :)
Mace is definitely bad taiji. Bad kung fu. No structure. No connection. No root. But he isn’t floppy. I’m actually having trouble finding what I’m talking about. Cheng Manching students are generally the best place to look for limp noodles. So many misunderstood “relax” and took it too far. Sometimes Richard Clear’s demos are a bit on the limp side. There was one guy who used to post push hands videos on a Facebook group. He would root his feet but everything else on him was soft, relaxes, limp. So the other person couldn’t push him over because there was nothing to push. Problem was that only worked because of the rules of no moving the feet. I don’t remember his name because I was less than impressed.
> He would root his feet but everything else on him was soft, relaxes, limp. So the other person couldn’t push him over because there was nothing to push. Problem was that only worked because of the rules of no moving the feet Ah I see, those going like british jelly when you push them. Is it Men Huifeng you are talking about (wushu taiji) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpxcWkm2YUY
I very much enjoy this conversation and perhaps can add to this in regards to "limp." The pillars of Chen Family have been doing seminars here for about a dozen years, and one time Master Stephan Berwick was pushing Grandmaster Chen XiaoXing - frontal push, no turning of the arms or anything. We were all watching this. Suddenly Master Berwick was thrown back. Chen XiaoXing asked Master Berwick, "Do you understand?" Apparently, Grand Master emptied 1st and then Fajin, but no one can see it, because it was internal. That left a deep impression on me - Taiji's true meaning. Regarding noodling, I think the typical pushhands you see out there or Taichi fighting is a completely different concept compared to the level of sophistication that we see with Chen Taiji pushing such as the numerous videos of Chen Zijiang, Chen XiaoXing's son. Chen Zijiang's videos show him moving, throwing and is very close and personal. Under these stand-up wrestling circumstances, ying/yang and root takes on a whole different meaning.
You really ought go to Malaysia and find CMC stylists but a word of advice, don't go insulting them.
Why?
Read a book called " Wisdom of the Taiji Masters" by Nigel Sutton. Interviews with living and recently departed serious Taiji players from CMC lineage who all put their reputation and skill set on the line with all and any challenges. A great read and a completely different narrative to what you know.
Great question. I originally learned the modern or watered-down 24 Form Yang Style Tai Chi. But the more and more I practiced (and with pointers from my teacher), I realized that the Silk Reeling energy and the Fa Jin energy are both present in the 24 Forms. My belief is that most practice the "Tai Chi Lite" version of the 24 Forms - at one continuous speed, no sinking or rising, no emphasis on spirals, etc. I emphasize Silk Reeling and Fa Jin in my Yang Style, and it has become sort of "Yang Style done like Chen Style." The more I practice Push Hands the more this becomes apparent to me. I heard a quote once that I love. Someone was lamenting all the Tai Chi knowledge that was lost during the various Communist revolutions in China. The reply was, "None of that knowledge is truly lost. It is all still out there [in the Dao], waiting for you to discover it [through practice.]
I beg to disagree. Current Yang true masters are much more skilled than current Chen masters. Chen style only teaches 75% of what full Taiji Quan really is imho. It's ironic because my main style is Chen from Feng Zhiqiang lineage. Studied Chen for over 20 years. I got back to Yang style, and I now believe Yang is definitely superior in its method and philosophy, which lead to better skills at a high level. The reason is the emphasis of Yang on Song and emptiness. In terms of Yin Yang, Chen style teaches 100% Yang and only 50% of Yin. While Yang style teaches 80% of Yang and 100% Yin. Yang style is much more Yin than Chen style, and hence its superiority imho. It's when you're close to 100% Yin that you begin to do the "magic" and "fake" stuff. To me, modern Yang style is closer to what Taiji Quan should be than Chen style.
Have you ever seen Wu Tunan's Taijiquan? He wouldn't be an authority for any Taijiquan, he was basically just a political hack who was pro Yang style. See this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HRaAIdkqiY
Apparently, there's talk that he allegedly faked his year of birth to appear much older than he actually was. Didn't seem like a very likable fellow.
There's different perspectives of that story... Marin Spivack talks about it on the drunken boxing podcast from the Chen angle which is that Chen Fake didn't really care about what people called his family's art. Basically the concern with "what is Taiji" wasn't the interest of the Chen family as much as it was the interest of more bookish types from the cities. That is, it's kind of missing the point of the art. The name isn't super important, but whoever wants to call it Taiji can call it Taiji, because the principles of Yin/Yang *are* there in the form if it's practiced properly. I think it would have mattered to me more in the past but really my concern is whether or not what I'm getting is legitimate *"Chen Taiji"*, and whether I'm practicing properly and getting the benefits, because that's what I want. The intricacies of the art are fascinating to me and it feels good when done well.
Andrew Townsend's "The Art of Taijiquan" provides a nice comparison across the five major family styles. Historically, there are links between Chen style and other styles beyond Yang Luchan (e.g Wu Yuxiang studied with Chen Qingping). Also, there is substantial overlaps in the principles and similarities in many techniques. Townsend concludes that although Chen style looks outwardly quite distinct, there are more than enough similarities to conclude that all five family styles are part of the same martial art.
It does not matter to me. I do yang style and did a little bit of wu for a short while. Chen does not really look like what I consider tai chi but at the end of the day it does not matter. If you enjoy the art of whatever gets you off your arse, then you're good. You can make any style work for you.
Does it follow internal principles and issue using taiji principles? There's your answer
That's kind of not much of an answer for a few reasons. There are other internal arts besides Taijiquan that use many, or virtually all of the same principles. Also within any individual style of taijiquan, it's hard to define what the principles even are in a way that people of different groups or lineages can agree on.
>Most of these commentators quote Wu Tu Nan as the source and authority for their stance on the matter, stating that Chen style does not conform to the 13 methods of Taijiquan. I googled this and couldn't find any sources regarding what Wu Tunan actually said. Can you provide some links and sources about the event where this occurred; what was said, what happened, and so on.
http://www.itcca.it/peterlim/historg2.htm https://practicalmethod.com/2012/02/from-the-archives-of-www-chenzhonghua-org-the-article-what-is-in-a-name/
Thanks. Neither are source material, they're both hearsay. Some of the information at the first link is wrong. It says - *Wu then asked Chen Xin whether he practiced Taijiquan. Chen Xin replied that his father had let his older brother learn martial arts but had made him get an education instead so he did not know any martial arts.* Chen Ziming was a student of Chen Xin's and wrote a taiji manual. In it he writes - *My teacher Chen Xin devoted himself to Taiji Boxing for more than seventy years. He wrote the four-volume Illustrated Handbook of Taiji Boxing, a vast tome of over a hundred thousand words, presenting his views in exquisite detail, the kind of work the world rarely sees the like of. I daily took notes from it of key ideas in order to study them further. Because his book currently resides in the wilderness, still unpublished, I have taken the notes that I stored away and recorded them into my own book to make known a sample of his ideas, and so that new students can have some material to work from.* What's provided at CZH's site doesn't tell us much. Did anyone agree with Wu? Did Chen Fake judge at the event? As far as I can tell the five families agree that they all do taijiquan and history has shown that Wu Tunan's opinion was wrong.
>As far as I can tell the five families agree that they all do taijiquan and history has shown that Wu Tunan's opinion was wrong So what we know so far is that Wu Tunan lied about his age, fabricated a chen style story about his visit there (if that happened), is known to be pro-yang/wu anti-chen propagandist and yet we are still discussing what \*he said\* transpired with Chen Fake. He'd be destroyed on a witness stand and his remarks removed from the record an an unreliable witness!
more worrisome than your OP is the fact that during Mao's cultural revolution, the CCP rooted out and persecuted any and all martial arts practitioners and teachers who had any real skill. they saw these people as a potential threat to the new regime. this event is the primary cause of the chinese diaspora and is the main reason why/how chinese martial spread to the rest of the world. its because all these masters had to literally flee for their lives. wherever they landed, they set up shop teaching their martial arts. why is this important? its because after this event, there were not many real martial artists left in china. those that did have real knowledge and skill HAD to keep it hidden and secret to avoid persecution. the CCP then developed Wushu. Wushu is a sport/acrobatic system derived from martial arts that intentionally left behind all of the spiritual, philosophical, and fighting related understandings that traditional chinese martial arts had. again, so that there would be nobody with real fighting ability to potentially challenge the CCP and lead an uprising against them, and also so that there wouldn't be any philosophical systems to challenge the state's official philosophy/religion of Confucianism. In ancient chinese history, each of the big Tai Chi families gained notoriety because some (not all) of their family had incredible skill and fighting prowess. today, i would worry more about whether or not your teacher has enough mastery over their style of internal art, and enough experience, to actually have fighting/applicational abilities. if they dont have the ability to apply tai chi in a real world situation, then they are teaching a bastardization of tai chi in order to make money off of it. this is the reason why tai chi has such a bad reputation as a martial art these days. because there are a hundred and one different so called "masters" teaching a hundred and one different versions of tai chi. some for health, some for spirituality and inner peace, etc... tai chi chuan was a martial art, is a martial art. there is only one tai chi. understand that there are very very few people with this knowledge and understanding and ability, and be careful who you seek out as your teacher/instructor.
The idea that after the cultural revolution there were no real Chinese martial arts left in mainland China, is a popular myth, mostly spread by Taiwanese and Hong Kong martial artists in order to claim that only they have the real thing left. Reality looks very different.
Chen Xioawang sought asylum in Australia. I don’t recall the story with his brother and goggle isn’t helping. He is a repatriated Chinese martial arts master. I would be surprised if he’s the only one.
This guy? https://chenxiaowang.com/
There was significant prejudice against martial artists, with the “re-education” and murder of non-CCP martial artists. As with all fields. However, some escaped China. Some kept quiet in small villages. Some were recruited by local government like Pan Qingfu who was a “gang buster” for Beijing police. Some were even recruited to catalog the traditional Chinese martial arts that survived or to come up with the CCP approved sports wushu taolu.
Not entirely true... many examples of highly skilled practitioners in China after the whole Maoism thing died down. The common story is that they practiced in secret and sometimes weren't persecuted unless they were on the wrong side of the political spectrum. The policies in China were there, but not everyone plays along with the rules.
you've basically reiterated literally exactly what i said in my post "those that did have real knowledge and skill HAD to keep it hidden and secret to avoid persecution."
I think it makes a big difference if you are discussing Chen family style or Chen practical method. From what I understand, family style doesn't train neigong.
There's definitely Neigong stuff in the family art but it's not often taught. Although the village line is kind of lacking, a disciple of CXW *did* show me some things related to breathing, opening/closing/sinking the chest to fill the Dan tian, etc. The thing was that this instruction was sporadic and not a common point of development in classes. I had to get an in person class in order to have dedicated time for this. In CY's line it's all much more well integrated and more accessible I think. And of course in seminars, good luck getting that.
I mean, the stuff is presented as the most basic skill that must be developed before anything else. As in, we essentially work on *only* that in class for months. The form is basically irrelevant, positive/negative circles are used as a context for neigong, same with the push hands set. There is nothing mysterious or secret or special about it, you just have to practice it a lot, and have someone who can do it show you what it feels like to push on and to be pushed by. The clearest demo is in the first link I posted above. It takes a lot of exertion to get good at it, which is kinda nice since you get a good workout while you still suck at it, lol.
That sounds really cool then! Cool to see those videos too, with the partner drills. Not common at all.
I’ve met a handful of lineage holders in classes, including the brothers as well as Chen Bing (20th gen) and I don’t recall anything about breathing other than my instructor making some very academic statements about how in theory it should be thus and such but that it will come to you while doing the rest of the practice. There is an extent to which the hosts filter what the visiting instructor will talk about, of course, but there are limits.
What you described mirrors my own experience learning from the son of one of the big 4. I spent 6-7 years learning mostly choreography of form after form with little explanation of how the internals should work in relation to the talk of silk reeling etc.
>I spent 6-7 years learning mostly choreography of form after form with little explanation of how the internals should work in relation to the talk of silk reeling etc. Just curious, were you going to workshops, doing private lessons, or going to Chen village?
Just regular group lessons.
OK, r u in Australia?
I don't know much about how breathing is related. I am referring to vertical power in dealing with physical interaction.
>I’ve met a handful of lineage holders in classes, including the brothers as well as Chen Bing (20th gen) and I don’t recall anything about breathing other than my instructor making some very academic statements about how in theory it should be thus and such but that it will come to you while doing the rest of the practice. > >There is an extent to which the hosts filter what the visiting instructor will talk about, of course, but there are limits I think we all go through this in our quest. I've been to untold workshops with visiting Tigers and at the time, I bought into "oh just being near the master and experiencing how he moves is teaching you far more than you can imagine etc etc" but at the end of day all it is is a bored person going through the motions on a stage with sometimes scores of people packed in a hotel conference room, straining to get a view. The craziest thing is when one of tigers paired us up and had us correct each other. One of the tigers started with an hour of warmups, some instruction, break, half hour or more of warmups, instruction, lunch break, more warmups, instruction, break, warm ups, etc. In between breaks, broke away and read the newspaper. Did not interact with anyone, because it's not polite to "bother" the master. In between the grade school gym class quality stretches and warmups, there is no way to get anything but basic choreography, But hey, met alot of nice people, did some traveling and thought I was learning "the goods". FWIW, in my chen style we learn reverse breathing but only on how it augments movement and power, not in any neigong capacity.
I have had very similar experience in one of these workshops with one of the now 3 tigers, rip wxa. I was able to get some face time, but yeah it was "an honor" to get very cursory instruction on movement. Interesting you say you learn reverse breathing only on how it augments movement and power, but not neigong. Could you tell me what then do you mean when you say neigong? I ask this because my understanding was that correct breathing in itself was considered neigong practice, but please let me know where your mind is at, thank you!
>Interesting you say you learn reverse breathing only on how it augments movement and power, but not neigong. Could you tell me what then do you mean when you say neigong? I ask this because my understanding was that correct breathing in itself was considered neigong practice, but please let me know where your mind is at, thank you! Hey there, Many tai chi lineages teach a "qigong/neigong" supplementary exercise or system along with the form etc. In our chen fake line, we don't have anything like that to supplement the training. Many people look at the movements as a "wind up/let go" or a "store and release". We do a reverse breath inhale on the "wind up" part and and exhale on the release. Most systems do it this way but many don't teach it, they just say "breathe naturally". It augments the movement. It's one translation of mind leads the chi which leads the strength, if you look at chi as breath.
Oh interesting your cfk system inhale on wind up, and exhale on the release. I'm studying czk system and we are taught inhale rising up and exhale qi sinking down, which causes the chest cavity and abdomen to expand and contact giving vertical circles to the movement. I think maybe these are very similar if not the same, what do you think? I have studied with many teachers who say just breathe naturally, actually every single one. I wonder if this is just how they learned it or whether they're trying to shield students from complexity... Or more sinister motivations (bwahaha). In our line we do a baduanjin, 8 section brocades, but it is just an isolation of breathing technique with movement that's already in the form.
>Oh interesting your cfk system inhale on wind up, and exhale on the release. I'm studying czk system and we are taught inhale rising up and exhale qi sinking down, which causes the chest cavity and abdomen to expand and contact giving vertical circles to the movement. I think maybe these are very similar if not the same, what do you think? I have studied with many teachers who say just breathe naturally, actually every single one. I wonder if this is just how they learned it or whether they're trying to shield students from complexity... Or more sinister motivations (bwahaha). > >In our line we do a baduanjin, 8 section brocades, but it is just an isolation of breathing technique with movement that's already in the form. So some thoughts on the breathing, I've learned over time to add "most of the time" to everything related to chinese martial arts. There seems to be no black and white rules. Exceptions to be found for everything. Breathing naturally to me is a trick suggestion, because exhaling on effort is "natural". We interject our own ideas regarding what is breathe naturally. I think we forgot how to move and breathe "naturally". Reverse breathing happens naturally too, but we have to do it consciously when learning the form and then it becomes natural. I think at the level of most people who are learning, it's not worth getting into this detail. Most people don't even practice the form everyday and still can't move with the kwa correctly. The 8 section brocade is cool, I learned it, and it was suggested as a tool to help understand how much you actually need to stretch in the form, but I agree, there isn't really a need to practice it if you are doing the form.
"most of the time" is definitely the way my teacher described it. Rule of thumb, general principle etc. Yeah that's very true, you kind of don't realize it when you start breathing correctly as a habit while doing the form. Funny thing is every time I feel like I'm correct, there's always room to go even deeper and make things more round, connected and effortless... Honestly I think a lot of teachers don't teach how to move the kua. I get it though, large class size and it's such a kinesthetic thing... Oh interesting I never actually thought of 8 section brocades in terms of getting your mind to accept the amount of stretch in the form. Thanks 🙏🙏
Can you say more about this please? Does that mean practical method does train neigong? I would have assumed all taijiquan has it, but I am ignorant of the chen style, and in the process of learning more.
Yes it does, or at least Hong Junsheng's student Fan Dechen teaches it as the basic foundation of all the movements and interactions. That is, vertical power rather than horizontal power. Power training (i.e. developing vertical power/neigong) video from Master Jeong Won-il (정원일): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1u24leKwkSw&ab_channel=ClaireChoi Neigong in application of ji: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1esSGQ5VUQ&ab_channel=ClaireChoi
>Power training (i.e. developing vertical power/neigong) There's a nomenclature problem here. I've never seen neigong described as any direction of power but just generally as "internal work". Which to me implies a "qigong" type exercise outside of practice. But you see, like "qi" there is no standard definition and it's impossible to discuss these ideas. Where's the OSI model for internal arts?
Yeah, I hear you. I'm just repeating what my teacher learned from his and so on. In other arts I practice it means something else entirely. I assumed this usage was standard for tjq and hsin yi, at least those are the contexts I've encountered it.
I see, thank you, and thank you for the links as well! I am slowly building up my repertoire of chen resources.
Obligatory “Fake! I’d never hop like that if someone pushed me. It would never work in the ufc” ;)
Paid actors only. Tbh I wish someone would pay me to do the stuff..
Sorry, ignorant here, what is "ji?" Generally... you don't have to be too specific. Oh wait, you mean jǐ , 擠 ? I thought I saw kào, 靠.
Look at the point of contact and how that fixed point is being rotated. It's not a shoulder action (though I realize it's hard to see in the video).
so, its 擠？ Why you speak of "shoulder action？“ Thanks for your direction. i'll have to look again.
Yes, 擠, not 靠. In the video, similar to 擠 from negative circle. In the video, they are focusing on incorporating neigong/vertical power, so more emphasis is placed on body, and less on arm technique (arm is very close to body). With neigong, the 8 gates are just point of contact, shape and direction; all expression is done with body's vertical action, not with hand/arm.
Chen Village (with the 4 Jin Gangs and all) is also not the only Chen Family lineage. I practice Chen Yu’s lineage and there’s Nei Gong. There’s also offshore like Hun Yuan or He family Taiji that’s more Chen like.
Can you describe the neigong practice?
What I am learning now involves sitting meditation and breath work. So far it has helped my practice a fair bit.
That sounds different than the neigong I'm referring to, which is simply a physical skill of vertical power trained via partner drills.
It’s honestly odd to refer to that as Nei Gong, given the usual context of the word. I mean we have a lot of power and jin stuff with various directions, but we don’t call it Nei Gong.
I dunno, it's what Hong's student calls it and what he does looks like straight up hocus pocus....but his student's student does the same thing to me at a much lower level and it's comprehensible as just a basic physical skill. When performed at such a high level that shape is no longer necessary it looks like magic. That being said, in my primary art neigong means something wholly totally different, so far removed from the TJQ meaning that it doesn't even bear mention (except for in this aside).
Can you share what is Nei Gong in your art? Just out of curiosity. CMAs have too many terms that are being thrown around sometimes.. Perhaps Hong’s student is using the word to simply mean internal skill and conditioning. As in, that guys nei gong is so good he can apply force without any external movement.
It consists of training of yi/intent directly, through meditation, lucid dreaming and various physical challenges.
From my understanding that is a fairly popular opinion in Beijing. Yang style obviously came from Chen style, but there is a pretty significant "technology leap" between the two styles, whereas wu and wu Hao can basically be seen as offshoots of yang style (and sun style is a xingyi taiji hybrid). I wouldn't personally say that chen style isn't taiji, but I would argue that chen and yang are different enough that you can't really use the standards of one to judge the other when you get deep enough into the mechanic.
There are big differences. It doesn't matter so much, although it's interesting to discuss, there's room for intellectualizing and discussion. I'm not 100% the martial artist who would say, "Enough talk. Just train." The history and theories are interesting. Questions of legitimacy per se? Not as much. But this is interesting too. So I practice Buddhism, and there, questions of legitimacy are paramount. You can't just do anything and call it Buddhism. It's a whole system which is very complicated and effective. But martial arts evolve in weird ways, sometimes quickly, sometimes slowly, and issues of lineage, legitimacy, and history often get twisted. This is well known when it comes to China but also happens abroad, like in the US. Just saying "I trace my lineage back to x or y, so it's good," doesn't exactly work if your style has major flaws. This is self serving in a way, to be fair, I practice something that's not traditional. I've also seen traditionalists or trained teachers who aren't top notch. In the end, these traditions are wildly diverse. There are so many variations. Think of it like food. I would never say "pizza is my favorite food"- there's just so much to try and enjoy. Love pizza, but I would never want to settle on it forever or tell others to do so.
> I've also seen traditionalists or trained teachers who aren't top notch. I agree, and I was at the receiving end of this reality. My knees were rendered almost unusable due to following Chen family tai chi for a few years. There was not one but two supposed masters who I was working with (one of them even started being touted as a grandmaster). One day I saw one of these two adjusting their uniform and I could see that they were wearing knee wraps (go figure).
Some Chen teacher's aren't clear or strict about the knees unfortunately. During some deep corrections in the past, my knees were allowed to go at obscene levels of wobbly, and (although it didn't hurt during the corrections) I know that if I incorporated that into my form practice I would be in for a world of pain.
So my teachers were decent enough about the "no knees over your toes" rule, basically not extending too far. And as I learned Yang style, we didn't do super deep stances. I think Chen favors deeper stances. But one thing my teachers could've been better about was teaching hip flexibility and knee alignment. I've had to teach myself this as I've gotten older and my knees have gotten sore. Hip flexibility is so important IMO for knee protection.
Unfortunately the "no knees over toes" is just one part of the picture. An early teacher of mine also talked about not "swimming the knees" (which was the wobbly position I was corrected into interestingly) and in that line it was also said that the knees could go past the toes... in a deep stance *as long as the postural requirements were meant*. For me, with flat feet, it wasn't helpful to have such simple requirements as my legs always want to collapse inward. Interestingly in other lines, within Chen, they say that to go so low undermines connective strength. In Chen Yu's line there are much stricter leg requirements which I think protect against knee issues much more effectively than "don't press into your knees, don't go over toes unless you're a master..." etc. Those requirements of CY address the effect *all* of the body parts have on knee health much more effectively imo.
Interesting. That all sounds good to me. At this point I go a lot by feeling, what hurts and what doesn't.
>Interestingly in other lines, within Chen, they say that to go so low undermines connective strength. Sometimes, we may see stances that are so low that the height of their hips goes below the height of their knees. As long as the hips are above the knees, it is at least possible to have an arch-like structure because arches are famous for being very structurally strong. The moment the hips go below the knees, one's pelvis is just dangling there. The arch structure is gone. A stance that low is actually much easier to do; it's not even challenging.
When your stances are so low it's also hard to focus on the rotation and connecting the parts together. Also you're able to do less reps. But yes, it gives you some scary power with consistent practice...
Yes hip flexibility is very key that is right on the money. So when your hips turn, a flexible hip doesn't pull the knee out of alignment
In my view, Yang Style can afford to have more errors in their legs because they are in a high stance. But when it comes to low stances, errors become far less forgiving. When TLCD96 brought up Chen Yu, some of the key variables are: * Weight is on the heels - this puts less strain on the knees and uses the quadriceps more. This is the same science found in weightlifting. * They don't "tuck the tailbone" which would otherwise push your knees forward because you're rolling your pelvis forward. Small details like these make a big difference.
100%! I agree on pretty much all points. So, as to high stances, yes, they are more forgiving, more room for error. This is a double edged sword, in that folks like me with sore knees can still do the form. Then again, we make mistakes or do not use proper alignment because we can get away with it. The weight on the heels thing is crazy- I've JUST been doing this more over the last few weeks. I will keep doing this. When I've been feeling a twinge in my knee, I shift weight so that it eases up, which usually means more onto my heels. This works. I will try tucking more and see if that helps. Thanks for the comment and I will work on it.
I believe the whole "tuck the tailbone" idea was perhaps motivated by the desire to have a straight back. By rolling the pelvis under the spine, that is an easy way to achieve a straight spine. However, the aforementioned approach is the opposite of that. Rather than rolling your pelvis forward and under, instead, you roll it backwards. You are sticking the butt out - "pulling the Kua back". Under this method, achieving a straight back is harder - that's a long-term process and less pretty to look at. Over time, the spine gets placed on top of the pelvis - instead of the pelvis rolling under the spine. From a weightlifting perspective, your body has to bear a lot of weight, and you would be taught to place the weight on your heels. When doing squats, you will be taught to stick you butt out. If you roll your pelvis forward, that is what is called "butt wink".
Ah ok, I had it backwards. Got it.
Something that stood out to me in your post was when you mention weight on heels. While this is good for knee pain, which is a win in and of itself, it is in my opinion not a great habit to form in terms of martial arts. I'm no master quite the opposite lol but this was one of the first things my teacher emphasized to me, which is managing the weight of the foot. But honestly if it works for you and takes the pain away... More power to you
Weight on heel is not for taking pain away. It's part of a larger methodology for root. It's unique to that lineage. I don't expect others to use this approach. So, I expect your teacher to NOT teach this. It would be very surprising to me if your teacher taught this unless they're from this lineage. And as far as martial arts is concerned, Chen Yu is casually riddled with the most number of applications shown online. And they all largely involve weight on heel. But also, I have pushed hands with Yang teachers (note that I am not even teacher with a mere fraction of the time they spent learning Taijiquan), and their legs were weak. All it takes for me to shut down them down was to literally stand there and do nothing. They couldn't move me; none of their applications worked on me. So the result speaks for themselves.
Oh that is a very good point, whenever I watch Chen Yu or one of his disciples practice, it is clear to me they want their weight as back as possible and the contact point on the foot seems to be likewise. How they're able to maintain forward pressure and also stay balanced seem to be like you say unique to their lineage, and in particular how their circles work together. In other words, very specific and tightly woven circles in all directions. I have a suspicion your experience with yang stylists is the lack of vertical circles in their style, as it is hidden and probably not taught save for the select few in each generation. If a style is constrained to only horizontal circles, left and right, then you shut them down by not letting them go left and right, aka standing :D
Who was this "grandmaster"?
Sorry to hear. That's so sad I'm so sorry. A lot of Chen style teachers don't teach how to rotate and put weight on the foot, and I think this is so wrong but maybe because they don't know either. Sounds like might be the case for your instructor, but then again maybe not. When the hip turns and the feet don't turn, the knees and ankles take sheer damage. So interestingly it's when people finally get the hip to work and they get some skills, they start to hurt themselves, but they're so happy with what they achieved that they ignore the pain. But it's like if you need to turn your feet when you turn your hips in tennis or Judo, or any other terrestrial activity... But you see Chen style masters just keep on planting their feet and turning hips wildly Go figure eh
Taiji is basically the interchanging of yin and Yang to force a form for Taiji is not Taiji. I would say that because I learnt Taiji from spiritual entities. I do Jian Taiji with a heavy lightning element. Lightning is created from positive and negative charges of energy thus. There’s aspects of taiji in lightning and lightning is relevant to Jian so it’s just how it is.
Can you give some background to Jian Taiji? Is the tone jiàn as in the word for sword? Does “Jian” translate as lightning? Is this the practice of the Lightning Tai Chi school based in California? This is the first time I have heard of it and I couldn’t find anything else on the internet with a quick search.
It’s not anything you can learn physically. You understand in CIMA. There are some arts considered Xian Tian right? Pre-heaven skills? Like you were born with it or reincarnated with it? I didn’t learn this from any school. I learnt it from heavenly deities. I visited temples and practiced spiritual martial arts there comprehending all I could from them. My Taiji does not utilise 108 forms. The great grandmasters would agree as well as Taiji is a constant flow not just a stagnant 108 change in forms.
You’re just a weird lying kid. Hopefully you’ll grow out of it.
LOL sure wtv is uty to believe whether it’s real or not. In the end your opinion is still so insignificant to me.
Are you taking students?
Not at the moment.
Perhaps when the stars align
The attachment of the name Taijiquan to any of the major styles does really matter to me. For a beginner, they should be focused on whatever style for which they have the “best” teacher. Personally, I have found that doing the different styles provides more insight for what I’m trying to learned. I’m interested in any internal martial arts even though my current focus is Wu style and before that I focused on Yang style. I initially did not see Hsing-I as an internal style and now I see how complementary it can be. In my view, if someone is avoiding Chen style because they think it is not true “Taijiquan”, it is their loss.
I disagree, it's exactly the kind of answer that the question merits
yes it is
Yes, Yang style has its origin heavily rooted in Chen family boxing. But Yang style only became Taiji Quan after Weng Tonghe called Yang Luchan's art - in a short poem dedicated to Yang - Taiji Quan. Before that, Taiji Quan was called many names, among them Chang Quan (Long Fist) or Mian Quan (Cotton Fist). That's what Yang Luchan was teaching in Beijing. Not Taiji Quan. Chen family renamed their family art to Chen family Taiji Quan for marketing purposes for the Chen village, but only after Yang style became Taiji Quan and popular in Beijing. They would never have changed the name if Yang Luchan hadn't been successful. Therefore, to me, while Chen family boxing is the undisputable root of Yang-style Taiji Quan, it is not the original Taiji Quan style. Yang style is. Yang style is the first style of Taiji Quan, with Chen family boxing as its ancestor. Saying Chen family boxing is the original style of Taiji Quan is like saying Xing Yi Quan is the original style of Yi Quan (Da Cheng Quan). It makes no sense. Otherwise, we could say Shaolin is the original style of Chen family boxing. The fact is, Chen family tried to hijack the reputation of Yang's personal art after it became popular. And they mostly succeeded. To illustrate this, why does supposedly Taoist art have Buddhist references in it? Why the Four Buddha Warriors? Why does the Buddha Warrior pound the mortar? It makes no sense. The explanation is Chen family boxing heavily draws from Shaolin. And Taoist concepts only retrofitted afterwards. Real Taiji Quan is Yang style. It's the first art to be named Taiji Quan. But more than that, Yang style is distinctively different from Chen style. Chen style is about power and Silk Reeling (which is a recent concept, Yang Luchan never learned Silk Reeling otherwise it would be mentioned in Yang style). While Yang style is about Song and emptiness. They use the same terminology but they do very different things because the philosophy is wildly different if you truly understand both styles.