Tai Ji Sparring

[Informer]

I just think that everything that teaches you something is your teacher, from animate to inanimate objects, from books to people. Teacher isn't so distinctly and narrowly defined from this angle, in that there is no specific mold for a teacher or a student. Like we are all a student, a teacher, neither a student or a teacher, both a teacher and student.

 

So you need someone to physically help you, why is it any different from anything else you learn something from?

 

Why does there need to be a specific form to a teacher?

 

 

 

Some people have ability to adapt and learn to fight...they are good fighters. That doesnt make them martial artists. Bruce learnt wing chun from ip man. He used that as the basis of jkd...he added fencing and wetern boxing strategies...so who taught him jkd...all the teachers of his vrious systems helped him get the knowledge to create his medley...

 

But jkd is not an ima...there is no internal aspect to it. Cant compare with taiji...the principles are radically different imho.

 

JKD is is not a MA, it is a way of assimilating and seeking useful tactics and putting them together in a suitable way instead of following the predetermined structure path. It was an evolution of that path and those decision that brought him to JKD, through seeking and determining what was self-evident.

 

The metaphor Lee borrowed from Chan Buddhism was of constantly filling a cup with water, and then emptying it, used for describing Lee's philosophy of "casting off what is useless". He used the sculptor's mentality of beginning with a lump of clay and hacking away at the "unessentials"; the end result was what he considered to be the bare combat essentials, or JKD. The dominant or strongest hand should be in the lead because it would perform a greater percentage of the work. Lee minimized the use of other stances except when circumstances warranted such actions. Although the On-Guard position is a good overall stance, it is by no means the only one. He acknowledged that there were times when other positions should be utilized.

 

Bruce Lee did not stress the memorization of solo training forms or "Kata", as most traditional styles do in their beginning-level training. He often compared doing forms without an opponent to attempting to learn to swim on dry land. Lee believed that real combat was alive and dynamic. Circumstances in a fight change from millisecond to millisecond, and thus pre-arranged patterns and techniques are not adequate in dealing with such a changing situation. As an anecdote to this thinking, Lee once wrote an epitaph which read: 'In memory of a once fluid man, crammed and distorted by the classical mess.' The "classical mess" in this instance was what Lee thought of classical martial arts.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeet_Kune_Do

 

He was using a seekers mindset towards Combat Martial Arts as well as tradition. I agree he may have done better to have applied that seeking to internal aspects as well.

[ChiDragon]

Well, the original Tai Ji Chuan was always known as Tai Ji Chuan.

Mr. Chen learned Tai Ji;

Mr. Yang learned Tai Ji, and

Mr. Wu learned Tai JI.

Mr. Chen changed the form of Tai Ji to fit his taste for body Jin enhancement;

Mr. Yang changed the form of Tai Ji to fit his taste for health; and also

Mr. Wu changed the form of Tai Ji to fit his taste for combat.

 

All these changed forms of Tai Ji are very unique and passed down in their families from generation to generation. Hence, all the unique styles of Tai Ji were given credit to the families. Now, we have three famous forms of Tai Ji. They are known as

Chen Tai Ji Chuan,

Yang Tai Ji Chuan,

Wu Tai Ji Chuan,

Edited June 16, 2012 by ChiDragon

[mjjbecker]

Now, we have three famous forms of Tai Ji. They are known as

Chen Tai Ji Chuan,

Yang Tai Ji Chuan,

Wu Tai Ji Chuan,

 

You're missing two-Wu/Hao and Sun. There are five renouned family styles, not just three.

 

As for your 'Mr Chen', 'Mr Yang' and 'Mr Wu', that applies to the different generations. It seems that each generation has made its own changes, not just, for example, Chen Fake, Yang Chengfu and Wu Jianquan.

[ChiDragon]

You're missing two-Wu/Hao and Sun. There are five renouned family styles, not just three.

 

As for your 'Mr Chen', 'Mr Yang' and 'Mr Wu', that applies to the different generations. It seems that each generation has made its own changes, not just, for example, Chen Fake, Yang Chengfu and Wu Jianquan.

 

Thank you for the addition. Changes made are inclusive and understood. I only use these three famous known families as a general idea to get my point across. BTW I have an original book written by a disciple of Yang Chengfu and learned the Yang style from a disciple downstream of the same author.

Edited June 16, 2012 by ChiDragon

[gatito]

Can you define what is a "teacher" MM? I think that's most of the confusion.

 

Sounds more like you want a boss or master to tell you how it is. If that is the case then One will never progress beyond the master or boss.

 

The philosophy of Jeet Kune Do may open your mind to what I'm talking about and using Bruce Lee as example:

 

 

 

 

So my question is, who would have been the one to teach Bruce Lee Jeet Kune Do?

 

A good teacher is a good friend, although it is said that if you are sincere, even a stone will teach you.

 

I think that this is probably true but very few teachers teach in that Way. (In fact, I know of only one that uses stones in that Way. )

 

This is something that I've just copme across and when I saw it I thought of you. I sincerely hope that it is useful.

 

Namaste Informer.

 

Soundbites Will Never Liberate You

By

Chris Hebard

 

Awakening Clarity Blogspot

 

http://awakeningclar...ource=BP_recent

[mYTHmAKER]

I just think that everything that teaches you something is your teacher, from animate to inanimate objects, from books to people. Teacher isn't so distinctly and narrowly defined from this angle, in that there is no specific mold for a teacher or a student. Like we are all a student, a teacher, neither a student or a teacher, both a teacher and student.

 

So you need someone to physically help you, why is it any different from anything else you learn something from?

 

Why does there need to be a specific form to a teacher?

 

 

Grasshopper you state the obvious platitudes re everything is your teacher.

I believe i covered the we are all students teachers part when i said the teacher is always learning.

As to why there needs to be a specific form to a teacher i will state the obvious.

When i want to learn math i don't sign up for an English course in the same manner when i want to learn a specific art i take a course with one who is qualified to teach that subject. To answer your next query the teacher of math or English or whatever has been given a piece of paper that qualifies him/her to teach. And yes not all teachers with papers are good teachers.

We could go on and on but it's time for me to stop this nonsense and do my practice.

Actually I should thank you, for you too are my teacher by inadvertently teaching me to type

Edited June 16, 2012 by mYTHmAKER

[Informer]

A good teacher is a good friend, although it is said that if you are sincere, even a stone will teach you.

 

I think that this is probably true but very few teachers teach in that Way. (In fact, I know of only one that uses stones in that Way. )

 

This is something that I've just copme across and when I saw it I thought of you. I sincerely hope that it is useful.

 

Namaste Informer.

 

Soundbites Will Never Liberate You

By

Chris Hebard

 

Awakening Clarity Blogspot

 

http://awakeningclar...ource=BP_recent

 

Thank you! I really enjoyed reading this and seem to have many same views.

 

 

BEFORE I START, let me share a warning about "Teachings". I do so hate the word--"teaching"--it implies that what is discussed here is both official and can be learned. Here is my experience: It can't. True Wisdom must be seen and that seeing is born directly through the loins of the "seeker"--from a different, mysterious place altogether.

 

 

One of the challenges of being guided in Self Discovery is an inclination to forage for "pointers", feeding grist to the mill facilitating the search. These pointers can be shortcuts. The risk is that, prior to investigation of them, we may come to accept, rather than question, every view we encounter, particularly when they come from "teachers". When this happens, we trade freedom for expedience. In my experience, blind acceptance of any pointer--any teaching--may provide a false sense of assurance and feel good temporarily, but, it's fruit may be proven hollow under the harsh light of recognition of the very next emotional agitation experienced.

Edited June 19, 2012 by Informer

[gatito]

Thank you! I really enjoyed reading this and seem to have many same views.

 

 

 

Yes.

 

I like Chris too.

[The Observer]

I just think that everything that teaches you something is your teacher, from animate to inanimate objects, from books to people. Teacher isn't so distinctly and narrowly defined from this angle, in that there is no specific mold for a teacher or a student. Like we are all a student, a teacher, neither a student or a teacher, both a teacher and student.

 

So you need someone to physically help you, why is it any different from anything else you learn something from?

 

Why does there need to be a specific form to a teacher?

 

 

 

 

 

JKD is is not a MA, it is a way of assimilating and seeking useful tactics and putting them together in a suitable way instead of following the predetermined structure path. It was an evolution of that path and those decision that brought him to JKD, through seeking and determining what was self-evident.

 

 

 

He was using a seekers mindset towards Combat Martial Arts as well as tradition. I agree he may have done better to have applied that seeking to internal aspects as well.

What you say about learning from anything is true in a relative sense...however when learning a martial style it's a lot simpler to go to a qualified teacher that can give you advice and feedback than say a book on, for example, taijiquan which can't correct subtle errors you might not pick up on in the same way a live teacher can.

 

Additionally I think you should look at how a man carries his personal life before you start taking his advice; clearly Lee did not act like a master off screen, so (at least for me) that doesn't make him a truly worthy teacher.

 

A book I highly recommend if you like chess and Tai Chi Chuan is The Art of Learning by chess prodigy/master and Tai Chi push-hands world champ Josh Waitzkin. It addresses a lot of the issues you brought up.

Edited June 22, 2012 by The Observer

[Prince...]

You can't turn any theory into sung. You can't learn sung from a dictionary. Your body has to learn it from a real teacher, your mind has to get a clue as the outcome, and then your practice has to perfect the real skill rather than a construct of your imagination. The problem being that if you start out with a wrong mindset your body can't ever get a chance to learn. Paradox.

 

I used to talk about what I thought was sung, until I met someone who let me feel sung. I don't talk about what I think sung is, even after feeling it. I can talk about the things I experienced, but until I know what it's like to be on the giving AND receiving end, I don't feel as if I can talk about sung.

 

I liked what Taomeow says here. If you can figure this stuff out without a teacher or someone who is more sung than you to help, then big ups to you-- I however do not have this ability yet.

 

As for the original post-- that's not Tai Ji Sparring-- hell it isn't even good Sanshou.

[Informer]

Why don't you critics post a better example then?

 

I used to talk about what I thought was sung, until I met someone who let me feel sung. I don't talk about what I think sung is, even after feeling it. I can talk about the things I experienced, but until I know what it's like to be on the giving AND receiving end, I don't feel as if I can talk about sung.

 

I liked what Taomeow says here. If you can figure this stuff out without a teacher or someone who is more sung than you to help, then big ups to you-- I however do not have this ability yet.

 

As for the original post-- that's not Tai Ji Sparring-- hell it isn't even good Sanshou.

 

 

You just said you don't have enough knowledge to judge yet then you judge . . .

Edited June 23, 2012 by Informer

[Taomeow]

Why don't you critics post a better example then?

 

Um... I did, on the very first page, see post No. 2. Both participants have done workshops at our school. Both are direct descendants of Chen Wanting, documented lineage unbroken since the 17th century, i.e. this is as authentic as it gets in at least the past 400 years. One of the participants in the posted example, Chen Zhenglei, is the official lineage transmitter to my teacher, in a formal ceremony, though the latter learned from all the Four Tigers and also the older folks still living in Chen village, as well as the folks in Beijing who were the branch of the family related by transmission of discipleship but not by blood (students of Hong Junsheng, the great disciple of the great Chen Fake). The other one, Chen Bing (his name is misspelled as Bin in the title of the video), still lives in Chen village.

 

 

You just said you don't have enough knowledge to judge yet then you judge . . .

 

I think you mistake humbleness for ignorance and irony for a confession. Prince has plenty of knowledge, but that's one thing true taoist knowledge in general, and taiji in particular, does to you -- you always feel ignorant, and the more you learn from a real master, the better you understand how little you know. Every breakthrough, every time you feel you've got it, a true teacher will see as the moment you're ready for more, and that's how you discover that you're still super ignorant. If you're not ready to learn how ignorant you are, he or she will never show you. They spare you the humiliation... they are compassionate.

 

One of my accidental teachers (not a regular one, just a friend who is very accomplished with 40 years of taiji under a great teacher, who gives me a lesson here and there when we meet -- alas, he lives too far for this to be a regular thing) is not compassionate with cocky ignorami though. I've seen him teach them differently... but then, he's not Chinese, and not a taoist -- but VERY sung. So sung, he can demolish anyone who would use the slightest bit of force -- first by rendering the opponent as helpless as a newborn kitten, then gloating. I'd love for ChiDragon or you to spar with him. Can arrange it too if you're interested.

[doc benway]

 

FWIW, though the film makers call this taiji sparring, I agree with Taomeow that this video does no capture the essence of taijiquan.

It's actually MUCH closer to xingyiquan. Here is a video clip of the advanced xingyi two man set referred to as an shen pao - stable body pounding.

 

 

Here are two more nice an shen pao videos.

 

 

 

And looking at it again, it looks even more like a northern style gong fu two man set. Here's an example, though much shorter and less skillful, it is authentic.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=daFwGROlM9w

[ChiDragon]

This is only a demo. Not a video competition. You can post and whatever you like....

[Prince...]

Why don't you critics post a better example then?

 

 

 

 

You just said you don't have enough knowledge to judge yet then you judge . . .

 

uhmm...at what point did I say what you're implying? There is a conversation on sung, and a conversation on the video by the original poster. I saw fixed patterns and immediately was aware that this is some type of training drill and not actual "Taiji" sparring.

 

Anyway, from your past posts, you seem to like to debate over small stuff, so do you, bro. Do you.

[Protector]

OK, the original video sucks, let's just get over it

[Informer]

uhmm...at what point did I say what you're implying? There is a conversation on sung, and a conversation on the video by the original poster. I saw fixed patterns and immediately was aware that this is some type of training drill and not actual "Taiji" sparring.

 

Anyway, from your past posts, you seem to like to debate over small stuff, so do you, bro. Do you.

 

Haha, BUSTED!

 

 

Doesn't matter small or big, whatever seems off that maybe I can increase my understanding or help someone else. Seems win win.

 

I think we will get along fine if you don't easily take offense, I don't take anything personal so you can say whatever you want to me.

Edited June 24, 2012 by Informer

[ChiDragon]

FWIW, though the film makers call this taiji sparring, I agree with Taomeow that this video does no capture the essence of taijiquan.

 

For an experienced Tai Ji practitioner, the most obvious was to observe that the hands of opponents are stay in contact. The timing of each opponent was in sync with no delay which shows good body coordination. It was the most basic concept of Tai Ji. I believe someone had mentioned it was the method of "stick-adhere-follow".

 

 

 

It's actually MUCH closer to xingyiquan. Here is a video clip of the advanced xingyi two man set referred to as an shen pao - stable body pounding.

 

In this video, the hands of opponents do not stay in contact with each other because it was not a Tai Ji style.

Edited June 24, 2012 by ChiDragon