Tai Chi as a Practical Street Art?
Rich Davy
Hi
I am interested to know if anyone has any experience of using Tai Chi as a
practical martial art i.e. Defending yourself on the street.
I have read many places that it is a martial art but also that many people
use it for a workout and for it's spiritual properties only.
Has anyone seen a demonstration of Tai Chi in this way (real self defence),
or seen people sparring Tai Chi or anyone defend themselves in a 'real'
environment.
I am very interested in this and have not been able to find out much info.
on it.
Yours respectfully
An Open Minded Karate Student
storys
Rich Davy wrote in message <82o8d6$pf0$1...@panther.rmplc.co.uk>...
>
>Has anyone seen a demonstration of Tai Chi in this way (real self defence),
>or seen people sparring Tai Chi or anyone defend themselves in a 'real'
>environment.
>
I've read about this and seen it used this way in a demo once time. It was
very effective. The problem according to the demonstrator is that it takes
time & much practice to get to the point where you can use it this way. Many
others have said that the problem is not just this but the difficulty of
finding someone who teaches it this way. Evidently by far the majority of
teachers never get beyond the moving meditation stage. I don't practice this
art so YMMV but this is what I've seen and heard.
.......Tom.......
Bobone
Rich Davy <rb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:82o8d6$pf0$1...@panther.rmplc.co.uk...
> I am interested to know if anyone has any experience of using Tai Chi as a
> practical martial art i.e. Defending yourself on the street.
Yes, I have
> I have read many places that it is a martial art but also that many people
> use it for a workout and for it's spiritual properties only.
Very true. The vast majority of teacher don't (or most often) can't teach
TCC as a martial art.
> Has anyone seen a demonstration of Tai Chi in this way (real self
defence),
> or seen people sparring Tai Chi or anyone defend themselves in a 'real'
> environment.
We have some video clips on our website at www.sctca.co.uk though they are
really just showing basic application work.
>
> I am very interested in this and have not been able to find out much info.
> on it.
There is very little info about. Try some of the links from the site above,
they may help
Regards
Robert Poyton
Chas
> I've read about this and seen it used this way in a demo once time. It was
> very effective. The problem according to the demonstrator is that it takes
> time & much practice to get to the point where you can use it this way.
Tai Chi guys will knock your puckerstring loose.
It must be hard to show an actual application because the physical
strength exhibited in their strikes or forces will *hurt* you- otherwise
it just looks like drawing pictures in the air.
Make no mistake about it's combat effectiveness- just a little thump
from one of them will convince you.
Finding a teacher seems to be a trick though.
Chas
Rich Davy
>It must be hard to show an actual application because the physical
>strength exhibited in their strikes or forces will *hurt* you- otherwise
>it just looks like drawing pictures in the air.
>Make no mistake about it's combat effectiveness- just a little thump
>from one of them will convince you.
>Finding a teacher seems to be a trick though.
>
>Chas
Hi Chas
Have you actually seen this 1st hand Chas? Any martial arts strike is
designed to *hurt* you, as you say. For instance being hit by a boxers
right cross or a karateka's reverse punch will hurt you, but it can still be
demonstrated and taught very well.
respectfully
RD
Chas
> Have you actually seen this 1st hand Chas? Any martial arts strike is
> designed to *hurt* you, as you say. For instance being hit by a boxers
> right cross or a karateka's reverse punch will hurt you, but it can still be
> demonstrated and taught very well.
Yessir.
Mike Sigman demonstrated to my complete satisfaction that practice of
the Taiji skills will produce a formidable fighter of complete and
different practice from most other forms of fighting practice. I mention
him because he is prominent on the group and can speak to the scholarly
aspects of the practice. I have had other forceful applications
generated on me by various other sorts of 'internal' practitioners also.
That's another reason why they practice so formally.
You will find, in the slow practice arts, an utterly different approach
to generating the strike or other martial expression.
Our own slow practice is for the training of the skeletal alignment, the
footwork and ground positioning, the integration of the whole (?) body
into the application of technique; weight shifts and commitments, muscle
engagement, properties of anatomical distribution of force stuff.... If
you do them quickly, you are distracted by the relative quickness of it
and miss the subtleties and finesse aspects of it. If an opponent sees
that weakness, he can exploit it; your ankle position, your breathing
pattern, too much something not enough somewhere.
Real skills are demonstrable and there is no mistake about it. When you
see the dear old things prancing about in silks and talking about how
best to avoid fighting at all, they don't tend to be real taiji people
(from my limited experience)- no one learns to do this stuff well
without a thought to application- doesn't happen.
It's utterly completely intentionally 'streetworthy'. The highest praise
I've ever heard from my own teachers, for another style, is for good
taiji fighters (as an added appeal to authority <g>).
Chas
Jerry Love
>
> I am interested to know if anyone has any experience of using Tai Chi as a
> practical martial art i.e. Defending yourself on the street.
>
> use it for a workout and for it's spiritual properties only.
>
defence),
> or seen people sparring Tai Chi or anyone defend themselves in a 'real'
> environment.
>
> on it.
>
We train it that way at my school, though I incorporate it into my Silat.
It's a great secret weapon playing with the students that study only silat.
Jerry Love
YENDOR3
<<Tai Chi guys will knock your puckerstring loose.
Richard
>it must be hard to show an actual application because the physical
>strength exhibited in their strikes or forces will *hurt* you- otherwise
>it just looks like drawing pictures in the air.
>Make no mistake about it's combat effectiveness- just a little thump
>from one of them will convince you.
>Finding a teacher seems to be a trick though.>>
>
>
To this I would add that a few months of blindfold pushhands with your pals
makes it darn inconvienient for a bushwacker to successfully take you out with
a sucker punch.
On video it looks like they threw themselves into those outside wrist locks.
Richard
======================
Life is funny . . . if you're lucky.
mikel evins
rls...@aol.com wrote on 12/12/99 8:41 AM:
> (Chas wrote:)
Mmm...the only folks I know of who do 'push-hands' blindfolded are
associated with Sin The's schools. Are you associated with his schools, or
is there another group who practices something they call blindfolded
push-hands? (If you're with his schools, you might be interested to know
that the drill they do blindfolded is not the same thing as what the
traditional lineages call push-hands.) None of the well-known lineages I'm
familiar with do push-hands blindfolded.
-------------
mikel evins
mev...@best.com
Richard
>> To this I would add that a few months of blindfold pushhands with your pals
>> makes it darn inconvienient for a bushwacker to successfully take you out
>with
>> a sucker punch.
>>
>> On video it looks like they threw themselves into those outside wrist
>locks.
>
>Mmm...the only folks I know of who do 'push-hands' blindfolded are
>associated with Sin The's schools.
I happened on it quite by accident. We were having a proverbial slow night and
decided to cut the external infuences to a minimum for increased E
sensitivity.(We just closed our eyes, blindfolds don't go over well if the
shift manager strolls in) It was good and became the standard. The next cheap
shot that came down the pipe I'm not even sure I saw, but the leading edge of
the E envelope certainly attracted my wrist. Like I said, when I looked at the
tape later, it looked like the perp jumped into an outside wrist-lock. Haven't
taken a bad one since.
Try it for a couple weeks, then tell some of your assoc. to go for it
unannounced over the next few days. You'll like it. It doesn't seem to be for
the 'just try harder' crowd though.
Are you associated with his schools, or
>is there another group who practices something they call blindfolded
>push-hands? (If you're with his schools, you might be interested to know
>that the drill they do blindfolded is not the same thing as what the
>traditional lineages call push-hands.) None of the well-known lineages I'm
>familiar with do push-hands blindfolded.
>
>--
======================
Jerry Love
and
> decided to cut the external infuences to a minimum for increased E
> sensitivity.(We just closed our eyes, blindfolds don't go over well if the
> shift manager strolls in)
You mean it isn't standard? I usually close my eyes.
Jerry
Robert
I've been involved in TaiJi since 1972. Andy Lum had a TaiJi school in
Honolulu. Very "Combat" oriented.
No New Age mystical mumbo jumbo. Incidentially I had a year of Kenpo Karate
before getting involved with real TaiJi. I sparred with a Taiji person from
this Taiji School and he wiped the floor with me. I was convinced. Since
then I haven't bothered with any systems other then internal systems (i.e.
TaiJi, BaGua and Hsing-I).
And yes I've had to use them a few times. Once on base in 1973 during racial
troubles where blacks were attacking whites. A hang over from the racial
rioting tensions in American cities from the late 1960's.
I was jumped. I put him thru the wall. Also on the streets of NYC I was
accosted in 1982. A tag team of two guys hitting up people. I saw the
hit/grab coming. Simply walked to the side unleashed a half-side kick
(seperate foot to side from Yang style form). Collapsed him. Shoved him
towards second person (with a adaptation of Push from Yang form) and
disappared into the crowd.
Fighting involves perception. You have to sense, feel it coming. Also Taiji
is more involved in teaching fighting principles. You never actually use a
clean, 100 percent as in the form, technique in a street situation. But the
principles of preceiving, moving with the person, netrualizing his hits,
leading his hit into an overextended situation and then hammering him with
JING in your attacks. And yes Taiji has attacks. Yin And Yang. It's not all
defensive (Yin) there's also the offensive (Yang) side.
Rich Davy <rb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:82o8d6$pf0$1...@panther.rmplc.co.uk...
>
> Hi
>
> I am interested to know if anyone has any experience of using Tai Chi as a
> practical martial art i.e. Defending yourself on the street.
>
> I have read many places that it is a martial art but also that many people
> use it for a workout and for it's spiritual properties only.
>
> Has anyone seen a demonstration of Tai Chi in this way (real self
defence),
> or seen people sparring Tai Chi or anyone defend themselves in a 'real'
> environment.
>
> I am very interested in this and have not been able to find out much info.
> on it.
>
ju...@my-deja.com
Take a look at the web site of Master Chan Wing
(http://world.conk.com/world/cwtaichi), who is highly
regarded by top martial artists in Hong Kong for his
superior skill in the application of Tai Chi in
self-defense.
You'll find:
1. Photos demonstrating the martial application of Yang style postures
2. Questions and answers regarding:
- the relation of the practice of Tai Chi for
health to its practice as a martial art
- distinquishing use of Tai Chi from use of other
("external") martial arts in combat
- misconceptions about the martial effectiveness of Tai Chi
3. Links to a few other web pages related to the
self-defense applications of Tai Chi
Some of Master Chan's most devoted students had
practiced other martial arts (Karate, White Crane,
e.g.) for years when they met him. Each responded to
Master Chan's open invitation to challengers and, upon
being quickly beaten, became his student. Though I
myself am new to martial arts, I have spoken with these
students and watched him "spar" with them - though they
are so quickly defeated "spar" is hardly an appropriate
description!
Hope this helps,
junya
ju...@rocketmail.com
In article <82o8d6$pf0$1...@panther.rmplc.co.uk>,
"Rich Davy" <rb...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> I am interested to know if anyone has any experience of using Tai Chi
as a
> practical martial art i.e. Defending yourself on the street.
>
> I have read many places that it is a martial art but also that many
people
> use it for a workout and for it's spiritual properties only.
>
> Has anyone seen a demonstration of Tai Chi in this way (real self
defence),
> or seen people sparring Tai Chi or anyone defend themselves in a
'real'
> environment.
>
> I am very interested in this and have not been able to find out much
info.
> on it.
>
> Yours respectfully
>
> An Open Minded Karate Student
>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
ju...@my-deja.com
It takes years of practice of form and Push Hands
before the beginning student is able to reach the stage
of actually starting to learn Tai Chi self-defense
applications. However, it is rare to find teachers that
can take you beyond that stage.
Worse, if a student is taught form and Push Hands by
someone unskilled in Tai Chi self-defense, it is
unlikely that the student's skills will be
applicable. If you learn forms devoid of knowledge of
its self-defense application, it is likely that you
will develop bad habits that will have to be unlearned
in order to successfully apply those forms in
self-defense.
When I first met my instructor, I was "shopping" for a
teacher and cautiously reserved from committing
myself. He told me I wouldn't find many other teachers
teaching the self-defense aspects of Tai Chi. Frankly,
I took that as a rather crudely immodest sales
pitch. After extensive research on the web and in the
Hong Kong and San Francisco Bay Area communities, I
concluded that he was terribly understating the facts.
Of the very few that even *claim* to teach it, closer
inspection reveals that often techniques from other
martial arts are actually being employed and the core
principles of Tai Chi are discarded in actual combat!
One school teaches Tai Chi self-defense at the advanced
level, but on communicating with one of its beginning
students (my level), found beginners were not shown or
even told about the purpose of what they were
doing. While this may be valid from a pedagogical
standpoint (a newbie like me is in no position to
judge), it doesn't help dispel the misconceptions about
Tai Chi.
The good news is that there is at least one master,
Chan Wing (my instructor), that is deeply committed to
correcting the general perception of Tai Chi. I'm
utilizing this forum, along with our web site
(http://world.conk.com/world/cwtaichi), to help spread
the info beyond Hong Kong. Hope you find this info
useful.
thanks for your attention,
junya
ju...@rocketmail.com
In article <s4vb6r...@corp.supernews.com>,
"storys" <sto...@delete.execulink.com> wrote:
>
> Rich Davy wrote in message <82o8d6$pf0$1...@panther.rmplc.co.uk>...
> >
> >Has anyone seen a demonstration of Tai Chi in this way (real self
defence),
> >or seen people sparring Tai Chi or anyone defend themselves in a
'real'
> >environment.
> >
>
> I've read about this and seen it used this way in a demo once time. It
was
> very effective. The problem according to the demonstrator is that it
takes
> time & much practice to get to the point where you can use it this
way. Many
> others have said that the problem is not just this but the difficulty
of
> finding someone who teaches it this way. Evidently by far the majority
of
> teachers never get beyond the moving meditation stage. I don't
practice this
> art so YMMV but this is what I've seen and heard.
>
> .......Tom.......
>
>
ju...@my-deja.com
> >strength exhibited in their strikes or forces will *hurt* you-
otherwise
> >it just looks like drawing pictures in the air.
> >Make no mistake about it's combat effectiveness- just a little thump
> >from one of them will convince you.
> >Finding a teacher seems to be a trick though.
> >
>
> Hi Chas
>
> Have you actually seen this 1st hand Chas? Any martial arts strike is
> designed to *hurt* you, as you say. For instance being hit by a
boxers
> right cross or a karateka's reverse punch will hurt you, but it can
still be
> demonstrated and taught very well.
>
>
> RD
>
>
I must agree with Mr. Davy here.
Every week my Tai Chi instructor demonstrates an application on me and
others in the class, tailoring the amount of "force" used to his
perception of the student's capacity. Actually, in many cases in Tai
Chi, it is not his "force" that defeats you, but your own resistant
reaction. Students more experienced than me have trained themselves not
to resist, and are much more flexible, so it takes somewhat more to
subdue them.
But no one is ever hurt.
And I would be highly suspicious of anyone claiming martial Tai Chi
skills, all of which are too "dangerous" to demonstrate. Some, maybe,
but not all. The level of Tai Chi skill required for martial application
brings a great degree of control and sensitivity that minimizes the risk
in demonstration.
junya
ju...@rocketmail.com
http://world.conk.com/world/cwtaichi
PS - from Master Chan:
"It *is* just drawing pictures in the air!"
Mike Sigman
wrote in message <84071k$dfh$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>The good news is that there is at least one master,
>Chan Wing (my instructor), that is deeply committed to
>correcting the general perception of Tai Chi. I'm
>utilizing this forum, along with our web site
>(http://world.conk.com/world/cwtaichi), to help spread
>the info beyond Hong Kong. Hope you find this info
>useful.
You realize of course that this simply comes across as another "my
instructor is great" post? And the general feeling about that sort of
thing is that it leaves a negative impression about both the student and the
instructor (i.e., it's sort of questionable how smart people are who will
engage in that sort of thing).
Besides, reading the fantastic blurb about your teacher leaves me with the
impression that the *only* skill he hasn't mastered is the jazz trombone,
but he's probably going to be master level in a year or two. :^)
Instead of "spreading the info" about how great your teacher is, why not
engage in functional and factual information about the intricacies of Taiji?
Then when people see if you know anything, they'll know whether to give
credence to your hype about your teacher.
Regards,
Mike Sigman
jos...@my-deja.com
answer:
With whom and for how long did Mr. Chan study Chen,Yang,Wu,Woo, and Sun
taiji?
With whom did he study Bagua?
If Taiji is so effective why did Mr.Chan feel it necessary to
supplement it with mantis kung fu?
If Taiji is so effective why was Mr.Chan studying judo as late as 1986?
Given Mr. Chan's extensive and impressive training in external arts,
how do you know that Mr. Chan is teaching taiji applications and not
techniques from other martial arts?
I never realized that iron palms, seven-section steel whip, and rope
dart were part of the Chen Taiji curriculum, does Mr. Chan teach these
techniques as well?
thank you for taking the time to answer my questions,
josh feinson
In article <84071k$dfh$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> The good news is that there is at least one master,
> Chan Wing (my instructor), that is deeply committed to
> correcting the general perception of Tai Chi. I'm
> utilizing this forum, along with our web site
> (http://world.conk.com/world/cwtaichi), to help spread
> the info beyond Hong Kong. Hope you find this info
> useful.
>
> thanks for your attention,
> junya
> ju...@rocketmail.com
>
ju...@my-deja.com
Chas <gryp...@home.com> wrote:
> Real skills are demonstrable and there is no mistake about it. When
you
> see the dear old things prancing about in silks and talking about how
> best to avoid fighting at all, they don't tend to be real taiji people
Great imagery!
Yes, i think i've met them too ;-).
However in my at least equally limited experience, I also know one
person I would regard as "real taiji" from his demonstrations that also
talks about how best to avoid *street* fighting. Despite his formidable
fighting skills, rare mention of his street encounters came only to
illustrate a point, and was presented as a regetful failure of his
(equally formidable) diplomacy skills. This didn't strike me as false
modesty. It is the attitude encouraged by the Tao Te Ching, the
philosophical text associated with Tai Chi:
"Now arms, however beautiful, are instruments of evil omen,
hateful, it may be said, to all creatures. Therefore they who have
the Tao do not like to employ them. ...--he uses them only on the
compulsion of necessity. Calm and repose are what he prizes; victory
(by force of arms) is to him undesirable. To consider this desirable
would be to delight in the slaughter of men; and he who delights in the
slaughter of men cannot get his will in the kingdom."
So to return to the original posted subject of "street art", since
Taoist philosophy generally comes with the Tai Chi turf, you're unlikely
to find true Tai Chi masters street fighting. Put simply, when you know
you're capable of easily *really* putting a hurting on, you strive to
avoid it. I suspect this is true of masters of other martial arts as
well.
> limited experience)- no one learns to do this stuff well
> without a thought to application- doesn't happen.
Amen.
junya
ju...@rocketmail.com
http://world.conk.com/world/cwtaichi
Chas
> And I would be highly suspicious of anyone claiming martial Tai Chi
> skills, all of which are too "dangerous" to demonstrate. Some, maybe,
> but not all. The level of Tai Chi skill required for martial application
> brings a great degree of control and sensitivity that minimizes the risk
> in demonstration.
this one guy I'm thinking of; he can tap you pretty good in
demonstration- then you see what he can do to a bag- the full expression
of the blow is not suitable for demonstration on a human being that you
like.
Same-o with the chin na expressions- there are compulsions that are
'gross' and compulsions that are 'skilled' or 'sophisticated'. To have a
technique applied at minimal force, but with enough to understand the
action, is good- any more than that and your bones shatter.
On another note; there are any number of things that I do that I'm not
skilled enough to show in restrained demonstration (they're not
particularly tai chi things)- the fulness of that skill might be
demonstrating it in a reserved way, but one must acquire the skill for
combat first. If I then show them in a reserved manner, with corrections
and amplifications and a good practice method, I feel that I've done my
job.
People who want to check your oil are always there- you don't stand up
in front of a group of fighting men and say; 'Hi, I'm here to teach you
to fight', without someone wanting to see if your checks mate.
Chas
JimS
>However in my at least equally limited experience, I also know one
>person I would regard as "real taiji" from his demonstrations that also
>talks about how best to avoid *street* fighting. Despite his formidable
>fighting skills, rare mention of his street encounters came only to
>illustrate a point, and was presented as a regetful failure of his
>(equally formidable) diplomacy skills. This didn't strike me as false
>modesty. It is the attitude encouraged by the Tao Te Ching, the
>philosophical text associated with Tai Chi:
Yes it is. You'll love me, then. Despite my formidable fighting skills, rare
mention of my street encounters comes only to illustrate points, and are presented
as a regretful failure of my equally formidable diplomacy skills.
Yee-ah, diplomancy is #1 in my book and, just like the Dao Duh Ching!, I always regret
slaughtering my enemies; I don't know about you.
>"Now arms, however beautiful, are instruments of evil omen,
>hateful, it may be said, to all creatures. Therefore they who have
>the Tao do not like to employ them. ...--he uses them only on the
>compulsion of necessity. Calm and repose are what he prizes; victory
>(by force of arms) is to him undesirable. To consider this desirable
>would be to delight in the slaughter of men; and he who delights in the
>slaughter of men cannot get his will in the kingdom."
Thanks for the quote, we never read that even though it's probably in every new age
book ever printed. Most of 'em even are even better translations than this sorry little
item you've pulled up. Since it's talking about rulers choosing arms, too, we appreciate the
direct connection to the topic at hand...
New agers. Love 'em or hate 'em, ya gotta love 'em anyway.
>So to return to the original posted subject of "street art", since
>Taoist philosophy generally comes with the Tai Chi turf, you're unlikely
>to find true Tai Chi masters street fighting.
That's true. I never see Robert Smith in action. Must be those strong daoist principles
about pimping your teach....er....about showing the "secrets".
>Put simply, when you know you're capable of easily *really* putting a hurting on,
Wait a minute! I thought you were talking about the Robt. Smith crowd, and now you're
changing your group. It's hard to keep pace with you when you sneak in others like that.
Sheesh.
>you strive to avoid it. I suspect this is true of masters of other martial arts as
>well.
Thanks for the lecture. I feel a lot less likely to fight after this post. Lao Tzu
quotes from new agers will do that to a man...
JS
Euclid
>>talks about how best to avoid *street* fighting.
In any martial art you should avoid fighting and only use it as a last
resort. Sometimes that is hard with our egos, but sometimes the best thing
to do is to run.
>>It is the attitude encouraged by the Tao Te Ching, the
>>philosophical text associated with Tai Chi:
I agree. Clearly Tai Chi can be thought of as the physical embodiment of
Taoist principles. Clearly this makes sense, especially if Chang San Feng
was the creator. If not, there was bound to be someone who was a Taoist who
did create it. ;)
>Thanks for the quote, we never read that even though it's probably in every
new age
>book ever printed. Most of 'em even are even better translations than this
sorry little
>item you've pulled up. Since it's talking about rulers choosing arms, too,
we appreciate the
>direct connection to the topic at hand...
>New agers. Love 'em or hate 'em, ya gotta love 'em anyway.
Its a more preferable trait that people have an open mind to others'
beliefs.
>>So to return to the original posted subject of "street art", since
>>Taoist philosophy generally comes with the Tai Chi turf, you're unlikely
>>to find true Tai Chi masters street fighting.
I'd agree with that too, but again I'd expect any high-level martial arts
teacher to not engage in frequent fights, and rather him/her employ other
options.
>Thanks for the lecture. I feel a lot less likely to fight after this post.
Lao Tzu
>quotes from new agers will do that to a man...
>JS
"New ager" isn't really a pejoritive term when you think about it. I'd
sincerely hope that after reading (especially completing) the Tao Te Ching
that one would feel more peaceful mentally and physically. -It does have
that special calming property.
Mike Sigman
Euclid wrote in message <84j0cs$998$1...@news-02.meganews.com>...
>
>
>I agree. Clearly Tai Chi can be thought of as the physical embodiment of
>Taoist principles. Clearly this makes sense, especially if Chang San Feng
>was the creator. If not, there was bound to be someone who was a Taoist who
>did create it. ;)
>
>
Far out. You're about 6 years behind times... even a lot of the average
practitioners are now aware that there is no relationship between Taiji and
Taoism and the idea was mainly concocted in the late 1890's - early 1900's.
>
>Its a more preferable trait that people have an open mind to others'
>beliefs.
>
Amazingly, the people I find with the tightest-closed minds are usually the
ones who talk the most about "open mindedness". Open your mind to the idea
that Taiji is not Taoist.
>
>>>So to return to the original posted subject of "street art", since
>>>Taoist philosophy generally comes with the Tai Chi turf, you're unlikely
>>>to find true Tai Chi masters street fighting.
>
>
>
>I'd agree with that too, but again I'd expect any high-level martial arts
>teacher to not engage in frequent fights, and rather him/her employ other
>options.
>
We wouldn't even know about Taiji if it hadn't been famous for fighting.
Get some history books, guys.
>
>
>"New ager" isn't really a pejoritive term when you think about it. I'd
>sincerely hope that after reading (especially completing) the Tao Te Ching
>that one would feel more peaceful mentally and physically. -It does have
>that special calming property.
That or reading some New Age posts.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Euclid
>Far out. You're about 6 years behind times...
Why 6 years as opposed to some other year? Did something happen in 1993-94
that I don't know about?
>>Its a more preferable trait that people have an open mind to others'
>>beliefs.
>Open your mind to the idea
>that Taiji is not Taoist.
I have considered that and its just not rational. Keep in mind that I'm not
saying that people who practice the religion/philosophy of Taoism
automatically have to do Tai Chi and vice versa --- What I said in my post
was: "Clearly Tai Chi can be thought of as the physical embodiment of Taoist
principles.", so please don't misquote me.
>>>>So to return to the original posted subject of "street art", since
>>>>Taoist philosophy generally comes with the Tai Chi turf, you're unlikely
>>>>to find true Tai Chi masters street fighting.
>>I'd agree with that too, but again I'd expect any high-level martial arts
>>teacher to not engage in frequent fights, and rather him/her employ other
>>options.
>We wouldn't even know about Taiji if it hadn't been famous for fighting.
>Get some history books, guys.
You're quite correct Michael. However, back then in China that was
considered the normal way of life. Today it certainly is not. Apart riots
and X-mas shopping lines we don't see groups of people fighting in the
streets in the US. Keep in mind it is possible for this apparently 'quiet'
martial art to also be the most lethal. - but that doesn't mean that we are
forced to use its lethalness on a daily basis, or at all.
>>"New ager" isn't really a pejoritive term when you think about it. I'd
>>sincerely hope that after reading (especially completing) the Tao Te
Ching
>>that one would feel more peaceful mentally and physically. -It does have
>>that special calming property.
>That or reading some New Age posts.
>zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Once again someone uses 'New age' as a pejoritive term. Feel free to attach
any negative labels you like if that makes you feel that you've elevated
your status. But either way I'm glad my postings have had that special
calming property on you, and that the Tao Te Ching has had that effect on
you as well.
Mike Sigman
Euclid wrote in message <84jge7$nau$1...@news-02.meganews.com>...
>Hi, thanks for your response Michael,
>
It's just Mike, not Michael. I signed it Mike.
>
>>Far out. You're about 6 years behind times...
>
>Why 6 years as opposed to some other year? Did something happen in 1993-94
>that I don't know about?
How would you know?
>
>
>>>Its a more preferable trait that people have an open mind to others'
>>>beliefs.
>>Open your mind to the idea
>>that Taiji is not Taoist.
>
>
>
>I have considered that and its just not rational. Keep in mind that I'm not
>saying that people who practice the religion/philosophy of Taoism
>automatically have to do Tai Chi and vice versa --- What I said in my post
>was: "Clearly Tai Chi can be thought of as the physical embodiment of
Taoist
>principles.", so please don't misquote me.
OK. I won't misquote you. I'll ask you directly to support how you know
that "Tai Chi can be thought of as the physical emobdiment of Taoist
principles". Are you a Taiji expert? Are you a knowledgeable Taoist? Or
were you simply speaking rhetorically?
>
>
>>>>>So to return to the original posted subject of "street art", since
>>>>>Taoist philosophy generally comes with the Tai Chi turf, you're
unlikely
>>>>>to find true Tai Chi masters street fighting.
>>>I'd agree with that too, but again I'd expect any high-level martial arts
>>>teacher to not engage in frequent fights, and rather him/her employ other
>>>options.
>>We wouldn't even know about Taiji if it hadn't been famous for fighting.
>>Get some history books, guys.
>
>
>You're quite correct Michael. However, back then in China that was
>considered the normal way of life. Today it certainly is not. Apart riots
>and X-mas shopping lines we don't see groups of people fighting in the
>streets in the US. Keep in mind it is possible for this apparently 'quiet'
>martial art to also be the most lethal. - but that doesn't mean that we are
>forced to use its lethalness on a daily basis, or at all.
Can you use "lethalness" or is that again rhetorical?
>
>
>Once again someone uses 'New age' as a pejoritive term. Feel free to attach
>any negative labels you like if that makes you feel that you've elevated
>your status. But either way I'm glad my postings have had that special
>calming property on you, and that the Tao Te Ching has had that effect on
>you as well.
No effect. No calming. Just words.
Mike Sigman
Euclid
>>Hi, thanks for your response Michael,
>It's just Mike, not Michael. I signed it Mike.
Please concentrate on a martial arts discussion. I don't check the
newsgroups to respond to insult material.
>>>Far out. You're about 6 years behind times...
>>Why 6 years as opposed to some other year? Did something happen in 1993-94
>>that I don't know about?
>How would you know?
You evaded the question by responding with another question. -So I'll
repeat: What happened during 1993-94 that I don't know about. [because you
said that I'm about 6 years behind times].
>OK. I won't misquote you. I'll ask you directly to support how you know
>that "Tai Chi can be thought of as the physical emobdiment of Taoist
>principles".
Tai Chi Chuan can be though of as the physical embodiment of Taoist
principles because there are so many elements present in Taoist thinking
that are practiced in Tai Chi Chuan physically. The examples are abound: the
Tao Te Ching tells us to be natural and relaxed, to involve our state of
openness and receptivity.--the parallel in Tai Chi Chuan is to be sung -
relaxed but conscious, and not flopping around on the floor. There are
direct passages [Ch. 22] that tell us to 'yield and overcome', 'bend and be
straight', 'know the strength of man, But keep a woman's care', and to
'know the white but keep the black!' [referring to ying/yang as well as
'soft overcomes hard ' principles, and using force - but keeping extremeties
bent to allow chi to flow. [Ch. 30] -"force is followed by loss of strength"
[over-extend yourself and your opponents takes you down], "achieve results,
But not through violence". [non-action is a good thing]. Lao Tzu wrote: "If
you want to take, you first must give." - which was incorporated into the
Tai Chi Classic (by Chang San-feng supposedly) to be "If we wish to lift
something, first push down. The root will break naturally and the opponent
will be thrown out." [of course root referring to our feet on the floor].
The Taoist phrase "The waterwheel spins backwards" seems to illustrate the
flow of the chi as it travels up your spine and through gates.
Now of course this is my interpretation (obviouslly, since I am writing it),
and you are free to draw whatever conclusions you wish.
>>Keep in mind it is possible for this apparently 'quiet'
>>martial art to also be the most lethal. - but that doesn't mean that we
are
>>forced to use its lethalness on a daily basis, or at all.
>Can you use "lethalness" or is that again rhetorical?
Well that depends on if you are being rhetorical. ;-)
Yes I can perform many of the martial applications, or I wouldn't be talking
about it. And there is no need for quotes around lethalness- Tai Chi Chuan
as a complete system [and individual postures] is quite lethal, wouldnt you
say?
Mike Sigman
Euclid wrote in message <84kjk9$p53$1...@news-02.meganews.com>...
>
>>>>Far out. You're about 6 years behind times...
>>>Why 6 years as opposed to some other year? Did something happen in
1993-94
>>>that I don't know about?
>>How would you know?
>
>
>You evaded the question by responding with another question. -So I'll
>repeat: What happened during 1993-94 that I don't know about. [because you
>said that I'm about 6 years behind times].
That's about how long that it's been fairly *common* knowledge that the
Taoism - Taiji relationship cannot be supported. Worse yet, there has been
nothing substantive to support the claimed relationship since the beginning.
The only two things that anyone ever hung their hats on was (1.) the
so-called Yang "classics" which were probably written by Wu Yu Xiang in the
main (none of the original manuscripts have ever been shown to the public)
and (2.) the Sung Pu which was "revealed" by Sung Xu Ming but which was
deemed to be a forgery upon closer examination.
>
>
>
>>OK. I won't misquote you. I'll ask you directly to support how you know
>>that "Tai Chi can be thought of as the physical emobdiment of Taoist
>>principles".
>
>
>Tai Chi Chuan can be though of as the physical embodiment of Taoist
>principles because there are so many elements present in Taoist thinking
>that are practiced in Tai Chi Chuan physically. The examples are abound:
the
>Tao Te Ching tells us to be natural and relaxed, to involve our state of
>openness and receptivity.--the parallel in Tai Chi Chuan is to be sung -
>relaxed but conscious, and not flopping around on the floor.
That's a conclusion you're drawing. Yet many of the so-called "external"
styles say similar things.
> There are
>direct passages [Ch. 22] that tell us to 'yield and overcome', 'bend and be
>straight', 'know the strength of man, But keep a woman's care', and to
>'know the white but keep the black!' [referring to ying/yang as well as
>'soft overcomes hard ' principles, and using force - but keeping
extremeties
>bent to allow chi to flow. [Ch. 30] -"force is followed by loss of
strength"
>[over-extend yourself and your opponents takes you down], "achieve results,
>But not through violence". [non-action is a good thing]. Lao Tzu wrote:
"If
>you want to take, you first must give." - which was incorporated into the
>Tai Chi Classic (by Chang San-feng supposedly) to be "If we wish to lift
>something, first push down. The root will break naturally and the opponent
>will be thrown out." [of course root referring to our feet on the floor].
>The Taoist phrase "The waterwheel spins backwards" seems to illustrate the
>flow of the chi as it travels up your spine and through gates.
>
>Now of course this is my interpretation (obviouslly, since I am writing
it),
>and you are free to draw whatever conclusions you wish.
Exactly. All you have done is "interpret" things toward what you want to
hear, believe, and say. In other words, the support I asked for is not
there, other than in your own mind.
>
>
>>>Keep in mind it is possible for this apparently 'quiet'
>>>martial art to also be the most lethal. - but that doesn't mean that we
>are
>>>forced to use its lethalness on a daily basis, or at all.
>>Can you use "lethalness" or is that again rhetorical?
>
>
>
>Well that depends on if you are being rhetorical. ;-)
>Yes I can perform many of the martial applications, or I wouldn't be
talking
>about it. And there is no need for quotes around lethalness- Tai Chi Chuan
>as a complete system [and individual postures] is quite lethal, wouldnt you
>say?
I don't practice the complete Taijiquan. It turns out there is more to it
than I thought. Do you practice the "complete" Taijiquan or are you
speculating again?
Mike Sigman
Rich Davy
You seem to be having a very lively debate!
It was me who submitted this post originally, it went along the lines of:-
Has anyone had any first hand experience or seen Tai Chi being used in a
real or street environment. I have read books that say it can be used for
defence/attack, but the only info. I cannot find any info to back this up.
Does anyone train in Tai Chi in this manner i.e. to be used in a life or
death situation.
I am not putting the art down at all, quite the opposite I am just geniunely
interested in finding out more.
There were originally lots of responses from people saying 'Yeah, it is a
deadly martial art', or 'Yeah, them Tai Chi guys can really punch hard', but
still no real evidence or examples.
An interested and open minded martial artist.
RD.
Mike Sigman wrote in message ...
Mike Sigman
Rich Davy wrote in message <84sqfb$kka$1...@panther.rmplc.co.uk>...
>
>Has anyone had any first hand experience or seen Tai Chi being used in a
>real or street environment
I've "used Taiji" in what would be called "real situations" twice (other
than sparring situations), but the level of the situations wasn't
particularly high and I only did one thing to end the situation in each
case. If you're picturing an action sequence from a movie where an
impressive series of moves was used, I didn't do it. Usually I want a
fight to be over almost instantly so I don't run any risk of incurring
damage to my classical greek profile.
And since both of the moves I used happen to be moves that I depend on a
lot, I'm not going to tell you what they were. :^)
Mike
Richard
>I am not putting the art down at all, quite the opposite I am just geniunely
>interested in finding out more.
>
>There were originally lots of responses from people saying 'Yeah, it is a
>deadly martial art', or 'Yeah, them Tai Chi guys can really punch hard', but
>still no real evidence or examples.
>
>
I'm not sure what you would consider evidence, but since I was shown the first
push hands excersize, and realized how handily it turns a punch into an outside
wrist lock, I have had very little need for anything else. I'm a Casino
Security Boss in Las Vegas, so I get plenty of practical application time.
It's okey-dokey in my book.
Richard
Rich Davy
>I've "used Taiji" in what would be called "real situations" twice (other
>than sparring situations), but the level of the situations wasn't
>particularly high and I only did one thing to end the situation in each
>case.
Doing one thing that works is best and commendable, it obviously had the
desired effect and was an effective technique.
If you're picturing an action sequence from a movie where an
>impressive series of moves was used, I didn't do it. Usually I want a
>fight to be over almost instantly so I don't run any risk of incurring
>damage to my classical greek profile.
>
I don't like to see an impressive series of moves as they are a waist of
time. I prefer the one shot stop techniques which you are talking about.
>And since both of the moves I used happen to be moves that I depend on a
>lot, I'm not going to tell you what they were. :^)
>
Thats fine!
regards
RD
Blanche Nonken
> I'm a Casino
> Security Boss in Las Vegas, so I get plenty of practical application time.
Which casino, if you don't mind my asking? If you'd prefer to not say,
that's cool.
Laife
>
> Amazingly, the people I find with the tightest-closed minds are usually the
> ones who talk the most about "open mindedness".
Interesting, isn't it?
Perhaps it makes them feel good to think that they are open-minded. Just as
long as they are not wrong! :)
Personally, I think it's an insecurity issue based on fear. So deep rooted that
they don't even realize it.
> Open your mind to the idea
> that Taiji is not Taoist.
>
--
Laife
Robert J. Mallis
mikes...@earthlink.net says...
>
>The only two things that anyone ever hung their hats on was (1.) the
>so-called Yang "classics" which were probably written by Wu Yu Xiang in the
>main (none of the original manuscripts have ever been shown to the public)
>and (2.) the Sung Pu which was "revealed" by Sung Xu Ming but which was
>deemed to be a forgery upon closer examination.
>
I'm kind of curious about this. What of the Yang family manuscripts that
Douglas Wile translates in his two books? Speculation was that one from his
second book came from Yang Ban Hou. Has there been any news about that since
the release of his book? Also, any speculation on whether the Yang family
will release some of these documents in the future?
Curious,
Bob Mallis
Mike Sigman
Robert J. Mallis wrote in message <85842j$8ov$1...@news.iastate.edu>...
"Yang family" is really sort of a generic term for things that were often
peripheral to the actual Yang family. Bear in mind that Yang Lu Chan was
illiterate and his two sons Yang Pan Hou and Chien Hou were not particularly
literate (some people say they were functionally illiterate). So there are
some real questions about attribution. Wu Yu Xiang and Li Yi Yu quite
probably deliberately mis-attributed some things; this is fairly commonly
acknowledged by even many Yang stylists. The original question had to do
with "Taoism" and Taiji.... what particularly were you referring to in
Wile's translations?
Mike Sigman
Robert J. Mallis
mikes...@earthlink.net says...
>
>some real questions about attribution. Wu Yu Xiang and Li Yi Yu quite
>probably deliberately mis-attributed some things; this is fairly commonly
>acknowledged by even many Yang stylists. The original question had to do
>with "Taoism" and Taiji.... what particularly were you referring to in
>Wile's translations?
>
I realize that my question is peripheral to the Taoism and tai chi question
(which I want no part of...)
I was mostly referring to the 40 chapters Wile presents in the latter half of
his "Lost tai chi classics of the late Ching dynasty". It always bothered me
that, although I had only heard that Yang Pan Hou was illiterate, Wile
attributed this chapter to him. I don't know if you are saying that there
were no real Yang family manuscripts, but if there were where did they get
them, do they still have them, and are there more to them than what has been
translated by Wile and by Olson???
Regards,
Bob Mallis
Veera Luhtala
Veera
LisaandAndyS
to apply techniques. It is also a step along the path toward free fighting.
X
>> What is it?
>> Veera
Push hands is a Tai Chi Chuan activity used to develop timing, power,
subtlety, and coordination.
It can be done standing faceing an opponent, or moving, but it is not to be
confused with free sparing, which is something quite different.
The Tai Chi Chuan form techniques are more used in a lethal situation (for
example if you would like to cause internal damage), where the push hands
techniques are mainly used to get someone away from you and make sure they
don't hit you.
Steve Groome
and push (collectively known as grasp birds tail).
There are two types of push hands fixed step and moving, when moving the
moves of elbow, shoulder, split and pluck are also employed. Push hands can
be followed by san shui and da lu.
Steve
Veera Luhtala <veera....@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:87fhb8$ien$1...@news.kolumbus.fi...
> What is it?
>
>
> Veera
>
>