Here it is!
Part two of Sigung's wonderful answer to the question I aired earlier in the thread.
Thank you Sigung!
Part two of Sigung's wonderful answer to the question I aired earlier in the thread.
Thank you Sigung!
Some patterns, like Carry Tiger Back to Mountain and Needle at Sea Bottom, are performed differently in our version. This is because we perform them the way we would use them in combat application. In the original version, Carry Tiger Back to Mountain is similar to Grasping Sparrow’s Tail, except an initial palm strike.
Using Needle in Sea Bottom as performed in the original version to counter an organ-seeking kick, which is a main function of the pattern in our version, is not effective. Using it to release a wrist grip, as mentioned in Yang Deng Fu’s book, or to pierce into an opponent on the ground, as suggested in the pattern, is inappropriate as it dangerously exposes the exponent.
A few patterns are added to the original version because the additional patterns are meaningful and useful. Elbow Strike and Shoulder Strike, for example, complete the two missing techniques of the 8 techniques mentioned in the original 13 postures of Taijiquan. Striking Tiger Poise is an important pattern in Chen Style, Taijiquan, the forerunner from which Yang Style Taijiquan evolved, and is a very useful pattern for combat.
In the hidden group, the way the Bow-Arrow Stance is performed is exactly what we ask our students to avoid because not only it is disadvantageous in combat but also detrimental to health. It is telling to note that in earlier pictures of Yang Deng Fu, he performed the Bow-Arrow Stance the way we now do, and not the way shown in the original version.
It is understandable if Yang Deng Fu hid some combat applications from his ordinary students, as that was the norm then, but it is unthinkable to suggest that he distorted the form of the Bow-Arrow Stance to cause harm. Hence, there must be good reasons why the Bow-Arrow Stance is performed the way it is now performed and which we consider detrimental.
One possible reason, which might or might not be true, could be for expedient needs, like Yang Deng Fu was injured from his numerous fighting when teaching the Bow-Arrow Stance and the current form, which would be necessary for his expedient need at the time, had become established. It is similar to a situation that some Chinese terms, like the Five Elements, are wrongly translated but has become established.
Fa-jing was an advanced skill, taught only to advanced students. This could be a reason why it was not included in the original version of the set which was performed by ordinary students. But our school is different. We teach what most schools considered as advanced right at the beginning.
This is the same as performing the set with speed in our version but slowly in the original version. Initially Taijiquan movements were performed slowly so as to get the form perfect and to generate energy flow. When students became advanced, they would perform the movements fast, especially in combat. Most students did not have an opportunity to progress to an advanced stage with the result that performing Taijiquan slowly has been established, mistakenly, as the norm.
We are ridiculous. We progress in a four-hour course what it would take other students many years. Hence, like fa-jing, we perform our Taijiquan movements fast, after having performed it slowly at our initial stage which would take less than an hour, to learn picture-perfect form and generate energy flow.
Personally I do not find any disadvantages regarding these differences, which only enhance our benefits. If there were disadvantages, I would not have made the changes.
Even the suggestion that having these changes which necessitates performing both sides instead of one, adding new patterns, and learning new skills, does not hold waters because these changes were made in place of repetition. For example, instead of repeating a sequence of techniques five times, we perform the sequence twice, and use the remaining three times to learn new techniques and skills.
The suggestion that performing something five times makes a practitioner more skillful than performing twice, is also not true in our case because, at the risk of being accused to be boastful, we benefit more from performing a sequence of technique twice than most other people performing it five times. This is readily seen in the fact, except that other people may be too slow or stubborn to see it, that our student learning Taijiquan in a course of a few days have better performance and more benefits than many other people practicing Taijiquan for a few years.
Using Needle in Sea Bottom as performed in the original version to counter an organ-seeking kick, which is a main function of the pattern in our version, is not effective. Using it to release a wrist grip, as mentioned in Yang Deng Fu’s book, or to pierce into an opponent on the ground, as suggested in the pattern, is inappropriate as it dangerously exposes the exponent.
A few patterns are added to the original version because the additional patterns are meaningful and useful. Elbow Strike and Shoulder Strike, for example, complete the two missing techniques of the 8 techniques mentioned in the original 13 postures of Taijiquan. Striking Tiger Poise is an important pattern in Chen Style, Taijiquan, the forerunner from which Yang Style Taijiquan evolved, and is a very useful pattern for combat.
In the hidden group, the way the Bow-Arrow Stance is performed is exactly what we ask our students to avoid because not only it is disadvantageous in combat but also detrimental to health. It is telling to note that in earlier pictures of Yang Deng Fu, he performed the Bow-Arrow Stance the way we now do, and not the way shown in the original version.
It is understandable if Yang Deng Fu hid some combat applications from his ordinary students, as that was the norm then, but it is unthinkable to suggest that he distorted the form of the Bow-Arrow Stance to cause harm. Hence, there must be good reasons why the Bow-Arrow Stance is performed the way it is now performed and which we consider detrimental.
One possible reason, which might or might not be true, could be for expedient needs, like Yang Deng Fu was injured from his numerous fighting when teaching the Bow-Arrow Stance and the current form, which would be necessary for his expedient need at the time, had become established. It is similar to a situation that some Chinese terms, like the Five Elements, are wrongly translated but has become established.
Fa-jing was an advanced skill, taught only to advanced students. This could be a reason why it was not included in the original version of the set which was performed by ordinary students. But our school is different. We teach what most schools considered as advanced right at the beginning.
This is the same as performing the set with speed in our version but slowly in the original version. Initially Taijiquan movements were performed slowly so as to get the form perfect and to generate energy flow. When students became advanced, they would perform the movements fast, especially in combat. Most students did not have an opportunity to progress to an advanced stage with the result that performing Taijiquan slowly has been established, mistakenly, as the norm.
We are ridiculous. We progress in a four-hour course what it would take other students many years. Hence, like fa-jing, we perform our Taijiquan movements fast, after having performed it slowly at our initial stage which would take less than an hour, to learn picture-perfect form and generate energy flow.
Personally I do not find any disadvantages regarding these differences, which only enhance our benefits. If there were disadvantages, I would not have made the changes.
Even the suggestion that having these changes which necessitates performing both sides instead of one, adding new patterns, and learning new skills, does not hold waters because these changes were made in place of repetition. For example, instead of repeating a sequence of techniques five times, we perform the sequence twice, and use the remaining three times to learn new techniques and skills.
The suggestion that performing something five times makes a practitioner more skillful than performing twice, is also not true in our case because, at the risk of being accused to be boastful, we benefit more from performing a sequence of technique twice than most other people performing it five times. This is readily seen in the fact, except that other people may be too slow or stubborn to see it, that our student learning Taijiquan in a course of a few days have better performance and more benefits than many other people practicing Taijiquan for a few years.
Comment