Transitioning to Tàijíquán from External Martial Arts - Martial Journal

[Xue Sheng98]

The Journey Inside: Transitioning to Tàijíquán from External Martial Arts​

Perhaps the greatest challenge for external stylists lies in releasing ingrained patterns of tension and forceful movement.

 

[_Simon_103]

Really enjoyed that article, thanks Xue

 

[Taiji Rebel]

Introducing martial arts to university clubs with their competitive and sporting elements more than likely removed a lot of the principles which taiji retained. The earlier teachers and practitioners of Japanese martial arts appear to have a more balanced, mindful and zen-like approach to their studies.

It seems a great deal of these principles were further eliminated when the GIs returned home and begun teaching with their limited understanding of the martial arts.

The removal of 'internal' principles and mindful practices from the martial arts has reached a new level in the modern day sports versions we see. Westerners, especially the young, are heavily focused on external rewards such as titles, belts, medals, trophies and endless victories.

As we age we often see the folly of youth and begin refining our thinking, learning from our mistakes, altering our actions and maturing like fine wines.

Thank you for sharing this article, much appreciated

 

[windwalker099104]

From the article..

"1. Maintain a Beginner’s Mind and an open mind about new ways of…well, of everything. Remember: Tàijíquán can never replace what you’ve studied and it will make no effort to deny your prior Art.

"You can keep your earlier Art(s) and still invite Tàijíquán in to complement both your Art and your self."

Wondering how many having made the transition would agree with the statement ?

 

[isshinryuronin]

From the article..

"1. Maintain a Beginner’s Mind and an open mind about new ways of…well, of everything. Remember: Tàijíquán can never replace what you’ve studied and it will make no effort to deny your prior Art.

"You can keep your earlier Art(s) and still invite Tàijíquán in to complement both your Art and your self."

Wondering how many having made the transition would agree with the statement ?

I definitely agree with the first four words quoted above. It allows for so many opportunities for learning and understanding. Seeing old things with new eyes can get you excited all over again.

I can't comment on taiji + other art comparisons since I've never studied taiji. But in general, it seems that one's initial mind set in some arts is to yield to an attacker's force while in others it is to deliver your own force. Certainly, each has some element of the other to some extent, but on a basic ingrained mind and muscle memory level I think this difference holds true.

This fact, IMO, makes it difficult to fluidly transist from one methodology to the other (a worthy yet elusive ideal to reach), especially under duress since in such situations we will tend to automatically default to one or the other initial response.

 

[Same Trick49]

From the article..

"1. Maintain a Beginner’s Mind and an open mind about new ways of…well, of everything. Remember: Tàijíquán can never replace what you’ve studied and it will make no effort to deny your prior Art.

"You can keep your earlier Art(s) and still invite Tàijíquán in to complement both your Art and your self."

Wondering how many having made the transition would agree with the statement ?

I now and then go through a couple karate katas that I worked very much on back in those days, they kind of call me saying - “ hey. try me out, se if you remember!” And I must say I have come to some enlightenment about them through my now many years of taijiquan( and Xingyiquan) practice. Practice karate as it’s commonly practiced and also practice TJQ as it should be done is not optional, those two methods are different, and if one do both of them one of them has to change - But there are a group of karate(Shotokan) katas named Taiji (taikyuku)

The author of the article write about learning taiji relax , however his facial expression in the picture in the article seem tense

 

[windwalker099104]

I can't comment on taiji + other art comparisons since I've never studied taiji. But in general, it seems that one's initial mind set in some arts is to yield to an attacker's force while in others it is to deliver your own force.

This seems to be a common mindset about "taiji" that it involves "yielding to an attacker's force."

In reality, there is no "yielding" in the passive sense; rather, there is preempting, joining, and neutralizing.
A distinction, important both in terms of mindset and the mechanics of how it's done.


Force an often much-discussed topic in taiji, usually in terms of "external" versus "internal."

In my own transition, I started taiji to deepen my CMA practice at the time. After about 20 years of studying with two other taiji teachers, I met my last taiji teacher. Dropping everything else to understand his method, spending another 20 or so years attempting to do so.

 

[windwalker099104]

I now and then go through a couple karate katas that I worked very much on back in those days, they kind of call me saying - “ hey. try me out, se if you remember!”

There are times I wish I had stayed with Tibetan White Crane, my first style. Although I remember a lot of the techniques and methods, my body, due to my taiji practice, can't move that way anymore. It feels quite strange.

At one time did try to modify TWC to fit into my taiji practice, after 5yrs of experimentation found there were some fundamental physical differences in practice based on type of power developed.

Was unable to reconcile them. Maybe, if I have enough time left in life, I'll come to understand how to integrate them.

 

[Kung Fu Wang104]

In reality, there is no "yielding" in the passive sense; rather, there is preempting, joining, and neutralizing.

It's like a BJJ guy starts to train the ground skill before training the throwing skill. No matter how good your ground skill may be, if you can't take your opponent down, you can't apply your ground skill.

Every time we talk about Taiji joint, yield, sticky, follow, ..., I always like to ask, "Is Taiji a striking art, or a grappling art?" If Taiji is a striking art, where is the "establish arm contact" training? If you can establish arm contact during a fist flying situation, you can't apply your joint, yield, sticky, follow, ...

Any external MA can help Taiji to fill in that missing link. This is why my long fist teacher won't teach any students Taiji until they have at least 3 years of long fist training.

 

[isshinryuronin]

This seems to be a common mindset about "taiji" that it involves "yielding to an attacker's force."

In reality, there is no "yielding" in the passive sense; rather, there is preempting, joining, and neutralizing.

Semantics, again. How does one define "yielding?" From my viewpoint, it doesn't necessarily imply weakness or passivity (as may be a common interpretation by some). I agree that some active mechanics are required to achieve an effective yielding as I think you allude to by listing "preempting, joining, and neutralizing."

In MA, I see "yielding" as allowing the opponent's motion to continue (in a fashion he had not intended) ultimately resulting in neutralizing its efficacy. This can be done actively by taking control of his movement and extending it beyond his center of balance or till the attack's energy is expended. It can also be accomplished passively by simply moving out of the way from an overcommitted attack. In either case, the opponent is now vulnerable due to weakness in balance or position/angle. While such strategy is present in the "external" arts like karate, my understanding (perhaps wrongly) is that it's the major default doctrine of the "internal" arts.

In contrast, the "external" arts such as karate and some kung fu styles are more likely to attack (block) the opponent's strike, taking a more direct route to a counter. The instinctual initial response would be the main doctrine they've practiced. It's difficult to switch between the two approaches.

 

[windwalker099104]

Semantics, again. How does one define "yielding?" From my viewpoint, it doesn't necessarily imply weakness or passivity (as may be a common interpretation by some). I agree that some active mechanics are required to achieve an effective yielding as I think you allude to by listing "preempting, joining, and neutralizing."

No one mentioned any of the things you mentioned based on your viewpoint. IE weakness , passivity ect.


My view point...

Yielding involves both the mind and body moving in the same direction as the incoming force. Conversely, resisting involves both mind and body opposing the force.

Both yielding and resisting can lead to a state referred to as "double weighted" where there is a lack of dynamic balance and responsiveness.

In Taiji, the principles of "stick" (黏, Nián), "adhere" (贴, Tiē), "connect" (连, Lián), and "follow" (随, Suí) are emphasized.
The concepts of offense and defense in Taiji are different; they are integrated and not seen as separate actions. Taiji focuses on maintaining a dynamic interaction to the advantage of the taiji practitioner...

a little different from other MA...

 

[windwalker099104]

In contrast, the "external" arts such as karate and some kung fu styles are more likely to attack (block) the opponent's strike, taking a more direct route to a counter. The instinctual initial response would be the main doctrine they've practiced. It's difficult to switch between the two approaches.

External or internal is quite interesting in that they can refer to different aspects of martial arts practice.
When you refer to them, it seems to be in the context of tactics and strategies.

When I refer to them, it's more along the lines of how the energy is developed to be used in those tactics and strategies.

 

[Same Trick49]

Blocking/blocks was mentioned

Interestingly karate blocks as they are named in Japanese refer to “receiving” with the word “uke” - age-uke, uchi-uke…and so on..with the exception of the downward “block” that’s named gedan-barai meaning downward sweep.

This would imply karate is supposed to be less brutish board breaking machismo but more soft, flowing and Taiji like, steel wrapped in cotton

 

[isshinryuronin]

Blocking/blocks was mentioned

Interestingly karate blocks as they are named in Japanese refer to “receiving” with the word “uke” - age-uke, uchi-uke…and so on..with the exception of the downward “block” that’s named gedan-barai meaning downward sweep.

This would imply karate is supposed to be less brutish board breaking machismo but more soft, flowing and Taiji like, steel wrapped in cotton

Yes, the implication of "uke=receiving" does hint of a less aggressive, defensive technique, but this should not be taken as "soft" as most karate blocks are done hard. There is a saying in Okinawan karate that "there are no blocks" and that is certainly the attitude in isshinryu. We don't receive anything. We attack the opponent's strike, causing injury, or at least pain whenever possible.

You were accurate in describing gedan-barai as a downward "block," putting that word in quotes, as in advanced kata bunkai it is not normally used to stop a kick, but most of the time has other applications.

No one mentioned any of the things you mentioned based on your viewpoint. IE weakness , passivity ect.

I meant this part to be agreeing with you, that "yielding" need not be seen as passive/weak, even though it...

may be a common interpretation by some.

I think we're on the same page on this point.

The concepts of offense and defense in Taiji are different; they are integrated and not seen as separate actions.

My style, and most Okinawan TMA doctrine (though some schools don't realize this) are in full agreement with your statement above. I have posted several times on this subject. There are no blocks - this infers "defense." Our doctrine is every move is an attack or directly facilitates an attack. In our forms, even stepping backwards is practically non-existent. It's rather aggressive. We are the General Patton of karate. I do not differentiate between offense and defense. Ideally, our offense neutralizes any counter by the opponent. As you say, "they are integrated."

 

[Appledog42]

You have to be able to yield, or you can't stick.

The thing about Tai Chi is that it has many individual skills, and sometimes when people begin to learn they find one or two of them and their mind instantly tries to use them. At that point they stop progressing. There are some very skilled people like this.

If you want to get better then you must ignore anything like this and keep working on what your teacher tells you. Sometimes the lesson can only be discovered after several years at a plateau. This is why lineage and trust matters. For many people, it is impossible to learn this way because they have such strong preconceptions from other arts.

And now, a question. What is the empty middle path (kong zhong dao)?

 

[marvin83]

Semantics, again. How does one define "yielding?" From my viewpoint, it doesn't necessarily imply weakness or passivity (as may be a common interpretation by some). I agree that some active mechanics are required to achieve an effective yielding as I think you allude to by listing "preempting, joining, and neutralizing."

In MA, I see "yielding" as allowing the opponent's motion to continue (in a fashion he had not intended) ultimately resulting in neutralizing its efficacy. This can be done actively by taking control of his movement and extending it beyond his center of balance or till the attack's energy is expended.

... or till the opponent is double weighted, not necessarily unbalanced nor energy expended.

It can also be accomplished passively by simply moving out of the way from an overcommitted attack. In either case, the opponent is now vulnerable due to weakness in balance or position/angle.

Yes.

While such strategy is present in the "external" arts like karate, my understanding (perhaps wrongly) is that it's the major default doctrine of the "internal" arts.

Karate has simultaneous block and punch, go no sen timing. In yin-yang, there is no doctrine.

In contrast, the "external" arts such as karate and some kung fu styles are more likely to attack (block) the opponent's strike, taking a more direct route to a counter. The instinctual initial response would be the main doctrine they've practiced. It's difficult to switch between the two approaches.

Block then counter is less direct than just counter. In kumite, there is less blocking. Posted overhand punch videos show that most KOs happen without blocking suggesting it's more effective.

An example of counter without blocking first. This applies to grappling too and follows taiji combat in concept but without initial contact. Lopez yields simultaneously KOing Commey. There is a difference in timing, position, distance, reaction time and advantage from block/counter.

Should Lopez have tried to block, harm, or grab Commey's arm before KOing him? Which is better chasing hands or center?

https://imgur.com/WwsvBnU

Yes, the implication of "uke=receiving" does hint of a less aggressive, defensive technique, but this should not be taken as "soft" as most karate blocks are done hard. There is a saying in Okinawan karate that "there are no blocks" and that is certainly the attitude in isshinryu. We don't receive anything. We attack the opponent's strike, causing injury, or at least pain whenever possible.

... which can be considered "chasing hands" and using force against force. Their strike can be a feint to set up a counter. The limbs are easier to move than the center (e.g., body, head).

Excerpt from "Taiji Quan Combat" by Tim Cartmell:

The primary combat strategy of Tai Ji Quan can be summed up in the phrase "Entice (the opponent) to advance, (cause the opponent to) fall into emptiness, unite (with the opponent) then throw (the opponent) out" [Yin jin, luo kong, he ji chu]. Enticing the opponent to advance (advance refers to the opponent's aggressive forward momentum) can be as simple as standing in front, presenting an open target or launching a preemptive attack designed to draw a reaction. Enticing the opponent into aggressive forward momentum has several advantages...

Finally, enticing an opponent into aggressive forward motion locks his mentality into the attack mode. With committed focus on attacking, the opponent will be slow in changing to the defensive mind set as the Tai Ji Quan fighter counterattacks. The opponent's reaction time is delayed, further increasing the counterattacks odds of success; this allows the Tai Ji Quan fighter to "leave after yet arrive first..."

Stick and Adhere refer to connecting with the opponent in a soft and nonconfrontational manner and maintaining this connection as you both move (blocking an opponent's incoming force inevitably results in the opponent being knocked away. This makes it impossible to join with the opponent and one is doomed to remaining double weighted).

Most often, the Tai Ji Quan fighter will seek to stick to and control the opponent's center through contact with his arms and/or upper torso, using these regions as handles to the opponent's center.

In combat sports and other MAs, most often, the fighter will seek to and control the opponent's center starting without contact as shown in my post #83.

 

[Kung Fu Wang104]

We don't receive anything. We attack the opponent's strike, causing injury, or at least pain whenever possible.

It's more 5 elements strategies that "internal" and external.

You are using the metal strategy. Taiji tries to use the water strategy. Both have value depending on which strategy your opponent is using.

If your opponent uses fire strategy that dancing around with fast non-committed punches, it may be harder for you to use your arm to hurt his arm.

If the Taiji guy's opponent uses earth strategy that have strong defense and move in inch by inch, it will be difficult for that Taiji guy to borrow his force and apply yield, sticky, follow, ...

 

[isshinryuronin]

If your opponent uses fire strategy that dancing around with fast non-committed punches, it may be harder for you to use your arm to hurt his arm.

If the punches are "non-committed" there is no need for me to go after them. I'll just blast thru, stuffing his guard, and go right for the body/head. Or lure him into a committed attack that I can counter.

 

[Kung Fu Wang104]

If the punches are "non-committed" there is no need for me to go after them. I'll just blast thru, stuffing his guard, and go right for the body/head. Or lure him into a committed attack that I can counter.

When you try to lure your opponent into a committed attack, you have changed your "metal" strategy into "water" strategy.

There is only 5 elements strategy change. there is no "internal" vs external. "internal" is part of the 5 elements strategy, the "water" strategy. You want your opponent to commit, so you can sticky, yield, follow, ...You try to ignore all non-committed attack.

 

[marvin83]

If the punches are "non-committed" there is no need for me to go after them. I'll just blast thru,
Or lure him into a committed attack that I can counter.

If you can lure your opponent into a committed attack, then they can lure you to "go after them" with feints or fakes.

We don't receive anything. We attack the opponent's strike, causing injury, or at least pain whenever possible.

When you try to lure your opponent into a committed attack, you have changed your "metal" strategy into "water" strategy.

There is only 5 elements strategy change. there is no "internal" vs external. "internal" is part of the 5 elements strategy, the "water" strategy. You want your opponent to commit, so you can sticky, yield, follow, ...You try to ignore all non-committed attack.

When using force against force (or feints), you are not enticing the opponent into emptiness.

Should Lopez have tried to block, harm, or grab Commey's arm before KOing him? Which is better chasing hands or center?