If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You will have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Welcome to the Shaolin Wahnam Institute Virtual Kwoon and Discussion Forum.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free.
When considering joining our community, please read our Forum Rules and FAQ. Please also note that this forum, although open to the public, is actually a virtual extension of the Shaolin Wahnam Kwoon (Martial Arts School). Upon "entering" the school, we do expect our guests and members to conduct themselves in an appropriate manner at all times.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Please follow this link to find out what a Virtual Kwoon is.
I have been doing Cheng Man Ching style of Taijiquan for about 11 months and a new chinese martial arts clubed opened up, i decided to see what they teach and the sifu told me that if you do other styles you still have to do the original yang 108 if want to use it for martial purposes.
All taijiquan have martial usage. The problem is that very few people teach know or teach it. If you had all levels of training in Zheng Manqing style (tuishou, qi'nna, shuaijiao) then you are far above the game. If you learnt only the form with no other training then you are at the level of most taijiquan people.
If you are unsatidfied with your level of training then it is not that Manqing style is bad but the breath of training is lacking, not the style.
Most postures in a form do not make a style better.
Better can refer to execution of the form with the accents, rotations, relaxation, requirements and the like. Better can refer to a short form or a long form and they can have different uses.
The overwhelming majority of Tai-Chi Instructors today....especially most of those who teach the modern 'short forms' such as the Cheng Man-Ching Set or the Beijing Simplified 24 Forms Set....teach the movement routines only as a Health Exercise or a Moving Meditation...not as a Martial Art. This being the case...it is best to inquire of different teachers whether or not they can demonstrate and teach the martial applications of their Tai-Chi as a Soft/Internal Kung-Fu method or not before enrolling in the class. I would certainly have no reservations about demonstrating my martial skills using Tai-Chi Chuan to a potential new student in order to prove that such skills are developed already...and I would be suspicious of any teacher who claimed martial skills but was unwilling to demonstrate them beyond any shadow of a doubt. Those who can...will.....and those who can't usually won't...be willing to prove it.
It is more common to find teachers with martial art skills among those who teach the older, traditional Family Styles of Tai-Chi Chuan such as the Chen Style Old Frame Lao-Jia Set and the Old Yang Style Long Imperial 108 Set than among the more 'modern' versions of these Family Styles. Of course...there are always delightful exceptions....but you'll know who these exceptions are by their willingness to demonstrate their skills...rather than asking you to merely take their word that they have martial abilities with their Tai-Chi.
Yeniseri:
You remind me very, very much of a person who posts on the Qi Institute Forum as xanoq! Are you in fact this same person? C'mon now, tell me the truth!
What style of Tai Chi one practises is not important as long as one does it correctly and deligently. We are one big family and we have to respect each other.
There is no such thing as which is better or which is worse. There is nothing wrong with the style(s) but there is always something very wrong with the person(s).
I completely disagree that all Tai-Chi Chuan styles or Form Sets are equal...and that it doesn't matter which style a practitioner selects for their training. In my opinion....ALL of the major, traditional styles and even SOME of the modern competition or modified, short Sets have the potential to generate the highest levels of health benefit and martial skills...when properly practiced with correct traditional principles. The problem is that this seems to be rarely the case anymore.
There are more practitioners of all varieties of Tai-Chi Chuan today than at any time in the history of Tai-Chi Chuan thus far...yet fewer practitioners who are able to personally demonstrate the martial skills of pre-WWII exponents...and very few who are able to personally demonstrate any real long term health benefits either...even though the latter is the supposed focal point of their teaching or training.
We need only look at the majority of the people who are purported to be the world's 'best' practitioners to see that most of them are clearly very overweight and are undeniably athletically unfit and even unhealthy in appearance. Those who are not fat, bald, and rapidly aging are the exceptions rather than the rule. And it is extremely rare to see any of them demonstrate believable soft style kung-fu fighting skills like the Old Masters of the past. If they demonstrate at all...it is only to show Forms and pre-arranged, fixed pattern Push Hands (Tui-Shou) only....even privately in their teaching venues. No names are here mentioned...and no disrespect is intended to anyone in speaking these truths! Just easily observable facts!
I believe that this is due to several obvious reasons: 1) They do not practice the same Form Sets as the early generations of practitioners did...i.e a Quantitative difference; 2) They practice the same Form Sets, but don't perform them in the same manner as the older generations did...i.e. a Qualitative difference; 3) They simply don't practice anything very often...i.e. both Quantitative AND Qualitative difference compared to the early generations...choosing instead to enjoy status and prestige based on knowledge and skills acquired long ago...but clearly not adequately maintained since then.
So...to some degree...you are correct in saying that the problem often lies with the individual rather than their style of Tai-Chi. But what of the many people who train hard for many decades with some of the popular Form Sets...yet have very little to show as benefits for their great efforts? This scenario HAS to be the fault of the Style rather than the fault of the practitioner!
As always...there are notable and impressive examples of those who ARE able to personally demonstrate a youthful vitality and appearance which belies their actual age, perpetual good health, uncanny knowledge and wisdom, and incredible energy and athleticism in their martial techniques...even in advanced years of age! But again...these are the exceptions rather than the norm...and exceptions which are apparently consciously and deliberately orchestrated through their choices of WHAT to practice and HOW to practice it.
The choices made DO make a difference!
Last edited by Sifu Stier; 12 December 2005, 10:20 PM.
Thank you for your wisdom and expert advice. I am still a novice after having been practising martial art and Tai Chi for nearly 50 years. I am still learning. I would appreciate if you could advise me what is the best style of Tai Chi I should do. I am 61. Reasonably healthy although sometime I may catch a cold. I am 5 feet 7 inches tall weighing 135 lbs with a waist line of 30 inches. I don't think I am overweight neither I am underweight.
I am not afraid of hardwork as I practise at least 3 hours every morning from 5.30am.
Making a choice - Form follows function, so what's your purpose?
When you make a choice about anything you need to have an understanding of the choices. You also need to understand what is required from you and what are the results/consequences of your choice.
Its not easy to find out all the answers to everything before you begin anything, so a little trust and faith needs to be placed that you have made a good decision. But you shouldn't base your understanding on faith alone, you should try to access the situation to the best of your understanding and ability, follow the method and see if it lives up to what it says it should, review and move from there.
In the context of martial arts :
Understand the martial art.
- What does the martial art offer? - Health, fitness, combat efficiency, emotional, mental or spiritual development.
- Do you understand the scope and depth of the martial art? - Its history and for what purposes did it develop in the way it did.
Find the teacher.
- What effort are you prepaired to make to learn?
- Does the teacher display the things you are looking for from a martial art?
- Can the teacher actually teach you how to meet your aims & objectives. The exponent of the art may be very good, but is the exponent skilful as a teacher to pass the art to you?
- Does the teachers students display the things you are looking for from a martial art?
As a student.
- Can you follow the teachers instructions properly?
- Can you access and put into action your aims & objectives for practicing in the first place?
- Are you prepared to make changes in your life for the pursuit of martial arts and the time they require?
As to what style you choose, there is a good saying, along the lines of, if you can train with a fantastic teacher of a low to intermediate martial art, then you are better doing so than training with a poor teacher of an advanced art.
Originally posted by SifuStier
So...to some degree...you are correct in saying that the problem often lies with the individual rather than their style of Tai-Chi. But what of the many people who train hard for many decades with some of the popular Form Sets...yet have very little to show as benefits for their great efforts? This scenario HAS to be the fault of the Style rather than the fault of the practitioner!
I would disagree that it HAS to be the fault of the style alone. When SifuStier says "popular Form Sets", I will take this as an established genuine system that is proven to work. There are 3 factors involved in reaping benefits in martial arts, they are Method > Master > Student. Weaknesses in any of these 3 aspects cause a decrease in the results.
As SifuStier says, there are many people who have trained hard for many decades with some of the popular Form Sets, but have very little to show as benefits for their great efforts. I don't think it is the art/style itself that is the problem. I believe that most teachers today don't quite fully comprehend a good proportion of the true scope and depth of the art/style they practice. Information does get watered down over the years and another factor is that people sometimes don't reach a sufficient level of competence in an art before they start to make modifications as they see fit. There are other problems like masters dieing out before passing on their teaching, students drop out before completing their training etc etc. This now shows the "breaks" between Master & student in the 3 link chain of Method > Master > Student.
Sifu has written some excellent articles on accessing a martial art and getting the best benefits from your training. I have linked these two articles below and they are well worth reading.
To get the best benefits from your training, you should have a sound philosophical knowledge of the art; be clear about your aims and objectives; learn from a genuine master; practice, practice and practice; and periodically assess your progress with reference to your aims and objectives.
I think Sifu Stier's upcoming answer may depend on how willing you are to commute to Woodcreek, Texas.
My opinion about whether or not the style matters is similar to what a lot of folks, including Sifu Wong have said, about Internal Arts training. You've got the style, the teacher, and the student. Each one of these three factors has certain inherent limits. Many diplomatic gongfu masters have said publicly that it's not necessary to criticize other styles because any style that survived into the 20th century has strong merits and is worth pursuing. I haven't heard that said for styles that were created since WWII. Any particular teacher will be limited by his style, his own ability as a student, and also his teaching ability. A lot of people with real gongfu are not especially good teachers, and so only the most ardent and dedicated students can learn from them. And the final limiting factor, and the one most commonly doing all the limiting, is the student. Most everyone is in agreement about this last point.
The other limiting factors are very practical, such as what is available to the student. Many of Sifu Wong's students travel regularly to Malaysia from England to learn from him. Sifu Stier has mentioned on the forum that he and other students followed his Sifu Lee to New York City. So maybe the final limiting factor is what the student is willing to do, which always comes up in the Internal Arts.
Whether we practice gongfu, qigong, or some other art, this stuff is really hard work, and it's hard work in much more than the physical sense, as most of us already know. Why are so few willing to really go all the way? Some peole are willing to put in the time, but never really get much benefit. Why? The Internal Arts give us ample opportunity to realize our own limitations and shortcomings, which are very difficult and painful to face. None of us being masochists, we usually trade the hard work and pain that we essentially chose to endure for the immediate and long term benefits in health and well-being. I believe that my Internal Arts practice is for the purpose of learning the most I can from life and its inherent difficulties. As I practice Internal Arts to expand my own life to include more of what all of life has to offer, I learn more, enjoy more, do the more, and get more out of life than waiting passively for it's lessons to be taught to me according to my fate. Sieze the day, as it were.
I say that if your style of gongfu is doing the above, it is a good style, you have a good teacher, and you are a good student.
Best wishes,
Michael Udel
Last edited by Michael Udel; 13 December 2005, 12:38 PM.
Reason: warren oates
Take kindness and benevolence as basis.
Take frankness and friendliness to heart.
I am curious about what form or style of Tai-Chi you have been practicing for three (3) hours each day for nearly 50 years which leaves you still a novice! Unless you are merely expressing self-modesty...it would seem that your experience is sufficiently great enough to produce a higher than novice skill level.
In spite of Mr. Udel's smart-a**ed remark...it shouldn't be necessary for you or anyone in Hong Kong to travel abroad to find good Tai-Chi Chuan. I personally believe that the best styles are those composed by and practiced by the Old Masters. These methods are generally of pre-WWII composition as he stated...and many of them are of pre-1900 composition. Are any of these methods still taught by any of the Sifu's in Hong Kong?
A former teacher said that a good master should know and embody the core principles of taijiquan and then have a systematic method for transmitting it to the student. He was of the thinking that the forms or sets were less important (that is imperial 108, 24 short, Chen xin/lao jia...). This was followed up with an explanation that all the forms embody the totality of taijiquan. For example while Chen style is known for fa-jing and chansi jing, you can still find it in the other forms and express all of the different energies in any form you do if you choose to train a particular skill. I know this philosophy runs counter other held opinions (eg that the forms are designed for a particular pedagogical goal), and I think there's truth in both views and they are not mutually exclusive. He trained in Taiji Tanglang as well as Chen taijiquan, so his performance of the 24 short form looked quite a bit different from how a Cheng Man Ching disciple's, inasmuch as Sifu Wong's performance is influenced by his prior training in Southern Shaolin.
Sorry I didn't express myself clearly when I said 3 hours. I don't mean 3 soild hours doing forms like a bull. I practise together with friends. We do a lot of things together during the 3 hours and this includes but not limited to Zham Zhuang, forms and meditations. We talk a lot as well during the 3 hours. After the 3 hours session, we normally continue our discussions at "Yam Cha" sessions.
What is "Yam Cha"? This is a Chinese culture in Hong Kong and Southern China. Having Chinese tea with some "dim sum" (Chinese snacks) in those nosiy Chinese Tea Houses.
I normally do another hour in the evening at home. Make no mistake. Not one hour of forms. Mainly meditations.
The opinion expressed by sunyata and his former teacher is one that is shared by many in the worldwide ranks of various Tai-Chi Chuan teachers and practitioners. I have rarely seen this opinion validated through personal demonstration during the past 45 years of my exposure to the Chinese martial arts. When I have seen this opinion validated...specifically that all of the Styles and Form Sets are equal in potential...it has always been when the non-traditional Form Set has been 'fixed' by someone who learned the correct principles through their study and practice of one of the older Traditional Sets...i.e. Chen Old Frame, Old Yang Large and Small Frame, Yang Kuang-Ping, Wu/Hao, Wu/Ng, Sun, or Wu-Tang Styles.
In each case...the original and standard performance of the newer Set....like the Beijing Simplified 24 Set for example...had to be altered and modified from its Standard Style to produce the desired results. It had to be 'fixed' to incorporate the proper principles and stylistic manner of performance to 'work'. And even then...the results were not as great or as fast and easy to attain as when practicing one of the older Styles. I don't see the point of putting forth such time and effort to 'fix' routines like this when the same time and effort is rewarded better and faster by learning and practicing something that doesn't need to be 'fixed' like the Traditional Styles I mentioned earlier.
This is only my humble opinion. The validity of these varying opinions will be made manifest in the due course of time through the personal demonstration of all respective parties. I predict that there will be many who shall wish that they had dedicated their time and energy more wisely!
I believe the simplified forms were created for "busy" people in 1952. Most if not all the styles or forms mentioned by you are being practised in Hong Kong and China. You are correct to say "pre-WW2" and I would go further to describe the simplified form as 'post republic".
Sunyata, "ha gau", "siu mai" etc are good and delicious. Come to Hong Kong and you can get the best. Those sold in the U.S. are not the same.
I read over Sifu Wong's comments and that is truth as ever there was!
If one applies Sifu Wong's observation to even the 24 Form, then that form will have as much impact as any other. That is why the teacher's knowledge is one main key as a transmitter of a tradition. If a teacher has vast knowledge and he sees the 24 Form he can use it since he sees its potential and he can transform it like SIfu Wong has done. In the same breath, if a teacher does not have the breadth of knowledge or experience and he teaches the 24 Form as many teach it today, then it impact will be minimal.
We process personal data about users of our site, through the use of cookies and other technologies, to deliver our services, personalize advertising, and to analyze site activity. We may share certain information about our users with our advertising and analytics partners. For additional details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
By clicking "I AGREE" below, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our personal data processing and cookie practices as described therein. You also acknowledge that this forum may be hosted outside your country and you consent to the collection, storage, and processing of your data in the country where this forum is hosted.
Tweet
. Single whip and ha gao!!!
Comment