Announcement

**yeniseri** · 5 June 2006, 09:19 PM

purist/new age/fun instruction-Yang style

Robin,

In my own mind, it is hard to describe to others what genuine taijiquan because its objective criteria APPEARS so muddled!
Here's why?
To begin:

1. Who is a genuine taijiquan instructor?
a Zheng Manqing
b wushutaijiquan instructors
c Beijing Institute taijiquan instructors
d. Wushu trophy winners
e. All of the above

2. Taijiquan usage
1. Is taijiquan good for
a. health
b. martial
c. both (a) and (b)
d. New age feelings
NOTE: all are valid.

3. What does taijiquan training encompass?
a. Taiji ball
b. ZZ (no not sleeping)
c. Individual posture training
d. Form only
e. Weapons
f. None of the above
g. (d) only

BASIC QUESTIONS:
What if a teacher teacher Tai chi ball, is he more genuine than one who does not teach it?

What does lineage mean? and who does it refer to?
Is Fu Zhongwen lineage?
Is Zhao Bin lineage?
Why or why not? Are they not family, OR is lineage the son or daughter of a particular member, i.e. Chengfu, etc

Who are those that insist they are lineage but they are not on the lineage scroll? (as it were)! Are they less lineage or is the quality and expression of instruction far more important?

These are far more points in determining genuine Taijiquan instruction!

**Kaitain** · 7 June 2006, 10:47 AM

Sorry Robin, I've been in Montreal on business and just got back so Im jetlagged. Consequently if my tone appears aggressive, please dont take it as deliberate - I'm just knackered.

As stated by me elsewhere on this forum, the very act of an audience or videoing prevents it from being a "friendly sparring" session as there is basically too much at stake. If you want to challenge me, Im not interested. If you want to see what im talking about, come and see me and I'll show you (and you can show me) in private. I've been very clear on this from the start - no video, no audience - in my experience it is the only way to avoid bullshit and ego. As a start point I wouldnt spar with you anyway until I got to know you (I have this rule with anyone who trains with me, especially for people Im not teachin) - a taijiquan practitioner should be able to demonstrate most of the principles within pushing hands before even translating it to fighting. It's a solid way to avoid accusations of boxing/wrestling as well. If you've got 'it' in pushing hands then that's usually enough to prove knowledge and internal skill - should you feel the need to spar after that then I'd be happy to do so at a later date.

Aside from that, I've covered all of your areas in depth on this and other threads here - I see no benefit in doing it again. It'll just lead to "my dad's bigger than your dad" and frankly that's wasting everyone's time. I have my understanding, you have yours - if you care enough to know about mine, then arrange via PM/email to come and see me and I'll gladly cover things in the appropriate manner in private - irrespective of the outcome I won't talk about it to other people (I have had a few exchanges like this and I stick to this for good or ill).

Since I have legitimate lineage from a Yang style master who fully endorses my teaching and skill, I am confident that I am faithful to the Yang family interpretation of taijiquan - it isnt boxing and wrestling. However, your understanding differs (this is not a criticism, Im just stating where we are different) - given that difference, would it be fair to say that we would be no better off after sparring? If I 'won' you could say it was because of size (I'm 6'4'' and 18 stone - I'd say you were about 5'10 and at least 6 stone lighter?), or because of boxing/wrestling - "not taiji". If you "won" then I could say it wasn't taijiquan (not unlike Dan's challenge to Chu, no?) because it didnt follow principles that I believe are key. Would you or I be any further on in this discussion?

Anyway - the offer is there on those terms, no others. I have nothing to gain or lose by involving myself with this, and consequently I invest nothing of myself in the outcome of the discussion.

Regards

Paul

PS - I appreciate you are in a somewhat awkward position. My opinions are merely that - if it helps your position then Im perfectly happy for my posts here to be deleted so that you dont feel compromised - I understand how it impacts upon you and your school.

**George** · 7 June 2006, 04:51 PM

Originally posted by Kaitain

I understand how it impacts upon you and your school.

Very well.

**Robin** · 7 June 2006, 09:56 PM

Dear Kaitain

Dear Kaitain,

I am really disappointed in you. After coming to our forum and telling us that our techniques are useless and that you would be ready to show us a real shoot, you back down when we accept you offer. Nevertheless, it doesn’t matter. As I have said, if you change your mind about meeting us in sparring, that is fine. Let us continue the debate.

‘

"the very act of an audience or videoing prevents it from being a "friendly sparring" session as there is basically too much at stake.”"

We insist on a video recording so that it can show exactly what happened in the sparring.

“I've been very clear on this from the start - no video, no audience - in my experience it is the only way to avoid bullshit and ego.”

It is just the reverse. A video recording can demonstrate who is “bullshiting”.

“As a start point I wouldnt spar with you anyway until I got to know you.”

Didn’t you say that “Someone with 6 months of kickboxing would have killed him (meaning me)”? You have more than 6 months of kickboxing, I presume.

“If you've got 'it' in pushing hands then that's usually enough to prove knowledge and internal skill”.

From what you have written, my impression is that you have no Taijiquan knowledge and internal skill. I shall elaborate on this in my coming posts.

“Aside from that, I've covered all of your areas in depth on this and other threads here - I see no benefit in doing it again. It'll just lead to "my dad's bigger than your dad" and frankly that's wasting everyone's time.”

You have not even touched the surface of Taijquan. What you have been doing is to tell our students that Wahnam Taijiquan is not Taijiquan, that our counters are useless, and that your Boxing and Wrestling techniques are better than our Taijiquan techniques. This public debate is not to find our whose dad is bigger, but whether Kaitain’s version of Taijiquan or Wahnam Taijiquan is closer to genuine, traditional Taijiquan.

"I have my understanding, you have yours - if you care enough to know about mine, then arrange via PM/email to come and see me and I'll gladly cover things in the appropriate manner in private - irrespective of the outcome I won't talk about it to other people (I have had a few exchanges like this and I stick to this for good or ill)."

I am not interested in any private exchanges with you. Any exchanges, such as debates or sparring, should be made in public so that eveyone knows what has happened. I remember my Sifu says something as follows: If you are afraid others know about your action, either your action is unworthy, or you are unworthy of the action.

"If I 'won' you could say it was because of size (I'm 6'4'' and 18 stone - I'd say you were about 5'10 and at least 6 stone lighter?)”

This statement of yours further shows that you have no knowledge of genuine, traditional Taijiquan. Both Jamie and Ronan as well as myself know you are bigger in size and much heavier than us. But to us, in line with the philosophy of genuine, traditional Taijiquan, size and weight do not matter.

“I appreciate you are in a somewhat awkward position. My opinions are merely that - if it helps your position then Im perfectly happy for my posts here to be deleted so that you dont feel compromised - I understand how it impacts upon you and your school.”

This is the biggest irony. It is you who are in a very awkward position. You have insulted our school and arrogantly thrown out challenges, but now they have been accepted, you back down.

I am glad that you have posted in our forum, and definitely want your posts to remain. Your posts highlight the pathetic situation Taijiquan is now in. You claim to come from a respectable Taijiquan lineage (which we do not doubt), but insult the past masters of your own lineage suggesting their combat techniques were ineffective, and you try to be smarter than them by bringing in Boxing and Wrestling techniques.

**Robin** · 7 June 2006, 10:00 PM

Shen-Fa or Body-Movement and other Principles of Genuine, Traditional Taijiquan

I shall start the debate on what is genuine, traditional Taijiquan with principles, as that is precisely what Kaitain depends on to claim that his art is Taijiquan. He suggests that even if his forms are those of Boxing or Wrestling, as long as he follows Taijiquan principles, he is performing Taijiquan. He says:

“I think it comes down to how you perceive taijiquan. For me it is a principles based system. Whatever the outward appearance, it is the internal aspects that make it taijiquan.”

But he does not talk about famous Taijiquan principles like “using minimum force against maximum strength” and “flowing with the opponent’s momentum”.

Instead he talks about “shen-fa” or “body-movement”:

If the Shen Fa (body method) of taijiquan is not present, then it is impossible for any of the skills that are built upon that Shen Fa to be present. From the videos I have watched, the Shen Fa is not present.

Indeed I am very surprised that Kaitain does not see Taijiquan body-movement in Wahnam Taijiquan because that is what we emphasize much in our teaching. In Wahnam Taijiquan, body-movement is closely related to footwork and hand-movement, often mentioned in genuine, traditional Taijiquan

Much about Taijiquan body-movement has been revealed in the “Yielding” thread, where a Taijiquan practitioner using an appropriate combination of footwork, body-movement and hand-movement in one continuous process, yields, deflects and counter-strikes an opponent. This use of Taijiquan body-movement or “shen-fa” also demonstrates the Taijiquan principles of “using minimum force against maximum strength” and “flowing with the opponent’s momentum”.

At a recent Intensive Taijiquan Course, my sifu (Sifu Wong) emphasized much on Taijiquan body-movement. Here are some photos showing Taijiquan body-movement. These photos are not taken in isolation, but extracted from a video recording.

**Robin** · 7 June 2006, 10:04 PM

Shen-Fa or Body-Movement and other Principles of Genuine, Traditional Taijiquan

In the first picture, my sifu attacks my throat with a White Snake palm strike. In the second picture I neutralize the attack using a typical Taijiquan body-movement, and counter-strike in the third picture. This typical Taijiquan body-movement is found in the “peng” technique of “Grasping Sparrow’s Tail” of Yang Style Taijiquan, and is known as “Immortal Waves Sleeves” in Wahnam Taijiquan.

In contrast, let us look at Kaitain’s shen-fa or body-movement in the following three photos which are also extracted from a video recording provided by him.

In the first picture Kaitain faces his opponent in an ordinary standing position. In the second picture Kaitain shifts his whole body to his left as his opponent attacks with a punch. In the third picture, Kaitain deflects the punch with his left hand.

The question is not whether Kaitain’s body-movement or Wahnam Taijiquan body-movement is more effective. The question is which one follows more closely the typical shen-fa or body-movement of genuine, traditional Taijiquan. I shall leave the verdict to forum members to decide.

**Robin** · 8 June 2006, 08:19 PM

Debate

I was disappointed that Kaitain did not want to meet Jamie, Ronan and me for free sparring. I was more disappointed that he did not want to take part in a debate or discussion on what genuine, traditional Taijiquan is, especially after he came to our forum with such gusto telling our students that our Shaolin Wahnam techniques were useless and that our Wahnam Taijiquan was not Taijiquan.

Nevertheless, I respect his decision as well as the way he chooses to practice and teach his version of Taijiquan. I sincerely want to thank him for his posts because they have set me thinking deeply of our own Wahnam Taijiquan philosophy and practice. I have spent many hours preparing my posts for this thread and shall continue to post on why we in Shaolin Wahnam believe our Taijiquan to be genuine, traditional Taijiquan with special reference to Kaitain's version and our Wahnam Taijiquan. If Kaitain wishes to pop in to comment, he is certainly welcome.

I would like to categorically state that the difference between Kaitain and Shaolin Wahnam is purely professional, and nothing personal. We aspisre to the scholar-warrior ideal. This includes that when someone comes into our forum and publicly tells our students and the public that we do not practice what we claim to practice, we are duty-bound to right wrong. On a personal note, I am sure all my Shaolin Wahnam brothers and sisters will join me in wishing Kaitain all the best in his endeavour.

**Robin** · 8 June 2006, 08:21 PM

Calling a Cow a Horse

While form is not everything in genuine, traditional Taijiquan, it is still very important. It is the visual aspect, and often called the “body” of the art. Just as your physical body is not everything you are (your mind and how you conduct yourself are also important parts of your personality), it is usually by the appearance of your physical body that you are known.

In our school a common theme we talk about is that many people merely practice the outward forms of Taijiquan but miss the essence such as Taijiquan internal force and Taijiquancombat application. For convenience we call this Taiji dance.

Kaitain’s case is different. I have no access to his solo Taijiquan forms. In another public forum, EmptyFlower, which Kaitain has said he goes for confirmation of his views, a poster warned Kaitain not to show any video of himself performing his forms to avoid being labeled “low-level”. Whether Kaitain heels this advice is of course his choice and privilege, but I would hope he may post a video here showing how he performs his Taijiquan forms so that we can compare whether his forms or those of Wahnam Taijiquan are closer to genuine, traditional Taijiquan.

Meanwhile, for the purpose of discussion here, I would use his forms in the video he posts here where he seems to be very proud to have hurt his student. As Kaitain has said that he trains the way he fights, it is reasonable to presume that it is also how he trains his version of Taijiquan.

For the convenience of forum members here, I have extracted some pictures from that video and reproduced them below.

**Robin** · 8 June 2006, 08:24 PM

Calling a Cow a Horse

I am really at a loss as how anyone can call what Kaitain demonstrates as Taijiquan.

In an earlier post Kaitain said that forms were not important, it was the principles that made his art Taijiquan

“I think it comes down to how you perceive taijiquan. For me it is a principles based system. Whatever the outward appearance, it is the internal aspects that make it taijiquan. Consequently I have no issue using sprawling against a shoot - if my strikes, chin na, throws and grappling skills are all borne of taijiquan, then Im using taiji. If my body, breath and mind are all unified then Im doing taijiquan - according to my definition. I accept that there are many different approaches - this just happens to mine”

Hubert replied succinctly:

“Most fighters could then claim to do taijiquan. I believe that indeed naturally good fighters have achieved body, breath and mind unity. However surely there is more to Taijiquan than that.”

To which, Kaitain said.

I can perform a sprawl and still be doing taijiquan. Hell, I can do a flying knee and still be doing taijiquan. … Taiji is a grappling system - it trains at grappling range (push hands is grappling no?). … If I have to go to ground I am still using taiji principles - even if the submission techniques are mostly BJJ/sub-wrestling, all of my defensive work on the ground is taijquan.

Kaitain may point to a cow and say that it is a horse, but we don’t, we say it is a cow. Kaitain performs grappling, BJJ and sub-wrestling and calls them Taijiquan, but we don’t, we call them grappling, BJJ and sub-wrestling.

Kaitain may say that although its appearance is a cow but if it performs the functions of a horse, he calls it a horse. But the fact is that Kaitain’s cow does not perform the functions of a horse. His grappling, BJJ and sub-wrestling techniques use grappling, BJJ and sub-wrestling principles, and not Taijiquan principles.

In fact it would be unwise to apply Taijiquan principles in grappling, BJJ and sub-wrestling techniques or vice versa. Kaitain probably does not realize that Taijiquan principles, or principles of any art for that matter, are derived from the actual application of Taijiquan techniques in combat. From their actual fighting using Taijiquan techniques over many centuries, generations of Taijiquan masters generalized the essence into Taijiquan principles. Instead of trying to work out fighting techniques ourselves from scratch, we benefit from the experiences of past masters by using their time-tested techniques and principles.

Kaitain may not be aware of it, but he is actually insulting Taijiqian masters of his own lineage, implying that these past masters from his lineage were “stupid” (to quote the word he used on a master from his lineage, Sifu Chu King Hoong), not knowing that the sprawl he now uses against the shoot was more effective than the Taijiquan counters they used.

Our philosophy and attitude in Wahnam Taijqian are different. We honour past masters of our lineage as well as of other schools. We believe we can learn a lot from them. Hence we use Taijiquan counters – not grappling or wrestling counters – against the shoot or any other attacks. We have no doubt that these Taijqiquan techniques, which are a manifestation of Taijiquan forms, are effective. Our only question is whether we ourselves are skillful enough to apply them effectively. I am ready to test my skill in using Wahnam Taijquan counters against Kaitain’s shoots if he wishes, and I would like this to be recorded in video which can be released here for forum members to judge.

One can easily find many Wahnam Taijiquan forms in my Sifu’s webpage on Taijiquan at <http://www.taijiquan.org>. For the convenience of forum members, I am posting here some random pictures of Joko performing Wahnam at a recent course where I also attended. It may be interesting to add that these forms were performed by Joko while in continuous chi flow; they were not forms taken from individual choreographed poses. .
The video clip can be found at <http://shaolin.org/general-2/taijiquan-pictures.html>.

I shall leave forum members to decide whether Kaitain’s Taijiquan forms or Wahnam Taijiquan forms are closer to genuine, traditional Taijiquan.

**yeniseri** · 8 June 2006, 08:38 PM

traditional and genuine taijiquan still not defined

Anyway,
It is an impossibility to see skill in statics postures or even execution.
Tai chi fighting has never existed and never will. As long as I can see expression like peng, lu, ji an, etc in application I can be sure it is genuine

just my 2 shillings!

**Mark Blohm** · 8 June 2006, 09:52 PM

Originally posted by yeniseri

Tai chi fighting has never existed and never will.

just my 2 shillings!

Sorry, Yeniseri. I agree with Robin, even if he's from England

Mark

**Ronan** · 8 June 2006, 10:58 PM

Nice thread Rob,

Tai chi fighting has never existed and never will

You say this like you're quite an authority on the subject. Are you? That's quite a sweeping statement. How are you so sure of not only the past, but the future too?!!

Are you saying that no one has ever used Taijiquan for fighting? I don't get what you mean by "Tai Chi fighting"

Either way, just because you've never seen or experienced something, does that mean it doesn't, hasn't and never will exist?

Ronan

**DarkCosmoz** · 9 June 2006, 12:30 AM

Where is the link to Kaitain's video?

**KungFuJoe** · 9 June 2006, 01:43 AM

I wonder whether trying to define what is "genuine and traditional" is not misdirected. I spent a long time (my younger years mind you) looking for "authentic" kung-fu, and old "traditional" style with lost secrets, special powers, etc.

But it's a fools quest. What is more important is "good Tai Chi Chuan" vs. "bad Tai Chi Chuan", or good kung-fu vs. bad kung-fu. We can certainly compare good and bad kung-fu under the headings listed above, but should recognize there's plenty of bad traditional MA, and lots of good new MA.

If Sifu Wong invented his own style, incorporating the best of what he knows, then I would learn it, and it wouldn't matter that it isn't traditional. I would know that it can bring me to exceedingly high levels because it's creator had himself reached an exceedingly high level. As a matter of fact, Sifu did invent WahNam Tai Chi Chuan.

I can point to other examples of masters changing styles to suit student's needs.

Interestingly, new is often better in MA. Sifu's style may be better than the styles of older masters, because it is geared towards modern needs, what happens in modern fights, etc. Or by better I mean better for me. I think MAs have tended to get better over the years. People have always created their own styles (look at Tai Chi as an example), and the person is always ultimately more important.

So how can you tell good kung-fu from bad kung-fu? There's lots of ways obviously, but there are three principles that I like.

Bad kung-fu degenerates into a debate over styles, and which style is better, who's style is correct. Is Yang better than Chen, or is Shaolin better than Karate or Tai Chi Chuan? Is a pheonix eye fist better than a snake strike? That's bad kung-fu. We're not there, though we joke about it.

Good kung-fu tends to be an issue of force or conditioning. Strength, speed, agility, timing, power, accuracy, and all of those issues. It's a question of should I do ZZ alone, with weights, and if so then in what combination. People debate on how to best build force and skills and test their skills. I think we're at this point.

Great kung-fu is a matter of developing a specific force or skill to such a high level that you are almost unstoppable except by another master. This is the guy with such a good punch that you get hammered every time you spar with him. No matter what you do, you get finished with that one technique. There are many examples of this in all MA. Or it can be a skill like agility or one-finger-zen, or whatever. It's "the marvelous" in WahNam speak.

My opinion, and a humble one I admit. Just don't go getting hurt at these competitions.

Announcement

What is genuine, traditional Taijiquan?

What is genuine, traditional Taijiquan?

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment