# kempo and taiji



## marlon (Aug 18, 2008)

i am not sure if it deserves its own thread but does it not seem like many many kempo people do taichi...especially the higher the ranking? Does anyone care to speculate why?

Marlon


----------



## JBrainard (Aug 18, 2008)

marlon said:


> i am not sure if it deserves its own thread but does it not seem like many many kempo people do taichi...especially the higher the ranking? Does anyone care to speculate why?
> 
> Marlon


 
Probably because the push hands/sensitivity practice from tai chi would be a beneficial supliment to (most) any martial art. I would like to get back into it later to compliment my hand-to-hand arnis training.


----------



## Flying Crane (Aug 18, 2008)

You may notice that most teachers of Chinese martial arts also practice and often teach taiji, in addition to whatever else they are teaching.  Taiji can benefit the practice of any other martial art.  Sounds like some of the kenpo people are catching on to this.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Aug 18, 2008)

Flying Crane said:


> You may notice that most teachers of Chinese martial arts also practice and often teach taiji, in addition to whatever else they are teaching. Taiji can benefit the practice of any other martial art. Sounds like some of the kenpo people are catching on to this.


 
The only thing my Sanda teacher openly teaches is Taijiquan, but it is only a couple of forms he picked up somewhere while he was growing up in China. 

However the only thing my Taijiquan sifu teaches and trains is Taijiquan and he has little concern for anything else.

Sorry I know this is a Kempo/taiji thread and I know NOTHING of kempo so I will try not to get to envolved.


----------



## RevIV (Aug 18, 2008)

I started about 20 years ago in kempo and the first thing I did in my first class was a tai chi exercise,  I was a little baffled and young and did not understand because it was not what i had watched the day before when i was observing class.  The next class we were back to kempo.  I had just come in on a day that he had set aside to do tai chi.  We worked different things at least once a month on tai chi.
Jesse


----------



## Flying Crane (Aug 18, 2008)

Xue Sheng said:


> The only thing my Sanda teacher openly teaches is Taijiquan, but it is only a couple of forms he picked up somewhere while he was growing up in China.


 
ah, I wonder if that is because taiji is more recognized by the masses than sanda?  sometimes the masses get what they expect, and those digging deeper get something else...

and a couple of forms he "picked up" somewhere are probably plenty, if he is doing them well.   
	

	
	
		
		

		
			







> However the only thing my Taijiquan sifu teaches and trains is Taijiquan and he has little concern for anything else.


 
and of course taiji can stand on its own at least as well as any other art.


----------



## Flying Crane (Aug 18, 2008)

RevIV said:


> We worked different things at least once a month on tai chi.
> Jesse


 
I'll suggest that if you learn taiji properly, and then make it a more regular part of your training, you will get much greater benefits.  

Outside of class, I train quite a bit on my own, like as much as 10 times a week (yes, that means twice a day is common, and on occasion three times a day happens).  Whether I am focused on my kung fu or my kenpo, I always finish with about 15 minutes of taijiquan.  I don't feel I'm especially good at it, but I keep it a very regular part of my training.


----------



## graychuan (Aug 19, 2008)

marlon said:


> i am not sure if it deserves its own thread but does it not seem like many many kempo people do taichi...especially the higher the ranking? Does anyone care to speculate why?
> 
> Marlon


 
I think we could get away with saying that it is almost a norm for Kempoists to practice Tai Chi Chuan.
I am a 15 year practitioner of Kempo and a 10 year practitioner of TaiJi. 
In B.K. Frantzis' book, The Power Of Internal Martial Arts and Chi, in the appendices section he speaks of when Yang Lu Chan, founder of Yang style, first taught in Bejing that most of the students he took on were heavily schooled in Northern Shaolin. This is one explaination of why the changes from Chen to the popular Yang style has diferences such as the stances and frame of the forms. The heavy Northern Shaolin influence on his Bejing students promted him to build on the foundations that they already had.
Since the kempo that I study is very shaolin oriented then it was a natural progression for me.
If any have this book or dont have it then I highly recommend it for supplemental reading and info.
As I get older and my Martial Arts training more indepth...I find that the coolness of the arts lie in how they are similar and not how they are different. The following is an essay by late Tai Chi Chuan master Jou, Tsung Hwa in his book, The tao of tai Chi chuan: Way to Rejuvenation. I honestly believe that if you replace the words Tai Chi Chuan or Chuan as he uses it with the general word 'style' or 'martial art' then it still holds true regardless of the art. This is just my opinion of course but I am glad to contribute to this discussion. Thanks for starting this thread, Marlon.
_______________________________________________


'There is a Master Key to Tai-Chi Chuan. Possessing it, if we are willing to devote time and energy to practice, we can continue to make progress throughout life to the limits of our natural ability. Without this key, we can only hope to improve our technique to a certain level, and then will "sign away our time," as the Song of Thirteen Postures says. The Master Key defines the art of Tai-Chi Chuan. We can do the forms, the "ch'uan," and even practice a variety of principles such as slowness, relaxation, straight spine, and certain hand positions. We can even reach high technical achievement; but without the Maser Key, we should not call our art "Tai-Chi Chuan." 

The Master Key is not related to any particular style. Instead, it makes one family of all diverse forms of Tai Chi. The forms and styles are analogous to rooms in the same hotel. Each room has a key whose superficial appearance differentiates it from all others, and provides the guest with access to that room, and to no other. Problems arise when guests begin thinking their room is best, and the particular bumps and valleys, notches and grooves, straight or contoured edges in their key are essential, and should appear in everyone's key. As the external differences are given greater significance. "Tai-Chi hotel" turns into "Chuan Condominiums." All the guests try their keys in one another's doors and say, "Your room is no good because my key doesn't open your door, and I know my key works." This is happening among some Tai-Chi players today. Adherents of various styles become involved in describing individual differences as if they were fundamental. One might say, " The Key to Tai-Chi Chuan has five notches of increasing depth in its upper edge"; another might counter, "The upper edge of the key must be smooth to permit it to turn either way." When instructors, who may have been misled by their teachers, focus on the unique configuration of their own "keys," students are easily fooled, and mimic the person at the front of the class instead of seeking to apply the Master Key for themselves. However, just as the manager of a hotel has one master key which unlocks all doors, there is one Master Key to Tai-Chi Chuan that reveals which bumps and valleys in individual keys are merely superficial differences, and which are common to all other styles, and therefore define the essence of the art. 

The Master Key to Tai-Chi Chuan, is so complete that it contains all other principles within it, yet so simple that some people will hear and laugh, some will acknowledge it yet forget to practice it, and only a few will achieve mastery with it. Yet anyone can hear and immediately have some understanding of it. What is the Master Key? You do not have to take my word for it: I did not originate it. It has existed since ancient times, distinguishing Tai Chi from other "ch'uan." I only wish to emphasize it so Tai-Chi players of all styles can see the common ground defining their practice, and can work together toward mastery.'

-Jou, Tsung Hwa


----------



## marlon (Aug 19, 2008)

Thanks for the post and the excellent essay.  although it was a big tease.  What in his opinion is the master key?  I do agree that there seems to be a relationship btwn taiji and the kempo i study.  Honestly, i do not know if my original teach had taji training or not but when i began my taiji practice and study, i found that many of the principles were the stuff she would correct us about again and again.  it felt like coming home.  although kempo is not taiji as i understand it and teach it they certainly compliment each other.  perhaps, due to the lack of uniform "shaolin kempo" theory out there i have supplimented some taiji theory..yet it is as far as i can recall the  way i was initially taught sk.  i have come to love taiji and see that my sk does not work properly without adhering to those principles.  There are others on this forum, much more knowledgeable than i that also recognize the relationship btwn taiji and kempo as valid.  i love it...and my base art is still sk yet i understand it better partially through the teachings and principles of taiji..  B.K frantz's book is very good...other excellent sources are , of course, Yang Chen Fu's book, Cheng Man Ching's books, Ralston's books and there is this person in southern California...  Looking into the form Fu Zhongwen' book is the best i have found for the Yang long form.  
I have found that most students don't take to it though...perhaps it is a deficiency in my presentation. I teach them the standing practice and let them know the benefits i have from it...i explain that there is deeper to go, but only after they have kept up thier practice..and no one has as yet even managed 100 days of consecutive standing practice.  so i do not go further.  We have 'breathing exercises"that have a natural progression to the breathing that i allow them to do at thier own pace...no one has gone beyond the starting practice.  As i did not need these things to advance in rank (skill yes, rank no) i do not force it on them, but it is disappointing that they do not put the time and energy into what i have said repeatedly is of key importance.  Yet i love them and love teaching so i wait and hope.  Does anyone think i should make it more of an issue?  I do not think i should unless they are willing to demand more of themselves and thier art...but i could be wrong...about so many things..HA!!

be well and thanks for sharing...I would like to know what that author said that the master key is, still.

Respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## Flying Crane (Aug 19, 2008)

What kind of taiji are you practicing and teaching to your students?  How much of it do you know and understand?  Have you learned a complete form, if so, which?  Or are you doing primarily qigong training?


----------



## marlon (Aug 19, 2008)

Flying Crane said:


> What kind of taiji are you practicing and teaching to your students? How much of it do you know and understand? Have you learned a complete form, if so, which? Or are you doing primarily qigong training?


 
Hi Flying Crane,
if you are asking me this question i am practicing Yang taiji but am not teaching it per se to the students (not qualified).  I have the complete form for over two years now.  I cannot say how much i understand in that i am not any kind of taiji master to be able to say....I teach many principles as i teach skk that are in accordance with taiji structural alignment and the ten essences.  The qi qong training i recieved from a Wu taiji master and i have shared some with my students as i mention in the other post.  i also know that many of the principles i am teaching were taught and emphasized by my first kempo instructor before i ever had even heard of taiji.  hope this answers your question...BTW i am still learning and practicing taiji, for myself and my growth

respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## DavidCC (Aug 19, 2008)

marlon said:


> I have found that most students don't take to it though..



other students ask me how I do X or Y, and I show them the drills, or meditations, or breathing exercises - whatever it happens to be - and then that's it.  With rare exception, they are curious, their shallow curiosity is satiated, and they just pass it by.


----------



## Flying Crane (Aug 19, 2008)

marlon said:


> Hi Flying Crane,
> if you are asking me this question i am practicing Yang taiji but am not teaching it per se to the students (not qualified). I have the complete form for over two years now. I cannot say how much i understand in that i am not any kind of taiji master to be able to say....I teach many principles as i teach skk that are in accordance with taiji structural alignment and the ten essences. The qi qong training i recieved from a Wu taiji master and i have shared some with my students as i mention in the other post. i also know that many of the principles i am teaching were taught and emphasized by my first kempo instructor before i ever had even heard of taiji. hope this answers your question...BTW i am still learning and practicing taiji, for myself and my growth
> 
> respectfully,
> Marlon


 
Sorry, yes I was directing the question to you.

I guess I was asking in the context of what seemed like your expressed frustration with your students not being as interested in taiji as you are.  I think it's something that Western students need to sort of figure out themselves, the value that taiji has.  The perception of taiji as an art is so very different from other arts, it isn't fast and furious, it doesn't have the same kind of "wow" factor that other arts can have and so Western students often don't realize the value that it has.  That may account for the possible lack of interest that some of them show.  I remember when I was a teenager studying kenpo, my teacher expressed the notion that taiji would be something very valuable to learn.  At that time in my life, I was completely disinterested in the idea.

The other thing is that if you aren't ready to be really teaching taiji, then it can be pretty difficult to work bits of it in edgewise into your kenpo.  I kind of feel you gotta jump in with both feet if you are going to really understand something and get the benefits from it.  There needs to be a concentrated effort, or else it's easy to just sort of "play" at it and not go anywhere with it.  If you arent' yet ready to offer a class that is really focused on taiji, that probably will also act as a handicap in getting your students interested in it, because it isn't being presented in a format in which they can really grab the bull by the horns, so to speak, and start to understand it.

I've been doing taiji steadily for over ten years now, and I feel like I really don't truly understand it in a way that I can explain the details well to a student.  I know several forms, including taiji sword and taiji broadsword, I do the forms sort of reasonably well if I'm stretching my imagination 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




, but the details are slippery and I cannot consider myself a taiji teacher even tho I have helped my sifu with some of the beginning students.  I think I understand what I am doing well enough to get some benefit myself, but perhaps not well enough to give the benefits to a student.

But then, my taiji practice, while it has been steady, has also been secondary to the external arts that I practice so I am sure that has contributed to my own stunted growth in the art.  But at any rate, I do finish all my training sessions with some amount of taiji forms practice, so I keep it a very regular part of my training.  I guess I figure when I get too old to continue with the external stuff, I'll be in a good position to switch over to my taiji full time.

If you see similarities between your kenpo and taiji, and you teach your kenpo with that in mind, that is one thing.  But it's not really the same thing as teaching taiji, and your students probably just don't understand this.  You do, because you've had enough training in taiji to know the difference.  But in the context of teaching kenpo, your students haven't had that experience and aren't in a position to understand it.  Personally, I think they ought to be taught as separate, distinct methods with their own potential.  Once a student learns them for what they have to offer on their own, they can then see how they can blend and overlap.  But they need that separation first, to understand the two arts for their own merits.  This is why I'm not a fan of mixing different arts and calling it a new art.  I believe that separation is really very important, during the learning process.

anyhow, maybe that gives you something to consider in regard to your own students.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Aug 19, 2008)

Flying Crane said:


> it doesn't have the same kind of "wow" factor that other arts can have


 
Sure it does, just train it for 6 to 10 years and WOW 

What is being discussed as to student&#8217;s interest is not confined to Kempo students and taiji. IMO the majority (not all) of people training taiji today are not really interested in learning it beyond form, the taiji dance nothing more. You show them stance training and they believe 5 minutes of Zhan Zhaung or and stance for that matter is all they need to be a master, that is if they do it at all outside of class. You show them applications and they do not want to know them. You teach them tuishou (push hands) and they only want, what they feel is the meditative side of it, if they want to know it at all (and many do not). 

Sorry. I am taking this off post marlon, I will stop.


----------



## Flying Crane (Aug 19, 2008)

Xue Sheng said:


> Sorry. I am taking this off post marlon, I will stop.


 
I don't think so.  These are valuable truths that many people don't realize, simply because nobody has told them straight up.


----------



## marlon (Aug 19, 2008)

Xue Sheng said:


> Sure it does, just train it for 6 to 10 years and WOW
> 
> What is being discussed as to students interest is not confined to Kempo students and taiji. IMO the majority (not all) of people training taiji today are not really interested in learning it beyond form, the taiji dance nothing more. You show them stance training and they believe 5 minutes of Zhan Zhaung or and stance for that matter is all they need to be a master, that is if they do it at all outside of class. You show them applications and they do not want to know them. You teach them tuishou (push hands) and they only want, what they feel is the meditative side of it, if they want to know it at all (and many do not).
> 
> Sorry. I am taking this off post marlon, I will stop.


 
No need to stop, truth is always of value

marlon


----------



## marlon (Aug 19, 2008)

DavidCC said:


> other students ask me how I do X or Y, and I show them the drills, or meditations, or breathing exercises - whatever it happens to be - and then that's it. With rare exception, they are curious, their shallow curiosity is satiated, and they just pass it by.


 

sad is it not?


----------



## marlon (Aug 19, 2008)

Hi Flying Crane,
i guess there are a few overlapping issues, here.  I am not teaching taiji chuan and i am no where near being able to concieve of doing such a thing.  Should any of my students express such interest i wouold direct them to a qualified teacher.  Many of the prinicples i use to teach kempo match taiji prinicples and this i find useful and powerful and this is necessary for the students to advance in rank and skill.  the internal practices i have and have benefited exponentially from, i share and get lukewarm interest in from the students and almost no follow up.  As you and XS mention..it is probably due to the lack of immediate WOW factor.  but then they come to me and say "sifu how is it that you can...?" i say do this practice and it will get you there and then they do ...nothing.  i do not know.  My point in the earlier post is that i do not make it an absolute must for ranking b/c it is not reallly sk proper but it saddens me that i can show them this great stuff and even the simplist parts of it they let go.  In a way i an jealous of  graychuan teacher to have a student take interest the way he seems to have is a rare gift.  So not to worry, in terms of arts to practice i teach kempo fairly well, i think and i will leave the taiji teaching to those qualified.  BT i appreciate your willingness to say things the way you see them without flaming anyone.

With respect
Marlon


----------



## Flying Crane (Aug 19, 2008)

marlon said:


> Hi Flying Crane,
> i guess there are a few overlapping issues, here. I am not teaching taiji chuan and i am no where near being able to concieve of doing such a thing. Should any of my students express such interest i wouold direct them to a qualified teacher. Many of the prinicples i use to teach kempo match taiji prinicples and this i find useful and powerful and this is necessary for the students to advance in rank and skill. the internal practices i have and have benefited exponentially from, i share and get lukewarm interest in from the students and almost no follow up. As you and XS mention..it is probably due to the lack of immediate WOW factor. but then they come to me and say "sifu how is it that you can...?" i say do this practice and it will get you there and then they do ...nothing. i do not know. My point in the earlier post is that i do not make it an absolute must for ranking b/c it is not reallly sk proper but it saddens me that i can show them this great stuff and even the simplist parts of it they let go. In a way i an jealous of graychuan teacher to have a student take interest the way he seems to have is a rare gift. So not to worry, in terms of arts to practice i teach kempo fairly well, i think and i will leave the taiji teaching to those qualified. BT i appreciate your willingness to say things the way you see them without flaming anyone.
> 
> With respect
> Marlon


 
Gotcha.  

I think you are probably doing it the right way.  Yup, I keep feeling the lack of immediate "wow" is probably at the root of it, for most people.  What is the age of your students?  I bet if they are youth, it is even harder for them to grasp. I keep saying, the internal stuff is just subtle and slippery and elusive, and most people who try to develop it never really grasp it even after many years.  Those who really do grasp it and become truly skilled with it are, in my opinion, rare.  I think most "teachers" of the internal arts really don't understand it.

So like you said, you pass on a little hint, maybe the student trys it a couple times and expects sudden magical powers, and so he is disappointed.  He doesn't realize that he needs to do it absolutely religiously, and probably for a few years before he will begin to see results, and even then there is no guarantee.  It takes someone who can really see down the road ahead to decide to make that committment.  Most people don't want to do that, and lack that vision.  They want immediate results, or they trust their muscles because that is solid and "real" to them, and nobody can fault them on that thinking.  In fact, they can get a lot of mileage that way.  But they don't realize there are more subtle ways that can take them farther yet.  In a way, they do need to be willing to make a leap of faith and commit to a long term training program with no guarantees.  That's hard for a pragmatic and practical sort of person to do.  And I think it's especially difficult for Westerners to do, because we are not raised to think that way.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Aug 19, 2008)

There is the problem everyone thinks it is magic and it is exactly what Kung Fu translate as "hard work".

The WOW of Taiji has been, in my experience, over whelming. When I completed Tung Ying Chieh's fast form it all hit me all at once everything seemed to fall into place but this was only after 12 years of training Yang Taiji with my Yang Sifu. I have experienced a similar wow factor in Chen but it took me only a year of Laojia Yilu. It was not as great as the fast form wow but it was most certainly a wow but an equivalent wow in Yang took me 5 years to get to. 

In some cases it is just what form fits a student best but in all cases it will take time and it is not magic so right there you loose a whole lot of people. And many simply do not want to put in the time. And there are others that never stop beleiving it is magic and they simply never really get it nor do they want to.

I am about to go into a rant so I will again stop here.


----------



## graychuan (Aug 19, 2008)

Flying Crane said:


> What kind of taiji are you practicing and teaching to your students? How much of it do you know and understand? Have you learned a complete form, if so, which? Or are you doing primarily qigong training?


 
I learned the Chen Man Ching 37 posture form from master Joan Richert. Studied 4 years with Robert Grant, a lineage instructor in the tradition of Gia Fu Feng. Gia fu's form practice only consisted of the 24 movement 'peking' set or 'simplified' form as the teaching was more based on concepts and qi gong but i learned a whole curriculum of martial techniques, push hands and Da Lu. I have since learned the 'traditional' yang form from Carl Meek and Bil Wojazinski(i think i spelled it right.) from the Kentucky Tai Chi Chuan Association. Also did a lot of seminar study with Dr. Yang, Jwing-Ming. Picked up some mad/crazy Chin Na skills that complimanted the Kempo and Tai Chi nicely. :wink2:

And hey , Marlon, I did reply to the PM you sent. let me know if it go thru or not.

Chris


----------



## IWishToLearn (Aug 20, 2008)

marlon said:


> i am not sure if it deserves its own thread but does it not seem like many many kempo people do taichi...especially the higher the ranking? Does anyone care to speculate why?
> 
> Marlon


While I wouldn't consider myself high ranked - I have practiced t'ai chi for about seven years now. It's movements are included within just about every aspect of the kenpo I practice and teach.


----------



## graychuan (Aug 21, 2008)

IWishToLearn said:


> While I wouldn't consider myself high ranked - I have practiced t'ai chi for about seven years now. It's movements are included within just about every aspect of the kenpo I practice and teach.


 
The 'master key' at work. AWESOME!

~Cg~


----------



## marlon (Aug 21, 2008)

graychuan said:


> I think we could get away with saying that it is almost a norm for Kempoists to practice Tai Chi Chuan.
> I
> 'There is a Master Key to Tai-Chi Chuan. Possessing it, if we are willing to devote time and energy to practice, we can continue to make progress throughout life to the limits of our natural ability. Without this key, we can only hope to improve our technique to a certain level, and then will "sign away our time," as the Song of Thirteen Postures says. The Master Key defines the art of Tai-Chi Chuan. We can do the forms, the "ch'uan," and even practice a variety of principles such as slowness, relaxation, straight spine, and certain hand positions. We can even reach high technical achievement; but without the Maser Key, we should not call our art "Tai-Chi Chuan."
> 
> ...


 
Perhaps i am missing something.  Can someone say in thier own words what they see as Jou, Tsung Hwa's definition of the master key?

Respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## Xue Sheng (Aug 21, 2008)

marlon said:


> Perhaps i am missing something. Can someone say in thier own words what they see as Jou, Tsung Hwa's definition of the master key?
> 
> Respectfully,
> Marlon


 
Train it, understand it, make it your own.

Don't just go through the motions.

In my Sig I have a quote from Di Guoyong's book



> If you train martial arts without training deep skill you arrive at old age with nothing


 
Pretty much the same idea, or at least that is my take on it.


----------



## graychuan (Aug 21, 2008)

marlon said:


> Perhaps i am missing something. Can someone say in thier own words what they see as Jou, Tsung Hwa's definition of the master key?
> 
> Respectfully,
> Marlon


 

My particular take is that the master key is exactly what he says it is. Just like the first line of the Tao Te Ching,' the Tao that can be told is not the Eternal Tao. The name that can be spoken is not the Eternal Name.'

For instance...can you tell me any real significant differnce from a Judo hip throw and say an Aikido hip throw? How about a Shotokan straight punch vs. a Kempo straight punch? Even better, is there any real difference between a Shaolin Kung Fu side kick and a Karate side kick? Not Really. Even within all of the Tai Chi Chuan styles they all pretty much do the same form. The postures may be 'large or small frame' but all Tai Chi styles have the Single/Double whip, Peng-lu-chi-an (grasp sparrows tail) and such. The core principles may vary but its all tai chi. In yang style in particular there are several versions of the 'traditional' form. The number of the classical postures really depends on how they are counted. Ive seen the 85, 105,108,and 150 posture forms and guess what...THEY ARE ALL THE SAME FORM. LOL.
Ive even watched a Wudang Tai Chi form on youtube and other than the fact that the guy was an authentic Wudang Martial Artist the posutres were the same order and fundamentally executed the same. 
After a few years of this one begins to wonder what is real and what is not and what all the hype is about. Then the concept of the 'Master Key' as explained in the essay makes sense.
On the same note...as I have been practicing a lineage form of Wing Chun Kung Fu for the past 2 years...I have found that the Plumtree blocking and the 10 Point are very similar in posture and exectution as the Sil Lum Tao beginning form in Wing Chun. So my understanding of Wing chun snowballed because of this. Master key at work? Maybe , maybe not. Just some stuff to think about. 
I remember a clip from the movie, 'Ghost Dog:Way of the Samurai' with Forrest Whitaker and he quoted the Hagakure,' when one comes to a deep understanding of his way then he will also learn to appreciate and understand the virtue of ALL ways.'

So the Master key is not a unique concept.


----------



## marlon (Aug 22, 2008)

I read the article again...a few times.  My take on it, is that since the author speaks of something that makes taiji specifically different from other martial arts, and that the master key is not about rerlaxation, or the ten essences, i will say that the master key is the transformative qualities of taiji.  That taiji is about evolving ones being.  that the master key is the philisophy of tao and taiji is primarily about growth as a being  and the security of self defense and longevity are necessary for that goal.  so any time one practices and trains with the goal of growth as a being based on the principles of the tao then it is taiji...in  a sense...then one possesses the key that will unlock the greater depths of the art.  The artcle speaks of certain specifics that lead me to think that we are not only speaking of the form...(grasp the sparrow's tail and the like) nor is he speaking of the principles of movement as in the ten essences but rather something else "that if one were to hear it one would laugh".  Not everything is tai chi chuan but everything can be taiji

my little thoughts

Respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## MeatWad2 (Aug 23, 2008)

I study Taiji and Kempo.  I have found that Chen style works best with it.  It has a lot of hidden applications in the movements that are complimentary to Kempo


----------



## Xue Sheng (Aug 23, 2008)

MeatWad2 said:


> I study Taiji and Kempo. I have found that Chen style works best with it. It has a lot of hidden applications in the movements that are complimentary to Kempo


 
Not surprised, jin gang dao duì all by itself has about 8 different applications, all fairly nasty. But then all Taiji styles individual postures tend to have multiple applications.


----------

