CMC style is a fascinating enigma. But it is by no means the be all and end all. There's much better stuff just lying around begging for disciples nowadays. I am sorry if I sound deflationary. The truth is that CMC style is a great topic to talk about in tai chi circles. And an important part of our shared history. I wish I could have tea with you to talk about CMC style.
Personal Observation - Books about Taijiquan
- Thread starter Xue Sheng
- Start date
CMC style is a fascinating enigma. But it is by no means the be all and end all. There's much better stuff just lying around begging for disciples nowadays. I am sorry if I sound deflationary. The truth is that CMC style is a great topic to talk about in tai chi circles. And an important part of our shared history. I wish I could have tea with you to talk about CMC style.
OP
Xue Sheng
All weight is underside
- Thread Starter
- #22
My exposure to CMC style is limited
My lineage is traditional Yang
Yang Chengfu > Tung Ying Chieh > my Shifu > me
I just found his book and the books of some of his students interesting. Beyond that I trained briefly with a man who was a student of William CC Chen and a little with another student of CMC. But I am traditional Yang with much more background in Chen than CMC
Teapot
Orange Belt
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2023
- Messages
- 75
- Reaction score
- 68
I find it interesting how two of Yang Chengfu's disciples talk about history here:
On the left, we have Fu Zhongwen who credits Yang Style Taijiquan to Chen Village. He makes zero mention of Zhang Sanfeng.
On the right, we have "Zheng Manqiang" who credits Yang Style Taijiquan to Zhang Sanfeng. The translator himself suspects CMC to have written the Preface which is "problematic" because the story it tells is physically impossible. How can Yang Chengfu have met his grandfather when he was born after his grandfather's death?
Whoever wrote it, why fabricate such a story?
Right off the bat, I must question the credibility of this guy.
On the left, we have Fu Zhongwen who credits Yang Style Taijiquan to Chen Village. He makes zero mention of Zhang Sanfeng.
On the right, we have "Zheng Manqiang" who credits Yang Style Taijiquan to Zhang Sanfeng. The translator himself suspects CMC to have written the Preface which is "problematic" because the story it tells is physically impossible. How can Yang Chengfu have met his grandfather when he was born after his grandfather's death?
Whoever wrote it, why fabricate such a story?
Right off the bat, I must question the credibility of this guy.
OP
Xue Sheng
All weight is underside
- Thread Starter
- #24
I have had several conversations with my shifu, about CMC, he did push hands with him in Hong Kong, per request of his Shifu Tung Ying Chieh, who would not do push hands with CMC. And that is all I can say about that, other than you suspicions are likely correct.I find it interesting how two of Yang Chengfu's disciples talk about history here:
On the left, we have Fu Zhongwen who credits Yang Style Taijiquan to Chen Village. He makes zero mention of Zhang Sanfeng.
On the right, we have "Zheng Manqiang" who credits Yang Style Taijiquan to Zhang Sanfeng. The translator himself suspects CMC to have written the Preface which is "problematic" because the story it tells is physically impossible. How can Yang Chengfu have met his grandfather when he was born after his grandfather's death?
Whoever wrote it, why fabricate such a story?
Right off the bat, I must question the credibility of this guy.
The following 2 clips shows how much that CMC understanding the Taiji application.
When CMC does "double pulling", his hands are facing down (I have no idea what application this can be).
The correct way to do "double pulling" is to have 1 hand face down (control the wrist) and 1 hand face up (control the elbow).
mograph
Master of Arts
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2008
- Messages
- 1,883
- Reaction score
- 1,102
Sometimes it's problematic to attempt to understand a martial practice through second- and third-hand accounts of long-past stories in a book. In general, these are ethos appeals, or credibility arguments: "this is true because this guy said so."
I've found that direct experience with the practice works best, when evaluating things such as Yang's Ten Essences.
But then again, I'm neither famous, nor ancient, nor Chinese, so I have little to no credibility.
More practice?
More practice.
I've found that direct experience with the practice works best, when evaluating things such as Yang's Ten Essences.
But then again, I'm neither famous, nor ancient, nor Chinese, so I have little to no credibility.
More practice?
More practice.
OP
Xue Sheng
All weight is underside
- Thread Starter
- #27
its not pulling, its redirectionThe following 2 clips shows how much that CMC understanding the Taiji application.
When CMC does "double pulling", his hands are facing down (I have no idea what application this can be).
The correct way to do "double pulling" is to have 1 hand face down (control the wrist) and 1 hand face up (control the elbow).
Wing Woo Gar
Senior Master
Find two CMA teachers that can agree 100%, go ahead.
The "Grasp Sparrow's Tail" before "single whip" contains:
- ward off (Peng),
- pull back (Lu),
- press forward (Ji),
- push (An),
- double pulling (Shuang Lu).
Shuang Lu is double pulling.
isshinryuronin
Senior Master
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2019
- Messages
- 2,481
- Reaction score
- 2,690
As someone who has some knowledge (far from being a scholar) of karate history, I know of Zhang Sanfeng who studied both hard Shaolin and soft Daoist kung fu in the early 1300's. He is notable for his pioneering work in vital point striking and rumored to have experimented on live subjects. My source does not credit him with creating taijiquan, but rather for laying the foundation for its later development by others. I have no info regarding its branching off into different styles.
As a side note, three centuries later vital point striking found its way to jiu jutsu and then to early "karate." It's interesting that there seems to be a continuous thread linking the various systems of MA.
Teapot
Orange Belt
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2023
- Messages
- 75
- Reaction score
- 68
If we turn to Meir Shahar who has a PhD in Asian languages and civilizations at Harvard University, he has a book about Shaolin. That book mentions Cheng Zongyou's Shaolin Staff Method (ca.1610) which had like a "Q&A" section such as:
Someone may ask: “As to the staff, the Shaolin [method] is admired. Today there are many Shaolin monks who practice hand combat (quan), and do not practice staff. Why is that?"
I answer: "The Shaolin staff is called the Yakºa (Yecha) [method]. It is a sacred transmission from the Kiœnara King ( Jinnaluo wang) (Shaolin’s tutelary deity, Vajrapâÿi). To this day it is known as “unsurpassed wisdom (Bodhi)” (wushang puti). By contrast, hand combat is not yet popular in the land (quan you wei shengxing hainei). Those [Shaolin monks] who specialize in it, do so in order to transform it, like the staff, [into a vehicle] for reaching the other shore [of enlightenment].”
A lot of sources from Meir Shahar converge to the conclusion that Shaolin wasn't famous for bare-handed martial arts in the Ming Dynasty. They were famous for their staff method. They were so not famous for bare-handed fighting that it was even worth asking in a book as to why the hell they were doing bare-handed combat.
The Ming Dynasty military general, Qi Jiguang, thought that bare-handed martial arts wasn't useful on the battlefield because weapons existed. He thought it was good for instilling courage and as a starting point for weapons usage. When Qi Jiguang praised Shaolin, it was specifically their staff method.
A lot of Chinese martial arts that we know of today were rather recent developments. People who want to make modern Chinese martial arts seem 1000 years old have a clear incentive. Older = higher status. If Taijiquan was 1000 years ago as opposed to a few hundred years ago, that elevates its status.
Staurt Alve Olson - student of T.T.Liang who's a disciple of Cheng Manching and Liu Peizhong wrote in his book, Taijiquan Treatise: Attributed to the Song Dynasty Daoist Priest Zhang Sanfeng, "No historical data can prove that assertion that he created what has become popularly known as Taijiquan, or that he ever wrote anything concerning Daoism or Taijiquan."
Academically, he got nothing. So all he has left is faith as he writes: "Even without concrete, verifiable proof connecting all the stories of him, it would be wrong not to accept the existence of Zhang Sanfeng, as it is highly improbable that a myth of this grand a scale could have been so widely accepted or existed for so long. Hence, to consider Zhang as just a myth equally means we must form the conclusion that all these emperors and imperial officials, all the learned and cultivated Daoists, and many reputable citizens who believed in and claimed the existence of Zhang were all just simpleminded fools."
On his website, he translated the book, Zhang Sanfeng’s Secret Arts for Refining the Elixi, but also claimed that the original edition was in the year 1946. Because you know... Zhang Sanfeng's link to Taijiquan was invented in the 20th century. Prior to the 20th century however...
mograph
Master of Arts
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2008
- Messages
- 1,883
- Reaction score
- 1,102
You guys might want to agree on a definition of "pulling."
Similar threads
