1 - Hi Chris,
Good to see writing on standing. Over time I have pactised various different standing sets and have found all of them to be valuable. Although I consider standing to be the foundation practice in 'internal' arts, in the UK I see very few taijiquan practitioners who really practice standing outside of their regular classes, even among those who train taijiquan as a martial art. This seems to be much less the case among xingyiquan, baguazhang (and of course i chuan) practitioners. Perhaps this comes down to the percieved relevance of the standing/circle walking to the art. It's very easy to see how san ti translates into xingyi or the circle walking qigong postures into bagua. But I think the situation is better in the UK than it is here in Malaysia as far as standing in taiji is concerned.
Although I've been out here in Malaysia for 8 months now training full time (primarily with Nigel Sutton), I have seen little emphasis placed on standing post by other teachers here I've spoken to or trained with in taiji (although they all do it to some degree). Other forms of nei gung aimed at developing the ability to take blows are emphasised more - an aspect of training little covered in UK....
Do the Yang family lineage from whom you are learning in Shanghai integrate standing into their taiji to same degree as John Ding or Bruce Frantzis? Do they mostly practice shoulder-width or wide and deep stances? Single or double leg? For as long as physically/neuroligically possible or within a comfortable level of exertion?
I look forward to your next standing article.
On a slightly different note.... Thank you for giving me Glen Jenkin's details some years ago when we met at one of BKF's seminars. It has been a great pleasure learning from him and I look forward to seeing him again when I get back from here in 5 months or so.
3 - The third picture is completely incorrect. I quote Master Tian “standing meditation is not part of my fathers nor Yang Jian Hou’s training”. The only time standing meditation is used by them is for a totally different purpose to your reference. It is used as a physical strengthening technique forced on the children of the family before they were taught 8 brocade or form. It is basically the same as that taught to young Shaolin novices as leg strengthening and mental discipline.
As with the Shaolin version it is full low riding horse stance with the thighs parallel to the ground, not the “no-mans land” stance you have adopted in the picture, which for the purpose this work was designed is a complete waste of time. Once the purposes of leg strength and discipline have been achieved the youths of the Yang family were only then taught 8 brocade and form and they no longer practiced any form of standing work. (Comment this)
4 - (sigh) You are very negative and aggressive. That is truely sad. I think you are misleading people by seeking to bolster your statements based on the absolute authority of others rather than your experience.
The first point:
In my experience standing is a process which pretty much all arts use whether they be so-called internal or external. It is only the degree to which they use the process which varies. I have found that the emphasis (both in amount and quality - i.e. their focus for doing it and the feelings associated with it) can vary vastly amongst all individual practitioners irrespective of their style or 'lineage'.
I have spent a great deal of time with standing practise and I find it is valuable in its place. However, as with most things ... real progress comes from understanding Change. Extreme perspectives leading to rigidity in body and mind are not helpful and good teachers realise that human beings are all unique and different.
For some, at a given time, standing is good.
For others, at a given time, standing is a hindrance.
The basis for these decisions and for when these decisions change is what is important not some absolute statement with little or no context.
The second point:
What you describe as Shaolin horse stance is designed to 'stretch' the tendons in the legs to the butt. The leg posture he's doing is to 'release' his kwa and connect the legs to the spine. The word 'release' is important and illustrates a difference in the approaches. The difference is the degree and order in which you develop leg to torso connectivity. (Done correctly one will actually help you develop chan szu chin .... I wonder which one).
A teacher can place the emphasis on moving first. A teacher can place the emphasis on standing first. A teacher could teach someone Shaolin before Taiji. Someone can stand high. Someone can stand low. All these things are superficial to the real question ... WHY.
Do you notice how I commented without being nasty? Do you think it might start a trend? (Comment this)
5 - I happened to have questioned Master Tian about this very matter while in Shanghai training with him in June. My personal standing practice is the same (but lower) as in picture 2 which is 1st position of a six position form. My point was that according to Master Tian picture 3 is wrong. I knoe this as I deliberately took similar position as the photo and he kept pushing me down and saying it was pointless unless you went *this* low. So I provide that information as correction, as I would not like people to be misled as to what he is teaching. He also stated that the purpose of the training is different, as I stated in my first post. Neither Tian Yin Jia, Tian Bing Yuan, Tian Yun, Yao Guo Qin practice standing, they were very clear about that.
I have no doubt what he doing in picture 3 is beneficial, I am correcting the statement that it is "Old Yang" practice from the corriculem of Tian Yin Jia (Comment this)
6 - There you go again with your absolutes and validation from external authority. I don't get any sense of space in your mind or in your attitude. Each technique is a process. There is no absolute .. no absolute authority or technique. The question of right or wrong in the standing picture is irrelevant. The question is the spaciousness in the mind which informs the qi flow which informs the blood flow which irrigates the body.
I only ask - because obviously I wasn't there - but is there the mildest possibility that your teacher might have been indicating to you ...
Look ... you need to get this low "ideally" for the full benefits ... but ... its your job to understand that the practice is a process and its your responsibility to treat it as such. My friend .. that is the ideal .. the goal. But take care ... both your body & mind have to support you in that journey to the "ideal". If you perhaps force your body there using your mind then, my friend, you'll not be reaping the benefits of an integrated practice. But also take care that you work towards the "ideal" because without work your mind and body will both become lazy. Here I'll show you how hard it is to meet the ideal so that you do not become lazy and realise that there is some work to be done.
You say there are six movements in this sequence. I say there are infinite possibilities. You say there is a way to do it and a way not to do it. I say there is a process which unfolds differently for different people and it is having clarity in understanding your tools and direction that is important. Which is the more rigid? Which is the more spacious? Which creates more balance?
He even let you take a picture of his expression of the ideal that he laboured to achieve ... that is quite a nice man. (Comment this)
7 - This is just ad hominem, why don't you address the information not the person. I have made no personal references to anyone here in this group apart from refering to the source of that training in order to provide corroberation as to the validity of the information I am giving. Once again, I do not critisise standing work as I do it myself. My criticism and comment is aimed entirely at picture #3 in the group, which is incorrect and not a valid representation of the techniques and teaching of Tian Yin Jia, it is that simple. If you wish to say I am wrong in that correction please give me your arguments and your experience and qualification to make those statements. If you wish to criticise my posts please aim that criticism to what I say and not what you wish I had said.
All the way through your post you apply examples of what is not there! I said the 6 position I use in personal practice. You interpret that as that I think they are the only six position. This distortion can only come from an agenda to create distortion, to what purpose!
When these distortions and anomolies (as exampled in your replies and the photograph) are no longer inflicted on the unknowledged but interested reader in a publically available blog I will no longer feel the incentive to reply. (Comment this)
8 - Perhaps if you presented your arguments in a more constructive manner rather than presentations of a person of absolute knowledge about what YOUR teacher said then people would, from your perspective, address your question and not address your perceived attitude. (Comment this)
9 - It is your perception I have seen it before here. I am just trying to keep things honest and accurate. There seem to be very strong commercial motivations to change Master Tians training into something it isn't, and as the guy who brought them to the UK and invited Chris to meet them at the seminars I organised in a *warm* September in 2004 (even though it seems he does not wish to acknowledge it), and as his student as opposed to Mr Yao's student, it is my responsibility to ensure these anomalies are answered, as I was asked to do by Master Tian when in Shanghai this summer.
Create no anomalies and you recieve no answers. (Comment this)
10 - As an adenda to give information as opposed to just critisism, there has been some discussion on a couple of discussion lists recently on the use of standing work in Tai-Chi. This was my take on it.
***************************
A little history as conveyed to me by Master Tian.
In the direct Yang family from the 1st to the 4th generation there was no meditation. There was standing training but it was Shaolin riding horse stance training for the kids as a form of discipline and leg strengthening. After forms were taught standing was no longer practiced. Standing meditation was introduced into the Yang family in the 3rd generation by Chen Wei Ming after the death of Yang Cheng Fu. Chen Wei Ming became the primary teacher for the 4th generation kids Zhen Ji, Zhen Duo, Zhen Kwok. Where as Zhen Ming (Sau Chung) their elder half brother was down south and was far more advanced than them, so did not get involved.
This has left some peculiar anomalies within the remaining family members and Tudi. Exampled by the three Tudi of Yang Zhen Ming (Sau Chung). #1 Ip Tai Tak did no meditation as he only trained under Yang. #2 Chu Gin Soon does Wuji standing as it came from his previous teacher before he baisi to Yang. #3 Chu King Hung does a full standing set of Zhang Zhuang as his previous teacher before he baisi was Chen Wei Ming. So IMO standing or seated meditation in Yang is traditionally non standard.
Now moving meditation, well yes that depends on what you call meditation :o)) as the Sub Continent - Chinese - Japanese traditions are different, and even within those genre the styles are very different. But conceptually I vote on the concept of stilling the mind. But easier said than done and one of the main means is to focus your mind on to one object or concept. Exampled by Zazen focusing on counting the breath, in some Taoist and Buddhist traditions focusing on the sound and the feel of the breath. In other Buddhist / Hindu tradition focusing on repetitive mantra. Even though they dont call it such but the Gregorian chant tradition and repetitive prayer techniques used in monasteries is the same thing. It is what takes you inside and closes the outside that makes meditation, but also avoiding / stilling the conscious mind chatter, that is musing not meditation. Ok so the form - as a beginner you concentrate on getting it right so it focuses you and stills the mind - does that fit the definition? More senior and you can focus on the energy flow or on the application or on creating circles or on any number of things that are elements within form development - does that fit the description?
But by following that description isn't everything moving that concentrates and focuses mind activity moving meditation, dancing, some sports. What is the saying / song - "Its not what you do, its the way that you do it"
***********************************
My contribution to the information pot!! (Comment this)
Good to see writing on standing. Over time I have pactised various different standing sets and have found all of them to be valuable. Although I consider standing to be the foundation practice in 'internal' arts, in the UK I see very few taijiquan practitioners who really practice standing outside of their regular classes, even among those who train taijiquan as a martial art. This seems to be much less the case among xingyiquan, baguazhang (and of course i chuan) practitioners. Perhaps this comes down to the percieved relevance of the standing/circle walking to the art. It's very easy to see how san ti translates into xingyi or the circle walking qigong postures into bagua. But I think the situation is better in the UK than it is here in Malaysia as far as standing in taiji is concerned.
Although I've been out here in Malaysia for 8 months now training full time (primarily with Nigel Sutton), I have seen little emphasis placed on standing post by other teachers here I've spoken to or trained with in taiji (although they all do it to some degree). Other forms of nei gung aimed at developing the ability to take blows are emphasised more - an aspect of training little covered in UK....
Do the Yang family lineage from whom you are learning in Shanghai integrate standing into their taiji to same degree as John Ding or Bruce Frantzis? Do they mostly practice shoulder-width or wide and deep stances? Single or double leg? For as long as physically/neuroligically possible or within a comfortable level of exertion?
I look forward to your next standing article.
On a slightly different note.... Thank you for giving me Glen Jenkin's details some years ago when we met at one of BKF's seminars. It has been a great pleasure learning from him and I look forward to seeing him again when I get back from here in 5 months or so.
Best regards,
Hugh Crosland (Comment this)
As with the Shaolin version it is full low riding horse stance with the thighs parallel to the ground, not the “no-mans land” stance you have adopted in the picture, which for the purpose this work was designed is a complete waste of time. Once the purposes of leg strength and discipline have been achieved the youths of the Yang family were only then taught 8 brocade and form and they no longer practiced any form of standing work. (Comment this)
The first point:
In my experience standing is a process which pretty much all arts use whether they be so-called internal or external. It is only the degree to which they use the process which varies. I have found that the emphasis (both in amount and quality - i.e. their focus for doing it and the feelings associated with it) can vary vastly amongst all individual practitioners irrespective of their style or 'lineage'.
I have spent a great deal of time with standing practise and I find it is valuable in its place. However, as with most things ... real progress comes from understanding Change. Extreme perspectives leading to rigidity in body and mind are not helpful and good teachers realise that human beings are all unique and different.
For some, at a given time, standing is good.
For others, at a given time, standing is a hindrance.
The basis for these decisions and for when these decisions change is what is important not some absolute statement with little or no context.
The second point:
What you describe as Shaolin horse stance is designed to 'stretch' the tendons in the legs to the butt. The leg posture he's doing is to 'release' his kwa and connect the legs to the spine. The word 'release' is important and illustrates a difference in the approaches. The difference is the degree and order in which you develop leg to torso connectivity. (Done correctly one will actually help you develop chan szu chin .... I wonder which one).
A teacher can place the emphasis on moving first. A teacher can place the emphasis on standing first. A teacher could teach someone Shaolin before Taiji. Someone can stand high. Someone can stand low. All these things are superficial to the real question ... WHY.
Do you notice how I commented without being nasty? Do you think it might start a trend? (Comment this)
I have no doubt what he doing in picture 3 is beneficial, I am correcting the statement that it is "Old Yang" practice from the corriculem of Tian Yin Jia (Comment this)
I only ask - because obviously I wasn't there - but is there the mildest possibility that your teacher might have been indicating to you ...
Look ... you need to get this low "ideally" for the full benefits ... but ... its your job to understand that the practice is a process and its your responsibility to treat it as such. My friend .. that is the ideal .. the goal. But take care ... both your body & mind have to support you in that journey to the "ideal". If you perhaps force your body there using your mind then, my friend, you'll not be reaping the benefits of an integrated practice. But also take care that you work towards the "ideal" because without work your mind and body will both become lazy. Here I'll show you how hard it is to meet the ideal so that you do not become lazy and realise that there is some work to be done.
You say there are six movements in this sequence. I say there are infinite possibilities. You say there is a way to do it and a way not to do it. I say there is a process which unfolds differently for different people and it is having clarity in understanding your tools and direction that is important. Which is the more rigid? Which is the more spacious? Which creates more balance?
He even let you take a picture of his expression of the ideal that he laboured to achieve ... that is quite a nice man. (Comment this)
All the way through your post you apply examples of what is not there! I said the 6 position I use in personal practice. You interpret that as that I think they are the only six position. This distortion can only come from an agenda to create distortion, to what purpose!
When these distortions and anomolies (as exampled in your replies and the photograph) are no longer inflicted on the unknowledged but interested reader in a publically available blog I will no longer feel the incentive to reply. (Comment this)
Create no anomalies and you recieve no answers. (Comment this)
***************************
A little history as conveyed to me by Master Tian.
In the direct Yang family from the 1st to the 4th generation there was no meditation. There was standing training but it was Shaolin riding horse stance training for the kids as a form of discipline and leg strengthening. After forms were taught standing was no longer practiced. Standing meditation was introduced into the Yang family in the 3rd generation by Chen Wei Ming after the death of Yang Cheng Fu. Chen Wei Ming became the primary teacher for the 4th generation kids Zhen Ji, Zhen Duo, Zhen Kwok. Where as Zhen Ming (Sau Chung) their elder half brother was down south and was far more advanced than them, so did not get involved.
This has left some peculiar anomalies within the remaining family members and Tudi. Exampled by the three Tudi of Yang Zhen Ming (Sau Chung). #1 Ip Tai Tak did no meditation as he only trained under Yang. #2 Chu Gin Soon does Wuji standing as it came from his previous teacher before he baisi to Yang. #3 Chu King Hung does a full standing set of Zhang Zhuang as his previous teacher before he baisi was Chen Wei Ming. So IMO standing or seated meditation in Yang is traditionally non standard.
Now moving meditation, well yes that depends on what you call meditation :o)) as the Sub Continent - Chinese - Japanese traditions are different, and even within those genre the styles are very different. But conceptually I vote on the concept of stilling the mind. But easier said than done and one of the main means is to focus your mind on to one object or concept. Exampled by Zazen focusing on counting the breath, in some Taoist and Buddhist traditions focusing on the sound and the feel of the breath. In other Buddhist / Hindu tradition focusing on repetitive mantra. Even though they dont call it such but the Gregorian chant tradition and repetitive prayer techniques used in monasteries is the same thing. It is what takes you inside and closes the outside that makes meditation, but also avoiding / stilling the conscious mind chatter, that is musing not meditation. Ok so the form - as a beginner you concentrate on getting it right so it focuses you and stills the mind - does that fit the definition? More senior and you can focus on the energy flow or on the application or on creating circles or on any number of things that are elements within form development - does that fit the description?
But by following that description isn't everything moving that concentrates and focuses mind activity moving meditation, dancing, some sports. What is the saying / song - "Its not what you do, its the way that you do it"
***********************************
My contribution to the information pot!! (Comment this)