A Chen and Yang style Analysis

[dre_doggX]

A Chen and Yang style Analysis, (Study Chen Iam not sure,you may want to read this
Iam not sure, according to Erle , Yang learn his art from a Daoist of the San Zan Feng leniage, directly will at the CHen village, the Chens had many contacts with Daoist but, Yang Luchan decided not to use the Shaolin like movements, Erle's claim becomes more believe when you study his stuff.

you see the things in his book Reflex Violence, and meditation on the Reptile Brain, studying Jing and stuff, I think I see a diference between Yang LU CHan Tai Ji with its Natural movementsna and CHen Style Tai JI with its unnaturally movements, I used to pratice a 57 movement chen form all the time.and it is on the lines of Shaolin, but the Yang Styles have certian things that differe them from of Kungfus(or external martial arts) the fist are always soft, and are held a a certained where as Chen style is like a Shaolin fist.

Erle says Chen Style is a external Shaolin art, I not completly sure about that

BUT I DO KNOW THIS.
Using the REPTILE BRAIN(Animal instinct part of the human brain) the Yang style dosent change in movement or appilcation, where the Shaolin and CHen style seem to. The Yang style is the same with or without reptile brain mode(which you can learn about inthe book reflex violence on his website).

Yang Lu Chang may of studied Chen style, but I believe that he may of learned from someone else who was not a Chen, but a Daoist.

It is fact that the Daoist did Soften the CHen families martial arts. and that there where more then one visits of Daoist Hermits to the Chen Village.


I was slow to accept this, until I started praticing it for myself.

I like the Chen style butwhen I praticed the YangLu CHan style, and studied the knowledge from it I looked at aspects


1) Chen Wan Ting was a Warrior, like the Samuria of Japan, his martial art was made to grapple and disarm people. this is probably why both Jujutsu and CHen style Tai ji use alot of Chin na(locks, and stuff)San Zeng Feng and the Daoist hermits where Hermits, they wondered China, and Asia but probably didnt take part on the battle feild, Erles claims that there is not grappling in the Internal martial arts,.

2) Now look. in Erles rules of fighitng he says its better to strike down your opponent, will you see if I was Chen Wang Ting or a Samurai my opponent would me armed, and he would have a armor, hence you would need Chin-na techinques to disarm him and flying fancy kicks to battle people on Horses, NOTE if alot of the CHen styles strikes do not hit pressure points to the body where armor would be,then what does that tell you. I havent studied the oringal Chen Wen Ting form only the one made my Chen Fa-ke,but maybe I should Elre has and he said Yang style has more postures. But look at how the Yang form seems to have more dim-mak then Chinna. On the street where hermits would more likely be, Dim mak is what you would use. But on the Battleflieds of China, Chin-na would be great for disarming a warriors weapon then attacking him in an unarmed part of his body.

3) FINALLY, lets talk about the Postures. Chen Fa-ke said that Chen Style is based on the thirteen postures, and even if you took Shaolin Cannon fist of the Chen family and studied that I-Ching, and based it on Daoism with the push hands and the softnes, if it isn based on the thirteen postures then ITS NOT TAI CHI, Erle doesnt consider Chen Style to be Tai CHi, but I do only for this reason. Wudang vs Shaolin, and Tai chi can be said to come from both. how do we know. hmm
lets us look at styles they made,

Wudang has Xing YI QUan and Eagle claw master general Yueh popularised it but we get the ideal the this art exsisted way before he was born. Then you have Bagua Zhang which has a history with more shadows and questions, one legend says that Tung learned it from a Hermit who revived him well freezing in a cave close to Wudang.

Both seem different and opposite to each other, but finally San Zeng Fangs martial art, people say it was Tai CHi but, thats not true(even though the Wudang certianly has a Wudang Tai CHi), he took Shaolin Martail arts and made 12 Qi disruptive forms.(according to Erle) and this was the ancestor to ALL INTERNAL MARTIAL ARTS again according to Erle.
He as an interview with a village of people who are descendants of San Zeng Feng, the do not teach there art openly to the public because Westeners, and Easteners alike have watered down martial art styles of almost every popular form. But according to Erle these 12 movements are in Yang Lu Changs forms,. (You can get Wudang 12 M videos from him to).

In sort BaguaZhang and XingYi Quan we know them to be more Wudang even if they may of been influence by Shaolin, however, when looking at

THE YANG LU CHAN STYLE and comparing it to Bagua Zhang and Xing Yi QUan. the doing the same with Chen style TAi chi, what looks more the same.


I found it to be the Yang style having both characteristics of BaguaZhang and XingYiQuan.



but all this I accepted only after praticing it I called myself a Chen style practioner and really like the Chen style but decided any real artist would not be narrow minded, so I took an honest look, and the rest is history.

the Yang Lu Chang form has 3 forms, the other 3 have "small frame" fa-jing so small and complex to be taught by a video or book, so I am going to learn the 2 other forms from Erle or one of his pupils.

you should read his books and articles for yourself

on Wudang Kungfu:http://www.taijiworld.com/Articles/disrupt.html

On Chen Vs Yang TaiChi;http://www.taijiworld.com/Articles/oldyang.htm

his site www.taijiworld.com and it wouldnt hurt to read "Reflex violence" in his download about books section.

[taijiquan_student]

"Yang learn his art from a Daoist of the San Zan Feng leniage, directly will at the CHen village, the Chens had many contacts with Daoist but, Yang Luchan decided not to use the Shaolin like movements, Erle's claim becomes more believe when you study his stuff."

There is nothing to suggest that Zhang San Feng had anything to do with martial arts. It is very commonplace for chinese martial arts to claim to have a legendary founder. Chinese generally prefer tried and true oer new and improved.

"I believe that he may of learned from someone else who was not a Chen, but a Daoist."

Who?

"Erles claims that there is not grappling in the Internal martial arts,. "

It is possible to practice taiji without grappling, but that doesn't mean it's not there.

"in Erles rules of fighitng he says its better to strike down your opponent, will you see if I was Chen Wang Ting or a Samurai my opponent would me armed, and he would have a armor, hence you would need Chin-na techinques to disarm him and flying fancy kicks to battle people on Horses, NOTE if alot of the CHen styles strikes do not hit pressure points to the body where armor would be,then what does that tell you."

Nothing wrong here. If the situation calls for qin-na or throwing, great. If you should be striking, great. From the video's I've seen of Chen Xiao Wang striking, Chen style can generate some impressive striking power. Although striking-points do work, one does not need to use Erle's system of dim-mak to be effective in striking.

"Both seem different and opposite to each other, but finally San Zeng Fangs martial art, people say it was Tai CHi but, thats not true(even though the Wudang certianly has a Wudang Tai CHi), he took Shaolin Martail arts and made 12 Qi disruptive forms.(according to Erle) and this was the ancestor to ALL INTERNAL MARTIAL ARTS again according to Erle."

I've always been VERY skeptical of Erle's Zhang San Feng story. Do you have anything to suggest Zhang San Feng did anything other than Daoist work, much less inventing dianxue by practicing on local prisoners with his acupuncture buddies?

"In sort BaguaZhang and XingYi Quan we know them to be more Wudang even if they may of been influence by Shaolin"

The supposed connection between shaolin arts versus wudang arts holds no historical accuracy. I thought this was "officialy" thrown out years ago. Xingyiquan--Ji Long Feng. Baguazhang--this one's hard, but nothing points to wudangshan itself. Taijiquan--Gen. Qi Ji Guan. This is greatly simplifying the history of these arts (maybe the Chen family was indeed influenced by Shaolin at some point), but I think you get the point. Shaolin vs. Wudang is for the movies.

One thing to keep in mind is that Erle's Yang Lu Chan form is not the only one out there. I practice Yangjia michuan taijiquan, which claims to be the system Yang Lu Chan did not teach to the palace. It is very different in appearance from Erle's old yang form. It's hard to say that "Yang Lu Chan's taiji was like this: ....."

[dre_doggX]

How is your form different. Martial arts is a never ending journey, ofcourse the style Yang Lu Chan did when he was 34 was different then the one he did when he was 65. so tell me have is your form different

[Brad]

Erle says Chen Style is a external Shaolin art, I not completly sure about that
:confused: :confused: :confused:
I don't get it. How so? Chen style is very much Taiji. If Yang style is "internal" then so is Chen style.

[RAF]

I recently got to see first hand, 32 movements of the longfist Tai Zu Quan (Emperor's longfist) demonstrated by someone very competent.

It doesn't look like any longfist I have ever seen and appears as internal as any of the big 3 (bagua, Xing Yi and taiji).

Sorry but it only further reinforces my belief that Yang Lu Chan's interpretation of Chen's was a throwback to the first training level and tai zu quan.

Almost every major Northern Chinese system has some mysterious daoist lurking in the Mountains with some secret form. Why does it always have to be daoist that does the martial arts synthesis? Why not a simple, practical farmer in a Village that functionally needs to protect itself?

[TenTigers]

I have studied a smattering of two different versions of Chen, and although I like the form, I prefer Yang due to the fact that the movements have more in common with my Shaolin (Siu-Lum Hung Kuen) possibly because according to one version (out of the many) Yang Lu Chan was an acomplished fighter in the Shaolin style before going to Chen Village. He then combined what he learned with what he already had and thus the Yang version was born. Since Qi Ji Guan was also schooled in Shaolin (some say he influenced Shaolin, some say the other way-chicken or the egg?) Legend has Chang Seng-Feng also a Shaolin adept. Nonetheless, Yang seems to have more of a lean towards Shaolin, and shares many comanalities with my art, so I have chosen to persue it. Now, the question,; who has the OLD YANG FORM? Earle, Guang Ping Yang Tai Chi, My mom? Who indeed? One teacher taught what he called "yang discharge form" which were fat ging (fa-jing) movements extracted from the form and practiced separately. What he told me was, that if you were to re-insert these fa-jing moves back into the form, you would then have the old form. ahhhh, I'm not sure. But seeing how everyone seems to have different versions of the "truth" who knows?

[gazza99]

"Erle says Chen Style is a external Shaolin art, I not completly sure about that "

When did Erle say this? Do you have an article or book to reference?

Gary

PS
RE:"I've always been VERY skeptical of Erle's Zhang San Feng story"

I didnt know Erle made that one up!!! His stories sure turn to chinese legend quick eh?

[gazza99]

Ok to set the record straight on what Erle really said on this issue.....I found the quote in his internal gung fu book, if your going to quote Erle Dre at least do it directly and dont take it out of context. Erle offers it up as a theory, and clearly states he is presenting his own beliefs...here is the quote you are reffering to, it also appears the quote about it not really being taiji is Erle quoting Fu Sheng-yuan.

"One theory is that a man called Chang San-feng saw a fight between astork and a snake and formulated the whole thing upon that! A rather fanci-ful and romantic idea but not true.There are two separate histories given as to the invention of Taijiquan. Amodern theory is that a family called the Chen family in China invented their form of Taijiquan from which came all other forms of Taijiquan. Ifwe look at both the Chen style of Taijiquan and the Yang style, we see that the Yang system could not have come out of the Chen style. They are so .....

(Internal Gung-fu Volume One: Page 19)

"different both in physical movement and in internal movement. The idea and use of Qi is also a contributing factor in my disbelief of this history. The Classics of Taijiquan are very definite as to how we should practise and all one has to do is to follow these lessons left to us by the masters of old. It can easily be seen that the Yang style of Taijiquan has come from no other ‘hard’ system. It is its own system, whereas it is easy to see that the
Chen style has its roots in the Shaolin martial arts, mainly Chang ch’uan or Long boxing. No hard style martial art is like Yang style Taijiquan, but one can see many hard styles within the framework of the Chen style. This is only my own idea while many still believe that all Taijiquan came from the Chen style.

It is interesting to note however, that not one ‘‘Chen style”
master was ever invited to any of the great meetings of Taijiquan masters and styles at the turn of the 20 th century. Several masters have told me that they considered Chen style to be not even Taijiquan. Nowadays, the Chen style is regarded as one of the great Taiji systems. Whether one believes that all Taiji came from it or not, does not take away from the fact that it is a
great system of martial art.

What Fu Sheng-yuan (the son of the famous Master Fu Zhongwen, nephew of Yang Cheng-fu) has to say about the Chen style and Zhiang Fa in the Chen Village.
In a handout freely handed out by the son of Fu Zhongwen, he writes;"
..."one often reads about the four major styles of t’ai chi ch’uan.... Viz.: Chen, Yang, Wu and sun. However, there is only one supreme Ultimate fist that conforms to natural forces and principles.
.... It is worthy to note that Chen style is not t’ai chi Ch’uan. Historically Chen Shi has it’s origins in Shaolin Ch’uan and was actually known as Pao Choi (Pauchui) or cannon fist. A hard external form does not comply with t‘ai chi ch’uan principles.... At the time when Yang Lu-ch’an was em-ployed in the household of the Chen master, a great boxer called Zhiang
Fa came to the Chen village. Zhiang Fa was the greatest exponent of t’ai chi ch’uan of his time. The Chen master was so impressed with Zhiang fa’s skills that he invited him to stay and teach t’ai chi ch’uan to his household. Thus it was that Zhiang fa taught t’ai chi to Yang Lu-ch’an...."

[Shadow Dragon]

One thing to note:

Yang has different 'classics' to Chen.

Chen according to my sources are as follows:
1.) Boxing and Weapons Collection.
2.) Book of Wenxiu Hall
3.) Sanxing Version
4.) Boxing and Weapon Collection of Chen Family pass through generations.
5.) Illustrated Manual of Long range Boxing.

Chen has 3 principles and 6 main requirements.
One difference is that Chen TJQ allows you to lean while the spine is kept straight, etc.

Both "styles" got things going for themselves and bickering which one is older, more authentic, truer, IMHO, is not becoming of a serious practicioner of MA.

Cheers.

[Shadow Dragon]

On final thought:

In the end all this 'yang is authentic' or 'Chen is the oiginator' is simply business and marketing.

Been like that ever sicne 2 Guys tried to sell 1 Guy their wares way back when.
Compare it to the crying of Vendors at a public Market, each will ensure you that his wares are fresher, better tasting, etc.
In the end most of those products come from the same place and will be very similar in freshness and taste.

Yang was the first style to become publicly known and thus might be reluctant to be upset from it's pedestal.

Chinese MA History is continously rewritten as more styles and histories are revealed and re-examined.

Unless somebody can provide 100% clear proof of their statements there will never be an end to these type of sagas.

Cheers.

[GLW]

I would be careful about conclusions based upon who is invited and not invited to meetings.

At the time of those meetings, Chen shi Taijiquan was still pretty much hidden and a family art. There were a few masters outside of Chenjiagou that did it and taught...but not many. The Chen's also tended to consider Yang a lesser figure.

The ORIGINAL history of Yang Luchan (as written, for example by Fu Zhongwen in his earlier book...but somehow mysteriously changed in later versions...ah...revisionists history)...was that Yang was an indentured servant. He managed to learn the family art sneakily and they then decided to teach him openly.

Being who and what he was, the lowest member of Chenjiagou would still consider Yang beneath themselves.

Pride and secrecy...does wonders.

Fu Shenyuan is NOT the caliber of his father. His grasp of the history is not the same and he has other motives for what he does. Marketing is marketing.

A famous person adding mythical folks into the mix and then writing about it is no more accurate than a nobody doing the same...but IS more likely to be believed.

As for concluding from seeing Yang style that Chen and Yang are not from the same root... Depends on who you watch.

I have seen much more BAD Yang style than BAD Chen style.... With many Yang style people, most conclusions are impossible - they have virtually zero basics. Without the foundation of stance work and such, nothing is going to be similar.

this entire thread is to promote an idea - to what purpose, I can surmise...but....

There IS a set of core Taijiquan principles that ALL styles of Taijiquan adhere to. Then each style has its set of special places and principles. Some are more complete and have deeper roots than others.

However, if you get benefit from doing what you do and are working with it...fine. To do an analysis of say Chen vs. Yang, you would need to either practice both for a number of years or interview experts in both. Gu Luxin was able to do this since he did both Yang and Chen expertly...however, if you look at his Yang, you can see that he favored Chen style more.

claims about mythical folks...Zhiang fa, Zhang sanfeng, etc...you can keep them. both have histories that can't even pinpoint when or if they existed.

[Kevin Wallbridge]

When speculating about Chinese history many people make the mistake of thinking that there is not a rich beauraucratic record to follow. While has been ravaged by time and misadventure, it does suggest the Chen village origins for Taijiquan is the only version that doesn't require wandering immortals or secret hidden variant wisdom. "Occam's Razor" after all.

As for the lack of similarity between Yang and Chen I am confused. I hear this statement from people who are familiar with one but not the other, or whose study of one is cursory at best. My study of Yang and Chen styles is detailed and broad and I can easily see that Chen Diyilu and the 108 are very similar in sequence. What looks like a vast difference on the surface (say wade-obliquely and brush-knee) is really rather minor when it comes to Jin/energy.

The only significant difference that I can see is in how power is transfered from the legs. Chen's bridge is a bow, with power twining up and down the legs and not requireing any outwardly visible weight shift (though it often does shift); while Yang style uses a hip track, from the releases into and out of the Kua and then carrying the torso along as the legs drive back and forth.

The Dianmai version of Yang style is just that, a version. To say that it was necessary component only of Yang Luchan's martial arts is just hubris. If Mr. Montague was told by his teacher it was Yang Luchan's, and he sincerely believed him, I have no problem with that. I don't want to change anyone's religion. Did an illiterate pharmacy clerk know a subtle and dangerous teaching reserved for trusted inner door students? Why not? Was he the only one? Not too bloody likely.

Look at the Yang family 40 chapters. Chapter 37 is on "The oral transmission of the theory of life and death acupoints." It includes eight disqualifications. Any wonder the forms are full of Dianmai that are unexplained? The deeper I go into the study of Chinese medicine the easier I find it to see literally hundreds of Dianmai applications in my forms. As I see it, to say that this one has it and that one doesn't is just based on a lack of knowledge.

[GLW]

I was afraid you would ask that.... :)

I have been toying with actually writing it all down and actually have some of it at one time...but not gotten a ROUND TUIT....

I am referring to things like San Jiao Bu - triangle stance work...all stances have triangles in them - stability.

Movement from the center of mass....

Dropping the shoulders and elbows...

The connection of the waist and the earth connection down to the legs and then back up until it eventually expresses itself in the hands.

The use of the mind and the gaze.

The concept of intent and relaxed power....instead of hard muscle power.

The idea of non-stop and no hard edges...if you see a hard edge or abrupt out of place non-flowing movement - it is a place that will soften and disappear with more practice...

those types of things and then explaining each one in detail takes several paragraphs or pages.

[RAF]

I second the thanks to GLW and others like you Wujidude, Joyce, Graham and Kevin Wallbridge.

Wujidude, you might find this interesting too:

http://www.geocities.com/yongnian/trainingbasics.html

[gazza99]

... Discussions of "whats the original taiji" is simply circular: myth, on top of exageration, on top of time and distorted history. Mr. DreDog simply didnt ask his question the right way, or for some reason is seeking validation that Erles old yang form is the best and the most original...

Dre: Youre barking up the wrong tree, you should be addressing principles, not history for answers. If you like what your doing great, I like Erles old yang, so I do it! The best comparison is if someone is proficient in both chen and Yang styles that can compare the different methods, postures, jin expressions and cultivation..etc.. Look over GLW's post, things that should transcend taiji styles is what we can focus on here, and if something differs, why? why? and why?

regards,
Gary

[wushu chik]

Check yer PM :)

~Wen~

[josh_f]

For those interested, Yang Lu-chan's biography from the official Yang family website:

http://www.yangstyletaichi.com/Home/History/Yang_Lu_Chan___General_History/yang_lu_chan___general_history.html

One would hope that the words of the family members will finally put this to rest . Of course I doubt that it will.

What I find more suspect than Erle's history is the following from [url]http://www.taijiworld.com/Articles/disrupt.html[\url]

"These forms not only teach us about self-defence and healing, they also teach us about ?qi disruption?. This exciting area deals with disrupting an attacker?s energy flows to cause that person to become very weak when they attempt to re-attack us. It involves brushing the hand or hands very quickly to the point of fa-jing over certain areas of the body. (Each form uses a different area to cause different Qi disruptions to occur). This will cause a magnetic field to be set up across the attacker?s own ?electrical? pathways thus causing an adverse current to be set up along that pathway. This is only a min. ute current as that is the way the human body works. If we were for instance to use much higher currents from an external unnatural source, it would not have any effect other than to electrocute the person! We are able to cause an attacker not to be able to punch us because when he tries, his body is drained of Qi very quickly. We are able to affect for instance the ?awaking energy?, which is that energy that causes us to wake up. When we do the reverse, we cause the person to want to be asleep.

All of this is scientific and much of it has had scientific experiments done on it to prove its veracity. I too have done experiments in my own meagre way which also uphold this theory."

I'd would be interested in seeing some double-blind peer review studies that verified the existance of "chi", "awaking energy" or "any human with the ability to generate a magnetic field strong enough to disrupt another human ( those who have used a magnets before might wonder why the field doesn't disrupt the electrical pathways of the person generating the field). I suspect that Mr. Montaigue is a little fuzzy on what constitutes science.
:) . Those have not done so, I highly recomend reading the form descriptions. , They are highly entertaining.


--josh

[GLW]

I love the short statement "Born in a poor family, when he was 10, he went to Chenjiagon in Henan province to learn Tai Chi from the famous master Chen Shing Xing (1771-1853). "

At that time, one did not come from a poor family, go to Chenjiagou, and be accepted as a student - carte blanche.

While this is essentially correct, the full story (from older - pre-PRC times history documents) was that as was the custom, Yang was 'sold' by his family as a servant to the Chen family.

This was a common practice. It got money for a poor family and insured that their child would have a job, food, clothing, and shelter. About the only downside was that as an indentured servant, the money the family received was more of a loan. If the child wanted to leave and go elsewhere, they had to payback that money or the person holding the loan had to determine that the debt was forgiven.

However, this was not done very often - where would a person go and what would they do? Being a servant for a rich family beat being on the street.

This aspect of the history is played down a lot because no Chinese family wants to own up to the major ancestor that makes their family special being a servant.

[gazza99]

Welcome to the Forum Josh I see this is your first post! Thanks for taking the time out of your busy political agenda to post an off topic comment! Its typical to start a new thread when you change subjects, keep in mind this topic has come up before, so Its easier to do a search for it. But then again that might not fit your agenda?

For the record when you put quotations on something *pretending* to *quote* them, it is comman practice not to add your own comments or question marks to that persons quote, once you do so it eliminates your credibility, and easily predjudices the following opinions.

I am also skeptical about the qi-disruption claims put out by my instructor, It may have some merit, it may be complete B.S. But to me after learning the forms its a moot point and here is why. Ill break it down....

1. The qi-disruption is a set-up for a strike, in most case the "qi-disruption" is done within a blocking/striking motion. learning all of the forms I was never once taught the methods are stand-alone techniques.

2. Since its done in the same motion it does not matter if it works or not, the method will still end the fight.

3. The forms are 99% real techniques bearing qualities from all the three sisters, they are 1% qi-disruption method. So if you think its complete BS so what? Look at many other forms and see if you can find such a good quality to B.S ratio of 99/1

regards,
Gary

Ps: Now lets get back on topic, respond to me via PM if you like, or start a new thread, or resurect an old one......

[RAF]

GLW:

King of Masks

Great film, makes your point.

Later.

[josh_f]

Gazza99,
First off I'm hardly new to this forum, I posted quite a bit over the years. You may still be able to find some of the posts I made regarding use of the Dantien and the differences between internal and external arts. Unfortunately after an eighteen-month hiatus my account was deleted, and therefore I've created a new account. Suggesting I search for the topic because it has come up before, in a topic that appears every four months like clockwork for last seven years. (Yes, I started posting in this forum before kungfu magazine bought it.) is pretty funny.
Regarding being off topic:
The quote was from a link in the first post of this thread. I would think that would make discussions regarding it on-topic.
Regarding the quote, I don't know what you mean by pretend to quote I cut and pasted that text as is from http://www.taijiworld.com/ . The question marks are unintended **** up on my part. If you read the original as I suggested in my original post. It would have been clear that the ?'s are the What editorial meaning did you draw from ' attacker?s'. Still I apologize to Earle for any misunderstanding caused by said character substitution.

[josh_f]

GLW,
I don't blame the Yang's for omitting the fact that Yang Lu-chan was an indentured servant. Although I did always like the story of why he was given his freedom. I should point out that although I've heard this from several sources this a Chenjigan story, and probable not true. The story goes that when Yang's master got older he becamed worried that he would die and Yang Lu Chan would be left alone with his wife and daughters. He therefore gave Yang Lu-chan. his freedom and sent him off to Beijing.
The only problem I really have with this official biography is that it makes it seem as though he left Chenjigan and became Yang "the invincible". When in fact his first trip out he lost a couple of fights and decided to return to chen village where he trained for a several more years. He also returned to Chenjiago some time after he established himself in Beijing although I'm unsure if this was a social trip or training trip.
I wanted to write something regarding your list of core taiji elements (which I think are really core neijia elements), but perhaps I'll just create a new topic so as not to offend anyone.;)
--josh

[gazza99]

Ok, sorry man, I didnt see the link to that arcticle in the first post! I also didnt see Dre tie it in, but nonetheless sorry for the off topic comment, what I meant by *pretending* to *quote* was simply the question mark insertion which definately makes ERle seem uncertain, and there renders it not an actual quote.
I have been here at least a year, and dont remember your name? Did you have another nick?

regards,
Gary

[dre_doggX]

No I dont think Iam barking up the wrong tree, this is a discussion board, I havent decided in my mind completely wether the conculsion by Elre my be half-true or false, but I didnt know, so I thought that if I couldnt figure it out maybe you guys could tell me your opinons after looking at the object and tell me from your view, after all we all cant see the same thing from the same angle, but what we all see IS REAL just the same, wether it is true or false, will, Iam not sure thats why I wanted people to go to www.taijiworld.com look at reflex violence book, and just his stuff and tell what you think, because I am not completely sure and I believe your educated opinons will help me alot.


thank you.

[gazza99]

You dont seem to be overly intelligent, or you are simply very young, your not getting my point. Even the chinese dont agree on whats the most original form, they distort their own history, its a useless point. Just train for god sakes, you dont have to just do Erles stuff, look at everything you can and decide what you like best and falls inline most with the PRINCIPLES.... since you obcviously need repitition let me re-post my comments, you didnt really address the points of my comments (you only validated my point about you wondering if Erles form was the most original, which is an endless arguement) , just think about it for awhile, and take other peoples advice, we are all basically saying the same thing.

... Discussions of "whats the original taiji" is simply circular: myth, on top of exageration, on top of time and distorted history. Mr. DreDog simply didnt ask his question the right way, or for some reason is seeking validation that Erles old yang form is the best and the most original...

Dre: Youre barking up the wrong tree, you should be addressing principles, not history for answers. If you like what your doing great, I like Erles old yang, so I do it! The best comparison is if someone is proficient in both chen and Yang styles that can compare the different methods, postures, jin expressions and cultivation..etc.. Look over GLW's post, things that should transcend taiji styles is what we can focus on here, and if something differs, why? why? and why

[Stacey]

hate to make blanket statements but

tai chi is tai chi


The public forms are different and people that don't know better conjure up all sorts of weird applications based on their shallow knowlege of it, regardless of years or masters they have trained with.

The "advanced" sets are chen style all the way, archaic, less flowy and all about fighting and working the hell out of your legs.

Yang is chen....for rich people.

Its like Tae Bo if thai bo's advanced levels were muay thai. I don't really care where people put their hand and what mid level teacher proclaim that their single whip creates more chi flow. Its all a means to a beggining.



as for chen style for being internal. This is one of the stupidest thing's I've ever heard. Yang tai chi is like a trickling fountain, advanced yang or chen (they merge, I promise) is like a fire hose.

I think Erle Montigue, with all due respect has been giving answeres to things he doesn't know, then after a while believes himself and then writes it down.

[Shadow Dragon]

Hate to do so, but to a degree I have to agree with stacey.


Good Yang Tai Chi and good Chen Tai Chi should look and feel the same.

Cheers.

[taijiquan_student]

Do you even practice taijiquan, Stacey?

You're joking about Yang style's inferiority, right?

[josh_f]

Gaza99,
I'm having problems with the new character limit on posts. Normally I write my posts in open office and then cut and paste it into the forum. The character limit seems to be screwing up my posts. The sentence regarding those blasted ?'s should have read: "If you read the original as I suggested in my original post. It would have been clear that the ?'s are the forum software substituting <?> for <'>. Regarding my old account it was always josh_f, but I've been taking a break from posting here for 18 months, which means none of my posts show up in the archive. Which is too bad as I spent a lot of time on couple of page long explainations on the mechanics of the dantien. I'd expect Fu-pow would remember me as would some of the other old timers-- not that matters. Let's forget this misunderstanding. I'll drop chi disruption thread. There will be plenty of future topics on which we can disagree;) .

josh

[GLW]

Josh,

the version you present is an oversimplification.

Being an indentured servant to a good master was not that bad of a deal. The Chen family definitely treated their servants well by all accounts. There are records indicating that they taught exercises based upon their family art...but not martial in flavor - to their servants to promote health. After all, a healthy and happy servant serve you better.

This aspect of Chen life may have lead Yang to begin the process of softening his art.

Also, if a master was kind, it would not be uncommon for them to allow a servant to go visit their mother or something...so this is not too far off either.

At the time, fear of a dalliance between Yang Luchan and the wife was not really the issue. It was actually more one of proprieties. A widow did NOT have ANY male servants. It simply was improper.

The option would be to transfer the debt to another family member or forgive it. Then elder Chen seems to have chosen to forgive the debt...not that uncommon either.

Yang was also set up working with an herbal shop. Some try to imply that he knew Chinese Medicine. This is not really the case. As a poor person and as a servant, he would NOT have been able to read so prescriptions would have been out of his realm. Since his grandsone (Yang Chengfu) was known to be illiterate, it is safe to say that YLC and his sons were as well. Being able to read and write...in a Chinese family, once learned, this knowledge is prized and passed down to the sons.

YLC was more of a worker...measuring amounts, talking with customers, delivering herbs, preparing herbs...grinding and such. He did this for a time until moving on. Not a bad deal to get started and then build up money and reputation.

The information I had was that the herb shop was owned by the chen family so returning to train and keeping contact with your Kung Fu brothers, uncles, etc... is also in keeping with tradition.

So, it is really not that unlikely...it just requires a person to know a bit about how life worked then and the choronology of events.

Of course the Yang family would prefer if everyone thought that YLC went to Chenjiagou and became a servant so he could learn...it makes the family feel better.

From a western point of view...an accurate story is better...and rags to riches is not a bad thing either.

[Walter Joyce]

dre dogg x
You may not be interested, but I emailed you offering to send you an electronic copy from the Journal of chinese studies that addresses this topic specifically and generally. Feel free to send me your email address if you are truly interested in an objective take on the issue.

[Stacey]

Yang isn't inferior. I do Yang. Yang is only different on the exterior.


Just as a beggining muay thai student and thai bo both get the same muscular workout, one is training to fight, one is training to health.

Yang style has the public set that is different, he can play with that, its for health.

"Yang' styles indoor sets are the same as indoor Chen sets because they are tai chi.

[dre_doggX]

IAM talking about Yang Lu Chan form, and to really understand where Iam coming from you should read Reflex Violence, now what was said earlier by Gazza99, Your saying it doesnt matter and I should just pratice I feel that, and I do. but at the same time I dont think is stupid, to know about the style or art I pratice, not saying that it is nesscary superior or inferior that all depends on what you want.


To Stacy I get most of what your both styles have the same core.

[dre_doggX]

I didnt get it, what email you sent it to.

you can send it to dre_doggx@hotmail.com and it should work

[taijiquan_student]

Stacey--who's indoor forms are you talking about. There are many different ones. Hell, my Yang style is supposed to be the indoor "michuan" (secret transmission) style that was only taught to family members until Yang Jianhou, but I doubt it's what you're talking about. By the way, the michuan looks really different from the little bit of Chen I've seen.

[gazza99]

ReL "I'll drop chi disruption thread. There will be plenty of future topics on which we can disagree ."

Sounds good Josh! I look forward to good productive disagreements in the future!!!!

best regards,



Gary R.

[TenTigers]

as the topic of this thread was a comparison between Yang and Chen...um is this gonna happen or what?
I suggest that since everyone is exhausted from slinging mud at each other, why don't you do this comparison. I, for one would be very interested in this. I am also interested in how Old Yang differs from Yang Cheng-Fu style. Where are the jumps, and faster moves occurring in the form?
I was looking at Yang Jwing-Ming's book, and was surprised that the only place the 'Ha' sound was emitted was at the "turn and strike with the heel" movements. Anyone else have any thoughts on this?