Great Void Boxing, it's in the same family as the other taiji styles, resembles chen style to a degree.Originally Posted by Hendrik
It's a vexed question in a way, as ZZ without tuishou does not lead to even level two of your list. The training is a holistic thing, except that, once one understands the circuits in ZZ, one expresses them more efficiently in tuishou, because they don't exist properly without someone else to give them context. At that point tuishou is the way and measure, until one can apply them without the limitations of tuishou, at which point they are in their true context, a martial one.Which level or the 4 level have you and the best person you have seen attain in ZZ?
I have seen people at times at the highest level, but the more equal the practitioners, the more it becomes clear that perfection is a false idea.
To do this, one is introducing a false influence, and thus is resisting to make something to yield to, or follow, or what have you. Without tuishou, without others, ZZ does not lead to martial knowledge. And tuishou ultimately replaces ZZ as the ideal way to train body mechanics in relation to others, i.e. martial.ZZ is a platform for one to train and experiments one's body mechanics, mind, Qi, awareness, intent, momentum. it is not a posture.
Thus, I have heard, in level 2 of ZZ one is doing Tuishou with the air.
This is where trying to disassociate ZZ from Taoism fails, it is Taoist at its heart. Big=less good, small=more good, nothing=ideal are arbitrary judgments. Before able to bridge, big is better than small. The relation falls apart. Big, small, and without motion are simply important things at times, but which is correct at the time depends on the situation.because at that point the body has already attain the "one feather not landing state" . unless one has this attainment, one will not be able to know what is the advance level stuffs---- of small move is better then large move, no move is better then small move.
It was read, but context is important. You relate it to fighting in one comment, and disassociate it in the next. Since the entire discussion is regarding fighting, it's best to stick with the related definition. As I said, they are holistic, if one uses ZZ for martial training, then its impact is definable, but YKW is correct, it cannot train all things, so that training ZZ alone, to whatever level, is a dead end if one is intending to use it for martial training.obviously it was not read.
IAs already stated, they did not do ZZ alone, because ZZ alone could not give them the kungfu needed.n fact, the levels of ZZ is related deeply with those people of 1930 and before who I mention. I got my information on the level from some one who study with these people.
They are major foundations of Taoism, and certainly some things are not debatable, but consistent in them. Labelling, x=good, y=bad, is consistently considered a waste of time. Non-acceptance of circumstances is considered a waste of time and energy. Lots of clear agreement. Since ZZ is a Taoist practice, they are highly relevant. Thus my comment about Zhuangzi's view on human pride in accomplishments, the greatest ZZ practitioner will never yield like a willow in wind, so being proud of good human yielding, or scowling at lesser ZZ, is laughable.Ok. for me, these are up to everyone's interpretation text. I wouldnt get into this because everyone's imagination is valid by themself.
It's a Taoist practice, there really is no getting away from that fact. It can be useful, imo, but it is only what it is.I am into traditional Chinese martial art existing practice and process only.
Reply With Quote