|
Healthy Living...
|
||||||||||||
From: David Poore
more internal definitions
Imagine someone pushes against your outstretched arm. The goal is to
channel the incoming force through your body, into the ground. To do this,
you must arrange your posture in such a way that this energy transfer can
travel through a series of joints. If an angle along this force vector
is somehow too acute, or in a 'bad' position, the force will be diverted
away from the ground and your center, and you will be unbalanced, and unable
to use the peng strength. If, however, your posture is arranged in such
a way that the force can go into the ground, then suddenly you have something
very powerful to work with.
Consider that if someone pushes your hand, that force must go through many joints to get to the ground: wrist, elbow, shoulder, from shoulder to upper spine, from there to the lower spine, and from there through the hips, to the knees, ankles, and finally to the ground. This is obviously very complicated. However, it can be done, and it can be taught rather easily by a competent teacher.
Here is an experiment.* Get a partner. Take a wide, comfortable stance.
Have your partner give you a VERY gentle push on your hips on either
your left or right side. You want them to push more or less parallel to
the ground, very gently with both hands against the side of your hip.
They'll be pushing along the long axis of your stance. Be very relaxed
and try to feel the force of the push in the bottom of the foot opposite
the side they're pushing against. When you can feel this 'line', from the
source of the very gentle push to the bottom of the foot, ask your partner
to slowly, gradually, increase the force of their push. Once you have established
this line, you should be able to relax, sink, and allow the increasingly
strong push to be neutralized into the ground, through your opposite foot.
If you truely have this line established, you should be able to: 1) Take
their full push 2) Slowly and without the use of brute strength, you should
be able to follow the line back towards them and push them away from you
and 3) They can let go without warning, and you will not lose your stability.
This is a simple, basic method that illustrates the principle, and begins training peng. Consider that the only linkage being made here, is through the waist, and using a stance that is very friendly to the pushee. But this illustrates the principle, and is the basis for training to have this quality in every posture you take. This is what allows you to neutralize force, and emit force in the manner Terry described earlier. And I also believe this is the basis for whole body power, or internal strength.
*[At the risk of making you believe we are already an inbred group,
I must give credit where it is due. The exercise I mention here is one
that Mike Sigman uses as a very basic introduction to teach a person to
understand Peng. I encourage anyone who has the opportunity to attend his
class to do so. He's an advanced practitioner and a good teacher.]
From: George Hawrysch
Subject: Re: more internal definitions (long)
To my mind, this is an instance where "real" (tm) internal methods would
come in handy. In this example, I would suggest training to enable
the bones at the joint interfaces to move apart and back together again
on demand. That way, instead of relying on a passive structural configuration
to deal with the incoming stuff, the pushee can compress or expand *each
joint* in the series leading to the floor, individually or in groups.
Joints can be spring-loaded for later release back at the pusher, can dissipate
some of the force laterally before it gets to the ground, or just allow
the force to transit through them that much more cleanly.
responding to George Hawrysch, above>
I suspect that the result of a "more than a modest amount of push "
unbalancing the person is largely due to either the receiver not adequately
maintaining the relaxed and integrated body structure (e.g., not relaxed
enough, not as well aligned as originally thought, etc.) and the pusher
subtlely manipulating the push to unbalance the person. If you haven't
had the body training, that's what'll happen. At least that's how
I know it. Boy, do I know it.
Earlier you mention how mechanical alignment is absolutely
responding to Terry Chan, above>
Never one to let a good argument get by [ :^) ], I'd like to interject
a couple of comments to the fascia/joint crowd. When you stretch
your arms (or whole body, for that matter) you feel a tensile resistance.
In internal martial arts, this tensile "feeling" augments the core strengths
of the internal arts. What you have to realize is that although the
handy word "fascia" covers that whole-body connectedness, there is much
more than just fascia involved. Muscle tissue, skin, tendons, etc.,
are all part of this "feeling" which is often loosely termed "fascia."
In recoordinating the musculature (coordinative sets) you begin to use
the interconnected muscles as larger "sets" which tend to contract... sort
of like the fascia would if it could... but it's not the fascia doing the
contracting.
From: David Poore poore@dirac.scri.fsu.edu>
It's interesting how relatively slight changes in posture (tail bone
over or under tucked, chin not tucked right, weight too far forward or
back, etc.) changes the stance from "solid" to "spongy". It's perhaps most
noticeable to the pusher, since you really feel like you're pushing the
ground when the stance is right. For the pushee, you have to be honest
with yourself and sense when to admit to resisting with muscle rather than
the proper use of muscle to simply align the stance.
It was surprising (to me) just how "stiff" a wardoff is to a push, when
held right. And pushed right; you can't, of course, support direct down
forces like a child swinging on your arms:).
A good test we did was to carry on a conversation while being pushed.
The pushee should have no chest or breathing tension, so should be able
to chat easily. If the posture sags over time, then you're using muscle
to resist. In some ways, It kind of feels like "surfing" the pusher's energy
into the ground.
A circle can be thought of as a closed figure composed of an infinite
number of points. A sphere's surface can be thought of as the end
of an infinite series of lines originating from the center... peng jing
is similar to *one* of these lines from the center to the surface.
However you can activate any line from the center, depending on where you
need it (for ward-off or for power discharge). Fa-jing will always
happen along a peng path.
< Peter Lim replies and Mike elaborates> > Apparently we are talking
two different things yet the same thing again. > Yuan jing is also known
as luo xuan jing. It is the point where peng jing > originates, the center
of the top as it were. All jing originates from the > centre which is located
at the tan tien. Thats why we have the phrase, > 'chi zuan tan tien'. :-)
> True, that is the normal perspective. My analogy was not perfect,
but let's use it for a moment. If the tan tien is the center of the
sphere, then we must allocate the path directly from the center to the
ground in order to access the ground's supportive strength (without the
ground, peng jing is lost; local minor jings I'm disregarding). So,
even though the classical Chinese view holds the origin as the tan tien,
lifting a practitioner from the ground will take away his power.
Incidentally, in the classical view, peng is said to originate from
the ming men. Again, though, without the ground, there is no peng.
My analogy was imperfect; let me give another (also imperfect) view.
> Fa-jing is to exert the force along this path.
> There are many ways to add more force to it, such as twisting the
> punch, closing/opening, pile stacking etc. >
> explain the role of tan tien in fa peng jing??
>From a western view, though, the peng path goes from ground to point-of-contact.
Not all jing release require or accomodate the bounce aspect, but all use
the peng path. I prefer to view the peng path as from ground to hand;
it's easier for me to monitor. Some Chinese view it the same way.
It is the path along which the fa-jing is issued, but it remains constant
before and during the issue. It may be broken immediately after issue,
but is quickly reformed.
Peng is considered solid in one direction only, void in all others.
If I push against the peng in someone's forearm, it should be solid, but
I should be able to move the arm easily up, down, or sideways... if I can't,
then the person is using muscle. Likewise, when I push, even though
it feels solid, the person should be able to wiggle his, knees, hips, torso,
etc.
Most people (statistically) who have an idea of the peng strength, ruin
it by the addition of muscular tension. Stay relaxed.
My definitions are simplistic and not necessarily correct by precise
definition. However, they do match up with some Chinese writings
(so I'm not too far off, by definition) and they help demystify (which
is what my main goal is).
Peng is the conveyance of the grond-force vector through the scaffold
which is our skeleton. It is the main power of an opening (expanding)
move.
Closing is normally done along pretty much the same path (shortest path
from target to ground), but it involves using the entire outer musculature
as a unit which contracts (heavy attention on torso and thoracic musculature).
It takes a lot of practice to truly re-coordinate the body to work in
this manner; academic understanding is not even close to the truth.
If the body is a series of scaffoldings which need to support some
(1). Place the scaffolding roughly between the object and the
ground. In this case the supporting "ground force" will flow directly through
the "scaffolding" to the ground. When you push on someones forearm
and they know how to use relaxed peng, this is the case. A native
porter carrying a load is another good example of this.
(2). If the object is lower than the top of the scaffolding, you
might put an appendage downward from the top of the scaffolding to support
the object. If you place the appendage just right, you can can direct
the incoming force "across the empty air" directly into the supporting
base of the scaffolding.
That 2nd analogy isn't too good, but the idea is to show you the two
main ways that the peng force can be manipulated.
If you hold one end of a staff, say with your right hand near the end
and
Now have a friend push moderately on the other end of the staff, directly
into your waist. You'll find that it is very easy to relax and ground
his push into your back foot. It's very easy to train into the use
of peng with this example.... once you understand the example you can train
a similar push into your arm quite easily. You can alos learn to
push outward from the ground,, i.e., your friend will feel the ground-force
in your push (you have "brought qi" to the end of the staff).
Weapons can be excellent ways to train in your understanding and use
of the internal body mechanics.
But to get to function.... those of you who understand the idea and
general how-to's of using peng strength; stop everything and for the next
2 -3 months practice opening doors by pushing with peng that is so pure
you use almost no muscular effort. If you know the closing side,
practice it also. That's all you should do.
On Thu, 27 Oct 1994, David Zhu wrote:
Just to add my $0.02 worth on 'bu tiu bu ting'. Translated it means
'no letting go, no resistance' but it doesn't get the full meaning across.
'bu ting' means no hard resistance. In peng, think of it like pushing against
a person's arm with a balloon in between, 'bu tiu bu ting' is not to be
taken in a passive sense (at least this is the way it was put to me) but
in that it will re-direct your opponent's force and in doing so find an
openning to attack, not letting go means always maintain contact, not resisting
with hardness but with roundness yeilding and redirecting the force and
flowing into opennings like water. My English expression is not good enough
describe it exactly the way I want to but I hope the above is not too confusing.
One translation I found useful was "don't lose, don't oppose"
- the idea
I think alot of confusion arises when Mike is talking about the core
of neijia wushu being the Peng Jing and people immediately think of "Ward
off". In essense they are really the same I guess. But ward
off is a motion, and peng is the essense which the motion of ward-off is
based upon. Without the peng (Tan/Ren), the motion of warding off
something would be entirely a muscular effort. Besides, I think translating
Peng to "ward-off" may be simplifying things a bit too much anyway.
Hmm..what else. Oh the cultivation. Well, I was told that
the quickest way to built up neijing is to do all sorts of standing posts.
In my school, on top of all the standing meditations there's also the Wu
square form. We can take, say, the first half of the brush-knee-and-push
and perform it to the point where everything is "open", i.e. everyting
is stretched to the limit, and then hold it here for a period of time.
Another example would be the Wu's single whip (which is sort of a single
whip in horse stance rather than bow stance). Here one hand is in
a beak pointing down, therefore stretching the upper side of the entire
arm; the other hand is in a "sitting" palm, therefore stretching the underside
of the entire arm. Now add the opening of the back you get a stretched
connection from tip of one hand to the top of the other hand. We hold it
there for a while then switch hands. Things like this.
I realize that "stretching" is probably a bad word to use for it implies
muscular effort. Well, it's hard to describe anyway. I get
all sorts of weird sensations along the "path" of the connection, which
I never get when I just "stretch". Now, all I have to do is just
"think" of the connection and a milder version of the same sensation will
return. It's kinda fun actually.
On Wed, 2 Nov 1994 XLTran@UH.EDU wrote: First question: if I hypothesize
that each basic posture of TCC has a peng strength application or training
purpose (let's forget about MA application), would you condone my hypothesis.
The hypothesis is basically correct, but will lead to errors if you
leave it too simplistic....Shooting the arrow is not that big of a deal;
if you "store" (using back, hip, knee, etc.) *along* the optimal peng path
to your target, the release is like launching an arrow... storing has the
"potential energy" feeling that drawing a bow does.
<....>
Ward-Off is usually shown to be in the arms (with Peng strength), however
you can bring peng to any *one* place at a time and still call it ward-off.
For instance, if you get through to my chest while pushing-hands, I'll
probably bring the peng strength immediately there and either bounce you
away or use it as a basis for turning and neutralizing your push.
In case I *do* use peng as the basis for turning and neutralizing your
push, it would be a rollback (see, rollback doesn't necessarily have to
be in the hands or arms, either).
Push is usually to the palms, as you said, but "Press" or "squeeze"
can be to the palm backed by the other hand, as can the wrist, the elbow,
or the shoulder.
Split refers to two opposing forces. For instance, if you apply
split to someone's elbow using "Close", the forces to break his elbow are
going in two separate directions. However, you can also split with
pure opening, such as when you have a leg behind him and you "open" upward
with your arm throwing him over your leg. Etc.
Elbow is peng jing through the elbow. What you're calling "shoulder"
is "Kao" and is more properly thought of as maybe "bump". It can
be applied not only with the shoulder, but with the hips, ribs, shoulder-blade,
etc., etc.
The continuous energy of
Taijiquan doesn't mean that movements are smooth, and constantly flowing
seemlessly from one technique to the next. It means that your body structure
is such that when energy comes in, it is transmitted to the ground smoothly,
and is then bounced back without interruption - if someone puts 10 pounds
of force on you, they feel 10 pounds back. If they put 100 pounds of force
on you, then they feel exactly 100 pounds back. You are not resisting with
100 pounds of force, but lining up your body so that all their force is
returned to them. Furthermore, the slow training of Taijiquan is not to
so much to train fluidity of motion, as it is to train you to maintain
this quality of your structure at all times, throughout all movements -
WITHOUT USING MUSCULAR TENSION TO MAINTAIN THE STRUCTURE.
<....>
On Mon, 14 Nov 1994, Stephen Chan wrote:
> How do folks account for this
variability ?
You'll notice also, that what happens if you get too low is that you
have great difficulty in establishing, maintaining, and manipulating the
peng strength... hence "no qi" will be said of a stance too low.
Relaxed, in a rough sense, doesn't mean that no muscle is used... one
of the marks of high-level Taiji players is extremely strong legs.
If the legs and lower joints are strong, the upper body can stay very relaxed
and need only be a 'transmitter.'
<....>
<....>
<....>
On Wed, 23 Nov 1994, Allen wrote:
Since the wrist is pretty much the weak link in this "chain", strengthening
the wrist and arms to transmit heavy-duty peng-jing and to strengthen the
"connection" (what some people crudely refer to as "fascia"), is very important.
Chet Braun:
As for the name of this exercise, I just called it "pole-shaking" because
that's what seemed to be used in previous mails. My teacher never
gives mush of a name to anything. (I think he referred to this as
"learn stick")
You can do short power and long power whichever way you train your muscles.
The real "correct" feeling comes from someone who does a lot of standing,
though. Both ways involve using peng jing, in the internal arts.
The only difference is the amount of time over which the projected push
lasts.
For instance, a long-jing tends to push you away... it's really a push
using peng jing. Short power, by doing the same push over a shorter
time interval can cause injury because of it's sharpness.
....now keeping that correct alignment, rest a 2-pound bag of sand on
the top of the head and let it rest on the top of this relaxed support.
That's very basic peng.
When you do "Brush Knee and Twist Step", stop, let your weight sink
down into the back leg, and have a classmate push with 2 pounds into the
palm of your forward hand. See if you can form the same relaxed path
again, from your hand to your back to the ground... no effort. (Keep
the shoulder very slightly forward and relaxed; relax the lower back so
that it bows incrementally outward). That's very basic peng, also.
The correct hand position for the "Brush Knee and Twist Step" is that position
which allows the propagation of this ground support with the least muscular
effort.
The Core List: Technique versus Skill
>From Wu Style Taijquan (discussing Wang PeiSheng): "His own training
ranged from pilestance-keeping ( a form of traditional Chinese isometric
training system) to the solo practice of verious forms of martial arts
of Taiji school, the quan (barehand), the sword, the broad sword and the
staff, with deep con centration on letting every movement be directed by
a tranquil mind in accordance with Taijiquan principles." page 2,
first edition 1983
To me, it is very interesting to pay attention to correct physical development
in the internal arts, and to have this continued growth of the odd aspects
of qi and qigongs. However, the physical practice can be done, and
skills gained, without having to pay attention to the etheric qi.
In the quotation above, the practice of pilestance keeping is referred
to as an isometric training practice. This is true.
Not only pilestance will do this (if done correctly), but also stopping
and holding postures in the taiji form will do it, doing a form very slow
will contribute to it, Xingyi's san-ti stance the same, and Bagua's circle-walking
is also the same thing (it 's just stances done while moving and training
the legs). All of these practices are said to "develop the qi."
The trick is to do them in the correct way...
All of the practices will build up the body frame-unity that is one
of the hallmarks of the internal martial systems. Incidentally, because
of the inseparable definition of Qi and this form of strength, these trainings
should be understood as developing this kind of strength, even when a teacher
says that stancework "develops qi."
When done correctly, stancework develops both peng and unit-body connection...
> Peter suggested using Peng (capital P) to describe a body-power (he
calls > it Jing), and peng (small P) to describe a technique (one of the
8 "jings" by others) based primariy on Peng... Jing the body power and
jing the technique.
This could get tricky, but let me give it a try.
Peng is always there, except for the momentary break at discharge.
When you see the posture "Wardoff" with the forearm held out in front,
you have to realize that that is only 1 posture that represents peng...
there are many others. In a sense, that forearm posture and any of
the other myriad ways of employing peng.. represent peng.
Ji and An are pure peng strength... and hence are techniques which employ
peng strength.
Lu and Tsai (Cai) tend to employ both closing and peng.
Lieh ("split") can be pure peng, pure "closing," or hybridized... it
depends on the application which you are using.
Jou and Kao are usually peng applications, but in sophisticated usages,
closing will enter.
For clarity's sake, I don't mind differentiating the jing and a posture,
but technically peng is in all postures. Confusing, eh? :^)
> I would contend based on my observation that relaxed power is not
really relaxed it is instead using muscle groups other than the arm muscles
to generate the energy in the strike and involving the mass of the truck
and legs in motion rather than just the arm and shoulder.
The idea of "sung" was never that the body was almost limp, since the
supporting structure was there. Technically, the body is relaxed
bu it should have peng strength as the core and a *very slight* stretched
connection throughout the body to maintain and train unity.
When this frame with "sheath" (I'm being simplistic, so there are some
implied errors) is trained (takes a while), the frame of the body itself
exhibits some rebound properties (using the ground as base). It is
the idea of the "frame" and its joints providing rebound (while the rest
of the body is relatively relaxed) which gives rise to the idea that strength
comes from the joints and sinews rather than the muscle.
To add to the cleverness, body momentum, inertia, etc., and other physical
addenda add to any strikes. There are even some very clever additions
which add even more to the power delivered. Without the core of peng
strength, thoough, it will just be external training.
That's just the power.... the techniques to use the power differ with
the style (Taiji, Xingyi, Bagua, I-Chuan, Liu He Ba Fa, etc.). Also,
because of training variations, the different styles will build these strength
characteristics with different emphases. It's a big topic, really.
If you're letting someone test your peng strength, you often let him
push against your forearm while you stand in a very relaxed, sunken state.
If you're doing it well, in this example, let's say that you're bringing
his push from your forearm to your back to the ground, very relaxedly.
Without changing posture, let your partner take away his hand and push
against your chest... you will have to make your peng path go from the
chest wall through to your lower back and on down to your sole.
Wherever your partner pushes you can form a ground path (sometimes slight
angular readjustments will be necessary), usually by just mentally forming
the ground path. As your skills get better, this ability gets more
sophisticated and pronounced.
At any rate, though, you have to will where you want the peng path.
To use peng is to imply using the mind, the will, the Yi. It
is a skill that differs from normal movement. The old saying is that
"this form of strength is not intuitive, it must be learned." The
same training and use of strength is required in all of the internal arts,
for the most part, or they are not internal arts.
The wai san ho (3 external harmonies) are something that naturally happens
when you have the body connected, with each motion driven by peng be pused
up *into* the back (different areas, different movements result).
One of the best ways to watch the wai san ho is to do a loose Repulse
On Mon, 19 Dec 1994 XLTran@UH.EDU wrote:
> And why a person with high internal strength doesn't need to rely
on technique? S/he can release or absorb so much power at anyplace on his/her
body that it seems to be no need to be worry about the technique ??
On Mon, 26 Dec 1994 JfWright@aol.com wrote:
On Tue, 27 Dec 1994, Rich Shandross wrote:
> Also, Mike -- are you referring to the vector at the point of impact,
or > the whole series of vectors which comprise the transmission of force
from the tan tien to the striking point (a la Peter's higher levels of
contact management)?
In an earlier post to Eric Hoffman I described how the vector is technically
from the sole of the foot to the hand, although the traditional Chinese
view has it going from the Tan Tien simultaneously to the hand and the
foot.
Also, because of the complexity, it *is* quite often only one vector.
Consider the example of a loosely-bolted scaffolding frame. If you
push down into it at 45 degrees from a top corner toward an opposite bottom
corner, the scaffold may shift slightly in accomodation, but will, for
all practical purposes, propagate the load to ground through only one vector.
When you get involved with Oriental martial arts, the idea of Ki or
Ch'i or Qi (all the same thing) is usually presented as an intangible "force"
that is somehow tied up with the word for "air."
However, many unusual physical displays are described as being done
with Qi, also.
I learned how to do many of the same displays.... accessing what was
really just an unusual physical skill, Qi be damned. :^) When
I would show my command to several *different* teachers (not related in
any way to each other), I would get compliments on my Qi skills and would
be shown further ways to improve on them. So we were talking about
the same thing, but they were calling it Qi and I was thinking of it as
a ground-vector strength (after talking with my friend Bill Chen).
I began to realize that the word "Qi" also contained this set of physical
skills within its definition boundary.
While studying with Liang Bai Ping (a member of the Beijing Chen-style
Research Society... one of Feng's students), I was able to talk often with
him about this definition.. because his command of English is so good (idomatic
level ... he likes puns, too). He sees where many of the misconceptions
have come from, but typically, doesn't want to say anything public.
When my group arranged to bring in Zhang Xue Xin from San Francisco,
I was able to listen to Zhang describe some of the very sophisticated Chen-style
windings in a way which confirmed this interchangeability of Qi and Jing
(as a vector strength). Zhang would track the driving force from
the ground, up the bones and muscles in the exact path that it traveled
(it spirals somewhat), all the while referring to it as Qi.
When I asked Liang why Zhang just didn't refer to it as a jing path,
he just shrugged and said, "Oh, the older generation always refers to that
as Qi.
It has to be understood that even though this physical element is actually
there, there is also an attendant increase in what can at best be referred
to as the "etheric Qi" or "Real Qi." Unfortunately for my engineering
mind, I am convinced that there is something about the etheric Qi that
warrants investigation.... it increases as your skills increase in manipulating
this jing.
In setting up the ground-path you have established the jing. What
you are getting back to is the release of power along the jing path, i.e.,
you are getting involved in power as a function of delta (time).
I am leaving out the delta(time) aspect because we are not necessarily
discussing jing as a power release. the Peng jing is the core path
over which *all* of the things you are talking about (including "listening
jing") are transmitted. Like I said, this may be different
to you. Hard to convey all of this over the net; as I said, I'm willing
to meet face-to-face and have a clinicla discussion which we could convey
back to the group.
My own understanding of "martial qi" is that it's used as a metaphor
for the physical force vector and the mental intention plus body-mind skills
necessary to present & maintain it. And this also differs from
what Mike terms the "etheric qi" which is of questionable martial use (especially
at the basic level -- I don't find it helpful, even in an inspirational
sense, to spend much time talking about zapping people at a distance).
When I was first exposed to Mike's dichotomy of force-vector vs etheric
qi, it fit with my own barely developed understanding of the body mechanics
and "qi flow" sensations I've experienced. At a basic, practical
level, they very much seem to be two things. Yes, at an academic
level it's all "qi", but even Chinese make distinctions about the different
kinds of qi.
It seems to me that the English term "energy" can be used in just as
vague a way as "qi", so it's probably a very accurate translation.
Without getting mired in math, let me see if I can simplify what we're
talking about. In the "core basics" sense, we're trying to represent
jing as an established path which has one end at the ground and the other
end at another part of the body (let's just say hands, but it could be
anywhere that you "will" it). The idea is kept simple because this
core "path" is the basis for many of the other skills which you're hinting
at.
Even "listening jing" is dependent on this path. Without knowing
how to establish and utilize this path, you have not crossed the threshold
into "internal" martial arts.
The Concept of F = Ma in the Internal Martial Arts:
True, Force is related to Mass and how fast that Mass is moving; even
the acceleration of that Mass is important. Often I see attempts
to model the "force" of a martial movement based on this Newtonian concept,
but it is an incomplete idea, particularly in the "internal" martial arts.
The "path" along which the ground-vector travels is probably the most
important "base concept" of the internal martial arts. Manipulating
this path in various ways at various speeds, etc., is the heart of the
"skills" of the internal martial arts. However, this skill which
very purely brings the ground-strength itself into play also changes the
whole concept of "Force" in the "internal" martial arts.
Although other martial arts use a "good stance", etc., in their performance,
they do not specialize in bringing the purest and strongest transmission
of the ground into play at all times. This is why "Kao" can feel
like getting hit by a truck. ;^)
So in the "internal" martial arts, while you still consider Force as
a relationship to Mass and acceleration, you now have to look at the addition
of Forces which are directly related to the ground-strength; in other words,
leverage forces, torsional forces, etc., which are more related to angles,
elasticity, etc., come into the forefront.
So in the "internal" martial arts, a Force will be related to not just
Mass and acceleration factors, but also the purity and stability of the
ground force ("standing" helps), the angles of the body (postures which
are used in the transmission of force), conditioning factors (they are
many, but they generally help in the release of this ground-based strength).
The whole of this type of strength is *far* more sophisticated that
this simplistic overview, but still the core remains the same.
Jonathan Buss writes:
Jonathan Buss:
Mike Sigman:
"Peng" can be viewed as having the relaxed connection between the ground
and any point of contact (or just on your own body if you're working on
your own). What is commonly described as "good posture" is a limited
subset of the variety of postures that people can affect.
If one's is skill is high enough, you can have "Peng" in almost any
posture which would probably be a far cry from what many consider to be
"good posture."
"Peng" allows you to "fa jing" (issuing energy) and to cultivate "ting
jing" (listening energy/skill). If you are familiar with "ting jing,"
you can probably have some sense that there's more to what's going on than
just maintaining "good posture."
Jonathan Buss
If you have an arm extended forward and someone applies a great deal
of strength into it, through your "relaxed connection" you can channel
all the incoming strength into the ground without tensing up or your stance
and posture being substantially altered. This is a simple and stylized
example but it illustrates an important property of Peng.
You should be able to extend your arm and effortlessly accept someone's
full weight with it. Increasing the force on your extended arm should directly
increase the force of the foot (where the root of the peng path meets the
floor) against the floor. If the arrangment of your joints is right then
the full force of the push is distributed along the skeleton from joint
to joint and the only muscular effort involved is that minimally necessary
to hold the jones in the proper position. It ought to be relatively obvious
whether you are doing in right or not (although you can get the posture
more or less right and still weaken it by holding one or more joints stiffly).
If I do it pretty much right in a peng posture then feeling I have is of
the peng path being a stick propping the pusher up, and all the rest of
my body hanging from that stick.
....The single-most significant idea is peng, in the context of internal
martial art. What I have been doing personally, is evaluating things in
this context. More often than not, if I really try to distill things, they
wind up at peng.
Peng is the process of directing some force applied to some part of
your body into the ground. In the simple example of someone pressing on
your arm in a classic ward-off posture, you are converting a horitzonal
force (applied to your arm) into a vertical force (down your load-bearing
leg). Using this scenario as an example, here's how I would break it down:
- Yi (intent) is used to create the path from the point of contact to
the ground.
- The physical requirements are 'standard' neijia postural demands,
and a relaxed body to prevent resisting the push with local
muscle force.
- Once the peng path exists, a 'connection' exists between you and the
pusher. This is the same path that is used to fa-jing along: it is just
the reverse connection, from the ground to the point of contact. This is
also the same path or connection that is used to ting-jing.
1) I assume my ward-off posture
...here's the view of peng that I have been developing (in the course
of my mere 1 1/2 yrs of taijiquan, of which probably only the last 9 months
have been focused on anything much more that choreography:):
My first experience with peng was in a month or so of "Iron
Shirt" chi kung classes. I never got to the iron shirt stuff (decided to
spend my free time on pushing hands instead); basic stances and such geared
to being pushed on without having to "resist" was where we started. The
teacher there asserted that there was "no magic", it was all really just
structure. So from that view, I suppose you could say peng is in posture,
but since posture is not a very enlightening word I don't think you'll
get anywhere that way. You'd have to emphasize "right posture", i.e. posture
that incorporates a peng path, so you're right back to "peng". I don't
know about Terry's idea that high enough skill could put peng into (almost,
he said) any posture; it would seem that many postures we "naturally" use
in daily life have a rather "contaminated" (as in un-refined) strength
to really work--we use too many muscles working at various (and cross)
purposes to really do peng.
The above chi kung classes did nothing with the mind (which
I thought was was strange, since it was the same teacher as for microcosmic
orbit stuff, but maybe I just didn't stay long enough). I've since found
that using "i" to form the peng path is much easier, although I'm not sure
I'm doing anything much different from the chi kung class, in that when
someone pushes on you, you sort of instinctively put your mind at the contact
point. The key in the classes was to relax/sink, letting the lateral push
really push you into the ground. We then played with and learned how subtly
the postural structure can call in various muscles, and the pusher could
easily feel the difference between a good, stiff peng path and one that
incorporated (too much) muscle.
In later form and push hands work, and following this list,
I've come to a sense that peng in every *taijiquan* posture is essential;
without it, the structure is just plain wrong. You have to be relaxed to
find it, and you have to be relaxed to make it dynamic. Hugging trees with
peng is one thing; carrying peng thru the course of roll-back, press and
push is quite another. (I'll let Jonathan post his understanding of relaxed=sung;
perhaps another maillist digest is in order here). Also, without someone
actively pushing on you the "i" requirement is pretty blatant. You still
have to make the point of would-be contact the end of the ground force
vector(sum), and you still have to ground somewhere.
I've found that my posture and structure are simply different
when I have the "i" of peng than when I simply try to do the movements
"right". In a roll-back, without the peng "i" I tended to overextend to
the rear, and when if I remembered to not overextend I tended to tighten
up or simply stall out while moving. With the peng, the feeling is of "riding"
or "drawing" an opponent's force into my root, which kinesthetically keeps
a cleaner path.
I don't get that just any ol' vector sum that routes your
hands to you feet will do. The inner sense I have is that the angles that
the various components meet at is important; it's is not sufficient that
the vectors add up to get you there, you also have to "flow" the "force"
along the path, and the more corners you turn that incorporate muscle the
more polluted your peng is (presumably something to do with how the various
joints are designed; treating them as hinges is way simplistic for understanding
this).
I also have the sense that there are many variations of
peng for a given movement, depending on how the opponent is structured.
For instance, you need to align your peng to the opponent's center to bounce
them away, but you would probably align differently to snap an elbow. Also,
I have the sense that the "shape" (for want of a better word) of the peng
path varies with what you're doing; to uproot and bounce away the peng
"feels" (to me, but then it's all in my "i" anyway, right?) like there's
a bit of an upward direction to the last "segment" of the vector(sum).
I believe that Mike (et al) have emphasized that peng is a "straight line"
from your root to the point of contact, but have also acknowledged (rewording
here) that this is not a mathematical straight line but more of a direct
line. I've not yet come away with a sense of clearly understanding their
words, so I'm hoping for some feedback on my words. I've found that "show
me" doesn't really cover all of learning, since one can flounder forever
and never really see what they're being shown. On the other hand, I'm also
looking forward to the experience of Mike peng-ing me across the room in
Vancouver:).
Mike Sigman writes: about what Terry Chan wrote:
The fine art of fa jing (which I'm practicing but not sure I'm really
doing) is based on the peng path expanding/contracting along it's length.
You do *not* deliberately do a burst of tension like a shot-putter. Rather
you rely on your "i" to sharply (or gently, for a push?) adjust the path
length without messing with it's curves and such (back to the idea of the
path being a straight line). I suppose if I could explain how "i" makes
the path in the first place, that might make sense:}. Expanding along the
path would be opening, while compressing along the path would be closing
(and you can fa jing either way, yes?).
So, taking the Crane's Beak push (in Single Whip) out of Tung's fast
set, one would quickly and lightly flow from the push at the end of Grasping
Peacock's Tail around and up (closing then opening) and end with a fa jing
out the back of the right wrist once you're at the "posture" for that (assuming
I've got the application right).
Concerning listening, you need to minimize the muscle tension along
the path in order to minimize the "noise level" due to your own muscle
activity. With a clean, quiet path you are much more aware of how your
peng is interacting with the opponent. I also get the sense that there
is some body-feeling feedback involved, however, as though you are unconsciously
"trying out" how your structure relates to your opponent. With muscles
working, there seems to be a subtle "playing" of fine motor skills that
gets swamped out. At my currently meager best of being relaxed and "live"
(sung), it's like I can feel a bit of "hunting" (old servo control term)
going on that I think is largely due to a poor focus of attention and "i".
It seems that to a certain extent you still have to know *what* to "i",
which is one thing I think this list *can* do for people.
Tim Cushing writes: peng path, so you're right back to "peng". I don't
know about Terry's idea that high enough skill could put peng into (almost,
he said) any posture; it would seem that many postures we "naturally" use
in daily life have a rather "contaminated" (as in un-refined) strength
to really work--we use too many muscles working at various (and cross)
purposes to really do peng.
>The hallmark of doing it right was to be able to carry on a conversation
in a relaxed manner (no puffing, no chest tension, relaxed breathing, etc.).
You should probably also be able to move your body around freely and
still maintain. Wiggle your hips, legs, bend the knees, bend at the ankles,
etc.
>you the "i" requirement is pretty blatant. You still have to make the
point of would-be contact the end of the ground force vector(sum), and
you still have to ground somewhere.
This is why it is probably much easier as a beginner to practice this
in zhan zhuang (standing), since there is so much 'less' happening physically.
> Jonathan Buss:
> be willing to bet that among people who are *really* good, a significant
amount of peng could be developed even in an apparently bad posture.
Please bear in mind that in chinese terms, peng through bone structure
is just the beginning. Since in the chinese concept, jing is derived from
the muscles and tendons, it is theoretically possible and is sometimes
a goal to use the msuclature alone to transmit peng jing with only the
bones providing the base of the jing to act on. This could provide some
explanation on why peng can sometimes be generated even in 'bad' postures.
(one recalls an earlier post on William CC Chen whose postures broke alot
of rules).
My current belief is that
external stylists also shoot for a
This is exctly right. However, it sounds as if you're saying
that it's all a matter of posture: angles and lines and spatial relations.
(Sorry if I miss your point on this.) While mechanical alignment
is absolutely essential, it's only the beginning of internal work.
If you are correctly set up as you describe *and* are very relaxed, you
will be able to channel incoming forces into the ground -- but only to
a limited degree. More than a modest amount of push, and most people
will be either unbalanced or will lose the relaxation part, tense their
muscles against the force, and end up with mere bracing as opposed to true
grounding. What's more, we want the grounding skill to expand eventually
into dissipating/redirecting/reflecting the incoming force, not be limited
to absorbing it.
From:
Subject: Re: more internal definitions
Well sure, but wasn't David Poore's original point to demonstrate the
ground-strength business in a passive state? This simplified and
contrived situation can help better illustrate what's going on. Of
course, you'll want to be able to dissipate/redirect/reflect the incoming
force.
Hm. I dunno about this George because what you're suggesting
seems to break the unity of the body connection at the points where the
"bones at the joint interfaces move apart and back together again on demand."
Those are the trickiest points to maintain the connection. If I really
stretch, I can imagine how flying your bones at the joints apart can sort
of dissipate incoming energy but it would seem to be particularly vulnerable
to an unexpected level of incoming force because it seems to significantly
dilute the structural strength of the body.
essential and yet it sounds like you propose a way that reduces its
role. I feel that a more logical approach to "internal work" would
be to train the body to dynamically maintain the optimal body structure
in response to external stimuli (oooooo...I love it when I talk dirty).
From: George Hawrysch
Subject: more internal definitions
Yes, *logically* it would indeed seem to be just as you say. All I
can tell you without a demonstration is that the opposite is what actually
happens: connectedness/unity is enhanced when the joints move apart freely.
I distinguish between "loose" joints, where there is above-average range
of movement at a joint due to lengthened tendons/muscles, and "open" joints,
where the joint is relaxed just as in the "loose" case but can also transfer
force through itself while remaining relaxed. For example, I get
dancers and gymnasts in my classes from time to time. These folks
can put a foot behind their neck no problem; their hips are "loose."
But when I put them into a Horse Stance-like posture (knees semi-bent,
anyway) they are shaking and sweating after just five minutes. Why?
Because they are using their leg muscles -- which are very strong -- to
transfer the force of their body weight to the ground. If they let
go of those leg muscles, they will fall down: the other connective tissues
will not transfer the gravitational force. Me, I can hold the posture
for half an hour no problem. I simply align, then "sit" on my skeleton
while relaxing the surrounding muscles. My hip joints are "open"
to passing my body weight (215 lbs) directly through the bone interfaces.
From: "Walter W. Sigman"
Subject: Re: more internal definitions
From: tec@slate.alta.com (Tim Cushing)
Subject: Re: more internal definitions (long)
> Here is an experiment.* Get a partner. Take a wide, > comfortable
stance. Have your partner give you a VERY > gentle push on your hips on
either your left or right > side.... > > *[...one that Mike Sigman uses
as a very basic > introduction to teach a person to understand Peng....]
> I found it very instructive to take this to the next couple levels of
pushing simultaneously on hip and shoulder, and pushing lateral-to-down
on both arms (wardoff). The "tree hugging" stance, with both arms in front
and the fingers slightly separate and the head just right ("tuck the chin").
Not too low, and not narrow, and be sure to point the feet right ("pigeon
toed" he said, and it felt, but it looks just straight ahead).
From: "Walter W. Sigman"
Subject: Re: Internal Strength
Picture again the sphere resting on the ground. Now make all
the lines reaching the surface of the shpere originate from the point where
the sphere is in contact with the ground. Now all of the lines radiate
from the ground and even if the ball is rolling there will always be access
to the ground from any point on the sphere's surface.... the taiji sphere.
That's correct.
>
That's correct.
That's correct. Ft = F1 + F2 + F3 + ....Fn In other words,
adding forces on top of the already strong peng, which is actually a vector
force.
> The main problem is that the Chinese view has the waist driving momentum
down the peng path to the rooted foot.... in order to increase the total
force through rebound. Since the waist (center, tan tien, whatever)
initiates the motion, the qi is said to go from the tan tien to foot and
back up to hand/point-of-contact.
> I think it may be a question of timing. At what point does the peng
> jing begin? Does the peng jing start when the mind decides to use
it > or when the rooted foot is ready? I may be *rooted*, but I'm
ready to > neutralize. At this point if I want to peng, the ground-force-vector
> needs to expand in two directions: toward the root and toward the
> point of contact. The first thing I do is *drop* some energy from
the > tan tien and establish the *ground*. The rest is the same.
This also > has the effect of internally *bouncing* energy (from
the tan tien) > off the ground, and through the *peng path*. From my
experience this > helps to *smooth* out the release of energy as well
(although I don't > know why). Try it and let me know what you think. >
Your peng strength should be present at all times, always forming the framework
of every move and posture. Opening and Closing are powered through
the use of peng and the way that you direct it... you direct it with the
mind and with the waist.
From: "Walter W. Sigman" msigman@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Peng in Xingyi
Please note that opening and closing have a close relation with the
expansion and contraction of the Tan Tien which is by the way the reason
why we do reverse breathing and why it it more effective than normal breathing.
The Tan Tien is the origin within the body of the root and power.
> My question, then, is do you *really* mean *straight line* root-to-contact
peng vectors independent of a through-the-body path (curvy vector)?
This is where the use of analogies comes back to haunt! :^)
object, we can do it in 2 general ways.
From: "Walter W. Sigman" msigman@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Question about Tai Chi Weapons
your left hand out a couple of feet toward the middle; left foot is
forward, staff is horizontal. Let the right hand rest against you
just below the ribs on the fight side.
From: "Walter W. Sigman"
Subject: Re: Getting Good at T'ai Chi Ch'uan
From: "Walter W. Sigman"
Subject: Re: Peng jing question?
> One of the main principle of Taichi is "bu diu and bu ding" (don't
loose > the contact, and don't block with strength). The Peng Jing
seems to > violate the second one. My understanding of Peng Jing
is you use it only > monentarily to make the contact when a attack comes
too quickly before you can move your feet or body or both. Any comment
on that?
I think that you could consider peng as the concealed strength (as
it says in the classics)... the one which is always there. To an
incoming force, it will "ward off", but you're right... to manifest it
aggressively is wrong.
From: Lim Tian Tek
Subject: Re: Peng jing question?
From: "Rob Morton"
Subject: Re: Peng jing question?
being that these are two boundary conditions we don't want to go over.
Eg when being pushed we shouldn't let the opponent take control of
our motion by acting like wet rags and stepping back in an uncontrolled
manner, nor, at the other extreme, should we just heave right back.
It's a useful simple idea to get over to beginners. cheers Rab NB When
I say "translation", it was made clear this was one idea "encoded" in the
original.
Subject: Re: Peng Jing?
From: "Walter W. Sigman"
Subject: Re: Yang Family Secret Transmission book
From: Stephen Chan
Subject: Re: Shaolin and Tai Chi
This one of the 2 fundamental
energies of Taijiquan, and it is what Taiji people call "peng".
This yin/yang stuff is totally
misapplied within this context.
Authentic, complete Taiji is both yin and yang already. Taiji power
is not a "soft, whiplike power", which is fast, but not solidly connected
to the ground. It is not like a ball on the end of a chain.
If an accomplished Taiji guy allows you to encounter the peng path directly,
you will feel a very solid and almost immovable connection to the ground.
If they avoid letting you encounter their peng path directly, you will
feel like you're trying to push a basketball into a tub of water; there
is a constant and almost overwhelming force keeping you from pushing in,
but you are unable to find the line of force to oppose it directly.
This last part involves a little trickery, since it keeps you from really
testing the quality of their peng, to see if they need to use tension or
not.
From: "Walter W. Sigman"
Subject: Re: Stances ( was Re: Bajiquan )
> I am told that the body mechanics
of the internal arts are all fairly similar, so that stances and such should
be the same.
Roughly so, Stephen, but if you have a comfortable and relaxed propagation
of the peng strength through open hips, you'll find that you can vary the
stances.... within certain parameters.
One good point that I've heard is that stances "should be round, not
square, and not triangular." This means that the crotch area should
be rounded like an arch. If you're doing too low a stance, the crotch
is flat and will form a square angle with the knees; if you're doing too
high of a stance, the crotch will form a triangle.
From: "Walter W. Sigman"
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and the dreaded Qi
In the sense that peng jing involves deliberately aiming and using
the supportive ground force through the skeletal structure (like using
a rickety, loose scaffold), they say that this force uses the bones...
enough muscle to manipulate and maintain the structure is needed, though.
Because the "scaffold" of the body (the skeleton) does most of the
load bearing, the whole body unit is used to support a load. This
is technically the "opening" force... there is still "closing to be reckoned
with.
Well, obviously, the scaffolding needs the ground or a connection with
the ground at some point. I can also sit on a barstool and do that
trick ... I just direct the incoming push into my bottom and down through
the stool leg(s) to the ground; bear in mind that there are always limitations
of angle and force magnitude (you can't stop a bulldozer).
From: "Walter W. Sigman"
Subject: Re: FaKe's Pole-shaking and Mike's Peng
> Mike, how does Chen FaKe's "300 Pole-shakings a day to develope his
wrist" fit in with your ground vector/Peng/everything-relaxed model?
I am just curious because this pole-shaking stuff seems to be all over
the place in many neijia styles.
Peng and the slight tensile body connection (*not* tense) go from the
ground, through the torso to about mid-back, up and out the arms to the
spear. Storing and releasing along this path (jing starts in the
legs, to waist, to hands), strengthens the connection and the waist.
There are actually anumber of various ways to shake the pole, each concetrating
on developing certain areas.
From: EHOFFMAN@CISVX2.DFCI.HARVARD.EDU
Subject: RE: Pole-shaking ?
>I was wondering if this type of exercise is similar to what I learned
but not by the name "pole-shaking". Can you briefly describe it?
It's hard to describe this stuff, but roughly you're in a basic bow
stance, with the pole held out to the front corner (i.e., if you've got
your right leg forward, the pole is towards the left front corner).
The right hand holds the end of the pole, the left hand is towards the
middle. Draw back (as in Rollback) onto the back leg as you "rollback"
the pole, cirlcing back then up. Then shift forward and really DROP
your weight into the front leg, extending the left hand out. The
power of the pole is basically going downward. Some points they emphasize
are to hold the pole pretty tightly (at least in the beginning) and try
to get the power out to the tip so it shakes (the pole, not you).
Also the hand holding the end of the stick must stay pretty close to the
body. In practice, the "power" part of the move can be done either as an
Opening or Closing.
From: "Walter W. Sigman"
Subject: Re: neijia criteria
From: "Walter W. Sigman"
Subject: Re: notes from a beginner
From: "Walter W. Sigman"
Subject: Core Principles Disc.
From: "Walter W. Sigman"
Subject: Re: Core Principles Disc.
From: "Walter W. Sigman"
Subject: Re: Tendon Question Fighting Observation
The real differentiating factor in the internal arts is gaining sophisticated
skills in the control and use of the peng strength... technically you only
need the muscles to support *maintaining* the peng structure since it is
the structure which does the "work." In that sense, the body is relaxed.
Someone who is really trained in "internal strength" parameters will
exhibit extraordinary power... not limp magic. The fully trained
body can hit with enormous power (over short distances)without local tension.
The whole body unit begins to feel like a heavy boa-constrictor to an outside
observer. The ability to "close" makes the practitioner feel again
like a giant snake contracting with vice-like power.
From: "Walter W. Sigman"
Subject: Re: Core Principles
From: "Walter W. Sigman"
Subject: Re: Core Principles - 6 Harmonies?
Monkey, making sure that you "close" inward as the body comes together
(just before the pivot, step back). If you're doing it right, it
becomes obvious about the shoulder-hip, elbow-knee, wrist-ankle harmonies.
From: "Walter W. Sigman"
Subject: Re: Testing Combat Skills
> Another question based on my ignorance of the peng strength.
If peng is basically structural with minimal tensile to keep the *frame*
in place (if I have been mistaken your internet teaching, please forgive
and forget it), then would working the internal strength to a higher level
be just training for sensitivity and quick alignment?? Or do you
mean working on the so-called add-on and closing powers ??
With the efficiency of peng and closing acquired, you can boost your
power to extraordinary levels with complementary training (add-on). Essentially,
you learn a way of strength which is very strong, yet which puts little
demand on the muscualr system.... then you strengthen it with some very
coever training devices.
That's true.
From: Peter Lim
Subject: Re: Qi Balls and Basics
> How _do_ peng and internal strength relate?
Well, internal strength (nei li) in normal chinese usage refers to
the ability to store, manipulate and express qi. peng is an expression
of qi at work.
From: Peter Lim
Subject: Re: Qi Balls and Basics
> Peter -- please explain what you mean by "refined force", as opposed
to Mike's"force vector". I can see that since force is a vector by
nature, one needn't state the word vector: so what I'd like to know
is, what's refined about it?
The term refined strength could also be used. Force is a vector by
nature but many times it is force without a directed purpose or target.
Targeted efficient force could be a better explanation. Normally there
is some contention between the antagonistic muscles that drive the motion
so a measure of the force is retained in the muscles resulting in tension.
Refined strength is when there is no muscular contention resulting in efficient
transmission of the force generated. But that is a explanation from a western
viewpoint. The chinese have a rather more convoluted and implicit view.
We are talking about the same thing. Manipulating this force
vector is what Peter *should be* referring to (I won't know until I can
get him to hit me whether we are exactly in agreement). For all practical
purposes we are talking about the same thing.
Technically, you're right. However, in real life it's a little
more complicated than that, and I use the simpler example because it's
easier to learn as one complete vector that as a series (the idea of added
vectors is then an easy step).
> On a related topic, since what's happening is opening and closing
at the _joints_, isn't the real force transmission from center of the joints
outward, the two ends receiving the ultimate sum of those forces being
the ground and the victim? And since the ground ain't taking the
energy, the victim does. That is, back to the springy pole and door
frame problem...do we have a tensile/compressive force problem (which interestingly
enough, the mechanics call an internal force problem) or some other kind?
I think in the interest of simplicity and accuracy and consistency, if
we can use terminology which implicitly stays within the framework of this
tensile/compressive model, opening and closing will seem obvious as the
fundamentals of internal work.
I agree. And in the same sense, this is one of our two "basics"
(the other one being like a "sheath of latex" over the springy pole.
From these two core "principles" all others derive as variations.
From: "Walter W. Sigman"
Subject: Qi, Jing, etc.
>From an engineering standpoint, he was delineating the path of
load-bearing and connected strength.
From: "Walter W. Sigman"
Subject: Re: Re Re Core Principles FAQ
From: Marion Hakanson
Subject: Re: Qi and FAQ
From: "Walter W. Sigman"
Subject: Re: Math/Physics of Force
From: hrich@ucsusa.ucsusa.org
Subject: Re: More or Less About Force and Qi
> What makes having peng different from having good posture?
If I may venture into the minefield (that is to say, if I understand
your question...)... as Mike has said, the Peng path is dependent on both
will (intent) and structure (posture). As the old saying goes, "I Dao,
Chi Dao, Li Dao". Without mental involvement (which is necessary to respond
to a situation with the appropriate jing) you can't maintain the Peng path
as the situation changes.
From: Terry Chan
Subject: Re: More or Less About Force and Qi
> > What makes having peng different from having good posture?
> I think that this is the area where people are getting confused.
> *Most* people who are sure that they are using "peng" are
just > using good posture.
> Can you explain "relaxed connection"? How is someone
with peng
> different from someone who can relax without falling over?
Lots of words have been flung here and in books. Conceptually
it's a simple thing but it can be (and often is) really hard to "get."
I suppose that's why Ma Yue Liang writes that when one understands the
nature and the meaning of Peng that one has begun to enter the door to
Taijiquan.
From: mikel@taurus.apple.com (mikel evins)
Subject: Re: More or Less About Force and Qi
Mikel Evins' description of peng, while not mechanical, was the most
accurate portrayal of peng that I've seen. If you can duplicate the
feelings he described, you will be doing good peng. The next step
would be to learn to move with and by this power.
From: David Poore
Subject: Re: More or Less About Force and Qi
2) You push against my arm in a slow, light horizontal direction
3) I am physically relaxed and my shoulder is *slightly* hyperextended
and create a loose structure
4) I use my yi to create the idea that the the force of your push is
travelling through my arm to the middle of my back, through my waist,
down my leg, into the ground.
5) Because I haven't used local muscular tension to resist your push,
for example my shoulder, the force transfer takes place cleanly.
6) By setting up this scenario with my mind, in my body, I have
converted your horizontal push into a veritcal push that goes into
the ground.
7) I have done this in the space (from a horizontal view) from the
point of contact to my rear leg: the longer this space,
the easier it is to do.
8) Once I create the peng path, I can then follow it back by pushing
against the ground into the point of contact.
From: tec@slate.alta.com (Tim Cushing)
Subject: Re: More or Less About Force and Qi
The hallmark of doing it right was to be able to carry on a conversation
in a relaxed manner (no puffing, no chest tension, relaxed breathing, etc.).
> > "Peng" allows you to "fa jing" (issuing energy) and to cultivate
"ting > jing" (listening energy/skill). If you are familiar with
"ting jing," > you can probably have some sense that there's more to what's
going on > than just maintaining "good posture." > Ha, rash youth.....
you just dug your own grave. :^) I'll guarantee that
almost everyone has their own definition of "listening", so *that* reference
doesn't really help either. :^)
I'll just lightly toss $.02 of theory in here, in case what I'm working
on personally is way off the mark.
From: David Poore
Subject: tec's thoughts on peng
This is an important point, don't you think? Clearly the idea is to
re-pattern the way you move - naturally - to eliminate this. Then I think
there is another component, which is that the examples we're dealing with
so far are cases of pretty 'pure' peng usage. There are apparantly ways
of overcoming odd angles, bad angles, etc. to still be able to establish
peng.
From: Stephen Chan
Subject: Re: More or Less About Force and Qi
> > > What makes having peng different from having good
posture?
My take on it is that, _at_best_,
good posture will get you as far as the three external harmonies. To really
establish the peng, you have to apply the three internal harmonies - otherwise
when someone puts a load on your frame, you will be resisting with strength
instead of your mind. There
is also the dynamic aspect - guys who have a really clean peng can wriggle
their bodies aroung while maintaining a static peng connection to the point
of issue (don't ask me, because I can't do it).
This makes it obvious that "good posture" is not sufficient for peng.
I'd be willing to bet that among people who are *really* good, a significant
amount of peng could be developed even in an apparently bad posture.
My personal opinion (Great! The conversation is up to the point
where I have to begin hedging because sometimes things can go either way)
is that the Liu Ho (6 harmonies, which are 3 external + 3 internal) cannot
be split like that. Although I can extrapolate a martial which is
external and uses the 3 external harmonies, I would suggest that the coordinating
of shoulder-hip, elbow-knee, and wrist-ankle are really the natural result
of a body driven by peng and "connected" as a unit-body.
This is somewhat true. If you learn to use the peng strength
in your movements, things like the angle of the foot etc., can be varied
within reasonable ranges. "Fine tuning" a form is still sort of necessary,
but not as critical, once you understand peng and connection.
I agree with Stephen here but my view is that the 3 internal and 3
external are necessary for proper neijia type "connection" to take place.
Excluding the mind from the MA would result in pretty mindless application
of structure since the structure derives its effectiveness from proper
usage as directed by the mind.
From: Stephen Chan
Subject: Re: More About Force and Qi
peng type connection, though they use more tension than would be acceptable
in the neijia. As I see
it, the critical difference is that in the neijia, the peng path exists
throughout the entire range of motion for a technique, whereas for a external
stylist, the peng-ish connection only exists briefly at the moment of focus
(at which point they often use tension to create a connection to the ground).