Is this Guy the Greatest Tai Chi Teacher Ever?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 2 жов 2024
- What makes a great tai Chi teacher? Some say it's lineage. Others fighting skill. But what if there is more to Tai Chi than family or calluses on your knuckles?
In this 10 min documentary - Discover why Cheng Man Ch'ing represented a new direction, new values and new insights into this art and left us a simple message to uncover the "mountain of riches" in the practice of Tai Chi.
What were the Mountain of Riches and where are they?
More on Cheng Man-ch'ing :
Resources and Articles
www.teapotmonk...
21st Century Tai Chi
Training Courses and books
www.21stcentur...
I became interested in tai chi in 1970. There was a public television show hosted by Marshall Hoo that was meant to be at tai chi teaching program. I didn't attempt to learn what he was teaching. I didn't think I could learn tai chi from watching it on TV, but I was fascinated. The only other resources were a few books and an occasional article in Black Belt magazine. There were two books at that time by professor Cheng which I bought and studied. That was 1971.
Finally, in 1977, I discovered a tai chi class being offered through a local college. The teacher had been a student of professor Cheng. I learned the first third only. That was all that was offered. It would be almost 12 years before I found another teacher, and that time I was really fortunate. She had studied with professor Cheng and after hie death she studied with Maggie Newman for two years, then moved to California and studied with Ben Lo. She was an outstanding teacher.
Do I think that professor Cheng was the greatest tai chi teacher? He was really the only teacher in my early years that was accessible, if only second hand, but having said that, and having had a very good look around at all the many teachers over the last 50 years, and especially the last ten years, he was the only teacher who presented tai chi in it's full form, which included philosophy, health and well being, TCM energetics and a type of social responsibility engendered within his students.
I practice tai chi for two reasons; the searingly obvious relationship to the operation and dynamics of the nature of existence, and the impact that it's had on my health and overall well being, including well being as it relates to my relationship with Tao. I think that, in particular, would have pleased professor Cheng.
As a side note, I have no interest in "one touch" knockouts or the ability to push someone off balance. That aspect of tai chi, especially with the current fascination with such things in the so-called tai chi community, is like playing Turkey In The Straw on a Stradivarius.
(I understand the point of pushing hands/sensing hands, but it's become a fetish and does not represent the true importance and deeper meaning of tai chi.)
My first book too was by Cheng Man-ch’ing - a Taiwan publication of his 37 step form in both Chinese and English, with a pull out section on footwork (indecipherable). Got it from China town in Soho, London early 1980s. So bit after your very early discovery.
Thanks for your comments and story. And your thoughts on the teaching of Cheng Man-ch’ing. All very interesting. Agree with much of what you say.
@@teapotmonk I have a copy of that book. I found it on eBay. It has the foldout as well. 🙂
Yes 👏 ✌️
Short answer no he wasn't, he was just one of the first proper masters to teach Westerners. Plenty of masters at a higher level than him in China
@@kaisekiryoriPlease tell me who you know of in China that you consider masterful tai chi teachers, and superior to Cheng Man Ching. I'd like to look them up. Thanks.
Cmc is the first and only taichi style I've ever practiced, but having trained in several martial arts, I always had a problem with dogmas and zelots who worship masters like gods.
We're all different and have different physical, cultural, social, material constraints. So if taichi is a universal principle, then it should be adaptable to everybody and every context.
For an art of change I find the taiji community very reluctant to change.
Thank for your comment and yes, couldn’t agree more. I suppose Taichi suffers from a romantic nostalgia that encourages new students to discover “lost secrets” and “hidden benefits”. It has itself to blame to some extent, perpetrated by the way some schools sell themselves. Fortunately, others are around to remind us of it inherent adaptive roots and ability to appeal on many levels to different people. 🙏 Thanks again
Unfortunately, many of Cheng Man Ch'ing's "outdoor" students began teaching beginners and of these so-called instructors they only learned the form. The obvious result is "form without substance" and for that reason what they are teaching is merely empty slow dance totally devoid of the true principles of Tai Chi Chaun. Only a few of the professor's disciples who are qualified Tai Chi Chuan Practitioners on their own are left. Maggie Newman may be the last of the remaining few.
afaik that happens all the time in all schools and styles, I would not blame CMC for that
@@dblazquezsanz I do no't blame anyone - especially Professor Chang Man-Ch'ing. I must note that am not the only one who believes that many Tai Chi Chaun practitioners are only teaching form without any substance. In the last century Wang Xiangzhai wrote an article that included a highly critical assessment of Tai Chi Chuan practitioners. My comment is merely given to suggest that beginner tai chi chaun students carefully select their instructors. Follow the principles of Tai Chi Chaun not the instructor. Otherwise one may never learn Tai Chi Chaun but only have the ability to do a detailed slow motion dance with questionable health benefits.
Yes, true...it's endemic at this point...also beautiful maiden hands is silly.... and they're often unclear about full/empty...
@@brianlee360 I do not disagree. From the little I observed is that the some tai chi Ching Man-Ch'ing progeny take sinking their shoulders and elbows too far to the extent of becoming limp and disconnected. Relax, refrain from using force but at the sometime remain connected - open the fascia, tendons and ligaments surrounding the joints. When the latter is established then one can progress in tai chi.
first learned the 37 CMC form. Later learned the 85 long form (Original, Elder, Old, Authentic). The 115 form was a Yang family form, yang chenfu removed the jump kicks and slap kicks, it became 108 form, 108 was simplified for the public. cheng man ching further simplified 108 with what he learned from Taoist influenced by Zuo Leipeng/Zuo Yifeng and Zhang Qinlin. Ye Dami was Cheng's first teacher as well before meeting Yang Chengfu.
11:12 I agree with you. I studied from the direct yang family lineage for 30+ years. In my later years I deconstructed the form. Original Tai chi it is said is only 13 postures. Even with the yang family the forms differ from brother to brother and yang sau chung added additional movements to Yang Chen fu form. I have made changes toy own form practice based on practical martial experience. I was a bouncer for 8 years. Tradition teaches the principles and concepts. These are the important things. I hope your message reaches many more teachers and students.
Thanks for your comment Neil. I’ve a strong feeling that all Tai Chi, and all arts must continually evolve to survive, and remain relevant to each new generation. Any practice based in Taoism would have this written into its DNA. And yes, agree completely with the need to evaluate its martial claims with practical experience. They are too often very different things. I’m pleased to hear you have adapted and modified, and would enjoy seeing what you have done should you have a link.
@@teapotmonk I don't have a link relevant to any of this commentary. Not a UA-camr really. However maybe I will put something together later.
CMC made beautiful contributions with Tai Chi for health, social interaction, moving meditation, stress relief and exercise. Bravo!
A gem off the beaten track. Brilliant ... and thank you!
Thanks for leaving a comment
I learned the CMC form from Bob Smith a long time ago in Maryland. We just watched Bob and followed along as best as we could. His wife and senior students spent more time in actually teaching. Bob did say that all references to martial arts were removed in describing the positions. I was not a senior student so I don't know if he taught the martial arts applications, at least he didn't in the class I was in.
Thanks for the comment. It can get very vague when we refer to skill sets. Of course proficiency in an art does not necessarily convey communication or teaching ability. Something often overlooked when evaluating the content of the class alone. I too have had many a teacher that rarely did little else other than perform a posture then get others to do the “correcting”. It was never a fruitful experience.
My first teacher Min Pai was a student of CMC in NYC. My second teacher Michael Gilman learned from Master Choy in Frisco. They both made modifications to the Yang Style. The Yangs modified the Chen Style as did other Masters who creaeted the Wu, Sun, etc. This guy acts like a TV salesman trying to sell some new gadjet. Big ego, big mouth, lots of hand jive. Not for me, thanks.
I took tai chi lesson for a little while. I wish I could take them right now!
Absolutely agree, the world of Tai Chi is a broad church, so any approach that encourages acceptance, rather than criticism, is a breath of fresh air.
My current teacher, my second CMC Tai Chi teacher, has his own way of teaching and through his teachers the CMC form has evolved in a particular way, just like my previous CMC Tai Chi teacher and his teacher. This is not "inventing something new", nor "straying from the path of tradition"; rather it is an evolution of Tai Chi to suit a different world to when it was first developed.
Not all change is necessarily good or bad, but it is different in some way. Obviously, there may be some inventions or adaptions that result in Tai Chi forms to suit many purposes, e.g.: sport, self-defence, mindfulness, wellness, spiritual development etc. The hard core fighters will seek the version that suits them, or not. The new age searchers will choose the version that suits them, or not. In between is a whole spectrum of schools, teachers, lineages etc.
My personal experience is that the CMC approach to Tai Chi Yang style was to distill its fundamental principles. In so doing, I have found that the focus on those principles is what helps to see the same principles at work in all other styles, systems and people who practise them. If we all did it the same way, then we'd be robots and not human. If we only focused on technique and applications, then we might never really know our true nature beyond that. It's an interesting journey that has some grim practice mixed with hearty laughter, we should never take ourselves too seriously - it's just Tai Chi...
An annecdote about belts and certificates:
I remember someone asking a teacher of mine, John Kells, about the chance of some kind of recognition, such as a belt or certificate. The answer he got perhaps wasn't what he wanted, as he was told that the only belts the teacher had were his and used for holding up his trousers! Regarding the certificate, he pulled out a crumpled piece of paper from his pocket and asked "What would you like me to write on it?". It was a moment of realisation that these things are worthless, because what really matters is what you have inside of you and how willing you are to work at it for no reward or self-gain.
Thanks for your thoughtful comments Mark. There is a lot I agree with, having tried my best to defend the "evolution of Tai Chi" for many years, but feeling the battle was slowly lost... until Comments like your appear :) - There is so much noise out there, I suppose it is not surprising that practitioners feel confused with so many diverse and often conflicting theories about Tai Chi. Especially when delivered with such absolutism. My advice these days to anyone is just find someone you connect with, and learn from them, while ignoring the rest of the noise. If it works out, great. If not, look around for someone else, but whatever you do, develop the capacity to shut out the noise, as it will only get louder
Such wonderful advice!
Come on dude, you talk a great game show some skills
I am sitting in my armchair with some popcorn - I am an armchair polarising comments audience member!
Amazing!
I take an almost historical perspective on my own Taijiquan practice. From this view, I feel the main weakness in most traditional and modern forms is their emphasis on Taijiquan as an exercise, rather than as a martial art. This, IMO, makes it exceptionally difficult to understand the energy and focus behind each posture, and it is much easier to perceive the correct force application if you combine both an "energetic" interpretation of force generation as well as an applied one. In my opinion, you derive the greatest understanding of deeper elements of the art once you embrace it as a martial practice and engage with the form in that way. I don't personally think you can divorce the martial from the other elements and retain all of the secondary benefits. Chen Xin has a reference to this in his works. I'd say the CMC style Taijiquan of people like William CC Chen are good at least in large part because they've actually tried to use it or understand its use when they do the form.
Thanks for your sharing your perspective and presenting your argument, that is shared (not surprisingly) by most other martial practitioners of Tai Chi that I know. And it is the belief I once had, having come to Tai Chi from other martial arts. But over time my beliefs change, as I expect them to do, and, I believe tai chi is a broad enough discipline to embrace different approaches, paths, and different ends even when they may appear contradictory. As my approach today is rooted in the philosophical concepts of being able to hold contradictory ideas I see no problem with this, and don't feel the need to demote or place on a hierarchical list the benefits of practice. It is what gives value and application to the method I practice. I expect this approach may change too over time ;)
From what I know from the Yang Family CMC was an indoor student but not a recognised master. It doesn't matter though. He popularised tai ji quan and spread it far and wide.
Hi Josh. Thanks for your comment. I agree with your sentiment, he undoubtedly introduced (and continues to do so) many to the art. Though the whole outdoor/indoor/inner circle/outer circle/ argument leaves me a little bemused. There is a tendency in political hierarchical organisations to do the same, as a means of holding onto control. I'm not sure it amounts to much more than the discussion about the perceived value between known brands and supermarket varieties. ;)
I am currently training with the greatest master.
Reading between the lines I assume you are referring to yourself.
I read once that there were originally 7 sets in the Taiji Form and that only 2 survived. So even the art had evolved by the time Yang Lu Chan was taught by the Chens.
And hopefully all arts will continue to do so. I remember watching an excerpt of the Crowning of the British monarch, Charles, recently as he was carried along the streets in a golden horse drawn carriage with umpteen straggly dressed men atop. Under certain circumstances, there is, arguably, a role for maintaining tradition (and I say this as a Republican, not a monarchist) but personally, I'd rather have seen him arrive by electric scooter or on the bus. Maybe I'm just too rooted in this century?
Not a fan of CMC’s Yang form.
To be fair the issue with the term master is people can't tell the difference - and you seem to be included in this cohort.
You're probably right. I'm no expert, just someone with an opinion. Though we all selectively contextualise...
@@teapotmonk Well we could actually go and touch some people who are good at it and get a direct experience... Or we could "selectively contextualize"
@@jamesm5192implying Paul has not? Lol fuck outta here.
Ha ha ha. Those taunts may work with others, but not here. good try though...
@@teapotmonk Just separate the fact that it may taunt some from its truth-value, which I believe it has plenty :)
Personaly I changed my prefrence from Yang Taiji to Wu. Not the Family Wu Style, but from Liu Caichen who learned from the founder Wu Quanyou. I like that the movements are more compact and not as over exaggerated.
Interesting!
excellent!!!👍👍👍😊
You make some good points, and it goes to show that CMC had a huge influence on Tai Chi today. But as you say it is a different direction, one that is notably very liberal relative to traditional teachings. The reality is that the traditional methods offer things that are deep and significant in their own way, which can't be easily accessed by such a liberal approach. There is nothing wrong with tradition. It doesn't mean one is better than the other, and it may sound like a marketing point... and it is :) just like the CMC approach has its own marketing points. Tradition has its good points.
Traditional lines can also be "relaxed" and "playful". Traditions are always working on that balance between evolution and preservation. It's a mistake to think that traditions are so rigid... you can see the opposite is true by looking at generational differences in the forms of "masters". If things were rigid, they would all look and do everything the exact same. Further, if traditions relied on this exactness to survive, then arguably they would be impossible to sustain in the long run when teachers are unable to pass things on. Evolution and innovation is there, but obviously it is within a bounds. The people who are perhaps most vulnerable to the pitfalls of tradition are those who think traditions are by nature unchanging.
To avoid the trappings people need to learn the culture, for example, so they can be able to identify when the term "master" is being abused and misused, or when foreign or extraneous ideas are introduced. Note that Taiji originates from farming villages, but the elites introduced the classics, and now people worship them. If they questioned the origins and learned the history, maybe that wouldn't be so.
You make some interesting points and I appreciate you sharing them with me, though I may disagree with some, it is good to exchange different points of view, for in doing, we all benefit. 🙏
is that a theatre performance?
I expected some information, hm, hm....
Nope. No information. Just theatre.
Jack of all, master of none
No, not even close
lol probably the worst. His students have the least ability and the least concept of health. This only from reality not from imagination Kung fu perspective
And yet his student's student went to China and beat all the Chen village guys in push hand
M0nkman, you know I love you but...
D I now here you saying that we should all start teaching and learning Cheng's Form?
😁
Not at all Steve. Simply that we can be inspired by those that have come before us - not because they had magic powers or could defeat 63 attackers with a spoon, or because they just so happen to have taught the same style that we practice, but because they were not afraid to change things, to teach others, to open up the practice and shove it in new directions. I suppose it’s the application of “listening energy” on an altogether different scale.
@@teapotmonk Relax M0nkman, I was just kiddin'. I have spent too many hours in front of "Teachers" who say that theirs is the only way to learn Taiji. It's a statement that is usually followed by - "Now gimme £50."
I have always admired your ability to see and hear things in an unusual manner. Keep up the good work and don't let the purists get you down!
@@stevejones3414 just ignore me Steve - you caught me on a day in which I have a stinking cold (first in years) and haven’t slept in days. Best teachers? Other than you, i can’t think of many off the top of my head ;)
Totally agree , opening the mind of ex-students of “Masters”, to the JOY😂 of practising Tai Chi is an ongoing aim and so is de-mystification .
If you understand what Taijiquan is, it requires movement of the body from the dantian. All of the true neijia arts control the body from the dantian and its connections to the extremities. CMC's martial art doesn't move from the dantian, so no matter what art it is, good or bad, it is not a bona fide Taijiquan.
How to feel or have a direct experience of dantian
As someone who has practice this form for over 30 years, and also studied with Masters of the Old Yang Style, I can say this comment is not correct. Typically, the rotation of the dantian in the Yang style is not physically going to look like the Chen Style's (or Shaolin's dantian rotation). It's different and more internal. That being said, we all know CMC didn't reveal or teach the Neigong that powers Yang Family Taijiquan to his Caucasian students. However, his contribution to health in the US and Taiwan is great. His contribution to spreading and sparking interest in Taijiquan is even greater! And his simplification for timewise with creating the 37 form that contains the entire essence of Yang Cheng Fu slow form is genius! He inspired Masters of other traditions to also create short forms which are helpful for those practicing for health or who have limited space indoors. If you want to really understand true Yang style Neigong, I recommend either studying online with Sifu Liang De Hua (Gu Lisheng Lineage) or Sifu Sergio (Huang, Sam Tam, and Tian Zhaolin lineages). The middle frame of the Tian Zhaolin lineage will show you what your eyes like to see for visible dantian rotation😂. However all of the other ones, including inner door Masters of Sun, Wu, other Yang lineages, and Hao are practicing Taijiquan. Most Neigong cannot be seen with your physical eyes. Blessings brother! 🙏
@@greg6509 I'm not sure you understand what using the dantian means. Besides, Yang Lu Chan learned and taught the Chen style. His grandson, Yang Cheng Fu didn't really practice what he remembered of Taiji until he was 30 years old and his teachers were all dead. CMC was not a disciple of Yang Cheng Fu and only studied some in the general classes taught by YCF's students (both Fu Zhong Wen and the Tung family have said this). The Yang family is diplomatic about the CMC claims, but they do not recognize the CMC form as legitimate Yang style. You may want to look more deeply into what Taijiquan means and what it is.
@@BobJohnson992 Hey Bob, I understand what you are saying. However, there are some innacuracies in what you are stating regarding Yang Cheng Fu. Other disciples took him on and retaught him and got him more than up to speed when he was out of practice. He also taught Chang Chuan (long river) fast form (individual combat applications that can be strung together as a fast form like a long river) from Yang Jian Hou. This was a very advanced form with the double lift legs and explosive fajing throughout. He only taught this to inner door disciples and he stopped teaching it when he was traveling later in life and got fat from success/overeating and diabetes. I have also studied and currently study Chen style as well, 1st road Ancient Respected Chen Style. I'm well aware of the Dantian rotation you're referring to. And yes that's not apparent in CMC style. However, there's other ways to generate in Yang Style power beyond physical dantian rotation. Keep in mind, CMC is the one who penned YCF's books. Do I think he had the full transmission, no I do not. However, stories of his chinese students demonstating short power to disrespectful folks putting them down to the ground easily with one punch suggests he received some martial teachings. When somebody gives you a gold, please research what they gave you. Empty the cup and learn more as I have been for many years. We are very blessed some teachers are allowing the inner door teachings to be presented online now since 2020. Learn about Nei Jin, adhering chi to the spine, separating chi from flesh, internal stretching, opening joints with chi, opening/closings, Liang Gong Ba Fa/Yang Family Ba Duan Jin, Xin Fa, Heng/Ha/Hai, and the many other neigong of the Yang Family. Internal dantian rotation at the higher levels will not be physically visible in Yang Style. Blessings brother!
@@greg6509 "Chang Chuan" is a common error that westerners seem to fall into. The main/first form of most martial arts is called the "chang chuan" (and it means "long fist", not "long river"). It's because of that error that so many westerners sagely propound: "Taiji comes from Long Fist". Wrong. The real story about Taijiquan and the Yang style is that Yang Lu Chan was an indentured servant to Chen De Hu in Chen Village and YLC was allowed to practice with Chen Changxing's class, but he was never officially taught further than the first form, the Laojia Yilu. When Chen De Hu got old and close to death, YLC was set free and Chen Changxing gave him permission to teach the Chen-style as a way to earn a living. However, he was told not to teach silkreeling because that is the core of real Taijiquan. From YLC there was some knowledge loss to the two sons. From the two sons to there descendants there was more loss, as would be expected. The Yang's naturally kept the "secrets" they had left, so there was greater loss to further student generations ... exactly what you'd expect to happen to a martial-art without access to the home information/support.
Very few western disciples of the Chen style learn to move with the dantian, so I'd be surprised to see some westerner honestly do it. But that gets me back to my main point: without moving the body, spiraling outward and inward via the dantian, an art is not Taijiquan. Hence my comment about CMC's stuff. I've seen numerous mainland Chinese teachers blow off the CMC form as nothing, and certainly not a legitimate variant of the Yang-style.