Does being a Taiji practitioner automatically make you a Taoist?

[gt3]

Does being a taiji practitioner automatically make you a taoist?

[shaolin_hendrix]

No! The most famous taiji master of recent times was a confucian! (Cheng Man-Ching)

[cybermonk]

Does being a taiji practitioner automatically make you a taoist?

No, the system's religious base is irrelevant to your development as a fighter.

[Syd]

No, and furthermore, I've met allot of official Taoists who aren't worthy of the name!

[gt3]

No, the system's religious base is irrelevant to your development as a fighter.

How can it be irrelevant if taiji is based off the philosophy of Taoism though?

[Syd]

How can it be irrelevant if taiji is based off the philosophy of Taoism though?

There are spiritual people in the world who are not religious, just as there are religious people in the world who are not spiritual. The essense of Taijiquan is based on the principles of the Tao but you don't have to be a practicing Taoist in order to practice Taijiquan and gain the benefits; It's as simple as that really.

[nzric]

NO!!

First of all, taiji wasn't developed with taoist principles. The term tai chi was a label that a royal poet (I think) gave to the style that Yang Lu Chan brought from the Chen village. Before that, it was called cotton boxing and before that it was simply the Chen family style.

Many people have found that taoist principles fit tai chi so it's stuck. Also, as tai chi has now become more a health exercise than martial art, and since TCM is based heavily on chinese philosophy/spirituality, it's become even more linked.

Tai chi is a martial art. Using taoist theory can be helpful to understand certain parts of the style, but you definitely don't have to be a taoist, pacifist and/or hippie to practice it.

It no more makes you a taoist than getting a christmas present makes you a christian

[Syd]

First of all, taiji wasn't developed with taoist principles. The term tai chi was a label that a royal poet (I think) gave to the style that Yang Lu Chan brought from the Chen village.

Well this is where the history of Tajiquan can get tricky. For those that believe that Yang learned a Wudang family art that was brought to the Chens from outside the village, not to mention the Chang San Feng mythical history, the Taoist principles of Yangs Taiji are very much interwoven and inseperable from the fighting art. The very nature of Taijiquan is about the balance of light and dark, hard and soft. It is for this very reason that the Court Poet named Yangs Mi Chuan, Taiji. It must also be remembered that what yang learned from the Chens he completely changed as he was not happy with all the moves ... or he was taught a different art altogether. This art has the Tao at it's core.

The other difficulty in all this is that westerners have a hard time comprehending how the cultural, religious, mystical, and historical aspects of Chinese culture meld together to form one huge tabula rasa. No individual part is truly free of any other aspect, they form a symbiosis for better or worse. Even before the name Taiji was given to Yangs art, it is clear to myself at the very least, that Taoist principles are entirely inherent in the conceptual aspects of it's creation and ultimate expression. It was based on very early forms that were in themselves deeply connected to energy manipulation and breathing techniques which found the pinnicle of their expression in both a healing and fighting art. These arts were not created by men with no sense of philosophy, far, far from it. You cannot in a place such as ancient China have an art without it's cultural companions, philosophy and religion. Both Taoism, Confucianism and Buddhism are factors which form an underlying subtext to every aspect of Chinese martial culture and cannot be ignored.

Taiji was always Taiji, even before it was given a name. The Tao is ever present in the expression and nature of that art and in that sense when you are doing Taiji the label is no longer required, for as Lao Tzu said...

"The Tao that can be expressed
is not the eternal Tao.
The name the can be named
is not the eternal name"

Taiji is Tao, all but for the name. So when you are doing Taiji you need not be a Taoist priest in order to benefit, the point is that you become Taiji ... formless and nameless.

[Syd]

... furthermore and as an adjunct to the above.

For anybody in doubt of Taiji's Taoist origins, one need only to consult Tai Chi Touchstones by Douglas Wile, largely considered to be the most balanced and well researched account of the Yang family history to date; referenced by all and sundry.

I quote page 7.

"...Ch'ang-Hsing gave him ( Yang Lu-Chan ) the transmissions of Chang Sang- feng, Chiang-Fa and Wang Tsung-Yueh, and Lu-Chan, realizing the Taoist origins of the art, journeyed to the Wudang Mtns in search of a Master. It was here that he studied Taoist Yoga and the soft aspect of the martial arts and invented push hands. Returning to the world as a consumate martial artist, he was introduced by Wu Yu-hsiang in Peking"

The above quote refers to what I mentioned about the changes that Yang made to what he learned from Chen after his travels to the Wudang Mtns and why his art became something different, not to mention the Taoist origins of that art. Now there are two historical figures named Chang Sang-feng, one is more mythical, and the other factual, who fits the time period old enough to be teacher of Chiang-fa who passed his art to Wang Tsung-Yueh and then on to the Chens.

Some people contest the Chang Sang-feng history but it is without doubt that Yangs, Mi Chuan, is indeed Taoist in it's origins as are certain other Internal MA's like Liu He Ba Fa. What an individual chooses to believe is personal ofcourse, I'm only offering the facts as I have been able to gather them. Erle is a backer of the Chang Sang-feng theory and I am also as I believe that the factual Chang Sang-feng to be an archetype of the founder of this particular internal art.

[cybermonk]

Thanks for the very informative posts syd, I most say I didnt know much of that information and its great to be able to learn so much in this place. While I agree with you that CMA are closely tied in with religion and culture it is my opinion that you can acknowledge it without having it be a part of you. I, for one, dont pay too much attention to the philosophical ideas behind the systems I study, yet I have evolved tremendously as a fighter since the time I began training. Do you think what I am saying is a possibility?

[Syd]

Hey Cyber.

I would respectfully add...

While I agree with you that CMA are closely tied in with religion and culture it is my opinion that you can acknowledge it without having it be a part of you.

I agree, infact that was the exact point I was making when I said ...

Taiji was always Taiji, even before it was given a name. The Tao is ever present in the expression and nature of that art and in that sense when you are doing Taiji the label is no longer required, for as Lao Tzu said...

"The Tao that can be expressed
is not the eternal Tao.
The name the can be named
is not the eternal name"

Taiji is Tao, all but for the name. So when you are doing Taiji you need not be a Taoist priest in order to benefit, the point is that you become Taiji ... formless and nameless.

If infact you missed my point, which is entirely possible as I can be convoluted :) - there are spiritual people who are without religion and vice versa. In other words by the very fact that a person is practising Taiji, they are infact being Taiji, if indeed they follow the principles therein. You therefore are it, without having to succumb to paraphenalia, robes and labels; these earthly things are pretty much besides the point. I always found Taoism to be beyond all of that. I see a man walking in nature, truly connected with the earth and it's purest elements as a true Taoist. Does that make sense? By doing Taiji you are in tune with the Tao, or you are on the road towards it. You are either doing Taiji or not, and by doing it your are beyond the name that cannot be named ... formless and label-less. The question of being a Taoist or not becomes irrelevent ... just be in your practice and you have arrived.

I, for one, dont pay too much attention to the philosophical ideas behind the systems I study, yet I have evolved tremendously as a fighter since the time I began training. Do you think what I am saying is a possibility?

You are absorbing the philosophical essence of your training without knowing it, much like the body absorbs nutrients and processes food. You don't have to think too hard about it if you adhere to the principles. The principles are a philosophical guideline to help you achieve your goals without paraphenalia, almost subconsciously. Teachers always talk about a point in your training where they cannot teach you any longer, this is what the Western Esoteric Tradition calls the dark midnight of the soul. It's a place where the internal aspects of your art come through intuitive perception, your body will tell you what to do. This is atleast the case with regard to the internal arts. I have had this happen in my own training and later checked in with my teacher who has told me I am on the right track. How did that happen? Nobody told me ... but it just does. The same thing applies with regards to Taijiquan. You don't have to walk around saying, "I'm a Taoist" or "I'm not a Taoist"; if you are adhering to the principles of the art then you are one with the Tao in your practice. What could be more Taoist than that? I'm talking specifically about CIMA's and not CMA's or hard styles perse'.

It comes without effort.

[ShhDragon]

NO!!

First of all, taiji wasn't developed with taoist principles. The term tai chi was a label that a royal poet (I think) gave to the style that Yang Lu Chan brought from the Chen village. Before that, it was called cotton boxing and before that it was simply the Chen family style.

Many people have found that taoist principles fit tai chi so it's stuck. Also, as tai chi has now become more a health exercise than martial art, and since TCM is based heavily on chinese philosophy/spirituality, it's become even more linked.

Tai chi is a martial art. Using taoist theory can be helpful to understand certain parts of the style, but you definitely don't have to be a taoist, pacifist and/or hippie to practice it.

It no more makes you a taoist than getting a christmas present makes you a christian
Great points. Wonderful post. I agree. Additoonally, being a Taoist does not make you a Taiji practitioner.

Side note:
Taiji practice is a modality in which the player seeks to cultivate, understand, inspire, reclaim, seek, refine, return to, and develop balance. This is also a pretty good description of a Taoist. But it needn't be a difficulty that hinders our understanding-that simply wouldn't be Taoist. I mean, taiji-like.

:)

[ShhDragon]

"The question of being a Taoist or not becomes irrelevant ... just be in your practice and you have arrived."


-perfect post! Humbly, thanking you.

[cybermonk]

Hey Cyber.

I would respectfully add...



I agree, infact that was the exact point I was making when I said ...



If infact you missed my point, which is entirely possible as I can be convoluted :) - there are spiritual people who are without religion and vice versa. In other words by the very fact that a person is practising Taiji, they are infact being Taiji, if indeed they follow the principles therein. You therefore are it, without having to succumb to paraphenalia, robes and labels; these earthly things are pretty much besides the point. I always found Taoism to be beyond all of that. I see a man walking in nature, truly connected with the earth and it's purest elements as a true Taoist. Does that make sense? By doing Taiji you are in tune with the Tao, or you are on the road towards it. You are either doing Taiji or not, and by doing it your are beyond the name that cannot be named ... formless and label-less. The question of being a Taoist or not becomes irrelevent ... just be in your practice and you have arrived.



You are absorbing the philosophical essence of your training without knowing it, much like the body absorbs nutrients and processes food. You don't have to think too hard about it if you adhere to the principles. The principles are a philosophical guideline to help you achieve your goals without paraphenalia, almost subconsciously. Teachers always talk about a point in your training where they cannot teach you any longer, this is what the Western Esoteric Tradition calls the dark midnight of the soul. It's a place where the internal aspects of your art come through intuitive perception, your body will tell you what to do. This is atleast the case with regard to the internal arts. I have had this happen in my own training and later checked in with my teacher who has told me I am on the right track. How did that happen? Nobody told me ... but it just does. The same thing applies with regards to Taijiquan. You don't have to walk around saying, "I'm a Taoist" or "I'm not a Taoist"; if you are adhering to the principles of the art then you are one with the Tao in your practice. What could be more Taoist than that? I'm talking specifically about CIMA's and not CMA's or hard styles perse'.

It comes without effort.

Hey syd, I somewhat understand now, thanks for the informative posts and sorry I completely missed your point before. Thinking is obviously not my department :(

[Syd]

Hey syd, I somewhat understand now, thanks for the informative posts and sorry I completely missed your point before. Thinking is obviously not my department :(

No worries Cyber, I wasn't trying to imply you missed my point; it was an allowance I was making for my own inability to make myself clear! :) Thinking is a bit overrated at times, we could all do allot less of it for health reasons. Meditation cures that one. ;)

[Adc]

I am just going to point out that
Tai ji太机 is a comon chinese philosophical term derived from the Yijing(Book of Changes).It is seen as the reconcilation of the principle of conflictual opposites,that is yin yang.The translation of supreme ultimate is used to refer to the unseparated state of Heaven and earth.It is refered to in Confucian Daoist and even some Buddist texts.Within the Song Period it took on more metaphysical conatations bringing its understanding similar to that of Dao.

While the MA is commonly refered to as Tai Ji, it is important, linguisticly to recongnize that the MA's correct name is Tai Ji Quan (The quan refering to boxing or fist)and that Tai Ji itself denotes a philosophical set of ideals.I am sure that many could argue that learning TJQ should expose one to the conceptual base of Taiji.

[Syd]

Well said Andy, it's well worth pointing that out to people new to Taijiquan and Chinese philosophical culture and history. I think that most of us are refering to the Quan aspect of Taiji when we use the term Taiji, rather than refering to Taiji in it's primordial, esoteric and metaphysical/philosophical sense. Though I'd argue in this case that the Taiji in Taijiquan is deliberately derivitive of the metaphysical meaning and all that implies. Hao! ;)

[daftyman]

I was going to add my 2cents yesterday, but forgot. Now I see that its all been said. great posts by Syd!

[nzric]

I agree! I'm always guilty of saying taiji when I really mean taijiquan. Saying taijiquan all the time makes me feel a bit pompous, and I think it's similar to insisting on saying "karate fighting".

[Adc]

and I think it's similar to insisting on saying "karate fighting".
To really nitpick karate already has the (te)particle to infer fighting/hand,(like the quan in TJQ)if one said kara,you have different conatations.
However my main point was not to pick people on the Quan aspect just to note that the Taiji itself is a long held philosophical concept that exists outside of the MA.
To speak of Taiji and then refer to the MA solely is to not understand the philosophical side.While within such a forum all would understand what is refered to with the term Taiji but that does not mean they understand the philosohical base that it is derived from.I'm sure that many schools expose students to this concept and perhaps even the action of doing creates understanding of the concepts.

[Syd]

...Taiji but that does not mean they understand the philosohical base that it is derived from.'

True, but there are many who don't seek to understand these things either and moreover another group who don't care. I came to Taijiquan through my study of the I Ching ten years earlier, infact I used to use the book of changes as an oracle in those early days. Personally the philosophical and metaphysical groundwork of these aspects were laid in my teens, long before I was studying Taiji as a martial art. I can only speak for myself then when I state my awareness of the useage of Taiji in it's martial form and then as a philosophical paradigm within Chinese culture. Infact this prompts an idea I had some time ago which was to post a message asking people to discuss how they came to Taijiquan as a martial art.

Cya in the mtns. ;)

[Adc]

'
True, but there are many who don't seek to understand these things either and moreover another group who don't care.
Here is more reason to be carefull with forgein terminology so as not to continue misrepresentation of ideas.Those who do not seek it or those who do not care may come across these concepts,misrepresent them and continue to alter the concept,untill you have the situation today re: TJQ
Here's some funny one's I've read on this forum and that I'm sure any one involved within IMA have all heard
"Taichi all about chi because chi is in the name"
"TJQ is just for old people"
"TJQ has no fighting context"
"there are no strikes in TJQ"
"TJQ needs no contact work at all, its all internal"

[Syd]

Absolutely!

It may actually be a worthwhile thing to arrange some sort of sticky that dispels these myths and helps to educate newcomers and those with questionable knowledge in understanding the broader facts of the matter in all it's permutations. A realigning of the perception if you will and something we could all contribute to and agree upon; afterall thats in part what this forum should be about.

Thought I might throw that one out there ... Nzric?

[nzric]

That was sort of the idea in the sticky I put in the IMA forum at the end of October:

http://www.martialartsplanet.com/forums/showthread.php?t=22063

I'd like to put something like that up, but the fact is although we may disagree about other people's perceptions of things, they're entitled to have their own opinions. If we convince them of what we see is the truth, so be it, but the forum is supposed to be a neutral area of discussion.

If we ask for ideas on a sticky, you're likely to get 10,000 different interpretations about what tai chi is. Shame, cause you know my own pov, but I have to have a mod hat on and say everyone's got a right to whatever kooky idea they want (as long as it keeps within the TOS and they're happy to receive plenty of constructive criticism).

[Syd]

Fair enough, but there are actually facts regarding Taijiquan, modalities and essentials which are standard and are known as the Classics. There are also silly un-truths that myself and Andy are talking about that would help educate newcomers as to the realities of Taijiquan and it's background. These aren't open to interprutation but are set in stone for all of the Taijiquan community, they just are. If you have people disagreeing it's in part due to missinformation rather than anything else; that would be the point. I agree it's a fine line between telling people and informing people ... I was merely suggeting the latter.

[gt3]

maybe the topic should have been 'Does being a taiji practitioner automatically make you a nudist?'

man, try telling the traditional chinese masters that it's a good thing tai chi spread to the west after showing them this http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B000065T3Y/qid=1101449999/sr=1-12/ref=sr_1_12/103-2062232-9279800?v=glance&s=dvd

[nzric]

If you have people disagreeing it's in part due to missinformation rather than anything else; that would be the point. I agree it's a fine line between telling people and informing people ... I was merely suggeting the latter.
I definitely agree, it's just difficult to get anyone to agree on anything at all on IMA/taiji. Maybe we could try to put together a thread with all those topics, then refer anyone to that if they've got questions...

[Syd]

That could work.

[ShhDragon]

count me in on the firm knowns re: taijiquan/IMA
I'd liek to contribute to that thread


-stephe

[madfrank]

In here late

does learning a deadly martial art make you a taoist

no the complete opposite


You need to learn Taoism and Tai chi in order to understand this

but not to a deep level as they are mutually exclusive

MF

[Johnno]

In here late

does learning a deadly martial art make you a taoist

no the complete opposite


You need to learn Taoism and Tai chi in order to understand this

but not to a deep level as they are mutually exclusive

MF

madfrank,

Why do you say that Taoism and Tai Chi (Chuan) are mutually exclusive?

Have you read the earlier posts in this thread, or is it that you disagree with what has been said?

IMHO, some of the earlier posts explain things very well. You don't have to be a Taoist to do Tai Chi Chuan, and you don't have to do TCC to be a Taoist.

Personally, I never really understood Taoism at all until I had practised TCC for a year or two. Then I things started to make more sense to me. And the more that I understood of Taoism, the more I felt I understood of TCC.

Doesn't mean anyone else has to be the same. Just saying that I think they are linked, and that it's a fascinating subject to explore. But if that's not for you then that's cool. We all find our own way, or our own way finds us.

:)

[ShhDragon]

great post Johno

anyway
by the time you can be deadly
even though the getting to that point involved a Taoist path
one would not wish to be deadly
and hence
they are not exclusive

[gurugeorge]

Syd,

That's a bit disingenuous of you to quote that bit of Wile there as if it was Wile's view of the history of the origins of TJQ, when it's actually part of his report of one of several alternative popular histories he gives so the reader can draw their own conclusions.

Moreover, it's clear from this and his other, more recent books that he himself leans towards Tang Hao's position that TJQ originally comes from Chen village, was transmitted over the course of 17 or so years to Yang Lucan who was an indentured servant, and has little, if anything, to do with Daoism, Wudang and all the rest of it.

Of course, it's impossible to be certain what the truth is, given that there's so little solid evidence, but none of the evidence that does exist supports a Zhang Sanfeng/Wudang connection, which, as the martial arts historian Stanley Henning opines (in his essay Ignorance, Legend and Taijiquan (http://www.nardis.com/~twchan/henning.html) ), seems to be a concoction dating from the early 1920s:-

"Why does there appear to be such concern to associate Taijiquan with the Zhang Sanfeng legend between 1912 and 1921, over 60 years after the style of boxing practiced in Chenjiagou village had been given the name "Taijiquan" and exposed to the big city? The answer may lie in a combination of events which began with the earliest reference to "The Dharma" or Bodhidharma as the originator of Shaolin boxing in a widely popular novel, The Travels of Lao Ts'an first published in Illustrated Fiction Magazine between 1904-1907.[23] This was soon followed by a book titled Shaolin School Methods, which appeared as a series in a Shanghai newspaper in 1910.[24] This book, of unknown origin but written in an anti-Manchu secret society tone, expanded on the Bodhidharma story and, in 1915, was altered further and published as Secrets of Shaolin Boxing under the pseudonym, Master of the Study of Self Respect (probably an allusion to anti-Manchu and anti-imperialist feelings).[25] According to Tang Hao, this book was so popular that nearly 30 printings had flooded the market by 1919, and it has influenced other authors ever since, beginning with Guo Shaoyu's History of Chinese Physical Culture (1919), which was the first popular Chinese book on this subject.[26] It is not difficult to see how Taijiquan masters may have felt hard pressed to compete for popularity against such a publicity blitz in an increasingly commercialized environment. Under these conditions, Zhang Sanfeng was a made-to-order counterpoint to Bodhidharma."

[Syd]

Syd,

That's a bit disingenuous of you to quote that bit of Wile there as if it was Wile's view of the history of the origins of TJQ, when it's actually part of his report of one of several alternative popular histories he gives so the reader can draw their own conclusions.

I don't think so George, though I take your point. There are indeed a few different stories in Touchstones but many of them do no contradict one another and the version I quoted is indeed supported by a good many authors who are also Taiji practitioners. Dan Docherty has written quite a few items which support the above and Tai Chi Magazine and Qi Journal have had recent articles reporting the same events. I personally believe there is enough evidence by way of oral tradition to support the Chang San Feng connection and at the very least that Yang Lu Chan studied outside Chen village with a Taoist Monk.

Moreover, it's clear from this and his other, more recent books that he himself leans towards Tang Hao's position that TJQ originally comes from Chen village, was transmitted over the course of 17 or so years to Yang Lucan who was an indentured servant, and has little, if anything, to do with Daoism, Wudang and all the rest of it.

Well thats his personal take, now. Thats fine, but it's also true that what Yang practiced in his later years was no Chen Style and Chen style was not known as Taijiquan at that time either. Taijiquan was a name given to Yangs art by an observant court poet.

Of course, it's impossible to be certain what the truth is, given that there's so little solid evidence, but none of the evidence that does exist supports a Zhang Sanfeng/Wudang connection, which, as the martial arts historian Stanley Henning opines (in his essay Ignorance, Legend and Taijiquan (http://www.nardis.com/~twchan/henning.html) ), seems to be a concoction dating from the early 1920s:-

A great many people seem to treat Henning as though he has everything nailed down in a box but it must be remembered that there are as many people who don't agree with Mr Henning and his findings. He is as polarized as any who takes a position on these matters and there is a great deal of speculation and deducing that goes on from his end of things also.

I presented from Wile what I have found to be the most common and abundant report of Yangs life and the Art that followed. Whether you personally believe it to be true or not is ofcourse personal, if you disagree thats also a matter of what position you take. I believe there to be a great deal of martial evidence to suggest Yangs connection to a Wudang art which did not jibe with the Chens.

Cest le guerre.

[soggycat]

NO!!

First of all, taiji wasn't developed with taoist principles.

Yeah go on , rewrite Chinese History. While you are at it, do teach the Chines how to hold their chopsticks properly too.

[soggycat]

There are spiritual people in the world who are not religious, just as there are religious people in the world who are not spiritual. The essense of Taijiquan is based on the principles of the Tao but you don't have to be a practicing Taoist in order to practice Taijiquan and gain the benefits; It's as simple as that really.

Many people forget Taoism originated as a Philosophy and Metaphysics discipline. It only started to become a religion circa 200- 400BCE when people began to pray to adepts who achieved Immortality ( Eg . Yellow Emperor, Lao Tzu, Lu Dong Bin ). That said, it is possible be say one is a Taoist and a Christian or Taoist and Atheist.

This is common knowledge in all China.

Why some of you “experts” here seem to have forgotten this most basic fact is beyond me.
It makes me question the accuracy of all other expert opinions stated in this forum.

And while on this subject , let me clear up a few other myths.
Lao Tzu is not the Founder of Taoism.
He is a Patriarch, like Lu Dong Bin, Yellow Emperor and Chiu Chang Chun to name a few.
Chiu Chang Chun also found the Northern Taoist sect of Complete Reality and was at one time Kublai Khan’s Taoist adviser.

Lao Tzu is a Title, not a name. His real name is Li Erh.
Lao=Old , Tzu = Teacher
So who is the Founder of Taoism ?
No one knows. But the Yellow Emperor ( Shang Dynasty 2700BCE) was already a Taoist before Lao Tzu came around in 550BCE
http://www.mystae.com/streams/ufos/emperor.html

[Syd]

You didn't tell me anything new there Soggycat and yet you assume what you just spouted had any relevance to anything that came before. Looks like yet another exercise in your wholier than thou mission to let everybody know what you think they don't.

Ok, bravo.






Next!

[gurugeorge]

I presented from Wile what I have found to be the most common and abundant report of Yangs life and the Art that followed.

You misleadingly presented it to an inquirer as if it was Wile's considered opinion, which it clearly isn't.

As to Yang (YCF) - or the two Wu styles for that matter - seeming to be in some magical way "different" from Chen, well that's a matter of opinion. Just for the record (for anybody who might be looking in), to me, and to many people, the derivation is clear, especially if you look at "small" frame Chen style, which flows continuously rather like Yang, and which may well be the style that Chen Chanxing taught Yang Lucan, cf. this article (http://www.chinafrominside.com/ma/taiji/xiaojia.html) from Jarek's Chinese Martial Arts pages (http://www.chinafrominside.com/). (This was also probably the style that Chen Qingping taught Wu Yuxiang on his visit to Zhaobao, and it's influence on Wu (Hao) style is even more obvious.)

To put it brutally, there is no provable connection, historically, between the Chinese religion of Daoism and Taiji whatsoever - if you believe it, it's a matter of faith, not evidence. All the actual evidence that exists, what little there is of it, points to Chen origins. There may be some vague connection, even in the "orthodox" Chen story, between some aspects of Daoist philosophy and Taiji, in that Chen Wangting may possibly have been familiar with Daoist inner alchemy literature, but even that is highly dubious (I understand that the famous poem making that connection may well be a forgery).

It's also true that Taiji (all Taiji, of whatever style) manifests some Daoist philosophical principles in action - but, again, many Chinese things do, without being connected to Daoism per. se., and after all, if one believes in the truth of Daoist principles as inherent in Nature, something that's effective is bound to manifest them to some degree.

[cloudz]

great post Johno

anyway
by the time you can be deadly
even though the getting to that point involved a Taoist path
one would not wish to be deadly
and hence
they are not exclusive


Just wanted to add that even though one would not wish to be deadly that does not mean one would not need to be deadly if required.

I don't think a taoist would have any qualms about defending himself with deadly force if needed, and other avenues have been exhuasted.


Is this not the nature of the tao after all - it encompasses all things - good bad and everything inbetween. Unfortunately conventional morality must go out the window, we cannot judge what is right and wrong. We just know that things are what they are and nothing more.

As for the original question I would not say automatically, but practicing taiji in my experience can certainly bring you more understanding of and closer to the spirit of the tao - if that is what you are looking for. I think it is possible to appreciate the connectedness to nature that practicing tai chi can bring without automatically becomeing a taoist.

However if you subscribe to the idea that tao can be found everywhere and in all sorts of activities - you can get this in such diverse activities - archery or futures trading for example. so really you will find it anywhere if you are looking for it. I guess it's just a lot more obvious in tai chi.

[Johnno]

Just wanted to add that even though one would not wish to be deadly that does not mean one would not need to be deadly if required.

I don't think a taoist would have any qualms about defending himself with deadly force if needed, and other avenues have been exhuasted.


Is this not the nature of the tao after all - it encompasses all things - good bad and everything inbetween. Unfortunately conventional morality must go out the window, we cannot judge what is right and wrong. We just know that things are what they are and nothing more.

As for the original question I would not say automatically, but practicing taiji in my experience can certainly bring you more understanding of and closer to the spirit of the tao - if that is what you are looking for. I think it is possible to appreciate the connectedness to nature that practicing tai chi can bring without automatically becomeing a taoist.

However if you subscribe to the idea that tao can be found everywhere and in all sorts of activities - you can get this in such diverse activities - archery or futures trading for example. so really you will find it anywhere if you are looking for it. I guess it's just a lot more obvious in tai chi.

Yes. Of course, whether Taiji was 'invented' by Zhang Sang Feng or not, and whether Taoism was 'invented' by Lao Tsu or not, Taiji Chuan is based on Taoist concepts like striving for balance between Yin and Yang. (And I believe that Bagua and Xinyi are also based on Taoist concepts.)

As to deadly force, I think that a Taoist's ideal response would be to use no more force than is absolutely necessary. But of course 'absolutely necessary' could include 'deadly' if someone forced you into it - if it was them or you. But that would be regrettable.

[cloudz]

Hi there johnno thanks for your response

I feel that its a bit like asking what came first - the chicken or the egg?

tao can be in all things, as all things can be within the tao

Is the tao expressed in these arts - yes. maybe it is the highest form of this type of expression

[Johnno]

Hi there johnno thanks for your response

I feel that its a bit like asking what came first - the chicken or the egg?

tao can be in all things, as all things can be within the tao

Is the tao expressed in these arts - yes. maybe it is the highest form of this type of expression

You mean did Taiji come first or Taoism? I'd say we can only guess at that. The name Taiji might be relatively recent (as covered by some excellent posts already in this thread) but the roots of the art go back a lot further. Exactly how far is a matter of conjecture!

Likewise with Taoism. The Tao Te Ching might be the first comprehensive Taoism text (or at least I think it is!) but I would imagine that it was a synthesis of ideas which probably pre-dated it by many, many years.

Chicken and egg indeed. (Except everyone knows it was the chicken!)

[gt3]

there are people who think tai chi might have come BEFORE taoism?

[Syd]

George.

You misleadingly presented it to an inquirer as if it was Wile's considered opinion, which it clearly isn't.

I think your now looking a little too hard for something that doesn't exist, you may interpret my response as misleading, fine, but I do not. It is the most commonly reported and well accepted account of Yangs life. Even Henning cannot dig for evidence that simply does not exist. The only facts we can rely on are the oral and written traditions that come down from the family and their students ... thats good enough for me and hardly seems misleading.

As to Yang (YCF) - or the two Wu styles for that matter - seeming to be in some magical way "different" from Chen, well that's a matter of opinion.

So you have your own, as do I and many others. Where then is your monopoly on the facts?

Just for the record (for anybody who might be looking in), to me, and to many people, the derivation is clear, especially if you look at "small" frame Chen style, which flows continuously rather like Yang, and which may well be the style that Chen Chanxing taught Yang Lucan, cf. this article (http://www.chinafrominside.com/ma/taiji/xiaojia.html) from Jarek's Chinese Martial Arts pages (http://www.chinafrominside.com/). (This was also probably the style that Chen Qingping taught Wu Yuxiang on his visit to Zhaobao, and it's influence on Wu (Hao) style is even more obvious.)

This is not the view of my teacher and quite a few others in the IMA world, infact Dan Docherty has a few chapters detailing how different both Yang and Chen style are in his book on Taijiquan. I respect Jarek greatly but I don't always agree with everything that comes from his website either. Your assuming a great deal in what you present above which does nothing to bolster a position any more solid than subjective speculation.

To put it brutally, there is no provable connection, historically, between the Chinese religion of Daoism and Taiji whatsoever - if you believe it, it's a matter of faith, not evidence.

I would agree with the above in part, but the principles of Taoism are very much symbiotic with the essence of Taijiquan whether it be accident or intention. The metaphorical connection is clearly there, in hindsight, whether you like it or not.

All the actual evidence that exists, what little there is of it, points to Chen origins. There may be some vague connection, even in the "orthodox" Chen story, between some aspects of Daoist philosophy and Taiji, in that Chen Wangting may possibly have been familiar with Daoist inner alchemy literature, but even that is highly dubious (I understand that the famous poem making that connection may well be a forgery).

"May well be" is no better than anything else, your position is unprovable and yet you seem to credit the tenuous deductions of the dry academics on these matters with greater promise than the stories from the Yangs and their students. It's undeniable that Yang learn't from the Chens and worked with them for many years, but it is also known that Yang changed what he learned from the Chens and thus created, or was taught a different art ... or both. If thats a matter of belief or faith then thats my personal bent on this matter.

And finally I think it's a bit disingenuous of you to point the bone at information I have provided when you do nothing more than present tenuous speculative data from other sources as though they have any greater grounding in fact than anything I previously shared. It's pretty clear we are on opposite sides of the fence on this debate, it's doubtful that will change.

By all means share your information but keep your perception of my character to yourself lest you make it personal.

[Wu_W3i]

My answer is NO. Taiji is using some Taoist ideas, yeah. But so does riding a bike where you use the balance as in Yin/yang where one leg presses and one rests and then that leg presses and so on.. thats in lots of things in life not just in IMA.

And then theres the difference between (Imho) stupid religious Taoists that basiclly go against the whole idea by being Taoists by choiche and the (Imho) real taoists that simply live by Tao without really going around thinking about it!

[ShhDragon]

ok, everyone let's all breathe. There, isn't it nice to practice Taijiquan together...er, I mean Taoism. Umm, never mind. :)

[gurugeorge]

George.
I think your now looking a little too hard for something that doesn't exist, you may interpret my response as misleading, fine, but I do not. It is the most commonly reported and well accepted account of Yangs life. Even Henning cannot dig for evidence that simply does not exist. The only facts we can rely on are the oral and written traditions that come down from the family and their students ... thats good enough for me and hardly seems misleading.

You said:-

For anybody in doubt of Taiji's Taoist origins, one need only to consult Tai Chi Touchstones by Douglas Wile, largely considered to be the most balanced and well researched account of the Yang family history to date; referenced by all and sundry.

I quote page 7.

Quote:
"...Ch'ang-Hsing gave him ( Yang Lu-Chan ) the transmissions of Chang Sang- feng, Chiang-Fa and Wang Tsung-Yueh, and Lu-Chan, realizing the Taoist origins of the art, journeyed to the Wudang Mtns in search of a Master. It was here that he studied Taoist Yoga and the soft aspect of the martial arts and invented push hands. Returning to the world as a consumate martial artist, he was introduced by Wu Yu-hsiang in Peking"


Now the clear implication of the above is that Wile is pretty spiffy, he's an authority, and if you want to know what the "balanced and well researched account is", well, there you go! Your quote is supposed to dispel doubt about Daoist origins.

But it's not like that: that quote doesn't represent a "balanced and well researched account", it represents one fairly common legend he's using to build his "balanced and well researched opinion" on!

"May well be" is no better than anything else, your position is unprovable and yet you seem to credit the tenuous deductions of the dry academics on these matters with greater promise than the stories from the Yangs and their students. It's undeniable that Yang learn't from the Chens and worked with them for many years, but it is also known that Yang changed what he learned from the Chens and thus created, or was taught a different art ... or both. If thats a matter of belief or faith then thats my personal bent on this matter.

But a while ago now, Yang Jun said in a sort of "semi-official" capacity on the Yangfamily taichi board that (I paraphrase from memory) yes, what Yang Lucan learned was full-on Chen style, he was granted the right to teach it to a certain level, he went back to Chen village a few times for refinements, and the Yangs and Chens have had cordial relations ever since. Don't you think the people in those clans and families know more about this business than you do? I certainly do!

None of this is a problem except for schools that have been claiming to have some "secret" version of Yang. That variety of Yang styles seems to have been rather blown out of the water by a sort of semi-official pronouncement from the Yang/Chen family oral traditions themselves.

How much credence you decide to give to it is up to you, of course. I suppose you could always go down the "oh that's Communist crap" route, FWIW.

And finally I think it's a bit disingenuous of you to point the bone at information I have provided when you do nothing more than present tenuous speculative data from other sources as though they have any greater grounding in fact than anything I previously shared. It's pretty clear we are on opposite sides of the fence on this debate, it's doubtful that will change.
By all means share your information but keep your perception of my character to yourself lest you make it personal.

It's not personal, I'm just pointing out a fact about what you wrote, and flagging doubt about your account as being at all an official Yang view. I'm just balancing the gung-ho Wudang/Daoist origins story you support here on this forum, presenting people with another option.

As I say, really, there's not enough to decide with certainty - it's just, what evidence do you count as valid? Up to you.

[soggycat]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tai_Chi

T'ai Chi Ch'üan is seen by many of its schools as a variety of Taoism, and it does incorporate many Taoist principles into its practice.

.........Lao Zi or Lao Tzu provided the archetype for this in the Tao Te Ching (Dao De Jing in pinyin) when he wrote, "The soft and the pliable will defeat the hard and strong."


http://www.wudangtao.com/cms/2_Page.html?id=150

Fundamental Taoist concept
Tao Te Ching says: "The Tao gives birth to one, one creates two, two creates three. Three gives birth to the ten thousand things. Wu Ji created Tai Chi, Tai Chi manifests into Liang Yi and thereafter into the five elements and the Bagua. So Wu Ji came from the Tao." Wu Ji alchemical Qi Gong is a technique of cultivation. You practice by sitting in meditation and developing stillness. You transmute Jing to Qi and transfer Qi to Shen, returning Shen to the void, uniting the void with the Tao. By using Jing, Qi and Shen, the three treasures of the body.

That Tai Chi Chuan uses the term “ Tai Chi” for its name which is intrinsically Taoist terminology, already suggests Tai Chi Chuan is Taoist.


I fear that some of the "clever reasoning" I see in this thread , by well meaning misinformed / uninformed folks here will lead one to perhaps conclude that Italian Marco Polo introduced noodles to the Chinese in 12th Century

:bang:

[Syd]

George.

Now the clear implication of the above is that Wile is pretty spiffy, he's an authority, and if you want to know what the "balanced and well researched account is", well, there you go! Your quote is supposed to dispel doubt about Daoist origins.

I think you have me well and truly misread my friend. You reading of the information presented by Wile is subjective as you yourself stated that Wile presented this data as a tabula rasa which presented all the various accounts for the reader to decide upon. I don't believe that Wile was outspoken against the quoted passages either way!

What I was trying to present was material from a respected author who has at his disposal a great deal of the known accounts that tell the story as we know it to date. The material I quoted is the most commonly accepted in the circles I read in, though there are others like Henning who speculate in the direction of some modern rationalized myth. I am more the Joseph Campbell type and I see in the thousand faces the man and his art quite clearly.

Your perception is that I was misleading ... thats your perception.

But it's not like that: that quote doesn't represent a "balanced and well researched account", it represents one fairly common legend he's using to build his "balanced and well researched opinion" on!

I quoted the book, the pages and the author ... it's not for me to tell people where the balance lies, they are well within their rights to look that up for themselves; I am hardly hiding anything there. I only presented what I find to be the most satisfying account commonly accepted and which was here presented by a respected author, Wile. The information presented by Wile is commonly accepted, I made my own mind up based on the presentation of information and presented my own findings. Wile was incidental to that fact and only served as a written base from which I supported my own position. I can't help the fact that you see some connivance in that and nor is it my wish to. You'll have to come to terms with your subjective view without my assistance.

But a while ago now, Yang Jun said in a sort of "semi-official" capacity on the Yangfamily taichi board that (I paraphrase from memory) yes, what Yang Lucan learned was full-on Chen style, he was granted the right to teach it to a certain level, he went back to Chen village a few times for refinements, and the Yangs and Chens have had cordial relations ever since. Don't you think the people in those clans and families know more about this business than you do? I certainly do!

Oh yes? I recall reading some months ago an article in a major publication with comments from a Yang family member that " what is missing from the Yang family is alive and well outside it". There was also a public flier that was produced by a Yang family member some years ago discussing the Yang vs Chen issue and I will get back to you on that as I do not have the text at my finger tips right now. I already agreed that Yang learn't Chen style originally, but it is clear that what he practiced later was not Chen at all. I don't think the Yangs and the Chens need to have a public battle to prove their differences, theres enough of that going on beneath the surface in much of Chinese culture. They both have large businesses to run and conflict would be bad for business. Sure, believe what you want ... we all have our sources.

None of this is a problem except for schools that have been claiming to have some "secret" version of Yang. That variety of Yang styles seems to have been rather blown out of the water by a sort of semi-official pronouncement from the Yang/Chen family oral traditions themselves.

Well they certainly wouldn't want to admit that they have lost certain teachings which survive outside the family would they? Though that recent article intimated an admittance of such. The elder of the modern Yang family was only 7 or 8 years old when Yang Cheng Fu died! How much transmission of knowledge do you think he garnered there? It is clear though that other students of the Yangs who were not direct family members were given a lions share of the Yang Family Michuan in the early days and it is clear that it survives outside the modern day Yang family, as that quote suggests! But again I am sure were are at odds on these and many other matters.

It's not personal, I'm just pointing out a fact about what you wrote, and flagging doubt about your account as being at all an official Yang view. I'm just balancing the gung-ho Wudang/Daoist origins story you support here on this forum, presenting people with another option.

If thats the case then great, welcome!

As I say, really, there's not enough to decide with certainty - it's just, what evidence do you count as valid? Up to you.

I don't disagree with that sentiment, I know it's a realm divided but it's an interesting one. I have chosen a side but it doesn't make me an enemy of any man with a different view. Afterall, we're just different sides of the same coin ... remember that.

Best, Syd.

[gurugeorge]

T'ai Chi Ch'üan is seen by many of its schools as a variety of Taoism,

That doesn't mean they are right. It could be mere mythology, and there's a hell of a lot of mythology in the CMA; most likely, it's the residue of past attempts by literate practitioners to make the martial art respectable as a health practice during the Republican period.

On the origins of some of the mythology surrounding Taiji, see my Henning (http://www.nardis.com/~twchan/henning.html) cite above, and on this matter and the broader question of the lack of respectability of the CMA in Chinese culture, and attempts to compensate for it, see also this history article. (http://www.zhenwei.org/History/HistoryMartialArts.htm).


Tao Te Ching says: "The Tao gives birth to one, one creates two, two creates three. Three gives birth to the ten thousand things. Wu Ji created Tai Chi, Tai Chi manifests into Liang Yi and thereafter into the five elements and the Bagua. So Wu Ji came from the Tao."

<ahem> where is this quote to be found in the Daodejing? Again, there's a fair amount of confusion about all this stuff - for example, the 5 phases aren't actually originally Daoist, but originated in separate schools of thought that were later incorporated into Daoism. The term Taiji comes originally from the Yijing, but the famous diagram we all know and love was actually drawn up by a Confucian.

The facts are a lot more complicated and interesting than "pop" Taoism makes out. For more on the above see this essay (http://www.arches.uga.edu/~kirkland/rk/pdf/pubs/YINYANG93.pdf) by Russell Kirkland, and this. (http://www.arches.uga.edu/~kirkland/rk/pdf/pubs/pres/TENN97.pdf)

I fear that some of the "clever reasoning" I see in this thread , by well meaning misinformed / uninformed folks here will lead one to perhaps conclude that Italian Marco Polo introduced noodles to the Chinese in 12th Century

It's a pretty story that Taiji is Daoist, unfortunately, as with so much of the mythology surrounding this matter, it doesn't have much evidence to back it up. Again, cf. Henning (http://www.nardis.com/~twchan/henning.html), who carefully traces the history of the "connection".

[gurugeorge]

It is clear though that other students of the Yangs who were not direct family members were given a lions share of the Yang Family Michuan in the early days and it is clear that it survives outside the modern day Yang family, as that quote suggests! But again I am sure were are at odds on these and many other matters.

Well, of course I'd say none of that is "clear" at all. But I've made my point - as you were! :cool:

[Taiji Butterfly]

Re: Original Question:
No. There's none such thing lol
N ;)

[gt3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tai_Chi

T'ai Chi Ch'üan is seen by many of its schools as a variety of Taoism, and it does incorporate many Taoist principles into its practice.

.........Lao Zi or Lao Tzu provided the archetype for this in the Tao Te Ching (Dao De Jing in pinyin) when he wrote, "The soft and the pliable will defeat the hard and strong."

:bang:


HAHAHA i hope to god wikipedia isn't where anyone is getting their trusted information
:rolleyes:

[gt3]

When you're doing say, the taiji solo form, you're balancing yin/yang by being both yin (in a calm frame of mind) and yang (fighting frame of mind). Whereas, if you only practice the form like some 'new ager' then you're doing the form totally yin by only thinking of the serenity of it. And if you were an external martial arts person you'd be doing your kata's all yang. The beauty of taiji is its nearly impossible to do the solo form as all yang unless you were doing it fast or with muscle tension

[soggycat]

This thread is about :
"Does being a Taiji practitioner automatically make you a Taoist? "

But the discussion seems to have change courses to " Is Tai Chi Taoist in nature " and the likes.
Therefore this thread should be closed.

[Johnno]

This thread is about :
"Does being a Taiji practitioner automatically make you a Taoist? "

But the discussion seems to have change courses to " Is Tai Chi Taoist in nature " and the likes.
Therefore this thread should be closed.

Should the thread be closed just because the subject has changed onto a closely related topic?

IMHO, the anser to the original question is simply "no"! So having answered that and explained their reasoning, people have moved on to something else! :)

[madfrank]

madfrank,

Why do you say that Taoism and Tai Chi (Chuan) are mutually exclusive?

Have you read the earlier posts in this thread, or is it that you disagree with what has been said?

IMHO, some of the earlier posts explain things very well. You don't have to be a Taoist to do Tai Chi Chuan, and you don't have to do TCC to be a Taoist.

Personally, I never really understood Taoism at all until I had practised TCC for a year or two. Then I things started to make more sense to me. And the more that I understood of Taoism, the more I felt I understood of TCC.

Doesn't mean anyone else has to be the same. Just saying that I think they are linked, and that it's a fascinating subject to explore. But if that's not for you then that's cool. We all find our own way, or our own way finds us.

:)


Hi


I was making a point which i think you missed

When the chela is ready the guru appears

:)

MF

[Johnno]

Hi


I was making a point which i think you missed

When the chela is ready the guru appears

:)

MF

madfrank,

Sorry, but I'm not familiar with the terminology. What is a chela?

Cheers.