Books on internal part of the (Yang) Taijiquan???

[oldyangtaijiquan]

There are many good books on the Taijiquan form and its bio-mechanics (external part), but very few about its internal energy (internal part).

Some of (the best) books on this topic (in my opinion) are:
- Cheng Tzu's Thirteen Treatises on T'ai Chi Ch'uan, Cheng Man Ching
- T'ai Chi Classics, Waysun Liao
- Tai Chi Chi Kung: The Inner Structure of Tai Chi, Mantak Chia
- Combat Techniques of Tai Ji, Xing Yi, and Ba Gua, Lu Shengli

Are there any others good (or maybe better) books on this topic?

[Yuri Snisarenko]

My humble opinion – I would accentuate only CMC's book from your list (if we speak about Yang style). Its content correlates with the Yang Forty chapters and it more simply and (imo) more correctly reflects "daoist part" of taijiquan.

[This message has been edited by Yuri Snisarenko (edited 07-04-2006).]

[Simon Batten]

Worth checking out is Da Liu's 'T'ai Chi Ch'uan and Meditation'. This book does not concentrate on the martial aspects but is excellent on the breathing. It also links Tai Chi in detail to the I Ching. However, Da Liu's Form is similar to Cheng Man Ching's, but with a few extra movements. Kind regards, Simon.

[Louis Swaim]

I would suggest looking for a copy of Stuart Olson’s _Intrinsic Energies of T’ai-chi ch’uan_. I’m not sure if it’s still in print, but one can hunt for used copies. It’s a translation of the “Discussing Jin” section from Chen Yanlin’s 1943 book. There are various theories about how Chen Yanlin (Chen Gong) came by these materials, but most agree that they are based upon Yang family teachings. It’s fascinating material.

Take care,
Louis

[chris]

What makes such a book good?

Simple, or complicated?
Imperative, or descriptive?
Falsifiable, or not?
Familiar, or unique?

[Gu Rou Chen]

Shi Ming. Mind over matter: Higher Martial Arts.


"For the more advanced student, we have published the teachings of Chinese Master Shi Ming (featured on Bill Moyers? ?Healing and the Mind? pbs series). This unique book explores the Chinese science of mind/body and the refinement of consciousness in the higher martial arts. Thomas Cleary is the translator of more than forty works of philosophy, religious texts, and literature from Chinese and Japanese sources, and is the leading translator of Taoist texts.

[Yuri Snisarenko]

I read the translation of Shi Ming's book, and must say that in my opinion the problem of that rendering is similar to the rendering of Yang Shouzhong's book – there is no hints about what original Chinese notions were used in some crucial places. It hampers the reading. I asked through my friends who know his disciples about the original Chinese but couldn't get it.
Besides that book was written by a group of people - I believe Shi Ming and his disciple(s). I wonder, what did Shi Ming write there…



[This message has been edited by Yuri Snisarenko (edited 07-08-2006).]

[Yuri Snisarenko]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by chris:
<B>What makes such a book good?

Simple, or complicated?
Imperative, or descriptive?
Falsifiable, or not?
Familiar, or unique?</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think different readers need different type of books according to what they seek at the moment. I wouldn't recommend to beginners some good but complicated books. To me, a good book is about what I am working at or seeking at the moment. Maybe it's just me, but I noted that the articles/books of the masters I liked the most were written with simplicity about complicated matters. It doesn’t mean that you'll understand it immediately, but it won't give you a headache either.

[This message has been edited by Yuri Snisarenko (edited 07-08-2006).]

[oldyangtaijiquan]

My favourite book on this subject is the book of Cheng Man Ching. It is easy to read and the things are clearly presented.
However no book on this subject completely satisfy me Every book (that I found) has a lack of informations.

The Stuart Olson’s book is very good but it talks mainly about the Jin(s). The description (in the book of Chen Yanlin)
about Qi and Jin are very good but is not enough detailed! It will be very useful if there was also a explanation of Chen Yanlin's tekst.

[Gu Rou Chen]

Yuri:

Shi Ming's book is actually quite an amazing translation. There are only a couple places where it appears to be off the mark. Unfortunately, I too, have been told there is no Chinese version available.


Can you ask your friends what Shi Ming's lineage is? He does not mention anything about it in the book, which is something I found to be quite odd.

Jeff

[Louis Swaim]

Greetings Jeff,

Re: “Shi Ming's book is actually quite an amazing translation. There are only a couple places where it appears to be off the mark. Unfortunately, I too, have been told there is no Chinese version available.”

I’m curious how you arrive at this if you haven’t seen the Chinese version. I read the Shi Ming book a few years ago. I do find some of the contents fascinating, but like Yuri, I find myself sort of craving a peek at the original Chinese. A good deal of the content seems to be based on a mix of modern science (neuropsychology, physics, etc.) and classical martial theories, including Sunzi, but there’s not much of a trail to follow. Cleary is notorious for avoiding footnotes or giving much mapping to the source texts that he translates. I know from the copyright page that the reference to “refinement of consciousness” recurring throughout the book is “lian4 yi4,” which was in the title of the original book or manuscript.

Take care,
Louis


[This message has been edited by Louis Swaim (edited 07-10-2006).]

[Yuri Snisarenko]

Jeff,

this is what I found in the web some time ago:


ʯÃ÷ÀÏʦ×ÔÓ×ÌåÖʲ»¼Ñ£¬ÎªÁ˽¡ÉíÇ¿Ì壬¿ªÊ¼Ñ§Ï°Îäʽ̫¼«È­¡£¹¤×÷ÒÔºó£¬ÓÖѧϰ Ñîʽ̫¼« È­£¬Õýʽ°ÝÔÚÖ컳ԪÀÏʦÃÅÏ£¬²¢µÃµ½Ê¦Ò¯ÍôÓÀȪ´óʦµÄµã²¦¡£ ʯÃ÷ÀÏʦÃô¶øºÃѧ£¬ÉȭÀí£¬¿Ì¿àÁ·È­£¬×ªÒæ¶àʦ¡£ÎªÁË×·ÇóÌ«¼«È­µÄÕæÚУ¬ ½Ú¼ÙÈÕÔø×ß±é ¾©³Ç¸÷´ó¹«Ô°£¬°Ý·ÃÃûʦ´ó¼Òפ×ãÔÚÖøÃûÌ«¼«È­Ê¦µÄÊÚͽÏÖ³¡¹ÛĦѧ Ï°¡£ÔÚÑо¿ÖУ¬Ëû²»¶Ï½áºÏ×Ô ¼ºËùѧ£¬Ï¸Ï¸Æ·Î¶Ì«¼«È­Éî¿ÌµÄÎÄ»¯ÄÚº­£¬´ÓÖÐÌåÎò ÀÏ×Ó"·òΨ²»Õù£¬¹ÊÌìÏÂĪÄÜÓëÖ®Õù"¡£ÁìÎò ÀÏ×ÓµÄ"µÀ"£¬¼ÓÉî¶Ô¡¶Ì«¼«È­ÂÛ¡·ÖÐ¹Ø ÓÚ"Ì«¼«Õß,ÎÞ¼«¶øÉú£¬¶¯¾²Ö®»ú£¬ÒõÑô֮ĸҲ"µÄÀí½âÒÔ Çó"Ã÷·¨¡¢Ã÷ÊÆ¡¢Ã÷Àí"¡£×¨ ÐÄÐÞÁ·Ì«¼«È­Ö®ÕæÒâ¡£ÓÉÓÚËûÒì³£µÄÇÚ·Ü¡¢ÆæÌصÄÎòÐÔÒÔ¼°¾ªÈËµÄ³Õ ÃÔ£¬ÖÕÓÚ̽µÃ Ì«¼«È­µÄ°ÂÃØ£¬²¢×ܽá³öÒ»Ì׶À¾ßÌØÉ«¡¢¹¦Ð§ÏÔÖøµÄ½ÌÊÚ·½·¨¡£


[This message has been edited by Yuri Snisarenko (edited 07-11-2006).]

[Louis Swaim]

Hi Jeff,

Aha! So can you recognize some influence of Wang Yongquan in Shi Ming's writings?

--Louis

[Gu Rou Chen]

Thanks for the quote Yuri. Too bad Shi Ming could not have given credit to his teachers. Would have been nice to hear him describe his training. Maybe we will hear from his students someday.


Louis: "I’m curious how you arrive at this if you haven’t seen the Chinese version."

Experience. Knowing the subject well and the languages, you can tell when a translator is guessing-especially for such a specialized topic. I have heard people talk about this stuff all day long, for days on end in Chinese. It was interesting and refreshing to read it in this superb English language rendition.


Shi Ming makes a very valiant attempt at describing what the 'essence' of higher marital arts is to many who have experienced this. He is, for the most part, very successful. The translator, as I remarked above, does an incredible job that few could match. I was extremely impressed.

The content exactly matches what Wang's disciples have inherited and demonstrate in their practice.


Jeff




[This message has been edited by Gu Rou Chen (edited 07-12-2006).]

[shugdenla]

Vey few of modern taijiquan pioneers mention who their teachers were and that is a good thing! Teachers like Shi Ming, it seems (and other older masters) say that the skill of the teacher is in how he lives the arts in comparison to those just wanting to say they studied with a famous teacher and that is as far as the skill they possess.

Being the student of a well known teacher is only that! If you cannot teach, explain and show what you learnt, then what use is that announcement?

Manqing is such a teacher. Whether he is lineage (or not) is not really that important! Does what he taught pan out as being real or not is the main key.