International Yang Family Tai Chi Chuan Association

My question is this... when applying them, do they actually apply to the direction of which they are named? The reason I question this is that when you actually apply "peng" or "ward off", it actually is not in a straight line but moving energy from one corner to the next or it will not work.

If someone can explain this in further detail that would be great.

Thanks,

You asked whether the "Eight Gates"

<<actually apply to the direction of which they are named>>.

What exactly do you mean by "direction by which they are named"? I am not aware that any of the eight gates are directional in the sense of being connected with relative or absolute compass points. As a specific term, I understand Ward Off energy to refer generally to lifting energy upward. I do not thing any other directionality is implied.

As a general term, I think Ward Off energy is also thought of by many as energy that expands or bounces out from one's center. In this sense or perhaps in its former sense, I understand Ward Off energy to be the characteristic energy of traditional Yang Style, as opposed to Silk Reeling Energy in Chen Style, etc.

You also stated that

<<when you actually apply "peng" or "ward off", it actually is not in a straight line but moving energy from one corner to the next or it will not work>>.

I am not sure I am following your thoughts here. What do you mean by "moving energy from one corner to the next"? Are you talking about physical corners as seen from a particular posture? The corners on a bagua diagram?

By the way, in the most recent issue of Tai Chi Magazine, there was what I thought was an excellent article on Ward Off energy. I do not agree with every detail of what the author said, but nonetheless feel what he was describing was authentic and the same phenomenon that I perceive and try to develop. He went to great pains to describe what Ward Off energy was not and also gave specific descriptions about how it can be used.

If you saw this article, what did you think?

In the explanation of the "eight gates", each part of the "eight gates" refers to a direction of the bagua. "Four corners" "Four Sides". Ward off, push, roll back and press are the four sides of N, S, E and W. elbow strike, shoulder stroke, pull down and lifting energy are the four corner directions. They correlate with the yin/yang theory of flow. When they're applied they will change with the situation and flow of energy being emitted.

I had my question answered earlier last week. The above information comes from the Yang Family Transmissions and the Tai Chi Classics. They also refer to the Five Elements in step similar to Bagua. Meaning Eight Gates/Five Steps.

Maybe this information will give you some more insight into this subject.

I notice in your reply that you use the term "lifting energy" for one of the corner directions. I assume this is a reference to what is commonly translated as "split energy." Can you tell me where you got this particular translation? I am curious because the Chinese character/word for this energy seems to be rather obscure, and I have been trying to get at what the root meaning may be. I feel reasonably comfortable with the Taiji meaning of the word, but have never been able to pin down for certain the origin of the character.

Thanks for your question...

"Lifting Energy" or "Split Energy" can be used to describe the same application. When you apply split energy your are spliting the opponent's center axis or center of gravity and "root". When you apply lifting energy you are applying the same energy on a different plane of axis. It all depends on the energy that is being directed toward you.

As far as the character and meaning, it's best to go by the direct application because the translation can get very lost when you're directly applying it to use.

My information came from my teacher and the Yang Family Transmissions and the Tai Chi Classics.

As with traditional saying goes, you can receive knowledge on your own but you need a guide to show you how to apply the knowledge.

I hope this helps out. Feel free to ask me anything. If I don't know the answer, I'll find it for you.

I like to think of the word "lie" as "rend". Mis-aligning the opponent's central axis or in plainer words - making the top half go one way and the bottom go the other. Although it's considered a secondary energy in the Yang style it is the primary energy for most throws.

It almost always reqires 2 attacking points (1 high & 1 low) on opposite sides. This can be seen as the shoulder and arm on the opponent's chest and the leg behind the opponent's thigh in "Diagonal Flying" gesture. Another good example is the hand pushing the chin or head up and the other hand pushing the small of the back down while hugging the torso from the side in "Embrace Tiger".

Remember when you were kids and your friend knelt down behind someone and you then pushed him and he fell over your friend on his butt? Perfect application of "Lie" energy! Your push was the top attacking point and your friends crouching body was the lower on the opposite side.

Imagine you see a refrigerator in a field. You want to push it over. If you push straight forward it will be much more difficult that pushing it up in order to tilt it then allowing it to fall on its own. That's the LIFT energy that is present in any "lie" application. If there is a low wall behind the fridge you have a perfect "lie". If you could spiral it in some way as it fell the force of the impact as it landed would be even more destructive - like how I feel when someone successfuly throws me with "Diagonal Flying". ...ouch!

I see the 8 gates as different "jin", "waves of force", "qualities of movement" or what-ever you want to call it. The body absolutely must move in a certain way to generate a specific desired wave of force. I don't believe that it has to be in any specific direction of the compass any more than I believe you actually grasp a sparrows tail.

There are also quite a number of different jin described in Taiji classical writings - around 30 I believe (without looking it up). Peng, Lu, Ji, An are just the primary 4 and Cai, Lie, Jou, Kao the secondary 4.

The confusing thing is that these words refer to specific movements in the form AND specific waves of force.

Remember that all chinese subjects are filled with symbolism. Sometimes not so user-friendly.

Your explanation of lie is very helpful, and much in accord with the way I interpret it. I see lie as essentially a "spreading", or "separating out" -- connoting the separating out of the two arms in opposite directions. This is initiated in the turning of the waist, but manifests in a kind of centrifugal force whose bi-directionality results in the unbalancing and uprooting of the opponent in a fashion as you describe.

You wrote:
‘I see the 8 gates as different "jin", "waves of force", "qualities of movement" or what-ever you want to call it. The body absolutely must move in a certain way to generate a specific desired wave of force. I don't believe that it has to be in any specific direction of the compass any more than I believe you actually grasp a sparrows tail.’

Very nicely put! Historically, the compass points associated with the eight gates had cosmological/metaphorical rationale, which were developed to a fine point in late antiquity when, for example, the directionality of winds (ba feng) were correlated with seasonal prognostications having to do with agriculture, military threats, and other affairs of state. Early medical theory also correlated pathologies with certain directions or characteristics of winds. But there is no reason to construe the “directions” of the eight gates in taiji theory as having any literal sense of actual compass points; it is rather just a convenient conceptual metaphor connoting the ordering and hierarchy of the “jins.” One could say it’s a post-facto overlay of theory on a pre-existing body of practice.

Thanks for clearing this up. I am able to decipher between history and application most of the time. But you know, most of the time you need a little guidance. Thanks for all your replies. It helps a great deal.

Louis, you make the point:

"Historically, the compass points associated with the eight gates had cosmological/metaphorical rationale, which were developed to a fine point in late antiquity"

However, later in the same paragraph, you write:

"But there is no reason to construe the “directions” of the eight gates in taiji theory as having any literal sense of actual compass points;"

I'm unclear here. Are you saying that the "'directions'" are related to the "eight gates in taiji theory"? But, that this was not part of traditional CMA or TCM theory? And, if it were attached at a later date, as you suggest, "a post-facto overlay of theory on a pre-existing body of practice", then does it apply, can it be applied, or not?
I agree that it is a conceptual metaphor, but I'm curious about the structure. Although there are some, like some of T.T. Liang's students, who would (and do) maintain a strict correlation between a particular compass direction (one based on the I Ching hexagrams) and a particular posture. I'm not sure if they suggest that there's a necessary correlation between the "force/jin/wave of movement" and any static direction. However, that *any* particular movement has a particular "vector" or "direction" in space away from some real or imaginary center. Clearly one can "Lu" to the Northwest, or to the Southwest, depending on which way one is facing, not to mention changing the position of the feet. I guess I'm trying to say that "direction" needn't be reduced to "compass point" and then discarded as being non-traditional or non-descriptive of what it may be meant to describe. I think the problem comes from confusing the "jin" with the "direction." Anyway, I agree that they are not the same.

Respects,
Steve James

it is rather just a convenient conceptual metaphor connoting the ordering and hierarchy of the “jins.” One could say it’s .

I do want to make one point on this subject and maybe it will clear all of this up since I'm the one who brought this confusion to the table.

Understanding Taoist theory of Yin/Yang and the esoteric meanings of the I Ching will bring about some order to this discussion.

As Louis stated, it is metaphorical but, it still does apply in a since. You need to step away from the application and look at the energy body as a whole and delve into the theory of Change and Push & Pull in a Physical since.

The I Ching will state that all of these energies of the eight gates and five steps are represented in everchanging positions based on situational influences (hince: a negative and positive or vise versa in a fighting situation or give and take). If you look at an old diagram that explains the Bagua and these energies it all makes since.

Everything is like a wheel of change intermingling with each other. At static point they are represented at specific points to note some kind of form but are everchanging in application or flow.

Sometimes I think we need to just step away and not discount the ancient teachings because they are there for a reason. Maybe not the reason we are looking for but for a reason.

In saying that the bamen (eight gate) theory is “a post-facto overlay of theory on a pre-existing body of practice,” I was, first of all, expressing an opinion, and second of all, my post was a kind of an off-the-cuff response to something I thought Erik expressed very well.

The bamen correlative theory is of course quite old, as is the wuxing (five phases) theory. Both theories have spatial metaphorical entailments, and the historical origins and rationales for the directional/spatial associations are complex. The bamen model references actual compass points, and different traditions assign particular symbolic meanings to the directions of north, south, east, west, etc. In turn, each of the cardinal compass points, and each of the intermediate quadrants, is correlated with a given trigram of the Yijing. Even this system of correlations came relatively late to the evolution of the Yijing, for the earliest known versions of the Yijing made no mention of them. At some point in time, taijiquan incorporated or drew upon the bamen and wuxing models, correlating the Thirteen Postures (or what I think might more properly be termed the Thirteen Efficacious Dispositions) with these Eight Gates and Five Phases.

The more literal interpretations of these theories have their adherents among taijiquan practitioners. On the other polar extreme are more skeptical factions who see little of value in the taiji classics, and who complain that they are just a body of idle poetics that have nothing to do with the “practical” workings of a martial art. I find myself somewhere in between. I tend to have difficulty with literal interpretations of some of the language of the classical taiji theories, but see real value in understanding the metaphors inherent in the theory. When I speak of metaphor in the art, however, I never mean “that’s ONLY a metaphor,” as though metaphor is mere literary embellishment. I think that metaphors are very potent, and that they can open doors (or gates!).

Or, what this really opens may be a large can of worms, having to do with the relationship of the boxing art of taijiquan with the transmission of its theory. How much of the classical theory was developed and enunciated by later masters, and how much of the boxing art can be attributed to the explicit, consciously understood workings of theory? Was the theory a post-facto attempt to explain and rationalize an otherwise unfathomable and marvelous creation of intuitive body-mechanical algorithms? Or did the early masters intentionally and deliberately set out to create a boxing art that emulated and embodied these enduring cosmological themes? My inclination is to distrust any assertions too far in one causal direction or the other. I feel it is much more likely that the evolution of the art involved a mixture of these impulses, and that theory and practice developed more or less synchronically.

I hope you’ll pardon the verbose ramblings of this laotouzi (old head). I should probably stop drinking coffee and switch to green tea.

Very well put! My thoughts exactly! I didn't mean to sound or imply that you were only metaphorically speaking. I was agreeing with and you make a very good point in that what we have today has probably evolved into something in between the esoteric theories and the application of practice. I believe this whole heartedly.

I think the reason I opened this "can o' worms" is because I don't think people discuss these topics enough. I think talking over these theories with other practioners brings some "light" to interchange with the Tai Chi Community.

Thanks for your participation!

Your opinions are always more than worthwhile. I agree with your point about metaphors (and metaphorical overlays). I think adding the issue of the "wu xing" is also important. "Advance", retreat, look left and gaze right are also close to "directions." But, of course, they still wouldn't be as "pure" as compass point directions. (I.e., we don't always face directly forward; most often we are "looking" or "gazing" at some angle; we never face backward -we only shift, turn, or step to the rear. This reminds me of the saying "Eight in the hands; five in the feet." Anyway, you also raise another fascinating issue.

>did the early
>masters intentionally and deliberately set >out to create a boxing art that emulated >and embodied these enduring cosmological >themes?

I share your distrust of causal relationships. No one person or family thought it up or applied it. Well, fwiw, I think that the theory of "taichi" offers an accurate description of the (apparently chaotic) way things work, including the human body. At any rate, even though it is not scientific (in the western sense), it allowed the invention of black powder. And, imo, it can be applied to anything. So, to me, tcc differs *only* to the extent that its practitioners have deliberately approprated and incorporated taichi theory as the fundamental strategic, tactical, logistical and philosophical basis of their martial art. I believe that it has been possible (across time) for any person to realize or recognize the relation between whatever he was doing and taichi theory.
Yes, I agree that, at some distinct point in time, the connections were made.

Oh well, I guess now I'll have to beg your pardon for rambling.

This is an interesting can of worms! I’m enjoying the discussion.

Regarding something you said, Steve: ‘I think adding the issue of the "wu xing" is also important. "Advance", retreat, look left and gaze right are also close to "directions." But, of course, they still wouldn't be as "pure" as compass point directions.’

Sarah Allan, in her book, _The Shape of the Turtle: Myth, Art, and Cosmos in Early China_, writes of early enunciations of this notion and how it’s often called something like “the five directions.” But she points out the semantic problem of referring to the “middle” as a “direction.” Of course it’s not a direction. In taiji theory, this “middle” is also sometimes translated as one of the “five directions,” but that just doesn’t make sense, does it? It’s also more properly called, “central equilibrium” (zhong ding). But this raises another semantic problem. Can “central equilibrium” be called a “posture?” Ideally, central equilibrium is operative even in movement, but “posture” says to me something static rather than dynamic. By the same token, can “advancing,” “retreating,” “look left,” “gaze right” be called postures? I don’t think so. That’s why I’ve come to think that translating “Shisan Shi” as “Thirteen Postures” is flawed. The Chinese character “shi” has a range of meaning that includes “posture” but that encompasses much more, including a meaning of “disposition” or “situation.” So that’s why I propose a rendering of “Thirteen Efficacious Dispositions” for the traditional notions of peng, lu, ji, an, cai, lie, zhou, kao, jinbu, tuibu, zougu, youpan, zhongding.

Yes, I agree; "13 postures" may be one interpretation, but it leads to all the flaws that you point out. You write:

"The Chinese character “shi” has a range of meaning that includes “posture” but that encompasses much more, including a meaning of “disposition” or “situation.” So that’s why I propose a rendering of “Thirteen Efficacious Dispositions” for the traditional notions of peng, lu, ji, an, cai, lie, zhou, kao, jinbu, tuibu, zougu, youpan, zhongding."

Imho, "efficacious disposition" is a much better description of the cumulative and synergistic working of hands and feet. I think "tuibu" and "jinbu" imply movement. Hmm, for example, both "Peng" (ward-off) and "Ji" (squeeze/press) use "jinbu" (forward step) --as do Brush Knee, Fair Lady, etc. The Wuxing are "actions," not postures. You raise a great point about "central equilibrium," btw. Well, there are "ups and downs" in central equilibrium, no? Certainly, there are in the form; and the form, itself, can be lowered or raised. So, it could be argued that central equilibrium has more than one level. Anyway, my real point is that all the postures (if we decide to call them such) are the results of specific actions; and that it is possible to reduce those actions to a set of factors. I think the "13" are pretty comprehensive.

For instance going back to Louis' point of synergistic movement and central equilibrium. This can all be broken down into factors of the application equation. When a action is made and a counter is applied... our central equilibrium will move with our hands and feet as one applied motion which can be analyzed as a fact of movement.

I think the both of you Steve and Louis make very good points. That sets me thinking even more about our discussion and my own practice and how I will teach this.

Great !!!

There are a lot of things that can go wrong when trying to generate power but I usually look for any errors first in my alignment with gravity and if that wasn't the problem, then next with 3 dimensional movement.

Just browsing the above posts. My mandarin is not what it used to be. I haven't been back to China in a while - but what about the "13 Gestures"? Just a thought.

You've enforced my statement of stepping back and analyzing the movement from a different perspective when you talk about your center of gravity moving from left to right. This is a very good point about central equilibrium and how it can spin on your axis.

We all know that it's a constant and used with kinetic energy.

Thanks for breaking that down.

I think you're right to think in terms of three dimensions. Anyway, I think that central equilibrium is not quite a "gesture", only an essential aspect of any one, so I like the idea of "disposition" better --it's also 3-dimensional. Hmm, ok, I guess this can't be style-specific. If you were to do the form while holding pencils in your hands, what shapes would/should you draw?

Respects,
Steve James

You wrote:
“I think '13 stations' works better than '13 dispositions'; 'disposition' is really more about disposing than position.”

I suppose that highly nuanced actions require highly nuanced words for referring to them. If disposition is more about disposing than position, then I think that supports my point that it’s a good rendering for the 13 shi. “Stations,” again, sounds too static to me, unless you’re thinking of “the act or manner of standing: posture.” But consider this: disposing, after all, is an action. One disposes troops, positioning them along a line of defense. The disposing is prior to, and essential in, the positioning. Disposition includes connotations of “orderly arrangement,” “prevailing tendency,” so the word does a good job of capturing the ‘yi’ of taijiquan movement technique. I think of shi as a configuration of jin and intent.

Here’s a passage from a wonderful book by the French Sinologist, Francois Jullien, _The Propensity of Things: Toward a History of Efficacy in China_. The whole damn book is about the word "shi." Although Jullien makes a few references to taijiquan in his book, quoting Despeux's book _Taiji Quan: Art martial, technique de longue vie_, he is in this passage speaking specifically about calligraphy theory. It really applies to numerous arenas, as he demonstrates throughout his book:

"When translators do gloss shi, they render it indiscriminately as 'postures' ('positions') or 'movements.' But actually both 'postures' and 'movements' are simultaneously involved. On its own, 'posture' seems inadequate because it implies immobility, however temporary: our notion of reason seems incapable of analyzing a disposition without petrifying it. But given that, in reality, one gesture follows into another, it is not possible to arbitrarily distinguish between one individual 'position' and the movement that both stems from it and leads into it." (1995, Zone Books, p. 113)

To me, that applies beautifully to the art of taijiquan.

Although sometimes rendered “power,” I think that etymological arguments can be made that shi is more about the management of power or resources, carrying an entailment something like the English word “husbandry”: ‘the control or judicious use of resources.” Roger Ames, in his translation of ch. 9 of the Huainanzi as _The Art of Rulership_, argues convincingly that the word shi developed primarily in the area of military theory, where its meaning was usually one of “strategic advantage.” Later, it was appropriated into political usage, where it had a meaning something like “purchase” as in “to get a purchase on” or what modern politicos may call “traction.” 'We aren't getting any traction on that issue in Vermont.' But in both contexts, the term shi referenced and depended upon the prevailing circumstances—environmental, psychological, etc.

I’ve notice that in more modern Chinese taijiquan manuals beginning in the 50s or 60s, the compound “zishi” is consistently used with a meaning of “posture.” In earlier manuals, it is usually just the character shi by itself. Often, for example in Yang Chengfu’s book, Taijiquan tiyong quanshu, it is used interchangeably with the homophonic shi meaning “pattern,” “model,” “form,” or “style” (as in Yang Shi Taijiquan). But I think it is misleading to think of “shi” as it appears in the earliest taiji texts, and in the traditional formula, “shisan shi” as “posture.”

I agree with you. I think "posture" or "position" should be used here. As Louis stated earlier. "shi" or "zhishi" is used later on to mean "posture" or "shi" meaning form or model. I think this makes more since in the context of our discussion.

Speaking, not from the point of view of any real familiarity of Chinese, but, only from the point of view of the form and English commentary on the form, in all the usages in the past that I have seen shi4 to mean something along the lines of a point on a curve - the place where one is "stopping without stopping" - the one dimensional point of the infinitely small pause.

So FWIW (probably less than $0.00) I think that Louis is closer than Jerry.

I also like "disposition" because it can imply an attitude.

Regards,

I would be the first to admit that “efficacious dispositions” is awfully wordy and inelegant. But my intent is to translate what shi means in the context of these old taiji texts such as the Song of the Thirteen Shi, or the Exposition on the Thirteen Shi, (neither of which, by the way, says much about thirteen postures or movements to my recollection) and I think there is a misconception in thinking that “shisan shi” means thirteen postures, as though taijiquan originally was composed of only 13 discrete postures. I’ve seen people assert this, but I think it misses the meaning. I think that the shisan shi are operative throughout the form we know today, however the numbers of forms are counted (85, 103, 108, or whatever), and they are operative as well in tuishou, dalu, and sanshou.

You state, Jerry, that “Clearly shi does not mean movements. It's movements seen in snapshot, the state of play at a high point of a movement, etc. I think that the photos of Yang Chengfu display shi.” I’m not sure of this. I think the photos certainly display shi, but the very fact that the photos freeze Yang Chengfu’s movement means that they cannot entirely capture his shi. We cannot mistake the photo for the shi. This is precisely the point that Jullien makes in the quotation I cited. Moreover, when Jullien writes that “our notion of reason seems incapable of analyzing a disposition without petrifying it,” he is making a profound statement about epistemology, about how we (specifically we as Westerners) perceive reality. I hope I don’t sound hyperbolic here. I’m perfectly serious.

Does Rollback only occur in the sequence Grasp Sparrow’s Tail? If so, what is the “high point” of lu? Is it at its beginning immediately following the completion of Ward Off Right, or is it at the endpoint of the leftward turn before changing to Press, or is it somewhere along the way? Or is Rollback the entire operation, and if so, there is no highpoint at all, but only the highpoint of how efficaciously the performer has engaged the posture and by extension, engaged the opponent? We know, of course, that Rollback is not limited to its occurrences in Grasp Sparrow’s Tail; that it occurs in transitions in the Brush Knee Twist Step sequences, in transitions in the Separate Legs sequences, and in numerous other places in the form, some more explicit and obvious than others. Which of these is the highpoint of lu? If we don’t have a photo of it, how do we determine what is the shi?

"Posture" is OK if it is well-qualified:

My Random House Unabridged has some potentially useful entries for Posture:

*The relative disposition of the parts of something. (God I love that word disposition!)
*A mental or spiritual attitude: 'His ideas reveal a defensive posture.' (YCF tells us that "What one trains in Taijiquan is the spirit, therefore it is said, 'The spirit is the leader, the body follows its order.'" Humm, so, one could say that the posture we train is in some important degree our mental or spiritual attitude?)
*Position, condition, or state, as of affairs.
and in verbal forms:
*To place in a particular posture or attitude.
*To position **especially strategically**: to posture troops along a border.

Tim relates that “He said it’s very difficult to get true meaning from what was meant and how we look at things now along with straight translation. He said it’s nearly impossible to understand.”

I would be the first to say that it’s difficult, but I would hope it’s not impossible.

Great discussion!

Take care,
Louis

I hope it's not impossible. By the way, I'm reading your book right now on Fu Zhongwen and Traditional Yang Style.

Excellent!

I love that word disposition too. It sounds so powerful!

I'm a professional writer as well and there are some words that just "work" for you.

both of you have far more knowledge of the language. I can only give my meager understanding of "disposition" in English usage. Using them in a sentence will make it clearer.

"What is the position of your troops?" asks "where" they placed. "What is the *disposition* of your troops?" (apart from asking about their morale ("how") they feel) is really a question about "how" they are positioned, or "disposed" (spread into position). (Sorry, imho, it has little to do with "throw away" except that it is one way to dispose *of* something.) Anyway, "a disposition" is a mood. "A disposition of" something is obviously different.

The “shi” in Thirteen Shi:

http://www.zhongwen.com/d/182/x213.htm

The “shi” meaning, “form,” “pattern,” or “style”:

http://www.zhongwen.com/d/166/x161.htm

The compound “zishi” meaning, “posture”:

http://www.zhongwen.com/d/171/x186.htm

You all have made some very interesting points about "shi," "posture," "disposition," etc. I think this discussion was begun before, but the exchange did not go as far.

Go back to an earlier point in this thread, I just wanted to add something to the discussion on “Split Energy.”

As I understand the systems the Yangs teach, the term "Ward Off" (peng) Energy is reserved for “lifting” energy, and different qualities are ascribed to "Split" (lie) energy that do not refer to the overall direction of application. Again, as I understand it, Split Energy is supposed to have three aspects: an energy (1) that sends the opponent's energy in two opposite directions, (2) that is executed with a sudden sharp impulse (someone earlier on the board talked about a dragonfly skipping off the surface of a pond), and (3) that is associated with rotation.

I am uncertain, however, how prominent each of these aspects is supposed to be, particularly with respect to rotation. I have not heard that the Yangs ascribe any particular directionality to Split Energy beyond this or that they require the energy to be directed to the opponent's “center axis or center of gravity.” Since some may have apparently been taught differently or have come to different conclusions, this appears to be a case of “different strokes for different folks.”

To give some examples of what I understand to be the Yangs’ teachings, Flying Diagonal features Split Energy, but Parting Wild Horse's Mane features Ward Off Energy. The difference is that the former has the large body rotation, whereas the latter involves a lifting intent. Other examples of Split Energy I have been shown or heard referred to are the arm breaking application of the Roll Back Posture and the wrist breaking (qin na or ch’in na) application of Needle at Sea Bottom. Each was described as involving a sharp attack and some rotation of energy or of the limbs. It was said that both of these postures could also be performed without Split Energy with different results.

Erik, I find your use of the word “rend” interesting, since my best guess about the origin of the character used for “lie” is that it was based on the character for “split/crack/tear” that has the clothes radical underneath. “Rend” would provide some bridge for the transfer of meaning. By the way, another example of “Split” energy I heard from an authoritative source referred to some sort of form or pad used by nurses in China, where the paper could be successfully detached with just the right opposite ripping motion of the hands.

Any additions or corrections would be welcome.

Some thoughts regarding your post of June 5.

The "middle" direction could be the middle path, i.e. the path that stays away from the extremes.

Each of the four things mentioned above (advance, retreat, look left, gaze right) is paired with its opposite, so this can imply that balance, and the general pairing of opposites, is part of the idea of 'central equilibrium' which they lead up to.

'Central equilibrium' applied to the previous four could simply mean "stay centered."

'Central equilibruim' could be a posture as the "middle" direction could be staking (AKA standing or ZZ).

Regards,

'The center of gravity must be stable. If your weight shift is not suitable you might lose your balance. If you are unable to support yourself stably, the move will be wobbly. That is why in the 13 shi4 of Tai Chi, the last mentioned Central Stability (zhong1 ding4) is mainly in reference to one’s center of gravity or weight shifts. The problem of weight shift is extremely important; it can influence the way the entire form is completed and affect the degree of correctness of each move and each posture. Controlling weight shifts is inseparable from these and therefore it must be solved properly.'

I have translated zhong4 xin1 variously as 'center of gravity' or 'weight shift'. Yang Zhenduo typically uses the this term in phrases like zhong4 xin1 hou4 yi2 'shift the weight backward' which could also be rendered 'move the center of gravity backward'.

I visited a few thesaurus websites to see what alternative we might have to "efficacious disposition".

Efficacious reminds me of effervescent, and Speedy Alkaseltzer in a three piece suit, too fancy and arcane (don't mind me, it's late). I wonder what's wrong with plain old effective or efficient?

"Predisposition" can mean spirit or attitude as well as position, and I think that this sort of points in the right direction.

"Stance" can mean posture or attitude, and I think that this is the sense of it. I do note however that stance, stand, and static have the same root, and as Louis suggested might lose the dynamic flavor.

I think that "carriage" is interesting because we are talkng literally about how we carry ourselves. And the term has an old world charm to it.

So I vote for "efficient carriage."

YMMV.