Yang family

[Steve James]

It's not a semantic argument. We're talking about "na," and what it refers to in cma, specifically in tcc.

Grab gives the impression of brute force; seize, secure, or control doesn't. I agree that 'na' isn't simply a grab.

The reason I brought up the different languages is that Anglo-Saxon terms are considered vulgar next to their French or Latin derived equivalents. We think that peeing and shitting are more crass (low level) than urinating and defecating. You say tomato; Mario says pomidoro. Let's call the whole thing off.

However, there's cai, and it's sometimes translated as "pluck." That's also an example of na, and it's one of the 13 thingies.

[D_Glenn]

Putting a spin on the ball so that it curves in the air after it’s hit.

I mean - wasn’t there English words for such in table tennis until recently , is that what you mean. Table tennis was invented by an Englishman.
I just thought your table tennis analogy curved strangely

It’s (I thought) common knowledge, it’s a term used in billiards, tennis, table tennis, baseball, golf, basically any sport that has some implement to affect the rotation of a ball when it’s hit or thrown. I don’t know where or when that term originated.

[D_Glenn]

It's not a semantic argument. We're talking about "na," and what it refers to in cma, specifically in tcc.

Grab gives the impression of brute force; seize, secure, or control doesn't. I agree that 'na' isn't simply a grab.

The reason I brought up the different languages is that Anglo-Saxon terms are considered vulgar next to their French or Latin derived equivalents. We think that peeing and shitting are more crass (low level) than urinating and defecating. You say tomato; Mario says pomidoro. Let's call the whole thing off.

However, there's cai, and it's sometimes translated as "pluck." That's also an example of na, and it's one of the 13 thingies.

Technically ‘qin’ is a seize or lock. ‘Na’ is anything that results in serious harm. Following through with a joint lock and destroying and maiming a joint makes the ‘qin’ a ‘na’. Striking someone in the throat is technically a Na. Pressure points are a Na. Kicking out someone’s knee or following through with a shin bite or ankle hook and breaking something is a Na.

[Kelley Graham]

in yang push hands i was taught that to 'grab' with the fingers was an direct invitation to escalate the encounter to 'fight', not train or play. whenever someone would try to grab me, usually when frustrated, i would stop and ask, "So, you're trying to grab me, do you want to fight now? i would prefer to train." over the years, as a teacher, i wondered the purpose of this rule. "Why not use the hands, after all, what is this thing called pluck?" My ongoing idea is that to learn to lead the mind of your opponent, you have to find the 'hook' in their peng. Any hollow or protrusion becomes a place to attach. What you attach with, and further, the kind of force that can be applied is the skill. this is a deep topic.

my limited shanghai wu experiences are similar, although movements differ. same kind of yi emphasis.

very different than my experiences in the xingyi-bagua partner practice arena.

[everything]

here's some deliberate qin na, arm bar, resulting in a shoulder (ligament) break.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mi7fXtGTwbc



doesn't involve tiger's mouth or any "hand grip". it's pretty subtle, accidentally on purpose, made to look like two guys "just fall"

the guy who executes the "martial arts" move is a known dirty player. probably knew what he was doing. deliberately pulls the arm straight and falls on it.

[Steve James]

Striking someone in the throat is technically a Na

So there's no difference between ti da shuai na? Fair enough, but imo it helps to distinguish, if only to talk about it.

Where I'd agree is that qinna includes strikes. Hey, this is the way I was taught, and it could be wrong, but it works for me.

[Steve James]

Qinna techniques include:
-divide the muscle/tendon
-misplace the bone
-seal the breath
-seal the vein, artery, acupressure point

This is common to all cma.

Yeah, "pluck" is hard to do without using the hands. But, I'm really confused why there's such a resistance to grasping that.

[origami_itto]

It's not a semantic argument. We're talking about "na," and what it refers to in cma, specifically in tcc.

Grab gives the impression of brute force; seize, secure, or control doesn't. I agree that 'na' isn't simply a grab.

The reason I brought up the different languages is that Anglo-Saxon terms are considered vulgar next to their French or Latin derived equivalents. We think that peeing and shitting are more crass (low level) than urinating and defecating. You say tomato; Mario says pomidoro. Let's call the whole thing off.

However, there's cai, and it's sometimes translated as "pluck." That's also an example of na, and it's one of the 13 thingies.

Technically ‘qin’ is a seize or lock. ‘Na’ is anything that results in serious harm. Following through with a joint lock and destroying and maiming a joint makes the ‘qin’ a ‘na’. Striking someone in the throat is technically a Na. Pressure points are a Na. Kicking out someone’s knee or following through with a shin bite or ankle hook and breaking something is a Na.

That might just be something from your lineage, it's not what the word means.

Shuai, Na, Ti, Da, throwing, seizing, kicking, and punching.

Striking a pressure point in particular is referred to as sealing.

Qin na is catch and hold, but it is a different thing than taijiquan "na jin"

I'd argue against cai being na for a number of reasons, but it is something that is "in the fingers"

Perhaps even more importantly, I'd share my teacher's advice that "there's no magic in Chinese words"

[Steve James]

'd argue against cai being na for a number of reasons

Fair enough; what are some. But, which of the things you mentioned (shuai, na, ti, da) should cai be considered?

I can't say that tcc na jin is different from bagua, xingyi, lhbf, etc., na jin. Though, I think it's the same as tcc people who say their shuai 'jin' is different. I'd say the techniques and theories are different. I just don't know enough about the other arts to comment.

Put it like this, from what I've heard right here on RSF, there's not even a single tcc jin. At least, they can't all be the same. And people will let you know that theirs is different.

[origami_itto]

'd argue against cai being na for a number of reasons

Fair enough; what are some. But, which of the things you mentioned (shuai, na, ti, da) should cai be considered?

I guess broadly I would say it's shuai, pluck as I understand or employ it pulls someone up out of their stance or down into a hole, either way it's an unbalancing, a way of compensating for a failed lu to set up another attack.

I've never really thought about the 8 energies in that respect, it isn't really part of Taijiquan per se, but more CMA as a whole. Interesting, though, may look more deeply into that when I have some time for it.

[windwalker]

'd argue against cai being na for a number of reasons

Fair enough; what are some. But, which of the things you mentioned (shuai, na, ti, da) should cai be considered?

I guess broadly I would say it's shuai, pluck as I understand or employ it pulls someone up out of their stance or down into a hole, either way it's an unbalancing, a way of compensating for a failed lu to set up another attack.

I've never really thought about the 8 energies in that respect, it isn't really part of Taijiquan per se, but more CMA as a whole. Interesting, though, may look more deeply into that when I have some time for it.

Interesting

our meaning of the word pluck.
woo-woo alert: viewer discretion advised.

[origami_itto]

Interesting

our meaning of the word pluck.
woo-woo alert: viewer discretion advised.

Thank you for sharing, I am highly skeptical. If you're ever in the US let me know.

[D_Glenn]

Qinna techniques include:
-divide the muscle/tendon
-misplace the bone
-seal the breath
-seal the vein, artery, acupressure point

This is common to all cma.

Exactly.

Ti Da Shuai Na is a general idea of how a conflict progresses. And also ranges, or distance between you and the opponent. First is kicking range, then striking range, then throwing range, then Na. A Shuai can simultaneously be a Na if you have both their arms tied up and drive them headfirst into the ground. Kicking a vital area or joint can be a Na, and you skipped over the Striking and Throwing and went straight to Na. Na is a fight ender. Traditional CIMA, in general, ideally prefers to find less damaging ways to end a fight. Intent (Yi) to scare the opponent’s Hun and Po, is a strike that can end a fight without maiming or causing permanent damage. But it takes decades to train one’s Yi to get it to that level, so the normal ways need to be learned and trained in the meantime.

.

[D_Glenn]

My question is how come nowadays you have all these thousands of people around the world who practice Taiji for an hour a day, for a handful of years, self proclaiming themselves as master Taiji fighters. Then you have the handful of Taiji masters of old, who practiced Taiji for 8 hours a day, for 10-30 years, but somehow they’re not considered competent Taiji fighters?

It doesn’t add up.

.

In todays rapid society an hour is at least comparable with 16 h of the old world…and also 1 hour training + 10 h intellectual taiji musings + a couple of h of video watching = supreme mastery

Exactly.

.

[origami_itto]

I'd say there is a difference between qinna meaning a particular system of techniques associated with a particular art or style and the concept of na, seizing, as applied in general, and that seizing can range from benign to completely destructive.

Control holds are na but they might not even cause pain.