Discovering Internal Principles Through Embodied Practice

[ChiDragon]

14 hours ago, FluffyGuardian said:

But here's the problem. An "essence" is a distillation of something. They are constantly in pursuit of subtracting their own art.
For example, Taijiquan is known for Ba Jin: Peng, Lu, Ji, An, Tsai, Lie, Zhao, Kao.

 

But in today's Taijiquan community, people seem to realize that Peng is "fundamental" whereas the remaining 7 are not. One is not literally using all 8 of those Jins at the same time, but Peng is always present and is the mother of all other jins. 

 

So, due to their mindset, they essentially tossed the other 7 out the window. 
Very often, they define Taiji as "Peng and Song"; they don't care about other jins anymore. The last four hardly ever gets mentioned.

 

When I say that they believe principles lead to or are the "methodology", one example of that is that they might believe if they ONLY practice Peng and Song, they will magically be experts in the remaining 7 Jins. 

The ba jin(八勁) is not coming out of nowhere. The reason they were called ba jin was for a reason. The ba jin are the 8 methods to fajin(發勁) at their most efficient and effectively. They were particularly depicted from the whole set of Taiji movements. They are the best methods to exert the body strength that are called jin. It is not anyone can executed such force. It requires long diligent practice to condition the body to do so. Thus only masters at highest level and at best to be performed such methods. 

It happens to be that peng appears in most of the 8 methods. The other 7 are not ignored. It is only a matter of gesture in performing the fajin methods.

Edited yesterday at 04:20 AM by ChiDragon

[TaiChiGringo]

17 hours ago, FluffyGuardian said:

 

I agree with you that methodology leads to principle, but.... in the Tai Chi community, by and large, people believe the opposite. 

They believe that principle leads to methodology, or... they believe principles ARE the methodology.

 

And that's why I wrote methodology beats principles because... in my experience, people who talk about principles often lack methodology or believe the principles is the "how" part. They view Tai Chi as nothing more than a checklist. 

 

They are obsessed with finding the "essence" of the art. A principle, by definition, is a fundamental truth/proposition that serves as the foundation for a system of belief or behavior or for a chain of reasoning." 

But here's the problem. An "essence" is a distillation of something. They are constantly in pursuit of subtracting their own art.

For example, Taijiquan is known for Ba Jin: Peng, Lu, Ji, An, Tsai, Lie, Zhao, Kao.

But in today's Taijiquan community, people seem to realize that Peng is "fundamental" whereas the remaining 7 are not. One is not literally using all 8 of those Jins at the same time, but Peng is always present and is the mother of all other jins. 

So, due to their mindset, they essentially tossed the other 7 out the window. 

Very often, they define Taiji as "Peng and Song"; they don't care about other jins anymore. The last four hardly ever gets mentioned.

When I say that they believe principles lead to or are the "methodology", one example of that is that they might believe if they ONLY practice Peng and Song, they will magically be experts in the remaining 7 Jins. 

There seems to be a trend here.....

 

 

I think I broadly agree with your diagnosis of the problem, but I’d frame the Peng / Song part differently.

 

Peng is indeed one of the jins, but it’s also the structural condition that makes all jin possible. In that sense, Taijiquan can be thought of as Peng Jin Quan (Wang Haijun says this, not my line). And Song is foundational to Peng.

 

So yes, you can distill Taiji down to Peng and Song, or even ultimately just Peng, but only if Peng is understood as a living, trained structural state, not a conceptual checkbox. The problem isn’t distillation per se. The problem is distillation without embodiment.

 

What you’re pointing at with “methodology beats principles” is spot on:

many people treat principles as if they were instructions, rather than outcomes of a long developmental process. They think “understand Peng” replaces building Peng. In my experience, the other jins aren’t discarded because they’re unimportant, they disappear because without sufficient Peng, they can’t actually be expressed. Tsai, Lie, Zhou, Kao aren’t separate techniques you “add on”; they’re directional expressions of Peng under pressure, timing, and intent.

 

So I’d say:

Methodology creates the container

The container allows Peng to emerge

Peng then differentiates naturally into the other jins

 

Where things go wrong is when people try to shortcut that process by collapsing everything into ever-more abstract language, instead of doing the long, unglamorous work of forging the body. In that sense, I don’t disagree with you, I just don’t think the issue is “too much Peng/Song”, but too little actual Peng being trained.

 

There's a good article about the foundational principles (that must be forged through method!) by Wang Haijun:

https://taiji-forum.com/tai-chi-taiji/basics/5-most-important-beginner-s-skills/

 

Relevant quote to this topic:

"Chen Fake taught that there are two types of peng jin. The first is the fundamental skill or strength of taijiquan. The second is one of the eight commonly recognized taijiquan jins, (peng, lu, ji, an, cai, lieh, zhou & kao.) The first type of peng is the core element that is the foundation of these eight commonly recognized skills. It is perhaps best considered in English as a separate term from the peng that is listed as one of these eight skills. All eight jins have their basis in peng that is the fundamental skill."

Edited yesterday at 07:32 AM by TaiChiGringo

[TaiChiGringo]

On 05/01/2026 at 2:18 AM, ChiDragon said:

There are many members had mentioned having a good teacher is a must. However, a good teacher can guide the student to do all the correct postures. At that instance, the student should discover something about the instruction. Otherwise, if the student just said "ok I got it" with no discovery, then it is a different story. If the student got it without practicing diligently, then there will be no discovery and remain in the non progressive stage. 

 

Yes I absolutely agree. In Tai Chi, we are totally dependent on a good teacher to guide alignment, structure, and help us get a 'taste' of the feeling. But at the same time, the practice is deeply interoceptive, so real development ultimately depends on ourselves. Without diligent, self-directed exploration, the guidance remains external, and the body cannot register the subtle sensations that drive more advanced progress. True discovery happens when the nervous system and fascia are actively engaged and sensing the unfolding patterns, not just when instructions are repeated or acknowledged intellectually.

[TaiChiGringo]

6 hours ago, SodaChanh said:

 

Of course, they are people, so they are per definition nuts 😁

 

The opposite is happening in Buddhism where they add and add methods, descriptions etc etc all the time so they lost the essence and groundedness of truth which was simple back in the days. 

 

Maybe Truth should be learned from a simple farmer and Taijiquan only learned from veteran bad ass fighter. 

 

Haha, agreed

Generally simplicity carries more truth than endless layers of method and theory. And for me in my Taiji journey, the practice feels simpler and simpler the further I go. So in my understanding, the purpose of the methods isn’t complexity for its own sake, but to create the framework that allows one to discover that simplicity firsthand.

[ChiDragon]

1 hour ago, TaiChiGringo said:

Without diligent, self-directed exploration, the guidance remains external, and the body cannot register the subtle sensations that drive more advanced progress. True discovery happens when the nervous system and fascia are actively engaged and sensing the unfolding patterns, not just when instructions are repeated or acknowledged intellectually.

 

The nervous system and fascia are actively engaged and sensing the unfolding patterns. At this point, you have gone into the next higher level of fajin(發勁), It is to sense someone's internal strength by Ting Jin(听勁). I think it's about time having someone leading us into the most subtle subject in Taiji. I think you are knowledgeable about the subject. Would you like to have the pleasure to go into that? Thanks!

Edited yesterday at 10:59 AM by ChiDragon

[TaiChiGringo]

3 hours ago, ChiDragon said:

 

The nervous system and fascia are actively engaged and sensing the unfolding patterns. At this point, you have gone into the next higher level of fajin(發勁), It is to sense someone's internal strength by Ting Jin(听勁). I think it's about time having someone leading us into the most subtle subject in Taiji. I think you are knowledgeable about the subject. Would you like to have the pleasure to go into that? Thanks!

 

Yes certainly, I feel I have a solid understanding of Ting Jin and (Chen-style) Fajin so happy to discuss with you

[FluffyGuardian]

17 hours ago, TaiChiGringo said:

 

I think I broadly agree with your diagnosis of the problem, but I’d frame the Peng / Song part differently.

 

Peng is indeed one of the jins, but it’s also the structural condition that makes all jin possible. In that sense, Taijiquan can be thought of as Peng Jin Quan (Wang Haijun says this, not my line). And Song is foundational to Peng.

 

So yes, you can distill Taiji down to Peng and Song, or even ultimately just Peng, but only if Peng is understood as a living, trained structural state, not a conceptual checkbox. The problem isn’t distillation per se. The problem is distillation without embodiment.

 

What you’re pointing at with “methodology beats principles” is spot on:

many people treat principles as if they were instructions, rather than outcomes of a long developmental process. They think “understand Peng” replaces building Peng. In my experience, the other jins aren’t discarded because they’re unimportant, they disappear because without sufficient Peng, they can’t actually be expressed. Tsai, Lie, Zhou, Kao aren’t separate techniques you “add on”; they’re directional expressions of Peng under pressure, timing, and intent.

 

So I’d say:

Methodology creates the container

The container allows Peng to emerge

Peng then differentiates naturally into the other jins

 

Where things go wrong is when people try to shortcut that process by collapsing everything into ever-more abstract language, instead of doing the long, unglamorous work of forging the body. In that sense, I don’t disagree with you, I just don’t think the issue is “too much Peng/Song”, but too little actual Peng being trained.

 

There's a good article about the foundational principles (that must be forged through method!) by Wang Haijun:

https://taiji-forum.com/tai-chi-taiji/basics/5-most-important-beginner-s-skills/

 

Relevant quote to this topic:

"Chen Fake taught that there are two types of peng jin. The first is the fundamental skill or strength of taijiquan. The second is one of the eight commonly recognized taijiquan jins, (peng, lu, ji, an, cai, lieh, zhou & kao.) The first type of peng is the core element that is the foundation of these eight commonly recognized skills. It is perhaps best considered in English as a separate term from the peng that is listed as one of these eight skills. All eight jins have their basis in peng that is the fundamental skill."

 

Another aspect of “methodology beats principles” is that Peng and Song alone do not teach entire categories of skill.

Peng will not teach you qinna. It will not teach you how to reverse or escape qinna once it’s applied. It will not teach leg sweeps, trips, or counters to them. It will not teach you how to punish errors.

Principles are publicly discussable because they are safe. They don't reveal missing content. If the methodology for qinna, sweeps, counters, and punishment isn’t trained, those skills won’t “naturally emerge” no matter how refined someone’s Peng is.

Talking about Peng, Song, and intention costs nothing, reveals nothing, and cannot be used to reconstruct lost methods.

This may also explain why books, aimed at a public audience, only talk about principles. There is nothing to lose by talking about them. Actual training methods, on the other hand, are kept private. 

Edited 20 hours ago by FluffyGuardian

[ChiDragon]

12 minutes ago, FluffyGuardian said:

Peng will not teach you qinna. It will not teach you how to reverse or escape qinna once it’s applied. It will not teach leg sweeps, trips, or counters to them. It will not teach you how to punish errors.

Well, you are talking about two methods and styles. Taiji(太極) and ginna(擒拿) both methods are trained differently. The purpose of each do not ended with the same result. Taiji is an internal art and also it's a form of Qigong. Peng is to Fajin by using the internal force to guide someone away while someone is pushing or grabbing. The technique of ginna requires a lot of grabbing. The defense mechanism of peng is by internal strength other than the emphasis on physical grabbing. Peng requires long time of diligent practice of Taiji to condition the body muscle to build up Jin. Jin is what gives the tremendous internal force for Fajin. Thus Peng is only a technique to Fajin. It happens to be appeared in most of the methods of Fajin. So to speak, you are comparing apples and oranges!

[ChiDragon]

58 minutes ago, FluffyGuardian said:

Talking about Peng, Song, and intention costs nothing, reveals nothing, and cannot be used to reconstruct lost methods.

Perhaps, someone didn't grasps the basic principle of Taiji. Peng is not performed by anyone without the training and practice. It is not a thing that can be learnt in one day then there you have it. No, it is not something like that at all. It takes years of practice of Taiji to develop the internal body strength in order to execute Peng.

Peng is execute by using the forearm only, The forearm moves in most of the Fajin methods. The is why Peng was considered as the major gesture of Fajin.

Edited 20 hours ago by ChiDragon

[ChiDragon]

1 hour ago, FluffyGuardian said:

Another aspect of “methodology beats principles” is that Peng and Song alone do not teach entire categories of skill.

Methodology is only show someone how the do it. Macroscopically, It doesn't help to appreciate more deeply into the art. You can repeat and repeat of what you are doing. However, there is something might be missing from further understanding of the art. That might prevented you from progressing to a hidden level. 
 

Edited 19 hours ago by ChiDragon

[FluffyGuardian]

31 minutes ago, ChiDragon said:

Well, you are talking about two methods and styles. Taiji(太極) and ginna(擒拿) both methods are trained differently. The purpose of each do not ended with the same result. Taiji is an internal art and also it's a form of Qigong. Peng is to Fajin by using the internal force to guide someone away while someone is pushing or grabbing. The technique of ginna requires a lot of grabbing. The defense mechanism of peng is by internal strength other than the emphasis on physical grabbing. Peng requires long time of diligent practice of Taiji to condition the body muscle to build up Jin. Jin is what gives the tremendous internal force for Fajin. Thus Peng is only a technique to Fajin. It happens to be appeared in most of the methods of Fajin. So to speak, you are comparing apples and oranges!

 

Oh right... you're the guy who didn't know what Sanshou was either. 

Let me quote you Fu Zhongwen, Yang Chengfu's disciple, in his own book:
 

Quote

The Taijiquan curriculum begins with practicing the Taiji hand set, followed by single-hand pushing circuit, fixed-step push hands, active-step push hands, dalu, and sanshou, then comes implements training, such as Taiji sword (jian), broadsword (dao), spear (qiang), and so forth.

 

As you can see... sanshou is a word even Yang Family members used. 

And contrary to what you thought Sanshou meant,, they do not mean Sanda, the sport. 

The same is true for Shuai Jiao. It also refers to a genre, not just a sport.

And the same is also true for Qinna. It also refers to a genre. 

Taijiquan traditionally has Sanshou, Shuai Jiao, and Qinna methods. 

But you are a classic case of exactly what I have been talking about. You don't even realize what you don't have; you didn't even know what the words meant.

[FluffyGuardian]

Quote

Peng is execute by using the forearm only,

 

Ooof... yikes...

[ChiDragon]

1 minute ago, FluffyGuardian said:

 

Ooof... yikes...

 

5 minutes ago, FluffyGuardian said:

Peng is execute by using the forearm only,

Oh, yeah. That was the basic principle. Yes, you may assume that I don't know anything. However, do you know how much I know that you think I don't know? 

[ChiDragon]

By definition he is using the forearm to Fajin, that is Peng Jin. The practitioner is explaining the principle to show how the most effective way to Fajin. 

[ChiDragon]

 

Find the principle, learn the principle, apply the principle.

[FluffyGuardian]

23 minutes ago, ChiDragon said:

 

Oh, yeah. That was the basic principle. Yes, you may assume that I don't know anything. However, do you know how much I know that you think I don't know? 

 

Wow. So Taiji's Peng went from "five bows, whole-body power" to "forearm only."

Damn... is this the trajectory Taiji now...

After "Peng and Song", is the next stage: "Peng and Song... but only in the forearms"

...

Quote

The practitioner is explaining the principle to show how the most effective way to Fajin. 

 

Oh.... really now... you actually understand his Chinese?
 

He made zero mention of Peng and forearms.  

He did, however, repeatedly used words like Dantian, Qi, Waist, Ma Bu, Twisting in the foot, Zhen Jiao (Shocking foot), Li, etc....

 

Edited 19 hours ago by FluffyGuardian

[FluffyGuardian]

4 minutes ago, ChiDragon said:

 

Find the principle, learn the principle, apply the principle.

 

Oh god... this guy is not good.

 

9:27 - "Turning my face away so I don't have to deal with the incoming blow"

Let's put this into perspective... in Boxing... they are perfectly fine with getting punch in the face.

Getting punched in the back of the head (Rabbit punch), on the other hand... is illegal in Boxing. Even Boxers don't want to get struck in the back of the head.

And to then... spin out... giving the opponent your back from a grappling range....

Edited 19 hours ago by FluffyGuardian

[ChiDragon]

2 minutes ago, FluffyGuardian said:

Wow. So Taiji's Peng went from "five bows, whole-body power" to "forearm only."

Using the forearm is only the general description of Peng. You need to know what is the principle behind it. He doesn't have to mention it. It was understood by definition of what Peng is. He had demonstrate by his gesture. 

[FluffyGuardian]

1 hour ago, ChiDragon said:

Well, you are talking about two methods and styles. Taiji(太極) and ginna(擒拿) both methods are trained differently. 

 

You're not being very consistent here....

So... according to you... I am not looking at Taiji here, right?

Edited 19 hours ago by FluffyGuardian

[ChiDragon]

2 minutes ago, FluffyGuardian said:

 

You're not being very consistent here....

So... according to you... I am not looking at Taiji here, right?

I have no idea what is in your mind. If you are more consistent, then you might be!

[FluffyGuardian]

1 minute ago, ChiDragon said:

I have no idea what is in your mind. If you are more consistent, then you might be!

 

Well, earlier, you mentioned how Taiji and Qinna were "two methods and styles". And that Qinna involves a lot of grabbing. 

And that they are so different that you said: "you are comparing apples and oranges!" 

And then... you showed me a Tai Chi video... of a guy using... Qinna...

In other words... the video is titled apple, and the content was about oranges.

[ChiDragon]

7 minutes ago, FluffyGuardian said:

Well, earlier, you mentioned how Taiji and Qinna were "two methods and styles". And that Qinna involves a lot of grabbing. 

 

This is Ginna, not Taiji

 

[FluffyGuardian]

7 minutes ago, ChiDragon said:

 

This is Ginna, not Taiji

 

 

Here is Chen Yu, grandson of Chen Fa;ke of the Chen Family, doing some of the same Qinna as your Qinna video
 

 

 

 

In Aikido.... this is called Nikyo.

In Chinese martial arts... this is everywhere.

White Crane has it... Bajjiquan has it... Taijiquan has it (or some who preserved it still do at least)... but like... this is very common in martial arts across culture. 

Chinese martial arts are said to have four genres: Ti (Kick), Da (Hit), Shuai (Throw), Na (Grasp). 

Edited 18 hours ago by FluffyGuardian

[ChiDragon]

Ginna do not push the opponent away from the body like Taiji. The goal of Ginna is to disable and control the opponent.

[ChiDragon]

17 minutes ago, FluffyGuardian said:

Chinese martial arts are said to have four genres: Ti (Kick), Da (Hit), Shuai (Throw), Na (Grasp)

All martial styles has these similar techniques. You can't lump all the styles together and be confused about them.

PS

Please keep in mind, a competent Taiji practitioner has a Taji body. 

Edited 18 hours ago by ChiDragon