Video

I'm glad that it works for you.

Of the 3 questions that you've asked, I'm not sure that I understand the last part of your question... 1. Because you are trying to get your centre/core/dantian/hara etc. to operate the bending of the lets. 2. Yes, opening up the spine at the back does open the Du channel/meridian on the lumbar area of the spine. 3. I don't understand what you mean by cyclical 'melting'... did you mean circular? You can email me direct at james@taiji.co.uk if it's easier. James.

Thank you.

Yes, exactly the same principle!

Thank you!

Thanks for the comment, much appreciated! James.

Good question! Most people tense in the lower back and don't realise that they are doing so. When they are even slightly tense, they increase the natural curvature of the back, and the pelvis rises very slightly at the back (I give this the 'charming' name of 'duck-bum' because it's a bit like you try to lift the tail feathers at the back, sticking the buttocks backwards). When you feel that tension (and the key is to 'feel' it), you are able to let go of it. However, flattening the back (by tucking the pelvis under deliberately) is also problematic. You might stop doing 'duck-bum', but you haven't actually released the back to allow it to sink naturally; when you force the pelvis to tuck under, it's usually happened because the abdominal muscles have tightened and are causing the lower back muscles to stretch - which is different to 'releasing' them. So the answer is that the back might flatten out slightly, and the lordosis therefore will slightly 'undo' (meaning that the buttocks will drop a little at the back), but the entire process needs to be achieve by stopping holding on in the lumbar region, and not by MAKING it happen. This is very difficult for people who don't even realise that they are tense in the lumbar area - which is the vast majority of people... You know how it is... we all get used to our discomfort and it becomes the norm.

@@taichiqong Thanks James for taking the time for this comprehensive answer. So, letting go into the natural lumbar curve must be the way to go. My personal experience is that letting go into the curve also involves letting go of the front of the spine that is perhaps also pulling the lumbars flat. Would you agree?

@@harveyburns3500 Yes, I agree. When you let go at the back, the front appears to straighten the spine slightly, you might even feel the abdomen or front of the body (even up to the chest) rising a little without your doing anything to make it happen. The key to the entire thing is to let it go at the back rather than forcing it, but I reckon from what you've said that you've got that concept. Incidentally, I write a blog once a month, and this kind of thing comes up on it regularly. You'll find the blog address in the video 'description'.

@@taichiqong Will take a look. Thanks again. H

Thanks for the comment...

Absolutely!

Absolutely NO idea what you're talking about. I don't call it jam jong (although some of my teachers have called it that); I call it Zhan Zhuang as in mandarin, and no idea where salad comes into it.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

Hi, Yes, I learnt with him for a couple of years (about 30 years ago!). James.

You're very welcome!

You're very welcome.

I’m glad it was helpful!

I'm very glad to hear it. I will be doing a few more of these occasionally. James.

Thank you! James.

It sounds as though you are using muscles to 'empty the chest and round the back'. I'm guessing that to 'empty the chest' you're pulling your shoulders forward, and perhaps pulling the head of the humerus slightly out of the socket. If so, this isn't my understanding of 'empty the chest'.

@@taichiqong my impression is that with your backward rotation of the shoulders exercise you achieve the opposite of empty the chest and round the back

Hi, I'm assuming that you've watched both Shoulder & Hip Alignment videos. Video no. 1 is explaining how to align your posture so that the shoulders sit correctly on the body. Video no. 2 is explaining (or starting to explain, as it's a big subject) how to use the arms when you have arranged you posture correctly. In Video no. 1, the body is what you might call 'neutral' - there is no 'hollowing' of the chest and no 'rounding' of the back. Then when you start to use the arms (Video no. 2), you need to make sure that you don't destroy the connection that you've made in the 1st video. From what you say, it seems that you think it is necessary to pull the head of the humerus forward in order to 'hollow'. But actually, keeping the head of the humerus connected correctly to the socket, it is possible to (e.g.) raise the arms ahead of you, without drawing the head of the humerus forward of the socket. The question then arises, how do you 'hollow' at the same time? If, without pulling the shoulders forward, you raise the arms but simultaneously you soften the breastbone, you will then be 'hollowing' the chest (to make it very obvious, breathe out at the same time). Just make sure that you don't pull the HEAD of the humerus forward, the humorous needs to rotate within the socket. By pulling forwards, it creates an energetic disconnection, and tends to tighten the back of the neck which should actually be doing completely the opposite (i.e. it should be softening and therefore lengthening). I have the impression (and it's hard to say because you've said so little) that when you hollow the chest, you think you ought to PULL it forcefully inwards (therefore making your upper spine go backwards) as though you are trying to concave it; I suspect that you are over-pulling inwards to create the hollowing. If you do this, you are creating a great deal of tension in the chest, and if that happens, how can the qi sink? It can't. One of my teachers has said that the feeling of the hollowing is as though the front of the body (chest/sternum/clavicles/xiphoid process/diaphragm etc.) MELT, or as though they liquify and turn to water running down your front. Any tension has the effect of solidifying, and qi is stagnated.

Well, I suppose the answer is 'because you're not going to see very much on camera'. The changes are very subtle... but then thinking about it, you haven't actually said which aspect you'd like to see from the side.

Hi, Thanks very much for your comments, and for making that point; I agree that the point of balance needs to be central in each foot. In Alexander Technique, the point of balance falls directly below the front of the tibia. I don't think that I can attach pictures to this reply, but I wrote a blog about this, not so long ago (you'll find it here: www.taiji.co.uk/post/shoulder-alignment-the-mechanics-1). The second image in the blog shows the alignment quite well. I do quite a few blogs on Wordpress about this kind of thing... jamesdrewetaichi.wordpress.com/ James.

Hi Bob, Thanks for asking about that, really good point. You definitely don't maintain the tilt, and perhaps 'release' is the word. I have a couple of thoughts about this: I think that the buttocks/pelvis/thigh of a horse is called its 'haunch' (may be wrong about the name). If I'm right, the haunch is not just the buttocks, but the entire hip consisting of pelvis, buttocks, thigh, and the division from the torso of the horse is (like in humans) down its inguinal groove (on each side - except in a horse it's sort of underneath the body), and down the crease of the buttocks to meet the inguinal groove on the underside. Okay - so picture that instead of having separate parts - leg, buttocks, hip, pelvis etc. you just have a haunch on each side. The 'leg' is much more than the leg as we think of it, it's the entire hip/buttock structure. Sitting Back (front leg to back leg): We rotate the entire haunch to sit back (this includes the pelvis tilting automatically). Just feel the back haunch rotating as you sit back. Moving Forward (back leg to front leg): We rotate the entire haunch to go forward... What did the pelvis do? It definitely didn't stay tucked under. It released. Sitting Back: We allow the lower back to lengthen, and we shorten the (lower) front. Moving Forward: We observe the opposite happening. The lower back releases (from being lengthened) and therefore shortens, and the front, from being shortened, is allowed to lengthen. Sitting Back (front to back leg): Imagine you're doing a tug of war against 30+ rugby players. You would HAVE to tuck under to be able to move the - i.e. the entire haunch would HAVE to function correctly. Moving Forward (back to front leg): Imagine you have a 4X4 with the brakes on behind you and you're wearing a harness which is attached to your pelvis. It would be very difficult to stay tucked under whilst moving from the back to front leg.

Thank you, I will try to add more info of this kind. James.

You're very welcome!

I know that it is said never to let the knees go beyond the toes, but in my opinion this depends on where the weight is resting on the sole of the foot (as well as upon the flexibility of the achilles tendons). It's quite easy to feel this; if you go into a low stance, but you put the weight further forward on to the front of the feet, you can feel the strain just under the kneecaps. In my opinion, this isn't good on the knees. However, if your pelvis is compensating for the forward weight, in other words if you are counterbalancing with the pelvis so that the weight is over the balance-point in the foot (in Alexander Technique terms, this is approx. on the vertical line at the front of the calf where it meets the foot), the pressure is released from the knees. You can also rock too far back on the heels also (worth the experiment) because you can feel where other parts of you start to grip up also - even up to your neck. Re. the stabilizers/mobilisers point you make, I haven't particularly noticed that going lower brings them into play more easily, but that doesn't mean that you're not right, and it's quite possibly a personal issue. I can think of several of my students for whom it would actually do the reverse and make them freeze up rather than let go in order to hold the position because of the additional work required. When I try it myself, I can see your point, but I'm not convinced that there's a great deal to be gained by it as it seems to take the focus off the body as a whole and focuses it more on the legs. If you google 'Zhan Zhuang old photos' and go to 'images', no one is sitting very low, and some appear to be almost standing.

@@taichiqong Thank you for your detailed response. I will definitely play around with your suggestions and see what I find. Cheers!

@@mountainpeakcloud8442 👍

Thank you! You're right, there's a lot to be said about the knees and the legs in general. James.

You’re very welcome. James.

Absolutely, but what’s your point? This is a short lesson… it’s unlikely in a video that the practitioner will stand still for 40 minutes!!

Why not make a USEFUL comment in Russian. That one isn't terribly helpful to anyone!

Hi, No. I've had a few very good teachers over the years, although not one of them has really put together all the various strands that go together to make this exercise really work, so that it feels 'comfortable' (and as though you could quite happily stay there for hours). If you haven't already done so, take a look at the short video 'Stabilizers & Mobiizers'; it goes a long way to explaining about the disconnection of white muscle tissue (which is what you're aiming to do), and the integration of red muscle tissue (stabilisers). J.

You're very welcome. I've spent a lot of time pondering on balance over the years, and for some people it's DEFINITELY something that needs practising. The key, it seems to me, is the settling of the pelvis (as mentioned in the videos); in Chinese terms, this is allowing the body to 'Song' (pron. 'Song' or 'Sung' - perhaps a regional dialect thing!). This is almost like a draining of stress downwards through the feet, so that all upper body tension 'melts'. One of the big problems, it seems to me, is that when you, say, lift a leg to practise balancing, your focus goes to the lifting leg, and therefore is no longer on the Song process. If balancing is something you'd like to work on, as you go to lift a leg, try not to be distracted by the lifting leg, but keep the attention on the sinking/melting sensation of the body. J.

Thank you.

If only I were confident about absolutely everything... I'm not keen on performing on the piano in public!!!

Couldn't agree with you more. The whole point is that you don't FORCE the pelvis under, it is a release of the lower back (kidneys area/lumbar spine etc.) that is part of the tilt. Not entirely though because you need to engage the front of the body by gently lifting the pubic bone towards the navel. By learning how to do this correctly, I have sorted out my lower back issues that I have had since I was in my 20s.

@@taichiqong Awesome!

If you're referring to the BROADSWORD (not 'jian') resting on my arm, the broadsword is only sharp on one side!!!

@@taichiqong Fair enough I thought it was a Jian/ Gim. Unusual form for a Dao

I do know that some people pronounce it that way, I think it's a dialect thing... My understanding is that in classical mandarin it's as I pronounce it.

Thank you. James.

Thank you for recognising that!!!! James.

Yes, couldn't agree more, and like you, I am resisting the temptation to use that instruction. I sometimes go for 'allow the knees to bend' but that is pretty much the same... By the time that you've said, 'Allow the pelvis to gently rotate, by releasing the lower back, thereby causing the knees ultimately to bend', you've almost lost the will to live, and have definitely forgotten what you were going to say in the first place!

Thanks Jessica! Oscar has serious spinal issues… James.

@@taichiqong and he has lost a bit too much weight :) :) :)

@@RobertAgarHutton So true!

Thank you.

Thank you very much... much appreciated.

A pleasure.