Yi quan and qi concept

[johnwang]

Perhaps IMA do need to move away from talking about qi so darned much.

- Some republican members believe that if they don't keep talking about "tax cut", people won't believe that they are true republican.

- Some IMA guys believe that if they don't keep talking about "Qi", people won't believe that they are true IMA guys.

[dacheng]

要知不用力则可，不用意则不可，乃畏对方之击动而起， 殊不知精神已接受被击，安得不为人击中乎？

Let me try to translate this.

You have to know that it's OK not to use your "force", but it's not OK not to use your "intention". If your move is just to response to your opponent's attack, your mind has already accepted the fact that you have been hit, how can you not be hit by your opponent as the end result?

This one I would call good translation, although it would be good if the word fear remained there.

It make no sense to me at all.

Well, as I said before, WXZ was better in talking paradoxes than using very precise logic. In fact most of his students couldn't understand much of what he was trying to say Only because they witnessed his abilities and skills, they believed he knew what he was saying Fortunately a few of them achieved quite high level and were able to communicate better than Wang

[neijin]

Neijin,
That guy takes a few lines out of the whole interview to try and support is own view and to what point when we can just read the whole article for ourselves.

Your reference to J. Zorya's crazed ramblings... Please say you're weren't serious?


I think reading his whole reply will give everyone an idea of what he actually meant:
....
.

D_Glenn,
I don't understand the sense of your post. Maybe because I'm Italian and I don't speak English very well.
In my post I cited the Kalisz's forum with his interesting considerations on qi. Then I cited a part of WXZ's famous interview. I'm sorry but I cannot past all the source on a forum. Anyone can search the whole text on the net.
I was serious talking about J. Zorya. Her point of view on Qi is similar to that adopted by the Yao's branch of Yi-Quan. So what's the problem?

My original question remains not answered. Is the Qi concept and related terminology useful in MA?

[jjy5016]

Neijin,

One has to take a lot of what he reads lightly. If you can gain something from it then good. If not then don't be too concerned about it.

In the case of Wang Xiang Zhai and his writings don't be concerned about his comments or opinions. Trying to understand his words fully is like reading a college professor's paper on calculus without knowing basic algebra. His understanding of the subject was at a muc higher level than yours and trying to translate it or comment on what the meaning of his words is not much more than someone's opinion. We'll probably never know the exact meaning because there isn't anyone around at his level. (as far as I know) Perhaps the reason that Wang sent many of his students to study with Wu Yi Hui was because he couldn't explain certain things to them in a way that they could grasp the meaning.

As for qi being usefull in the martial arts it all depends on your understanding of it. Apparently Wang Xiang Zhai did believe in certain types of qi because there are exercises within yiquan that are pure qigong such as drawing qi from trees and one's surroundings. Zhan zhuang itself is a form of qigong. I believe that Wang wanted to distance himself from the mystical qi mumbo jumbo that some other teachers were peddling at the time.

Just my opinion though.

[Wanderingdragon]

Perhaps the reason that Wang sent many of his students to study with Wu Yi Hui was because he couldn't explain certain things to them in a way that they could grasp the meaning.

Or perhaps Wu Yi Hui was one of only three, as legend has it, Martial Artists in all of China that he could not defeat. or perhaps because Wu Yi Hui was a proponent of an Art that is at that level of understanding to begin with, or as you say, this was a man that could teach the elite concepts of the Martial Arts that he could not verbalize, one never knows

[D_Glenn]

D_Glenn,
I don't understand the sense of your post. Maybe because I'm Italian and I don't speak English very well.
In my post I cited the Kalisz's forum with his interesting considerations on qi. Then I cited a part of WXZ's famous interview. I'm sorry but I cannot past all the source on a forum. Anyone can search the whole text on the net.
I was serious talking about J. Zorya. Her point of view on Qi is similar to that adopted by the Yao's branch of Yi-Quan. So what's the problem?

My original question remains not answered. Is the Qi concept and related terminology useful in MA?

If you've actually seen J. Zorya in movement you would think twice about giving any regard to what she writes.


Original question: Yes a little but jing and shen are more important, or actually 'yi', as it's our intention that can keep 'qi in the dantian'. What is qi in the dantian? It's better to understand the opposite of it which is basically a flushed face, top heavy as the blood is up and racing, breath is short, diaphragm can't relax, then the mind starts to fail and the skills dissapear. You don't need a huge gut to have 'qi in the dantian', you just need to understand how to relax and maintain calmness or how your yi/intention can control this.


How about this for an answer: Totally misunderstanding a poorly translated description of a somewhat complex chinese concept will never be useful in any MA.


.

[Ian]

IME you don't have to believe in qi to use your stuff for real, but you do have to do the neigong.

In fact it's probably better to just shut up and do the work

[neijin]

D_Glenn,
I don't understand the sense of your post. Maybe because I'm Italian and I don't speak English very well.
In my post I cited the Kalisz's forum with his interesting considerations on qi. Then I cited a part of WXZ's famous interview. I'm sorry but I cannot past all the source on a forum. Anyone can search the whole text on the net.
I was serious talking about J. Zorya. Her point of view on Qi is similar to that adopted by the Yao's branch of Yi-Quan. So what's the problem?

My original question remains not answered. Is the Qi concept and related terminology useful in MA?

If you've actually seen J. Zorya in movement you would think twice about giving any regard to what she writes.


Original question: Yes a little but jing and shen are more important, or actually 'yi', as it's our intention that can keep 'qi in the dantian'. What is qi in the dantian? It's better to understand the opposite of it which is basically a flushed face, top heavy as the blood is up and racing, breath is short, diaphragm can't relax, then the mind starts to fail and the skills dissapear. You don't need a huge gut to have 'qi in the dantian', you just need to understand how to relax and maintain calmness or how your yi/intention can control this.


How about this for an answer: Totally misunderstanding a poorly translated description of a somewhat complex chinese concept will never be useful in any MA.


.

I've never seen her..so I don't know. Her articles seem to be interesting. Nothing more..
Thanks a lot for the reply.

[martialartist]

Originally is only:
要知不用力则可，不用意则不可，乃畏对方之击动而起， 殊不知精神已接受被击，安得不为人击中乎？

In my clumsy translation (neither chinese or english is my first language):
"You could not use force, but you cannot not use mind intent. When you fear when opponent attacks, you don't know but your spirit already received hit, how could you avoid being hit by opponent?"

my Chinese isn't good, but here's how i took it. I think my translation of the first part is a little bit more precise.

"Must know how to not use force, then you can - if not using force, then you cannot. So, if you are afraid when your opponent starts to attack, you really don't know your jingshen (spirit and consciousness' essence), so you've already taken the hit. How could you not be hit?

Unfortunately your translation is a bit wrong. You would need to learn more of 古代汉语/文言。

Maybe you could correct my english, but don't try correcting it too much in part which is about understanding original. I did actually study ancient chinese and did enough number of translations under guidance of specialists in this field, to be able to understand grammar structures used here But in part about when attacks starts you actually did it more precisely, that's right. In other parts you kind of changed it to worse translation.

hi - thanks for your feedback!

could you point out some of the mistakes?

thanks

[dacheng]

It's not so much about mistakes. With old chinese texts many interpretations are possible. However if doing more translations, you can better know and "feel" how various structures and expressions are usually/typically used. Additionally reading and translating more of Wang Xiangzhai's texts can give you better idea about what he was saying and how he was expressing it, what rethorical structures he used to repeat. In various texts in various periods, he was talking about the same things using different language: more classical language and traditional expressions at beginning, modern language in later years. This is something which also helps with translation and interpretation.

But it also seems that you missed expression 'bu yong yi ' in your translation. You repeated 'not using force' twice, while it was 'not using force' first, but 'not using intention' in next part.

So far I see John Wang's translation as most accurate.

[martialartist]

It's not so much about mistakes. With old chinese texts many interpretations are possible. However if doing more translations, you can better know and "feel" how various structures and expressions are usually/typically used. Additionally reading and translating more of Wang Xiangzhai's texts can give you better idea about what he was saying and how he was expressing it, what rethorical structures he used to repeat. In various texts in various periods, he was talking about the same things using different language: more classical language and traditional expressions at beginning, modern language in later years. This is something which also helps with translation and interpretation.

while i know this isn't a language forum, i was hoping you could point out the linguistic mistakes, as it is a tricky subject...

But it also seems that you missed expression 'bu yong yi ' in your translation. You repeated 'not using force' twice, while it was 'not using force' first, but 'not using intention' in next part.

aha, you're right... typo on my part

[klonk]

I am surprised we have not heard more from the theory's staunch defenders. I know it has them.

[martialartist]

what theory?

[Wanderingdragon]

The theory of Chi or the theory of kickass, I think old Master Wang was more into the theory of Kickass, as far as Chi so far as I understand it, it is simply the life force. Together I would venture to say, by emptiness you have simply the life force necessary to kick ass, surely overly simplified, but I am a Dragon I don't think I just do

[martialartist]

Chi is not a theory...