The search for jibengong

[phil b]

When I studied Hung Gar with Jim Uglow, it was all about the basics. The "warm up" was the biggest part of the class. Later, when I was teaching beginners, they asked me to take them through the "warm up" I had to go through. I had 11 people in that class, next week I had three. Most people don't want that kind of training, it's hard work and bitter.
The "warm up" consisted of basic exercises to open the body, lot's of kua work, at least thirty minutes of stance work, upper body training that used the stances (so more stance work) two man drills including da saam sing (three stars) and other bridge training (all with stance work). There were also other exercises that Jim would teach individually, such as pole work, jars, tendon changing. It was brutal, but there was no deceit! When training with seniors, if you hadn't been doing the work you got found out very quickly.
Paul Whitrod teaches the same way. You have to be honest with yourself because when you're having a private lesson with someone like that, they are going to see right through you.

It's good to see some interesting discussion on the board.

Phil

[kenneth fish]

Jim is one of the few "open door" teachers who teaches the Hung Gar foundation. I have a lot of respect for him - I know he encountered some "resistance" from the Chinese community for it.

Iskendar : yes. Exactly.

I had a semi-closed door school for about 14 years - I always taught this material from day one. It quickly weeded out those who had illusions.

BTW - it is not just men who trained and taught this way. My Tongbei teacher (who was very skilled at Mianchuan, Taiji, and Xingyi as well) taught me this way for over a year. I thought I was going to be crippled.

Fu Suyun, who represented China at the 1936 Olympics, taught this way for a while. I discussed this with her at length - she was disgusted with the younger generation in general, Americans in particular. "Everybody wants what they see I have, but nobody wants to do the work that I did". She is right, everyone wants the end product - the skill and ability, but very few are willing to endure the training that takes you there. Jackie Chan is a great example - the training he and his classmates went through was sadistic - but all of them have remarkable skills. His classmates were grateful to their teacher in later life.

[klonk]

I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that zhan zhuang, if you do enough of it, lays a sufficient foundation. That's a pretty big "if," because people often don't. You not only have to do a lot of it, you must do it in the right way and with various postures, not just the stereotypical tree hugging.

I'm setting this out there for refutation, as much as anything. It is what is claimed and believed by many. ZZ is, at least, adequate foundation for what I am doing. This may be the old problem of me not knowing what I don't know. My aim, and I am succeeding at it, is to "put the foot into the hand," so to speak.

If there are levels and dimensions I have not glimpsed, that raises the old problem of explaining music to a deaf man. As I say, I'm setting this up with the idea that anyone who wishes to naysay, may.

[marqs]

I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that zhan zhuang, if you do enough of it, lays a sufficient foundation. That's a pretty big "if," because people often don't. You not only have to do a lot of it, you must do it in the right way and with various postures, not just the stereotypical tree hugging.

I'm setting this out there for refutation, as much as anything. It is what is claimed and believed by many. ZZ is, at least, adequate foundation for what I am doing. This may be the old problem of me not knowing what I don't know. My aim, and I am succeeding at it, is to "put the foot into the hand," so to speak.

If there are levels and dimensions I have not glimpsed, that raises the old problem of explaining music to a deaf man. As I say, I'm setting this up with the idea that anyone who wishes to naysay, may.

I don't really know what kind of training other posters are talking about, or what kind of development it produces so I don't want to comment on that.

ZZ is useful, but it's difficult to learn & strengthen some things without shi li or something similar. And shi li can be really painful and hard, as much so as ZZ. When you've done enough of shi li (or similar), you can do the same in ZZ. But you can't really skip the step of learning movement before integrating that into your ZZ. It might be possible to get all that with just ZZ, but at least my experience has been it's a lot easier to learn things separately and bring them back to ZZ.

Also ZZ can be done in so many different ways that calling it with one name might give the impressions it's one exercise. With the different ways to do it, the form is the same, what's practiced and developed is not.

[klonk]

Marqs, yes, I'm talking about ZZ as integrated into a program that includes movement (silk reeling in my case, not shi li). Just doing ZZ in a vacuum might not show you much.

I've encountered this idea of "don't just do something, stand there" in karate, taiji and qigong, one of the powerful ideas in martial arts, but it's one piece of the whole.

[klonk]

[...]
Also ZZ can be done in so many different ways that calling it with one name might give the impressions it's one exercise. With the different ways to do it, the form is the same, what's practiced and developed is not.

I mean, of course, ZZ as it pertains to connecting foot upwards to hand, and other body bits together into one thing. What I mean by it is tied to the context, but you're quite right, people can say what they like, and mean anything at all by it.

`When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.'

`The question is,' said Alice, `whether you can make words mean so many different things.'

`The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, `which is to be master - - that's all.'

Alice was too much puzzled to say anything, so after a minute Humpty Dumpty began again. `They've a temper, some of them -- particularly verbs, they're the proudest -- adjectives you can do anything with, but not verbs -- however, I can manage the whole of them! Impenetrability! That's what I say!'

`Would you tell me, please,' said Alice `what that means?`

`Now you talk like a reasonable child,' said Humpty Dumpty, looking very much pleased. `I meant by "impenetrability" that we've had enough of that subject, and it would be just as well if you'd mention what you mean to do next, as I suppose you don't mean to stop here all the rest of your life.'

`That's a great deal to make one word mean,' Alice said in a thoughtful tone.

`When I make a word do a lot of work like that,' said Humpty Dumpty, `I always pay it extra.'

[klonk]

The larger question I am placing out there is whether I am fooling myself by thinking ZZ is an adequate foundation to strengthen and connect. Stipulated that it is done per its best effect.

*klonk hums* Oh, the foot bone connected to the heel bone, the heel bone connected to the ankle bone, the ankle bone connected to the shin bone...

[Doc Stier]

This is a pretty good warm-up routine.

[kenneth fish]

Zhan Zhuang is not what I am referring to - and neither is the version of Ba Duan Jin that Doc posted. Yes, it is true that if you do not know what it is that you do not know, then you are satisfied with what you know.

Whenever I found a new teacher, they always asked what it was I was interested in or what I wanted to learn. Rather than show off my lack of skill, I always answered that I was very interested in starting from scratch, starting with the most basic jibengong. If they started to show me techniques or form or anything of the sort I would always say that it was too advanced for someone without a foundation like myself, could they please show me something more basic. This usually found a receptive ear - the teachers knew I was serious about learning - that I wanted to liangong 练功 - although in the beginning it seemed like I was trying to plow the ocean, after a time I was able to learn the "martial arts" portion more quickly, easily and accurately.

I learned this with my first teacher, Henry Leung - he told me that was what he looked for in a student (he let me know this after I had been learning for almost a year). Henry started me on real jibengong - the sort of thing he had started with. The other students would ask me why I was just doing basic stuff (some of which was unfamiliiar to them) and they would try to "help" me by taking me aside and trying to teach me the system. Henry told me to ignore them - he was very clear that it was they who were missing out.

Zhanzhuang assumes foundation skills. Without them, you are just standing.

[jonathan.bluestein]

Zhanzhuang assumes foundation skills. Without them, you are just standing.

I both agree and disagree. IMO, it is very much dependent on which posture we're talking about, and at what stage of training. I was taught starting with Hun Yuan Zhuang. The very basic use of Yi and the basics of the internal work were taught to me gradually, after maybe 4-5 months of training. During these months I was also given Kua-stretching exercises. I was then gradually taught San Ti (as a ZZ posture, I trained it all the while doing my Pi Quan) and Wu Ji Zhuang. Over the years there were added more variations on San Ti and Hun Yuan, and the Fu Hu and Xiang Long postures (the latter I don't practice regularly), and also Se/San Bu Pan Gen (small-scale "circle-walking", with four/three step base encircling). There are still about 3 postures which I have haven't learned, including one single-legged posture with a kick held in the air, and others. So the whole ZZ learning process was very gradual, and started from holding a plain static posture and slowly advancing into more difficult postures, with lots of Yi and mind-work involved, and tons of stuff to do with the body while holding the postures, including some advanced Dantian gong (which I am sadly not allowed to discuss, but can say that exists in other XYQ schools since I've seen it first-hand under some circumstances... And Dr. Fish probably knows what I'm talking about). So the ZZ themselves went from absolute beginner level to a very advanced level. There were no jibengong prior to the ZZ, but I can attest that ZZ wouldn't have meant anything if it wouldn't have gradually become more and more complex, and was not accompanied by other basics, such as Shi Li, Wu Xing and basic spear work.

Kenneth - Which type of jibengong would you argue is necessary prior to ZZ training, and why?

These days, doing Pigua jibengong, I really identify with Dr. Fish's words. I've intentionally asked my teacher to learn Pigua very slowly and gradually, even though I already had lots of background with my XYQ. So over the last 6 months, I was only taught 5 basic exercises of this art (out of 12), and I only practice these. I may ask to learn a sixth one soon, but then I'm gonna wait for at least another six months before learning others. What I've noticed is that by only practicing these 5, my body has changed a lot over 6 months in terms of my capacity to generate long whipping power - which is characteristic of Pigua, but rarely occurs in XYQ movements. My heavy hands skill has also significantly improved, and my torso "opened up" a lot.

[kenneth fish]

If I may point this out without ruffling any feathers - what you are describing (as far as Zhanzhuang is concerned) are not jibengong. You started from a point that (generally) assumes some foundation. The problem with this approach is that it is both limited and limiting - you may very well get good at zhanzhuang (although I suspect some of the mechanics will be lacking) - but you do not attain broad and deep skills beyond that. That is the benefit of having trained in kung fu foundations before getting into the style - not only do you build strength, endurance, balance, fine muscle control and so on - you also, by developing fully rounded abilities, decrease your limitations in all motor skills and physical endeavors. My former father in-law learned Shaolin foundation skills and tongzigong as a child in Hubei. He never went on to learn a martial art - but the benefits were life long.

As for what I would recommend - again, i don't think that learning exercises to do Zhanzhuang is the point. The body that one develops from jibengong will allow you do anything in CMA - you will already have the framework.

[jonathan.bluestein]

So would it be correct to assume that by training the foundations, much of what you're referring to is getting rid of bad movement habits, diseases and postural imbalances?

And wouldn't you believe there are examples out there of people who've reached high levels of skill in some IMA, without having trained the sort of Jibengong prior to their IMA training?

Without taking sides here, I believe that your sayings, in this regard, have great implications for many styles and teachers. For instance, and correct me if I'm wrong here - I'd assume that all modern Yi Quan training has this flaw of lacking the foundations you speak of (as they immediately start the beginner with ZZ).

[kenneth fish]

Jonathon: In order:
" So would it be correct to assume that by training the foundations, much of what you're referring to is getting rid of bad movement
habits, diseases and postural imbalances? "

No.

"And wouldn't you believe there are examples out there of people who've reached high levels of skill in some IMA, without having "trained the sort of Jibengong prior to their IMA training?"

Not that I have seen.

As for your last point - bingo. Bear in mind that Yiquan was founded by someone with a lot of foundation training and training in style. As for implications for styles - only as currently generally taught openly in the West (and among the current middle and younger generation in China). Implications for students and teachers - most definitely.

Back when I was running tournaments, I used to make a point of sitting next to Tai Yim and Y.C. Wong whenever there was southern kung fu being demonstrated or judged. It was always evident, regardless of how polished the movements, who "had it" as a result of strong foundation training and who did not. (There was one competitor who was very physically talented - and you could count on him to demo the latest version of whatever Hung Gar set had been shown in the most recent Shaw brothers classic. He was an audience favorite - but Master Yim, Master Wong and I would just shake our heads - to our eyes it was just a hollow shell).

I am not trying to pick on anyone or any style here. Nor do I particularly care if any one individual "gets it" or finds the training I am talking about. What I am concerned with is the larger picture - too many people do not even know that there is pre-requisite work in Chinese martial arts, and if you do not know you cannot even begin to look. This lack of knowledge is what allows fraudulent and substandard CMA to not merely be passed as the genuine article, it allows it to flourish and supplant the real thing because the true tradition is built on blood, sweat, and tears, and is frankly not an egalitarian pursuit. It is not for everyone - only those who are willing to subject themselves to the hardship that real training for real skill requires. That is true of the pursuit of any craft.

[jonathan.bluestein]

What I think now happens in the background is that many people reading your words, like myself, are unsure of which jibengong you are talking of. Granted, it's not all the same - you're discussing different lineages from different parts of China, of different martial arts. So I for one can think of the Jibengong I know from either Jingang Bashi or Pigua, which are very physically strenuous - yet I cannot tell if these could be classified as the ones you're referring to. Strictly speaking - I can't think of anything more basic than these basics of Jingang and Pigua. They can be elevated to a high level of skill and have different levels to their practice, but their basic forms are as basic as it gets. To add to the ambiguity of the situation, you refrain from bringing more concrete examples. Isn't there even one public video on the web that can do justice to these methods? Not even one article? I'm sure you have at least a few you can share to help guide people reading these posts in the right direction, at least in terms of understanding the topic at hand...

When master Zhou started out, he really did start with the very basics. Some really basic stuff from Ditang Quan, Chuo Jiao, Tan Tui and Fanzi. It was only after these that he learned Pigua and all the other arts. When students come to him to learn for long periods of time, he assesses their gongfu first in order to teach appropriately to their level. When my teacher came to him, it was after he had been practicing Goju ryu and some Yang style and modern wushu stuff for many years, and had one years experience with Capoeira. Master Zhou started him with XYQ immediately, with no prior learning requirements. I think it was the same with my Baji uncle, who had about the same background when he came to him, plus some Chen Taiji background. So I assume that master Zhou knew what he was doing when he decided that they already had enough basic gongfu to start XYQ/Baji. When he took his students a few years later to competitions or to meet his own teachers, there were no disappointments - on the contrary. As I know master Zhou personally and have also learned from him, and from what I'm being taught by my teacher, I know he doesn't ever hold back in his teachings. So I figure that if he had thought there was something essential for us to learn that we needed, he'd have taught us that. Just like he taught me some Jingang Jibengong to stretch my body better in the past.

[Andy_S]

SNIP
These exercises are "secret" in that they are usually externally simple, but must be done with a number of "rules" that are not obvious (and usually not visible from the outside) that generate the actual skill if enough "gongfu" is applied - that is if enough time and effort is spent. And like any potent medicine they had equally potent side-effects if taken without the "doctor guidance" ..
SNIP

Very interesting point, if I understand it correctly.

In today's Chen Taiji, the basic exercises - which inculcate torso posture, spinal alignment, stance width, stance depth and stance alignment, foot position and stepping, weight shifts and movement from A to B - are single movements taken from the classical forms, or "silk reeling exercises" in modern parlance.

These can be fairly easily learned in seminar format....in fact, I suspect one could even learn them from video.

However, to learn to do them right, with all the rules in place, is hard work and it takes a damned long time. It has also been my experience under Chen Xiaoxing that there are different ways of doing these exercises..one graduates from one way of doing them to the next. And then, even though the change may be simple - it can be verbally explained in a couple of sentences - it can take months to instill this into the body.

However, IMHO, to bring out the real gongfu, one needs (literally) hands-on correction. When this is done by Chen Xiaoxing or Chen Xiaowang, the stances become incredibly painful and almost impossible to hold.

As a teacher, to be able to adjust the student in this manner is, I assume, a very, very difficult skill to get. The younger Chen Village coaches (who are shit-hot at PH) and my own instructor - who has been teaching this art full time for over a decade as an official representative of the village school - can't quite adjust me the way the older masters do with their touch.

The tricky part is to try and replicate the same stance and posture as the one you were adjusted into by the "master-hand."

Very difficult. Very interesting.