dedicated to the discussion of the chinese internal martial arts of xingyiquan, baguazhang, taijiquan, related arts, and anything else best discussed over a bottle of rum
kenneth fish wrote:There is, to the best of my knowledge, zero evidence for Xingyi prior to the 18th century. Xinyi, its root, is a 17th century development.
IMAS wrote: Xingyi was developed with the concepts of Yi Jin Jing, and so is Wing Chun but with more improvements.
IMAS wrote:Kwok Fu was not in good health since the cultural revolution but Lun Gai was doing okay up to 1998 in Foshan to carry on the Yip Man tradition. There is no real difference between Foshan and Hong Kong in the Yip Man system. Chi Sau did not took up in a big way in Foshan when Yip Man went back there in 1917 but certainly there were some influences on the Wing Chun community. So, I think Chi Sau is a good way to setup some standards.
IMAS wrote:From the Mawangdui archaeological site, qigong daoyin is said to be dated back to the western Han Dynasty (206 BCE – 9 CE),
According to the sources, it's more likely to have been developed by martial artists in the beginning of the 19th century. It wouldn't be very close related. But it has a clear connection to daoism and daoist practice.the question is whether Yi Jin Jing is related to Daoyin.
Taoism is not fully evolved as a philosophy at that time.
and making Taoist Daoyin as a standard for IMA is irrelevant.
GrahamB wrote:So, 11 pages in.... Did we decide if Wing Chun is an IMA?
IMAS wrote:GrahamB wrote:So, 11 pages in.... Did we decide if Wing Chun is an IMA?
I think we have established some sort of ideas on what IMA should be, and Taoist Daoyin is not it.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests