Yi quan and qi concept

[Sprint]

First of all it wasn't my translation wiseass. It was a translation and explaination of the meaning of an article by a native Chinese who taught literature, history and traditional caligraphy. I'll go with that any day before someone for whom the language is not native.

The "translation" that you posted had information in it that was not in the original. Dacheng pointed up a link to the orignal in Chinese where anyone could go view it. You have conveniently overlooked (or maybe hoped that people had forgotten) that extra information, not in the original, made it into your "translation". It made you look a fool back then, it makes you look a fool now.

Secondly there are a lot more people posting on yiquan than just Dacheng.

Here's what you actually said "I'm just curious as to how many people in this thread actually study or have studied yiquan for any length of time." No one? Why am I not surprised.

You are expecting people to justify themselves...... to you...? Because what..you're the expert? And what's more is you hurl insults at people who draw attention to the fact that you post questionable, if not downright false information. You can't attack the truth of what I say, so you try to attack me instead.

[Wanderingdragon]

I'm just curious as to how many people in this thread actually study or have studied yiquan for any length of time.

I don't mean going to a workshop once a year and then doing some standing and walking. Nor do I mean reading books and watching videos.
I mean real yiquan, the whole nine yards. In case some didn't know already zhan zhuang, shi li, shi sheng and mo cha bo are all qigong methods.

Myself, it's been more than a decade learning from students of Zhang Chang Xin, the Han brothers and Kuo Lien Ying, all students
of yiquan's founder. All of whom neither denied nor overemphasized the place of qi in yiquan. If anyone remembers the four part interview with
Cui Rui Bin posted several weeks ago he clearly stated that his teacher Yao Zhong Xun acknowleged even the presence of empty force of all things
within the practice. Yu Yong Nian, one of the few surviving direct students of Wang Xiang Zhai teaches the empty force part of the art. Li Jiang Yu who
possibly spent the longest time with Wang also believes in the qi model.

FWIW

small John

I am still not convinced that Yiquan is an art rather than a skill set that comes after a period of dilligent committed practice of the arts in general. If I'm not mistaken Master Wang himself was a Xing I master as well as having a great working knowledge of Tai Chi and BaGua, before his art [i]evolved [i]. IMO Yiquan cannot be taught , and is only the evolution of any art studied with dilligence, giving one the ability to act upon intent without considering the necessity of motion , as far as Qi , Ki, Chi ,? it is the motion.

[jjy5016]

Sprint I expect people who comment on the contents and how to's of a system to at least have practiced it at length, not from books, videos, magazine articles and correspondence courses. Otherwise false information is spread about the system, which is why most people only think of the standing when it comes to yiquan.

If all you can do is bring up an article that someone else translated as embarassing me then that's a pretty weak argument.

The fact remains that there are a lot of people talking about and voicing opinions on yiquan that come from what they've read or seen on video without having had consistent practice and/or instruction from someone qualified. I don't call training with someone once a year or for a couple of weeks at a time ongoing instruction and correction. The system can not be transmitted properly in that manner. I don't believe it qualifies someone to answer specific questions about the system.

The information I post about yiquan is neither false nor questionable. It is however quite different than what one reads in ebooks and magazine articles on the subject. It comes from third generation teachers that have passed it on to me. Where does your information come from? Who was/is the teacher that made your knowlege of yiquan such that it can question my statements? Please tell me so that perhaps I might actually take what you say seriously.

[Wanderingdragon]

jj, as a student of the system, and myself being interested in learning from a qualified instructor, could you give an outline of the curriculum. All I have been introduced to is standing and pushing, but when it comes to fighting, even in demonstration it is shown to be similar to american boxing , in hand techniques as well as footwork. It would be great if you could shed sdme light.

[jjy5016]

If you're a student of the system then why not ask your teacher?

I. Zhan zhuang - many differnt postures, types and purposes.

II. Mo Cha bo (Friction stepping)

III. Shi Li (Testing Strength) several different types

IV. Shi Sheng (Testing / Using the Voice)

V. Fa Li (exerting force)

VI. Tui Shou

VII. Jian Wu (Martial / Health Dance or freeform practice)

VIII. Free Fighting training

There is also bag work, long pole and short stick exercises for developing power & proper body method. There are also different punching drills & techniques for self defense that don't fall under the other categories. There are also sitting postures and some do postures while lying in bed.

My book will be much more detailed.

[Franklin]

John

if your not joking about your book... i look forward to checking it out when it is finished...

i know writing a book is a lot of hard work...
i wish you the best in your endeavor

franklin

[Sprint]

If all you can do is bring up an article that someone else translated as embarassing me then that's a pretty weak argument.

You have obviously forgotten your own words. You held your "translation" as being the last word in accuracy and authenticity. I remember you were very forceful in saying that your own teacher had personaly instructed this professor to do the translation and that it could not be more accurate or complete. You even submitted it as a jpeg to add to the so called authenticity. Crucially though, either you or your teacher had added words that were not in the original. I am inclined to think that it was you who added to it and that your teacher had no idea what you had said or done in his name. So you were just trying to make yourself seem big and important and unfortunately for you, you were found out.

And here you are again trying to sound big and important. "I'm just curious as to how many people in this thread actually study or have studied yiquan for any length of time." No one? Why am I not surprised.
This in spite of the fact that one person with around 20 years yiquan experience had posted quite a bit of sense already.

As for taking me seriously, I do not care what you think about me.

[klonk]

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=4451&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=75#p81030

i'm amazed that all the zhan zhuang threads end up the same way, every time.

All yiquan threads too. It is an odd thing. I call it...

The curse of T

.. ..

[jjy5016]

Well Sprint your memory of the incident is a bit different than mine but it seems to bother you much more than it does me. I wonder why? Regardless you seem to keep wanting to go back to something that has no bearing on this discussion and suggests a personal issue.

Not trying to sound big and important. Just offering my own experience as another fourth generation yiquan practitioner/disciple.

Otherwise, I'm still waiting to hear who your yiquan sifu is / was.

[martialartist]

lineage is important.

one thing is though, if you read Master Wang's articles, nothing he was describing was "i chuan" version of martial arts, but rather simple principles and philosophies of his understanding and experience...

so all the talk about 'i chuan' lineage risks turning into a discussion about egos instead of principles.

[Wanderingdragon]

[quote="jjy5016"]If you're a student of the system then why not ask your teacher?

I am not a student of the system, I am an interested student of a different art that has already led me to much of what is being touted as Yiquan, as I said, the fact that it is a system is still in question to me. The standing , pushing and stepping are all just steps towards proficiency in every style , whats the difference between the health dance and american footwork dance in any boxing gym ,as a matter of fact , other than the pile standing what makes it any different than american boxing. The body machanics are part and parcel of every TCM. As a result I have no teacher because I honestly believe no one truly understands what Master Wang had developed well enough to teach it. I know of few Masters in TCM that even come close , of those, they believe as well, that it is only dilligence and evolution that will take you there.

[jjy5016]

Apparently I misunderstood you Wanderingdragon.

As far as I can tell boxing and yiquan are very different. Some prefer to adapt boxing techniques into their training while other teachers who studied other cma integrate techniques from those systems into their yiquan.

If you believe that no one understands yiquan enough to teach it then why bother asking for an outline of the curriculum?

[Sprint]

Well Sprint your memory of the incident is a bit different than mine but it seems to bother you much more than it does me. I wonder why? Regardless you seem to keep wanting to go back to something that has no bearing on this discussion and suggests a personal issue.

Not trying to sound big and important. Just offering my own experience as another fourth generation yiquan practitioner/disciple.

Otherwise, I'm still waiting to hear who your yiquan sifu is / was.

I'm not surprised it does not bother you. Anyone devious enough to add complete crap to an original text as a way of supporting a really dumb argument is not likely to be embarrassed when caught out.

For others who do not recall: John stated that certain yiquan practices had to be done at certain times of the day in order for the qi to flow correctly or some such. Unfortunately he did not even bother to check whether his made up "facts" corresponded to actual recognised theory on qi flow, meridiens and times of the day. Doc Stier pointed out his errors. Unabashed John then produced a "translation" of a text by WXZ (with bits added) to "prove" his case. Dacheng pointed out all the bits of the translation that had been added, which surprise, surprise were all the bits that supported Johns "theory". Dacheng also provided a link to the original article in Chinese so people could see for themselves.

Now this clearly does not bother you John, but I think it is important for people who are genuinely curious about yiquan on this forum to be made aware that you are quite relaxed about embellishing the truth to suit your own ends. For that reason among others it does have a bearing on this thread. This is especially so when you also expect that everyone needs to justify themselves to you.

I don't know about a book but I could see you heading up a cult.

[jjy5016]

Ah yes, the time of day thing. Unfortunately I don't read Chinese and was taking notes by hand, not making them up for the sake of posting incorrect information to suit my argument. My bad. If that's the way you see it then you just go right on thinking about it in that manner.

Your memory serves you very well when it comes to trying to discredit me.
So who was / is your teacher Sprint? Why can't you remember where your expertise in yiquan comes from and share it with us?

[EightExtremesBoxer]

I always figured Yiquan wouldn't really be a style, but a distillation of the essence of what are called internal martial arts. That was before I had really practiced it and was pretty much me buying the style's marketing line. Now, having been introduced to it more properly, I'm not so sure. Or rather, I'm pretty sure it's a style, because it has it's own, distinct way of doing things, but I'm now led to think about what a style exactly is anyway.

The styles that have always worked best for me have been the ones that felt more... pedagogical than dogmatic. That's what I always thought of Systema. That it really isn't a style at all as usually conceived, but just a way of training. Yiquan is definitely similar in that respect. That's also kind of what I think about Bajiquan's emphasis on basics and power training. If you consider a style to be something which has to have a lot of techniques, forms, etc., then maybe some of these ways of training aren't styles at all. It's one possible viewpoint. Ultimately, I think they're just different styles.

Now further on Yiquan : I'm not sure it's necessarily any more focused on formlessness (and therefore "style-lessness") than many other styles out there. It has formlessness as a goal, but so do most other styles and forms of fighting. That said, I think Yiquan is pretty awesome, so that's not a put down at all.