The Wing Chun skill called YI — The Power of Intent

[marvin8]

Wing Chun Mind Force
Jun 28, 2020

In this three part series I discuss a vital skill/ability/idea in Wing Chun called in Cantonese Chinese YI. It is a word usually translated as 'Intent' and sometimes as 'Meaning'.
For many years in my training I was aware of this skill and began using and experimenting with it, with some input from my seniors, yet never knew that it had a name until I read Sifu Horace Chu's essay in his father's Book of Wing Chun Vol 2. I wrote to Horace and discussed the term, which he spelt 'Yee' and then recently I came across a fantastic video by
Sifu Mark Ho, a long time student of Sigung Chu Shong Tin, from Sung wing Chun, Sheffield, England.

In the next two videos I will demonstrate using Yi unarmed and in the third video I will talk about using Yi with the Wing Chun weapons.

You can check out Mark's excellent seminar here -
https://youtu.be/sgUZo8p5Jnc


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8v_0qg88iEQ

Wing Chun Mind Force
Jun 30, 2020

Carrying on from Part 1 I talk about and demonstrate how to use your Yi (Intent/ focused mind) to apply force to another person.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMvbmOJCDh8

Sung Wing Chun - Chu Shong Tin method in Sheffield
Feb 12, 2019

Mark Ho from Sung Wing Chun discussing the importance of Yi Sik in the Chu Shong Tin wing chun method.

https://www.sungwingchun-sheffield.com/



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgUZo8p ... e=youtu.be

[GrahamB]

I watched the Mark Ho seminar - quite enjoyed that, thanks.

[robert]

I watched the Mark Ho video. It's a pretty good discussion of standing, song, and yi. It reminded me of Mike Sigman introducing one of his Internal Strength seminars.

[wayne hansen]

Why are all those so called internal arts stealing stuff from wing Chun

[LaoDan]

Intent can be thought simply as being similar to wanting to pick up a glass [the intent or meaning behind the action] and the body responding without having to consciously think about it. Training allows us to do actions without having to focus our attention on the steps required. So, what you talk about with yi being in-between the conscious and unconscious minds is perhaps OK; and that with training we have developed a “neural map” or “primed our nerves” (they already know how to accomplish the task) which allows us to perform the actions without devoting conscious thought to them is also probably OK. But these things are not really special; science already knows about these things and they are not exclusive to martial arts (indeed, everybody does these things every day).

What makes it seem more special is that various demonstrations, like those you do, illustrate how we seem to overcome resistance differently when physically trying to oppose force vs. the effective use of what seems to be less/minimal effort (i.e., using intent instead of strength).

So, how do we explain the difference between ineffective physical strength, and when “moving with intent” rather than with strength seems to be able to succeed? This I do not think that science has studied well. I address some related concepts in the following article:
http://slantedflying.com/what-the-unbendable-arm-can-reveal-about-taijiquan/

More specific to your demonstrations, I would speculate as follows:

Under stress we tend to initially tense up and contract our postures (to prepare for subsequent actions). We can see this if we watch what happens when someone is startled. When not in contact with a potential opponent this response is probably OK. But once we are in contact with an opponent, and dealing with their force/pressure on us, that instinctive contractive response is counterproductive. We want to train our bodies to respond differently than that instinctive tensing reaction. The tensing leads us to use the wrong muscles and therefore they subsequently require us to “force” things. In TJQ the quality we seek is peng (like a properly inflated ball that receives force without collapsing or pushing back; or like a pine tree limb receiving snow).

So what does physical effort do differently than when moving with intent? When we try to lift up against resistance we tend to FLEX our arm; but when using “intent” instead, we EXTEND the arm. Flexing uses the yin muscles that are better designed for absorbing force rather than projecting force, which is the function of the extensors or yang muscles. When someone uses “muscular strength” to push against resistance from one side to the other, we tend to lead with the body and this again FLEXES our arm rather than EXTENDING the arm as is done when one instead utilizes trained “intent’ to move the arm. Rather than using the biceps, we should be using the triceps and the muscles of the back (and, by extension, all the way through our structure and into our feet which push against the ground, i.e., whole body power instead of isolated arm strength).

Unless trained to maintain the potential to change from absorbing to projecting (using yin muscles then yang muscles) and vice versa, people typically react to failed actions by trying to add even more of the same thing. If pushing does not initially work, then push harder! I would argue that, instead, we should push DIFFERENTLY. It is difficult for most people to change actions when what is required is opposite the initial one. How we initiate an action can be the most important factor, especially when acting from contact and under force/pressure from an opponent. We should train to avoid the drawing in reflex unless we are deliberately using it to absorb and pull the opponent.

[Bhassler]

The demos in the second video are silly. The first two are just a matter of body positioning and leverage. The third one is, too, but it's a little bit more complex in the movement. All this stuff is easy to do when you direct someone to push on your arm-- and is not really relevant when someone is attacking *you* instead of trying to awkwardly dominate your arm from a bad position. Learn a couple of simple mechanical tricks, add in a bunch of mumbo-jumbo talk about Chinese words, and POOF, this guy is the Adam Mizner of Wing Chun...

[Bao]

Intent can be thought simply as being similar to wanting to pick up a glass [the intent or meaning behind the action] and the body responding without having to consciously think about it.

Exactly. Yi means "idea". It's just an idea of doing something that tunes in the whole body to do something. Just a simple idea. Yi is what makes us ride a bike. We just do it. Learning the mechanics to ride the bike is not using yi. But the process of learning something, like riding a bike, builds up the yi necessary to do it. Then all of the technique is preserved in just the idea of riding the bike. When you have built up this "idea," you don't need thinking about the mechanics anymore. The yi, this idea of riding the big, triggers the mechanics.

[wayne hansen]

Yi,intention is more like focus
I see people whose focus is anywhere but where it should be
This is the hardest thing to teach most people
Like a flag waving in the wind
Does the flag move
Does the wind move
No the mind moves