How much of Yi Quan is re-packaging?

What's the difference between "whole body strength" and jing?

If the animal shapes got dropped why can I see Yi Quan people doing 12 animals applications?

Is it anything to do with communist attitude of "rotten old traditions" and only name-changes is the real difference between Yi Quan and Xing Yi?

There are large differences between different Xing Yi styles - is the difference between Yi Quan and Xing Yi even further than that?

Yi Chuan teaches combat science, principles. Wang the founder boiled it down, but only after he learned so many other things. Does it still have all the things he learned and knew before he created it?

Out of A, B, and C just B is chosen and A and C left behind, but the creater knows why and his knowledge is reinforced by A and C. He cannot erase them from memory. If all you were taught is B, would your knowledge and skill of B be as profound and thorough? I think not.

My realization is that arts that generate good fighting skill in 2-3 years do not usually provide the same steep learning curve after that. It levels off.

Very good answer.

But there are Xing Yi styles that are also very minimal - many people practice only 5 elements and nothing else but become good fighters. Even only fundamental underlying principles of 5 elements, not "forms". Some stories of fighters only learning 1 or 2. In their case "B" is even less than in Yi Quan, so they must also be able to get a profound depth of understanding.

Ji Ji Ke also learned a lot of things and he too filtered out only what he found essential from an informed place, leaving much behind. He also learned many other things, particularly wide group of weapons arts which influenced him. He did science also - everything tested for real in life and death combat in battle - live blades, not boxing - if it's not scientific he would be dead and no transmission.

But your answer is true - after Ji Ji Ke many people have added. The essence of Xing Yi is to learn from nature - therefore it is also scientific. Animals evolved over millions of years with continual testing by nature. For instance when Tuo (crocodile) attacks he comes from the water and catches his prey. If the prey is big he can't drag it straight back into the water so he makes a strong lateral turn with his body, twisting in a special way, using leverage to pull the prey down and over into the water. If you watch this you can learn Tuo from nature as long as you can adapt it to human terms. This is the real meaning of Xing - it's not a form, it's an essence derived from a tested action. So if you look at Tuo form, you can see someone has done it before. If it's not scientific, crocodile will starve.

So I'm pleased Yi Quan is scientific, but so is Xing Yi.

What I’ve gotten from reading Wang Zhang Zhai’s books and articles (unfortunately not in original Chinese), he never claimed that he had invented anything new. He simply went back to the roots of Chinese martial arts, restating and reinventing essential principles and skills, trying to leave behind artificial trash which always attacks all human ideas and/or practical disciplines, eventually killing them. But then, I might be wrong.

But original question is was it from Master Wang or from Mao Zedong/communist? Master Wang died in 1963 it means he has height of martial arts during anti-tradition communist activities and Great Leap Forward. Everyone in China has to reject old "trash" or they are in big trouble, if not they are anti-revolutionary to support rotten old traditions. Not everything they said was trash was trash.

As far as I know WZZ was not very popular with Chinese communist regime. I Chuan was called a “hooligan’s art” and he was eventually prohibited from teaching anything but health aspect of his art. Chinese Communist Party has ruled China since October 1949. If you read an interview with him, published in two Beijing newspapers in 1940, you will find out that all of his essential ideas on martial arts and their trainning methodology were already fully developed.

Thanks - good info.

But Communists had strong influence in China from 1935, and Marxist ideas from earlier. 1935-1949 was period when most positive light on communist teachings - no negative consequence yet and massive popular support is growing. Then they treat Marx and Lenin like Lao Tzu and Confucious - esteemed philosophers. Formal founding of CCP was 1921.

All fighting arts were "hooligan arts", so he's not special in that.

What does he say in those newspaper articles about relationship with Xing Yi? Had he already changed name from Xing Yi by 1940? In revolution did he support Mao or other faction?

Thank you - I appreciate your help. I hope for more good info.

Sumi

It looks like he changed the name of his system to I-Chuan in or around 1925. Check this link for additional information.

http://www.yiquan.com.pl/history.html

As far as Hsing I is concerned, the original Hsing I, according to him, didn’t have training methodology of 12 animals or theory of mutual promotion and restrain of five elements. There were only five elements representing five different forces. It also didn’t have any fixed routines, techniques or forms. If you’re interested you can purchase a translation of this interview at

http://members.surfeu.fi/yiquan/

They have some other material there too.

I have no knowledge of his political affiliations. I know he was very critical of some traditional Chinese ways and customs, namely superstition, secrecy and master-student relationship, but I seriously doubt that Marxism had any influence on his theories. But as I said before, I might be wrong.

Thank you.

Yes I'm satisfied of it. 1925 is very early for name change.

Common traditional theory on Xing Yi is other way - original has only ten animals and not five elements. Five elements and extra 2 animals (Tuo and Tai) were add later (maybe Guo Yun Shen).

Many say 12 animals come from 5 elements, but easily other way. 2 animals add much later than 5 elements.

Henan and Shanxi/Hebei branch at very early point - Ma Xue Li and Cao Xi Wu is evidence for it if compared now.

For those of you who are interested, this is from an interview with Wang Xiang Zhai (my translation):

(talking about early Xing Yi Quan practice) "There was also no theory of the creation and destruction of the Five Elements in the art, the names (of the Elements)were only used to describe five types of power. There were no hand method or forms of the Five Elements.

I remember the words of my teacher: Metal represents the tendons and bones containing potential force. The intent is strong enough to bore through stone, to cut through metal or slice through steel.

Wood refers to having a curved surface area, like a tree with a structure able to support weight.

Water refers to force like a flowing river, active as a dragon or snake, when used, there is no hole it cannot penetrate.

Fire refers to a force like gunpowder, the hand moves as if brushing the hair aside, with a force that feels as if it burns to the touch.

Earth represents a heavy and substantial force, expansive and sinking, it is as if you are a primal force, connected to the earth and sky, united as one. This is called the unification of the Five Elements.

This is unlike the practitioners today, who think that 'this' fist is used to counter 'that' fist. If one looks at the situation and then thinks about the 'appropriate' counter technique, and then moves to counter the enemy, it would be rare indeed to find such a one that was not defeated every time."

I didn’t want to post a copyrighted translation but that’s it. Thanks Tim.

George

Is it 'thinking', this 'fist' counters this 'fist', or can that literal interpretation be easily turned around as well, to that 'force', counters that 'force'?

The actual word Wang uses is "quan," literally "fist" referring to the Five Element Fists (or forms). I think you could substitute the word "force" or "technique" and the meaning would be the same.

Tim, that's basically my main point. In my experience the two are used interchangedly and 'misunderstandings' can often arise because of this.

"This is unlike the practitioners today, who think that 'this' fist is used to counter 'that' fist."

Who in Xing Yi thinks that?

I didn't meet them

Fujiwara, there are lots of people who think that way. You're lucky you haven't meet them

Does that imply that it is their 'thinking' or 'philosophy' that has to change; or is it a symptom of much deeper problems?

Interested in weapons meaning in Yi Quan (sorry if should be new discussion). Spear so fundamental in Xing Yi - no understand spear, no understand unarm. Ji Ji Ke first master spear, second master unarm. So unarm comes from spear.

Can anyone comment on Yi Quan weapon meaning?

Thank you.

Yiquan has practice with wooden pole (white-wax wood usually). So actually it's very much like spear.

As for possibility of Wang being influenced by communism. He started developing yiquan around 1925 already, and you can know his views on xingyiquan from his work from that period: "Yiquan zhengui" (Correct path of yiquan). Then his yiquan developed over some years, and it became quite different from that early stage, when he started teaching in Beijing in 1937. 1937 - 1947 was when he actively taught what we call 'mature yiquan' (or what is also known as dachengquan). You can know his views of this time from interviews for a Beijing newspaper around 1940 and from his work "Quandao zhongqu" (Central axis of the way of fist). This was period when Beijing was occupied by Japanese, and Wang couldn't be much influenced by communists. When communists took over, Wang could only teach zhan zhuang and other basic methods as health practice, and very few people were able to learn from him yiquan as a martial art. Also from around 1941 it was his assistant Yao Zongxun who was much more active in teaching. Yao's yiquan became more boxing-like (influence of western boxing), but those changes were approved by Wang.

Thank you. Pole - good news - Xing Yi Pole and Xing Yi Spear same - make no difference.

I'm already convinced he's not directly influenced by communists. They are most strong in west of China at that time, only "underground" activity in Beijing during Manchu revival under Japanese. Just similar idea on faults of old traditions, maybe different source.

But these are not true faults of Xing Yi. Only faults of people, not faults art. Every art has these people faults.

Different question: does that mean that students who learn from him during 1937-47 call it "Da Cheng Quan" and students other times that call it "Yi Quan"? Or is it more complicated?

Another: did Wang teach some students fighting skills in secret, as other masters did when their arts were banned by the communists? Do these people from zhan-zhuang-only time form a distinct group among Yi Quan practitioners today?

Maybe I should research myself - but you guys have done it already, so I thank your patience.