Yiquan and dachengquan. The name dachengquan was given to this art around 1940 by some students of Wang Xiangzhai. This name was commonly used until 1947. But from beginning Wang was against using this name, so later he told his students to use rather the earlier name - yiquan. In later years he himself was talking rather about quanxue (fist science) without using any specific name. Some people representing those lineages which started in 1940s still use the name dachengquan. Those who represent lineages of earlier version use name yiquan. But also those who learned in 1940s when the art was called dachengquan, changed the name back to yiquan later, according to Wang's wish. Some of them use both names interchangeably.

Yes there is a distinct group of zhan zhuang practitioners (or "health yiquan". Wang used to teach some of them something more in 1950s, including some martial aspects, but at that time it wasn't as much combative as it used to be before. It was Yao Zongxun - Wang's assistant in 1940s, and kind of half-official successor, who was preserving this more combative yiquan/dachengquan. But even he for quite long time didn't teach all of this. Even his best of students of 1950's - 1960s lacked this extremely combat oriented practice which was standard before. Only after "cultural revolution", when in end of 1970s Yao could come back to Beijing (being earlier sent to work as horseherd), and saw that popularizing yiquan would be possible, he decided to give his twin sons Yao Chengguang and Yao Chengrong and some other young people (like Cui Ruibin, Liu Pulei, Wu Xiaonan) recommended by his elder students (who were too old already to be able to take it) some years of extremely hard, extremely combative practice, with a lot of stress put of full contact fighting.
So now there is big difference between people like Yao brothers, Cui Ruibin and some other yiquan fighters and other people teaching yiquan.

Very good info.

Thank you.

So, how does one practice yiquan if there are no forms? Is it just standing and push-hands? And if so, what techniques does one use during push-hands if no techniques were learned? Or is it supposed to be some sort of zen freeflow of the mind?

Yiquan is not just standing (zhan zhuang) and pushing hands (tui shou). Yiquan contains: standing (zhan zhuang), slow moving "testing force" (shi li), slow moving "friction steps" (moca bu), fast "issuing force" (fa li), dynamic breathing "testing voice" (shi sheng), pushing hands (tui shou) and free figthing practice (san shou). This is just rough sketch. In standing (zhan zhuang) there are two groups: jianshen zhuan ("health" standing, or literary: "building body" standing) and jiji zhuang (combat standing).
Standing (zhan zhuang) is basis for slow moving (shi li). As yiquan founder Wang Xiangzhai said: "zhan zhuang and shi li are actually the same thing - shi li is zhan zhuang extended in space, and zhan zhuang is shortened shi li". In zhan zhuang you seek 'this', and in shi li you test 'this'. "This" or "thing" (wu) as Wang was saying is hunyuanli (holistic force), which is about the same as nei jin. Zhan zhuang is simplifying the situation, which makes the progress in developing hunyuanli easier. You start from seeking it in the simple basic directions, then come other directions, changing directions and "all directions at the same time". This is partly about body mechanics, partly about coordination between mind and body and also the feeling of readiness of being able to use any part of your body, issuing force in various ways at any moment. This jin is everywhere at any moment, being ready to be issued.
Zhan zhuang is simple, cause you do it in just one point of movement, not in long movement. In shi li you have more complicated situation, cause you go through many, many points, checking if you are able to keep this all the time, not loosing this hunyuanli. Wang Xiangzhai said: "Zhan zhuang is most basic, but shi li is most important". Shi li you start from simple basic directions, like: forward-backward, opening-closing, upward-downward, then there are other other directions, from simple movements, to more complicated, from single movements to linking them together in changing order in kind of an improvised form, and to free movements and beeing still able to keep this hunyuan li. With fa li it's similar, from single exercises to linking them together in improvised form. Then shi li and fa li are linked together in jianwu or jianshenwu (health dance) - , or jijiwu - combat dance, where in free movements you express the principles you learned and understood, and your pushing hands and free fighting experience.
There are also many other, supplemental exercises.
Pushing hands is just something helping the free fighting training. This is not pushing hands for sake of pushing hands. So when we talk about techniques, there is no reason to talk about tui shou only. We can talk about san shou. Now, this talk of no techniques being learned. Many people completely misunderstood it. They think there are no techniques, so the yiquan people are just standing or maybe doing some pointless movements. Or some think there is something mysterious in yiquan - you just stand and then suddenly you become great fighter. Or some other think that maybe yiquan gives you something valuable, but you should first learn "standard" martial arts which give you technique, and only then you would be able to get something from yiquan practice. No, this is not like this. Yiquan is quite logical system of training methods which enables gradual developing of abilities and skills needed in combat. When people say: "there are no techniques in yiquan", actually it relates to "mei you gudingde zhaoshi", which meaning is rather like (this is not literary translation, but it gives better understanding): "there are no determined movements to use against some given opponent's movements". This is like Wang himself said: "Figthing is not like usually people imagine: if you use this movement, I will use that movement. It is not as simple as this, but it is also not as complicated as this". This is the kind of techniques which we avoid teaching in yiquan. But it doesn't mean that yiquan fighter fights as some unskilled bar brawler. Yiquan teaches PRINCIPLES. Whether you learn zhan zhuang, shi li, fa li, tui shou or san shou, you learn those principles. Of course, as Wang said: "There is no limit to the development of martial science". So the principles can be changing with time, with different teachers, but anyway, you learn and test the principles in practice (including tui shou and san shou). Actually sometimes for outsider it can look like learning techniques!!! But we call this principle-methods (yuanze fa). What is difference? Those are some very general methods, based on general principles. They can be used in practice in various ways and in various situations. Actually it is not something new for seriuos internal arts practitioners. Actually they talk about it in all internal arts. Some forget it. This was reason why at some point of time Wang felt he had to remember people about it. So yiquan is kind of a try of making such a system, when there is not talk about forms, about techniques, so that practitioners wouldn't go astray. But actually yiquan is not so much different in its "formlessness" and "techniqueless" from xingyi or bagua. Some more stress on learning the methods from practice with partner (tui shou and san shou). Anyway this is all much simpler to explain with direct contact and demonstration, then with text. Soon you see that this is all quite simple and even kind of obvious. Anyway, if want to read more, welcome to my site: http://www.yiquan.com.pl where new stuff about yiquan (including articles by Wang Xiangzhai and other masters) is being added regularly.

wow. thanks for the detailed post. much appreciated.

Tim,
So are the 5 elements simply 5 different kinds of force, or must there be a specific direction of motion that go with each of the elements?

For example, I figured that even a backfist can contain the 'fire' element even though it does not resemble the Pao Chuan in anyway.

Therefore, for example, can a UPPERCUT/BACKFIST contain the 'metal' element, or must any strike with the 'metal' element be forward and downward in motion like a Pi Chuan?

Thank you

Generally, the Five Elements are used to describe methods of generating directional force. Pi is energy descending, Zuan is energy rising...

But, as in the translation of Wang Xiang Zhai's explanation I referenced, the idea of the Elements can also be used to describe different kinds of basic forces, all of which are present in every move.

Thanks for the response, Anthony, I've bookmarked your site. Now, if I could only understand Hsing-Yi......

But while we are on that subject, is it a tradition of Hsing-Yi to overcomplicate its practice? I mean, I have read Yang Jwing Ming's book on it and found that his "interpretations" were merely re-wording of earlier writings and shed little or no light on the subject. I have read Tim and others in here compare it to western boxing in some aspects. Is this because it is relatively few techniques practiced repetitively in order to obtain a high degree of proficiency? Apparently, some of the earlier masters had dismissed the importance of the elements in relation to training. How can this be if they are so integral to the moves? Or is it just some philosophical mumbo jumbo and I am overcomplicating it (and blaspheming? My apologies if I am)?

Kenneth,
This will be a big help to your better understanding Xing-Yi: Read all of Tim's postings on the Xing-Yi strand. Really! Tim has been posting answers to such questions for a couple of years now (so there's a wealth of information at your fingertips right now). Just scroll down each column & look for "Tim" (or use another, more efficient means such as a search).

If you don't have the time to do this right now, then here are some quick answers:

5-Elements Theory isn't necessary; but it can be useful (to some extent) to help explain certain aspects of each basic move: such as a feeling or direction (water gushing up, metal axe falling down, etc.).

Relatively few techniques practiced in Xing-Yi? No! Rather, relatively few base (basic) directional movements are practiced (say prior to the forms training when they are integrated, refined, & varied). Regardless of any order taught, Drilling, Splitting, Smashing, Pounding, & Crossing each represent directing ones energy in a certain general direction (expressed with the whole-body motion emphasized in Internal Martial Arts Schools; though such are present but not necessarily emphasized in many External Martial Arts Schools -- but enough trivia...)...

As Tim explained in one posting, the principle of a Drilling motion (such as an upward & forward or upward & outward or upward & inward motion) can be applied (expressed) technique-wise in many ways, such as:
(1) Obviously it can be used much like a Western Boxer's uppercut (that is, as an upward punch in which your punching hand turns palm-side up/skyward) -- this is what the novice & some outsiders see (this & usually only this is what they see); but Xing-Yi's Drilling is much deeper than just this;
(2) for instance, Drilling can also be expressed as an uprooting push (by first making light, somewhat "slow" contact & then accellerate; you can use an open hand & turn your palms a different direction for variations on this theme);
(3) or as a Chin-Na (grappling/locking) technique (see "Lifting the Spear to Strike the Tiger" pp. 145-146 of "Practical Chin Na" by Zhao Da Yuan -- translated by Tim);
(4) or as part of a set-up for a throw (see "Opening the Mountain & Entering the Door" sequence starting on pg. 105 of "Practical Chin Na";
(5) or, along with appropriate footwork & positioning, even as the base for an uprooting (arcing) throw in which your hands never touch the opponent (I've done this using an upward varation of the "Shoulder Stroke" starting Pg. 54 of "Effortless Combat Throws" by Tim Cartmell -- the same Tim whose postings I encourage you to read; this is very effective & done correctly you feel as if you haven't done anything to the other guy as he is literally launched away);
(6) or as a forearm blow (apply it against an opponent's arms, or try it against his collar bone to control or break); &
(7) as an elbow blow (particularly useful if drilled straight up overhead -- this simple variation got me out of a tight spot once).

Note that these are but some of the applications/expressions/techniques of what's known as Drilling. And Xing-Yi is not alone, for some other arts do the same (teach basic motions as a base for beau-coup techniques & more) -- it's just that we don't always see applications until we study, practice, & often get advice (because none of us can see EVERY application to any given general body movement; but reading this posting & all of Tim's postings as well as a few choice others on this website will give you a great head-start).

Some of these techniques derived from the basic practice will look exactly like the basic practice. Others won't; but all will have the same basic properties/principles of directing your whole body's energy in a primarily upward direction. Once you get the feel from practice & have the understanding of the upward movement principle in your mind, then some useful variations will develop as you study further. You'll have plenty of very useful techniques by way of understanding & applying the principle/principles &/or strategy/strategies involved (principles & strategies are sometimes entwined like in a Venn diagram, uh, er, you know, like in two interlocking circles).

Likewise, just as the practice of the whole-body motion in Drilling teaches us principles/ strategies about (generally) upward movement, the practice of the whole-body motions of Smashing, Crossing, Splitting, & Pounding teach us their respective principles/strategies from which we can derive many basic techniques & even more variations on those basic techniques.

So by learning the one (or the few, if you will), you then learn the many (much more efficiently than trying to learn the many one-by-one). THIS HAS BEEN A "QUICK" ANSWER -- THERE'S MUCH MORE GOOD, RELEVANT STUFF ALREADY POSTED (SO IF GO BACK & READ IT WHEN YOU CAN MAKE THE TIME TO DO SO, THEN YOU'LL MOST LIKELY BE WELL PLEASED & WELL ENLIGHTENED ABOUT XING-YI).

P.S.: The purpose of learning Xing-Yi is to defeat someone who would otherwise defeat you. So always ask yourself questions like: "Could a master of Xing-Yi survive many battles empty-handed against experienced & sometimes armed foes if he were only allowed to:
(1) punch (with no body parts allowed to touch his opponent other than his fists or open hands);
(2) use five types of basic punches (left & right) without any variations of the motions involved in the strictest practice of those five;
(3) use a Crossing "punch" only after first executing in order a Splitting "punch," then a Drilling "punch," then a Smashing "punch," then a Pounding "punch;" and also
(4), respond to any variation of a Drilling move by an opponent of any style with a basic & strictly unvaried Crossing "punch" (and supposing he had just finished a Splitting "punch" countermove to the opponent's Smash-like initial attack; the opponent's second move being a Drilling-like move because he doesn't adhere to a strict interpretation of a 5-Elements Theory; so now our Xing-Yi master must retaliate with Crossing but can't until he first goes thru the cycle of punches)?"

Obviously the answer is "No!" So then one has to seek practical logic to it all or else discard it as not being useful to you (but before you completely ignore a facet of IMA, you may first want to ask someone such as Tim for advice on the matter as there may be a practical usage that you're just not seeing).

I've given you pearls here!

You evaluate the Xing Yi Classics/Transmissions etc, in the 'light' of your own training. They are a guide/aid to practice, not a basis for speculation and conjecture, or an end in 'themselves'.

Oh great! Mike Taylor is now a Xing Yi know it all! What's next? I wonder how the Marines would use Xing Yi...

Chris,
Really?

"Speculation" (a noun) comes from "to speculate" a verb stemming from "speculor, to view, to contemplate, & from specio, to see." Were not these traditions written? And if written, were they not meant to be seen & to be read -- and perhaps even read aloud to be heard? And having been read &/or heard, were not these teachings to be contemplated ["to contemplate" is (1) "to view or consider with continued attention; to study; to meditate on; & (2) to consider or have in view, in reference to a future act or event; to intend." (Do we not see/hear these teachings & study them keeping in mind that they may be of use to us in the future in the event we come face-to-face with a dangerous enemy?)].

"Conjecture" is used above as a noun meaning, "(1) Literally, a casting or throwing together of possible or probable events; & (2), Idea; notion." ["Idea being the conception of something visible...& notion the conception of things invisible or intellectual...but the words are constantly confounded."]. Merely by being on this sight, do we not imply (if not outright assume) the possibility & even a probability of needing martial knowledge (visible as well as intellectual) during some unknown future event?

You write that "You evaluate the [Classical written stuff of Xing-Yi] in the 'light' of your own training." -- implying that this is what should be done.

I say that it's more accurate that one would want to evaluate his or her own training in light of all of that classical written stuff (well, if not all, then in light of that part of the whole body of works which one has had access to, can reasonably figure is on task, & can be understood). Here's why (in question form):
(1) we make the assumption that such writing were written by masters of Xing-Yi, an art we wish to study & get to know both physically & mentally in the event that we may need such knowledge in the future (be it near or far, or unexpectedly not at all); if not, then why are we even thinking about using such records in any relation to our Xing-Yi training?
(2) most can accept that they don't have access to all records; and they also usually understand that it's better to study & understand what little they might have than to waste their time vainly seeking or lamenting what's unavailable.
(3) not all ancient (or not-so-ancient-but-wannabe-ancient) Chinese writtings are on task; at least one writer took two separate things such as one of the martial arts that he was proficient in & a popular philosophy of his time & locality which he was also proficient in & then meshed 'em all together in book form; his intention may have been more to impress the rich & powerful of his day than as an honest attempt to make learning that particular martial art any easier for would-be students (for after his book caught the eye of the rich & powerful they eagerly sought him out, hiring him as a bodyguard or instructor, but not necessarily learning any martial art from him themselves -- they being the "armchair intellectuals" of their day);
(4) Understanding is usually a prerequisite to appropriate usage (of course, there are always exceptions); & (now for the meat of all of this...)
(5), If understanding the portion of the sage writings that one has which are actually concerned with the task at hand (learning how to defeat someone that would otherwise be a conqueror of one's self), wouldn't one as a non-master student who desires to know the whole art want to check one's own progress in the art by this understanding of what the masters of the art had to say about it?

Or, as a non-master student of the whole art of Xing-Yi would one choose to put the Xing-Yi masters on trial for the art they either created or cultivated & attempted to pass on?

As for myself, a non-master student of Tai-Jitsu (my particular chosen art form -- also an "internal system", I have gone to train at other schools & have outrightly & summarily rejected some of the master teachings due to perceived (but not necessarily real) conflict with my art's master teachings (I say not necessarily real conflict, because sometimes after further study I can resolve my initial error of perceived conflict). It's more difficult to un-learn than it is merely to learn having a clean slate to begin with; so I sometimes err on the side of caution when learning about some aspects of another art.

The classical writtings themselves can't (without one's physical involvement in the art) teach one Xing-Yi. So in that sense they are not an end in themselves, but rather a means towards a goal. I agree that they can be a guide & aide to one's practice of Xing-Yi (& other martial arts as well).

Even though all who know me don't agree, I have learned much about Tai-Jitsu by dabbling in Ba-Gua, Xing-Yi, & Tai-Ji at Tim's Shen Wu Academy. Tim is a great teacher (& I've been around a bunch -- I've even been one myself, but so far I still pale to Tim's teaching style); he is also very friendly & generous with his knowledge; I again suggest reading or re-reading all of Tim's Xing-Yi posts if you are seeking understanding of Xing-Yi. Certainly there are other knowledgable sources, but why waste this valuable source while you're at the site anyway?

P.S.: Most of my quotes above are from Noah Webster -- a master of American English. Please. don't for one moment think that I think you a fool. I don't. Sometimes I feel a lesson in semantics is necessary so that we all understand each other better. After all, we post to help understand or to be understood (usually a bit of both). At first reading even I thought every word rang true, but then I paid closer attention (having forgotten some of the meanings of some of your words myself -- you'll also note some of my recent typos, eh?) Take care Chris.

Hey Meynard,
I was wondering when you were going to pop up over the ridgeline.

How are you doing? I read that you're getting pretty good with your martial arts. Congratulations! Your hard training is paying off.

Now about being a Xing-Yi know it all...hmmm...(just when I thought I had written way too much already -- but I'll make time for you, buddy). Try re-reading my post & this time pay attention (me? well I'm too poor to pay attention, but you're not). Note that I said words to the effect that:
(1) none of us could possibly know EVERYTHING about any given movement;
(2) I haven't said all there is to say; &
(3) It's a good idea to read Tim's postings (you know Tim: the Xing-Yi expert & your instructor who knows beau-coup about Xing-Yi & thinks highly of your own perseverance).

Now I ask you, does that sound like a know it all (I'm saving that attitude for next week's postings...just jokin' guys-n-gals out there that don't know me)? Have you heard of Pearls Before Swine? A wise man warned me not to try to teach pigs to sing. He said that I would fail miserably while only succeeding in annoying the pigs. He was right, but I keep repeating the same darn singing lesson from time-to-time. It's been a year now. Are you in voice?

All Other Readers,

I like to joke with Meynard from time-to-time as he's Army. As for anyone curious about how the Marines would use Xing-Yi, I say, Go ask the Marines -- 'cause I ain't one (4 I B X-Marine). I tell a lot of Marine stories. I could also tell quite a few Army stories, but then Meynard might like that & I wouldn't be able to annoy him. And I just can't allow that. Later folks!

Hell..., Mike if i didn't think anyone even read my posts, let alone pay close attention to them. I'll have to remember to dot my ayes and cross my tease in future....

Thank you for the detailed response, Mike. The detractors here never made clear exactly what it was about your post they disagreed with (especially considering that the gist of your advice was to read Tim's posts), but to an open mind, any opinion can offer a perspective from which to approach a subject that one wishes to learn. By the way, Taijutsu is awesome, like a BJJ that needs no additional arts mixed in, though I see why one would want to study "sensitivity" based arts such as Tai Chi to enhance one's practice. My Taijutsu instructors actively encouraged such an approach as opposed to most who have the "my style is THE one" prejudice.

What annoys me about Mike is his long winded posts. The truth is I don't read Mike's post because he doesn't really train in Xing Yi or Ba Gua. He just has a lot to say. I'm really not sure where he thinks he gets his credibility from. I trained with Mike and overall his a good guy, but he is an over weight out of shape middle aged guy that I havent' seen in a Xing Yi or Ba Gua class in almost 2 years. He likes Shen Wu and admires Tim, but never goes to class. My advise to Mike is to train more and give less advise about classes or arts that he doesn't really attend or train in.

Chris,
I like your sense of humor.

Howdy Kenneth?,
Thanks for reading & understanding my main point. I was beginning to wonder about some post "readers'" abilities to do this. One of my friends told me that my writting style is often difficult to follow. I may try to improve it someday (but then how could I annoy Meynard?).

About Tai-Jitsu & BJJ,
My exposure to ground-fighting methods after years of basic Tai-Jitsu practice were no where close to those learned in the first few months of BJJ practice. In my Tai-Jitsu classes, groundwork per se wasn't even practiced (let alone emphasized). And while Tai-Jitsu principles will work in groundfighting (because they're the same as BJJ principles), the actual feel, short distances, & certain angles that come about in groundfighting will throw someone off if they haven't spent enough time studying & practicing groundwork applications.

OUCH
but

Meynard,

Have I got a(n) (i)deal for me! Why don't you "pay" Tim for me to attend formal training on a regular basis now that my health is back but my pockets are empty? Put YOUR "MONEY" where your mouth is -- for me -- & I'll be there; Wadda-ya say? Is it a deal or what?

In this way we can change a "rotten old tradition" & start a "rotten new one" (well, maybe not so rotten for me, eh?

I know your above posting is an attempt to get me back in class, but...Hey, did you call me out of shape? That's just wrong! I had a fine pear-shape going on the last time you saw me!