YCF form differences

Postby Wushuer » Fri May 14, 2004 1:13 pm

OYT,
While reminiscing about the past and history is, by itself, a worthwhile endeavour...
What real purpose is served by dwelling on who did what and when?
Does it matter to your everyday practice if Chan San Feng was the originator of TCC? Does it matter who learned which portion of TCC when or where two or three hundred, or a thousand, years ago?
If your instructor knows his TCC, and he's teaching you in good faith, and you're practicing regularly and applying martially...
That's what's truly important.
Isn't it?
My current instructor has a real grasp on TCC. He knows his stuff, better, much better, than I do when it comes to the martial apps. He has been taking the time to show me the gaps in my martial knowledge. He has been taking the time to then show me in the form where this or that technique is best performed so that I can take that technique, add it to my "intent" in form training and thus improve both.
I think it's really very cool to know at least the general outline of who invented TCC, who passed it on, where it came from, what they did. Don't get me wrong I've been caught up in the eternal debate before myself.
What I'm trying to say is...
It makes no difference to me, truly, who invented TCC, who passed it on to who, when or where. As long as MY instructors are genuine in their knowledge and are sincere in their wish to pass that knowledge on to me.
You will know, hopefully much sooner than I did, whether or not your instructor is passing on genuine TCC knowledge, or is milking you for a paycheck.
That's what matters now, today.
Wushuer
 
Posts: 631
Joined: Wed Nov 06, 2002 7:01 am

Postby oldyangtaijiquan » Fri May 14, 2004 3:12 pm

I think that the history is important. There is not important "who" created TJQ (also beacause it was not created by one person but through time), but we must know it origins.
Not only the Yang Taijiquan is a useful martial art, so is important what style you want to learn! Maybe you trust to your "instructor" and is not inportat what style he teach to you . Maybe for you is important only that he pass to you his "genuine knowledge", but for me is also inportant that the knowledge is "authentic".
Many instructors blend more martial arts and say that this is a "secret" version or pretend that is authentic, so if you want to learn a "Yang Style" is important to distinguish what is authentic (Yang Style) and what is not.
To distinguish what is authentic and what is not you must know the origins of the style!

[This message has been edited by oldyangtaijiquan (edited 05-14-2004).]
oldyangtaijiquan
 
Posts: 73
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2004 7:01 am
Location: Slovenia

Postby Wushuer » Fri May 14, 2004 5:21 pm

OYT,
How much more "authentic" do I need the lineage I'm learning to be than that my teacher learned his stuff from one of Grand Master Yang Zhen Duo's own disciples, then Master Yang Jun and Grand Master Yang Zhen Duo himself? He has not only the disciples permission to teach me, but Master Yang Jun and Grand Master Yang Zhen Duo's permission as well.
Is this important to me? Sure. I wouldn't have taken instruction with him if he didn't have his bona fides.
How much more "aunthentic" of a lineage are you seeking than learning from the direct representative of the Grand Master whose father's name IS the form I'm learning?
I will also take instruction from Master Yan Jun when he gets to our neck of the woods for the seminar this year. Is that "authentic" enough of a lineage?
It is for me.
But once those bona fides have been established, how much more time will you spend seeking out the "authenticity" in the TCC they are teaching us?
I'm not interested in learning what others claim is "authentic" or "old style" or "traditional" or "better" or "secret" or any of the names others try to tag onto their TCC in the hope that students will come to them to learn what they claim is the "real deal, being hidden from you by the Yang family".
I will humbly accept that if anyone in this world has the direct line to "authentic" Yang family TCC...
It's the Yang family.
The others are most likely sincere in their beliefs, but if their name isn't Yang and they're not on the lineage chart of descendants from Yang Lu Chan...
It may be "a" Yang style, but it's not "THE" Yang FAMILY style.
Again, how much more direct of a line to authenticity can you possibly need than Yang Chen Fu's own son? If he's not getting the "real deal" the "authentic" TCC of his family, then there isn't such a thing left in the world.


[This message has been edited by Wushuer (edited 05-14-2004).]
Wushuer
 
Posts: 631
Joined: Wed Nov 06, 2002 7:01 am

Postby JerryKarin » Fri May 14, 2004 6:02 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by oldyangtaijiquan:
<B>DavidJ - Do not confuse the Jiang Fa - friend of Chen Wang Ting with a Jiang Fa – teacher of Chen Chang Hsiang! They are two different persons. Some said that the Chens modified the data of the time when the Jiang Fa comes in Chen village. I don't know what is true. I can only say that I belive to the Wu Tu Nan research!
Also are usually wrongly confused Wang Zong – disciple of Zhang San Feng and Wang Zong Yue – teacher of Jiang Fa! Also this two are different persons.

[This message has been edited by oldyangtaijiquan (edited 05-14-2004).]</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This sort of thing is all a waste of time. The history of taiji becomes murky about a hundred years back and there is no way to conclusively prove any of these contentions. There is really no point in arguing over which legends you prefer to believe. If you believe Wu Tunan then believe it. Why post here, since you are not going to listen to anything anyone has to say?
JerryKarin
 
Posts: 1067
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 7:01 am

Postby oldyangtaijiquan » Fri May 14, 2004 7:01 pm

JerryKarin - I agree with you. I also understand the beliefs of others, but I can't agree with everybody. The problem is that there is not clear history about Taijiquan and its developement. Who is/has right?

[This message has been edited by oldyangtaijiquan (edited 05-14-2004).]
oldyangtaijiquan
 
Posts: 73
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2004 7:01 am
Location: Slovenia

Postby Graham » Thu May 20, 2004 10:14 am

oldyangtaichichaun,

I think you need to read this:

http://www.nardis.com/~twchan/henning.html

And look at this thread:

http://www.emptyflower.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi/YaBB.cgi?board=Xing;action=display;num=1084208713

It might help you with some of your theories ;D

Cheers,
Graham
Graham
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2001 6:01 am

Postby oldyangtaijiquan » Thu May 20, 2004 1:05 pm

Graham, I read more than that. The article is from the "Chen Journal" and is a Chen's point of view.
All the main Yang Style masters (Lu Chan, Ban Hou, Jian Hou, Shao Hou, Cheng Fu) regarded the Taijiquan as a Wudang martial art (Wudang origins). The theory of Chen Wang Ting as a source of Taijiquan was made later (maybe this is the theory accepted by the commusist and so it become a official history).
For now, there are not facts to prove or disprove whichever theory! We can only suppose what is the real TJQ history. Maybe in the future some documents will appear that can clarify the TJQ origins.
oldyangtaijiquan
 
Posts: 73
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2004 7:01 am
Location: Slovenia

Postby oldyangtaijiquan » Thu May 20, 2004 1:09 pm

Look the Yang Taijiquan origins chart that I made:
http://www.geocities.com/oldyangtaijiquan/lineage3.htm
In my opinion it is the most probable.

[This message has been edited by oldyangtaijiquan (edited 05-20-2004).]
oldyangtaijiquan
 
Posts: 73
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2004 7:01 am
Location: Slovenia

Postby Graham » Thu May 20, 2004 5:04 pm

All I can say is that Henning's research looks like it's based on facts, not heresay. I'm a Yang stylist myself, so have no affiliation with the Chen's.

I like your chart - it's really sweet!

"Shaolin Quan - 100% hard 0% soft" - now that is really, really quite amusing Image Bless you!
Graham
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Graham » Thu May 20, 2004 5:28 pm

Here is a video of Du Yuzhi (Tu Yu-tse), student of Chen Yanxi (the father of Chen Fake) and Chen Minbiao (Small Frame and Hulei Frame Chen style):

http://www.kongfu.org/film/fist/TU_taichi.wmv

This is the oldest Chen video I've ever seen, and I think the oldest out there.

In his form we can find more similarities with Yang Style that in today's Chen.

Both have evolved with a different 'emphasis' as they've gone on - nothing wrong with that.

Everything evolves and changes over time.

After more than a hundred years it's hard to see the similarities with today's Yang and Chen, but go back further in time and they start to look a lot more similar.
Graham
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Wushuer » Thu May 20, 2004 5:46 pm

Graham,
Very nice, thank you.
On just my first run through I recognized brush knee and push pretty darned quickly.
Wushuer
 
Posts: 631
Joined: Wed Nov 06, 2002 7:01 am

Postby psalchemist » Thu May 20, 2004 6:01 pm

Greetings Graham,

Thank you very much for that link.

Absolutely enthralling clip!

The expression was exceptional, and I enjoyed witnessing the varying speed within this form...

...Was that a "FaJin" punch? Smiles.

Thanks again, very excellent!

Best,
Psalchemist.
psalchemist
 
Posts: 619
Joined: Wed May 21, 2003 6:01 am

Postby Graham » Thu May 20, 2004 6:53 pm

Hey - thank Bob over at Empty Flower, he 'discovered' this clip - I can't really take credit. Image

Regarding the clip: What's interesting (amongst many, many things!) is that his Single Whip looks a lot more like today's Yang style Single Whip than today's Chen Single Whip.

Also, it's interesting to speculate that the 'Buddah Warrior Attendent Pounds Mortor' at the end of the first section became 'Cross hands' in Yang style. The way he's doing it in the clip doesn't look that disimilar...
Graham
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2001 6:01 am

Postby rvc_ve » Thu May 20, 2004 8:02 pm

Oldtaijiquan,


I like your chart. If its not 100% accurate, it has to be the closest theory.
rvc_ve
 
Posts: 111
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2003 7:01 am
Location: Lawrence, KS

Postby psalchemist » Thu May 20, 2004 8:43 pm

Greetings oldyangstyletaichi,

I thought your comparison charts were very interesting.

Certainly very unique, I have not seen another display like it.

I personally am studying Yang style, and am not familiar enough with the other various styles to comment on the content.

I was hoping you might translate some of the written text, in Russian is it?, into english, so that I may benefit from the comments.

Are you referring to the degrees of internal and external aspects of these martial arts?

...If so, I would invite you to describe how you have arrived at these conclusions, for further clarity and understanding.

Thank you,
Best regards,
Psalchemist.


[This message has been edited by psalchemist (edited 05-20-2004).]
psalchemist
 
Posts: 619
Joined: Wed May 21, 2003 6:01 am

PreviousNext

Return to Tai Chi Chuan - Barehand Form

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests