Jiang Rong Qiao's BGZ and Earles

[Ka]

Black Taoist I was wondering what you ar anyone else thought about Earle M Ba gua circle form.I understand you practise the same lineage and wanted to know your opinion of his appications etc.In general a chat about E BGZ. Little bit about me I have learnt off Earle (here in OZ) Ba gua and Tai chi and enjoyed it,however I have also studied a Fu style of BGZ which concentrates much more on circle walking qigongs and the single and double palm change.As far as my training with Earle and Keith (one of his instructors)circle walking is not focused on as much and the changes as often only pivots.I should say I gained alot from both and continue to practise both but are now more focused on YiQuan.I must say one thing if anything should draw people to Earle it is his excellent attitude towards IMA and people in general. All and any comments appreciated Thanks

[dedalus]

Hmm, I'm looking forward to seeing what migh turn up here. One thing I can contribute is that I've practised Erle's form and seen Jiang Rongqiao's training manual, and they're certainly the same. How much circle walking you do might be an individual thing... I try to do some daily, but make discoveries and learn nuances fairly regularly.

I also understood that Jiang incorporated the basic palm trasitions into the form instead of performing them qigong style... but I can imagine there would be some benefit to training them more exclusively in that manner. Anyhow, I look on with interest. Bagua's getting some great attention on the board at present :).

[Ka]

Helo Den I am a sydney boy myself and would like to catch up with you,Also on a Sydney level do you (have you meet etc)know a gent named Con who practises in Belmore Park and Ultimo.If you do I would like to here any information or your opinion of his teaching styles etc.About the Form I have meet different people who also have learnt Jiang style (from who I didn't find out )but with a very different moves.Most of there techniques where of a very different interpartation .Once again ,all comments welcome.

[blacktaoist]

Sorry for the late reply., But I be working a lot of over time, because of the **** that went down in New York.

Anyway, The Chiang Jung Ch'iao BaGuaZhang form that I learned is not the same as Erle Montaigue. As you know the Original form is a very world renowned popular form practice today.

There are many variations in practicing this form, each BaGua teacher that I met perform the original form have differences in their styles.

From what I saw of Erle Montaigue performances of Chiang jung Chiao original form is, in Erle method I see he likes to utilize a lot of jing in his palm movements.

The way I was taught the form was to utilize more soft energy changed to hard. A kind of recycling type of energy.

Erle likes to use a lot of yang energy from what I saw of his Chiang Jung ch'iao BaGua original form video. Nothing wrong with that.

Erle is a big man, so a big man would utilize more yang movements then a small person in my opinion. After all Chiang Jung Ch'iao was a big man himself.

My sifu all ways told me, the outer forms of BaGua forms may look different in comparision to each other because of the personality (philosophy) and comprehension level of the teacher and his background in martial arts. (fighting)

What I like about Erle Montaigue is his Mental fighting strategy philosophy. Very practical fighting theory. No Bull$hit

Most Internal Martial arts web site talk to much about past dead masters and unpractical fighting theory, not one of these web sites talk about real BaGuaZhang Auxiliary training. I see now that many of them don't know about other BaGua training, thats way they talk so much about the !-Ching Philosophy. And Many talk unpractical about the I-Ching theory. Many need to do more research on Taoism, because a lot of $hit I read on other web site is not conforming to fact or truth.

Anyway the most you will hear about BaGua auxiliary training is post training from other web site. Even tai Chi had post training, but if you go to any tai chi web site not one of these web site talks about tai chi post training. Why? because most of them don't know the real training.

I learned BaguaZhang for fighting, this is just how my personality is. I'm a cool guy, if you or and body met me you see that. But my hearty nature and enormous freedom may disturd more timid souls. LOL

Bottom line I like the BaGua information Erle put out.

Peace.

[maoshan]

Peace all

Earl's form is not Practiced the same as ours. While it is the same form, his form uses more fa jing and at different points. Then way I learned it was with power through out the form except the 5th palm, which required a softer energy.
Also, not to say that he doesn't teach it but there are a lot of hidden Tec’s in that form. I've encountered 3 teachers of that particular form and they all had different ways of applying the same palm In particular the 3rd and 5th Palms.

About Earl though,
You’re right about his attitude. We are in complete accordance with him in terms of fighting.
He been preaching the internal gospel for a long time now and has my true respect.

DeDalus

I need to understand something
Do you mean that the form is the same as Jiang or do you mean that the approach is the same because if so I have to disagree with you, I also have that manual, and the way that Earl teaches the form and applications is not quit the same my late Sifu Kenny Gong Learned from Jiang Himself. What I’ve seen on Earl’s tapes is not the same that I learned or what was in the manual. This is not putting Earl down, I've seen quit a few variations of the Jiang form, Most quit authentic including Earls, But it was not out of the manual.
I've had the honor being exposed to a lot of authentic Ba-Gua.
I've seen this form done with a more Xing-I flavor as well as a more Ba-Gua flavor. In fact something I just remembered, Liu Wan Fu a classmate of Jiang said that of the original form that Chang Chao Tung taught them. He said that Jiang changed the applications that their teacher had taught them. Not to say they were bad changes but they were different.
Now the question is, when did he make these changes? He was still a fairly young man when he took the photos for the book from which the line drawings were made. It was still later on that this form became standard. We can assume that most of the changes were made as he aged. Jiang was proficient in a few styles it was said so based on his experience he made some modifications to the applications, which probably changed the way the form was performed.
Look, I could go on with this; I just disagree with you on what you wrote.
The only thing that matters is that the training is true and that you practice hard.

Peace
Maoshan

[Ka]

Thanks both of you for excellent answers.This all just confirms for me that bagua is a very hands on fighting art.Each interpartation may differ as long as the principles remain. Cheers :D

[dedalus]

Maoshan,

I agree with you that there are many layers of "hidden applications", and I also agree that Erle puts a different emphasis on these than any other teacher I've seen - but I think *all* teachers seem to do this. What I meant in my comment was that Erle teaches the Jiang form with the same sequence of postures etc, but of course there's a lot that isn't in the manual. It's one of the amazing things about the internal arts, I think, that the forms can support such a vast number of interpretations of application. In my opinion there's no ultimate application, in part because the form teaches you how to move your body which you then do without conscious thought in combat. But it's fun nevertheless to root out those hidden apps.

I have a long list of folks I'd like to visit whenever I can next get over to the US, and you and TBT are definintely on it ;) . Best with your training.

[Ka]

Hey Dedalus,Wondering if we can catch up in Sydney some where,(interested to meet other BGZ people ,there doestn't seem to be too many).Also wondering if you know that gent Con I refereed to above.Also what do people think of YinYang BGZ as taught by Xie Shoude? And have a good Christmas all :)

[maoshan]

The applications are endless, as long as the principles are sound it doesn’t matter what you do.
Also, so that there is no misunderstanding, his whole form is in the manual, I was speaking on the performance of the form.
And if you can make it, I look forward to our meeting. It’s always good to be able to exchange with a fellow practitioner.
Peace
Maoshan

[dedalus]

Cheers Maoshan. Have you ever seen any of Erle's "Bagua to the Max" tapes? I know the title sounds like a stage in the Pepsi Challenge, but I've seen the series on the Jiang-style circle form (about 10 hours worth) and there's some awesome stuff in there as far as Erles's fa-jing interpretations and hidden applications are concerned. But I very much agree with your sentiments.

Ka: I don't live in Sydney, I'm actually studying in Adelaide ;). A few years back I met some Canberra guys who've learned and taught under EM, but not Con in Sydney. I'll post a notice if I find myself likely to visit out your way :)

[Ka]

Oops for some reason I got the idea that you live over this way,neverthe less give us a post if you are over this side.I live close to Central and there are not to many BGZ people ,always happy to play. :D