now the first question: "mizong quan"!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Djuan
... first question, structural integrity of mizong quan, what is its root? how much of mizong quan if found in other Shaolin quan, and why so?
... also anyone else spotting similarities in Xinyi Mizongg Quan and QiXing Quan? anyone know the link there (if any) ?
the case of mizong quan is the epitome of what is called "MISUNDERSTANDINGS", which is quite common in Shaolin culture.
the most common misunderstandings include:
- misnomers,
- irrelevant things with same or similar names,
- mixing modernly made-up concepts (from modern Wushu, newer styles of kung fu, kung fu movies, karate, taekwondo, etc.) into Shaolin kung fu,
- and so on.
the mizong quan case is a case of "different things with the same name"! my point is: this mizong quan is NOT that mizong quan!!
i explain this in the next comment below. it's easy to understand, you get it.
a bit on misunderstandings...
not quite related to your questions, but since i mentioned the word "MISUNDERSTANDS", let clear it a bit with some examples. each one of these requires an all-new thread of its own:
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SHemmati
the most common misunderstandings include: ...
- misnomers:
"Stance Training" is the most notable instance of misnomer. there was some exercises people called stance training. later they deepened their misunderstanding and nowadays we see people holding still in Ding bu, and Xu bu, and others like a fool, feeling happy their doing traditional wisdom, but it's actually a misunderstanding.
- different things with similar names:
in Shaolin there's pao quan, tong bi quan, chang quan, etc., mizong quan as well. people think that this pao quan or tong bi quan is the same as the non-Shaolin pao quan and tong bi quan, etc., while these have NOTHING in common. they're just different things with the same or similar names.
- mixing modern concepts with Shaolin:
for example, some people say: in Ma bu your feet should be parallel with toes pointing forward. this is wrong. this is what people in southern China do. we in never do it that terrible way in Shaolin; in Shaolin we naturally lay our feet outwards pointing to sides.
or people say: in Ma bu your thighs should be parallel to the ground, the feet should be apart 2 shoulder widths. this is also not true in Shaolin. this STANDARDIZATION comes from modern Wushu, in Shaolin stances could be quite higher or lower, wider or narrower; there's no standard.
not only newbies, but famous instructors are also infected with misunderstandings. for example, consider a famous name like Shi Deyang. he teaches all the above misunderstandings in his videos!!! everything about mizong quan he says in his videos are plain misunderstandings.
2 Attachment(s)
fine tuning Zhao Yang Quan
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SHemmati
ok. turns out the misunderstandings topic i noted was quite related to the subject:
1. that one instructor's form seems different from others' is most the times not difference, they're doing the same form. in traditional kung fu, the range, width, height, direction, right/left of every move is flexible. so every time i perform a form, you see it visually different from the previous times. this is true traditional performance.
Amituofo
As my luck would have it, I have learned a version different from Shi De Yangs video, yet recently, I have been trying some of his variables in transitional moves because his form is pretty sturdy. So as I was going thru the video, I noticed during the segment where he demos the entire form, in the start and finish of the video, he uses a move not displayed in the "step-by-step" instruction of the same segment of the form.
Its during the "3rd segment", moves 20 thru 23 are different than his performance of the form when he displays it in its entirety. To give him the benefit of the doubt, its a plausible mistake, while going thru loads if taolu, to mix and extra punch on accident, lol, for the sake of study however, I'd like to know if he did that on purpose, which would render the instructional video flawed in its delivery to the student who hasnt learned the form to begin with.
Little nuances like this might seem small, yet if you were trying to preserve a taolu precisely as it was transmitted to you "every finger and toe counts" as my teacher would say.
I imagine the only way to clear up Shi De Yangs delivery of the form would be to read the poem of his version. In this forms instruction, move 20, which would be a variant on pu bu qie zhang, moves to punching in ma bu with the r hand, and he teaches it this way in the step-by-step instructions, (not how he performs it)
and it could be a mix up of the first pu bu qie zhang earlier in the form @ 4:57 in the video Example , where you transition out of pu bu, into R gong bu punching with the Left and blocking with the Right. At 4:59, Example 2 .. he makes the transition from pu bu to gong bu, again, which is fine if thats how its supposed to be. Here Instruction Example In the step by step segment, he clearly, even says it, that the "next move is thrusting fist in horse stance, and it starts with cut palm in pu bu"
Attachment 10766
....
Attachment 10765
you would think, if the form is supposed to be as it is in the beginning of the video, they would catch on and fix it, or just re-perform the intro to match the instruction, however, this mix up is left there, so I bring it to you for some understanding.
Amituofo
Shi De Yang's latest version of Zhao Yang Quan
This is near exact to the one I learned. Theres another variation where there are single cannons (punches) during the "boy worships Buddha" segment of the taolu, instead of triple cannons during that same segment like this style of the form.
both variations are accurate.
just subtle Songshan Shaolin nuances lol "do ya wanna punch the guy once or thrice?" , its totally up to you lol :D
Amituofo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3kl...ature=youtu.be