Anyone ever taken xing yi?
I was thinking about taking it and was wondering how might it affect my wing chun? They both kinda use a linear approach right? How do they differ?
Printable View
Anyone ever taken xing yi?
I was thinking about taking it and was wondering how might it affect my wing chun? They both kinda use a linear approach right? How do they differ?
I did about 5 years of Xingyi in the early 1980's.
It is indeed a linear style; some people see strong similarities to WC, but I am not among them.
Xingyi as it was taught to me is *STRONGLY* based on the Five Element theory of TCM; I cannot emphasise "strongly" strongly enough. The Sheng (creative) and KO (checking) cycles of TCM 5 element theory come heavily into play in determining how best to both flow techniques into one another, and how to counter or check an opponent's attacks. Each basic form/technique matches one of the elements. There are also 12 animal forms, and the exact animals vary between various Xingyi lineages. The Dragon form is REALLY tough on your quads and knees. After 20 odd years of other MA and several knee injuries, I think my patellae would shoot away from my knee joints like bullets if I tried it again.
When people say "Wing Chun is a principle and concept based martial art", they ain't seen nothing until they've seen Xingyi. IMO many students were too rigid and inflexible mentally and physically, you have to know when the theory is valid and when you have to let it go.
The footwork is IMO very different from WC; extensive use is made of the "bamboo step", designed both to accentuate the power of the strike and to shock the spine, that shock in concert with particular technique stimulating certain spinal nerves, stimulating the meridians and orgns corresponding to the organ corresponding the the element/technique. Sounded a bit fanciful to me. Actually, more than a bit.
At least one of the basic techniques probably violates centre/central line principles; while others are fairly similar to WC basics.
Some people think all "Internal" styles are soft; not Xingyi. Some is, other parts of it are hard as tungsten carbide. But then taiji and WC are not soft, they too are a mixture.
Should you do it? If you have the opportunity and interest, why not? Worst thing that could happen is that you learn something new. Some true believers will tell you that training in multiple styles will "ruin" you for WC; in general IMO this is rice-bowl-protecting propaganda and complete rubbish.
the xing yi footwork is very different and it's basically a much more elaborate style. I think the similarities lay in their linear hands, though only in the beggining of the movement and direction it goes from there, where xing yi breaks into fancy variation strikes and wing chun is much less likely to do so. THrow in the elements and really the strikes are being planted in different places being supported by different concepts.
My 5c worth anyway.
EE
"Xingyi as it was taught to me is *STRONGLY* based on the Five Element theory of TCM; I cannot emphasise "strongly" strongly enough. The Sheng (creative) and KO (checking) cycles of TCM 5 element theory come heavily into play in determining how best to both flow techniques into one another, and how to counter or check an opponent's attacks."
While it is sometimes taught this way, it's not correct. The five "elements" really are just force vectors or directions of using neijin. Pi= up to down, Dzuan= down to up, Beng= back to front, Pao=in to out, Heng= out to in. Five element theory has nothing to do with how you might respond spontaneously in a real situaltion.
"The footwork is IMO very different from WC; extensive use is made of the "bamboo step",
There is no "bamboo" step. The term is ban bu which just means half step.
"designed both to accentuate the power of the strike and to shock the spine, that shock in concert with particular technique stimulating certain spinal nerves, stimulating the meridians and orgns corresponding to the organ corresponding the the element/technique. Sounded a bit fanciful to me. "
Me too. All that's too complicated and won't help you fight. You learn how to understand and use neijin. After that it's Xingyi's particular fighting principles.
"Should you do it? If you have the opportunity and interest, why not? Worst thing that could happen is that you learn something new."
Certainly to each his own, but the body method is entirely different.
"the xing yi footwork is very different and it's basically a much more elaborate style. I think the similarities lay in their linear hands, though only in the beggining of the movement and direction it goes from there, where xing yi breaks into fancy variation strikes and wing chun is much less likely to do so. THrow in the elements and really the strikes are being planted in different places being supported by different concepts."
Your lack of understanding about Xingyi is readily apparent and huge. Why comment on a subject about which you know nothing?
Quote:
Originally posted by Buddy
[BWhile it is sometimes taught this way, it's not correct. The five "elements" really are just force vectors or directions of using neijin. Pi= up to down, Dzuan= down to up, Beng= back to front, Pao=in to out, Heng= out to in. Five element theory has nothing to do with how you might respond spontaneously in a real situaltion.
spelling error aside, how you can say that and believe it is beyond me!
"designed both to accentuate the power of the strike and to shock the spine, that shock in concert with particular technique stimulating certain spinal nerves, stimulating the meridians and orgns corresponding to the organ corresponding the the element/technique. Sounded a bit fanciful to me. "
I think to understand its value you'd first need to know and understand its concepts academically, which apparently you don't
why not? Worst thing that could happen is that you learn something new."
[/B]
Have left WCK (in terms of official learning) and now dedicated my time to XingYi - not been doing it that long but love it.
Agree with much of what anerlich says, but Buddy (as far as my learning has so far shown me) hits the nail on the head regarding all points, especially the five elements.
The quote about XingYi and "fancy hands" was kind of funny, as I find WCK's hands to be "fancier" than those of XingYi.
On the whole I'd say do one or the other, as the footwork and body methods of XingYi are very different to WCK.
what I'm saying is with Xingyis defence strike-interception methods coming from those elemental concepts , it's elaborate. The humour was intended and WCK can sometimes be impressive to watch from someone skilled but it is a more basic system regardless of effectiveness.
Maybe I'm missing the point - what do you mean by elaborate? As Buddy said, the motions in terms of elements are up-down, in-out etc, just covering the range of movement.
The defensive hand movements I've been shown are pretty simple motions that clear the line and/or destroy the attacker's limb.
Just understanding of the concept of the elements is an elaborate skill. It's complicated and has more facets. WC focus on extremities is simple to grasp , hard to master. in Xing yi the variations with pulls and grabs and mid limb action etc are comparitively elaborate!
The element theory is complex, but I tend to think of it as being as complex as you want to make it. On a simple level the five fists are five ways to issue power. The mechanics are detailed but that's why they are drilled so extensively, to make it second nature.
But I've only just scratched the surface in this art, so perhaps you know more than me. So far, what I'm doing seems more dynamic and to the point than WCK.
;)
Quote:
Originally posted by mossman
Anyone ever taken xing yi?
I was thinking about taking it and was wondering how might it affect my wing chun? They both kinda use a linear approach right? How do they differ?
if one observe them in the energy domain one will see their different distinctly.
Both Wing Chun and Xing Yi are NOT linear approach, even though they have some partial similarity in "directness" expression.
Directness must not be confused with LINEAR.
so what do I based on ?
1,Thus I have heard, classical Wing Chun movements has to have that "sickle" cut in return path. and before and after the "sickling" is not a LInear approach. and, That Sickle differentiate Wing Chun with other art co exist in the Red Boat.
2, For Xing Yi, the frontal arm hand and the backward arm has to echoing each others.
To implement the above one needs circular trajectory. even they can "look" LINEAR.
THey can indeed both look linear and that was a great post!
To a noob , there is little distinction, and being we're asking .........
I spent a long time studying TCM around the same time as I did Xingyi. The link in my .sig is an extremely abbreviated version of my notes thereon. I even have a diploma, FWIW.Quote:
I think to understand its value you'd first need to know and understand its concepts academically, which apparently you don't
I suspect I know much more than you on the subject, so save your ad hominem attacks for people that are impressed by them.
Yeah. That's the way I saw it too. But the teacher was also a Taiwan and HK trained and qualified acupuncturist, who taught KF more as a system of self healing than fighting. The cycles were hugely and overly emphasised. He could fight (also having a Kyokushin 4th Dan probably helped) but most of his students couldn't.Quote:
While it is sometimes taught this way, it's not correct. The five "elements" really are just force vectors or directions of using neijin. Pi= up to down, Dzuan= down to up, Beng= back to front, Pao=in to out, Heng= out to in. Five element theory has nothing to do with how you might respond spontaneously in a real situaltion.
Glad to see the back of that one.
I've seen both, even a "half bamboo step" from a Chinese instructor. Maybe he was a jokester. I follow Matt Thornton's advice on terminology, which is that it tends to obfuscate rather than clarify anyway.Quote:
There is no "bamboo" step. The term is ban bu which just means half step.