Zhao Yang Quan, Mizong Quan, and a couple others

[Djuan]

Hi, with all the post, some one might have already provided the information sought in this post, if this is the case, please re direct to the place(s), if available!

1. So 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?
2. then structural integrity, and root of Zhao Yang Quan (bright Sun fist),
3. also origin of this style, little to no information found on it. why is this fist not more popular?
4. next, is the style of Qixing quan and changhuxinmen quan? what branch do these styles originate from, and how did they integrate into becoming a staple "Shaolin Fist"?
5. next, why is the structural integrity and flow of these two fists so different from Zhao Yang, which relates, in opinion, to Da Lohan more than Xiao Hong Quan or QiXing Quan? which when asked, most students would agree are foundation hands, wu bu quan, jin ben gong, louhan shibashou aside....when fists become the topic, xiao hong or qixing is more popular, in different styles, still same hands are most popular.

also anyone else spotting similarities in Xinyi Mizongg Quan and QiXing Quan? anyone know the link there (if any) ?
Any information or insight into how these hands came to be structured how they are today is welcomed with much gratitude! ANY thing on Zhao Yang Quan is welcomed with excitement and more gratitude because theres little to no information around on it!
Thanks again!
Amituofo

[Djuan]

sux bein the new guy lol

[Djuan]

as Summer blossoms, I'll explain the reason I asked about these hands,
.... is because in July, I am supposed to learn Zhao Yang Quan, which will be the first "new" form added to my "soul scroll" since about 2014.
After going thru some Luohan Chambers the past couple months, its been a refreshing journey, I'll likely spend the rest of this month cleaning the slate in terms of rhythm, doing pure conditioning, qi gong, & maybe some san shou just to stay ready .....the session starts July 5th and goes till the 31st. gives me enough time to prepare.

Send me good vibes!

[Djuan]

This class goes on for a month. This is like a crash course in memorization. Like learning, to recite the Tao Te Ching, in pure classical Mandarin, and not knowing what ANY word means lol..... and some of us are taught this way because of minimal access to our teachers. They visit us when theyre around and exchange what they see fit, and vise versa, if I'm able to reach a teacher, I'm going to visit, no questions asked. These visits make up everything for some who dont train in one place, who train on the road at various schools, or to those who have abandoned schools/kwoon/guan/dojo etc all together. "Meeting of styles" is great with peers, and PRECIOUS with Shifu.

my disclaimer: One fist from Shaolin is worth decades of study, crash coursing is not recommended if you dont plan on spending time with what you learn during the course, for YEARS to come, such is Gong Fu. Since I started training (18 years ago), I can count on one hand how may "forms" I know, and of those, only a few can I apply technique from, with specifics in a real time situation. So this isn't usually how its transmitted. this was summoned specifically for this summer , and by request. Its just time for Bright Sun boxing.
the next time I take up a new form will likely be in at least 5 years.

So the technical insight I was looking for, we may still discuss, as I progress through this session, and after. I'm interested in your knowledge of this particular hand, its poem, and why it was titled and taught as it is. I rarely hear of this style, and never see it performed, when I do, however, the signature on it is potent, always makes me wonder what the lineage was to forming this hand.

The integrity of the style, reminds me, structurally of Luohan Boxing because of the postures, and navigation. The body moves along the compass the same way, also in Hong Boxing, some of the same navigation. Now,the stories, and or lynx to why things like this happen in Shaolin Boxing are always great to learn for me as a student. During this course I wont be allowed to ask questions like this lol, not much talking going on, and the language barriers are serious , so for what I can manage, I focus on the training. I'll keep updated, and share what I can however, Im sure some one there will know something lol.


Amituofo

[mengfei]

Sorry, I do not know any answers to your questions but wanted to wish you best success and stay strong and stay hungry!

[Djuan]

Sorry, I do not know any answers to your questions but wanted to wish you best success and stay strong and stay hungry!

thank you, I will ! Amituofo!

[SHemmati]

also on popularity of chao/zhao yang quan, i think of rarity you mean rarity of resources (mostly videos) in the internet and media. while this is somehow true about online videos, in the actual situation they are not rare. chao/zhao yang quan is actually as popular as, say, mei hua quan, chang hu xinyi men, taizu chang quan, and others. still not as popular as xiao hong and qixing quan, because these are simpler to learn and understand and hence more popular to the public. for serious students, they should master chao/zhao yang quan the same way they master xiao hong quan and qixing quan; not less, not more.

if people don't talk much about chao/zhao yang quan, the reason is, being just about 200 years old, it's much newer than other styles such as luohan quan and taizu chang quan, and doesn't have all those historical ups and downs and is less subject to debate and discussion. however, the 20th century is still an ambiguous period for Shaolin temple and its martial arts and debates are not yet calmed down.

[Djuan]

also on popularity of chao/zhao yang quan, i think of rarity you mean rarity of resources (mostly videos) in the internet and media. while this is somehow true about online videos, in the actual situation they are not rare. chao/zhao yang quan is actually as popular as, say, mei hua quan, chang hu xinyi men, taizu chang quan, and others. still not as popular as xiao hong and qixing quan, because these are simpler to learn and understand and hence more popular to the public. for serious students, they should master chao/zhao yang quan the same way they master xiao hong quan and qixing quan; not less, not more.

if people don't talk much about chao/zhao yang quan, the reason is, being just about 200 years old, it's much newer than other styles such as luohan quan and taizu chang quan, and doesn't have all those historical ups and downs and is less subject to debate and discussion. however, the 20th century is still an ambiguous period for Shaolin temple and its martial arts and debates are not yet calmed down.

interesting , I honestly hadn't heard of Zhao Yang Quan until 2013, a brother of mine pointed it out online. I started researching it immediately and only found a few sentences here and there. soon after we found someone in the area who knew it well enough to share it.
The work you do is very important. Watching the Shi De Yang version is still enlightening to the fist, and the added insight below the videos give more room for deeper study into its principle.

Now that you mention it, I noticed the basic stances moving in Zhao Yang Quan immediately when I learned it. Until recently I didn't realize how foundational the style is to Shaolin in terms of its expression, flow and direction. It speaks like the oldest forms, in my opinion, it retains the core mechanics like xiao hong and qi xing quan in such a way that if you drill it enough you will gain some inherent Shaolin "ba" or natural volition. Characteristically, its not too flashy or overtly direct in its applications so its still good for drilling into your memory even in fighting sense.
It has a lot of Buddha nature in it as well (like movements 22 thru 24), which correlate to the early Luohan style,.....etc....in general, when practicing, I get the elder feeling from this form. It seems like an ancient one, even though its not that old.
It makes sense its a core fist style and I'd like to see its accessibility and visibility grow.

Amituofo

Amituofo

[SHemmati]

... 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.

[SHemmati]

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:

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.

[Djuan]

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:



- 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.

Right, a lot of stuff get lost in translation. I figured the mizong quan performed by Shi DeYang was its own apart from the other styles calling itself that.
it's not just in martial arts, in any form of recorded history dealing with art, politics, trade, spirituality, even language, as time passes the story and thus the "essences", are subject to change, for whatever reason. (too many to list)
because Shaolin has its curriculum, we have some what of a ruler to measure the art with, yet its still based on each masters 'signature' of their intent, personal variations which will be unique to the individual, and poise throughout the form. (take the difference in Shi De Yang, Shi De Cheng, and Shi De Jian, all from the same generations, yet express the same forms completely different, yet equally fierce and with their own grace to it.)
So some things will remain , and others will always vary.

to the eye, Zhao Yang Quan and XiaoLuohan Quan resemble. Makes me think Zhao Yang is a Buddha hand like the more popular Luohan Hands. (another example , the Luohan shibashou taught on Shi De Yangs dvd, is version for the dvd, very sharp and linear. Shi De Jian has made popular a totally different, rounder expression of the same form.)
ChangHuixnyinmen Quan is VERY fundamental, yet in the short version commonly taught, pu bu doesnt happen as a stance or in transition in the entire form, which for a fundamental Shaolin fist, thats unusual. where as Du Li bu happens in transitions a few times, and in instances where one draws power from above rather than below. Though you can draw power from below using that style by inserting pu bu quickly in certain transitions. Shi Yong Zhi has a dvd teaching it, and its like the one taught in the US, with no pubu variation of the sort though, that expression of Changhuxxinyimen is popular so its expected to draw power from above when you use it.

this is in plain sight. so some study can be done regardless, even with Shi De Yangs philosophy in the mix, his performance style is unique to him for sure.

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.

lol he's still performed it best I've seen in that way!!!! also he's surely reducing the intent, and talking for the videos sake.

For the record, I stand by his style of taolu as one of the sturdiest on the planet when it comes to traditional Shaolin Quan of Songshan, with no added fluff for show, and I know he can use it to fight beyond what he's showing on those short dvds. I don’t know him personally, however I know for a fact the applications he teaches in books and dvds, along with his brief philosophy and history on each style, is brief at best, and definitely not revealing the “non-noob”/non-civilian chamber of Shaolin Quan fa. I know he tailors the subject matter for the western and modern audiences who have either, too short an attention span, or too busy a schedule, or both.. and prefer to learn things short, and quickly. though that short and "politically correct" dose of Shaolin Gong Fu doesnt satisfy the in depth scholars who like to pick it all apart and put it back together just for learning (guys like us lol) , I am still very thankful to have even that much access to seeing it.
With that said I don’t hold anything against how he teaches them there. I’m sure he'd be more “expansive” in the offering to a personal student or disciple of his in person.

For example, advanced teachers won’t generalize stance specifics in a way that doesn’t complement the student and strengthen that student specifically. And he's beyond advanced. With the dvds comingg out how they do, a general description for things would be needed, I get that part, and it doesnt bother me so much, because Im at peace with knowing I know so little, and have so many questions lol, only thing that could fix the quest for knowledge is actually going to see him ad asking in person lol.
You know like I do, one form can be of study for years, decades. So he’s not giving the whole kit in an hour video, with Shaolin , its just not possible to give it all up in an hour lol

with defining the movement, its hard to do because nothing is really absolute, with traditional Shaolin....Taolu is a great example of "emptiness is form, form is emptiness" because essentially , you would have to be the exact same height, weight, and possibly age, having the same agility, flexibility, TIMING/BREATHING, INTENT, alignment and weight distribution etc etc to do the form as described and performed by your master, however, though you cant perform exactly it the same, you can certainly apply your masters performance to yours as a measuring.

One advantage adept students have with learning this way now, is a solid foundation. So interpreting Shifu De Yang’s material would be easier and more fruitful to you than it would be to a newbie who would take everything he says and does on face value. Plus its cool to see so many masters putting their “signature” on styles we learned from our masters, and refining your performance to suit you. That’s why I appreciate it. As of yet, for now, I haven’t been to China, so some of his work and like works from other Shaolin masters have helped me that way with my study here in the US, seeing thing I learned performed and explained from the points of views of the masters at Shaolin….and since I’ve been at it for more than half my life, its easy to digest and decipher , even with the language barrier and minimal explanation.

This very old guy told me before , that there was this world before the internet where you might see you master do something once, and he won’t show you again lol, you just have to know enough ad be present enough to receive the transmission when he feels you are ready. Like a Zen transmission, some people, search and search, and still don’t get the answer from the master, while some meet the master and are instantly enlightened .

Amituofo

[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. standardizations that fix the extension, width, height, direction, left/right, etc., of moves are a misunderstanding, as i first mentioned above.
(for example, as i previously told, in traditional Mabu stance, the feet could be as wide as just a few inches up to 3 times the shoulder width or more if possible. its height could be so low that the butts touch the ground and so high the your knees are straight. these are all Mabu, and no width or height is considered better or more standard.)

[SHemmati]

2. in the case of mizong quan, there are at least 2 absolutely irrelevant things, having nothing, neither historical nor technical, in common, while both are called mizong:

- the mizong yi or mizong quan of Huo Yuanjia and others, which is also called Yan Qing quan, is a typical northern style with its own history, lineages, and technical contents that are totally different from Shaolin kung fu. it's a style with it's own stuff and several forms.

- the one or pair of the forms called mizong or xinyi or xinyi mizong in Shaolin kung fu are a totally different thing. these forms are neither similar to Yan Qing quan nor even to Shaolin! look like 2 made-up forms as a mish-mash of various techniques which are mostly irrelevant to Shaolin kung fu style.

2 different things with similar names. later generations, like Shi Deyang, don't know this, and judging by the names, erroneously consider these to be the same or at least related!

Huo Yuanjia's mizong quan and Yan Qing quan are not related to Shaolin. but those 2 forms called mizong are practiced in the temple, and i'll describe their technical content (which is mostly unrelated to the Shaolin style) in the next post to end this topic.

in other threads i'l explain more about various misunderstandings!

[Djuan]

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"


....



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

[Djuan]

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:



- 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.

one thing I also observed relative to the ma bu standards, and Shi De Yang, he definitely makes it known and understood that with ma bu, the 90 degree angle at the knees, with toes pointing forward, is NOT required or recommended for beginners or advanced students. the phrase he uses teaching stances is "practice it well" ....so when he speaks on ma bu, he says "holding it low with 90 degree angle, and toes pointing forward, you can practice it well." ......then also says not to get discouraged if you cant do that because its not an absolute law, and practice at the depth you can get the best training for a said duration, other wise you'l bend your back and torso, and breath incorrectly hence you wouldnt be able to "practice it well" . focusing on depth in ma bu, without understanding posture, hip joint balance, and spinal alignment , you will think the important part is thigh muscles only, its uselss to train the thigh muscle with poor posture and breathing tho.

also about depth in stances during transition, Shi De Yang teaches it correctly, unlike modern wushu, which is graded on different terms, in Shaolin Quan fa, bending the torso in transition is taught as something that disrupts the 6 harmonies and thus compromises kinetic power. for instance, reaching for a super low dingbu, or pubu , xie bu, or xubu, and attempting to change direction, orientation, or deliver a strike, even with super strong thighs/calves etc...you lose the power transfer at the hip which is the main bridge linking ALLL that leg power coming up from the ankle and knee joints up into the back/shoulders/elbows/wrist..... so the emphasis is not to have the lowest, squarest stance.

the emphasis is in expressing the technique, or whole taolu, with a spine relaxed /core engaged for optimal breathing in all centers and diantians, and 6 harmonies in natural flow guided by your 1 unified awareness. as you "practice it well" , the stances get stronger. yet still , if the depth is question depending on body type and style, you still wont be sinking super low or getting too square for "wushu aesthetic", if that will disrupt the shen fa, distribution of fajing, etc then work the stance/transition at best balance point and best flow of the harmonies

Amituofo