Imperial Secret Yang Tai Chi Chuan

Discussion for senior taijiquan students only

Moderator: Scott M. Rodell

Post Reply
vincenzo
Rank: Yang Chenfu
Rank: Yang Chenfu
Posts: 42
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 5:38 pm
Location: Italia
Contact:

Imperial Secret Yang Tai Chi Chuan

Post by vincenzo » Sun Apr 08, 2007 10:16 am

Does anyone know this master?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qplQ-4l-QDg

Scott M. Rodell
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1364
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:50 pm
Location: Virginia
Contact:

Post by Scott M. Rodell » Sun Apr 08, 2007 7:40 pm

I haven't heard of the man preforming in this video, but he is doing the beginning of the First Section of the Yangjia Michuan Taijiquan form.

User avatar
Linda Heenan
Rank: Chang San feng
Rank: Chang San feng
Posts: 617
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2004 3:58 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Differences?

Post by Linda Heenan » Sun Apr 08, 2007 10:39 pm

This is interesting. I did not recognise that as Michuan until Laoshi said so. The set up is like other Yang forms, and the weighting and execution of some movements is quite different.

This brings up a question I've often thought over. How different does a movement have to be before it is considered a change in the form? I know people can do it with different intent and that sometimes it is more internalised or more martial in expression. I know things can be done in a more or less flexible way depending on the age and health of the practitioner. That is not what I'm getting at. If a form is carefully passed on from teacher to student, how can there be such differences? Surely there is only one correct way.

I understand, from reading forums where Yang Style Taijiquan is discussed, that it is commonly believed forms change and evolve according to the emphasis of various teachers. I'm still quite new to it all, having practised for less than three years, so am I wrong in thinking it should stay exactly the same? If that is the case, why doesn't it? What about situations like the one we have in Australia, where we only have our teacher once or twice a year - are we in danger of changing the form beyond recognition?

Roland Tepp
Rank: Chang San feng
Rank: Chang San feng
Posts: 107
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 5:34 pm
Location: Tallinn, Estonia
Contact:

Re: Differences?

Post by Roland Tepp » Mon Apr 09, 2007 2:43 am

Linda Heenan wrote:If a form is carefully passed on from teacher to student, how can there be such differences? Surely there is only one correct way.
Nay, there is no such thing as "only one way to do it". Doing something with a little different mind intent is not going to make the form significantly different.
Linda Heenan wrote:I'm still quite new to it all, having practised for less than three years, so am I wrong in thinking it should stay exactly the same?
Yes and no. Until you yourself reach some higher understanding of the principles behind the entire system you need to trust your teacher and learn from him as much as you can...

On the other hand - everything changes constantly as your understanding and the understanding of your teacher of the form broadens and evolves. This often changes the and this change in turn will trigger more understanding along the way... This is the natural way of the learning process, as I am sure you already know yourself ;) and has nothing to do with changing the style.

Naturally ... different people have different levels of understanding and their own priorities and focus on different aspects of the principles. I've noticed this more than once that classmates of the very same teacher have very different approaches and do things with (sometimes not so) subtle differences in their style. That in itself does not make those styles different, but given enough time for those lineages to evolve, the differences will become more pronounced...
Linda Heenan wrote:If that is the case, why doesn't it? What about situations like the one we have in Australia, where we only have our teacher once or twice a year - are we in danger of changing the form beyond recognition?
You worry too much about things that are not relevant in the long run, as you are still learning from Laoshi. Even if he is not in Australia all the time, he still comes there and teaches you, showing You where you need to change your form if you do it wrong and that is quite enough for now...
Roland

vincenzo
Rank: Yang Chenfu
Rank: Yang Chenfu
Posts: 42
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 5:38 pm
Location: Italia
Contact:

Post by vincenzo » Fri Apr 13, 2007 1:09 pm

Scott M. Rodell wrote:I haven't heard of the man preforming in this video, but he is doing the beginning of the First Section of the Yangjia Michuan Taijiquan form.
here's their lineage:
Yang Lu Chan
Yang Shao Huo
Professor Huo Chi Kwang
GrandMaster Lu Hung Ping
Nganga Mfundishi Tolona

Scott M. Rodell
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1364
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:50 pm
Location: Virginia
Contact:

Post by Scott M. Rodell » Fri Apr 13, 2007 2:10 pm

vincenzo wrote:...
here's their lineage:
Yang Lu Chan
Yang Shao Huo
Professor Huo Chi Kwang
GrandMaster Lu Hung Ping
Nganga Mfundishi Tolona
I'm sorry, but that lineage is false*. It came out several years ago that Hou Chi Kwang actually studied with Wang Yen-nien than returned from Taiwan & made the false claim that he studied with Yang Shao Huo. Several of Huo's own students admited this to me directly & asked me to correct their form which had been changed by Huo.

I'm am sorry to have to publically out them in this way, but it was very disrespectful to Wang Laoshi for Huo to do this & the truth should be known. And afterall, they admited it to me personally.

*MOD Note: Please see the thread: Professor Huo Chi Kwang in this forum (viewtopic.php?f=5&t=719) for further clarifcation concering this question. In regards to the confusion concerning the transmission of the Yangjia Michuan Taijiquan Lineage, my assertion that the above lineage is false or incorrect is correct. In regards to whether that lineage is correct, in regards to the transmission of other styles, I have no information. I was contacted by students of Hou's lineage who stated that they were certain Hou did study with Yang Shao Huo. I invited them to post any documentation or primary source material they had here & stated that I would personally retract the above statement if they did so. To date only Alan Lundmer responded in writing.

vincenzo
Rank: Yang Chenfu
Rank: Yang Chenfu
Posts: 42
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 5:38 pm
Location: Italia
Contact:

Post by vincenzo » Sat Apr 14, 2007 8:56 am

Scott M. Rodell wrote: I'm sorry, but that lineage is false. It came out several years ago that Hou Chi Kwang actually studied with Wang Yen-nien than returned from Taiwan & made the false claim that he studied with Yang Shao Huo. Several of Huo's own students admited this to me directly & asked me to correct their form which had been changed by Huo.
I suspected...thanks Scott.

Scott M. Rodell
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1364
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:50 pm
Location: Virginia
Contact:

Re:

Post by Scott M. Rodell » Thu May 13, 2010 8:43 am

vincenzo wrote: here's their lineage:
Yang Lu Chan
Yang Shao Huo
Professor Huo Chi Kwang
GrandMaster Lu Hung Ping
Nganga Mfundishi Tolona
According to Wikipedia, Yang Shao hou lived from 1862-1930. He was son of Yang Jianhou, i.e. the third generation of the Yang Family. Given that Yang Luchan died in 1872, when Yang Shao hou was about 10 years old, it is unlikely that Shao hou studied seriously with his grandfather.

According to the Traditional Chinese Cultural Academy's website, Huo Chi-Kwang passed on January 23, 1998 at the age of ninety-two. That would mean he was about 23 or 24 years old when Yang Shao hou passed at the age of 68. Does anyone know what year Huo began his study with Yang Shao hou?

I am asking these questions in order to clarify the questions raised above, not to attack anyone's lineage.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests