There is a current movement that uses the term Peng to denote Jing and who regard Peng Jing as the core Jing in internal martial arts. This emphasis on Peng Jing did not come into being until the 1963 work by Gu Liu Xin and Shen Jia Ren on Chen style Taijiquan. This emphasis is absent from all works on Taijiquan and internal martial arts prior to that and so it is a new innovation and not a traditional one.
Traditionally, in Chen Taijiquan, Chan Si Jing (silk coiling jing) was considered the Internal Jing in Chen style Taijiquan. The Yang related lineages placed emphasis on correct Jing generation and the usage of the 8 Jings which were in the basic 8 postures of Peng (ward off), Lu (rollback), Ji (press), An (push), Cai (pluck), Lieh (split), Chou (elbow), Kao (shoulder). Peng Jing in the Yang related lineages refers to a expansive, blending, upward and outward moving type of Jing. The Peng that this movement refers to is actually just simple Jing which has the four pre-requisites. This wrong usage of the term leads to wrong interpretation of the classic writings and the words of the masters. This changes the art and should be curbed. The Peng Jing used by this movement uses the resistance of a incoming force by alignment to the floor which is at variance with what Master Mah Yueh Liang says should be the correct application of Peng in which one should never hold up against a person's force. This is in line with the Taijiquan Classics which says one should not resist nor should one let go. Their test does show proper body alignment in which the path of the strength goes from the floor to the point of focus but it is certainly not the classical definition or understanding of Peng. It is also present in other martial arts but is certainly not called by that name. The misconception stems from the use of the Peng posture to show rooting by resisting the push of several men. This is not the correct way to use the posture though it does show good rooting. It should be noted that the understanding of Peng by the Chinese differs from that which is currently expounded by some in the West as can be seen in the above example. So in interpreting the words of masters from China and the East, it is important to take that into account. Peng Jing is distinctively Taijiquan and it is not a term present or can be correctly applied to other forms of internal martial arts. Though the term Jing applies across the board since it does not denote technique but simply the efficient application of strength. Each of these internal martial arts has its own characteristics and theories which make it distinct from each other. The insertion of Taijiquan theories and terms into their terminology assumes that these internal arts are all the same which is not the case. Whilst they may share some common characteristics, their expression of the is distinctly unique. That is why they are separate arts and not one and the same one.
Was this article helpful?