Songshan Iron Body Training Question

[freedom76]

Does the Songshan Iron Body method solely rely on Qigong practice (Baduanjin, Yi Jin JIng, Diamond Fist, etc) or does it also have "beating" bags and linament (dit da jow)? I have done Iron Palm in the past which involved dit da jow, massage of the hands, striking the bag (three ways: palm, backhand, and splitting hand...more like dropping on to the bag, not reaally hitting it with force-we didn't do the "beak" or "hook" hand strike at all). I've seen some iron body that involves striking the body with a bag (mung beans, etc) similar in concept to the iron palm I've done. reading various things by and about Shi Guolin, I have the impression that his Iron Body has been strictly Qigong, but I could easily have missed something.
Does anybody know how they do Iron Body or Iron Palm training from The Shaolin Temple?

[GeneChing]

Guolin once told me that he attributed his skill to Yijinjing mostly. I found that pretty interesting. If you read the story he tells in our Mar Apr 2003 (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/magazine/article.php?article=317) issue, he was training in this family style of his own, and suddenly realized he had these skills. Then he used that theory to expound upon Yijinjing and other Shaolin qigong methods to develop his incredible iron body.

As for at Songshan, there are plenty of liniments around, as well as lots of self-striking and conditioning methods, so many variations... It leads me to believe that Guolin's method was unique, but I can't say for sure.

[freedom76]

Thank you. I did find those two articles very interesting. It's good to know that there are other methods available for iron conditioning. Perhaps Shi Guolin has a "gift" for qigong, and he in turn developed and expanded his gift through his experience and practice. Very interesting. I wonder what that family form looked like that he had grown-up learning. Do you have anymore information on it besides the name in that article? I'm curious if it's dynamic tension coupled with breathing, it's overall continuity, if there are static positons, etc. I'm curious because of a Korean form called Pal Gye that was practiced by the Chung Moo Doe (Quan) crowd that I did for a number of years that would help make pressure points more resistant. (That was actually one of the few things that was legit there. It was a form of 8 static positions done on each side and the last one--bagua type guard stance done twice on each side, totaling 18 postions. Some positions weren't good mechanics and caused some foot problems in a number of people to to the torsion and tension on the knee and foot.) This form was all static except from switching from on position to the other. A position was commonly held for 30 seconds to a minute.

[Royal Dragon]

You know, Shaolin has holding sets just like Chung moo does, as do many Chinese arts. In all honesty, Chung moo's Pargey is not really all that great. You would be better off doing this Shaolin set instead. http://store.yahoo.com/martialartsmart/pr-tp004.html

It's twice as long as Pargey, but it does not have the excessive torquing of the lower body joints. I have been practicing it for several years now, and it is far superior to anything Chung moo ever offered. I HIGHLY recomend getting the above video.

Shi, Yan Ming was in Chicago doing seminar's in the Mid 90's, and I was able to pin him down just prior to a Tong Bei seminar I attended. I showed him Pargey, and I asked him if he recognised it. He said something to the effect of "it was like morning excercises at Shaolin, basics, there are lots of sets in Shaolin that hold postures like that." I don't know if he meant he recognised the exact set, or if he just recognised the practice of holding postures in sequential sets as is done with Tong Who & Pargey. Either way, he seemed rather unimpressed by it, like it's old news to him. I got the impression holding postures for long periods of time was considred pretty common.

[freedom76]

RD: I stopped practicing Pal Gye nearly two years ago because I didn't really like it all that much. (Isn't it strange that horse postition isn't in Pal Gye?--I've currently replaced Pal Gye with wubuquan) I left Chung Moo about six years ago when all the nonsense came out. I was helping run a school at that time in Minnesota and I didn't like being lied to. Here in Phoenix there are a couple of schools called United Martial Arts that are run by old Chung Moo instructors. They still do many of the forms from there but have added a Longfist form perhaps related to Cha Chuan ( I never could get a straight lineage on it), Hung Gar Tiger Crane, a little Sun Style Bagua, and Yang Style Tai Chi (just the 108) from an interesting lady named Ariel. I taught at one of the schools for a time but left for "personal" reasons (Much of the mentality is still Chung Moo). I have to take a look at that video you recommended, bu tright now my family and I need to move soon, probably out-of-state so I'm watching the money closely. I appreciate the suggestion and when we're settled, I'm going to get that one.
As for holding positions for a long time at the Shaolin Temple, I've heard "stories" of hours of mabu, even eating in mabu. In fact I think that there is a picture of that in an old Kung Fu Qigong issue with Shi Guolin's Hot Peanut Noodle Recipe (which is good by the way).

[GeneChing]

Yeah, well that was my first question to him - show it to me. He wouldn't. Said it was some kind of family secret. Too bad, I'd really like to know too.

[Royal Dragon]

Interesting, ancient family secret huh?

On the Pargey issue, if you look at it, and understand Kim over exaggerated everything, you will see horse stance is the posture where you hold the arms out to the sides, and the toes are pointed in. I really believe Pargey was at one time a legit foundationl form from whatever system Kim learned, Tong Who too.


Also, I do Wu Bu Chuan as well, It's an excellent set for holding postures with.

[GeneChing]

I've been knocking at Shaolin's gate for years, and they've only just let me peek into some of the secrets. I thought I knew it before, but that was just the external shell. And this doesn't even account for the folk/family secrets like Guolin's.

[Royal Dragon]

Yeah, I think most systems are like that. In Tai Tzu, I have discovered that in certian family lineages, it's not an external long fist style, but an INTERNAL Long Fist style. I have never seen a Shaolin lineage that was internal, but it may very well be so and we are not privy to it. The secret is in the Taiji ruler. It's not just a Qi Gong set, but the drills to teach internal body mechanics. Once you know the ruler well, you take it's body mechanics and apply them to all the external Tai tzu techniques, and whala, they become internal. If it wasn't for a Li Hu Ba Fa freind I have, I never would have figured that one out.

I also suspect Shaolin's systems may be like this as well, only instead of the secrets being in the Taiji Ruler, they are in Chen style Silk reeling exercises. I am willing to bet Dollars to Doughnuts the body mechanics for the secret internal Shaolin IS the body mechanics of the Chen Silk reeling.

Master Chen's Silk reeling, and apply it to Shaolin sets, and Whala, you have internal Shaolin. It makes too much sense to me.

[freedom76]

RD: I've never heard of Tong Who. We did a form called Tong Nah (they said it translated as ocean form). It started off with hook block palm strike on one side then the other, double hook w/ ankle sweep, then jump side kick (or ankle break). Sound familiar? I don't know anybody who learned the whole form, nor do I know anybody who knew how long the form actually was. I had about three or so runs. Now wait, my wife said that there was Tong Oo as she has seen it. I remember that now. It was translated as tunnel form or six tunnel form. From my research, much of the bagua that John C. Kim taught was from Park Bok Nam from Lu Shui Tien. I studied that for a short time and there were many similarities. In fact, Park Bok Nam says that John C Kim "stole" his forms. Park Bok Nam being the lineage master. It makes sense that Kim, being in Korea, would have learned bagua from Lu Shui Tien. Park has a tong nah form as well, but was a bit different with ten runs I believe. The Park bagua broadsword form is nearly identical to the one taught in Chung Moo. As for exaggerating things, that's an understatement. :D

Gene: Too bad about the form being "secret". Any idea why Shaolin is still so "closed"? I think their knowledge would be quite a boon, bu then perhaps diminsh their influence if so many other knew. Does it have anything to do with sacredness, rather than secrecy? How long does a person generally have to study there before they are let on the "inside"? ( I suppose much of that depends on the individual). Also, does one have to be a disciple to learn these "secret" things or just a proven student? I ask because of my personal religious beliefs being in conflict with discipleship to a man rather than God. Thanks for the info none the less.

[Royal Dragon]

Sorry, I'm and old school moo. Tong Who is the original name fro Who Yung Bope. It was usually taught to 1st-2nd sections and is basically a holding set.

I would be interested to see Park's version of Tang Nan. Personally, I don't see it as being Bagua, more like some sort of Long Fist. Since Bagua is considered a graduate course in may schools, I wonder if Tang Nan is the Long Fist system taught as a prerequisite for Bagua training in Park's system? I used to know about 50 or so moves from it I think. I have video of Nationals doing both Tang Nan, and Tang Nan Choy'o. It's probably the comlete form. Kim never taught anything that was 3 hours long. he just said he did, and made up new stuff for each form as he needed. I was told it was 14-1/2 hours long, nonstop never repeteing a movement twice. If you really want to know the truth about Kim and his system, check out http://groups.yahoo.com/group/oomyungdoe_discuss/ They would welcome your input if you have any facts to share.

As for Park's Tang nan, do you know where I could get a video of it?

As for Shaolin, to me it is comforting to think they haven't prostituted everything yet. I'm guessing you have to be an ordained Soldier Monk to learn it all.

I think the secrets are out there though, you just have to know where to look, and how to put the pieces together.

[freedom76]

Tang Oo that you talk about was changed to be called Ku Yung Bope then Hu Yung Bope (At least in Minnesota in the early 90s). I don't really want to join a discussion group about "the Moo". I've found most people just want to rip on them and try to stop each others' "horror" stories. I've enjoyed our discussion on Chung Moo because that hasn't been the tone. I appreciate that, thank you. I married an Head Instructors daughter (who was one of the "big" guys in Minnesota then), but we both left the style (with some hassle) in the mid 90s when Kim and others were convicted on the tax evasion.
As for Park's Tang Na, it was a beginning level form. I had only learned a couple runs (which I've since forgotten), but I saw the whole thing. The guy I trained with was an old Chung Moo guy too who had been training with Park for a few years, so the source was legit. I met Park at a seminar at this man's school. We didi some of the same things at this seminar that I had learned in Chung Moo (same self-defense movements that were popularly taught in Chung Moo). Park's webpage is http://www.pa-kua.com/ However, I have seen both of his videos and I have both of his books, but neither one has the tang nan form on or in it. There's info for a seminar in Chicago in Sept. The host is Steve Boznak, the contact info can be found on the seminars page on Park's website. Perhaps he could direct better than I could on getting a copy of the video or at least demonstrating it. I've never met him though, nor heard of him, so I wouldn't be of any help there. Sorry.

When did you train in Chung Moo, because your description of it matches my experiences from 1994-1997 when I was there?

I agree that it is good that Shaolin hasn't shared everything, that it hasn't been watered down. I'm looking because that's what I've chosen to focus on and I don't live anywhere near somebody who teaches it, so I pick-up what I can from videos and books. I'm hoping to get to Houston sometime to (hopefully) take some privates, but some things need to settle down first.
:)

[GeneChing]

Actually Shaolin is the most open school that I've ever seen. I mean you can learn anything there, even Tae Kwon Do in the private schools (it's an Olympic thing - don't get all freaked out about tradition on me on this.) The problem with "secrets" is that, for the most part, you have to achieve a certain level of proficiency before you can even begin to comprehend them. Otherwise, it's a bit like learning quantum physics before you can add. Now most Shaolin students train 6-8 hour a day, 6 days out of 7, for several years just to get the basics. By most, we are talking about literally thousands of students. So when some tourist marches in for a week of training, how can the expect to get the secrets?

[norther practitioner]

Now most Shaolin students train 6-8 hour a day, 6 days out of 7, for several years just to get the basics.

Too few people realize this.

[freedom76]

Great point Gene.

[Royal Dragon]

Actually, the discussion site I posted the link to is dedicated to the historical accuracy of Kim, and his schools, as well as those who really built them. Most argumentitive minded people get banned pretty quick. You should check it out. I donated all my court files, and there is a timeline and a list of instructors, and who taught who. It looks like Kim's brother taught all the guys that could actualy fight, and Kim apparently hardly ever taught anyone past the late 70's. If you have been involved in the Moo, it's a must see site for the files alone. It really details what really happened, and how it all really developed. There are guys on there that lived wiht Kim, and were part of his schools inner most workings. everything you ever wanted to know is there, or on it's way.

I did the Book & Video thing for a long time. My current study of Tai Tzu (Emperor's Long Fist) is based on video with live corrections as much as possible. It's a hard way to do it, but the extra effort you put into learning that way opens you up to understanding most do not bennifit from.

[freedom76]

RD: that group is very interesting. I couldn't get any of the pics to work though. The guy in Minnesota that I was learning Park's bagua from and hosted his seminars there was Rocky Richardson who, I'm told was at the trial and testified in Illinois. Anyway, I find it very rewarding to learn by video and book. I have to earn understanding, very little is given to me. I try to get as many sources as I can for any given form or concept, but unfortunetly that means I often get slighty (or overtly) conflicting information. I enjoy it though...learning at my own pace, learning what I want to learn...sometime I'm going to need to get some personal instruction on a semi-regular basis, even if it's just two to three times a year. Good luck in your endeavor.
I found your theory on Chen's link to Shaolin kung fu being internal very interesting. I'm going to look further into that as the years go on.

[Royal Dragon]

Yeah, the idea hit me when Gene was talking about Xiao Hong Chuan having an internal practice method. I have never given any thought to Xiao Hong being an internal set, it has always been the ipidimoy of external practice to me. When he said that, I made a connection to the External Shaolin Tai Tzu Chuan, and some select family branches of Tai Tzu that have the internal versions of the forms. I also know a school who is trying to implement Chen style silk reeling exercises into the Nanjing Long Fist. This in effect turns the Nanjing Long Fist into an internal style, the same way the Taiji Ruler converts Tai Tzu Chang Chuan from an external system, to an internal one. It then dawned on me that Shaolin Temple may have been doing something like this forever, and it might be the closely guarded secret everyone always talks about. Since Chen style was GREATLY influanced by Shaolin, and Tai Tzu Chang Chuan greaatly influanced both Chen style and Shaolin, the though that the Chen style Silk Seeling exercises (Or some equivilant) might be the body mechanics for internal Shaolin. Master them, and then insert those mechanics into all your external forms, and whala, you have authentic internal Shaolin Temple Kung Fu.

After all, they always say all martial arts are internal at the highest levels, right? I think I just figured out the secret right here on KFO. :p

[GeneChing]

This is where most westerners fail to understand that symbol we often mistakenly call the yin yang. It is more properly called the Taiji, as in Taijiquan (tai chi chuan.) And it symbolizes the unity, not the separation. And within that unity, there is always some yin in the yang and vice versa. Nothing can be entirely external, except maybe a maching or robot. Nothing can be entirely internal, except maybe a ghost. Every martial art has a bit of both, although some of the opposites are very miniscule. Nevertheless, they remain. In Taoist theory, using the term yin yang is really more akin to liang yi where the internal and external remain seperated. This is the first level. Some even say that Chen style is not a true taiji, since it is more like liang yi. In taiji, they unify, then progress to the highest level, wuyi - void.

So there's the secret for you, right in fundamental taoism. I know it, you know it, now we all know it in theory. But theoretical knowledge is not true understanding. It's the application...

[Royal Dragon]

Gene,
Couldn't it be argued that External = power generated by the limbs, and transfred through the torso to connect the lower and upper body together

Internal = power genrated by the torso itself, thus having a power multiplication effect on the power generated by the limbs?

This being the case, inserting Chen style silk reeling into ANY external form, would make it internal, because it teaches to generate power with the torso...............no? Yes?

[GeneChing]

Sure you could argue that. But your still defining internal and external as mutually exclusive when in fact, if you look understand the taiji, they are inclusive. There is some internal in any external form, no matter what it is. By adding more internal from another style, that doesn't necessitate the conversion. But then again, it's a case to case sort of situation. Actually, once you start blending stuff, some might argue that "you've lost the purity" (whatever the hell that means) rendering the whole claissifaction of int/ext a bit moot.

[Royal Dragon]

Sure you could argue that. But your still defining internal and external as mutually exclusive when in fact, if you look understand the taiji, they are inclusive.

Reply]
That depends on your deffinition. I have been looking at this subject for some time now, and I have determined that the role played by the core body is THE descisive factor in determining internal or external. If the power is generated by the torso It's internal. If it's not, and the torso just serves to transmit power from one end of the body to the other but otherwise is realtively beinine, it's external.

>>There is some internal in any external form, no matter what it is.

Reply]
Going by my strict deffinition, no. External forms are deviod of internal power. Rather than calling them external though, I think they should be called "Purely External" as to me the difference lies in the action or passivenes played by the Torso in power generation INTERNAL however has both Limbs, AND Torso operateing in unison to generate power. According to me anyway.

>>By adding more internal from another style, that doesn't necessitate the conversion. But then again, it's a case to case sort of situation. Actually, once you start blending stuff, some might argue that "you've lost the purity" (whatever the hell that means) rendering the whole claissifaction of int/ext a bit moot

Reply]
I'm not so sure this stuff wasn't blended originally. Based on how I know Tai Tzu Chuan to work, it really looks to me like there has been a separation. Styles not taught with the full mechanics are "External" because they are just the outside (external)of the system. Internal arts are taught fully. If you follow my thinking here, then we are not "Blending" anything, but "Restoring" things to as they originally were.

Chen style just has really good drills for developing those mechanics, and in haveing so may be one of the few styles that fully preserved them. By having a specific drill, they preserved what many other styles may have lost, or only teach to the senior most desciples because they taught the mechanics only after the outside of the system was masterd. They used existing forms, and just taught the internals to them. If you get someone who never learned the internals to thier sets, you now have lineages that are fully external, when they should be internal. Those learning Chen style are taught Silk reeling as Qi Gong, often very early on. So even if they only learn the outside of thier sets, they have the tools to "Internalise" them on their own. Most other systems donot have that.

By the Chen style preserving the absolute core body mechanics in thier Silk reeling drills, guys like you and me ALSO have the tools to restore modern external styles to thier former, traditional internal glory. We just have to use a different path to do so than was originally intended.

Compare the gross body mechanics of Chen's silk reeling to the Internal version of Shou Hong Chuan you have reacently seen, and tell me if they are not nearly the same.

Anyway, that's the conclusions I have come to since doing some exploration of things.

Your thoughts?

[GeneChing]

Now, if I understand you correctly, you're dividing external and internal by trunk (or torso) vs. limb (arm, leg, etc.) But these anatomical parts are attached, so for something to be entirely external, it would be a be an arm disconected from a body? Even if there is minimal power generated from the trunk in, say a punch, the arm is still attached to the trunk. To me, this gets at a fundamental difference in linguistics - the term anatomy is rooted in atom, to cut into pieces, so the western view is to look at systems like the nervous system or the musculature system as separate. The taiji is about wholeness.

In Chinese thought, the trunk vs. limb paradigm is usually divided into three sections, shaojie (tip) zhongjie (center) & genjie (root.) Using this on our punch, shaojie is arm, zhongjie is trunk and genjie is legs. Explosive power comes from the legs.

As for the original state, we can look at fundamental taoism and see that it goes liangyi, taiji, wuji. The quest is to get back to wuji, and I agree with you in theory that "blending" is a fine vehicle for doing so. But then, so is essence. As I mentioned before, some taiji people view chen style as just liangyi. So I might be tempted to compare the internal xiaohong to chen, but that would be a gross generalization.

[Royal Dragon]

Now, if I understand you correctly, you're dividing external and internal by trunk (or torso) vs. limb (arm, leg, etc.) But these anatomical parts are attached, so for something to be entirely external, it would be a be an arm disconected from a body?

Reply]
No, I'm talking about power generation. Internal, the power starts in the dantien, and radiates owtward into the upper, AND lower body where it has a power multipliction effect on the power generated by the limbs. This means, in order to be internal, the limbs and torso must work together I unison.

In the external, yes the limbs are still connected to the torso, but it does not have an active part in power generation. Instead it just transferes power from one end of the body to another, or from upper to lower/lower to upper etc...


>>Even if there is minimal power generated from the trunk in, say a punch, the arm is still attached to the trunk. To me, this gets at a fundamental difference in linguistics - the term anatomy is rooted in atom, to cut into pieces, so the western view is to look at systems like the nervous system or the musculature system as separate. The taiji is about wholeness.

Reply]
Agreed.

>>In Chinese thought, the trunk vs. limb paradigm is usually divided into three sections, shaojie (tip) zhongjie (center) & genjie (root.) Using this on our punch, shaojie is arm, zhongjie is trunk and genjie is legs. Explosive power comes from the legs.

Reply]
I beg to differ, or be more detailed, one of the two. In an External art, the power comes form the legs, is transfred through the torso and is added to the power generated by the arms.

In an Internal art, power is generated by the torso (Dantien), and it radiates both down to the legs, and up through the arms, thus multiplying the power generated by the arms and legs.

To me, with External, the torso connects the upper and lower, but has no real part in the power generation itself.

In Internal, the torso not only does that, but it generates it's own power that multiplies the power generated by the limbs through an expansion contraction and/or coiling sort of action. There must be an intimate connection for this to occure, and thus your Taoist principals are an integral part of the equasion.

>>As for the original state, we can look at fundamental taoism and see that it goes liangyi, taiji, wuji. The quest is to get back to wuji, and I agree with you in theory that "blending" is a fine vehicle for doing so. But then, so is essence. As I mentioned before, some taiji people view chen style as just liangyi. So I might be tempted to compare the internal xiaohong to chen, but that would be a gross generalization

Reply]
liangyi=external? if so,
Interesting. I think those that claim that have not seen Chen style silk reeling closely. It is the essence of internal action in motion.

When you have time to make the comparisen, please let me know what your thoughts are.

[GeneChing]

Actually, the shaojie, zhongjie, genjie theory is from a Shaolin monk, so I wouldn't say it was Taoist. It's extracted from some research I help translate from Shi Guolin (http://store.yahoo.com/martialartsmart/kf-705.html) on yijinjing (http://store.yahoo.com/martialartsmart/pr-gs001.html) and xisuijing (http://store.yahoo.com/martialartsmart/pr-gs009.html) in our last issues - MAR APR 2003 (http://store.yahoo.com/martialartsmart/kf200115.html) & MAY JUNE 2003 (http://store.yahoo.com/martialartsmart/kf200116.html). The terms are flexible, meaning that if we were to analyze the punch from just the arm, we could call the shoulder gen, the elbow zhong and the fist shao. Now in terms of power generation, we could get all heady and use the heaven and earth metaphor as source points before the dantien, where the roots tap power. If you look at power from the dantien, there is a certain amount of prenatal qi, but that can be exhausted. It needs replenishing and that must come from heaven and earth. Internal dan, if you will, which couldn't be more taoist.

Now liangyi is definately taoist but it means external and internal separated (in contrast to taiji where it is united.) What some taiji people argue is that Chen still separates it's external and internal into the internal reel and the external explosive power, so it is not a true taiji. Now personally I don't have an opinion on this yet, but I think it's an interesting perspective and one worthy to examine, especially given the popularity of Chen now.

To be honest, given my position I'm exposed to a lot and I generally take a devil's advocate stance. So if it seems like I'm trying to shoot down your theory, please don't misunderstand me. I'm just seeing if it maps on to the ancient teachings.

[Royal Dragon]

Interesting, that gives me alot to think about.

As for shooting my theory down, by all means do so. If you can then it means I must come up with another one and offer it up to be shot down. the process continues till I come up with one that CAN'T be shot down. This is how I develop bulletproof theorys. (Shh, don't tell anyone, it's a secret method :D )

[guohuen]

Not any more!:D Actually I do something similar if less refined myself.

[freedom76]

Gene: What were the differences with the additional energy channeling in xiaohong chuan? How did you know there was more energy channeling involved? Are you talking kinetic energy or the "chi" concept energy? The most impressive performance I've seen of this form was by Shi De Cheng from his three video set. He has so much strength in his movement, that explosive power (fa jing?). Your thoughts?

[GeneChing]

You know, that's hard to say. But it reminded me of a demonstration I saw of Weng Chun by Jeremy Roderuck of the Ving Tsun Museum. There was this energy generating movement that proceeded the form, a back and forth rocking in conjuction with breathing - actually it was similar to something that Tu Jin Sheng (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/ezine/article.php?article=290) showed me a while back. To be honest, I'm still assimilating that Shaolin trip and am not really prepared to speak on it yet. It's coming though - I'll have something up for you soon.

[freedom76]

Looking forward to it.:)
I have a copy of the masters' demo from Li Jinheng's tourney in '99 (I think) and Nick Gracenin did some kind of Tai Chi(internal something or other) that had this "shaking palm/shaking body" with some strikes. I've wondered if it was for show or some kind of energy channeling I' hadn't seen before. I wonder if it's similar to what you are talking about.....

[GeneChing]

I doubt it. That sounds more like fajing, which, while expressed in these types of methods, isn't exactly it. Or maybe it is. Still working on it. It may take me a while to solve this one, so don't hold your breath...

[KC Elbows]

During my stint, tong who, tong oo, and tong nan were three entirely different forms.

Freedom, you were looking for kung fu in MN, the two links below are related to a school out there, not sure how close to you it is, the first link is the bio of the guy who taught the school owner, you might recognize him(former moo, left early on, testified), the second is for the school itself, I'll let you know if I find any other MN kung fu links, if you're still looking.

www.geocities.com/mantiscave/agutierrez.htm

www.schoolofshaolin.com/home.html


Back to the subject at hand.

[freedom76]

KC:
Thank you for the links. I did go into the School of Shaolin, but I wasn't very impressed. All he wanted to do was talk about Chung Moo...that gets old. He moved okay, I guess, not really much power (he shifted his feet quite a bit, weaking his strikes). I had also seen him when he was teaching out of his basement in Coon Rapids a few years ago and he has improved quite abit since that time. Which, I suppose, is the best any of us can...continue to improve, grow, and learn. Overall it was a decent school, but not much energy there.

[KC Elbows]

Freedom76,

That's a problem with former members running into former members. Who else is there to talk about the stuff with? But, at the same time, training time is training time.

Sorry I couldn't be more help.

[Kymus]

Originally posted by Royal Dragon
Once you know the ruler well, you take it's body mechanics and apply them to all the external Tai tzu techniques, and whala, they become internal.

That's really interesting! I'll have to look into Tai Chi ruler stuff much more..

[freedom76]

What exactly is the "tai chi ruler"? Is there info on the internet about it?

[Royal Dragon]

I have a page with a little info on Taiji Ruler on my site at www.royaldragonusa.net

I'm thinking Shaolin internal may work the same way. I bet if you did Chen style for any length of time, then performed the Shaolin sets with Chen style mechanics you would have internal Shaolin.

In fact, I propose the theory that the Chen style, having roots in Shaolin Pao Chui, actually holds what may have been previosly lost knowledge on internal Shaolin. In other words it died out in Shaolin lineages, but was preserved through Chen style due to it's being more isolated. Sure the sets are different and all, but the principals are intact.

As for internal Tai Tzu, my studies into that lead me to believe the core principals are held in Li Hu, Ba Fa. It comes from the same Taoist monk who taught the Emperor who founded Tai Tzu Chang Chuan. They also have the ruler, and it's pretty similar to the Tai Tzu's Taiji ruler taught through the Chao lineage. The difference is the LHBF still retains the mechanics and principals, where as the Chao version seems to be deviod of them in modern times.

I'm actually going to guys who know LIHBF for the corections on my Ruler, and then applying it to my external Tai Tzu sets with really good results. It's clear those sets were ment to be internal as far as I'm concerned.

The rummurs of the secret internal Tai Tzu sets are false. The secret internal Tai Tzu uses the SAME sets as the external, only how they are performed changes. The shucksters that sell all those secret internal Tai tzu forms don't know what they are talking about. The whole thing is really really simple, and contained in the 8 original Taiji Ruler exercises. All you need is the secret "Key", which I just gave everyone for free.

[richard sloan]

...if you ever saw the Love Edit with SYM you will see a Shaolin Pao Chui form run in an inset which Yan Ming says is connected to Shaolin Internal and Chen forms...

[freedom76]

Thank you. I read the info on your website...very interesting. I checked around a bit on the internet, but didn't find much about it. A couple questions after looking around though:
1. Is this related to Tai Chi Chih?
2. Did you know David Carradine has a video on this? LOL
3. Is there a video clip or diagrams of this exercise somewhere that you know of? I did find this one:
http://www.soton.ac.uk/~maa1/chi/chikung/ruler.htm
It sounds like there might be more to it than just that page.
Your thoughts?