Author and age of 7 Star forms ?

[ursa major]

I was talking with a fellow practitioner the other day and we got on about how old is 7 Star then automatically replied "centuries old" then realized I didn't really know what was old and what was not with regard to 7 Star. In fact I couldn't answer who wrote what form and when ?

So I am searching for information for each WHF book that I have (16 of them now) to find out who authored the form and when it was written ? If you know of a book or website or thread on this site that helps/answers please post.
If you know the author and date of creation for any of these forms please reply. I would very much appreciate hearing from anyone on this. Here is the list of books with English names:

1. Four Direction Fighting
2a. Concealing the Hard
2b. 18 Ancestors
3. Piercing Fist
4. Monks Martial Breathing
5. White Ape Exits The Cave
6. White Ape Steals The Peach
7. Plum Flower Fist
8. Plum FLower Falling Leaf
9. Plum Flower Hand
10. 1st Set of Essentials
11. 2nd Set of Essentials
12. 3rd Set of essentials
13. Drunken Monk
14. Crushing Step
15. Two Man Crushing Step
16. Flying Goose Palm

thx in advance,
UM.

[MantisifuFW]

UM,

Not much of a start but here goes:

Lohan Gong, (Monk's Strength) story goes that it was given to Fan Xudong via Shaolin and passed to LKY. Not found on the mainland in my studies, though I have heard a story or two of folks who did have it there. Others say it was added in HK by LKY.

Chop Choi (CHopping Fist) and Say Lo Bung Da(4 Directions running and hitting), both definately from Wang Yongchun. I have seen varing versions of both these sets from different students of WHF.

White Ape Steals Peach and Exits Cave, in LKY line it was LKY who revised these sets as they exist in HK Tanglang. Others have added their own varitions like Chu Leung due to his being influenced by the Yip Duk Monks. On the mainland, it would be best to ask Sifu Tunks.

Drunken Monk, Zui Lohan, some say added by WHF to the system. Others say added by LKY. I have stories on both sides. Not found on the mainland and exclusive to HK Tanglang. Again Chu Leung has added much to this corpus of knowledge.

Two Man Crushing Step-The idea of a Ling or matching side is argued by some to be an emphasis made by LKY. On the mainland, where it is found, the took it from LKY and brought it back from that line. Others say it was originally a part of Tanglang until the time of Fan Xudong, lost there but preserved by LKY. Here I am only presenting the range of ideas present.

Got to go. Hopefully others will add more. If not, I will give it a try later.

Steve Cottrell

[Young Mantis]

Originally posted by MantisifuFW

Two Man Crushing Step-The idea of a Ling or matching side is argued by some to be an emphasis made by LKY and the mainland folks, where it is found, brought it back from that line. Others say it was originally a part of Tanglang, lost and preserved by LKW. Here I am only presenting the range of ideas present.


Sifu Cottrell,

In regards to the Ling forms, I cannot say if it was an emphasis made only by LGY but I do know that in our WHF line, the ling forms were taught and held in high regard. WHF also authored many articles on the subject on Ling forms, the most commonly found article being in the preface to his Ling Bung Bo book. I am not sure though why you say the ling forms are lost and preserved by LKW, whom I can only guess to mean Sifu Lee Kam Wing. To my knowledge and recollection, I have not seen any forms lists for any of his schools that include any ling forms.

YM

[MantisifuFW]

YoungMantis,

Forgive my mistake. I was just before class and miswrote. (Note to self, don't post when in a great hurry), Please see my amended version where I state that LKY preserved the ling. This was my intent, to state that the two main theories on two man Bungbo and all Ling sets were that either LKY created the emphasis on Ling as a method of preserving the true meaning of the sets or that LKY was preserving the work of Fan Xudong. I did not wish to bring my personal bias into the discussion at this point.

I did not say that only the WHF line places such an emphasis on Ling because I have not examined the Ling components of either LKW or CCY and did not wish to be exclusive until I had complete information. If you have more information on these other branches, I would be appreciative if you could share this.

Again, that's what I get for being in a hurry. I have amended my post to reflect my intent. Thanks for reading my post more carefully than I wrote it.

Steve Cottrell

[mantis108]

I believe Ling form(s) most likely was/were introduced between late 1880's and early 1900's. IMHO, I think the first fully developed (lengthwise) ling form would most likely be Bengbu which made its debut in Yantai county, Shandong sometime after 1841 CE. However, I don't believe the Bengbu is the first ling form of the system per se. It is quite possible that this methodology or rather this ling form in particular was developed with the help of Eagle Claw stylist(s). It is believed that Eagle Claw style has a long history in Shandong as well. I must clarify that there are 2 versions of this form, 7* & CCK TCPM, that I am aware of in exsitance today. They both reveal each style's individual stylistic flavor and fighting approach. I believe that 7 Star's version might have Eagle Claw influence while CCK TCPM is more akined to perhaps Taizu Men. CCK TCPM version is interesting in that it is reminiscent of the Taojie (steal intercept or Steal Connect) which is another 2 men form with lots of Chin Na techniques. The flavor and certain techniques of these 2 forms are amazingly similar. I am not sure of the origin of Taojie; therefore, I am not able to pin point the source of the inspiration for the CCK TCPM Bengbu 2 men version. Come to think of it neither can I figure out the true source of the 7 Stars version. :( Given the existance of 2 very different flavor long forms, I can only say that ling form methodology would reveal the inner feelings or rather the point of view of the author, as Usar Major puts it, of the form. It reveals a level of reality that the author(s) of the ling form(s) saw as insight subject to his attributes which is then articulated and solidified with a counter side. It is simply an insight of mantis fighting in a neat nutshell. All I am saying is beware of focusing on the finger point to the moon. Not that the finger isn't helpful btw. :)

Mantis108

[MantisifuFW]

Mantis108,

Facinating post! What factors do you use in establishing the time for the innovation of Ling? Personally I value the Ling as part of my heritage in LKY/WHF Tanglang and believe that there is great insight to be gained in this aspect of training.

Steve Cottrell

[loki]

others have added their own variations like Chu Leung due to his being influenced by the yip duk monks

I just want to say that CL did not "add variations" and was not "influenced" by the monks. This would imply that CL may have just learned a few things from them and then just added what he picked up to CCM's forms. CL trained directly under 2 of the temple's monks from childhood. He trained under them even while training with CCM. I believe he would still go back to the temple after leaving for New York whenever he went back to visit.

Whatever differences there may be between our forms, WHF forms and even CCM forms for that matter are not because CL added them but rather because that is how the form was taught by the monks.

I know that you did not mean it the way it sounded to me but I felt I needed to make the clarification nonetheless.

Also, while we are on the topic of ling I would like to share that in our line our Bung Bo has a 2 man fighting set ( I forget the chinese term ). The difference is that the ling is basicallly one-sided. By this I mean that in the Ling you have the person who is actually doing the moves to the form and the other person just basically extends his limbs out to facilitate his partner's applications of said form. In the other version, both partners are actually using techniques evenly for attack and defense and both get to use Bung Bo alternatively. I don't think this is exclusive to our line. I know there is a book ( in chinese ) that actually shows this form.

[Young Mantis]

Originally posted by loki

Also, while we are on the topic of ling I would like to share that in our line our Bung Bo has a 2 man fighting set ( I forget the chinese term ). The difference is that the ling is basicallly one-sided. By this I mean that in the Ling you have the person who is actually doing the moves to the form and the other person just basically extends his limbs out to facilitate his partner's applications of said form. In the other version, both partners are actually using techniques evenly for attack and defense and both get to use Bung Bo alternatively. I don't think this is exclusive to our line. I know there is a book ( in chinese ) that actually shows this form.

Hmm, not sure what your version of Ling Bung Bo is like but in the WHF tradition, the Ling side of any of the ling forms be it Ling Bung Bo, Ling Daw Ghong, Ling Sup Baht Sao, Ling Tchahp Tchoi, etc.,is more than just "...extends his limbs out to facilitate his partner's applications of said form".

Yes, one side does the regular sequence of the solo form although sometimes the techniques do not look exactly as they do in the solo versions. But to say that the Ling side of these partner forms do nothing but facilitate the other side shows a lack of understanding and appreciation of the ling form usage and lessons.

There is so much more going on for the ling side. To think of them as simply a means to practise Bung Bo, Daw Ghong, or any of the other forms with a partner from beginning to end, is truly missing some great aspects of the forms. There are mantis attacks and counter-attacks, defenses and escapes. There are many lessons for the ling side on learning timing and how to counter-attack.

Your spin on the ling forms sounds like there is nothing to be gained by practising the ling side of these forms. I think it is far from it and the ling sides are almost if not as important as the regular side. For anyone that has learned and really practised any of the ling forms, they should understand what lessons I am talking about.

YM

[loki]

YM ,

With the exception of "shows a lack of understanding" I can agree with the points you made regarding the benefits to both practitioners. That still does not negate the point I was trying to make, which is that there is another two-man (fighting) form which is different from the more common learned ling version. I cannot remember the chinese term for it right now but I will definitely ask Sifu tonight and get back to you on that , okay?

BTW, you don't know me so don't presume to know what I lack understanding in.

[ursa major]

Originally posted by Young Mantis
... There is so much more going on for the ling side. To think of them as simply a means to practise Bung Bo, Daw Ghong, or any of the other forms with a partner from beginning to end, is truly missing some great aspects of the forms. There are mantis attacks and counter-attacks, defenses and escapes. There are many lessons for the ling side on learning timing and how to counter-attack.

Your spin on the ling forms sounds like there is nothing to be gained by practising the ling side of these forms. I think it is far from it and the ling sides are almost if not as important as the regular side. For anyone that has learned and really practised any of the ling forms, they should understand what lessons I am talking about.

YM

Hello Young Mantis,

Without doubt your comments are accurate and reflect what is appropriate. IMHO the two-man fighting sets are invaluable contributors to our system.

However when reading loki's post I could also see a value in this 'one-sided place-holders' ling form described -- not as a final statement of the ling form itself (IMO we already have that)... but as an intermediary learning tool (no disrespect intended loki).

Let me explain using Bung-Bo 2 man as an example. I like to see students get 'hands-on' asap and the ling form is tremendous for this with one obvious caveat -- it is very demanding of skills. It seems to me the value of a ling form with one person acting as a passive dummy is that it is entirely one-sided and would get the student 'into the method' without having to concentrate much on the opponent. Instead they could step through the form visualizing their technique emphasizing stepping, position, stance, timing, etc... against a meaningful target that in return is not trying to pound on them. This is somewhere between the common excercise of practicing a form against an invisible opponent and the full contact 2-man excercise of the ling form. I find that some students take to ling right away while others struggle with the concepts. If I had a tool such as the one loki described I might be able to improve their learning experience through use of 'soft' and 'hard' ling versions.

regards,
UM.

[-N-]

Originally posted by Young Mantis
I think it is far from it and the ling sides are almost if not as important as the regular side. For anyone that has learned and really practised any of the ling forms, they should understand what lessons I am talking about.

When I was learning the 2 man forms, the partner that got to learn the ling side, or in our terms - the "attacking side", was considered lucky. It was the more advanced student of the partners that got to learn the attacking side first, and those learning the regular side were always envious(the junior student might not get to learn the attacking side until a year later).

*Everyone* wanted to be the one who got to learn the attacking side. If the partners were of relatively equal training level, one of them sometimes would defer the priviledge of learning the attacking side first to the other partner as a way to show respect and politeness to his kung fu brother. Later, that priviledged partner would return the favor by working extra hard to help his brother understand the subtle/hidden details when they switched sides.

N.

[Young Mantis]

Loki,

You are right, I do not know you nor do I know what you have learned and understand about the system. But I found your remarks regarding the ling form to be quite flippant and off-handed. Perhaps you were trying to downplay the ling form to highlight the two man Bung Bo form you have in your lineage. As you gave me no other indication as to having an appreciation or understanding of the ling form, I commented on your statement.

You see, I happen to think very highly of the ling forms. I think it really displays the beauty of the praying mantis forms. That every move in the sequence of the form can link to another in a cohesive and logical progression. When learning the solo form, one might not truly see and appreciate this. When learning the ling form, and then further dissecting the ling form, so much more about the forms' usage and design is revealed.

Your remarks regarding the ling side left me feeling you did not truly understand or appreciate this because they seemed so indifferent to these aspects of the ling forms. Perhaps you just don't see them the way I do or perhaps your training of the ling form is different.

Oh, and I never tried to negate your statement about your other 2-man bung bo set. I don't know why you made that statement. I have nothing to say about it since I do not know of it outside of your comments on it.

YM

[ursa major]

Ok, all other discussion aside, sofar we have:

1. Four Direction Fighting (Wang Yongchun -> WHF date unknown could be 20th century ?).

2a. Concealing the Hard (author and date of origin unkown).

2b. 18 Ancestors (author and date of origin unkown).

3. Piercing Fist (Wang Yongchun -> WHF date unknown could be 20th century ?)

4. Monks Martial Breathing (Fan Xudong via Shaolin and passed to LKY... does that make it a 19th century form ? 18??).

5. White Ape Exits The Cave (through LKY date of origin unkown).

6. White Ape Steals The Peach (through LKY date of origin unkown).

7. Plum Flower Fist (author and date of origin unkown).

8. Plum FLower Falling Leaf (author and date of origin unkown).

9. Plum Flower Hand (author and date of origin unkown).

10. 1st Set of Essentials (author and date of origin unkown).

11. 2nd Set of Essentials (author and date of origin unkown).

12. 3rd Set of essentials (author and date of origin unkown).

13. Drunken Monk (added by LKY or WHF date unknown).

14. Crushing Step (author and date of origin unkown).

15. Two Man Crushing Step (as early as 1841 then through LKY).

16. Flying Goose Palm (author and date of origin unkown).

thx,
UM.

[mantis108]

Hi Sifu Cottrell,

My take on the origin and dates of form would be mostly from the Taiji/Meihwa side of things. Also available info on the net by Ilya Profatilov, Brendan Tunk plus Fernando's Mantis Cave. Of course, private emails and personal contacts with Tainan Mantis and others provide great insights as well. So arguably, my "fact" might not be straight. :( However, I believe it is important to keep track of the dates. So I would put together the Masters "supposed" living periods and try to cross reference it with the rest of the material. It helps to see whether there is a hole in a supposition.

For example, from Ilya's research, we "know" that GM Liang Xue Xiang (CE 1810 - ?) taught Bazhou, Luanjie, and Bengbu. There are couple of Quanpu that are dated around his time. One of them is arround 1840-41 (?). BTW, it could be the later one that has the Bengbu. I will have to double check on the dates. It mentioned Bengbu. Zhaiyao didn't seem to be in exsitance at that time or at least it would seem so as the document goes. So at age 30 GM Liang was teaching or has been teaching these stuff. Personally, I feel that Bengbu, and Luanjie for that matter, was born of Bazhou. The elbow technique that is found in CCK TCPM Bengbu echoes the one that is found in the Xia Bazhou as well. I persume a similar case can be established with other TJPM families' "3 big forms". In my mind, the Laiyang Bengbu would be the missing link of the evolution. Bazhou would be the mother of all TJPM forms instead of the Zhaiyao IMHO. The Qishou form (7 hands) would be an important strand of DNA of Mantis fighting also extracted from the Bazhou to teach basic fighting concepts for the novice. That's kind of out of the scope for this discussion so I will leave it for now.

One of GM Liang's students was Jiang Hualong (CE 1855 - 1924). This means that GM Liang could lived pretty long (upto 80-90 years old). It is said (oral transmission of GM CCK) that on GM Liang's 70th or 80th birthday, 7 or more of his Kung Fu Master friends presented him with a gift - the Zhaiyao form (basically a bunch of different styles' techniques)which he later reorganized into the Zhaiyao form (one form only) as we know it. This would make sense since in the old days to have a big celebration for 70th or 80th birthday was customery. Actually, I would think it's more like 60th birthday but then that's just speculation. By then Jiang would be around 20 some years olds. One thing of note is that many old masters that I know of in person including GM CCK were very active even at 70 or 80 years old. So it is entirely possible that he would teach Zhaiyao (the prototypical version) and then perhaps working towards fine tuning it even expanding it. We also know that Jiang and some other GM Liang's students or grandstudents were teaching in Yantai city, the old capital of Shandong, where many other styles of Kung Fu including Eagle Claw, Monkey, Black Tiger, etc... were also taught.

By the time, GM CCK learned TJPM in Yantai, it would be around 1920-27. So it would seem that the TJPM 2 men Bengbu existed then.

This is a very breif account of my understanding to the subject. I understand this is straightly from a TJPM pov so...

Warm regards

Robert

[MantisifuFW]

Mantis108,

I understand and appreciate your noting the pov on the subject but the information is excellent! Thank you.

On another note, I remember, (I had to be eleven or twelve at the time), being told a greatly less detailed story of a great mantis master who was given the techniques of several systems as a gift. At the time it was just my being told about the Tanglang system as I was studying something else. I had actually forgoten the story until your post reminded me. It is interesting personally that now I am learning about the event.

Thank you for your willingness to take the trouble to share what you know with others.

Steve Cottrell

[mantis108]

Well from a TJPM perspective, we have an explanation that might not make others happy nontheless it is an explanation for you.

<<<1. Four Direction Fighting (Wang Yongchun -> WHF date unknown could be 20th century ?).

2a. Concealing the Hard (author and date of origin unkown).

2b. 18 Ancestors (author and date of origin unkown).

3. Piercing Fist (Wang Yongchun -> WHF date unknown could be 20th century ?) >>>

No comments

<<<4. Monks Martial Breathing (Fan Xudong via Shaolin and passed to LKY... does that make it a 19th century form ? 18??).>>>

The earliest written record available of 18 Lohan was about 1760s -1770s. That would make it older than the USA. The oral transmission would be even older.

<<<5. White Ape Exits The Cave (through LKY date of origin unkown).

6. White Ape Steals The Peach (through LKY date of origin unkown).>>>

The white ape series could be of Baiyuan Tongbei variaty which became quite popular during late Qing dynasty (late 1700s to 1800s). I believe it is added to the branches of the system in Qingdao first and then Yantai later. branches that are not in contact with the Yantai or Qingdao (ie Laiyang) with the exception of Jiang Hualong's branch don't seem to have this series at all.

<<<7. Plum Flower Fist (author and date of origin unkown).>>>

no comment

<<<8. Plum FLower Falling Leaf (author and date of origin unkown).>>>

It would be Jiang Hualong and possibly together with Song Zide created in the late 1800s early 1900s.

<<9. Plum Flower Hand (author and date of origin unkown).>>>

No comment.

<<<10. 1st Set of Essentials (author and date of origin unkown).>>

See above post. It would be from GM Liang at around 1880 or 1890 CE.

<<11. 2nd Set of Essentials (author and date of origin unkown).

12. 3rd Set of essentials (author and date of origin unkown).>>>

Not sure about the 7 Stars versions. The rest of the Zhaiyao would be from Jiang Hualong (said to have help GM Liang to develop 6 others).

<<<13. Drunken Monk (added by LKY or WHF date unknown).>>>

No comment

<<<14. Crushing Step (author and date of origin unkown).>>>

15. Two Man Crushing Step (as early as 1841 then through LKY).>>

See above post. As early as 1830-40 for Bengbu and after 1850s for the 2 men.

16. <<<Flying Goose Palm (author and date of origin unkown).>>>

It would seem that Flying Goose Palm has a complimentary set call the Descending Eagle Palm. Other than that I have no further comment.

Mantis108

[Tainan Mantis]

Mantis 108,
Where did you get your date on Luohan Gung?

Luohan Gung has the technique Weituo Offers the Pestle.
This is the same move in Yi Jinjing with the same name.
Too much for coincidence.
Yi Jinjing appeared out of nowhere in the early to mid 1800's.
Besides WHF's book there isn't much to link this to PM.
Maybe the manuscript of Wang Yifu which, as he wrote in the '30's. PM is also known as Short Strikes of 18 Luohan

Ilya Profatilov credits Meihua Lu to Song Zide.
Ilya's shrfu was Song's grandson.
Song was Jiang Hualong's literate childhood kung fu brother.
After training Song kept detailed notes and made a book.
I had the chance to read over this book while at Ilya's home last year.
This gives the Meihua Lu story some bit of credibility, at least to me.

The other Plum Flower forms are almost surely added by Luo Guangyu as well as HK 7* White Ape forms.
Small an Large Frame, Goose Palm, 14 Roads.
But eager to hear proof to the contrary.

WHF's student came to stay with my shrfu. I had the chance later to see my shrfu practicing Flying Goose Palm.
Very nice looking form.

Drunken Luohan is only called PM because it was taught by WHF.
Most likely he learned it in south as it has many points of Southern style.
I wrote details on this on a previous thread.

Four Direction Fighting.
Who says this is a PM form?
It is in other styles of Longfist.
Wang Songting taught it and he learned Longfistas well as PM.
But his version doesn't look PM.
Sun Longzhai also taught it and he didn't do PM.
More of the Mizhong Longfist style.

It seems as though Luo Guangyu learned it and changed it to more PM style.
Likely he did the same with Small and Large frame boxing.
Both forms start with unmistakeable Longfist and the become PM.
It is uncharactereistic of other PM forms that are verifiably old.

Concealing Hard is better called Avoiding Hardness.
Named after a single technique which is also known as dodging step.
The manuscript of the form reads like a keyword formula of PM:
adding,rolling, plucking, piercing, wrapping, hanging, sealing, stealin etc.

Interesting to note that the term fanche has to define two types of movement.
According to the writings of WHF this is because of the addition of Avoiding Hardness and Piercing Hand.
They have the Fanche technique which in Beng Bu was called "beng BU'
He changed the term in the form Beng Bu from "beng Bu" to "Fan Che"

Or is it possible that the term Fanche always had 2 different meanings?
Unlikely since WHF as well as manuscripts of mine define the term fanche very clearly.
It doesn't mean the term fanche that is used in beng bu today .

So it seems that these forms were added at a later date. And other styles of PM stick to the old term Tsuo Chuei instead of Fanche.
WHF uses both terms.

Why is Piercing Fist dated to Wang Yungchun?

[B.Tunks]

I am trying to stay away from this topic but I will at least address Cha Chui, Si Lu Ben Da.

Why is Piercing Fist dated to Wang Yungchun?

Because all of his students had the indentical form which was found nowhere else and passed successfully to their respective disciples.

The Si Lu Benda that is found in Mantis Boxing is a distinct Tanglang form regardless of its origin (granted it is Qixing).

Are Cha Chui and Xiao Huyan also not Tanglang forms?

Does not Meihua Tanglang retain many of its external influences?

If so, which Meihua/Taijimeihua/Taiji Tanglang forms are not Mantis forms?

[Tainan Mantis]

Hi Brendan,
I like the news you have on Cha Chuei.
The form performs like 100% PM. I like it very much.

I can't say the same for the Si Lu Beng Da and Hsiao Huyen forms I have seen.
They all look like PM forms with more Longfist added.

According to my Shrye Li Hongjie who learned it from Wang Songting.
This form was made up in the '30's.

I have seen many versions of this form and it was brought to Taiwan by quite a few different Shrfu's.
I suppose it was taught in many of the national MA schools in the 30's.

Do you have reason to believe that these forms also date back to early 7* days?

[B.Tunks]

Hi Tainan,

I can't say the same for the Si Lu Beng Da and Hsiao Huyen forms I have seen.
They all look like PM forms with more Longfist added.

They certainly do.

According to my Shrye Li Hongjie who learned it from Wang Songting.
This form was made up in the '30's.

A lot of evidence points to a recent origin.

I have seen many versions of this form and it was brought to Taiwan by quite a few different Shrfu's.
I suppose it was taught in many of the national MA schools in the 30's.

It was and Qingdao Guoshu academy was a major source.


Do you have reason to believe that these forms also date back to early 7* days?

Xiaohuyan is certainly earlier than the thirties but as far as myself possessing actual primary historical documentation about the entry period of both forms into the curriculum, no.
These two forms appear to be more of a Qingdao thing (especially Xiaohuyan) as far as Qixing goes, though both were/are also found in Yantai. Their era and location of entry into the system is disputed but tradition has them attributed to the Wang Yongchun period. Of course this is no 'true' historical evidence. Regardless, they are both now a part of the system.

[bungda07]

Thanks to the Senior Mantis folks out there for all the valuable info. Any history into The Black Tiger Boxing set? I've seen Lee Kam Wing's version, Yuen Man Kai. Do the mainland folks use this set? I like the mantis hands and shutteling feet of this set. Ok, and the eye pokes.

V/r

Steve M.

[ursa major]

bungda07, check out this thread:
http://forum.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14967&highlight=black+tiger+exits+cave

Quite abit of info on Black Tiger in PM.

Regards,
UM.

[bungda07]

Thanks Ursa Major. The article deals more with Black tiger heart stealing punch as in Dai Fan Che, 2nd route essense etc. Looking for more information on the above mentined set. I did however print out the entire post you referred to, thanks again.

Steve M.

[B.Tunks]

Bungda,


Originally posted by bungda07
Thanks to the Senior Mantis folks out there for all the valuable info. Any history into The Black Tiger Boxing set? I've seen Lee Kam Wing's version, Yuen Man Kai. Do the mainland folks use this set?
Steve M.

In answer to your question, yes. For some in the branch this set has been ommitted (in the manner of Xiaohuyan) and is not exactly common. Some masters in Yantai went to Qingdao to regather this form into the curriculum, some learnt it in Yantai and passed it on, others totally disregarded it.
hope that helps,
b.t

[bungda07]

Thanks Sifu Tunks for the reply and background info.

V/r

Steve M.

[tanglang]

Hi, there, greetings from Germany, by the way..:
I'm not sure what you mean talking about ` ling' -forms exactly? And concerning to the two-men-partner-form -got you right, you are talking about bung bo- doi da, not about Tow Far San Doi Da= Tao Hua Shan Doi Da Quan or Dai Choy Doi Da = Da Za Dui Da Quan , right?
:confused:
Sorry for asking ..:)

[mantis108]

Greetings Tanglang,

Welcome to the thread. I think there are 2 types of 2 men hand forms.

1 - Ling forms: essentially Mantis hand forms such Bengbu, 18 Elders, etc... that got a partnered side following the almost exact flow of the form.

2 - Dui Chai: essentially drill based. These forms don't necessarily has a single performing side. They are pretty odd looking if it is performed in solo. Here are some of them:

Pai An (slap press)
Tao Hwa San (peach flower blossoming)
Tao Jie (steal intercept/connect)

the following 2, I believe belong to Sifu Lee Kam Wing's lineage

Day Choi (I am not too sure of the translation on this one)
free sparring (?)

there is also Wulang Chui (5 brothers punch) which is found in CCK TCPM.

Hope this help

Regards

Mantis108

PS Are you from Sifu Lee Kam Wing's lineage?

[tanglang]

Yes, you're right- I come from the LKW-lineage. Ahh- yes, this helps. So what's the meaning of ling then? Essential? It sounds more like a special kind of force trained in these forms?- For me it's difficult to follow your discussion sometimes, because I'm not used to your terminology- sometimes I can guess from the cantonese words whitch principle of the mantis-style you are talking about, sometimes I understand the english terminology and don't know the cantonese word for it- so untill I got it- be patient if I ask a lot , please..:) :) :) :)

[tanglang]

means as much as big, I think..
Interesting to hear , that you teach the ling-forms in partner-version - For us these forms -exept the doy-da-forms- are single-forms and we train the applications with a partner also , but not as a form, we just teach the applications- sometimes in different interpretations of one technique by the way :)

[German Bai Lung]

I think it means:
Big thrusting Hits against each other
Fighting with big thrusts ....

the other Partnerforms I know:

tou fa san doi da: Peachflowerfighting ...
tao jit doi da:edit! ;) ...
chuen chi doi da: copper coins fighting or fighting very close together

hmm, the meaning of tou jie is difficult:
tou1 to steal, burglar, thief
jie2 jie1 knot, node, joint; section

I remember Sifu explained it like:
Fighting with hidden extremities

A good help:
http://www.mandarintools.com/chardict.html

[tanglang]

So what is the meaning of ling then?:)

[MantisCool]

Hi!

Ling in mandarin can be "ling chiao", in cantonese can be" leng Kao" In english, it means testing as if you call someone out to test his kungfu!

khoo

[Young Mantis]

Originally posted by MantisCool
Hi!

Ling in mandarin can be "ling chiao", in cantonese can be" leng Kao" In english, it means testing as if you call someone out to test his kungfu!

khoo

Ling by itself can mean either to lead or to receive.

Ling kao literally means to ask for advice or a lesson. Ling means to receive and kao means to teach. It does not inherently have anything to do with testing martial skill although this phrase is used by martial artists as a polite way of asking to exchange hands with someone. It shows humility since you ask to be taught a lesson by the other person.

In it's usage in the form names for the PM partner forms such as Ling Bung Bo, it would mean to lead Bung Bo. In other words, the ling side leads the other side through the Bung Bo sequence.

YM

[MantisCool]

Thanks for your explanation.

So, in the Ling Beng Bu, do you mean that the Ling side will lead the Beng Bu ? In other words, it means teaching the Beng Bu side how to use the form!

[ursa major]

MantisCool -- now that you know what 'ling' means how about making up your own fighting set ?

I do not mean to cast any form of denigration on the known fighting sets, still I encourage the practice of 'writing your own'.

IMO the fighting sets (two-man, ling, etc) are just another teaching tool in this case one designed to get us thinking dynamically, creatively, about techniques and methods in our forms. I do not believe that we should let it end at the known fighting sets. Rather, these are just an example of how one might do things and not by any means, the final word on techniques.

I wholeheartedly encourage students to take any form and build a complimentary set. Afterwards they always return with a new eye on Praying Mantis.

For my part and in the process of writing my own fighting sets, I have come across countless revelations on techniques and methods while dramatically increasing my understanding and awe at the transcendence of this system.

Regards,
UM.

[mantisben]

Originally posted by ursa major
I do not mean to cast any form of denigration on the known fighting sets, still I encourage the practice of 'writing your own'.
...
I wholeheartedly encourage students to take any form and build a complimentary set.
...


In Martial Arts, I think of myself as a traditionalist. From your posts, I've always thought of you as a traditionalist. However, what you are saying here - with my limited understanding of "tradition" - is untraditional ( or is it?).

It sounds progressive... Modern...

I like it... I like it alot...:D

[ninjaboy]

i like to think of actual sparring/ sanda/ free fighting etc. as an informal way of writing forms in a spontaneous way. taking the core of your own knowledge and allowing someone to come at you forces u to rearrange the order of the forms and use them in a way that corresponds to the attack in a logical way. two man sets are cool but i think we all know it's crazy to think that someone might attack us with THOSE 40 moves AND in THAT order, so to speak.

neil

[Young Mantis]

Originally posted by ninjaboy
two man sets are cool but i think we all know it's crazy to think that someone might attack us with THOSE 40 moves AND in THAT order, so to speak.


Yes, I agree it is unrealistic to think that a real fight will ever play out just like a 2 man form. I also think it is crazy to think that that is the reason for practicising 2 man forms. People who practice 2 man forms do not do so under some delusion that we can use that same sequence to one day win a fight. Do you practice 2 man forms? Do you know what purpose 2 man forms have?

[MantisCool]

It is possible to create our own "ling" set but only for our own school because if every sifu is to create his own than there would be no uniformity among the mantis society!

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by ninjaboy
two man sets are cool but i think we all know it's crazy to think that someone might attack us with THOSE 40 moves AND in THAT order, so to speak.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

All forms are created to assume that if the attackers are going to attack that way and I would block this way. Thats why we have so many forms for different attacks! It is like saying if you attack me here then I would block and counter here and so on and so forth until a form is created.

It is not the other way of saying that my form says here and you must attack here! Thats means the forms are initiated by the attackers when they were first created.

[tanglang]

It is possible to create our own "ling" set but only for our own school because if every sifu is to create his own than there would be no uniformity among the mantis society!
Sure- but in case of ling-forms: Why not coming to various (different ) interpretations of one and the same technique? This shows only the versatility of the mantis-style and the creativity you can develop by going deeper and deeper into the style- that's why I love PM!!!! I don't find it wrong- I understand forms only as a big book of knowledge - and if two people read the same book- they'll have different associations and come to different conclusions- because their individual experiences are different..but nothing wrong about that- if the "book" itself remains the same...plus interpretation maybe..as an offer- other interpretations allways wellcome..?

[Young Mantis]

Originally posted by tanglang

Sure- but in case of ling-forms: Why not coming to various (different ) interpretations of one and the same technique? This shows only the versatility of the mantis-style and the creativity you can develop by going deeper and deeper into the style- that's why I love PM!!!! I don't find it wrong- I understand forms only as a big book of knowledge - and if two people read the same book- they'll have different associations and come to different conclusions- because their individual experiences are different..but nothing wrong about that- if the "book" itself remains the same...plus interpretation maybe..as an offer- other interpretations allways wellcome..?

How does the book remain the same if the interpreted story is different? What if you interpret the story different from the author's intention? Is it ok?

The meaning of the form is more important than the form itself. This is why in my opinion, the ling forms are so valuable. Because they give us the original intent and design of the form. If you and I both practice a form the same way but have different interpretations of the applications, then how really is the form the same?

I agree that you can take the form apart and examine each individual technique or subset of techniques. You can and should investigate the different variations of each technique adjusting for distance and various reactions from your opponent.

Creating your own ling form is fine as an academic exercise. But you should always know the original method before experimenting with your own. This is true in all disciplines be it art, science, math....Learn and understand the method passed down by masters before us before creating your own.

"The rabbit snare exists because of the rabbit. Once you've got the rabbit, you can forget the snare. Words exist because of the meaning. Once you've got the meaning, you can forget the words. Where can I find a man who has forgotten the words so I can have a word with him?"
-- Chuang Tsu

Knowing the true meaning of the forms is more important than knowing just the forms themselves.

YM

[MantisCool]

Right! Most important is the original book but I could see that many forms have been off the original when passed from one master to another.

If the original remains the same it would be no harm to create
the "ling" form no matter how many we created because the users could always refer back to the original form.

A technique can be applied in a number of ways but there is only one best way. So, whoever can think of the best way will have the best application.

How many ling form have you all actually seen or learnt before? I have learnt the ling form of Beng Bu, Duo Kang and Bai Yuen Chu Dong.

[tanglang]

How does the book remain the same if the interpreted story is different? What if you interpret the story different from the author's intention? Is it ok? Because the written text is the base upon which the interpretation follows- and you will never find two people who interpret a text in one and the same way because of different backround these two people have. You can read a text and interpret it politically critic- or you put emphasize upon the historical context, in which the text has to be seen - or you read a text religiously critic- you'll allways come to a different interpretation, because your question you had in mind was different. This doesn't mean that there is only one right interpretation and all the others are wrong- an interpretation has to do with the perspective from which you approximate to the text/problem/form or whatever.
I meant it's ok to teach the form as it is ( ie. the book)
AND to come to own interpretations! Not to change the form. But one and the same technique of the form offers various interpretations in application, and i held it even IMPORTANT to make up my mind about that and allways have encouraged people in training to do so..everything else would be limitation in my eyes?

[Young Mantis]

Your analogy depends on what you are reading. If you were talking about a story or fiction, then I agree, there can and certainly will be many interpretations although I don't agree that they may all be correct. My goal when reading is to understand what the author was trying to say. You sound like you don't care what the author's intent was. When I learn a form or a new technique, I want to know what the correct application of it is, not what I think it should be. You seem to separate the form from the application. You say the form can stay the same but the applications are open to interpretation. Sorry, I don't agree. "ou lou choi" is "ou lou choi". "Gwa Tung" is "Gwa tung".

You sound like you are doing a self-study. Everything is left up to the individual to "discover". Why do we go to school to learn from professors? Why not then buy the texts and stay home and interpret on our own? Why do people go to church and attend religious services? Why not stay home and study the religious texts on our own? Why is studying martial arts any different? With your reasoning, there is no need for a qualified instructor. Just show them the form without any applications and let each person "discover" their own interpretations to how the techniques should be applied. Or even, just buy a book and learn the form from the pictures and "discover" our own applications.

Correct teaching includes the correct transmission of application. Learning a form without understanding the usage is useless.

Ling forms teach the correct usage of techniques. My Sifu said something to us last night. He said long ago, one of his Sisuks told him, "If you have not learnt Bung Bo, you have not learnt Praying Mantis." My Sifu added to this, "If you have not learnt ling forms, then you do not truly understand Praying Mantis." My knowledge and understanding of each form has increased whenever I learn the ling version of a form. That in turn opens understanding to other techniques in the system and how techniques flow from one to the other. The sequence of techniques in a given form are not arranged randomly. The Ling forms illustrate why. There is so much information in the ling forms than most people think.

[Young Mantis]

Originally posted by MantisCool
Right! Most important is the original book but I could see that many forms have been off the original when passed from one master to another.

If the original remains the same it would be no harm to create
the "ling" form no matter how many we created because the users could always refer back to the original form.

A technique can be applied in a number of ways but there is only one best way. So, whoever can think of the best way will have the best application.

How many ling form have you all actually seen or learnt before? I have learnt the ling form of Beng Bu, Duo Kang and Bai Yuen Chu Dong.

Hi MantisCool,

Yes, generations have changed or modified the form to suit their needs or tastes. I am not against change. This is part of evolution. But one must understand everything about what they learned to make a change meaningful. If a technique in a form originally was taught in a 7 star stance, and was modified to a bow stance, as long as there is a reason for this modification that makes sense, then I am not opposed to it. But don't make changes just for the sake of modifying something.

As for applications, I agree with you. For each technique, there is an ideal application. Forcing it to do something else, then you have a different technique.

Great to hear ling forms are thriving where you are. If I remember correctly, you are from GM Wong, Gum Hung's lineage? Glad to hear his line is continuing on. I have learnt the ling forms to Bung Bo, Sup Baht Sau, Daw Ghong, Tchahp Tchui, Bahk Yuen Tao Tow.

YM

[German Bai Lung]

[i]

You sound like you are doing a self-study. Everything is left up to the individual to "discover". Why do we go to school to learn from professors? Why not then buy the texts and stay home and interpret on our own? Why do people go to church and attend religious services? Why not stay home and study the religious texts on our own? Why is studying martial arts any different? With your reasoning, there is no need for a qualified instructor. Just show them the form without any applications and let each person "discover" their own interpretations to how the techniques should be applied. Or even, just buy a book and learn the form from the pictures and "discover" our own applications.

Correct teaching includes the correct transmission of application. Learning a form without understanding the usage is useless.
[/B]

150% agree! There is no learning without being teached!

[ninjaboy]

young mantis

i am a little confused about this:

"If you have not learnt ling forms, then you do not truly understand Praying Mantis."

now, before i go on, i'd like to say i also play ling bung bo and am a big fan of two man sets...HOWEVER

how does this comment (made by your sifu?) affect other lines of tanglang that do not play two man sets? i am open to correction of course but it is my understanding that not all mantis families play with ling forms and yet still feel fully qualified within their respectful branch to understanding PM. to make such a dichotomous statement regarding 'true' knowledge seems limiting to me.

again, to reiterate, i personally hold great value in the 2 man material i have been exposed to but wouldn't call it a NECESSITY for understanding praying mantis as a system overall.

any thoughts?

sincerely,
neil

[Young Mantis]

Ninjaboy,

Sorry for the confusion. Hopefully I can clear this up.

I see how my post may seem offensive to practitioners of other branches of PM that do not practice the ling forms. If any offense was taken, I apologize and should say that that was not my intent.

I am aware that there are other mantis branches that do not practice ling forms. As a matter of fact, my Sifu also studied with late GM Chiu, Chuk Kai whose TJPM has to my knowledge, only Ling Bung Bo. But I can't really speak for the other branches so I guess the quote should really refer to our mantis, or the PM as passed down by Law, Gwong Yuk. My Sifu was quoting his Sisuk and added his own feelings on the importance of the ling forms in our lineage. It may not be as evident to those who have not studied the ling forms but I cannot say enough the value I place on this training method.

Every year my Sifu rotates teaching a different ling form. Each time he repeats a form I have already learnt, I still learn something new. Not about the sequence of the ling form itself but the different variations that can occur at each step, at each technique of the form.

Is it possible to understand PM without ling forms? Yes. But for us, the ling forms are a way to understand the system more completely and to further understand how the solo forms are composed.

YM

[MantisCool]

If we wanted to change something to the student we must first teach them the original and than tell them why we change so the original could still be passed down! Who knows whether the changes we made are correct or not!

Sometimes, without learning the ling form we dont actually understand the usage of the form and its strokes. Ofcourse we dont have to ling every form. The ling also helps us to do combination of the strokes we learnt and also to improve our speed because you would be hit if you dont block fast enough!

Yeah, I am from the Wong Kam Hung's lineage.

[Young Mantis]

Originally posted by MantisCool
If we wanted to change something to the student we must first teach them the original and than tell them why we change so the original could still be passed down! Who knows whether the changes we made are correct or not!

Sometimes, without learning the ling form we dont actually understand the usage of the form and its strokes. Ofcourse we dont have to ling every form. The ling also helps us to do combination of the strokes we learnt and also to improve our speed because you would be hit if you dont block fast enough!

Yeah, I am from the Wong Kam Hung's lineage.

MantisCool,

I could not agree with you more. Sifu has always been very clear to explain where each form comes from. Whenever he has decided to modify some movements such as a stance or hand position, he always demonstrates the original version and then explains why he chooses to make that change.

I am glad to hear that the Wong Kam Hung lineage is still active in Malaysia. Sifu has an old HK magazine clipping of someone from your lineage demonstrating "Hahk Fu Gow Tsa" which is identical to ours. Always glad to hear of other Law Gwong Yuk descendants.

YM

[tanglang]

You sound like you don't care what the author's intent was.
Want to say something to this- offence or not- it's not important.
I think you don't understand at all what I'm trying to say. again. I said- without allegories now( or maybe somer small ones) for a better understanding: It's good to teach the form as it is, WITHOUT changes, as the original book so to say.
But if the student has an understanding of mantis and is not a beginner anymore, I would allways encourage him to find different applications for one and the same technique, too, because I want him to think actively about PM, not only to let others make the work of thinking for him. And about this comment: "Everything is left up to the individual to "discover", show them the form without any applications and let each person "discover" their own interpretations to how the techniques should be applied. "- this is not what I meant. I didn't say: go and make your own creative form without any understanding of the style. But for an advanced student: I'd want him to understand the style. and if you never make up your mind about how a technique works for yourself-with keeping in mind what you have learned from your master of course- you will never become an adult, you''l allways stay a child, to say it with the words of Immanuel Kant,if you understand what I mean. Maybe your master has taught you two versions of how a technique works- and you find another possible application that your master hasn't taught you- and it's logic- and works- why not?The thing on my shoulders is for thinking- and that's what I do. And about religion: It's one thing to go to church only and to learn the bible, but it's another thing to really believe- because this means to grapple with what you learned about god/ the bible in your own context. Nothing against going to church ,too, but not only! You must make up your own mind about your attitude towards belief and the written word in the bible. Otherwise you're only parotting what others told you without searching for it's deeper sense . Only if you find this sense the whole thing makes sense! (Sorry for my hard formulation) In one point I agree, german beilung, no understanding in self-study- this is not how I learned kung fu- otherwise my kung fu would be a big joke and nothing else.
Mantis Cool and Young Mantis: We don't train ling-forms, that's right, but we do undrestand the meaning of our forms, I can assure you. Nothing against giving applications the form of a set. I didn't want to say anything against the use of ling-forms. I simply wanted to say that i don't find it wrong to do both: ling-forms like traditioned and own variations of ling-forms. And I can't understand what makes you so angry about that , young mantis, or mantis cool. I still stand to my point of view.

[Young Mantis]

tanglang,

I am not angry. I was only trying to help you understand the concept of ling forms better. You came into this thread asking for a definition of "ling". You asked several times what "ling" means. You thought it might mean "essential" or some special force used to practice the forms. I tried to illustrate to you what the term "ling forms" means and how they are important.

But you then took this term, and without ever learning a traditional ling form, having admitted that your lineage does not practice them, went on to espouse that each individual should develop their own version of ling forms. Well, for me, without having learnt the traditional one, how does one create their own? Yes, there are some things that a martial artist needs to learn and discover on their own. But there is just as much if not more that should be properly transmitted from Sifu to disciple.

I am resolved that we have a difference in opinion. You take the physical mechanics of the form and see how many ways you can interpret it into applications. Like finding as many uses of a tool as possible. I look at the design of each form and practice the original application for that technique. I like using the tools for what they were designed for.

If you want to do that, then go ahead and say you like to figure out applications to techniques. If you can string them all together in a continuous fashion such that one side is doing the sequence of the original form and the movements still make sense, then congratulations, you are more advanced than me. As for me, I think it will take me my lifetime just to master all the techniques in my system as they are passed down to me. Somewhere along the line, I also have to master the ability to reflexively recognize and effecitvely use the best suited technique for any given situation. I will be amazed if somewhere in there, I can work on creating new applications for the physical motion of the techniques.

Best of luck in your studies.

YM

[German Bai Lung]

The Linage of Sifu Lee Kam Wing sure knows Ling Forms!

Sifu Lee is teaching them sparly but Ling Bang Bo is well known.

Maybe the only one confused is you, Kai-Uwe.

[MantisCool]

To be honest, I met up with a few of Sifu Lee Kam Wing's present senior students in Hong Kong recently and they told me that they dont have Ling forms???

[tanglang]

So what we do is not really different. You said:

I am resolved that we have a difference in opinion. You take the physical mechanics of the form and see how many ways you can interpret it into applications. Like finding as many uses of a tool as possible. I look at the design of each form and practice the original application for that technique. I like using the tools for what they were designed for. So I try to say it with other words.I don't know how it was in your case, but my master told me three and four ways to use the tool. But a ling-form like you described it ( and I thank you very much for that because my sifu told me once that we don't have what you call ling-forms- he used a german term for it so I didn't know what you all were talking about first and thank you for that I do know it now-) so again- a ling-form like you describe it has only one possible application that is trained in the partner-set, right? What about all the other applications you learned for the techniques?Why not training them as a partner-set, too, plus the traditional way of your ling-form?? This is what I wanted to say. And allso: if you have a hammer in your hand you know what to do with it in most cases. Sometimes the material itself offers the solution allready and this is what teachers take advantage of in primary-school-teaching, for example. What you call active learning. But this doesn't mean in case of kung fu to invent absolutely new techniques! My master sometimes showed me two applications- and let me myself find out the third one. This is very modern, you're right. But he himself had allready the third solution in his head and in most cases I found out what he had in mind allready. Sometimes not- then he showed me. But: I remembered the techniques better if I came to the solution and he corrected it only a bit, for example. Another question about ling-forms in this context: do you really learn only one application per technique? Maybe technique number 10 i.e. of bung bo has one special ling-form-application. You do this in the set. Thats o.k. But what about the maybe two other applications your master showed you for this technique? Or for the next following techniques? It's like with the ba-gua-symbols- or like mathematics:You can find lots of different combinations and must remember all applications that you've learned! This is what I mean with- the thing on my shoulders is for thinking! I didn't mean looking at the mechanics of the form only! I meant keeping ALL applications in mind, not only those that are trained as a ling-form! So- I hope things are getting clearer now. I'm not an advocat of Find-out-your-own- freestile-kung-fu- and -win- the- creativity-award ! Not at all !
@ german bailung: I was taught that in the whole LKW-system there are no ling-forms- I'm not sure,but maybe you meant the so-called bung-bo-doi-da. But that's something different. Or you know something that I don't know.

[German Bai Lung]

At Dec. 11th I will met Sifu Lee and ask him once more.

I had asked him some years ago. Maybe he had a different question in mind or understand me wrong.

I will let you know.

By the way: partner forms are in my opinion the solution to train forms with given applications!
If you lack a partner: okay then train the soloforms... ;)

[MantisCool]

With Ling or no Ling it doesnt matter. Not everybody knows everything and the same thing. He know this and I know that.

Other styles or branches has their own training and everything is still ok! It is just that with the Ling form we have something extra to learn and understand. To me, not every parts of the ling is perfect. It is just that we want to know what the grandmasters think when he created them.

Another thing is that, learning the ling form is fun. When we train, we must have hard work and fun as well!

[ursa major]

Originally posted by MantisCool
With Ling or no Ling it doesnt matter. Not everybody knows everything and the same thing. He know this and I know that.

Other styles or branches has their own training and everything is still ok! It is just that with the Ling form we have something extra to learn and understand. To me, not every parts of the ling is perfect. It is just that we want to know what the grandmasters think when he created them.

Another thing is that, learning the ling form is fun. When we train, we must have hard work and fun as well!

Well said MantisCool.

Best regards,
UM.

[tanglang]

Well then.. in this sense: let's train hard and have fun, you're right, MantisCool. And you and me we keep in mind what our grandmasters had in mind- you with your ling-forms also, we with our applications that we learned together with the single-forms. I think we all seek for the same and have different methods to reach this aim only.

[German Bai Lung]

Originally posted by German Bai Lung
At Dec. 11th I will met Sifu Lee and ask him once more.

I had asked him some years ago. Maybe he had a different question in mind or understand me wrong.

I will let you know.

By the way: partner forms are in my opinion the solution to train forms with given applications!
If you lack a partner: okay then train the soloforms... ;)

So like I promised:

I ask Sifu Lee and he told me that although he was learning some ling forms he see no reason to teach ling forms. In his opinion thepartnersets are a way better for teaching. He says: If you know the applikation (and he knows them very well and teaches everytime some of them along with forms) you can do ling forms by yourself.

And: greetings to all of you from Sifu Lee Kam Wing.

[Tainan Mantis]

Hi German,
You are with Lee Kamwing now?
My shrfu, Shr Zhengzhong, is on friendly terms with him and they exchange info in HK every once in a while.

I will pass along a "hi"

[mantisben]

Originally posted by Kai Uwe Pel

zhende ma???

What does this mean in english?

[Tieh]

zhende ma??? = really ???

[German Bai Lung]

Originally posted by Kai Uwe Pel
"I ask Sifu Lee and he told me that although he was learning some ling forms he see no reason to teach ling forms. In his opinion thepartnersets are a way better for teaching. He says: If you know the applikation (and he knows them very well and teaches everytime some of them along with forms) you can do ling forms by yourself."

zhende ma???
.................................................. ..............................

That's a pretty mess! And we have fun with "Lee Kam Wing's style" always.

Thanks!

Kai Uwe Pel

Yes really. But maybe its a mistake from me not to wrote it down more clearly:
Sifu Lee means with You not every student or even instructors with superficial knowledge! He means Teacher with longyears of experience and knowledge about the applications!

remember: the ones to create the former lingforms were masters! Nothing more and nothing less!

PS: I by myself did never create lingforms! I know a lot of applications but not all (exactly). So I teach single applications and sometimes a whole road.