Who created Wu Bu Chuan?

[Royal Dragon]

Does anyone know?

All I know about it is it's relatively modern, adn both Songshan Shaolin, and many modern Wu Shu schools use it. I have also heard it's been adopted into the curriculem of traditional masters as well (although I can't say who).

I'm looking for a specific date if possible, and the name of the creator, or at least the institution that designed the set.

Is it possible that this is a really ancient set that has never been recorded by anyone due to it's utter simplicity?

[Shaolinlueb]

it was created by sevenstar and he brought back into the past around the year 1500 i believe.

seriously? IDK i think it has been around for many many years.

[MasterKiller]

It's a modern wushu set.

[DoGcHoW108]

not to put too fine a point on it, lol.

[SevenStar]

Actually, I am indeed the one credited with the revival of it. :D


I learned two modern wushu sets in my cma days - 5 step and 16 step. I know that they are both fairly new forms, but I'm not sure who created them.

[GeneChing]

I've been trying to find the root of wubu for years. My suspicion is that it is modern, but I have been unable to validate that. It is so prevalent in PRC, even more so than Tan Tui. And just like Tan tui, there are many variations now ranging from traditional kung fu to modern wushu basics.

[Royal Dragon]

I am fairly certian it is a modern set, so being so, shouldn't it be relatively easy to find it's creator?

The fact that that info seems "unabtainable" makes me wonder if it really is a very old set that has just reacently become very popular.

[GeneChing]

Do you consider Tan Tui a modern set? It's as prevalent as Wu bu, even in PRC wushu circles. But that's a bit more traceable - you can see the influence of some of the leading Cha masters on early Wushu, like GM Wang Ziping. Zhang Lingmei, a leading wushu pioneer, traces her roots to Tan Tui - that was her foundation traing since when she started, wushu hadn't really been invented yet. Wu Bu is more of a riddle. I've seen it in modern wushu, in Shaolin, in Wudang, in O-mei. I remember it was in one of the first wushu books in English - Chinese Martial Arts -Teach Yourself.

[Royal Dragon]

Tan Tui is well known to be pretty old (Sung Dynasty). Wu Bu Chuan is "Said" to be Modern, but if it's THAT wide spread, across so many styles, lines and families, it may be the oldest thing we all do.

[NorthernShaolin]

According to Li Tianji and Du Xilian in their book, "A Guide to Chinese Martial Arts" 1991; ISBN 0-8351-2451-7 and ISBN 7-119-01393-9, they state that Wu Bu Chuan was created as an excerise by the Physical Culture and Sports Commission after the founding of New China. (after 1949?) and was part of the new Chang Quan. Their task, as a Commission, was to promote Chang Quan.

[Royal Dragon]

Ok, we are getting closer. Now, does it specifically say WHO was incharge of that mission?

[GLW]

Unfortunately, even if you found a name attached to it, the name may NOT be the one who created it.

There were a number of people that worked on the early routines back then. Wubuquan is probably one of those. There are at least two versions of it. They are the same except for how they handle the Ma bu punch (third move) - with the older version being a simpler move.

To make it all more confusing, there were a number of people that took credit for group work...

Then there were also people that figured they had enough of a reputation and essentially did the work but gave the credit either to a group or an individual that needed a leg up...

But...Wubuquan is Modern with very deep roots to traditional...It is simply a good basic stance training method.

Tan tui...traditional and several versions (even within the 10 line or 12 line).

[GeneChing]

Wu bu does have a lot of variations. The version that I've seen at Beijing wushu is more like a line drill. The Shaolin and O-Mei versions have different beginning and endings. The core five stances are always the same, but they are framed by different moves and only the wushu people seem to practice both sides.

As for the founding of new China, that's always a research stopper. Obviously, modern wushu developed much later than the birth of the PRC in '49. You know when you hit that old "founding of new China" statement, someone is just toeing the party line. It was more of a progression - not like all of a sudden they said "wushu" and it appeared magically. Most of the development of modern wushu seems to have happened on either side of the Cultural Revolution. Of course, "after the founding" is a lovely bit of doublespeak, since that could mean anytime between '49 and today. The root of wubu and the spread of wubu is very interesting to me since it can show the effect of modern wushu on traditional. Despite being a modern set, if it is indeed modern, I think most people will agree that it's a great fundamental for traditional style too. It makes me wonder if the creators based it upon something, or if it was completely novel.

[GLW]

Probably a bit of both...

In the version that I do, you have Block punch to Gong Bu, then Tan Tui (kick and punch at the same time), then the kicking leg steps and pivots to Ma Bu as you do a block and punch (here is where one of the differences comes in)...

From a previous northern style teacher with lineage that goes to Taiwan and eventually back to Nanjing Central Guoshu...These first three moves are the same as one of the basics we did leading up to learning Tan Tui.

then you have the Thread palm in Duli, down to Pubu, and then up to Gong Bu and then stepping up to Xubu (empty stance)...

Traditional Chaquan makes heavy use of the thread palm duli to Pubu and then to Gong bu...the step into empty stance is not that much of a stretch from there....

Doing it on both sides is not unlike doing each Tan Tui line over and over instead of doing one of each....

So....exactly how Modern is Modern...or how Traditional is Traditional....:)

[GeneChing]

Hold the phone... are you saying you can trace your wubu lineage back to Nanjing Guoshu? If so, then it precedes the "founding of new China".

For me, the terms modern and traditional are relative, depending upon how you're speaking about it. Most people interchange modern with modern wushu, which I beleive to be a mistake. My personal barometer is that modern styles were founded within the last century which would make wushu, JKD, TKD, BJJ, aikido, etc. all modern. So I'm not so interested in wheter wubu is 'modern' or not. I'm more intersted in it's roots. I've always felt that it had a Cha feel, as does much of modern wushu, so I'd be very interested if you can map it on to a traditional Cha set.

[GLW]

Now don't put FULL sentences in my mouth....

In learning from one Taiwanese instructor who was in the Han Chingtan lineage, there were several basic line drills.

One was simple block Gong bu punch...

The third was the Chaquan Wulu Tan Tui (#5 Tan Tui).

The second, however, was starting from feet together and fists at the waist, step to the left into Gong bu, block left hand punch right fist. This was then followed by kick right foot punch left hand. Then stepping down with the right foot, turn 90 degrees while blocking with the left hand and punching right hand while sitting in Ma bu.

This basic was then repeated turning to the right and doing it alternating sides. (we used to simply call it Block Punch, Kick Punch, Ma Bu Punch...and I learned that before I even heard of Tan Tui).

Since the Taiwanese teacher had only the lineage for northern that goes back to Han Chingtan...and Han Chingtan was, according to the information I was given, trained at Nanjing, that is the connection...

BUT...those moves are the exact first half of Wubuquan....so I am not surprised if there is a very solid background to traditional.

It strikes me more like someone took a piece of a training basic that was widely used in many places and schools....and then another piece from say Chaquan...and then worked out how to glue them together.

[MasterKiller]

Originally posted by GLW
The second, however, was starting from feet together and fists at the waist, step to the left into Gong bu, block left hand punch right fist. This was then followed by kick right foot punch left hand. Then stepping down with the right foot, turn 90 degrees while blocking with the left hand and punching right hand while sitting in Ma bu.

This basic was then repeated turning to the right and doing it alternating sides. (we used to simply call it Block Punch, Kick Punch, Ma Bu Punch...and I learned that before I even heard of Tan Tui). We do this sequence, but punch forward instead of to the side (like wubu chuan) We call it "bow stance variations."

[GeneChing]

Fair enough - I was just hoping you had a piece of the puzzle. Given that Wubu is really only a few stances, at least the universal core is only the five, half probably doesn't count. There's bouind to be parallels in any long fist style for so few movements. I'd be more intersted if someone had almost all of it embedded in a traditional form.

[GLW]

Well, from what I have seen, the part I described is one unit.

From the thread palm up to Duli, down to Pu bu and then up to Gong bu and finally to empty stance is a combination I have seen in several northern styles...

About the only part that was new was the cover and step into cross stance sitting and then the puch upward...

That is the part that seems to me like some said "Hey, you know if we connect this basic with this Thread palm basic and use this cross legged sitting stance it will flow and train the major stances...."

Oh...to have been a fly on the wall....

[Royal Dragon]

The interesting thing about Wu Bu Chuan, is it's pretty much a universal set that can be used by all styles of Kung Fu to train the core stances. It's not nessasarily part of a specific system now. It has a life all it's own.

[Brad]

I saw a part of wubu quan incorperated into a "wudang taijiquan" routine... it was umm... interesting :D There was also a very slow wheeling arms so I'm a tad bit skeptical of its wudang origins ;)

[GeneChing]

Did that Wudang group claim wubu as originating from them? I've heard a Shaolin monk once claim wubu as a Shaolin origin, but that particular monk didn't really know what he was talking about (he had great kung fu, but wasn't really up on history). I've haven't heard anyone really 'lay claim' to originating wubu except for the wushu people. And ironically, it's not what most would consider as 'wushu'. As RD says, it works for almost any style (although I'd qualify that a bit and say it works mostly for longfist - imagine some Wing Chun guys doing wubu just brings a smile to my face ;) )

[r.(shaolin)]

I've never heard of this form. Is there a quicktime movie up on anyones site? Basic forms in the tradition I practice have names like "Ji Ben Dong Zuo" (basic movements) and "Lohan Kai Men" (Lohan Opens the Door) etc.

r.

[GLW]

try

http://www.wushucentral.com/videos/

and then do a search for

wu bu quan

There is an MPG file of the standardized version (having the punch to the side with an upper grab in Ma bu instead of the Ma Bu block and punch that was an older version...)

[Starchaser107]

it's not there,
but I think they recently took alot of thier videos down to update thier server or something , and all of them might not be back up as yet.

[MasterKiller]

Originally posted by r.(shaolin)
I've never heard of this form. Is there a quicktime movie up on anyones site? Basic forms in the tradition I practice have names like "Ji Ben Dong Zuo" (basic movements) and "Lohan Kai Men" (Lohan Opens the Door) etc.

r. http://www.geocities.com/wushugungfu/wubuchuan.html

[oasis]

the video for wu bu quan is still up on wushucentral; it's just been placed in the miscellaneous beginner's section.

download (http://www.wushucentral.com/videos/miscellaneous/library/beginners/wu_bu_quan.mpg)

[r.(shaolin)]

In my opinion this is a modern set probably developed during the 1950's. I agree with GLW the author of this standardized exercise was most likely a committee.
The techniques, steps, and the five combinations are all found in traditional Shaolin's long fist forms. Overall this set seems to be someone's idea for basics techniques and basic combinations as typical of northern styles including northern Shaolin. Wu bu quan actual is not a set but one of the number of "combination excersis" developed in the 50's as a way of standarding long fist "combination basics".
Unlike earlier modernist ideas about standarzation of traditional martial arts during the 20's and 30's the over riding criteria for these excersis was not combat effectiveness but rather estetics.
This had a decided effect on the details of techniques, transitions and set design. Overall Wu Bu's structure is not typical of traditional Shaolin sets.
r.

[Royal Dragon]

Overall Wu Bu's structure is not typical of traditional Shaolin sets.

Do you mean "Body Structure?" or the order in which it is coreagraphed?

To me, up to the "Horse & Punch" it looks pretty common.

[r.(shaolin)]

I agree "Horse & Punch" is pretty common, as are the other 4 combinations, in long fist sets. I was refering to the overall set. Generally
traditional sets mirror how fights were measured in the old days by 'exchange of blows'.

r.
My guess is I don't think you will find Wu Bu being done before the 1950's.

[GLW]

Actually, it is not that far off from traditional Chaquan beginner work.

By that I am referring to Tan Tui. In 10 line Tan tui, you have one line being done over and over until you reach the end of the training area. They are generally linear.

So, you have #1, Two hand strike, elbow, sweep block to punch, then cover and kick...

But, there is also what is called (excuse the bad pinyin or spelling) Chuan Tan Tui - staked Tan Tui - where you do ONE of line one, flow to line 2 do one of it, then line three, etc...so you do one of each of the 10 lines back to back...up one line for the first 7, turning back for # 8 and then coming back for 8, 9, and 10.

Done this way, the aspect is not unlike Wubuquan....Where you have Yi Shou - block punch, Er Shou - kick punch, San Shou - block with Ma bu punch, Siu Shou - block down while stepping back to sitting stance and cover over to punch, Wu Shou - Thread palm up to Du Li throat strike or eyes... Liu Shou - Pu Bu down to groin or leg, Chi Shou - up to Gong Bu to block, grab and step up to strike from empty stance. Each of these could be done by themselves sort of like Tan Tui...

It is simply way to simple to say it is Modern or Traditional...

Traditional sets often seem like: Beginner sets - linear. Intermediate, you hit the corners and diagonals...but not circular. Advanced level, you take over ALL of the area with linear, diagonal, and circular stepping and movement forward, sideways, and backwards....

Now, of course, that is my perspective from a Chaquan viewpoint...which is not exactly a Shaolin approach.

[Royal Dragon]

So maybe it is an ancient set, just new to Shaolin?

I'm personally going with the theory that it is a couple of ancient drills combined into one form to work all the major stances. My guess is one coach started doing it, and the rest folllowed until noone really knew who started doing it like that.

[GeneChing]

My guess would be that Wubu's roots lie in Cha. I don't really base that on anything beyond a gut feeling. I only dabbled in Cha when I was younger, but a lot of modern wushu is based in Cha.

The issue of modern and traditional can be quite blurry. GLW, I find your corner/diagonal/intermediate theory quite interesting becuase I've often defined modern wushu as playing to the corners (because that's where the judges sit). Coming from a Shaolin root, which is very linear where footwork is concerned, that was a simplistic defination, this definition can work for Shaolin style, but falls apart outside Shaolin. It's an easy way to spot traditional vs. modern at Shaolin.

[GLW]

An interesting different perspective...but supported by all of the descriptions of Shaolin vs. other northern styles...where it is said that true Shaolin is powerful with stable and quick footwork...but more "meat and potatoes" approach than other styles.

Coming from a Chaquan base, I notice that the directions and how much of the floor you cover gets more complex and bigger with the more advanced routines....but certain ones are simpler than others....For example, Huaquan is very different in use of floor than Chaquan...but both are similar in other ways. Hongquan tends to be more linear than Chaquan, and so on....

[r.(shaolin)]

I believe that Cha Quan is an offshoot off Northern Hong Quan. That is Hong Quan is older than Cha, as is Shaolin Xiao and Da Hong Chang Quan. Xiao and Da Hong Chang Quan are important base long fist sets in Shaolin and have been practiced at Shaolin for centuries. In looking at the chang quan set posted on 'Traditional versions to Wushu sets' thread and looking at combination wushu exercises like 'wu bu', I would say that basic and intermediate northern Shaolin (in the tradition I practice) has much in common with wushu - minus things like running in a semi circle across the mat. From my point of view, the roots of modern wushu is Shaolin. Having said that, traditional Shaolin is a much bigger, more varied and, combatively speaking, a deeper system than modern wushu.
r.

[Shaolinlueb]

Originally posted by r.(shaolin)
Having said that, traditional Shaolin is a much bigger, more varied and, combatively speaking, a deeper system than modern wushu.
r.


thank you captian obvious :D

[GeneChing]

I've practiced both Xiaohong and Dahong from Shaolin and I see no significant connection to modern wushu. None of the moves seem even remotely parallel. I've also practiced Chaquan #4 and took a lesson in Cha#5 in China once, and that has a much closer feel to modern wushu. In fact, I took that lesson in Cha#5 at a cultural exchange when I was representing the USA on the national AAU team in '91. The lesson was sprung on me by my Sifu, who had taught me Cha#4. The cultural exchange didn't go so well, because they didn't provide enough translators, so to lubircate the situation, my Sifu set me up with this woman master and she just started teaching me Cha#5. I got about half way through, and at the time I felt what the woman was teaching me was modern wushu. Then she took me to her master, this old guy. He showed me a bunch more, exact same set, but this time, it had a totally traditional feel. There was actually a pic of me during that lesson published in IKF March '92. It totally reshaped my perception of what wushu and traditional was.

[GLW]

Bingo Gene...

The difference between the two...well ignoring the NEW compulsories like the Changquan one - just doesn't flow well in my view...

The difference is more being one of how you interpret it instead of the routine.

[r.(shaolin)]

Gene wrote:
I've practiced both Xiaohong and Dahong from Shaolin and I see no significant connection to modern wushu. None of the moves seem even remotely parallel.
.........................................
In looking at the xiao hong quan on http://www.nacma.net/index.cfm?ac=shaolinT2004 being done by some students (I am assuming this is the same form practiced at Shaolin today,) I see what you mean. From what I can see, it appears that this version came from Liu BaoShan who had learned it from his father Liu Jinwen a lay master from Henan.

Our version of these sets clearly resemble Cha Quan, and as I said earlier, Cha Quan is closely related to Hong Quan. In our lineage of Shaolin, which also came out of Henan province, the full names of these sets are Xiao Hong Chang Quan and Da Hong Chang Quan (Hong Long Fist).

Re: Wushu
Early modern wushu coaching manuals, clear identify the source of early wushu forms as Hong, Cha and Hua. I find it interesting that older shifu like Cai Longyun, in-spite of being one of the architects of early modern wushu, having being taught traditional long fist by his famous father, did his bow and arrow step in the traditional manner out of habit, as opposed to the modern wushu bow and arrow, which has the front knee over the heel and often behind the heel.

r.

[GLW]

I wouldn't be so qick to say that he did that out of habit and that the new way is right while his way is "Traditional" and not what was intended in Contemporary Wushu.

Virtually every original generation teacher (back to the 1950's) and then the first generation teacher (up to just before the Cultural Revolution) that I have seen do the Traditional stances.

Then, just after the Cultural Revolution (not much to talk about from 1966 to 1976 - except bad things), the first group did not have the years of training in childhood when they reached the Physical Education colleges. That was the time that the split off into something else seems to have started. It was very slow and met with a lot of resistance at first.

However, as a newer generation of coaches came along, they wanted to make their bones...and the tie to the past had been seriously damaged by the 10 years of madness. A lot of the coaches I have seen from that generation of students (just coming into their own now) talk a good game about Wude, tradition, the lineages and such of Wushu...but in practice are more "Whatever gets the win...and to the devil with ties to the past"

Even in the Contemporary Wushu circles this is being acknowledged in their talk of "old school" vs. now...and how the "old school" folks had to have a broader base of basics but may not have been as acrobatic...

[r.(shaolin)]

GLW wrote:

Virtually every original generation teacher (back to the 1950's) and then the first generation teacher (up to just before the Cultural Revolution) that I have seen do the Traditional stances.
......................................

GLW I think your are right in this.

r.

[Shaolinlueb]

this thread is becoming really interesting and I'm enjoying it a lot. :D

[GeneChing]

True, there are different forms of hong quan - my observation was based on the Songshan version. I've seen the version that the Lau sisters taught when I worked on their videos for WLE, and it's quite different. Was that a Jingwu version? Was that closer to yours, r.(shaolin)?

As for Cai Yunlong, check out our Sep/Oct 2004 issue (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/magazine/article.php?article=531). The 'big dragon with the magic fists' posed for our got qi? subsription ad (http://www.martialartsmart.net/19341.html). Our publisher Gigi met with him informally on her last trip to China. More to come there... ;)

As for the mantis form, the most common mantis form at Shaolin is the modern Yu Hai form. Yu Hai was a noted first gen traditional-to-wushu master from Shandong. He played the big monk in the film Shaolin temple (http://www.martialartsmart.net/dvd40021.html). That form was left at Shaolin after he made the movies. It's very recognizable. FWIW, my own Shaolin teacher, Shi Decheng (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/magazine/article.php?article=501) practices a more traditional 8-step mantis. I think it's something he learned prior to his study at Shaolin, and it's not a regular part of the Shaolin curriculam, unless you've studied under him or his school.

[r.(shaolin)]

Hi Gene,

Who are the Lau sisters? Is there a Jingwu version?
I haven't seen any of these. The only other versions I've seen
is the ones being done at Shaolin now.

r.

All the best on your birthday SL

[MasterKiller]

Originally posted by r.(shaolin)
Hi Gene,

Who are the Lau sisters? Eagle Claw masters Lily and Ginny, I presume.

[NorthernShaolin]

There is no official version taught at the Jing Mo schools.. The Lau sisters must have adopted it for their curriculum.

[GeneChing]

I thought about it and remember now. Dai Hong Kuen is a form within Gini Lau's Eagle Claw system. I worked on the video she did with WLE. I assume that for is in Lily's system as well.

[r.(shaolin)]

Hi Gene
Do you have the Chinese characters for her form?
On the wle site they translate Dai Hong Kuen as 'Big Hero's Fist'.
"Hong" as used in the set's name (at least in our lineage) does not mean
'hero' nor does it mean 'red' nor a sir name. Here are the Chinese characters for our version of Da Hong Chang Quan (http://www.shaolinwushu.com/da.htm)

[GeneChing]

...if memory serves, I addressed that in the intro of that video. I don't have the character on hand, nor that intro. I'd really have to dig to find that. Them's some old notes...;)
I also addressed the issue of Hong phonetic/character ambiguity in an article I did for IKF on Hay Say Fu Hung Gar in Jan '99. It was reprinted in their Ultimate Martial Arts Encyclopedia (a fact that I was not alerted too, much less compesated for) and there are many copies floating around the net (maybe someone can dig up a link?) I think that was the most cited peice I ever did for IKF.

[oasis]

Hey Gene,

You just need to go to CFW Enterprises' site and search their (limited) archives ;)
gene ching on hung gar (http://www.cfwenterprises.com/article.asp?s=cfw&content_id=522)

too bad you werent informed about it being republished :o . at least they valued your research!

[r.(shaolin)]

Out of curiosity I did a search on the web and found this cd by Shi De Yang. It appears that he used the same character for "hong" as we do. The character used does not mean 'red'. Our tradition associates both Da and Xiao Hong Chang Quan with the first Song Emperor Zhao Kuang Yin (Taizu). Gene or anyone else do you know the verbal tradition of Shi De Yang's form?
r.

cd (http://us.yesasia.com/en/SrAllDept.aspx?section=videos&code=c&version=all&did=2&str=xiao+hong+quan&x=17&y=11)

[oasis]

Originally posted by r.(shaolin)
Out of curiosity I did a search on the web and found this cd by Shi De Yang. It appears that he used the same character for "hong" as we do. The character used does not mean 'red'. Gene or anyone else do you know the verbal tradition of Shi De Yang's form?
r.

Interesting...Perhaps it was just an incorrect translation, but Shi De Yang's video has 'hong' subtitled as 'red.' :confused:
And this particular video doesn't give history on the form but emphasizes its fundamental techniques for shaolin kung fu.

However, on www.aboutshaolin.com, it gives this info about the name:
"Many masters translate Xiao Hong Quan as “The small Red boxing” but in the old times this style of Shaolin Boxing is called “The Small flood boxing”. Even in nowadays this style uses the old way of writing but the translation of the style changed.

There is also a story about this style of boxing, which was told by the late 30th Generation Shaolin Master Shi Su Yun.

This style of boxing took its name from a father and a son who came as refugees into Shaolin Temple. The small boxing routine was given by the son and the big boxing routine was given by the father to the Shaolin Temple as a gift for the Monk’s hospitality and help. The monks of Shaolin temple gave the name of the two fugitives to these styles. The fathers boxing routine was named as Da Hong Quan (Big Hong fist) and the son’s boxing routine was named as Xiao Hong Quan (Small Hong fist).

Both of the Hong’s boxing routines have still been taught in Shaolin Temple since nowadays."

[r.(shaolin)]

That's right, hong is used to describe things that are vast or overwhelming, commonly used in describing a flood or trubulent waves. These two long fist sets were practiced at Shaolin monastery for centuries (our tradition say since the beginning of the Song Dyanasty) and were used in tests of basic skill.

r.

[Scythefall]

Originally posted by r.(shaolin)
That's right, hong is used to describe things that are vast or overwhelming, commonly used in describing a flood or trubulent waves. These two long fist sets were practiced at Shaolin monastery for centuries (our tradition say since the beginning of the Song Dyanasty) and were used in tests of basic skill.

r.

I asked Shi Xingwei about the "Hong" sets because I wasn't sure if they were Hung family or where they came from. He said there are MANY legends about Shao Hong and Da Hong's origins but none of them are particularly important. It's just the name of the form.

The nature of the form tells me that Hong means "red" in this case. Red represents Birth and Growth -- it's also a color signifying strength..energy..power. It represents the root chakra also. Given that the beginning of the form is also a chi kung element (touching heaven and earth) this answer makes the most sense. Excellent beginning Shaolin form.

[Royal Dragon]

Hi,
As for Xiao, and Da Hng Chuan, I don't believe they are connected to Tai Tzu. Both seem to have a different flavor than the Tai Tzu Chang Chuan, and the Tai Tzu Hong Chuan.

Incedentally, Tai Tzu Hong Chuan also has Da, and Xiao Hong Chuan sets. They are much longer, and totally different Long Fist forms from the sets seen commonly at Shaolin.

Tai Tzu Hong Chuan is suposed to be made of 4 Xiao Hong Chuan sets, and 6 Da Hong Chuan sets.

[GeneChing]

Hong is a very tricky character for CMA. The root is gong with the left side radical for water (thus flood). gong on it's own means 'altogether' or 'share'. This is a different gong than in gongfu. Ironically, the hong that means 'red' has the root of gong too, but also a different gong than in gongfu - that one means 'work', it's the I-shaped character, same as the cantonese gung as in Hung Gar's ( or hong jia) gung gee fook fu. It should be noted that in the Chinese martial arts, it is not uncommon to find things misspelled. How do you misspell in Chinese? Well, one way aside from just messing up the character is to write the wrong character - something that is phonetically the same as the one you want to use. I've found myself on some massive tangents trying to chase down a character, then finding it was just a misspelling.

oasis - thanks for finding that old article. The funny thing about that was it's a piece about my BSL sifu Wing Lam and the picture they used was Sifu Y.C Wong. I'm sure neither would be happy about that. :rolleyes:

[DoGcHoW108]

I'm for some reason having trouble remembering the terminology of the steps in WBQ-

Gong Bu...gotcha
Ma Bu...gotcha...
now whats the name of the step you sink backwards into..the one with the legs crossed?

anyway, after that there's a Pu bu (actually the version i learned has a Pu Bu at the very beginning)

and then the last step, is that called a Xi Bu...Xie Bu...i dunno, i suck....

Just wanting to know the Chinese vernacular for them.

Thanks,

DC

[Premier79]

Let me see if i remember. There's mabu, gongbu, pubu, xubu(empty stance), and xiebu(crossed stance). I think that's it.

[GeneChing]

...we published the basic Shaolin version of Wubu in our last Shaolin Special (Jul/Aug 2004) (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/magazine/article.php?article=500) including all the terms in chinese characters. :cool:

[Sal Canzonieri]

I;ve been reading this discussion about the Da and Xiao Hong Quan forms and I must comment that a lot of what is being said is flat out wrong (I've been doing research on Forms history and origins for the past 20 years and I wrote all those KF history articles for Wushu Kungfu magazine af ew years back).

The Shaolin Xiao Hong Quan form and the Shaolin Tai Tzu Chang Quan (32 moves) form are both part of the same system, they share a large portion of moves. Both also are derived from Tong Bei Quan originally.
This form comes from Li Shou and his son, who along with Bai Yu Feng, came to Shaolin to help Monk Jue Yuan develop the almost dead Shaolin martial arts into a new system.
Together they developed the Xiao Hong Quan form that everyone knows and a DIFFERENT Da Hong Quan form (it is rarely shown at Shaolin, but I have copies of it, it has four sections) that is also very much like Shaolin Tai Tzu Chang Quan (and it is like Xiao Hong Quan). Bai Yu Feng developed the 13 Grasping Claws form and this eventually mixed with Lohan (of which Monk Jue Yuan was an expert) and became the Five Animals system (only the southern shaolin arts call it the five animals system and not did it is famous the north calls it that too), but originally there were at least 12 animals forms being developed, but Bai Yu Feng died after developing 10 animal forms completely.

The Da Hong Quan (which in its entiretyis three sections) that is currently taught out of Shaolin is a long form that was developed much later than Xiao Hong Quan and the original Da Hong Quan. If you see the newer Da Hong Quan you can easily see that it is not at all related to Xiao Hong Quan, they do not share much in common, but the old Da Hong Quan form shares many moves between them.

The Hong in Xiao Hong Quan was the flood character originally. The Red Fist Hong Quan forms, which are from Shanxi province are complelty different from the Shaolin Flood Fist forms, even though both styles share a form called Xiao Hong Quan.

Shaolin Tai Tzu Chang Quan is a mixture of Lohan and Tong Bei moves, many of the moves in this form and Xiao Hong Quan can also be found in altered form or not in both Chen and Yang Tai Chi.
Many people think that Yang tai chi borrowed from Wudang Nei Jia Quan forms, but the truth is that it borrowed from Shaolin Tai Tzu Chang Quan just like Chen did, except Chen style borrowed from both this form and the original Da Hong Quan forms and also from Shaolin Tai Tzu Quan. Only thing different is that Yang borrows some moves from these forms that are different from the ones that Chen borrowed.
Four forms of Hong Quan and Shaolin Tai Tzu Quan are one of the roots of Chen as listed by their family books.
Yang Lu Chan studied Hong Quan first before he studied Chen style.
The moves that are in the Wudang Nei Jia forms that are seen in Shaolin Tai Tzu Chang Quan are either borrowed from Tai Tzu or come from the same Tong Bei root as Tai Tzu Quan.

There are many Hong Quan forms all over China that are very much like Shaolin Tai Tzu Quan, these are considered Folk Long Fist, they are very old, dating back from Sung Dynasty, as everyone wanted to practice what the Emperor did.

So, the mystery is still where did the newer Da Hong Quan form (all 4 sections) come from?

We've been having this discussion at www.russbo.com
if you want to read it, go to the forums archives and look up Xiao/Da Hong Quan thread.

[Sal Canzonieri]

Also, who said that Cha Quan is yonger than Tai Tzu Quan.
Impossible since Tai Tzu is from the song dynasty
and Cha Quan goes back to the original tan toi like Moslem style that were from the dynasty before, even the Tang Dynasty. It goes back to the martial arts practiced along the silk route by Moslem.

Why Cha Quan shows similarities to Tai Tzu Quan is simply because Cha Quan also is based on Tong Bei (mixed with persian and other martial arts from the far west).
Tong Bei is the second oldest style in China, and it spread all over northern China in the span of over 3,000 years.
Only Shuai Jiao is older than Tong Bei, Shuai Jiao is over 4,000 years old.

[GeneChing]

Great to have you here! Welcome!

[Sal Canzonieri]

Originally posted by GeneChing
Great to have you here! Welcome!

Thanks, I appreciate it.

Hope people don't think I sound arrogant in my posts, I am just being matter of fact, no meaness implied.

I'll try to post when I can, I am stilling doing a lot of research in between touring and recording with my band Electric Frankenstein www.electricfrankenstein.com and writing articles for various magazines.

Please feel free to discuss any Chinese KF history of styles and forms with me anytime! thanks!

I hope to write an article on the Shaolin 18 Lohan Fist form and all the hidden things that are inside that form, for Wushu KungFu magazines, soon as I can actually have the time to sit and write it!
Been trying to get that done for the last 2 years!

By the way, I am teaching supertraditional Chinese Martial Arts in New Jersey. So, if anyone wants to learn the real ancient way to do forms and so on, if they are from the NY/NJ area, please contact me, thanks!

Sal

[Jhapa]

Originally posted by Starchaser107
it's not there,
but I think they recently took alot of thier videos down to update thier server or something , and all of them might not be back up as yet.

http://www.wushucentral.com/videos/miscellaneous/library/beginners/wu_bu_quan.jpg

[Starchaser107]

that's not a video clip, it's a picture :eek: :confused:

[r.(shaolin)]

I agree that Cha Quan Hung Quan, Hua Quan, not only resemble each other but are related to one another. It is my opinion however, that Cha Quan developed out of the older Song Dynasty style of Hung Chang Quan . Cha is traced most convincing to Chamir a Hui native from Xinjiang who lived during the early 1600's (Ming Dynasty). I know there are some legends saying it came from the Tang Dynasty but this may be "borrowed history" based on a Tong Dynasty short story called Kun Lun Nu. Some Cha Quan folk traditions claim that Cha Quan is traced to Hua Quan, a Tang Dynasty general named Hua Zongqi and his student Cha Yuanyi. However these stories are connected to Shangdong Province. I find it more convincing that Hung Chang Quan was more than likely a military style practiced in the Loyang region. "Hong jin jun was a northern Song army during time of the Jurchen conquest. This is to say that 'Hong jin jun', military style was around before the time of Fu-yu and I believe very likely the source of this Song Dynasty martial art.
According to our tradition, Da and Xiao Hong (overwhelming) Chang Quan, were absorbed from a style called Hong Chang Quan by monks of Henan Shaolin Si. Apparently these forms were adopted by Shaolin monks as part of Fuyu's program to develop Shaolin martial arts. The style is accredited to Zhao Kuangyin, the first Song Emperor(posthumous temple name -Taizu). Zhao came from a military family in Lo-yang, not far from Shaolin Si. As an outstanding military officer he became the commander of the palace guard. The Imperial guard was considered the best fighting force of the Zhou military. As a famed military commander and later as the first Song Emperor, it can be seen why his name would have been attached to Hung Quan.

I would point out that Song armies were very large and it is highly unlikely that only one style was practiced by an army made up of so many men coming from different regions. 'Hong jin' army martial arts more likely came from a number of different 'bao-jiaï' that more or less resembled each other in terms of general characteristics.
In the latter part of the Song dynasty, a number of reforms were introduced including the establishment of local militias called 'bao-jiaï' plus a 'directorate of weapons' to supervise armaments manufacture with the intention of improving weapon quality. Between 1069 and 1073, an important official, named Wang Anshi, introduced a number of reforms for the defense of the Song, one of which was the 'bao jia'. It meant 'protective households." Originally is was a policing system which organized households into groups of 10s and 100s, but became the basis of organizing militias to strengthen the regular army. This without a doubt had a profound effect on protective folk martial arts in the northern regions. In fact there were 11 martial arts training grounds established for this training in the old capital near Loyang alone. Eventually 700,000 trainees in Henan, Hebei and Shaanxi were involved.

There may well have been a related martial art practiced by Hong Jin (Red Turbans) inspired by the Song military. Hong Jin was a movement in the north part of China lead by the Peng Yingyu, a monk turned revolutionary leader, as part of the uprising against the Yuan Mongols in the 1330's.

r.

[Jhapa]

Originally posted by Starchaser107
that's not a video clip, it's a picture :eek: :confused:

here you go. again

http://www.wushucentral.com/videos/miscellaneous/library/beginners/wu_bu_quan.mpg

[Sal Canzonieri]

Well, r.shaolin, great posting!

The trouble is there is more than one Cha Quan, there are various lineages from various sources and time periods that are called Cha Quan. I have at least 4 hard cover books that delinate four completely different Cha Quan styles. They all trace their lineage back to toally different people and they are all different from each other, they do not do the same forms.

I agree that there is one Cha Quan that seems to be post- Tai Tzu, but there is also a Cha Quan that is pre-tai tzu that can easily have been something that Song Tai Tzu might have encountered over the years, especially since many members of the army and also generals were of moslem heritage (they liked the pay and they were proud nationalists).

You have something when you mention Loyang, this city, so very near Shaolin is the real center of Henan Martial arts.
There were Taoist schools there that preserved an important style that during the Yuan Dynasty, Monk Jue Yuan had to fall back on. He reached a stalemate in his experiments with Lohan in Shaolin and Bai Yu Feng sent Jue to study with HIS teacher, who was of the Ma family, an ancient moslem family name. Jue stayed here and learned what he was told was the original internal arts that used to be taught at Shaolin before it was almost destroyed.
Jue stayed in Loyang many many years and went back to Shaolin in his old age and passed down what he learned (which reaches far ahead to Choy Gar eventually once this style moved south) to a few students, who taught many by the Ching dynasty.

Also, bear in mind that Henan Xin Yi Liu Hu also originates in Loyang with the Ma family by the 1600s. (no one so far knows for sure who taught the Ma family Xin Yi, there is no proof who is real teacher was, it was not Cao Jiwu or Ji Long Feng as Xing Yi practioners claimed a hundred years later. No one in Loyang says that Ma learned from either person, only that a wandering Taoist taught him Xin Yi. His Liu Hu style is not the same as the Shaolin style of the same name, his was the local moslem indiginous art, named after their six cornered hats.

So, it is very possible, like you point out, that Sun Tai Tzu forms show commonality with the local Hong Quan forms because Sun Tai Tzu borrowed from the forms most likely to be learned from his youth in Loyang. So, his style comes from folk Hong Quan forms and not vice-versa, a great observation you have there!
thanks!

Fu Yu / Fu Ju (they are two different people, Fu Yu was commisioned to make new "shaolin" temples all over the place).
Fu Ju was the Abbot that in Shandong gathered the 18 masters (all 18 are from Shandong, you know). Fu Ju did this some time after first Song emperor was dead (he died young). He created 245 or so forms during that time. These were preserved in a book, the dozen Kan Jia Forms come from this (these are the forms that are no called Northern Shaolin style by many who do 10 of these 12 forms - the Wing Lam / Chan Kwok, etc schools).
Supposedly he did gather some forms that are Hong Quan. But over time something got lost in knowledge.
There is today the Xiao Hong Quan form that is obviously like the Hong Quan forms from Shandong and Henan areas. But there are two Da Hong Quans now, the one that is really from back then is most like Xiao Hong Quan (and Tai Tzu, but maybe tai Tzu takes from it, not known yet) and it has 4 sections, its a long form.
And, there is the newer Da Hong Quan that is found now that has 3 sections but is not as long and shares almost nothing with Xiao Hong Quan and Tai Tzu Quan.
These two different Da Hong Quans cannot be mixed up, they are different by a lot. Doc from Russbo.com asked the old guys at Shaolin about this and they said this info is correct.
You can read all this discussion at his site in the forum archives under Shaolin Kung Fu.

The militias were a major way that some forms or style more than likely became widespread from Shandong, Shanxi, and Henan provinces.

Shaolin fought against the Red Turbans eventually.
They were taken over by Yuan sympathizers long before, that's why many were at Shandong "shaolin" base, they developed Tang Lang really during the Song Dynasty and it was used AGAINST Shaolin arts when the need arose during the Yuan.
I heard that the Red Turbans took up Taoism because it was indiginous to China, as opposed to Buddhism. Many started hating Buddhism out of nationalist sentiments during the Yuan.
Many Buddhist temples had become corrupt landlords over the peasants and we allowing gambling and prostitution in the temples, and used the temples tax-free status to get rich from it all.

[Shaolinlueb]

Originally posted by Sal Canzonieri
I'll try to post when I can, I am stilling doing a lot of research in between touring and recording with my band Electric Frankenstein www.electricfrankenstein.com and writing articles for various magazines.


**** electricfrankenstein, i havent heard that name in a long time. how are you guys doing with it?

[Sal Canzonieri]

EF is doing great, bigger than ever, 14 years on and just as many albums too.
New album is out in April.

[Starchaser107]

ok jhapa, thanks.:cool:

[r.(shaolin)]

I do know that some people have suggested that the long fist styles like Hua, and Cha were the invention of the Moslems, I disagree. It doesn't make any sense particularly in Henan which can be considered the birthplace of the Chinese nation, the origin of Chinese family names, the residence of 19 dynasties and the ancient political, economic and cultural center of China. Yes there were members of the Hui minority who were in the Chinese military and some were even generals, but IMO it is an erroneous idea to believe the Hui invented long fist, and associated weapons training methods.
As I say in my post above, training of very large numbers of civilians in the north (including minorities like the Hui) during the Northern Song was extensive, serious and well organized. This included Hebei and Shandong. Hundreds of thousands of men were taught military techniques (wuyi) with standards controlled by the Chinese government. In fact some historians estimate the number of civilians being trained in military techniques in the northern provinces to be approx. 3 million plus. It should not surprise that Song Dynasty style weapons, are used by nearly all northern Chinese styles (including the so called Hui styles) up to this very day. Their origins are not Hui villagers but the Chinese Song military.
The consequences of the extensive training of that many civilians did come back to haunt subsequent Dynasties.

As far as Zhao Kuangyin, learning his martial arts from villagers, I doubt it. Both his father and grandfather were military leaders. His grandfather was a general, in fact he was also the commander of the palace guard which were the elite fighting core the Zhou army.

..........................
Sal Canzonieri wrote:
This form (Shaolin Xiao Hong Quan) comes from Li Shou and his son, who along with Bai Yu Feng, came to Shaolin to help Monk Jue Yuan develop the almost dead Shaolin martial arts into a new system. Together they developed the Xiao Hong Quan form that everyone knows and a DIFFERENT Da Hong Quan form (it is rarely shown at Shaolin, but I have copies of it, it has four sections) that is also very much like Shaolin Tai Tzu Chang Quan (and it is like Xiao Hong Quan). Bai Yu Feng developed the 13 Grasping Claws form and this eventually mixed with Lohan (of which Monk Jue Yuan was an expert) and became the Five Animals system (only the southern shaolin arts call it the five animals system and not did it is famous the north calls it that too), but originally there were at least 12 animals forms being developed, but Bai Yu Feng died after developing 10 animal forms completely.
..........................

Our tradition has a different version of this and claims that Jue Yuan was skilled Bai Ma Quan, a long fist style. By the time of Jue Yuan (Yuan Dynasty) both Xiao and Da Hong were already at Shaolin - neither he nor Bai Yu Feng invented it. However our tradition mentions that Bai Yu Feng did help re-introduce Hua Quan into the Shaolin curriculum. We also do Xiao and Da Hong but it not the same as what is being practiced at Shaolin today. Our sets are more like long fist forms than xiao hong quan I've seen been done by todays monks.
Although the Shaolin tradition we practice is extensive, Bai Yu Feng's, wu xing are the core of our tradition and are made up of 12 sets ( 10 bare-hand sets and two weapon sets). It is very much a combination of long fist and animal imitation methods ( 10 animals and 5 fist formations). Our tradition claims that Bai Yu Feng was planning to develop 15 sets but passed away before completing the last 3 sets.
r.

[Sal Canzonieri]

Well, I certainly didn't mean to imply that the Moslem Chinese created Long Fist! That's impossible, for all the reasons you state and more.
Just pointing out that there had to have been feedback between diverse groups.

It's very obvious that Hua and Cha Quan and other Moslem styles are essentially composed of many moves from Tong Bei, Ba Fan Shan, Chuo Jiao, Shuai Jiao, etc. These are very common everywhere in northern China.

Henan's Moslem population has always been famous for it's martial arts, so there is a feedback loop there too.

Also, about Zhao Kuangyin, also wasn't clear, I didn't mean that he learned from villagers, but that surely his family was aware or even well versed in the martial arts that are most practiced in Loyang, there must have been some feedback loop here too.

[r.(shaolin)]

I think we're more or less on the same page on this.

r.

[Sal Canzonieri]

Originally posted by r.(shaolin)
I think we're more or less on the same page on this.

r.

cool, thanks for some great exchange of knowledge.

[r.(shaolin)]

...........
Sal wrote:
cool, thanks for some great exchange of knowledge.
.............
dido

................
Sal wrote:
Fu Yu / Fu Ju (they are two different people, Fu Yu was commisioned to make new "shaolin" temples all over the place).
................

Agreed. See:
http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=7981

[Sal Canzonieri]

Ah, great! Finally someone that I can ask questions of and learn from too, thanks!

Okay, many many books and articles confuse Fu-Yu of the Yuan Dynasty and Fu-Ju of the Song Dynasty.

DO you have some important details about Fu-Ju that you can list so I can comment, like you listed about Fu-Yu in that previous thread?

Is it correct that Fu-Ju went to Shandong province and established new martial arts forms there?
I believe so, based on what I have uncovered.

I have some missing pieces in a big puzzle I am working on about origins of some forms and details on Fu-Ju that I can compare to my notes would really help!
thanks!

[r.(shaolin)]

I know very very little about Fu Ju. As far as I could find he is first mentioned in the Qing Dynasty and is associated with Tanglang Quan history. I understand that there is other sources concerning the 18 masters which were brought together by a monk from Shaolin named Fu Ju, but I think they all draw on "Shaolin Monastery Annals' (Qing Dynasty). His name does not appear in any Song or even Yuan documents, Buddhist or otherwise, at least that I am aware of. Our tradition makes no mention of him. I would love to hear what you know of this monk.

r.

[r.(shaolin)]

Since Fu Yu is important to Shaolin history and the article on him on www.aboutshaolin.com a bit on the thin side I'm resposting some other stuff I wrote on him which you might find of interest.

The subject of Jue Yuan and Fu Yu touches on our collective Songshan Shaolin history and which are connected to a series of events that go back to the dying days of the northern Song Dynasty. This puts the reasons in the development of Shaolin martial arts by both these monks into perspective. This was the time period during which both Jue Yuan (late 1220's-1230's) and Fu Yu (1250's-1260's) were active at Shaolin. It begins with the Jurchens and their 120 year 'alien' rule over the north parts (including the areas where Shaolin Si stood) followed by the Mongolian conquest that swept from the north pushing the Jin out of the region. These conquests created great havoc not only in the population at large but in the monastic world, not only from the Mongols but from desperate roving bands of robbers.
It is important to point out that a large number of monasteries in the north were either destroyed or abandoned. The Mongol invasion was a time of great tribulation. There were even proposals by some Mongol leaders to turn northern China into a great pasture land by killing every single Chinese person in the regions. It would have been the greatest slaughter of human beings in the history man. This did not happen largely because of a few Chinese Buddhist leaders that held sway over the Mongol court. Of these giants among men, the greatest was a Chan monk by the name of Hai-yun. A number of Taoist monks were involved in this great work of defending the and saving the population as well. The most notable was Qui Chuji (aka. Ch'ang-ch'un chen-jen). At that time he was the patriarch of Quanzhen sect of Taoism. Early in the Mongol campaign into Central Asia, Qui Chuji befriended Genghis Khan and subsequently was appointed as administrator of all religious communities including the Buddhist ones. He further gave Qiu Chuji an edict exempting all clergy in China from taxes and labor service obligations. Armed with this power, the Taoists immediately began leveraging their position to take over Buddhist monasteries which had been neglected because of the many military campaigns and even more boldly forcefully, seizing temples and monastery that were occupied.

The Chan monk Hai-yun had become very influential with the Mongolian military government as well and eventually was appointed superintendent of Buddhist Affairs in north China. Earlier on Hai-yun recommended Fu-yu being appointed Abbot (Fang-chang) of Shaolin Si. At his recommendation Fu-yu was appointed to lead the Buddhists in denouncing Taoist appropriation of Buddhist monasteries as well as other misrepresentations in front of the Mongol military governor. After arguments from both sides, Kublai Kan declared the Buddhist as winners and ordered that all seized property be returned. It was under the directions of Fang-chang, Venerable Fu-yu and Shaolin monks had the onerous task of taking these temples back. It appears that the training and development of a defensive force was the direct result of these events as there was a great resistance on the part of the Taoists to comply. Buddhist historical records document this debate with the Taoists but not the Buddhist defensive martial initiative under his direction. That comes to us from martial traditions of various Shaolin Lohan lineages. But they do make sense and are relatively consistent.

The Buddhist Taoist debates and controversies go back to the Han Dynasty. By the 1200's it was already a thousand year old controversy. A controvery that was end by Fu-yu in 1258. This final 'show down' took place after the long standing bickering took a particularly nasty turn with the Taoist appropriating over 500 Buddhist monasteries and temples and destroying statues notably of Buddha and Kuan-yin. Furthermore their campaign included misleading Buddhist converts through what were essential two fabricated Taoist apocrypha. Although these texts were ancient, they were simply copies of very old fabrications that were part of the controversy for centuries. Although these controversies were framed in doctrinal matters, they, as I mention above, were essentially political power struggles. It was Fu-yu that is given credit for putting this 1000 year old debate to rest and discrediting the claim by the Taoists, that Buddha was but a manifestations of Lao-tzu. The Taoist were claiming that Lao-tzu appeared as Buddha for the expressed purpose of converting the 'barbarians.'

Fu Yu headed the debate on 3 occasions in 1255, in 1256 ( the Taoist refused to attend that meeting), and finally in 1258 when he lead 300 Buddhist and faced 200 Taoist. This grand assembly a K'ai-p'ing took place at the order of Qubilai Kan with the intention to settle the matter once and for all. At that time the Taoists lost much property as well as influence with the Mongol court. Apparently, however, Taoist did not rollover easily in giving up any property. I believe this was the principle reason why Fu-yu re-established a formal marital organization and martial arm at Shaolin.

After 1258, Fu-yu began reestablishing Buddhist Monasteries in the north. In 1258 he was 55 years old. Given the realities of the time and place and the job at hand, It was not without reason that Fu-yu organized an effort to invite the best experts available to him.
Fu-yu invited martial shifu on three occasion to Shaolin, each group to teach for a three year period. The effort spanned 9 years. Their work involved teaching resident monks and developing a martial organization of monk experts. This is reminiscent of what that took place at Shaolin at least twice during previous dynasties. Fu-yu created a defensive system at Songshan Shaolin Si - the 'muscle' so to speak, to accomplish the task of rebuilding Buddhism in the Mongol territories. The result was that there was a great depository of highly effective martial methods at Shaolin Si but not necessarily a coherent system.

As a further note on the Taoist issue, based on Buddhist records and an 1281 edict by Qubilai Kan, it is clear that the Taoist were still harboring grievances and ill feelings concerning the 1258 judgment because in 1280 the banned texts were still being circulated. There are even records of some Taoists claiming falsely, that Buddhists set two of their temples on fire. Their attempt to frame Buddhist monks was uncovered and the now irritate government had offending Taoists executed.

[Sal Canzonieri]

Originally posted by r.(shaolin)
I know very very little about Fu Ju. As far as I could find he is first mentioned in the Qing Dynasty and is associated with Tanglang Quan history. I understand that there is other sources concerning the 18 masters which were brought together by a monk from Shaolin named Fu Ju, but I think they all draw on "Shaolin Monastery Annals' (Qing Dynasty). His name does not appear in any Song or even Yuan documents, Buddhist or otherwise, at least that I am aware of. Our tradition makes no mention of him. I would love to hear what you know of this monk.

r.

No I have seen him listed in Shandong Shaolin Literature, he is listed as being from the Song Dynasty time period, near the bigging of this period. Jue Yuan is from the end of this period.

Also he is in the Shaolin Da Quan:

Chapter 3 the fighting monks in Song Jin dynasty...151
27 Ling Qiu 28 Zhi Rui 29 Fu Ju 30 Zhi Sheng 31 Hui Wei 32 Hui Lin
33Hai Zhou 34 Hong Wen 35 Jue Ze 36 Jue Yuan 37 Qiu Yue 38 Cheng Hui
39 Zong Yin

[Sal Canzonieri]

There is a section on Fu Yu and one on Fu Ju in Shaolin Da Quan.

Fu Yu is listed at the end of here:

1. the ancestor of Shao Lin temple--Ba Tuo.................44
2.Shao Lin temple Da Cheng Zen ancestor--Pu Ti Da Mo.........................47
3.Da Cheng Zen second ancestor--Hui Ke...................49
4.Da Cheng Zen third ancestor--Seng Can...................50
5.Da Cheng Zen fourth ancestor--Dao Xin...................50
6.Da Cheng Zen fifth ancestor--Hong Ren...................51
7.Da Cheng Zen sixth ancestor,Chinese Zen ancestor--Hui Neng...........53
8.Zen seventh ancestor--Shen Hui55
9.the sixth ancestor of north sect Mahayana Zen--Shen Xiu....................57
10.the sixth ancestor of north sect Mahayana Zen--Fa Ru .....................58
11.the seventh ancestor of north sect Mahayana Zen--PuJi.....................58
12.the ancestor of Zen Cao Dong Sect --Ben Ji ..........59
13.the ancestor of Zen Lin Ji Sect --Yi Xuan.... ...........60
14.the ancestor of Zen Yun Men Sect --Wen Yan .....60
15.the ancestor of Zen Wei Yang Sect --Hui Ji ..........61
16.the ancestor of Zen Fa Yan Sect --Wen Yi .............62
17.the ancestor of Shao Lin temple Cao Dong Sect --Fu Yu......................62

[Sal Canzonieri]

Also it lists:

5.Fu Ju assempled the heros and created the fist forms............................316
6. Jue Min monk saved the general...............................317
7.Hui Wei mond resist against the army of Jin............322
8.Jue Yuan went out the mountain and visit the famous master...............323

Fu Ju it makes clear assembled the 18 masters from Shandong Province and the surrounding areas.

Fu Yu assembled people to document forms and made the book that contains about 250 (?) forms.

It is very confusing as to which one of them to developed the Kan Ja 13 forms (now known as Northern Shaolin style).
I am pretty sure it was Fu Yu that did so. Which means way before Fu Ju.

Everything must have turned to **** again by the time Jue Yuan was around since he started from scratch (18 Lohan, the oldest style indiginous to Shaolin) and developed new material from that core.

[r.(shaolin)]

................
Sal wrote:
No I have seen him listed in Shandong Shaolin Literature, he is listed as being from the Song Dynasty time period, near the bigging of this period. Jue Yuan is from the end of this period.
................
My point was that this information comes from Qing Dynasty
documents or later. There are no Song or Yuan Dynasty documents that mention him and these events - at least that I know of. Its very much the same with Damo, althought his name is mentioned as far back as the Wei Dynasty, his connections to Shaolin martial arts comes from 1600s.

As far as historical Shaolin martial arts instructional documents, they are all relatively recent with the the earliest I know of written in the early 1600's, and that was by a layman.

On another note, do you know if there are stone steles at Shaolin for Fu Ju, Jue Yuan, and Qiu Yue? I do know that there is one for Fu Yu done by Zhao Mengfu of the Yuan Dynasty.

..........
Sal wrote:
It is very confusing as to which one of them to developed the Kan Ja 13 forms (now known as Northern Shaolin style).
I am pretty sure it was Fu Yu that did so. Which means way before Fu Ju.
..........

Fu Ju is traditionally placed in the early years of the Song Dynasty (mid 900's) while Fu Yu's activities are quite accurately accounted for by historians (see above and my post above) well after the time of Fu Ju not before him.

The most verifiable dates are those concerning Abbot Fu Yu. Using these as a basis, puts Jue Yuan's activities slightly before Fu Yu. That is, if the (1224-1234) dates concerning Jue Yuan's travels are accurate.

Are you saying that these Kan Jia sets are the same as the 10 taught by Kuo Yu Chang?

[Sal Canzonieri]

Damo I know is from 1600s first referenced.
There have been extensive articles about this, and everyone that has traced the legend atributes it to one person's preface to his book that made the claim and it continued unquestioned, though very false, til recent times.

Far as I know there are no steiles at Shaolin that mention Jue Yuan or Qiu Yeu.

Fu Ju, well, I thought he went to Shandong province and had left Henan Shaolin place. maybe that's why it is hard to find historical records at henan Shaolin?
What if we traced the names of the 18 masters he gathered?
I recognize two names (Lin Chung and Lu Chun-Yi) as students of Monk Zhou Tong, the famed Fan Tzi master and teacher of General Yue Fei.
It also includes Yen Ching as one of the masters, who is from the Mizong Style (and who was adopted by Lu Chun-Yi).
Also, Emperor Tai Tzu must have been dead by the time the style was named after him, so Fu Ju had to have done this gathering in the early 1200s.

I haven't seen anything anywhere about there being stone steles at Shaolin for Fu Ju, Jue Yuan, and Qiu Yue.

Yes, I am saying that these Kan Jia sets (there are 13 of them) are the same as the 10 taught by Kuo Yu Chang. The first 10 sets of Kan Jia Quan have the same names and are basically the same moves.

[r.(shaolin)]

Sal wrote:
Damo I know is from 1600s first referenced.
............................

I'm with you if you are referring to the claim that Damo was the source of martial arts at Shaolin. I agree it is a fabrication and clearly ridiculous, Just it is ridiculous to believe that Yue Fei founded xingyi and Ying Zhao Fan Men etc.
However Damo is referenced well before the 1600's in important and verifiable historical documents. He has been important to Chan Buddhism at least since Song times. Furthermore there is documentation that he has been revered by Shaolin monks for centuries. Damo represents a system of thought and is embodied in the practice of Chan and martial arts at Shaolin for centuries. It is too bad the Shaolin is abandoning him as is suggested by Gene's post elsewhere. If this is in-fact the case, it is recent.

[Sal Canzonieri]

The jury isn't out on the Yue Fei connection to Xin Yi Liu Ho Quan.

There is all kinds of recent findings that are bring him back into the picture, at least indirectly.
Lots of distortion has happened because of people claiming stuff about their stuff that isnt really true, origin-wise. They are really just calling the same styles different names to stake a claim for themselves.

here's what shaping up:

Back in late Song Dynasty time, the real source of most of the styles that are claiming ancestry to Yue Fei, is the documented person Zhou Tong (many various spellings).
What he taught is essential Ba Fan Shan or what is not called Fan Tzi and also he taught what is essentially Tong Bei. Two of his students are listed as among the 18 Masters that Mantis is rooted to. But they are real people, because their martial arts have lineages in Shandong province. Styles today known as Yue Fei, are very similar to Fan tzi / Tong Bei mixture.
Yue Fei is considered to be one of his students. And, as has been posted on some other websites:
http://www.chinafrominside.com/ma/xyxy/xylhhistory.html

"Recently one of Chinese martial arts magazines published an article about a discovery of a new branch of Xinyiquan, related neither to Moslem nor Dai Family. The style is practiced only in a very small community in a small village in Henan Province. Many facts seem to support the thesis that the style is a "living remain" of Yue Fei's boxing from before Ji Longfeng's times. For example - one of the rules of that style does not allow to pass the boxing to people with the last name Qin - probably because Yue Fei was betrayed (which resulted in death sentence) by Qin Hui, minister in Song court. The style shows some similarity to other Xinyi branches, but its movements are more simple, methodology of Neigong (internal exercises) is practically non-existent and emphasis is put on practical fighting skills."

From what I heard this rare style that is called xin yi doesn't really have forms but loose techniques and they are very similar to what is called Yue Fei Style in other provinces.

Also, if you compare Xin Yi ? xing yi loose techniques to movements shown in fantzi styles like the "Cuffed style of Fan tzi" they are easy to translate. My teacher knows both styles and he has shown me how if you know xing yi already the moves in these fan tzi forms are a piece of cake to follow and learn.
So, all this stuff seems to share some roots.

Furthermore, Lau Tsoi San got from the famous Liu Dekuan
Six Harmony style, Yueh Style San Shou and the long spear. This Six Harmony is synonimous with Xing Yi, because Lau later in his life went to his teacher's xingyiquan brother Geng Ji Shan (1860-1928) to complete his study of xingyiquan.

Liu Dekuan's original style was Yueh Style San Shou (also called Yueh Style Eagle Hand or Yueh Style Connected Fists). He learned this from Hebei Xiong County Liu Shijun. De Kuan first studied with Shijun's student Xu Liu and then later he studied with Shijun.

So what one person at one time was calling Yue Fei style, another person was calling it Fan Tzi while another called it Liu Ho Quan, while another called it Xin Yi Liu Ho Quan, but they are all derived from the same source, Zhou Tong's teachings.

Zhou Tong is said to have been to Shaolin, if he did all there was there was Lohan, and the 18 Lohan Fists form, the very first move, done exactly like Splitting in Xing Yi/Xin Yi, is called Eagle Seizes the Gullet and it involves the earliest use of the eagle claw technique. It is the opening move of the form and can be used with chin na and pressure point defense as well as usual self defense.
This move is also called the Shi Ying zhao Qin Na (岳氏鷹爪擒拿, the Eagle-Claw Catch, which is what it is also called in Yue Fei styles and eagle claw styles.
Zhou Tong is said to have taught "The 108 Fighting techniques", which is essentially fan tzi and tong bei and lohan. I've watched eagle claw forms and the throat seizing while twisting a caught attacker's fist is exactly how that first move in 18 Lohan is done.

[r.(shaolin)]

Yue Fei became a military hero and a wonderful semi-historical myth, there may be other reasons why arts like xingyi and Ying Zhao Fan Men as well as others, including elements of Shaolin, as being linked to him. As in the tradition of Northern Shaolin I practice, we have a number weapon sets (ie. "Yue Jia Qiang", " Yue Jia Shuang Chui" etc.) connected to Yui Fei. Although it can be safely certain that Yue Fei, excelled in the military arts (i.e. military weapons), I think it is unlikely that he invented xingyi or any of other arts that are credited to his name. However I believe there is good reason why these are associated with him.
As Yue's fame of being a daring leader grew, he was given higher titles and more ambitious assignments by the Song Imperial government. By the age of 30 he was leader of the main armies (Central China Unified Forces) in the central Yangzi region, leading offensives against the Jin and rebel forces. As Yue Fei defeated these armies, his "Yue Jia Jun" absorbed thousands of the enemie's best, "battle tested" troops.
As a result, his armies grow to over 100,000 men. It would be ridiculous to think that Yue personally trained these men in his martial arts. The term 'Jia,' in this case refers to "family army". It was not uncommon for the forces of generals to be called " jia." This was not because they were private armies, but because it was the mode of military organizations of the time, for armies to take on characteristics of their leaders. Personal links between the commanders and solders were so strong that that when a general moved to a new post, their men would follow. This identification with commanders extended to martial training and methods as well (ie. spear methods being called, yue 'jia' spear). Here the reference is not to 'blood' family ties, as in a family village style, but rather to a 'military bond.' The martial arts of this Yue's army came from a great variety of regions, (very likely form the Henan, Hebei and Shanxi regions), all being absorbed and referred to as ‘Yue Jia’ wushu. This is why, I find the information concerning Yue Fu and Xingyi, in Jarek Szymanski’s article on his site very probable and reasonable:
" In 1838 he (Guo Weihan) went to Henan . . .together with Dai Wenliang and Dai Wenxiong (and) there learn(t) martial arts. In 1841 Niu Xixian, a (descendant of Niu Gao, one of the general's in Yue Fei's army. . .) came to Shijiadian and Guo Weihan and Dai brothers became his (Niu Xixian) disciples and leant martial arts from him."

r.

[Sal Canzonieri]

Yeah, I am in agreement with you there about Yue Fei.

The various lines of Yue Family martial arts are pretty similar to each other, no matter what province they are from, and also when I look at the specific moves of their forms or their loose techniques, they harken back to old martial arts of Song are, which again is Fan tzi and tong bei, with a dash of Shaolin Lohan.
Also, since Zhou Tong passed along his martial arts to people who taught many people, they must have turned "my teacher's teacher taught Yue Fei" over centuries to "my teacher's teacher was Yue Fei".

Between his general's passing on what they knew and
Yue Fei's sons passing on what they knew and Zhou Tong passing on what he knew, Yue Fei wound up getting all the credit so that these styles would look "cooler" to others.

[GeneChing]

It is too bad the Shaolin is abandoning him as is suggested by Gene's post elsewhere. Shaolin is NOT abandoning Tamo at all. Let's read a little more carefully here. Shaolin now acknowledges that Tamo is mythological, but they are far from abandoning him. They are taking the same stance that most Zen scholars take on Tamo - that he was a legend and just be treated and RESPECTED as such. It's only either/or if you're a Decartean thinker. Thankfully, zennists are anything but.

As for Yue Fei, it's ironic how he ties into the Tamo myth. In one of the earliest, if not the earliest (17th century), documentable versions of Yijinjing, there is a preface by Niu Gao. The preface states that Yue Fei was instructed in this method and alludes that it contributed to his success. The preface is clearly a forgery, so only the most naive of martial researchers would place any lineage value on it. It reeks of influence of the popular novel, as does a lot of Yue Fei origin myths in the martial arts. This doesn't invalidate us venerating such legendary figures as our progenitors - legend is legend and has its place - it's just that you can only take such metaphors so far until reason forces you to acknowledge that their value is symbolic, not literal.

But you can tie all sorts of things together if you just dig deep enough. You can look at Wu Jingzi's Unofficial History of Scholars which attributes Yijinjing as a major factor in the training regimen of Feng Mingqi, a knight-errant loosely based upon a contemporary of Wu's Gan Fengchi (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/ezine/article.php?article=498), the allleged founder of BSL. That would be an inappropriate tie, but there's such a tradition of making founder claims in CMA that it's not too far fetched.

[Royal Dragon]

So was there ever a conclusion on where Wu Bu Quan comes from?

I know half of it is in Cha Fist #5, and I know the full thing is in one of the 10 modern Wushu sets as well.

Is this an ancient Cha fist beginners set, or something recent distilled form various Cha fist forms?

[sha0lin1]

This is a good question that I have been wondering about for a long time. Thanks for reviving this thread. I must admit though that I have been somewhat lazy on this one since I only read the first page of responses then skipped to the last. I will go back and read the others when I get more time.

The other thing I am wondering about is the Shaolin form Lian Huan Quan. Since this form opens up similar to Wu Bu in the begining with the punch, kick punch, and ma bu punch. To me Wu Bu feels modern whereas Lian Huan feels more traditional.

My two cents, we teach Wu Bu at our school with an emphasis on the 5 stances and moving in and out of them, once the form is learned the student is given time to develop flow and speed, since the self defense applications are very simple and limited. Which I am pretty sure whoever developed it did it for this reason. Traditional or Modern, it is a great form for this purpose.

[Sal Canzonieri]

Shaolin encyclopedia says the Lian Huan and a variation set called Lian Hua Quan were developed in close late Qing or early modern times and is based on five Shaolin sets" Luohan, Plumflower, Hong Quan, and forget the other two.

Wu Bu Quan is actually a modern Wu shu set that Shaolin has adopted in modern times to use as a base to get beginners started with long fist stances.
It's a great beginner set, so why not. Better than starting with Tan Tui first.

[Royal Dragon]

Yes, but who actually created it? is it a Cha fist drill? was it developed by some committee? if so, which one?

I teach this one, I'd like to be able to say where it came from.

[LFJ]

dont have a name for you but just read the discussion about wubuquan not having many variations to it. the way we do it is not with mabu into gongbu as the first move, but duli into pubu then into gongbu. thats basically the only difference. but i've seen a few other people do it like this as well. i guess the variations really arent many.

[Royal Dragon]

I don't have the Chinese names, but mine does the opening same as all the others, then you lift the left leg up, and the left arm is in a guard over it so the elbow almost touches the knee. This is followed by dropping into a Snake stance similar to Snake creeps down in Taiji, only the rear arm is tucked at the rt side in a chamber position and the left arm chops downwards. Then that is followed by shifting forward into a bowstance and punch.

Most of the ones on line skip those first two moves, and go direct to the left bow stance, punch posture.

I do a second version where I replaced a bunch of the postures with whatever was the closest equivalent from my Tai tzu sets, but I am the only one who does that.

[LFJ]

if i understand your description correctly yours sounds the same. you can see it being performed in this documentary at about 6:50 with shi deyang's class. http://youtube.com/watch?v=U11Cph-lj6Q

its done twice on both sides down and back. left-right, right-left.

[Royal Dragon]

Yes, that is the exact same set I do, only they are ripping through it super fast, and I stop and old each postures for 1 to 3 minutes (depending on how fat and out of shape I am at the time LOL!!)

You don't see that version often, almost every clip of Wu Bu Quan I have seen anywhere skips the first 2 moves. This is one of the only ones I have seen that doesn't, and the is the first one that is exactly like the set i was taught.

[LFJ]

this is how its trained at master deyang's school. of course usually done slower for the beginner to learn properly. where did you learn it?

[Royal Dragon]

I used to train at John Tsai's school in Chicago/Norridge. There was a classmate of mine who had come in from another system named Rob.

When I could not afford classes anymore, he and i would meet at the nearby forest preserve and he would teach me sets and Qi Gongs. I learned Wu Bu Quan, Lianhuanquan, Xiao and Da Hong Quan some Choy Lay Fut Qi gongs and a few other misc. things, a good dozen sets in all before he moved out of state and could not teach me anymore.

None of it was from Tsai's system. He was teaching me what he called "Real Shaolin"

At the time I was just happy to learn, and I really don't remember what his lineage was. It was actually many years later that I discovered all the Qi Gongs (except Ba Duan jin) were from CLF.

When he taught me Wu Bu Quan, he told me it was the original Wu Bu Quan, and not the simple modern version...whatever that meant.

[LFJ]

yeah, whatever that meant. lol

you gotta get back with that guy. that would have been an interesting dig.

[Royal Dragon]

Unfortunately, I have lost contact with him, and don't know where he is anymore.

I originally thought all those sets were some sort of Choy Lay Fut once I figured out the Qi Gongs were, but apparently they were mostly Song Shan Shaolin.

With all te monks around now though, that stuff is much more common today than it was back then (1996?)

I have moved away from form collecting though, and prefer application and usage today.He was a huge forms collector, and must have known a hundred of them. Every 3-4 weeks he would be teaching me a new set, and new Qi Gongs at the same time.

I still do all the marching kicks leg lifts, punching drills and little exercises and certian stretches he taught me in my in warmups today though. I learned a bunch of little generic drills and exercises from him that are still in my tool box as well...I just forgot most of the forms, and what I remember is foggy at best.

We would do all the above, then Wu Bu Quan, Xiao Honh Quan, Da Hoong Quan (the tai tzu one, but I didn't know that then), a Louhan set, and te Cannon Fist form, then we would stretch and play with an application or two, and heavy conditioning at the end and some Qi Gong after

[sha0lin1]

Shaolin encyclopedia says the Lian Huan and a variation set called Lian Hua Quan were developed in close late Qing or early modern times and is based on five Shaolin sets" Luohan, Plumflower, Hong Quan, and forget the other two.

Wu Bu Quan is actually a modern Wu shu set that Shaolin has adopted in modern times to use as a base to get beginners started with long fist stances.
It's a great beginner set, so why not. Better than starting with Tan Tui first.

Thanks Sal.

[Sal Canzonieri]

I don't have the Chinese names, but mine does the opening same as all the others, then you lift the left leg up, and the left arm is in a guard over it so the elbow almost touches the knee. This is followed by dropping into a Snake stance similar to Snake creeps down in Taiji, only the rear arm is tucked at the rt side in a chamber position and the left arm chops downwards. Then that is followed by shifting forward into a bowstance and punch.

Most of the ones on line skip those first two moves, and go direct to the left bow stance, punch posture.

I do a second version where I replaced a bunch of the postures with whatever was the closest equivalent from my Tai tzu sets, but I am the only one who does that.

Your version is the Shaolin version, I learned it that way too.
The other version is the common wushu version.

it was a set created by committee, far as I know. It's just common stuff found in all long fist, hong quan and cha quan. The committee head was a Hua Quan master.

[Royal Dragon]

Hmm, do you know which committee, when it was develped?

I found all but the last 3 moves in Cha Quan number 5 so i think it is derived from Cha Quan mostly.

Part of my questioning is more to try and figure out if it existed prior to modern times as a drill in Cha Quan? Or maybe several Cha Quan drills together?

Did this committee assemble it from previous shorter drills? or just pull sections from Cha forms that fit their needs at random?

[Royal Dragon]

Ok, I have been comparing forms of Cha Fist. It seems that the opening up to the punch kick in Wu bu Quan is in all of them.

The second part from the kick to the twisted (Monkey resting) position is in 5, only it enters the horse by retreating.This has the beginning as does all of them.

Also the end of Wubu Quan is in Cha #5 a bit earlier, only it does not stop at the empty stance and instead continues on to walk to the other side of the floor. You see this in most of them as well.

# 6 has the beginning repeated several times.

Since the core of Wu bu Quan (first 2/3 of it) are in Cha Fist 5, with the next moves and ending being a scaled back or stationary version of another move in Cha #5, I am saying it is a combination of practice drills distilled down from Cha # 5

Cha # 5 First 2/3s 0:34-0:40 The next move is at 0:21, and then the end is the empty stance right as she starts the walking at 0:26

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePXnLMbBA7g

[Sal Canzonieri]

That's cool to know, but its not a big deal really.

The wushu committee that created it just thought it was a good sequence of movements to make it easier for kids to learn long fist. Five year olds do it.

It's interesting that it is found in it's entirety in Cha Quan #5 and some other moves in other Cha Quan sets (there are three completely different Cha Quan systems, plus there is the modern wushu Cha Quan, which maybe that is what you are looking at?)

[Royal Dragon]

Re read my last post, i posted a link to the exact set I am talking about, and the times each move is performed.