Xiao/Da Hong Quan...the only fist forms practiced after Revolution

[taichi4eva]

I'm totally unsure about this but I remember reading a long time ago in one of the issues in kungfumagazine.com that following the Cultural Revolution, the only fist forms that were being practiced inside the Shaolin Temple were Xiao Hong Quan and Da Hong Quan. Many of the other styles practiced at Songshan were brought in from neighboring areas. Can I anyone support/decry this assertion? Also, my other question would be on weapon sets taught prior to when the movie, "Shaolin Temple" hit it big?

Thanks in advance.

[LFJ]

well, ven. shi suxi for example was known as the "shaolin boxing king" for his extensive knowledge of shaolin boxing. he was in shaolin temple before and after the cultural revolution, and certainly knew and taught more than just these two sets.

[GeneChing]

You have to keep in mind where Shaolin is geographically and historically. Zhengzhou, the capital city near to Shaolin, served as the capitol of China on five separate occasion for a sum of 3600 years. Henan Province is the very heart of China. So when you say 'neighboring areas' you have to keep in mind that the neighborhood was the center of culture for over three and a half millennium. That's going to have a lot of influence.

If you're interested in what happened during the CR at Shaolin and the effect of neighboring areas, take a look at our 2008 November/December (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/magazine/article.php?article=789) cover story Shaolin Masters Keeping the Faith (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/magazine/article.php?article=793). That's just a starter. I've done many articles on the other leading folk masters in the area who helped preserve traditional Shaolin forms, and not just Dahong and Xiaohong.

Weapons is another question. Start by looking at our yinshougun thread (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=48637).

[r.(shaolin)]

Weapons is another question. Start by looking at our yinshougun thread (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=48637).

My view is that that the staff set 'yinshougun' being done by the monks today and the
'yinshougun' referred to by Cheng Zongyou are two different weapons.
Here are my thoughts on this:
http://ironbodhisattva.blogspot.com/
r.

[GeneChing]

When I was first taught yinshougun by Shi Decheng, we used a longer 'rat-tail' staff (http://www.martialartsmart.net/32-84.html), more akin to what is depicted in Cheng Zongyou's work. Some of the modern practitioners have converted it for an eyebrow-height staff, including my present Shaolin teacher Yan Fei (a disrobed monk). It's worthy of note here that there's a traditional Shaolin staff form called qimeigun (eyebrow-height) which is played more like European quarterstaff or Japanese bo staff (http://www.martialartsmart.net/26-60.html) where you strike with both ends a lot. Rat-tail staffs tend to work more like spears (http://www.martialartsmart.net/45-051.html).

That being said, I tend to lean towards your belief that Cheng's form is different from the modern one simply because the figures in the text don't map well. Even given a wide latitude for variation, I don't see the pattern as being the root of what we do now. I confess, this is based on a rather cursory examination. But I know yinshougun fairly well and I don't see the connection. Perhaps I should look at it more carefully.

[Sal Canzonieri]

From the research I've been doing, it seems that there were different methods practiced by different factions within and nearby Shaolin grounds.

Books such as that by Cheng only show one of many different traditions, and I agree because these books are the only ones found today people assume that they are the ONLY methods taught there.

But other books from the 1500s and 1600s show that there were completely different factions doing totally different techniques with different weapons and each had their own set of followers, some in the many thousands and some in the few dozens.

[GeneChing]

The area surrounding Shaolin is rich with martial tradition. Many of the local masters like Tagou's Liu Baoshan, Epo's Liang Yiquan and Chen Tongshan (see my post above, #3) have generations of experience with secular Shaolin forms. My current teacher, Yan Fei, learned a lot of his material outside the temple from a folk master, so he has a completely different array of forms. Being a former monk, he has the standard sets too. Another example is the Wu Gulun lineage, which we've discussed here before (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=45017). Shaolin is quite diverse that way. While there are certainly some universal forms, I find the variations more interesting.

And I completely agree with Sal. In my research, I've only been able to document a small fraction of the Shaolin curriculum. There's plenty more that I haven't even begun to penetrate. Given that there's much more research happening now, that in our modern age of the internet, research is almost a disposable commodity, just imagine how it was back in the 16th century when the hot new thing was the printing press. Documentation was a luxury back then. Surely there's been countless undocumented variations over Shaolin's history. It just stands to reason. Nevertheless, the record that remains is very interesting, and the very fact that some classic names like yinshougun were recorded centuries ago is in its own way fascinating.

[r.(shaolin)]

From the research I've been doing, it seems that there were different methods practiced by different factions within and nearby Shaolin grounds.

Books such as that by Cheng only show one of many different traditions, and I agree because these books are the only ones found today people assume that they are the ONLY methods taught there.

But other books from the 1500s and 1600s show that there were completely different factions doing totally different techniques with different weapons and each had their own set of followers, some in the many thousands and some in the few dozens.

Sal,
I've come to the same conclusions as you and Gene.
r.

[Eugene]

Just a short Question,

The well known Xiao Hong Quan routine and first to be learned, is in its way the second part of 3 parts of Xiao Hong Quan right.

Eugene

[RenDaHai]

@eugene

No. Although there are hundreds (possibly thousands) of forms closely related to shaolin temple, Xiao Hong Quan is by ALL accounts I have come accross, the Greatest Fist.

Some lineages have several sets of xiao hong quan, these vary between lineages. However the main Xiao Hong Quan is uncannily similar between all schools, even WuGuLun pai.

It is the main form, it is the most powerful form in shaolin. I can't begin to emphasize the importance of this form over others. It is profound martial wisdom. It is the oldest of shaolins forms, and must be one of the oldest forms in china.

So my advice is don't worry about the other roads of xiao hong quan.

The history of this form is fascinating, and the general thinking among masters here is that Xiao Hong Quan set the style by which all later shaolin forms followed, as did forms in many styles of wushu. Off course the idea 'tian xia gong fu chu shao lin' (all kung fu comes from shaolin) is nonsense, however if you look at the thousands of kung fu styles over northern china, the vast majority share the same style of recorded form. (the way forms are sequenced and performed). This could conceviably be all imitations of one style. Although there would be many candidates form this mother form, Xiao Hong Quan is one of the strong ones.

Certainly all the main shaolin sets can be constructed using only the principles outlined in xiao hong quan.

On an extra note it is unfortunate but a great deal of the xiao hong quan practiced in dengfeng now is awful. This is one form you really want to find the best of the best to teach you.

[Northwind]

That province and the cities in it have had some SERIOUS history and some of the most famous spots historically & culturally are there. Not to mention a sweet spot in that road of silk...There's LOTS of different fu there throughout history, just like the temple's fu has changed throughout history.

[LFJ]

It is the oldest of shaolins forms, and must be one of the oldest forms in china.

:confused:

xiaohongquan?

as far as we've been able to tell, the original version in laojia hongquan is only from yuan dynasty. there is a lot that predates that. and the version of xiaohongquan practiced modernly was likely only abbreviated and worked out in the last 100 years.

[RenDaHai]

Xiao Hong Quan is Song Dynasty, (c.1000 AD)

There is a great deal of earlier stuff off course, Xiao hong quan was created to represent the basic principles of the many schools existing at the time. However I say it is the oldest because stuff from before this era is so uncertain.

It is impossible to know what xiao hong quan was like that long ago, but given the importance the great teachers place on this form it is likely the least changed form.

Last 100 Years??:confused: No. Even my masters master was born before 1900 and would have learned this form in the very early 20th century. Lets test; It is elementary to see how the form xiao Pao quan, imitates the structure of the form Xiao Hong quan. If we look at Wu Shan Lins Pao quan it is almost identical to that practiced now. Wu shan lins family lineage left shaolin temple at the time of Wu Gu Lun. Wugulun is actually pictured in the mural in the hall at shaolin, the picture of all the monks training. He is the one with the moustache in the middle. If pao quan from this time is unchanged then we can say for certain xiao hong quan of this time is unchanged.... That is already more than 100 years.

But it is much older than the mural as well. Ask around, xiao hong quan is really the ultimate form. It is less loved now simply because not many people teach a good version of it anymore. Most people have never even seen a good version. The actual sequence is basically unchanged, and exists in most of the family lineages around the area, all very slightly unique, but all very similar. I don't know why you think the structure has changed so recently, it really hasn't, not for a very long time.

[Eugene]

@RenDaHai

Thx for your big awnser, I dont know so much about the history as you guys here, but, I will concentrate on the Xiao Hong Quan as it excists now yes.

I think it has many cool things in it, so in the documentary * The Myths and Logic of Shaolin Kung Fu * the person tells when the boy does Xiao Hong Quan, that is is the mother of all boxing styles, so that is true.... i wonder who the father is btw..jk

It is when performed right a fascinating form to look at

[LFJ]

Xiao Hong Quan is Song Dynasty, (c.1000 AD)

There is a great deal of earlier stuff off course, Xiao hong quan was created to represent the basic principles of the many schools existing at the time. However I say it is the oldest because stuff from before this era is so uncertain.

we're talking about the two "dahong" and "xiaohong" sets created by li sou in the yuan dynasty when he came to shaolin monastery with jueyuan and bai yufeng.

its apparent that the original xiaohongquan has been simplified into the xiaohongquan set of today, and the real dahongquan is lost, or missing at least.

what history on xiaohongquan being from the song dynasty do you have?


It is impossible to know what xiao hong quan was like that long ago, but given the importance the great teachers place on this form it is likely the least changed form.

the versions done today are obviously simplified versions of the laojia hongquan which has a whole beginning section that is omitted in the xiaohongquan set.

after the first section it goes into baiyun gaiding- the first posture of xiaohongquan. the rest of the set follows the same structure and sequences, but the laojia hongquan set is far more dense in technique and transitional movements.

this set can be seen here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gEop0aFSRY


I don't know why you think the structure has changed so recently, it really hasn't, not for a very long time.

many people call this longer set the dahongquan that is supposed to be the matching set to xiaohongquan. but folk masters in the area who have this longer set, dont even practice the shorter xiaohongquan at all, because it is embedded in this older set. it was extracted and simplified.

if you have the longer set, you dont even need today's xiaohongquan.

in all likelihood the xiaohongquan practiced today is a modern simplified version of laojia hongquan which is the original xiaohongquan, rather than being the matching dahongquan it is mistaken for. that original dahongquan from li sou is yet to be found.

also very obvious is how in today's xiaohongquan the inside crescent turns all the way around to face the audience (manners for performance). then the scorpion tail turns the set around. while the laojia hongquan keeps sideways after the inside crescent, so when the scorpion tail swings it turns the set in the opposite direction of xiaohongquan.

what this causes is at the end of the set, xiaohongquan has to do an awkward turn around after the final gongbu palm thrust to face the audience again to finish. while laojia hongquan is already facing forward, because it doesnt turn around to face the audience with the earlier inside crescent. so there is no need for the awkward turn around at the end.....

there was an enormous topic on hongquan, which can be found in the archives. we covered all the many chinese hongquan styles in detail.

[Eugene]

LFJ,

Do you mean that like they made Tai Chi 24 Yang style and 42 from the 103 original Yang style, so did they do with,
24 Xiao Hong from ( believe ) Main Xiao Hong Quan, and the Main Xiao Hong Quan from this Lao Jia Hong Quan.

In this, the name Xiao only is put because its a smaller version of Lao Jia ?

It gets all mysterius to me :)

[LFJ]

LFJ,

Do you mean that like they made Tai Chi 24 Yang style and 42 from the 103 original Yang style, so did they do with,
24 Xiao Hong from ( believe ) Main Xiao Hong Quan, and the Main Xiao Hong Quan from this Lao Jia Hong Quan.

yes, basically.


In this, the name Xiao only is put because its a smaller version of Lao Jia ?

It gets all mysterius to me :)

not exactly, the set sometimes called laojia (old frame) hongquan is the original xiaohongquan that is a matching set with a dahongquan that is missing.

nowadays people call the simplified version of the set still xiaohongquan and mistakenly call the longer version dahongquan.

in fact, the longer version is the original xiaohongquan, and the original dahongquan has not been found yet.

[LFJ]

Do you mean the form that starts off with spear hand-kick-spear-cresent,turn-spear-kick-pu bu slap floor-etc ?

yes, and this opening section of laojia hongquan has a sequence that is repeated at the end of xiaomeihuaquan / ditang meihuaquan.

1. the point is you are forced to turn around at the end of xiaohongquan, which you need not do in laojia hongquan because you dont turn to face the audience with the earlier kick. you may find a more comfortable way to turn around, but from a left gongbu turning right 270 from the front foot is just awkward.

2. xiaohongquan/s i've learned have many more transitional moves than others. but still lack intermediate movements. xiaohongquan doesnt even have a single xubu in it. whereas laojia hongquan is much more dense in technique, beyond just transitional moves and stances. particularly in the ending sequences after the gongbu tuizhang section.

if you put the two sets side-by-side and compare from the start you can see where things are missing. xiaohongquan will stop moving and have to wait for laojia hongquan to get through all the different techniques before it ends up in the same posture, then move on.

3. in laojia hongquan its a different take on a very old rouquan sequence, these later forms just retained the rouquan way of doing it.

4. thats just personal preference.

5. its a simplified set.

regarding the technique before xiexing and panzhou, in laojia hongquan it depends on who does it. most people dont even do the second half of the set with panzhou. but the transition there both times is a more complex hand technique.

anyway, regarding its history, what do you have that puts xiaohongquan in the song dynasty, and by whom? whats your story with its development?

[Eugene]

@RenDaHai,

I am now very intrested in your unusual Xiao Hong Quan :)

Ive seen Shi Yong Wen do some moves of Xiao Hong Quan in a video where he also spins the dragons tail real fast.

Does your Xiao look a lil like the one that Shi Guo Song performes ?

[RenDaHai]

@ Eugene

My version is not from Yong Wen. And no it is nothing like guosong. Really there is nowhere on line you can see a version even close to as detailed as my masters version.

@LFJ

1. I agree, that version is a little awkward. Try turning of the rear foot of gong bu and moving back towards the center, turning hands a little like in da hong quan after dan bian. You need it this way because this way the Panzhou/ xie xing sections face opposite directions and balance.

2. Xiao Hong quan has MANY xu bu's..... They are also transitional, and dependant on personal body structure. The first move after yun ding is a turn to xu bu, then into tui zhang. It can be done in many different ways depending on intended application, but this is the way it starts in my version. Qixing is a continuous push and can stop in gong bu, or it can move through ding bu and into XU BU, it can even continue into the next gong bu. In some versions of Da hong quan since it is considered larger frame, qixing is done as xu bu (left foor foreward, right hand foreward). YOu will notice it is referred to as 'da qixing' in the lyrics instead of 'xiao qi xing' in XHQ. This is the meaning. Plus may others.

3. Yes XHQ should contain rou quan like shenfa and bu fa in places.

4. Tui Zhang is an interesting thing. Notice how the first TuiZhang is done from a high stance, with the hand prepared high (yun ding), the second TuiZhang is done from ShouRen, the lowest, smallest stance. Beautiful structure. These techniques cannot possibly be done the same way, one is from low, one from high. They are the same technique, yet done in a different frame, a different move in my form. As are later ones. The beauty of Tui zhang is somewhat spoiled in Laojia. The hook hand moving through is a specific technique. The more important aspect of tuizhang is not thinking of it as just a palm strike, but as placing the palm in the centerline of the body, as the standard guarding hand. The meanings of tui zhang are too many, but the hand guarding the centre is paramount. This is not so clear in laojia.

Regarding complexity and transitional stances; If we really split it up the sequence between the two xie xing stances; This is normally done as 3 stances, after xie xing its shou ren, kick, xie xing, right? In my version there are 9 stances in between the end of xie xing and the formation of the second xie xing. Of course it can be smoothed out, but if you don't know the transitional elements you a losing the better part of the form.

The complexity is added depending on the person doing the form, and how well they understand the technique. On the outset Laojia is no more or less complex, it is almost the same, but with a couple of extra moves at the beginning (which i think spoils the symmetry). The laojia form is certainly less profound. And contains more unusual versions of techniques and stances suggesting it is from a certain family style rather than Zhenchuan.

Regarding History;

My chinese is good on some domains, and less accurate in others. Historical terms is not a strong point. I have heard the history of Xiaohong from several older masters now, all put it in song di. My current master has given me the best story (especially regarding its formation) i have heard yet, but there will be holes in my translation and i don't want to misrepresent it. So until i can get a good translation of exactly what he said i hesitate to repeat it. Never the less they all say it dates back to song. Yuan is right after song though right?

[Eugene]

@RenDaHai,

Do you follow the lyrics of the Main Xiao Hong Quan, I believe the 54 postures ?
You also say that there are alot of Xubu`s in there, ( these are empty stances right )http://www.kungfufever.com/shaolin/stances/shaolin_statue_04.jpg

Just wondering because i think i havent seen a xubu in xiao hong so far, maybe i overlooked some videos i am not sure. But If a form is based on one technique, i guess you can put everything in it in a way :)

[Lucas]

@ Eugene

The first move after yun ding is a turn to xu bu, then into tui zhang.

this is the same for me.

[Eugene]

here is a old thread where Mr. Sal shows a rear Xiao Hong lyric,

I really have to make some progress on my chinese haha

http://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=43738&highlight=Xiao+Hong+Quan

[Lucas]

gene also has a link in that thread to a xiaohong lyric thread

[RenDaHai]

Yeah, these lyrics are good,

However you need to understand that for example 'shang bu tui zhang' step foreward push palm, is ambiguous in the lyrics.

Simply stepping foreward has too many applications to be mentioned, and can contain a great deal of intermediate stances to teach these lessons.

Xu bu is sometimes a solid stance but also sometimes an intermediate step.

And as i say, you could do seven stars in xu bu and it would still be absolutely correct.

No, most videos don't show this, as usually they do all tui zhangs the same with the same intermediate, often lifting the knee. Again a great technique, but there are many more variations.

[LFJ]

Xiao Hong quan has MANY xu bu's..... They are also transitional, and dependant on personal body structure.

i was actually talking about solid xubu in the set. it appears in laojia hongquan as not just a transitional step, but not in xiaohongquan.



Regarding History;

My chinese is good on some domains, and less accurate in others. Historical terms is not a strong point. I have heard the history of Xiaohong from several older masters now, all put it in song di. My current master has given me the best story (especially regarding its formation) i have heard yet, but there will be holes in my translation and i don't want to misrepresent it. So until i can get a good translation of exactly what he said i hesitate to repeat it. Never the less they all say it dates back to song. Yuan is right after song though right?

yes, a lot happened during the overlap between song and yuan dynasties.

did the history of the set not have anything to do with li sou creating the matching da and xiao hongquan sets at least? was it something different altogether?

the history stories are what i'm interested in here, because something being more profound and symmetrical is somewhat a matter of preference and doesnt indicate a time frame for development.

anyway, we discussed various hongquan in detail elsewhere on the boards here. this is what sal canzonieri had to say regarding laojia hongquan:


This is what Shaolin currently says, because they are going by what they have in possession today (which they had lost after 1928 and regained from outsiders in the 1980s).

The only thing I am disputing is that:
Yes, the longer set from Li Sou is definitely half of the pair of the Da Xiao Hong Quan. But, no one is really sure that the Xiao Hong Quan set that we see there today is the real one from back in Li Sou's time.
It seems to be a shortened version of the longer version, and since most people no longer practiced the longer version, this shorter version took its place.
But one of the original pair set was lost.
People are researching this.

In other regions of Henan, such as Dengfeng and elsewhere, where they practiced Shaolin sets from before Shaolin was burned down, they also practice the longer Lao Jia Hong Quan (Da Hong Quan) set, same as the few people left at Shaolin that know it do the set.
But none of them do the modern day Shaolin Xiao Hong Quan set, when they do, they added it later. In Shanxi, Shaanxi, Emei, they do a different Xiao Hong Quan set entirely.

Did the Xiao Hong Quan set come from WuGunLun's reintroduction of Shaolin sets to the monastery in the 1980s? If so, it is known that he and his son gave them abbreviated versions of the sets.

by the way, rendahai, may i ask who is your current master? and your nine stance transition between the two xiexing sounds interesting. is it possible to explain?

[Eugene]

@RenDaHai,

Would the old masters pay more time to internal kung fu then external kung fu ?

[LFJ]

rendahai,

we're talking about the history of li sou's da/xiaohongquan, as currently held by shaolin, and specifically the laojia hongquan set.

no one said there wasnt a lot practiced in shaolin all throughout the last century. thats obvious. anyway, we're talking specifically about the history of laojia hongquan vs xiaohongquan.

awaiting your new history story.


my current master (whose name i can't reveal, you won't have heard of him anyway)....

....On to my xiao hong quan, I can't list the moves openly on the forum, sorry.

:rolleyes: okay

[RenDaHai]

Yeah,

Sorry for the rant guys, and being mysterious, my bad! :)

Its kind of in theme with the thread though you see, lots of people think there was this void during the cultural revolution where no kung fu was practiced, so they say stuff like only xiao/da hong quan were practiced. I want to dispel this rumor as it leads people to judge current shaolin. Guess i don't need to lay it out for people on this forum though.

I'll get the history as I can; HOwever it will still not solve the Laojia problem... specifically it doesn't list the exact moves of xiaohong quan so...

The only way we can ascertain which is the older version is by analysing the form itself.

This can be done;

If we take any move, such as shu shen: This one move is an entire form of footwork in itself which apears in many shaolin forms. However it is an absolutely neccessary part of this footwork that one leg is left 'free', 'weightless'. In the classic xiao hong quan this is the case, in laojia both legs bear the weight together and clumsily. It is my opinion that this is from some specific family style rather than the correct lineage. Same goes for the hands in this form, spreading the wings as in laojia is a more specific use. The hands closing the body is more general, and can also be referreded to as shrinking the body, even when done in gong bu. Some versions of laojia use the correct hand posture, but wit different emphasis.

I can go into detail on why the leg needs to be free, or the hand positioning, but i think it is uneccessary... A similar analysis can be performed on every move in the form and comparison to other sets to show that the classic xiaohong quan is more likely to be the older.

Knowing the history won't help us choose..... More to come on it soon though.

P.s @eugene, Yes the older masters would have spent the vast majority of their training on internal aspects.

[LFJ]

Sorry for the rant guys, and being mysterious, my bad! :)

i was just giving you a hard time. :)


A similar analysis can be performed on every move in the form and comparison to other sets to show that the classic xiaohong quan is more likely to be the older.

it is also possible that the similarity comes from xiaohongquan taking the place of laojia hongquan, and following that, other sets conformed to the methods of xiaohongquan as being the standard and mother of other sets.

xiaohongquan is so played with now. you see it done slowly like rouquan. you see it done in the very low frame. you see it done in small frame as ven. shi dejian, wu nanfang, and others do it now.

i dont think this comes from years of development, but simply from people trying it with different elements, because its such an open form. most masters dont care if you change newer sets, because they are not very old anyway.

anyway, if laojia hongquan is not the matching set (dahongquan) but a later expansion of xiaohongquan, where did it come from? why does it have an entire first section before the xiaohongquan routine starts?

i have noticed portions of that first section also appear in other older shaolin sets, such as meihuaquan, which was developed around the same time (song dynasty) and abbreviated into xiaomeihuaquan in the yuan dynasty- same time that these xiao/dahongquan sets come from. but now, the section only exists in the old frame, laojia hongquan.


Knowing the history won't help us choose..... More to come on it soon though.

not only the history is important, but that in conjunction with tracking where it is and has been practiced, by whom, and what else they have in their training.

[RenDaHai]

Hmm

I expect forms as old as these have been in a constant state of evolution, it could be that xiao hong and lao jia both spring from one common ancestor, much like humans and chimps... Never the less i would attest to xiao hong being the greater form. At the least we can say it hasn't changed since the painting of the mural of shaolin (because wugulun pai's xiao hong is the same in all but shenfa). And is much more widely practiced than lao jia. The only places i have seen lao jia practiced here in dengfeng they refer to it as Da hong quan, because it is simply xiao hong but with larger frame movements. It could be that these were created simultaneously as da xiao hong quan i suppose. I was of the opinion that Li sou created Da hong quan, not xiao hong quan, and that the forms were not so closely related. That xiao hong was the older form.

As to the beginning meihua section...I am a little skeptical as to the Meihua men forms.... Meihua in early shaolin seems to be a completely different skill set,... I have some suspicion as to the origin of the current meihua forms. Need to investigate that further. I know we have some historical info, but it doesn't relate to the actual movements. I would like to see some more meihua forms....

I have several histories from different teachers, but they are by way of oral tradition, i suspect Sal's research may be more accurate.

The reason i really liked the history by my current master is that he made a real narrative story out of it, with different characters and quotes and so forth. It is this that i can't translate.... Still roughly the history paralells that of taizu chang quan. To say that Xiao hong quan is 'mu quan', one refined from many. From a meeting of 18 men pai, refining the technique from 18 styles into one form. THis is in the time of zhao kuang yin.

The whole part of this era, Taizu quan etc is very complicated....and mixed up, and so many styles like to put their origin at the meeting of the 18 styles.....Can't really say for sure. But I can at the least assure you that it is the opinion of a lot of old masters that Xiao hong quan is the most important shaolin skill set. And that it is possible to derive other sets like tongbei and pao quan from xiao hong quan alone.

By the way;

As to Taizu chang quan you will be pleased to know I am in contact with Liu Hui Zhen (liuzhenhai's son). If you remember we had some suspicions about his 'xiao tongbei' and its relationship to shaolin taizu quan and possibly Da Tong bei quan. He's out of town for the next month, but when hes back I should prepare some questions for him.


Also did you know that shaolin Da tong bei has 6 forms?! New info to me.... Have you seen any of the others?

[Eugene]

@RenDaHai,

I am a little cunfused, because a lot of story`s and video`s I read and see involve enormus hard practice for hours and hours on a day, in the morning, midday and evening.

for example,

A piece of a story from master Zhu Tian Xi, wich you guys know already maybe.

It takes more than twenty minutes to finishing practicing the twenty-four Lu Tan Tui entirely, and it has to be with a certain physical strength. When finishing the practicing ten rounds Tan Tui, one is already sweltering profusely. Some even cried for not being able to finish the practice completely. Teaching Kungfu for nearly forty years, I have never seen a person who can finish practicing twenty rounds successfully in one breath except one of my Shidi (male formally apprenticed after another to a master worker to learn a skill). My Shidi was dripping with perspiration from practicing twenty rounds Kung-fu, all of his clothes was soaked with sweat. Clothes off, his sweat was splashing down

He had to do each round of Tan Tui 20 times, and at the end doing about 1000 movements also in the story, it make me thing i had to also practice for hours and hours....

And afcourse, my first movie that I saw was the 36th Chambers of Shaolin, wich involvles also alot of physical training, so I was always focussed alot on the hard parts, not that I am any good at it..

And the Shaolin Songshan training at WushuGuan on You Tube. ( I guess the top is to take a bull down ! )

Maybe 10 % is external and 90 internal ?

And Xiao Hong Quan is like this 10 % in postures and perfect shape, but 90 % is missing if internal ways are not in it maybe ?

A link to the website, that begins on page one :)
http://shaolinrevelations.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=9&Itemid=7

[RenDaHai]

@Eugene

Off course training must be hard!

Although you can train internally from the begining the external moves must also be mastered. The old masters off course trained hard like this, but in their old age, when their basics were mastered they did not continue with this level of external training. This is just at the begining.

But internal training is even more difficult;

Try standing in Gong bu for 2 hours without flinching, all the while not listening to the pain in your body and searching for the void between thoughts.... My master had a disciple who stood in gong bu tui zhang for 21 hours..... That is harder than 20 full rounds of tan tui. This is some of the internal training.

Or meditating for 3 days straight, without losing posture or focus. I would rather practice 20 rounds of tan tui than to meditate for 3 days anytime.

[Eugene]

21 hours in Gong Bu Tui Zhang...that is some training, very interesting. Internal training is much harder to see it like that you describe.

Its unbelieveble in some ways, somehow i get the idea that to understand Xiao Hong Quan, and do it according to all above, it takes more then 10 years...

I watched a Wugulun Xiao today, and saw 3 Xubu`s in it, I havent seen much of wugulun, i dont understand it at all.

[RenDaHai]

It takes a long time certainly, but there are no definate times, it depends how well you train.

Wugulun Xiao hong quan is very good. It is difficult to understand the body mechanics (shen fa) at first, but it is a very good skill.

Try doing a move, say an uppercut. Do the move without moving your body, just your arm, see what it feels like?

Now do the same move but don't move your arm at all, only move your body. Try and get the same range of movement. This way the arm still moves, and does so with even more weight behind it. Its a simple example but this might help you understand why Wugulun pai move the way they do. In reality it is a combination of both movements and there is a lot more to it than that, but its a start.

[LFJ]

At the least we can say it hasn't changed since the painting of the mural of shaolin (because wugulun pai's xiao hong is the same in all but shenfa).

same as what? i see them nowadays doing it several different ways, all with the same small frame shenfa, but they seem to be moving free-form. each person seems to have their own way. and not only that, but i've seen some of them do completely different techniques added in that dont appear in others'.


I was of the opinion that Li sou created Da hong quan, not xiao hong quan, and that the forms were not so closely related. That xiao hong was the older form.

you mean dahongquan as in laojia hongquan, created by li sou in late song/early yuan dynasty, much later than xiaohongquan as an amalgamation of styles from early song dynasty?


As to the beginning meihua section...I am a little skeptical as to the Meihua men forms.... Meihua in early shaolin seems to be a completely different skill set,... I have some suspicion as to the origin of the current meihua forms. Need to investigate that further. I know we have some historical info, but it doesn't relate to the actual movements. I would like to see some more meihua forms....

well, the xiaomeihuaquan/ditangmeihuaquan is an abbreviated version of the original meihuaquan set. whereas the dameihuaquan was created fairly recently. i'm not sure how closely related all its weapon sets are to the early meihuaquan.

but the xiao/ditang meihuaquan has an opening sequence which is done in datongbiquan and others. it starts from the xubu following the gongbu danbian at the beginning datongbiquan, all the way up to the mabu one-two punch.

then the ending sequence of this meihua set is the opening sequence to laojia hongquan, which then flows into classic xiaohongquan.


As to Taizu chang quan you will be pleased to know I am in contact with Liu Hui Zhen (liuzhenhai's son). If you remember we had some suspicions about his 'xiao tongbei' and its relationship to shaolin taizu quan and possibly Da Tong bei quan. He's out of town for the next month, but when hes back I should prepare some questions for him.

yes, particularly the lyrics for one of his xiaotongbiquan sets match up with the lyrics to the second road of taizu changquan, a supposedly lost form, as it is listed in the shaolin encyclopedia. maybe bring that up.

i havent seen other datongbiquan sets, but i've heard of there being more, and felt there naturally should be more to it. that question is probably also related to those mysterious xiaotongbiquan sets. they're all connected somehow....

[Eugene]

@RenDaHai,

Ik took me some days, but I have a very small idea now, about the movements of wugulun, i tried what you said.
I am wondering if one knows 2 kinds of * shen fa * in your words, they dont get mixed up in a set ?