The link ?

[Xian]

Since I gotten deeper into the Shaolin Quan I saw many interesting things. In the beginning the maybe most wellknown Shi De Yang in case of Shaolin Boxing. I mean well known to generall Chinese Martial Arts puplic

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=po5LCDTVK7s

When you see him he seems to be extremly well trained his eyes seem to stare power and a certain pureness. On his DVDs or demonstrations he seems not to just run the form and finish. But somehow I feel there is something missing. For example it seemed for me at somepoints that in a few forms he was doing them and for a second he wanted to go another way and stopped and then went the way it was shown in the later video.
But nevertheless his movments are very correct you can easily see what he is doing. But somehow I miss bodywork. This is extremley strange for me as it doesnt seems like he is doing the work wrong.

I think there are some people that make the forms like he does, of course they are not trained like he is.

Then there is for example Shi Guo Song
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1dFKKw9V5zc

When I seem him I see him performing differently as for example Shi De Yang. Of course everyone is different, but when you look closer there are differences


Then the third as you may think its Wugulun:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9WUNpNQzlw

Much Shenfa, partwise very different looking forms that are shown. And also one thing which I rareley see in todays demonstrations. Mimic, some people find that may ridicoulus but for its a part of the mind set like when do you Monkey fist, imaging to act like a monkey.

The fourth is the very less stuff of Hai Deng. But for me it goes completly out of the Xiao Hong Quan, Da Hong Quan etc.. stuff...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=au9M2y3FFA8&feature=channel_video_title


My question is, how do they all link ? I mean they all seem to come from Shaolin.But in the same time to be all different. Esspecially I am interested in the role of Wugulun in it. Ive tried to search here on the forum for disscusions but I didnt found what I was looking for.


Kind regards,
Xian

[LFJ]

On his DVDs or demonstrations he seems not to just run the form and finish. But somehow I feel there is something missing. For example it seemed for me at somepoints that in a few forms he was doing them and for a second he wanted to go another way and stopped and then went the way it was shown in the later video.
But nevertheless his movments are very correct you can easily see what he is doing. But somehow I miss bodywork. This is extremley strange for me as it doesnt seems like he is doing the work wrong.

It's simply because the forms taught on the DVDs are bare-bones versions of the forms made for public, they differ from the way a legit student would learn them. Hence, there are places where he almost does it the right way, and sometimes the way he does the forms seem forced.

Almost all Chinese masters in different styles "mark" the forms they put on video or teach on instructional DVDs. Sometimes a key movement is missing which makes the whole form go in the opposite direction. Lots of things are done differently, important body mechanics and details are glossed over or left out, etc..

As for Shi Guosong, Wu Gulun lineage, and the rest in Shaolin, they do things differently because they are from separate lineages within Shaolin. That includes secular masters in the lineages as well. It is not that everyone in the monastery learns the exact same way. It differs from master to disciple. The Wu Gulun lineage is not that old at all. Wu Gulun (Shi Jiqin) was a monk in the mid 1800's and really developed the style he received from his master, hence he is considered the 1st generation master in the lineage.

As for Shi Haideng, he was not from Shaolin. He only stayed there for short periods. He was a martial artist and Chan monk from Sichuan province.

[JamesC]

Isn't Shi De Yang pretty much the Traditional Songshan Form God? I was under the impression that he was basically the Living Traditional Shaolin Sequence Library.

I'd do whatever that guy does.

Also, I would assume he does a LOT of forms and has to retain a LOT of movements. I wouldn't be surprised if it sometimes gets jumbled for a second.

[LFJ]

Yes, Suxi was called the Shaolin Boxing King, and he was the Young Shaolin Boxing King. It's just that the versions of forms taught on the DVDs are not the way a legit student of his would learn them, or the way he usually does them. They are either way dumbed down basic versions or have missing or jumbled moves and sequences. Yet still there are people who do the forms like this and claim to be his students. :rolleyes::p

[RenDaHai]

Shaolin has a set of principles which all these various sects adhere to. However some interpretation varies between them. But largely, all these sects practice the same shaolin, they merely exaggerate different elements.

Even within 1 school you can see as much variation as between these sects. SOme people like to focus on ShenFa (body mechanics), some people on BaoFaLi (explosive power), some people on ZhengQue (precise form) along with other elements.

In reality shaolin should contain all of these elements, but it is hard to put these all together in harmony.

I could perform XiaoHongQuan 3 times and focus on a different element each time and it would be hard for some people to tell it is the same form. It can look completely different.

Because every individual master has their own characteristics they kind of embed these on their students. In terms of Shaolin Technique, all the sects are quite similar, they just perform a little differently.

[sha0lin1]

I remember when I first started with my Master I was very confused by this. I would learn a form and then look it up on You Tube and see sometimes 5 different versions of the same form. I asked my Master about this and he gave me the same answer as LFJ and RenDaHai. I guess coming from other schools, such as I did, where all the forms are standardized, students new to Songshan Shaolin often have a hard time with this since they think that there is a "correct way" to do it. People can be so single minded about stuff. However, it was hard on my Master because when he was coming up and training he would tell me that whoever the Master was that was teaching, you had to do the form their way and it was always slightly different. Now that I am teaching in my own school, my students also notice this and ask me the same questions. Sometimes I get other students from some of the other Monks schools and they compare what they have learned to how we teach a particular form. They are then able to add to what they know already or enhance our form with these other methods.

[Matthew]

My question is, how do they all link ? I mean they all seem to come from Shaolin.But in the same time to be all different. Esspecially I am interested in the role of Wugulun in it. Ive tried to search here on the forum for disscusions but I didnt found what I was looking for.


Kind regards,
Xian

Hey Xian,

I have not anywhere read that Wugulun well developed his style any differently, but that his lineage is merely distinguished by his name Wugulun because he left the ShaoLin monastery and led a secular life to prevent the loss of his knowledge at the main temples 1920's destruction.

Since then we have seen commercialization/standardization of countless forms. I believe the name Wugulun stands to first distinguish his lineage as a pre-1920's Shaolin authentic lineage and secondly to give honor to the one who prevented it's loss at the temple.

If Shi De Jian (currently "wugulun" lineage holder under SuXi) is any indicator of why they practice the various traditional forms in the 'softer' and 'smoother' fashion they appear to, we can take his quote that it is only through the soft that power is generated. In other words, hard external movements are not the path to developing power. Also he even gives a seemingly commical take on a common longhand technique seen in countless shaolin forms noting that it is often done incorrectly- being fully extended and done with too much external hardness. He says "Doesn't it look good? Being fully extended?" From my view he is sort of poking fun at the traditional assumption that the forms should have a certain "Look" to them even beyond functionality. (although it should also be noted fully extended arms are more easily broken at the elbow joint XD).

an except with english subtitles can be seen here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6X9opF8MCiE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6X9opF8MCiE)

Also the 'Wugulun' lineage does not practice punches in the way we see most performed with full arm extension and horizontally. Their punch is taught as he demonstrates the two-arm extension there (obviously with one arm doing the motion though).

[LFJ]

I have not anywhere read that Wugulun well developed his style any differently, but that his lineage is merely distinguished by his name Wugulun because he left the ShaoLin monastery and led a secular life to prevent the loss of his knowledge at the main temples 1920's destruction.

Since then we have seen commercialization/standardization of countless forms. I believe the name Wugulun stands to first distinguish his lineage as a pre-1920's Shaolin authentic lineage and secondly to give honor to the one who prevented it's loss at the temple.

http://www.shaolinwugulun.org/view.asp?id=10
(http://www.shaolinwugulun.org/view.asp?id=10)
"Wu Gulun and Zhan Mo fought their way out of the Temple,past the 18 temple guards,and retreated to a small temple called Shi Guo Si where Zhan Mo taught Wu Gulun the art of Xing Yi Ba,which is regarded as a high level gongfu skill. Wu Gulun trained in many other Shaolin gongfu skills including Qing Gong (light skill) and Chi Gong (breath control). He developed Xing Yi Ba to the highest level and is now regarded as the First Generation Master of this form of gongfu."


If Shi De Jian (currently "wugulun" lineage holder under SuXi)

He's the 4th Generation lineage holder from Wu Gulun under Zhang Qinghe, not Shi Suxi. (1 Wu Gulun - 2 Wu Shanlin - 3 Zhang Qinghe - 4 Shi Dejian) Suxi was his Buddhist refuge master when he ordained.

[rett]

He's the 4th Generation lineage holder from Wu Gulun under Zhang Qinghe, not Shi Suxi. (1 Wu Gulun - 2 Wu Shanlin - 3 Zhang Qinghe - 4 Shi Dejian) Suxi was his Buddhist refuge master when he ordained.

I may be wrong here, but as I understand it Zhang Qinghe symbolically returned the lineage to Shaolin temple and the transmission of lineage was done by Suxi. There is a well-known photo of this occasion. So what both of you are saying accords with the available English language info, in different ways.

[LFJ]

I may be wrong here, but as I understand it Zhang Qinghe symbolically returned the lineage to Shaolin temple and the transmission of lineage was done by Suxi. There is a well-known photo of this occasion. So what both of you are saying accords with the available English language info, in different ways.

Being the monk to officiate the lineage transmission ceremony doesn't make Shi Suxi an inheritor of the lineage. That's what I mean to clarify. The teachings of the lineage went directly from Zhang Qinghe to Shi Dejian. So Shi Dejian is not a lineage holder of Chanwuyi "under" Shi Suxi.

What was transmitted in the ceremony was the Chanwuyi lineage papers, written by Zhang Qinghe and passed onto Shi Dejian via the ceremony officiated by Shi Suxi.

http://a367.yahoofs.com/hkblog/ZgLh7QmeAwBj_hMdH5Zg8mDe_33/blog/ap_20100823115906775.jpg?ib_____D5LLQa9L_

[Matthew]

Thanks LFJ. I would say anyone who practices and studies what they've been transmitted is "developing" their style. What I said, however, was that I had not read anything to indicate he developed his teachings in a manner different from what he had learned.



Hey Xian,

I have not anywhere read that Wugulun well developed his style any differently, but that his lineage is merely distinguished by his name Wugulun because he left the ShaoLin monastery and led a secular life to prevent the loss of his knowledge at the main temples 1920's destruction.

This is more to Xian's question of what the "missing link" is in regards to Wugulun style. It is important to note if Wugulun changed the style, or merely passed it on from Shaolin. This is important to note that if he did not ultimately alter the internal fundamentals of what teachings he received- that his lineage is still authentic pre-1920's-destruction Shaolin transmission.



He's the 4th Generation lineage holder from Wu Gulun under Zhang Qinghe, not Shi Suxi.

You have implicated that I said Shi De Jian was learned from Abbot Su Xi. My use of the word "under" meant under who the head abbot was at the time.
According to Agnes Chan's ChanWuYi book, While Master Xing Xing (Zhang Qing He) was his teacher and the one to transmit the teachings that came from Wu Gu Lun, while Abbot Su Xi was the one who approved the lineage document from Master Xing Xing and the one who officially passed it down to Shi De Jian. (Bottom half of this page (http://www.chanwuyi.org/showroom/model/T0152/templateCustomWebPage.do?webId=1233929329351&editCurrentLanguage=1235069892126&customWebPageId=1285499875625454238)).

More importantly, let's keep it relevant to Xian's topic.



So Shi Dejian is not a lineage holder of Chanwuyi "under" Shi Suxi.
Since Abbot Su Xi approved the lineage document on behalf of the entire Shaolin temple and then granted it to Shi De Jian, I would say the word under is acceptable here as long as it is not implying that SuXi was transmitting the knowledge/practice, but the official lineage recognition. I don't know anything about abbot Yong Xin's affiliation/take with Shi De Jian and if he is has already or plans to further document the teachings Shi De Jian has received.


In any case, it is an interesting question Xian poses. Where do these teachings Wu Gu Lun inherited meet the teachings of other Shaolin Teachers? I know Salcanzonieri has been doing alot of work on tracing history of various movements/sets individually.. and he has an extensive number of articles he has written on various origins... In terms of having solid factual information.. I think this has been a difficult point in that alot of it has been burnt down repeatedly and even the written bits we have are sometimes questionable in reliability.

I personally have been most interested in the practice of Shi De Jian and Wu Nan Fang in their soft approach to power generation. The soft movement approach to internal skill seems to be a common theme in various shaolin styles. I.e. Rou Quan and it's similarly derived and various other schools that practice in a softer fashion (And any other taiji-like older shaolin forms). Also note, I'm talking about softness in practicing their form, not in contact, sparring, application study, etc.

I'd be curious further as to anyone's experience with their direct methodology/teachings in terms of Nei Gong and a comparison against the more well known "Shi" monks such as those Xian mentioned.

[XiaoHong]

To Rendahai,

Hi Rendahai this is Eugene with a diff nick,

I was wondering about you could demonstrate 3 kinds of xiaohongquan,

Do you mean that you use 3 kinds of lyrics ? Or 3 types of styles ? wugulun, regular and another one ?

Its just that for example, when you hold or embrace the moon at chest level as to number 2, its hard to imagine for me that there are 3 ways of doing that stance.. :) maybe in stances, but still you have to hold or embrace the moon, and it would be seenable lol.

I still wonder about your xiaohongquan, as it is not to see on internet.
btw, you never use dingbu s in your xiao training right ?

Much Greetings XiaoHong :)

[Lucas]

hi just curious, if that is the case, what do you replace dingbu with?

[LFJ]

Thanks LFJ. I would say anyone who practices and studies what they've been transmitted is "developing" their style. What I said, however, was that I had not read anything to indicate he developed his teachings in a manner different from what he had learned.

This is more to Xian's question of what the "missing link" is in regards to Wugulun style. It is important to note if Wugulun changed the style, or merely passed it on from Shaolin. This is important to note that if he did not ultimately alter the internal fundamentals of what teachings he received- that his lineage is still authentic pre-1920's-destruction Shaolin transmission.

Not sure why he would be considered the 1st generation master of the style, if he had not further developed it. Surely he was not the only or first one to practice it to the highest level.

Whether he developed upon the style or not doesn't change the fact of its authenticity as pre-1920's transmission. Many monks at the turn of the century were still developing upon styles and creating new forms, such as Abbot Henglin and Zhenxu. I don't think that deauthenticates their lineage or styles.


You have implicated that I said Shi De Jian was learned from Abbot Su Xi. My use of the word "under" meant under who the head abbot was at the time.
According to Agnes Chan's ChanWuYi book, While Master Xing Xing (Zhang Qing He) was his teacher and the one to transmit the teachings that came from Wu Gu Lun, while Abbot Su Xi was the one who approved the lineage document from Master Xing Xing and the one who officially passed it down to Shi De Jian. (Bottom half of this page (http://www.chanwuyi.org/showroom/model/T0152/templateCustomWebPage.do?webId=1233929329351&editCurrentLanguage=1235069892126&customWebPageId=1285499875625454238)).

When you say Shi Dejian is the 4th generation master from Wu Gulun under Shi Suxi, it sounds like Shi Suxi is also part of that lineage, as the 3rd generation master.

There really doesn't need to be any "approval" from Shi Suxi, as far as passing the lineage goes. The lineage was transmitted outside of Shaolin to secular masters before. Zhang Qinghe was only symbolically bringing it back to Shaolin Monastery because Shi Dejian was a monk there.

So Shi Suxi "accepted" the document and officiated the ceremony to represent Shaolin Monastery acknowledging Shi Dejian as a lineage heir, something Zhang Qinghe was not in a position to do. It's not as if Shi Suxi entered that lineage and could have passed it to anyone of his choosing. It was still Zhang Qinghe transmitting to Shi Dejian. As you see in the picture, both Shi Suxi and Zhang Qinghe are handing the document to him. Shi Suxi merely represents the lineage returning to the monastery.

[Matthew]

Not sure why he would be considered the 1st generation master of the style, if he had not further developed it. Surely he was not the only or first one to practice it to the highest level.

Whether he developed upon the style or not doesn't change the fact of its authenticity as pre-1920's transmission. Many monks at the turn of the century were still developing upon styles and creating new forms, such as Abbot Henglin and Zhenxu. I don't think that deauthenticates their lineage or styles.

I'm also very curious about this LFJ. Perhaps rett could give us some insight from his experience with Wu Nan Fang.

From my reading- the ChanWuYi book by Agnes Chan (with writing help from Shi De Jian) does not make mention of Wu Gu Lun as the founder of it. Infact at the link I provided in last post- it does not even mention it by the name of "Wu Gulun Gong Fu." I think it may be simply a marketing tool for Wu Nan Fang's academy. As it is called by Shi De Jian and the official lineage paper (seen at the link in my previous post) it is simply called Shaolin Temple (Yonghuatong branch) ChanWuYi and it recognizes many in the lineage Prior to Wu gulun (Ji Qin).

I don't feel Wu gulun could have Founded a new style as many of the forms Wu Nanfang/Shi De Jian does are documented and known as authentic Shaolin traditional forms.

It should also be noted that in Chinese documentaries it mentions that Wu Nan Fang is the 师弟 Shi Di to Shi De Jian. Meaning that Shi De Jian is his GongFu/ChanWuYi senior. My only thinking is that Wu Nan Fang is marketing more of a school of 'Wu' (combat/martial) and calling it Wugulun Kung Fu. Again- rett may have more insight into this for us.

As for Xian's topic on these different videos..

I do not know if they are much different from external appearance, but I am highly interested in what methodology/instruction/way they teach the Nei Gong development and how it is integrated in the moves. This could be the difference in the links- as I have no experience with any of these 'Shi' monks in question- I can only speculate and hope others will chime in their bit.

From what I understand- variation in external movement is far less important for comparison of these forms than is the internal development NeiGong integration in the movements. At that, I would imagine monks that have developed their NeiGong do not always play the form at Full speed as we often see Shi De Yang and others play it. I would imagine they only do this for show (although I also do not know why they are interested in showing- perhaps to interest new generations in tradition??) and for practicing some sort of fa jin-esque bit.

I don't imagine these monks would start beginners off with such fast movements as it would be very difficult to grasp understanding of neigong.


. As you see in the picture, both Shi Suxi and Zhang Qinghe are handing the document to him. Shi Suxi merely represents the lineage returning to the monastery.
I think we are both agreeing with different words!

Further, I am trying to keep this relevant to Xian's question of how these various forms connect. My belief is that the we would need people with experience with each teacher to compare their learnings in regards to the essential NeiGong and the associated theories.

[Matthew]

Also I am interested in the Full arm extensions in punches that Shi De Yang and others are often seen doing- which does not appear in ChanWuYi practice of Shi De Jian nor Wu Nan Fang.

In one documentary (either of WuNanFang or Shi De Jian) they note that they do not punc with arms fully extended at all. In my travels I have met a monk who taught me a similar thing from what he seemed to note as 2 significant points- 1 was that there is a loss in connection to the hand and 2 that your arm will be easily broken.

In fact, In the link I posted from a youtube video translation http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6X9opF8MCiE
Shi De Jian explicates a little bit on this Full Arm length thing. I believe it may have a legitimate connection to Qi Flow in one way or another- but I am far from developed enough of a practitioner to know this for a fact.

If there's interest I'd also be willing to look through the videos I have from Youtube/Chinese sites for the documentary bit that mentions how the "punch" is done in "Wugulun gong fu" or Shi De Jian's ChanWuYi lineage.

[RenDaHai]

To Rendahai,

Hi Rendahai this is Eugene with a diff nick,

I was wondering about you could demonstrate 3 kinds of xiaohongquan,

Do you mean that you use 3 kinds of lyrics ? Or 3 types of styles ? wugulun, regular and another one ?

Its just that for example, when you hold or embrace the moon at chest level as to number 2, its hard to imagine for me that there are 3 ways of doing that stance.. :) maybe in stances, but still you have to hold or embrace the moon, and it would be seenable lol.

I still wonder about your xiaohongquan, as it is not to see on internet.
btw, you never use dingbu s in your xiao training right ?

Much Greetings XiaoHong :)

Hey Eugene,

What I meant before is I could do exactly the same xiao hong quan, with the same lyrics, but I could perform it the first time focusing on ZhengQue clean movements, the second on ShenFa body mechanics and the third on BaoFaLi explosive power. Although an identical set of movements it would look so different that it would be hard for some people to even see it is the same form.

If I can do this it is easy to see how the differences come about between lineages.

My XHQ does contain Ding Bu, Shrinking the body is Ding bu. ALthough one must note that ding bu is simply the smallest possible Xubu. Contrary to modern wushu the lower a Xubu is the closer the feet are together until at maximum depth DingBu appears. What is important is the orientation of the hips. Square or sideways. (or 45 as in some sects).

Typically Embrace the Moon is done lower than Chest level. Their are variations depending on your reason for doing this stance, but it does not appear in the XHQs of the other sects.

I have lived here a long time and I have made it a mission to explore as much about XiaoHOngQuan as possible since it is the MuQuan mother fist of Shaolin.

In terms of Xiyuanpai XHQ I have learned it more than 10 times so I have a lot of Variations.

Second to this I have learned the Nanyuan XHQ, also the Mogou Pai XHQ and the LuoTuoYuan XHQ. SO I could demonstrate 4 completely different XHQ in terms of Lyrics. Also Er lu XHQ etc.

To be really caled Shaolin the major variations are XHQ their are the following forms; Xiyuan XHQ 1,2,3,4 Nanyuan XHQ 1,2,3,4 Mogou XHQ 1, Luotuoyuan XHQ 1 and I beleive 1 more in Gansu province. The Nanyuan lineage seperates from Shaolin Temple 360 years ago and the Mogou lineage closer to 500 Years ago. Comparing these with the current XHQ is fascinating.

But I digress......

[LFJ]

From my reading- the ChanWuYi book by Agnes Chan (with writing help from Shi De Jian) does not make mention of Wu Gu Lun as the founder of it. Infact at the link I provided in last post- it does not even mention it by the name of "Wu Gulun Gong Fu." I think it may be simply a marketing tool for Wu Nan Fang's academy. As it is called by Shi De Jian and the official lineage paper (seen at the link in my previous post) it is simply called Shaolin Temple (Yonghuatong branch) ChanWuYi and it recognizes many in the lineage Prior to Wu gulun (Ji Qin).

Yes, Shi Dejian is often called the 18th generation heir to Shaolinsi Yonghuatang Chanwuyi from Shi Zhengdao, but he's also named as the 4th generation heir from Wu Gulun in the same lineage.

So why would Wu Gulun be named as another starting point if he did not make a significant contribution to the art? I'm not saying he founded a new style of course. They do many of the common Nanyuan sets. But he must have made such a significant contribution to the development of Xinyiba and their distinct way of performing their sets, that he is now considered a 1st generation master of the system in their lineage.

[RenDaHai]

Yes, Shi Dejian is often called the 18th generation heir to Shaolinsi Yonghuatang Chanwuyi from Shi Zhengdao, but he's also named as the 4th generation heir from Wu Gulun in the same lineage.

So why would Wu Gulun be named as another starting point if he did not make a significant contribution to the art? I'm not saying he founded a new style of course. They do many of the common Nanyuan sets. But he must have made such a significant contribution to the development of Xinyiba and their distinct way of performing their sets, that he is now considered a 1st generation master of the system in their lineage.

THis is an interesting question. In My travels to the North west of Shaolin (the Road towards Luoyang) I have encountered people of this lineage, but not usually referred to as Wugulun pai. But there are many people with this name. ALso I beleive there was another man named WuGuLun this century who also practiced this style. SO many its very confusing. Many people think I am reffering to this younger Wugulun when I mention the name. Apparently his KungFu was awesome.

Whenever I ask about this style I usually refer to WuShanLin. He had many disciples and is more well known. Wushanlin is also a name that also has several famous people connected with it, so it is very difficult to know whats going on.

ALso XinYiBa has been Somewhat Hijacked by Dejian... I'm sure his XinYiBa is excellent, but it is one of many that exist in Shaolin and the surrounding areas and not unique to his style.

[rett]

Perhaps rett could give us some insight

I'm learning from you guys. Interesting thread, thanks everyone:)

[rett]

THis is an interesting question. In My travels to the North west of Shaolin (the Road towards Luoyang) I have encountered people of this lineage, but not usually referred to as Wugulun pai.

Is this in the mountains or on the plains on the other side?

[RenDaHai]

Is this in the mountains or on the plains on the other side?

Both. Wushanlin had a lot of disciples.

[XiaoHong]

Thx for your anwser Rendahai,

Cool that you can learn so much there.

I also want to know as much about Xiaohongquan as possible, only am not as lucky as you to travel all around China, maybe someday I wlll.

Can you watch you tube yet ?

here is a monk doing Xiao Hong, a new video to me, ( from 5:40)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZqnS93pLcl4&feature=results_main&playnext=1&list=PLD0D0E4CD748DFD58

Peace Eugene

[XiaoHong]

btw, this monk I mentioned, I think his name is Chi de Chao..

[Royal Dragon]

an except with english subtitles can be seen here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6X9opF8MCiE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6X9opF8MCiE)

Also the 'Wugulun' lineage does not practice punches in the way we see most performed with full arm extension and horizontally. Their punch is taught as he demonstrates the two-arm extension there (obviously with one arm doing the motion though).

He's not doing a punch here. This is a take down move called a "Plow Hammer". Both arms will extend (not fully though) to allow for the expansion of the dantien during the power issuing that knocks them over.

[Royal Dragon]

Yes, Shi Dejian is often called the 18th generation heir to Shaolinsi Yonghuatang Chanwuyi from Shi Zhengdao, but he's also named as the 4th generation heir from Wu Gulun in the same lineage.

So why would Wu Gulun be named as another starting point if he did not make a significant contribution to the art? I'm not saying he founded a new style of course. They do many of the common Nanyuan sets. But he must have made such a significant contribution to the development of Xinyiba and their distinct way of performing their sets, that he is now considered a 1st generation master of the system in their lineage.

Because he was the first generation of that specific lineage to teach outside the temple walls. It's no more complicated than that.

[Matthew]

He's not doing a punch here. This is a take down move called a "Plow Hammer". Both arms will extend (not fully though) to allow for the expansion of the dantien during the power issuing that knocks them over.

Hey Royal Dragon,

I found it interesting that instead of punches, where the hand is horizontally flattened and released as a more or less external strike single point energy release, Shi De Jian's lineage, (according to RenDaHai) greater Nanyuan pai, and traditional schools do not often practice the punches. In the case of Shi De Jian and Wugulun there are no punches in their styles- and there is even a video from one of them noting that the [hammer fist] is the real way of punching.

I had found a brief discussion on the technique here:

http://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=55505&page=5

Note:


In a lot of the more traditional schools the vast majority of strikes are done this way. Its generally referred to as a hammer. Its kind of like doing a downwards hammer fist but using it in all directions. Its not with the 'pinky' but with edge of the hand and parts of the palm. Its generally quite blunt. If you get it right you can hit a rough brick wall full power without hurting yourself, which you can't do with an ordinary fist. Generally used in powerful movements. Can strike anywhere.

If you watch more of Wugulun schools videos (dejian, wunanfang etc) you will see they almost never use a fist, they nearly always use this type of hammer, even on 'straight' punches.

By extension- the more takedown-esque nature of it aligns with their said practice of non-violence.

A Fist is more so a direct violent outburst aimed at direct physical damage to their body whereas a takedown, redirection, or dissolving of the opponents energy is more a method to diffuse the attacker's aggression.
Not to hurt them, but to show them forgiveness (which would be hard to do in striking them). "It is very harmonious and natural" according to Wu Nan Fang to practice in this manner.

I personally believe this aligns with the greater point of practicing Kung Fu in it's buddhist context.

Edit:
I also believe the fully extended comment Shi De Jian makes may refer more to a vulnerability by extending your arm so wide open. Even if you leave some bend in it. Perhaps someone like RenDaHai could go ask WuNanFang or Shi De Jian for us XD

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

Hey Royal Dragon,

I found it interesting that instead of punches, where the hand is horizontally flattened and released as a more or less external strike single point energy release, Shi De Jian's lineage, (according to RenDaHai) greater Nanyuan pai, and traditional schools do not often practice the punches. In the case of Shi De Jian and Wugulun there are no punches in their styles- and there is even a video from one of them noting that the [hammer fist] is the real way of punching.

I had found a brief discussion on the technique here:

http://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=55505&page=5

Note:



By extension- the more takedown-esque nature of it aligns with their said practice of non-violence.

A Fist is more so a direct violent outburst aimed at direct physical damage to their body whereas a takedown, redirection, or dissolving of the opponents energy is more a method to diffuse the attacker's aggression.
Not to hurt them, but to show them forgiveness (which would be hard to do in striking them). "It is very harmonious and natural" according to Wu Nan Fang to practice in this manner.

I personally believe this aligns with the greater point of practicing Kung Fu in it's buddhist context.

Edit:
I also believe the fully extended comment Shi De Jian makes may refer more to a vulnerability by extending your arm so wide open. Even if you leave some bend in it. Perhaps someone like RenDaHai could go ask WuNanFang or Shi De Jian for us XD

One also has to consider Shaolin's core long fist came from the military when Zhao Kuang Yin sent his General's there to document thier arts. So with that consideration, breaking the opponent actually is the original way of things.

It may not be the Shaolin way, but you have to wonder where they got the idea that punching trees full forc, as being a good idea, came from. I submit those skills were originally reflective of the true nature of these arts, before Shaolin "Pacified" them.

So the right way to punch, is going to be based on what time period you are looking at, and if your focus is on Shaolin philosophy, or the philosophy of the art's origin.


As for all the take down apps, that actually makes sens in a battle field context, especially if armor was being worn. If the opponent was off of his feet, that bought you time to apply crippling actions to his joints, like stepping on ankles with your full body weight or pulling a boot knife to finish them by poking it into a soft spot not protected.

These actions are well preserved in non Shaolin systems that exist outside of China, like Kuntao Silat. The arts that migrated there were not tempered by moral constrictions of temple life.

I'll submit, even in armed encounters, if one got inside the weapon range, a take down is the fastest way to neutralize the threat of the weapon. One cannot fight, while one is in free fall.

I think all the take downs were the original use.

[RenDaHai]

Hey team,


I will have to apologise and recount some of my earlier comments from another thread.

The hammer method of striking is one I have learned in many schools, but I actually can't say for certain if they use this method in Wugulun Pai. It LOOKS like it in the videos, but since I don't have as much experience with Wugulun pai I cannot say for certain. Some people also do this move but still hit with the knuckles, they just do so in an arcing motion instead of straight out. They may well do this instead.

@Matt, unfortunately it is not so easy to just walk into a school and ask the teacher.... And despite walking through SanHuangZhai many times I have yet to meet Shi DeJian.

With the straight arm thing.... Few people lock the arm out completely when striking, it is more vulnerable so even a hard block can damage it. But saying that if you don't extend enough a punch will do little damage. Too bent and it doesn't retain structure and absorbs too much of the force it wants to give out. Its a fine balance. Every technique is a balance of risk and reward. The general Character of the Shaolin style is to use bold moves, fast and powerful.

[Matthew]

@Matt, unfortunately it is not so easy to just walk into a school and ask the teacher.... And despite walking through SanHuangZhai many times I have yet to meet Shi DeJian.


I suppose I forgot about the whole lineage respect- thing. :cool: That's cool about the San Huang zhai visits you've made, judging by the videos I've seen- the view from any of those mountains there looks to be absolutely breathtaking!

Also- while a single video is not telling in any complete aspect- WuNan Fang can be seen using a hammer fist-esque for a take down at ~ 31 Minutes. Either that or it is the hammer fist that comes out of the classical shaolin form closing. http://vimeo.com/18911353

(I believe there is also in one of these videos somewhere a comment by either Shi De Jian/WuNanFang/their student that it is 'the true way of punching' to paraphrase- I will try to find that clip though and as of now I do not know where I remember seeing it as my collection of Shi De Jian and Wu Nan Fang clips probably make up my largest of my martial arts folders of saved videos on my computer.)

[bawang]

He's not doing a punch here. This is a take down move called a "Plow Hammer". Both arms will extend (not fully though) to allow for the expansion of the dantien during the power issuing that knocks them over.

shi dejian is talking about single whip in the video. you are making sh1t up.

the way you guys obsess about form, about position of the hands in shaolin quan, like a bunch of chinatown weekend warriors disgusts me. where do you get the balls to disrespect shaolin kung fu like that? where?

you guys talk about shaolin kung fu like you are talking about choy lee fut or wing chun. i want to vomit.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

shi dejian is talking about single whip in the video. you are making sh1t up.

the way you guys obsess about form, about position of the hands in shaolin quan, like a bunch of chinatown weekend warriors disgusts me. where do you get the balls to disrespect shaolin kung fu like that? where?

you guys talk about shaolin kung fu like you are talking about choy lee fut or wing chun. i want to vomit.

You are a silly man.