Luohan Quan

[LFJ]

and also about Taizu Chang quan if you look accurately he says it originates (not being directly created) from Zhao Kuangyin, who made a style of his own experiences.

Actually he said; "According to legend this Taizu Changquan was trasmitted by the first emperor of the Song Dynasty, Zhao Kuangyin. In those years, Zhao Kuangyin learned boxing in the Shaolin Monastery for many years and summarized the boxing methods of many eminent Shaolin Monastery monks to create his own set of unique boxing style." (形成自己一套独特的拳术风格)

Besides, I've heard him retell this legend many times in person. It's just the common legend that Zhao Kuangyin created and taught the set himself.

[LFJ]

one resource i can say for now, Deyang in his series, quotes from Shaolin temple manuals that the set he demonstrates, which is Encyclopedia's 1st road, is the one created from those Qigong sets, and tells the story from those manuals he mentions until even creation of Xiao Luohan quan and later other sets from that.

I looked at the video again. I don't see where he mentioned any manual that he was quoting from...?

He was retelling the common legend of the evolution of Shaolin martial arts, from seated meditation, to qigong, to full moving boxing sets. That's assuming all Shaolin boxing came from the monks themselves.

He also says it led to things like Hongquan, Tongbiquan, and Zhaoyangquan, which we know is just legend. We know the individual history of these systems doesn't quite go like that.

i like Deyang's accuracy when he talks about history. in such cases, where they are quoting from historical records, i prefer to trust them.
HOWEVER, history is always doubtful and so every possibility must eventually be considered. that's the way of research!

I don't know what historical records you imagine he was quoting from. I'm sorry to say, instructional videos are not a place for researching accurate history or even form. It's mostly for enthusiasts. So you generally give a little introduction on the creation legend, then show a version of the set. It's rarely if ever the history and details of the set you'd pass to legit students.

[Xian]

http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?s...9389120&type=1

Is this one of those Luohan Qi Gong Sets ?



Best reards,
Xian

[mawali]

Sal,
You have an excellent point! It has been stated that Yin Fu got most of his 'training (conditioning, jibengong, etc) from Shaolin of that era so I can see how he was able to transform Shaolin into what we know today as his style of baquazhang. It makes sense that if one lacks a martial base (for baqua) then the learning of XXX Shaolin method can improve baquazhang practice.
One major question is 'Which specific style(s) provided that insight?

Maybe, reverse engineer the Shaolin attributes of what he learned and narrow the method (taizu, hongquan, luohan (which one???), etc

[SHemmati]

http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?s...9389120&type=1

Is this one of those Luohan Qi Gong Sets ?

these pictures are from the manual as linked. give it up! i checked it now and it's written on its cover that it's from 'Yao family of Hua mountain (華山姚氏: hua shan yao shi).'

[SHemmati]

...where he mentioned any manual that he was quoting from...?
...

"少林寺拳譜/谱" shao lin si quan pu: Shaolin Temple Kung fu Manual. sometimes they even write: "少林寺拳譜記載": ..., i.e., as 'written' in that/those manual(s). in Deyang's videos, apart from Deyang's mentions of it, it's written at the beginning of the video, when the blue cadre scrolls the written descriptions, there it says according to "Shaolin temple manual" so and so.

[LFJ]

That isn't the name of a specific text. It literally means "Shaolin Monastery boxing manuals". It's a generic term. A boxing manual could be anything. The abbot's recently published books are all called 少林寺拳谱. They are just boxing manuals, but not historical texts. I'm sure the common legends are recorded in many such manuals, but they aren't the actual history. Maybe I haven't paid attention to the right one, but I've also still not seen Shi Deyang mention any manuals in his videos.

[SHemmati]

the Blue Cadres at beginning of Deyang's videos, read them, if the description he's going to give is quoting from that manual(s), it writes it there. in the xian tian Luoahn 18 Shou video, for example, it writes it in Chinese, shaolin si quan pu. i see it. as well as some other videos. he also mentions it, and the English translation usually translates it as "...according to Shaolin Boxing spectrum" or " ...according to Shaolin sources," etc, in the videos.

as we all may know, you're right. they are a collection, a library. and Shaolin disciples talk about them as being very secret, that in every generation only a few prominent monks have the privilege to access them. and they are simply all the survived manuals written by those prominent monks of every generation. however, after the fire, the remnants were given to monk Deqian. these have been published as a multi volume book of this same name, shaolin si quan pu.

[LFJ]

the Blue Cadres at beginning of Deyang's videos, read them, if the description he's going to give is quoting from that manual(s), it writes it there. in the xian tian Luoahn 18 Shou video, for example, it writes it in Chinese, shaolin si quan pu. i see it. as well as some other videos. he also mentions it, and the English translation usually translates it as "...according to Shaolin Boxing spectrum" or " ...according to Shaolin sources," etc, in the videos.

Yes, I can see that written there in the description. I've never seen him mention any manual though. But SHemmati, "boxing manuals" doesn't refer to any specific historical text. Many boxing manuals contain common legends which we know are not historically accurate. If you believe the legends then you are of the opinion that all of Shaolin Monastery martial arts were created by the monks themselves over time, starting from seated meditation, moving to qigong, and on to full moving boxing sets. Is this what you believe? If so, then we have all the answers and we're done learning, aren't we?

other Encyclopedias compiled by individual monks, like Deqian's Encyclopedia, except in the Dian Xue and 72 secret skills (they are not secrets anymore!) are not direct parts of that library/manuals, but they only refer to those manuals in short parts and descriptions.

And yet, there are so many inaccuracies in the Encyclopedia. What sort of manuals do you think it was drawing from? It never mentions specific texts with historical weight to them. Shi Deqian got much of his information from other people who also didn't have it all. That's why it's full of historical inaccuracies which we know to be false through continued progress in research. We can't just rely on claims with vague references to "boxing manuals".

[LFJ]

True, we can some times get clues from what is said in the instructional videos. It is also good to question all possibilities to get to the bottom of things, to see where different roads might lead.

Healthy doubt is a good thing. It's just when we have various bits of historical evidence and consistent information from different sources which point to a more logical story of events, we can safely rule out common legends and other less likely options.

In the case of Xiaosihui, it was a combination of a technical analysis of the set and information about a special type of Tongbeiquan and its history in this sect that led to my suspicion, which I then had confirmed in discussion with one of the few inheritors of Zhenxu's complete teachings.

So I think in this case it is safe to say it is Luohan only by namesake. The story of a Luohan Shiba Shou boxing set evolving out of a qigong set and related to later Luohanquan material, if there is such a set, is in reference to something else entirely. I'm very confident that we can lay this one to rest. It's pretty clear and has solid proof.

[LFJ]

so, i search monks' sayings for the bits that show a promise. we cannot say anything they say is wrong.

Why not? The legend retold in those videos suggest generations of Shaolin monks created all of Shaolin martial arts themselves through a process of seated meditation leading to simple exercise and qigong and finally full moving boxing sets including all the the current styles. We can certainly say that is absolutely not true, but is simply the common legend. It has an important place nonetheless. It tells a story and gives a deeper meaning to the monastic practice of martial arts, but it's just not historically accurate. Legend and history do often overlap and a lot can be learned about actual history from certain legends, but some times we can prove legends false and shouldn't be ashamed to do so.

[LFJ]

for example, look at this videos, you'll first doubt about that if it's Luohan quan or TaiZu Chang quan, and this implies nothing but even these two seemingly totally different styles have the same core technical contents:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-2KqIMS1IU

in this case, we can conclude nothing but either Luohan quan core has been used to create TaiZu Chang quan, or TaiZu chang quan core has been adapted to make Luohan quan.

[LFJ]

so, referring to the 54 posture form, they may say that 'they've added an extra part from Pao quan to make that(!),' while regarding the analysis, the 54 posture form is the same as their Da Luohan, and if there's any extra part in the 54 posture Da/2lu Luohan quan (not its modern longer version), then the same is exactly there in their Da Luohan quan, movement-by-movement!!

No. The section at the end of the 54 posture set with Paoquan actions is not found in the Dengfeng Daluohanquan, nor in the Encyclopedia, which is Dengfeng Daluohanquan complete in section 1 & 2 with an extra section 3 that is just selected postures from the later sets in the series shown by Liu Zhenhai roads 5 & 6. Do you know what exactly is meant by the "Paoquan" actions?

The 54 posture form is of course similar to Dengfeng Daluohanquan, because they both come from the material of the full sets in the series as shown by Liu Zhenhai, in individual postures and full sequences. They are both extracts from that series, but from different times.

in reference to Xiao and Da Luohan quan date their emergence back to the great gathering of the 18 kung fu families in Shaolin temple under management of Fuju in the early Song dynasty, and say they are of the earliest styles of Shaolin quan,

Yes. Don't they all... When you don't know the history of any set, an easy solution is to just say it came from this and is impossible to confirm.

both these references call Da Luohan quan by this name, the Classic 3-section Luohan. probably, of "3 section" they mean these 2 together with the long 108 posture one.

I don't think so. They say this Daluohanquan set is also called "3-section Luohanquan" or "Laojia Luohanquan", just like the Encyclopedia calls it, which is where they probably got the information for the DVD description. It is in reference to this one set.

the more interesting thing here is that the SongShan Shaolin project (the latter links) names the last generation inheritors of Xiao and Da Luohan quan. these forms are referred to as two forms of the "Lao Jia" (old/classic) "3-section" Luohan quan that have been the Luohan style of monk Zhanju in the Qing dynasty, and then Henglin, Miaoxing, and Zhenxu. this line of generations is another evidence that they are old (Lao Jia) forms and the possibility of them to be modern extracts, is totally ruled out!

Although the back of an instructional DVD may say so, this is not true. When Shi Zhenxu came to Shaolin, he trained under Shi Henglin, inheriting the then current Xiyuan curriculum of the monastery. Yet this Luohan is not part of his heritage. He did have a 108 posture Luohanquan and other rare Luohan material I've not seen in any other sect... In any case, I don't think a DVD description is a very reliable source, especially if even the Encyclopedia is riddled with inaccuracies.

[LFJ]

What I meant was section 1 & 2 in the Encyclopedia. That's Dengfeng Daluohanquan in sequence throughout, which doesn't contain the Paoquan techniques and is different from the 54 posture set, although containing similar bits since they're from the same material.

The extra third section is made of techniques from LZH 5&6 and a bit from the end of the 54 posture competition set with the Paoquan techniques, but is still quite a different sequence. It's clearly an added section that doesn't belong to Dengfeng Daluohanquan.

[LFJ]

SO, here i became suspicious that of the '54 posture competition set' you probably mean the modern longer version of this Dejun's/Deci's 54 posture one which is an extra section longer than these Dejun's/Deci's and Encyclopedia's Da Luohan??

Nope. I say the Dengfeng Daluohanquan and the 54 posture set are both recent extracts from the fuller system shown by Liu Zhenhai. (Extracted at different periods likely last century, at least the 54.)

Dengfeng Daluohanquan is an older extract that has been popular by older teachers around Dengfeng for a longer time last century. Then there is Jintong as a more recent extract of the same system which was then extended to the 54 posture set and beyond adding Paoquan techniques and such to meet competition time limits just a few decades ago.

Then the extra section on the Dengfeng Daluohanquan shown in the encyclopedia is just another mash-up of more recent sections which was not originally part of the set.