Page 2 of 16 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 232

Thread: What was known about Shaolin Kung Fu prior to the 20th century?

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    DengFeng
    Posts
    1,469
    Quote Originally Posted by falkor View Post
    After 1904 Kung Fu was no longer being practised at the temple; the modern day Wu Shu Monks are not descended from the original monks nor do they learn the same Shaolin Kung Fu that was being taught at Shaolin prior to 1904. What was the original Shaolin Kung Fu? ?
    Not sure where you get this from. It was indeed practiced after 1904. There has never been a gap of someone practicing.

    Never the less if we look at the Forms for example. The forms now are the same largely as the ones practiced by my master in the 1930's with some simplifications. He learned from LiGenSeng who in turn learned in Shaolin post 1904. This is all very well known if you go to the area.

    But second to that in every village they practice Kung fu and have done for centuries. There are many villages. They have 1500 forms in Song shan. Yet they all practice largely the same technique. The form XiaoHongQuan appears in almost every sect.

    I leanred one from Luotuoyuan village and it is similar to the current one, a bit longer with more techs. I learned from the nan yaun pai in another village separated from shaolin by 360 years. Yet their form although different was the same sequence overall and contained many of the same techniques. I learned in Mogou village (seperated by 500 years). Different form but the same technques throughout.

    The main techs are; XieXing, PanZhou, ChongTianPao, Huitouwanyue, Wozhen, Gunquan, Yunding, QiXing, SHizidazhangzui, SHushen, KuaHu, DaHushi, Kuaichui, DanBian..... etc etc.

    True these appear in every style of longfist. But in song shan they have a unique look and they follow certain principles not held by all the others. the same names are used throughout the villages even though their kung fu is seperated by hundreds of years. And they all attribute it to Shaolin usually to JinNaLuoWang.


    Last edited by RenDaHai; 12-28-2012 at 04:57 AM.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    ᏌᏂᎭᎢ, ᏥᎾ
    Posts
    3,257

  3. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by RenDaHai View Post

    Monkey? Yes. Speciality of old masters. Shaolins monkey looks not much like a monkey however. The technique is imported from the XingYiPai some time ago and converted to Shaolin style. My master practices it and it was the first he learned back in the late 20's in his village (v. close to shaolin). It was from shaolin and earlier from Xingyi.
    Do you practice any of the traditional monkey style? Seems hard to find...when I want to see a traditional monkey form I always come across loads of wushu nonsense...how old is that system, why doesn't there seem to be many younger masters teaching it?

  4. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by RenDaHai View Post
    In the 1930's Shaolin was not an isolated temple. Literally outside the door was a market and an entire village called Shaolin. And just next to it a village called Tagou. Along with many more small hamlets in the gullies of the mountain. All of these are now gone because of regulation. They all practiced Kung Fu.

    There was never a gap with no Kung Fu practicing monk in the temple. There were times when the only ones were very old but still knew Kung Fu.People from the villages would still train in and nearby the temple.

    Monkey? Yes. Speciality of old masters. Shaolins monkey looks not much like a monkey however. The technique is imported from the XingYiPai some time ago and converted to Shaolin style. My master practices it and it was the first he learned back in the late 20's in his village (v. close to shaolin). It was from shaolin and earlier from Xingyi.

    Mantis? Yes and no. NO complete mantis system was practiced there. But there are Shandong forms which resemble mantis in technique. There are even sets called Mantis, but these are later interpretations of mantis technique mixed into shaolin style. SO kind of.

    Drunken? Yes and No. When the movie came out in 1982 the old monks still in the temple were incensed (yes there were monks there at the time and they used to teach the local kids). They said that Shaolin monks do NOT drink. And that shaolin has no drunken Kung Fu. Is there any in SongShan however? Yes, there are zUi Luohan forms. And BaXian forms (though these are clearly of taoist origin). ZhongYue Miao once had a thriving Ma.
    A lot of what you are saying sounds based on legends or is controversial. I think the villages that surrounded the temple and associated themselves with Shaolin Kung Fu is something of a modern phenomenon since the release of Jet Li's Shaolin Temple. Kung Fu techniques were certainly being developed in villages, say, 10-30 miles away, but I think it's unlikely that the buildings in the immediate vicinity of the temple complex go back to ancient times; they were most likely built and formed villages attached to temple as a way of accommodating modern visitors of the past 30 years.

    According to Shahar's research the temple was in ruins in 1904, Kung Fu was no longer being practised there, and in 1928 burnt for 40 days. Before the Qing army arrived it had already fallen under the attack of several bandits. So there was definitely a gap in the teachings and lineage. All the masters would have fled to other parts of China and Taiwan, but then that's where the legends start to come in, including the foundation of the Southern Shaolin Temple from 5 escapees and several burnings (both north and south); let's not delve into that area.

    What are your sources for Monkey and Mantis? Shahar's evidence for Drunken style is sound.
    The monks broke 2 rules: they drunk and they fought (for the Emperor). This is why they lasted for so long, whilst other Buddhist monasteries were shut down. Sometimes being a rebel will get you further in life than trying to be too nice and honest, etc.
    Last edited by falkor; 12-28-2012 at 05:34 AM.

  5. #20
    Thanks LFJ...I actually have seen this video before, I think from this forum...is this the only set or are there more to the system?

  6. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by RenDaHai View Post

    But second to that in every village they practice Kung fu and have done for centuries. There are many villages. They have 1500 forms in Song shan. Yet they all practice largely the same technique. The form XiaoHongQuan appears in almost every sect.

    I leanred one from Luotuoyuan village and it is similar to the current one, a bit longer with more techs. I learned from the nan yaun pai in another village separated from shaolin by 360 years. Yet their form although different was the same sequence overall and contained many of the same techniques. I learned in Mogou village (seperated by 500 years). Different form but the same technques throughout.

    Have you ever compiled a video of the various Songshan versions of Xiao Hong Quan? If so I'd love to see it...

  7. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by RenDaHai View Post
    Not sure where you get this from. It was indeed practiced after 1904. There has never been a gap of someone practicing.

    Never the less if we look at the Forms for example. The forms now are the same largely as the ones practiced by my master in the 1930's with some simplifications. He learned from LiGenSeng who in turn learned in Shaolin post 1904. This is all very well known if you go to the area.

    But second to that in every village they practice Kung fu and have done for centuries. There are many villages. They have 1500 forms in Song shan. Yet they all practice largely the same technique. The form XiaoHongQuan appears in almost every sect.

    I leanred one from Luotuoyuan village and it is similar to the current one, a bit longer with more techs. I learned from the nan yaun pai in another village separated from shaolin by 360 years. Yet their form although different was the same sequence overall and contained many of the same techniques. I learned in Mogou village (seperated by 500 years). Different form but the same technques throughout.

    The main techs are; XieXing, PanZhou, ChongTianPao, Huitouwanyue, Wozhen, Gunquan, Yunding, QiXing, SHizidazhangzui, SHushen, KuaHu, DaHushi, Kuaichui, DanBian..... etc etc.

    True these appear in every style of longfist. But in song shan they have a unique look and they follow certain principles not held by all the others. the same names are used throughout the villages even though their kung fu is seperated by hundreds of years. And they all attribute it to Shaolin usually to JinNaLuoWang.


    Please see my previous reply about the gaps; the info comes from Shahar's book.

    How much of this martial arts you are describing as having been learnt from those villages resembles modern Wu Shu? If you are talking about Wu Shu forms then everyone knows that this is not the same as original Shaolin Kung Fu (whatever that consisted of).

    What is the name of the system/style and associated techniques that your master was learning in the 1930s? Unless you can really prove that LiGenSeng studied at Shaolin (north or south?) it doesn't really help with identifying pre-20th century Shaolin Kung Fu. A lot of teachers claimed to come from Shaolin to enhance the prestige of their Kung Fu. That's why so many famous styles claim Shaolin to be their origin, but you have to take it with a pinch of salt. Only credible 18th/19th century sources can really be taken seriously IMO.
    Last edited by falkor; 12-28-2012 at 05:51 AM.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    DengFeng
    Posts
    1,469
    Quote Originally Posted by falkor View Post
    A lot of what you are saying sounds based on legends or is controversial. I think the villages that surrounded the temple and associated themselves with Shaolin Kung Fu is something of a modern phenomenon since the release of Jet Li's Shaolin Temple. Kung Fu techniques were certainly being developed in villages, say, 10-30 miles away, but I think it's unlikely that the buildings in the immediate vicinity of the temple complex go back to ancient times; they were most likely built and formed villages attached to temple as a way of accommodating modern visitors of the past 30 years.
    Its based on the fact that I lived in DengFeng for almost 7 years. I speak chinese and I went to many villages asked them and leanred from them and I know their styles.

    The area had flowing water. There are villages ALL over shaolin. Actually in the last 30 years is when they were removed because of the movie they wanted to make it a more peaceful place. These are ancestral villages. They are every side of the temple all within a few miles. And a load more 10 miles away, again many who have their own unique system. Mogou village for example has the Mogou Pai style practice within their village for 500 years and until a new road was finished last year was a very hard to get to place.

    Jut look at google maps of the shaolin temple and note the villages nearby. Many are too small to be listed, but there are still a lot that are.


    Quote Originally Posted by falkor View Post
    According to Shahar's research the temple was in ruins in 1904, Kung Fu was no longer being practised there, and in 1928 burnt for 40 days. Before the Qing army arrived it had already fallen under the attack of several bandits. So there was definitely a gap in the teachings and lineage. All the masters would have fled to other parts of China and Taiwan, but then that's where the legends start to come in, including the foundation of the Southern Shaolin Temple from 5 escapees and several burnings (both north and south); let's not delve into that area.
    The topic Shahar covered badly needed Original research. He made an analysis of known sources, he didn't find new ones. He needed to go there and find manuals and learn the history of the surrounding area and villages.

    The masters did NOT flee to Taiwan!! Why would they go that far?? They literally just went to the next village. In most cases they returned to their home villages since most of the monks were local anyway. These are mainly within 10 miles. Shaolin has several sister tempes where monks from shaolin were accepted in times of need.

    The monks went and spread their knowledge in DaJinDian, in Wen cun, Luotuoyuan, BaiYunGOu, GuanDi miao, MoGOu, Ruan, yanShi, ChanJiaDian, DongJinDian etc. etc. All close by. Some of these villages actually have or had dedicated Kung fu practicing halls with indented floors just like in the temple.

    I don't know where this idea of monks fleeing to taiwan comes from, it is crazy. Do you know how far that is? Look on a map. They were mainly local and went home.

    Quote Originally Posted by falkor View Post
    What are your sources for Monkey and Mantis? Shahar's evidence for Drunken style is sound.
    The monks broke 2 rules: they drunk and they fought (for the Emperor). This is why they lasted for so long, whilst other Buddhist monasteries were shut down. Sometimes being a rebel will get you further in life than trying to be too nice and honest, etc.
    There is an allowance by the Emperor to eat meat and drink wine. However they didn't necesserily use this. The Emperor though important was not buddha. They didn't break buddhist rules because he told them to. All the best lineages I encountered contained no drunken Kung fu. it would be popular if it was there. It is possible it was practiced but not a major style.

    The history of Mantis is fairly well known to the Mantis forum, ask them. There are some forms in shaolin but not a complete mantis style. Some i know exist but are the speciality of masters who came from Shandong originally.... No small wonder that their style would look like mantis.

    Monkey exists though is rare. In the case of the video above this is Shaolin YuanHou Quan but I know from the very master performing it that it comes from XIngYiPai distantly.

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    DengFeng
    Posts
    1,469
    Quote Originally Posted by falkor View Post
    Please see my previous reply about the gaps; the info comes from Shahar's book.

    How much of this martial arts you are describing as having been learnt from those villages resembles modern Wu Shu? If you are talking about Wu Shu forms then everyone knows that this is not the same as original Shaolin Kung Fu (whatever that consisted of).

    What is the name of the system/style and associated techniques that your master was learning in the 1930s? Unless you can really prove that LiGenSeng studied at Shaolin (north or south?) it doesn't really help with identifying pre-20th century Shaolin Kung Fu. A lot of teachers claimed to come from Shaolin to enhance the prestige of their Kung Fu. That's why so many famous styles claim Shaolin to be their origin, but you have to take it with a pinch of salt. Only credible 18th/19th century sources can really be taken seriously IMO.
    Shahar didn't understand the interplay between the villages and Shaolin. There is no gap in the transmission of knowledge.

    Modern Wushu is built from the famous styles of Hong,Hua,Pao,Cha Quan. Every style in northern China resembles these fairly closely. They didn't make it up from scratch.

    Here are Shaolin forms from Shaolin and Uniquely Shaolin;

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NrLSCa16no DaTongBeiYiLu

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQbZsgJ-pb4 DaHongQuanYiLu

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xub2tLJYzRY XiaoHongQuanYiLu

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O85HqfdCU74 TiShouPaoChui

    Practiced today as they were before.

    LiGenSeng was a very famous MA in Dengfeng. Speak to any old man in DengFeng and he will know his name and tell you stories. Speak to any old man in any of the villages nearby shaolin and he will know him. This is much better evidence than any written document. It cannot be faked.
    Last edited by RenDaHai; 12-28-2012 at 06:16 AM.

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    DengFeng
    Posts
    1,469
    Quote Originally Posted by bawang View Post
    because there is no such thing as shaolin kung fu. its all imported from outside.
    If you mean in terms of the techniques, then you are correct, the techs are not unique and exist in many styles. But then which style is the original? I am sure even before ShaanXi Hong Quan there were others. None can really claim to be the original.

    In terms of is there Shaolin Gong Fu? Yes there is. ChanWu is Shaolin. It is in many other places but I think Shaolin gets the credit for it.

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    DengFeng
    Posts
    1,469
    Quote Originally Posted by Kellen Bassette View Post
    Have you ever compiled a video of the various Songshan versions of Xiao Hong Quan? If so I'd love to see it...
    It is top of my to do list.

    I am going to release a video of all 4 roads of Shaolin Temples XHQ and then videos of 3 other village XHQ I think are of interest.

    I have to do the performance myself and get someone to film it and find a nice location first though. Videos don't exist of most of this stuff.

  12. #27

    Thumbs up

    RenDaHai, your description of the villages surrounding the Shaolin Temple together with an accurate history of their role in connection to the temple is an interesting topic in itself, so we should save that discussion for another day? I'm still trying to find out some basic information about original Shaolin Kung Fu whose history has been distorted by modern Wu Shu as well as myths and legends.

    The significance of Taiwan is that it was outside Chinese rule and mostly unaffected by the ban on Martial Arts, etc. At specific periods in history there may have been nowhere safe in China to practise openly and record it in manuals. Possession of a manual meant death.

    Shahar refers to villages and admits he would save that for a modern historian. It's not that he didn't understand; it was simply outside the scope of his book.

    You believe the history of the temple in terms of knowledge remained unbroken for hundreds of years, but many people will not agree with you (goes against Shahar's sources) due to the political events that the temple and monks got caught up in. So we'll have to agree to differ there, though I appreciate you sharing your opinons.

    LiGenSeng was a very famous MA in Dengfeng. Speak to any old man in DengFeng and he will know his name and tell you stories. Speak to any old man in any of the villages nearby shaolin and he will know him. This is much better evidence than any written document. It cannot be faked.
    Oral traditions cannot always be trusted, but I can see you believe in them, which is your prerogative. For sceptics like me, we need written documents.


    Does anyone else have anything to add in terms of pre-20th century Shaolin Kung Fu based on credible written sources? You can see that it's not an easy question to answer, hence Shahar did not have anything to add at the current time. However, for those knowledgeable about Shaolin Kung Fu, they may well know about some Qing training manuals or have other sources at hand that Shahar did not consider for his book in terms of the scope. I've not posted this topic because I thought it was a difficult question; I'm a complete novice and don't have the expertise to research the subject at even foundation level. I'm still hoping somebody out there does have an answer to my question who has managed to research the basic facts about Shaolin Kung Fu? I'm not asking anyone to prove the existence of the Southern Shaolin Temple or anything like that.

    For modern history of Shaolin I can see there is room for lots of arguments with the possibility of people getting upset, as a lot of the discussion challenges oral traditions and family beliefs. If we can keep this discussion limited to facts about the formation of modern Wu Shu then that would be great. There's so much to the history of Shaolin, which is why I'm trying to keep these questions as closed-ended as possible.

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    ᏌᏂᎭᎢ, ᏥᎾ
    Posts
    3,257
    @RDH

    I don't seem to remember. Are your four roads of Shaolin XHQ from different sources? Of course not counting the 1st which I know you've probably covered with a number of folks.

  14. #29
    Modern Wushu is built from the famous styles of Hong,Hua,Pao,Cha Quan. Every style in northern China resembles these fairly closely. They didn't make it up from scratch.

    Here are Shaolin forms from Shaolin and Uniquely Shaolin;

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NrLSCa16no DaTongBeiYiLu

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQbZsgJ-pb4 DaHongQuanYiLu

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xub2tLJYzRY XiaoHongQuanYiLu

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O85HqfdCU74 TiShouPaoChui

    Practiced today as they were before.
    You believe modern Wu Shu is just like the original Shaolin Kung Fu? I thought it was commonly agreed upon that the government adapted it for show after a long period when Kung Fu practise was banned in China. Again, facts in the form of well-researched books or articles should be able to settle this part of the debate. It comes down to my question about who was consulted when Wu Shu entered the competition realm.

    Do others believe that Wu Shu today is what Shaolin monks practised in the past?

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    ᏌᏂᎭᎢ, ᏥᎾ
    Posts
    3,257
    I don't think that's what RDH said...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •