Here is the Henning article...
Why would it be arrogant to call SanFeng a myth, when it is already known that Yang first learned from the Chens in Chen village? It is a Chen village art, the village actually exists and today still holds many of the family lineage holders?
Here is the Henning article:
http://www.nardis.com/~twchan/henning.html
The evidence is clear in terms of who learned from who.
It makes even more sense that Chen village used this system of combat to protect their village among other things.
Would it be arrogant to call Santa Claus a myth? :P
Originally posted by Malcolm
Indeed I agree. I also believe that to call SanFeng a myth is very arrogant. Indefinitely tai chi is an extremely old art form. Due to this fact and also the nature of research from china which is translated to the west. By this I mean a large number of documents being burnt, and what not. Research I am not going to go into at the moment. The research which suggests that SanFeng is not the founder is questionable. A relatively accurate why to find the truth is to look into lineage, since lineage is passed down to a selected student and is not disrupted by politics in China. Also another way to find the truth would be to go to China its self and to the village where SanFend was sad to have created this great art, thus avoiding all the *****iness between styles so predominate in the west. For example Chen style is the First style, no its Yang.
David Williams
http://www.wingchun.com
Kim sut, Lok ma, Ting yu, Dung tao, Mai jiang