Yantai Beng Bu Genesis

[MantisifuFW]

Tainan Mantis,

Perhaps because we are looking so closely to the Ling, (which I agree with you as being a creation of Master Luo or at least that he was the one to institutionalize this aspect) that we (WHF practitioners) are neglecting to include that Master Luo also taught Pi and Chi. These aspects, that of breaking apart aspects of the sets and practicing them or of Chai which approaches sparring are indeed essential for the path he laid out for the aspiring boxer to acheive mastery.

It sounds like the things you are describing in your fighting training are inclusive of these aspects. The problem is for those schools that practice only the set or just the Ling and neglect the other aspects of training.

As I see it, one can and indeed most branches of Tanglang do learn the art without the formal and systematic pursuit of the Ling of a set. What it does for the LKY HK Tanglang practitoiners is to provide as seemless a path as possible.

I believe that Master Luo's experience in the Qingwu and the times in which he was living made him extremely careful in his curriculum. Remember at that time the US, England, Japan, Germany, France and others were engaged in a unified project to wholesale discredit traditional Chinese Boxing and all who practiced through unfair and fixed competitive events, print media and social/ economic pressures. Those who pursued study of TCMA were swimming against the current, to be sure. Even Douglas Fairbane, of knife fighting fame and a respected military officer, came under ridicule for his own little known study of Chinese arts while in Shanghai.

I believe that the Ling was another way to ensure the success of the young striving martial artists and to enable organized training on a mass scale. In contrast, many schools in the past had engaged in a "weeding out" process, I believe that though still very challenging, LKY's method helped to an even greater degree to develop the student.

By the way, you wrote an excellent article on Ling and other aspects of training for the Mantis Quarterly (insert shameless advertisement here, lol).

Steve Cottrell

[Young Mantis]

Originally posted by Tainan Mantis

In our school we also learned another way to teach fighting.
When someone comes to my school to test my skill I find that it is not the ling training that allows me to win(sometimes I lose), but another method with very short drills and relies heavily on lu-lu and Fanche theory(not forms, but techniques)

I never said that we train fighting solely with the ling forms. In fact, I agree that short drills and sahn sao practice are a necessary component to fight training. It would not be efficient to practice the form applications solely with ling training. I would even say our training of sahn sao is more intense than our ling training but the ling forms add much depth to our understanding of each form and also the style as a whole.

Originally posted by Tainan Mantis

As you know WHF quotes Luo as saying only beng bu can ling.
Later WHF and others teach other ling forms.
Am I wrong here?

I do not agree with this translation and I think you mislead the other members of this forum by giving this partial interpretation of WHF's quote of LGY. In the preface to his Bung Bo book, WHF does indeed quote LGY. He states:

"Master Law often said: 'All Praying Mantis forms can be done with partners, but (consider) Bung Bo can be explained with three formats, ling, pek, and chak.'"

Perhaps you interpret this as only bung bo has the ling format. But I do not believe WHF is quoting LGY as saying there is only ling bung bo. He states that there are three ways to practice bung bo and ling is one of three formats. It can be said that here, Bung Bo is used as an example or that only bung bo has all three of these methods. But it is not clear to me that there are no other ling forms other than ling bung bo.

In addition, in 1951 WHF published a book titled, "Assorted Essays of Praying Mantis Boxing". In it he wrote an article titled, "3 Styles Originated From 1 Family". In this article, WHF writes that both LGY and Yang Wei Sun were both closed-door disciples of Master Fahn Yook Tung. Every set passed down by these two masters can be done in it's entirety with a partner just like commonly seen sparring sets of other styles and that without this knowledge, the fakes can not hide.

There is more information to support that ling bung bo was not the only ling form taught by LGY but I do not have time to get into it further at the moment.

YM

[MantisifuFW]

Young Mantis,

Thank you for the insightful post. I had completely forgotten about the passage you mentioned concerning Yang Weixin and his line (a mind is a terrible thing to lose).

When I was studying with some of his martial descendants this past summer I simply did not think to ask them about ling (I will pass this off to (1) jetlag, (2) that I was almost passing out in the 100+ temperature and (3) general exhaustion. I will make inquiries the next time I speak with them and get back with you!

I look forward to your information on the other sets! Thank you for being open with such important information.

Steve Cottrell

[Tainan Mantis]

Steve and YM,
First off, this comparison of our definition of the facts, I believe, is worthwhile to the PM community.
I think we are mostly in agreement about everything except for one quote which I have included here.

YM,
You have included in your quote from GM Luo "...but(consider)..."

Which I translated as "however" or "only"
I am not purposely trying to mislead anyone, just trying to get a better understanding.

Maybe some of the other Chinese readers can offer their opinions on the enclosed quote as the meaning seems to hinge on this single character (which I have circled-WEI).

About your quote from "Assorted Essays...." I see that it is as you say.

I believe that I can summarize your thought as the following:
-There were ling forms since before Luo Guangyu.
-They were taught to a very small group of indoor disciples.
-They are taught more openly now than in the past.

Did I get it right?

Steve,
We look forward to hearing the results of your future research with Yang Weixin's disciples.

[Young Mantis]

Tainan Mantis,

Let me first say that I did not mean that you have any intention of deceiving anyone in the forum with your comments. My comment was not to slander or attack your character in any way. You contribute much to the forum and through your posts, I can see that you are also a scholar in addition to a martial artist.

That said, let me clarify that I say you mislead fellow members of this forum because you often quote WHF under the assumption that anyone else with access to this information would interpret his writings the same way. First of all, I would guess the majority of the forum would not have access to this material so they would just have to take your word for what WHF says but as I have stated, it can be interpreted differently. You and I have shared discussions in other threads over this very matter. We read the texts differently, I think mostly because I read it being a WHF lineage descendant and you are not. There is a lot more information passed down from sifu to student than what is presented in the WHF texts.

Originally posted by Tainan Mantis
YM,
You have included in your quote from GM Luo "...but(consider)..."

Which I translated as "however" or "only"
I am not purposely trying to mislead anyone, just trying to get a better understanding.

Maybe some of the other Chinese readers can offer their opinions on the enclosed quote as the meaning seems to hinge on this single character (which I have circled-WEI).

Here again we have a difference in reading this quote. You seem to choose to stress the second line with a word by word translation. I look at the quote as a whole. I do not feel the meaning of the quote hinges on the word "wei" but you do and place your stress there. In fact, I did translate "wei" as "but" and offered "(consider)" as an alternative, hence the parentheses. I am not saying either of us is right or wrong, we simply have different interpretations of the written text.

Originally posted by Tainan Mantis

About your quote from "Assorted Essays...." I see that it is as you say.

I believe that I can summarize your thought as the following:
-There were ling forms since before Luo Guangyu.
-They were taught to a very small group of indoor disciples.
-They are taught more openly now than in the past.

Did I get it right?

I do not believe I ever said definitively that the ling forms came before LGY. Honestly, I can not know for sure. What I imply from the quote is that the forms taught by both LGY and YWS can be done as ling. Whether the forms were taught to them both that way or they together made innovations to the style while at Jing Mo I do not know. I have no idea who in that generation was taught or not taught what material. The quote only mentions these two names. I know you are a scholar and so conduct research and then make deductions based on your research. But I find it intriguing that you can take what I wrote about a quote and then feel you are able to summarize my train of thought on related matters. Nowhere in my post do I mention the points you bring up as following my train of thought and to answer your question, no, I don't think you quite understood me.

Quite honestly, I had not ever examined these texts as detailed as I have in the last few days and for that I guess I should really thank you. But I didn't make any jumps from what I read to what other people of the lineage may or may not have learnt or taught. I only know what was written, what was told to me by my Sifu, and what I have been taught by him. Ling form practice is definitely part of the WHF curriculum. According to my Sifu, most WHF lineage students would have learnt Ling Bung Bo. Those that were certified to teach certainly would have known Ling Sup Baht Sao, Ling Daw Ghong. Only a select few students would have been taught Ling Tchaap Tchoi, Ling Bahk Yuen Tchut Dhung, Ling Bahk Yuen Tao Toe,.....

I am resolved that we may never come to agree on how to interpret WHF's texts. We come from very different backgrounds and so differences of opinion of course will occur. It has been though interesting as always.

Gong Xi Fa Cai to you and your family.

Thank you Sifu Cottrell for your comments and compliments. I too lookk forward to hearing more about your experiences with YWS's lineage descendants.

YM

[Tainan Mantis]

Thanks all for the informative comments,

I think that a translation of WHF's material would be a good idea.
Seeing how much discussion there has been on the significance of one sentence this project would best be coordinated among several people.

[MantisifuFW]

Tainan Mantis,

Indeed for over five years I have been working on a comprehensive translation of the books. I am far from finished. However, as there is so much interest in them, I am working now on a primer to teach people how to read Chinese through the books, using the limited vocabulary and the Wen Yanwen style.

The workbook, intended to teach a person from no knowledge of Chinese to being able to read the movement section of a couple of books, (application sections will be later) will be available by December 2003.

I just don't have enough to do...

Steve Cottrell

[Albino_Mantis]

Hello Everyone,

I have noticed on the different boards that a number of you refer to research that you have done (are doing). First I must admit that I find that highly admirable, especially since I know from experience how difficult the research process is (different area though).

My question is, since I want to start my own research journey, how would I go about getting my hands on these different documents and information sources (since most College and public libraries don’t have it)?

Additionally, I have noticed at different times people calling to question one another’s source(s) of information. Has any though been given to contracting a PhD'ed historian to help validate the research and ensure the proper steps are followed, as well as help establish the validity of the documents being used?

I know it sounds like a lot of work, but it also appears that everyone really has the same goal in mind (thus worth the effort). If we can start putting out work(s) that follows the formal process (what you learn when getting your PhD), I believe it will start moving us all in the same direction and hopefully start clearing up some of the confusion. Plus it will provide a solid source of references for the generations that come after us.

Thanks,

Shen Bao Rui

[Tainan Mantis]

What westerner has a PHD in Asian MA history?

From what I have found there is only a handful of people on the planet doing research of this type.

They are all MArtists as far as I can see.
In the past excellent research has been done in China and Taiwan, for the most part it has not been translated into English.
Also, even in Chinese, its implications have not been fully analyzed.

Albino, what style of mantis do you study?
Seems that would be a good place to start.

[RAF]

Albino_Mantis:

If you are in your local Border's or Barnes & Noble, pick up a copy of The Journal of Asian Martial Arts. http://www.goviamedia.com/index.html

Look at the editiorial board and try contacting a few. You'll find that many hold graduate degrees, some with doctorates in a variety of fields, and you can probably locate them and write to them. Academic careers don't pay much---you buy a lifestyle and thats always an important factor to keep in mind but the work is always interesting because you determine what it will be.

Its a shame there is not more academic interest in this area and my biggest fear is that is shows of how little importance the martial arts were to China's 16th, 17th, 18th, 19th, and 20th century. However, I am seeing a lot of primary mantis data (article in past issues of JAMA on Meihua Tanglang Quan) and other findings coming to light and that could always change things.

Having said that, someone's got to do the job; why not you?

[Albino_Mantis]

Tainan Mantis and RAF thank you for your replies.

Tainan Mantis as to your quote below:

Originally posted by Tainan Mantis
What westerner has a PHD in Asian MA history?

There are a lot of PhD's in Chinese history, the person doesn't need to have specialized in MA history to be able to assist you and help you authenticate document.

I am in the process of creating my own library of resources to pull from for my personal research, but my original emphasis was not focused just on PM, so in truth I have very little information about PM.

During life, my Sifu (Lai Sifu) wasn’t too big on worrying about the history of PM or researching the origins of a set. The research he did, that he made know to me at least, was focused on the efficiency of a technique and what the possible counters were (rather useful lines of research for a MA practitioner). I do not know if he had a love for the history of PM that he just didn’t share with me (but maybe he shared with the other students), but since he has passed away I have no way of asking him.

In conversations with my other classmates, the only history they seem aware of are the old “stories” about the origin of the style and the “Who begot Whom” of the lineage. No one seems to have looked at where or when a set was added.

Originally posted by RAF
Journal of Asian Martial Arts. http://www.goviamedia.com/index.html

Look at the editiorial board and try contacting a few. You'll find that many hold graduate degrees, some with doctorates in a variety of fields, and you can probably locate them and write to them. Academic careers don't pay much---you buy a lifestyle and thats always an important factor to keep in mind but the work is always interesting because you determine what it will be.

Thank you for the idea. I will follow up on contacting them.

Thanks again,

Shen Bao Rui

[mantis108]

Personally, Chinese history and Chinese martial arts are pretty much inseperable. The scales may be different but they are connected. Of course the reasons to document dates, events, etc must appear to those who work on the documention. Many systems and styles were products of times. As we look into Chinese history we also get to see that CMA is about evolution and not creationism. For example, General Chi of Ming dynasty (1500s) documented martial arts that deemed useful for the military at the time. Styles that he mentioned were as far back as Song dynasty (906-1279 CE). Later in Qing dynasty around 1700s plenty of style flourished including Tanglangquan as we know it. Style such as Wutzuquan (5 ancestors fist) was developed out of 5 styles (Taitzu, Louhan, Damo, Monkey, and Wing Chun white Crane) related to Shaolin in one way or another. BTW Wing Chun is a county in Fujian province where General Chi stationed before. The father of the founder of Wing Chun White Crane (another Qing dynasty period creation) was said to be a Shaolin stylist. There could be a possibility that Shaolin temple's military arm was station there. Ming dynasty's military structure includes monk armies which shaolin temple monk soldiers happened to be among them. Therefore, we have the legends of Southern Shaolin, Wing Chun, etc... The famous Six Harmony Spear, if I am not mistaken, was of Six Harmony style (aka Shaolin Weitomen). General Chi studied this and taught it to the soldiers. To further this, we know that Karate came from martial arts in Fujian but the seed was planted during the Japanese pirates invasion and General Chi was there to suppress them.

All in all, I am all for reseach in CMA. If it takes PhDs to do it, by all means. I think it is about time that people take Martial Arts seriously as a study subject. If sports including dancing (I know it should be performing art ) Why can't we have PhD degree for martial arts? In fact, I think we should first start with a MA channel. Just think of all the cheezy kung fu flicks and yours truely be the Kung Fu talk show host. Just imagine the lineage feuds ... Jerry Springer, watch out!

Regards

Mantis108

[Tainan Mantis]

RAF,
Your idea of looking at the editorial board sounds good.

MA played a crucial rule in all aspects of Chinese history.
Although it was so important, it is odd that most history books don't give it its' due importance.
Problem is that most historians don't study MA. This is especially true in Asia or Taiwan.
Here MA has/had a strong connection with Anti government, criminal organizations.
Though this has been changing especially since the lifting of martial law.

Though the perception that the public has is often different from the way it really is.
For example, most legit masters will not teach criminals.

But the perception that common folk has still exists.
For example, My shrfu was beaten with a stick for studying kung fu when he was a teenager.
His parents feared MA was a doorway to the mafia.

Monks who know kung fu are sometimes retired gangsters who quit the business or they are hucksters.
You make a lot of money chanting for the dead here.
This is from what I have seen or heard in first hand accounts.
In one case, I was sitting next to a monk, he threatened to kick my ass if I took another chicken breast.

Albino,
If you come up with something interesting be sure and share it.
Supposedly WHF had a copy of some of the oldest PM documents.

His 18 Luohan Gung gupu was not completely published.
It has a clear reference to ancient history, including a novel that was famous in the Yuan dynasty, Xi Shuang Ji.

[Albino_Mantis]

RAF:

It could be that we’d end up increasing the ratings on Springer

Tainan Mantis,

If I do come up with anything, I will definitely let everyone know. If for no other reason then the fact that in most other research arenas, the researchers publish their work in peer-reviewed journals so that others can weigh in and look for holes in the research. It sort of leaves you vulnerable, but if you have really done your homework and covered all avenues properly, then your peers won’t be able to punch holes (pun intended) in your theories.

Publishing in a peer-reviewed journal also gives you a date/time stamp as it were, so other people would have difficulty stealing your research and capitalizing on it.

If someone were to be industrious enough to start a peer-review program within the Martial Arts Community, the problem that we’d face it getting peers who are of an appropriate level (i.e. Masters or PhD). We could start with just having anyone who wants to weigh in, get the ball rolling, and then as time goes on, as a group help the people industrious enough to get a Masters and/PhD program started at their college of choice. That could be one way to bring MA history studies into the mainstream academia. Lets face it Psychology didn’t really exist before Freud (a MD mind you) started documenting and testing his theories.

If the board feels it’s a worthy endeavor, I am willing to try pitching the idea to Kung Fu Mag (unless someone on this board has good connections with them, in which case I would as that they do the pitching). If people don’t care, or don’t feel it would be beneficial, then I won’t.

So I guess I am looking for a or from everyone.

[RAF]

Well, I wish I had this interest in the martial arts when I started my graduate program (I worked with underground coal miners).

I was asked by my teacher to help write in 1997 and also retrained in International Management and Business. I haven't quite found a way to leverage my martial arts interest with my academic interest in China.

Ph.D.s have pluses and minuses but I got tired of all the BS in taijiquan etc. etc.. It looks like praying mantis hasn't been distorted as much with all the mystical/commercial baggage found in the areas we call roughly call "internal".

I am not a praying mantis practitioner any longer but still have great respect and appreciation for it (much more than when I studied it from about 1987 to 1997).

So good luck! It just seems that praying mantis can really be made one of the respectable, competitive martial arts systems for the world. It really, as a system, give taekwando and karate a run for their money.