PDA

View Full Version : BSL vs. SSSL: GeneChing's New Topic



HuangKaiVun
05-29-2001, 12:09 AM
This is a continuation of the "Who has trained with a Shaolin Monk" topic that GeneChing started.

I am "picking" on you, GeneChing, because you are a well known BSL stylist and am my training superior in that method.

Personally, I feel that BSL is a complete style that really can go any which way the practitioner chooses.

You mentioned that some of the Shaolin monks have a very "Chen Taijiquan" influence on their SSSL. I myself regularly do the BSL sets in a Chen Taijiquan manner, as the "Planting Technique" from "Tun Da" reminds the practitioner to focus his yang energy into and outwards from his Dantien.

I am interested in "comparing notes" with you, GeneChing, on what you feel could be emphasized better in BSL.

beiquan
05-29-2001, 02:01 AM
from my point of view, as a BSL practitioner, BSL is BSL, taiji is taiji, and bagua is bagua. to a certain extent, one can draw comparisons, but to overdo it is to deny the specialties of each art which make it unique. i've never studied any Chen taiji so i can't comment on the specific move which you are referring to, but i try to keep the different systems which i study separate.

also, i'm curious about the comparison which you made between the two moves in #7 and bagua's single and double palm change; i was hoping that you could elaborate on this? i'll have to go look at my (wing lam) #7 book to see which move it is that you are referring to as "fairy scatters flowers", but if it's the one i'm thinking of (right palm strike/stealing step), to me it is a move with a very straight ahead (linear) energy and has none of the rolling/drilling/overturning energy which to me characterizes bagua (unless you choose to add this kind of emphasis, which, although it may be quite effective, is not the way i learned it).

cheers

HuangKaiVun
05-29-2001, 11:30 AM
I "chose" to add such emphasis on the "Bagua".

In fact, I often do my BSL sets all sorts of different ways.

Sometimes I do them slow and smooth like Taiji, sometimes slow and reeling like Chen Taiji, sometimes hard and powerful like Hung Ga, and sometimes even short and contained like Xingyi 5 Elements.

GeneChing
05-29-2001, 07:34 PM
I guess I should have started this thread after I wrote that article, then maybe the shaolin monk training thread would have stayed on topic.

I chose the bsl vs. sssl title to be controversial an generate some dialog, but personally (and I hope this was clear in my article) I find the two very harmonious.

HKV: I wholeheartedly agree that "BSL is a complete style that really can go any which way the practitioner chooses." But that also opens pandora's box. It's sort of the JKD problem, at what point does it cease becoming "kungfu" or "bsl" and start becoming something new? My own answer is somwhat zen - it ceases being kungfu when it stops becoming something new. But that's an even bigger pandora's box.
The power in SSSL is similar to Chen, but it's not silk reeling. Honestly I don't feel prepared to answer this question adequately at this time. You have to see it and I can't replicate it yet. How does that fit into BSL? Well, theoretically I'm starting to bring it over, but I have yet to master SSSL power (or even get a good handle on it) so it's presumptious for me to say yet.
BTW, thanks fot the superior comment, but please, let's just meet as equals here. I don't believe in rank at all, especially on the forums :)

BQ: I tend to agree with you on this move, but I'm willing to experiment. I've never been totally happy with the applications I've been shown for it, so the jury is still out on it. Let me get back to you guys on it after a few months or so...

Gene Ching
Asst. Publisher
Kungfu Qigong Magazine & www.KUNGFUmagazine.com (http://www.KUNGFUmagazine.com)

HuangKaiVun
05-30-2001, 12:34 AM
I'm totally comfortable with BSL being a "Pandora's Box".

I practice BSL with a decidedly Buddhist flavor, as it was Shi Guolin that wrote in an Kungfu/Qigong article that "Shaolin kung fu is an entry into Ch'an".


As far as beiquan's linear move goes, I've pulled that move off on more than a few unsuspecting opponents - in a variety of ways.

In general, I prefer to do my BSL sets (particularly THIS move) with a more rounded application because the soft round stuff works better for me against resisting opponents.

rickyscaggs
10-16-2005, 07:45 PM
What's the story with Wing Lam? Do any of the styles he teaches have roots at the Shaolin Temple? Were they ever practiced there by monks? Do they have anything really to do with the Shaolin Temple? What is the Shaolin Temple view on Wing Lam and the style? :confused:

GeneChing
10-17-2005, 09:32 AM
As the former head Shaolin instructor for Sifu Wing Lam and a disciple of Songshan Shaolin, I used to get asked this a lot. I wrote a three-part series that compares Bak Sil Lum to Songshan Shaolin (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/ezine/article.php?article=158) for our e-zine, as well as an article on Bak Sil Lum's legendary founder, Gan Fengchi (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/ezine/article.php?article=498). After reading those, let me know if you have more questions here...

rickyscaggs
10-17-2005, 12:06 PM
I don't have time to read it all right now, but here's my question:

It says "this style is no longer practiced at the temple today". But I thought this guy learned Shaolin Temple styles and then went south and created his style, Bak Sil Lum, based on what he learned in the north (bak being north in canto) and it shares the Shaolin name to give respect to it's origins.

I have also spoken to another person who practices this style and says he was told monks at the Shaolin Temple in Henan actually practiced this style once and then it's no longer there. Is this true? Was it practiced by the monks of the Henan Shaolin Temple at one point in history? Or was it just created outside the temple and based on that style? This is what I'm interested in knowing. :cool: Thanks for sharing.

GeneChing
10-17-2005, 02:09 PM
...haven't we discussed this before? Any of the other BSL members remember what thread that might be on?

I could not find any evidence of the *exact* forms of BSL at Songshan Shaolin, save but a slightly parallel Kwan Dao form (ver similar opening). However, there a hundreds if not thousands of forms still practiced at Shaolin. Clearly, Gan Fengchi, and other great BSL ancestors like Ku Yu Chueng, had tremendous impact upon the evolution of BSL. If they didn't, we probably wouldn't remember much more about them than their names. Now I've shown some BSL to Shaolin monks and they all concur that it's definitely Shaolin style, it has all the 'kicks and chops' characteristic to contemporary Shaolin, but no one has recognized the exact form yet. Note that there are a lot of other proponents of BSL beyond my old Sifu, and many of them post here too.

Royal Dragon
10-17-2005, 05:02 PM
Hmmmm,
In the old days, were forms not more a collection of techniques? Was a style not defined more by it's principals, techniques, and HOW they were used, than the organisation, and order of the form's performance?

Yes, there are many ancient Shaolin forms, like Louhan, and Hong Chuan sets that are considered sacred and thus maintained, BUT could it be that Shaolin was originally taught a technique at a time, based on a student's needs, and thus forms were created and forgotten to such a degree that the exact coreography of anything would surely be lost today?

Forms preserved the "Curriculem" of an individuals practice. Thus the contex and choreography of forms is as unique, and individual, as the many persons who trained at Shaolin. Only those who taught passed on thier personal forms, and that is how the many styles were born.

This being said, BSL may very well have been practice at Shaolin ONLY during the few years it's creators were there. When they left, so did thier school of Shaolin Kung Fu (it went with them).

GeneChing
10-18-2005, 09:52 AM
It gets to be rather messy if you start chipping at when forms practice actually originated. The tricky part is how to define forms practice. Are sword dances forms practice? Are qigong routines forms practice? Both of those are traceable to very ancient times. Are line drills, like tan tui or xingyi, forms practice? Those also bleed over into basic military training. Another tricky question to navigate (but we do it here all the time) is what defines Shaolin kung fu? Be careful where you tread here.

Did you find the time to read those articles yet, rickyscaggs? Because you ain't even gonna get no answers, if'en ya don't read. ;)

Royal Dragon
10-19-2005, 05:20 AM
I know legend has it that forms practice goes back at least to the early Shaolin with the first Louhan form, but I was under the impression that it didn't become wide spread untill the Yuan dynasty.

rickyscaggs
10-19-2005, 07:20 PM
Yes I read it. And your reply to me about your interactions with different monks was very helpful. If you have found no evidence of the exact forms being trained there then that answers my question. There may still be a possibility. If you were able to find it then that would answer yes, they were trained there. Having neither a yes or no answer is a good answer for me.

GeneChing
10-20-2005, 10:55 AM
Well, here's the weird thing, while I was there, and while many of my BSL family have been there, BSL was present at Shaolin Temple. Many of the monks and disciples bring in outside influences to Shaolin all the time - in fact, a major tradition of Shaolin is that it is non-traditional, if you can follow that. It's well within the realm of possibilities that if BSL does not exist at Shaolin at this moment, it could easily be brought in once again at any moment. With literally tens of thousands of practitioners living there, there's a constant influx of material. No one ever gets to the end of Shaolin. No one ever gets it all. But that's a Shaolin secret. You don't need it all. Sometimes you can find all you need just staring at a rock...

JamesC
05-13-2011, 12:52 PM
I'm sure this has been discussed a bunch over the years, but my search fu sucks.

Since i'm a relative newbie to kung fu in general, i'm curious as to the stylistic differences in KYC's Northern Shaolin style and the stuff that you see the more traditional monks practice today, I.E. Shi De Yang.

YouKnowWho
05-13-2011, 01:07 PM
Not sure which NYC Northern Shaolin school that you are talking about. If you are talking about the old "5 tigers club", my longfist brother Nelson Zou used to teacher there. It's quite different from the Shaolin monk style.

JamesC
05-13-2011, 01:09 PM
I was referring to the Ku Yu Cheong lineage of Northern Shaolin. It includes the 10 Hand Sets, etc.

Why the difference in forms even? Xiaohongquan, Dahongquan, etc.

GeneChing
05-13-2011, 01:35 PM
KYC Shaolin Vs Shaolin Curriculum TodayI merged your thread into a 10-year-old thread as well as another about my BSL Master Wing Lam. There are a few other threads that touch on this subject.

JamesC
05-13-2011, 01:36 PM
Thanks Gene!

ginosifu
05-13-2011, 01:38 PM
Ku Ye Cheong Shaolin curriculum is an older system going back to the late 1700's. The forms are not quite as flashy as the new Shaolin Temple stuff of today. Back in the early 1900's they was a "Destruction" of the Temple and a "Burning" of all the historical manuals and books. Any of the surviving Monks fled (Hong Kong, South East Asia, Europe, America's etc etc), taking this Ku Ye Cheong system with them.

Any remaining Monks were either killed or went into hiding. Eventually the Temple reopened and Monks returned, only to follow and teach what the Chinese government would let them. This included more flashy stuff that made money for the Government!

They have a curriculum now, but it is more of a San Shou / Kickboxing / San Da curriculum that an old school fighting / self defense system.

ginosifu

GeneChing
05-13-2011, 01:45 PM
You're only looking at the performance stuff. The classical Songshan Shaolin curriculum is traditional. It's not flashy at all. There are some versions that 'flash' it up, but the same is true for BSL. I've seen xin wushu versions of some BSL forms coming out of the mainland.

But check out curriculum in Shaolin Gong Fu: A Course in Traditional Forms (http://www.martialartsmart.com/bsl-115.html) which gives a decent overview of Songshan Shaolin forms and you'll find that it's very traditional. No aerials, no butterfly kicks, not even a cartwheel into splits like in BSL. :p

Gu Ruzhang's system may have roots in the 1700s with the probably apocryphal Gan Fengchi creation myth, but its composition is most likely rather modern (well, as modern as Gu).

ginosifu
05-13-2011, 01:49 PM
You're only looking at the performance stuff. The classical Songshan Shaolin curriculum is traditional. It's not flashy at all. There are some versions that 'flash' it up, but the same is true for BSL. I've seen xin wushu versions of some BSL forms coming out of the mainland.

But check out curriculum in Shaolin Gong Fu: A Course in Traditional Forms (http://www.martialartsmart.com/bsl-115.html) which gives a decent overview of Songshan Shaolin forms and you'll find that it's very traditional. No aerials, no butterfly kicks, not even a cartwheel into splits like in BSL. :p

Gu Ruzhang's system may have roots in the 1700s with the probably apocryphal Gan Fengchi creation myth, but its composition is most likely rather modern (well, as modern as Gu).

My bad Gene, I only see what performance stuff. When I was in DengFeng village, they gave us a show that was purely flash which I assumed was their normal curriculum.

ginosifu

ginosifu
05-13-2011, 02:09 PM
Gu Ruzhang's system may have roots in the 1700s with the probably apocryphal Gan Fengchi creation myth, but its composition is most likely rather modern (well, as modern as Gu).

I agree with you that Ku Ye Cheong and his peers may have altered, modified or even created the 10 hand forms. I doubt the Shaolin of Ku Ye Cheong looks excatly the way it did when Gan Feng Chi demonstrated in front of the Emperor.

ginosifu

LFJ
05-13-2011, 09:09 PM
Any of the surviving Monks fled (Hong Kong, South East Asia, Europe, America's etc etc), taking this Ku Ye Cheong system with them.

Any remaining Monks were either killed or went into hiding. Eventually the Temple reopened and Monks returned, only to follow and teach what the Chinese government would let them. This included more flashy stuff that made money for the Government!

Not sure where you're getting these ideas. A number of monks never left the area, such as Shi Zhenxu, Shi Chunpu, Shi Sudian, Shi Zhenjun, Shi Xingjing, etc.. These monks never abandoned Shaolin Monastery and were working to rebuild it within the first two years after the burning in 1928.

Moreover, they continued practicing a centuries old traditional curriculum, which had nothing flashy and was not for or by the government. They taught this curriculum to more monks such as Shi Suxi, Shi Suxiang, Shi Degen, Shi Xingzhang, etc., who taught our current generation of elder masters.

How can you just write these people and what they did out of history like that?

Furthermore, we've had this discussion (http://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=53287) several times, that the 10 set curriculum of BSL is something that evolved out of the 13 set Kanjiaquan curriculum in Shaolin, but developed external to the monastery. There is no evidence of the BSL curriculum of Gu Ruzhang as it is having ever been taught or practiced at the Shaolin Monastery.

ginosifu
05-14-2011, 05:31 AM
Not sure where you're getting these ideas. A number of monks never left the area, such as Shi Zhenxu, Shi Chunpu, Shi Sudian, Shi Zhenjun, Shi Xingjing, etc.. These monks never abandoned Shaolin Monastery and were working to rebuild it within the first two years after the burning in 1928.

Moreover, they continued practicing a centuries old traditional curriculum, which had nothing flashy and was not for or by the government. They taught this curriculum to more monks such as Shi Suxi, Shi Suxiang, Shi Degen, Shi Xingzhang, etc., who taught our current generation of elder masters.

How can you just write these people and what they did out of history like that?

Furthermore, we've had this discussion (http://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=53287) several times, that the 10 set curriculum of BSL is something that evolved out of the 13 set Kanjiaquan curriculum in Shaolin, but developed external to the monastery. There is no evidence of the BSL curriculum of Gu Ruzhang as it is having ever been taught or practiced at the Shaolin Monastery.

My history came from my sifu some 20 years ago. I am not up to date on the newer discoveries and findings. I do not disagree with any thing stated here by you or Gene, I'm kind of an old school dinosauer. I don't research or spend a lot of time browsing thru all the threads. Thanks for the info

ginosifu

RenDaHai
05-14-2011, 06:59 AM
Even there is Master Cui Xi Qi who is still teaching today at 90 years old (and still agile). He learned Shaolin back in the 1930's, right after the destruction.

These people are still around, you just have to look harder than the big few schools.

On the BSL SSSL Thing;

www.youtube.com/watch?v=dndU6SzYAE4 (lianBu quan, i think, i can't watch youtube, someone please confirm)

Is this a BSL form? Because it is the same form as Long Quan, 'Dragon Fist' still practiced at Henan Shaolin today. THis might be a link people are looking for.

http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XNzkzOTIxNzI=.html (Long QUan)

FOr some of you it may be hard to see that this is the same form, The shaolin version is not such a good version from wushu guan. The one I know is somewhere between the two videos. It is referred to in song shan shaolin as both LianbuQuan and Long quan. It is called longquan because of the footwork. Contains lots of 'LongXingBu' Dragon step. Although the henan video I posted doesn't show the dragon step, as i say its not a great version, just can't find another video and can't be bothered to post one myself.

Graculus
05-14-2011, 08:33 PM
I must admit that I don't think there is much likelihood of lianbuquan having been in the temple for more than a few decades - its introduction into the BSL curriculum is also quite well documented (from a CMA point of view), and it does not really belong to that system in the same way as the 10 core sets.

There seems to be no reason to doubt the connection between BSL and the Shaolin temple - however both common sense and the available evidence points to them having parted ways some considerable time ago and developed along separate lines. The extent to which styles can evolve (or devolve) in a comparatively short time can be seen in the progress of CMA in the 20th century - think of taiji (or various forms) and even the different branches of BSL. If we are talking 2 hundred years ago, even if the founders studied in the temple and swore blind they were passing on the same style, it would certainly have changed over the years.

For anyone new to this area, and is really interested in this kind of stuff, look up what Sal Canzonieri has written... love him or hate him, he has certainly gathered a lot of info on this.

Graculus
http://ichijoji.blogspot.com

David Jamieson
05-16-2011, 08:46 AM
I gotta agree with ~G that the old BSL is way flashier than the current Shaolin curriculum.

the flooding fist sets aren't anywhere near as flash as the beginner sets for bsl (6/7/8)...

can't speak for what they teach noobs or beginners there...

Siu Lum Fighter
05-16-2011, 03:18 PM
originally posted by LFJ
Furthermore, we've had this discussion several times, that the 10 set curriculum of BSL is something that evolved out of the 13 set Kanjiaquan curriculum in Shaolin, but developed external to the monastery. There is no evidence of the BSL curriculum of Gu Ruzhang as it is having ever been taught or practiced at the Shaolin Monastery.
I believe this information to be false and I'll tell you why. Sal Canzonieri pieced this theory together after he talked to some Kanjiaquan practitioners in some rural area (in Shandong?) who said that Kuo Yu Cheung's teacher, Yim Chi Wen, was mentioned in their lineage somewhere. This, he assumed, proved that Yim Chi Wen practiced Kanjiaquan and passed it on to Kuo who then must have drastically changed it so that it became what we know of as Bak Siu Lum today. I say drastically because I've compared the forms and I don't see any resemblance at all! The only set I saw that seemed to have a similar name was number 4 (Chum Sam or Strike to the Heart) but, just like in all of the other sets, most of the movements seem to be completely different or unrelated. The techniques that are supposed to be similar or the same are done very differently and the lyrics don't match up AT ALL. There's just no way they could have originated from the same masters. If the two styles are related then it's Bak Siu Lum that's older. Sal seemed to be trying to jam a square peg in a round hole. It's always being noted that he's fluent in Chinese but just because you can speak someone's language doesn't mean they're not giving you information that's false or incomplete.

To push this theory is to say that Kuo Yu Cheung lied to his students and said that his Bak Siu Lum was a style that was much older and not something that he'd just made up during his lifetime. It seems impossible to me (and somewhat blasphemous) to think that Kuo Yu Cheung would condense and completely rearrange a whole system, come up with a whole bunch of different lyrics, and then pass it off as the same Northern Shaolin style that was passed on to him from Yim Chi Wen.

LFJ
05-16-2011, 09:10 PM
I don't know the details on Sal's personal research, but that's not the theory at all. If you are familiar with the theory of evolution, the same principles apply to the martial arts.

The theory is not that two apes mated and birthed humans as the next generation. In the same way, the evolution of martial arts happens over several centuries, not years and single individuals. And with the spread of the art into different regions and their developments therein, there are produced related yet quite distinct variations from the same root.

Gu Ruzhang is very recent history. What came to him had already been extracted from the Kanjiaquan of Shaolin and had undergone the process of evolution for centuries.

Siu Lum Fighter
05-17-2011, 04:12 AM
Apparently there were lyrics that were considered to be older versions of the one's that are in the Bak Siu Lum sets today. The older lyric for Tornado Kick for example was Phoenix Flies to Heaven. Double kicks were called Carp jumps over the Dragon's Gate. If Kanjiaquan is truly an older style that's related to Bak Siu Lum, one would expect to see some of these older lyrics used in the sets. None of them show up at all. Not only do none of the older lyrics show up, but none of the lyrics (besides maybe "tornado kick") are the same in either style at all, period.

Also, Yang Xiushan is known as one of the original teachers of Kanjiaquan. The Kanjiaquan people mention that Yang Xiushan was an older classmate of Kuo Yu Cheung's teacher, Yim Chi Wen. Apparently the Chinese characters used (Yan Yuqi) for Kuo Yu Cheung's teacher in their texts are different than the Chinese characters used for KYC's teacher (Yim Chi Wen) in other well known documents. Back then, a person could have up to three different names: Their birth name, their adult name, and the one people used to refer to them after they became famous. Yim Chi Wen had two with the other being Great Spear Yim. It is also well known that some schools try to attach well known heroes or famous masters to their style or school in order to promote it. I don't mean any disrespect to any Kanjiaquan practitioners out there, but I think that is the case here. It seems unlikely that Yim Chi Wen was a classmate of Yang Xiushan's. Even if he was the styles they're known for are considerably different.

It's possible that Kanjiaquan was taught in Yang Xiushan's curriculum along with other styles that included Bak Siu Lum but this doesn't prove it's the older style at all. It's been documented that Kanjiaquan dates back to the Yuan Dynasty. It was always told in Kuo Yu Cheung's lineage that BSL dates back to the Sung Dynasty (around 1100 A.D.) with its roots connected to the Five Mother styles, Hung, Wah, Cha, Pao and Hua. I know this will always be quite a stretch for many historians but, need I remind you, Shaolin temple was destroyed and it's monks either killed or scattered several times. In 1732 it was attacked and destroyed by Ching troops and in 1928 it's records were even more thoroughly destroyed and lost forever. Then there was The Cultural Revolution when a great many books and records outside the temple were burned and destroyed. Does it really seem all that far fetched that some of these styles that survived outside of the mainland do indeed date back to antiquity. I wonder if it's just blind nationalism that keeps people from questioning the "official" findings on these matters.

GeneChing
05-17-2011, 11:37 AM
I must admit that I don't think there is much likelihood of lianbuquan having been in the temple for more than a few decades - its introduction into the BSL curriculum is also quite well documented (from a CMA point of view), and it does not really belong to that system in the same way as the 10 core sets.
We've discussed Lianbuquan:
Lian Bu Chuan (Lin Bo Kuen) History (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=23713)
BSL Lyrics: Lin Bo Kin (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=12351)

Personally, I've always felt there is a deep connection between BSL and Songshan Shaolin, but that's not based on history. It's based on practicing both systems. I've found that the others who have practiced both tend to agree. It's hard to explain as both systems are quite extensive.

bawang
05-17-2011, 04:33 PM
gu ru zhang boxing is obviously from shaolin. it has the ying yang salute. but u guys arent arguing about that. u guys are arguing about which branch is older so you can claim some sort of superiority.

im from gu ru zhangs hometown. ive never heard of bak siu lum until i came to america. no one in his hometown does bak siu lum. he was a nobody. bak siu lum is insignificant. the most famous boxing from that region is pei county da hong quan.

kung fu from gu ru zhang's hometown was famous for SINGING while preforming forms. SINGING. bak siu lum has shaolin roots but is very flowery, AND has cantonese taint. u guys need to know your place.

*rubs testicles

LFJ
05-17-2011, 08:15 PM
I've compared the forms and I don't see any resemblance at all!

If you see no resemblance between this Kanjiaquan set and the BSL sets then you are being voluntarily blind.
http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMzE1MTcyMzY=.html


The only set I saw that seemed to have a similar name was number 4 (Chum Sam or Strike to the Heart)

What about these?? They seem pretty similar to me!

Set 1

KJQ: Kaishan (open mountain)
BSL: Kaimen (open door)

Set 4

KJQ: Chuanxinchui (pierce heart hammer)
BSL: Chuanxin (pierce heart)

Set 7

KJQ: Meihuaquan (plum blossom fist)
BSL: Meihua (plum blossom)

Set 9

KJQ: Lianhuantui (linking kicks)
BSL: Lianhuan (linking)


It's been documented that Kanjiaquan dates back to the Yuan Dynasty. It was always told in Kuo Yu Cheung's lineage that BSL dates back to the Sung Dynasty (around 1100 A.D.)

The Shaolin Encyclopedia has Kanjiaquan in the Song Dynasty as well.

David Jamieson
05-18-2011, 06:14 AM
gu ru zhang boxing is obviously from shaolin. it has the ying yang salute. but u guys arent arguing about that. u guys are arguing about which branch is older so you can claim some sort of superiority.

im from gu ru zhangs hometown. ive never heard of bak siu lum until i came to america. no one in his hometown does bak siu lum. he was a nobody. bak siu lum is insignificant. the most famous boxing from that region is pei county da hong quan.

kung fu from gu ru zhang's hometown was famous for SINGING while preforming forms. SINGING. bak siu lum has shaolin roots but is very flowery, AND has cantonese taint. u guys need to know your place.

*rubs testicles LOL!!! YOu forgot to add the part about his command in the KMT and his untimely death at the hands of the communists. You also forgot how he was the trainer for the KMT during his time with them and that he had literally thousands of students by that merit alone. Furthermore, many great men have very humble beginnings, I'm sure your home town is filled with ignorant farmers, but they certainly don't have to stay that way, look at you! You are in a fancy foreign school getting a superior education. Things change in everyone's life. :) *counts money


If you see no resemblance between this Kanjiaquan set and the BSL sets then you are being voluntarily blind.
http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMzE1MTcyMzY=.html



What about these?? They seem pretty similar to me!

Set 1

KJQ: Kaishan (open mountain)
BSL: Kaimen (open door)

Set 4

KJQ: Chuanxinchui (pierce heart hammer)
BSL: Chuanxin (pierce heart)

Set 7

KJQ: Meihuaquan (plum blossom fist)
BSL: Meihua (plum blossom)

Set 9

KJQ: Lianhuantui (linking kicks)
BSL: Lianhuan (linking)



The Shaolin Encyclopedia has Kanjiaquan in the Song Dynasty as well.

open door and open mountain? The word open aside, there aren't similarities here.

Moi Fa is a name used in many kung fu styles that are completely unrelated. Hung Gar has a Moi Fah Kuen in some of it';s variants and so does CLF. the plum flower is symbolic of a lot of things and gets used in that way frequently.


the heart piercing... I would have to see the sets. I think it's been mentioned that they might bear resemblance to each other and that would be interesting.

Again, linked stepping sets are another common thing. Lin wan is also found in CLF and bears NO resemblance to the BSL set. Lin Bo is known to be separate from BSL and is considered a remnant of old shaolin dragon although I always thought it has more Crane flavour in the BSL way of doing it.

Shaolin certainly babysat a lot of styles and contributed greatly to the organization of systems and the maintenance of same. the distillation process is inevitable.

The qualities of the effect of shaolin on all chinese martial arts is seen in many similarities across virtually all styles.

ShaolinDan
05-18-2011, 06:38 AM
If you see no resemblance between this Kanjiaquan set and the BSL sets then you are being voluntarily blind.
http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMzE1MTcyMzY=.html



I only know one BSL set (meihua), but I would have to agree with this...there are many similarities/overlaps between this above set and BSL meihua.

To look for relationships in styles, I would think it makes more sense to look at individual movements, more than sequences...

It's easy to change order of movements, not so easy to create new movements.

David Jamieson
05-18-2011, 07:11 AM
here's bsl's moi fah.

the similarity is the "shaolin"

this is Kwong Wing Lam performing it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNEfqP9SuDs

(there appears to be a strong "Hung" flavour in Lam's BSL compared to other practitioners of same)

JamesC
05-18-2011, 07:14 AM
here's bsl's moi fah.

the similarity is the "shaolin"

this is Kwong Wing Lam performing it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNEfqP9SuDs

(there appears to be a strong "Hung" flavour in Lam's BSL compared to other practitioners of same)

I always thought that too David. He seems much more rooted than most northern guys and less extended in his movements. Less "Longfist", if you will.

ShaolinDan
05-18-2011, 07:52 AM
the similarity is the "shaolin"



That may be... I'm not too concerned about the specifics of what came from where and when. For me it's enough to see the relationship, doesn't matter much where it came from...

(For what it's worth, our meihua is 'flavored' much more like the kanjiaquan set posted than the meihua set posted...same moves [mostly], but different energy/rhythm, etc.)

Siu Lum Fighter
05-18-2011, 10:41 PM
Originally Posted by LFJ
If you see no resemblance between this Kanjiaquan set and the BSL sets then you are being voluntarily blind.
http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMzE1MTcyMzY=.html



What about these?? They seem pretty similar to me!

Set 1

KJQ: Kaishan (open mountain)
BSL: Kaimen (open door)

Set 4

KJQ: Chuanxinchui (pierce heart hammer)
BSL: Chuanxin (pierce heart)

Set 7

KJQ: Meihuaquan (plum blossom fist)
BSL: Meihua (plum blossom)

Set 9

KJQ: Lianhuantui (linking kicks)
BSL: Lianhuan (linking)



The Shaolin Encyclopedia has Kanjiaquan in the Song Dynasty as well.

If it's number 7 then it's arguable that the beginning is similar. But, besides some moves that are common to almost all longfist styles, the structure and sequence is very different. In fact, that's the case with all the Kanjia forms. They're short and structured differently from the BSL forms. If you look at all of the BSL forms, you'll notice that they roughly run along two parallel lines with one or two lines connecting them like an I or H form. All of the Kanjia sets seem to use one line. It's as if someone wanted to break up the BSL forms and change the way the techniques were applied and add their own favored moves. Furthermore, why would the monks create 13 sets? 13 is not a significant number in Buddhism and isn't 10 the more common number we see in Buddhist related systems?

As far as the names go, it's just like I remembered, number four seems to be the only one with a truly similar name and even then there's an extra word (hammer). I'm not saying that the styles aren't related just like countless other styles under the Shaolin umbrella, they're just not as related as people are saying these days. They were obviously developed by different masters and to say that Kuo Yu Cheung made up Bak Siu Lum based on Kanjiaquan seems completely false. It may be theorized that both styles date as far back as the Song Dynasty, but there are no actual records from that time to prove this. So if you're going to state that Kanjiaquan is older and Bak Siu Lum was made up by Kuo Yu Cheung based on some flimsy evidence then I have to cry foul.

LFJ
05-19-2011, 12:31 AM
open door and open mountain? The word open aside, there aren't similarities here.

Meanings are in contexts, not in words. The meaning is the same for both
expressions.

Kaishan (open mountain) taken literally (i.e. to cut into a mountain) means to open a mine. But this is only one context. In another it may mean to open a monastery.

Both expressions mean to establish something, or get something started; similar to "open doors" as an English idiom for making new opportunities. As the name of the first set in their series it marks them as the opening set for their system.

Kaishan (open mountain/ open monastery), being the name in the Kanjiaquan system, shows a monastic tie as it was developed at Shaolin Monastery. While Kaimen (open door), being the name in the Bei Shaolin system, is a more secular phrase as it was developed outside of Shaolin.


Moi Fa is a name used in many kung fu styles that are completely unrelated.....

the heart piercing... I would have to see the sets. I think it's been mentioned that they might bear resemblance to each other and that would be interesting.

Again, linked stepping sets are another common thing.

Of course, but the significance is not only the use of all these terms, but the precise placement of them within the two series of sets for KJQ and BSL.

Kaishan/men for both is set #1.
Chuanxin for both is set #4.
Meihua for both is set #7.
Lianhuan for both is set #9.

That's almost half of the series sharing practically the exact names for the same numbered set in the sequence.

LFJ
05-19-2011, 01:11 AM
But, besides some moves that are common to almost all longfist styles, the structure and sequence is very different. In fact, that's the case with all the Kanjia forms. They're short and structured differently from the BSL forms.

I'll get to the structure in a minute, but I don't think it can be argued that the overall rhythm and flavor of the sets are not similar; not only visually are they similar, but if you practice both you will not be able to deny the similar feeling of the tempo and style of the sets.


If you look at all of the BSL forms, you'll notice that they roughly run along two parallel lines with one or two lines connecting them like an I or H form. All of the Kanjia sets seem to use one line. It's as if someone wanted to break up the BSL forms and change the way the techniques were applied and add their own favored moves.

All the old traditional sets from Shaolin Monastery "run on a single line". That's one of the characteristics of Shaolin Monastery boxing systems, whereas other regional folk martial arts have a structure more similar to BSL which breaks this characteristic. In BSL history this is because it was developed outside of Shaolin as an alteration of the KJQ system.


Furthermore, why would the monks create 13 sets? 13 is not a significant number in Buddhism and isn't 10 the more common number we see in Buddhist related systems?

Many Shaolin Monastery boxing sets have 2 roads or 5 roads. These are not particularly significant numbers in Buddhism either. This is a very weak attempt to place BSL at the Shaolin Monastery, or KJQ elsewhere. There are certain standards for what constitutes evidence or proof in regards to historical facts. This would be inconclusive or simply meaningless.


As far as the names go, it's just like I remembered, number four seems to be the only one with a truly similar name and even then there's an extra word (hammer).

If that is your standard, then what makes Meihua & Meihuaquan or Lianhuan & Lianhuantui any less "truly similar" than Chuanxin & Chuanxinchui??

I am thoroughly perplexed by this. Anyhow, the third character in the KJQ sets is basically generic (fist/ leg/ hammer). They can be dropped without the meaning really changing at all.


They were obviously developed by different masters and to say that Kuo Yu Cheung made up Bak Siu Lum based on Kanjiaquan seems completely false....

....So if you're going to state that Kanjiaquan is older and Bak Siu Lum was made up by Kuo Yu Cheung based on some flimsy evidence then I have to cry foul.

I'm not sure who this is addressed to, but I have never asserted such a thing.

In fact, I remember explaining to you previously how evolution works; with examples of apes and humans, and how the theory is not that just in one generation a couple apes give birth to a human. It is just as patently absurd and false to claim that Gu Ruzhang made up an entire system on his own.

You seem to have missed that part, but martial arts evolve in a similar fashion over centuries. What I said to you was that the system of BSL received by Gu Ruzhang had already undergone centuries of evolution, while the KJQ system continued in another line. Hence today we have two systems that share a root but that have evolved into unique systems that are of course not going to be exactly the same.

David Jamieson
05-19-2011, 08:33 PM
THis is a hugely interesting topic, let's not let it degrade into a shouting match!
One can be assertive of course!

I am of the opinion that I would need to actually look at the sets. Because so far, I am not seeing the same thing in the songshan shaolin and the KYC bei shaolin.

yes, longfist styles across the board have similarities. Stances for instance and transitions from them. those are consistent.

sequencing and the practical techniques themselves though? I am not convinced that is true.

But hey, like anyone, what I don't know could fill a warehouse! A big one! :)

sha0lin1
05-20-2011, 06:19 AM
THis is a hugely interesting topic, let's not let it degrade into a shouting match!
One can be assertive of course!

I am of the opinion that I would need to actually look at the sets. Because so far, I am not seeing the same thing in the songshan shaolin and the KYC bei shaolin.

yes, longfist styles across the board have similarities. Stances for instance and transitions from them. those are consistent.

sequencing and the practical techniques themselves though? I am not convinced that is true.

But hey, like anyone, what I don't know could fill a warehouse! A big one! :)

One of my students used to be a BSL practitioner. He has continued to train with what he learned there and from what I have seen, it looks very close to what we do. For instance the first staff form is almost exactly like Yin Shou Gun. The open hand forms are very long fist looking and although I am not familiar with them, they do have that Songshan flavor to them.

Siu Lum Fighter
06-22-2011, 04:21 PM
OK let’s get this started again.


originally posted by LFJ
I'll get to the structure in a minute, but I don't think it can be argued that the overall rhythm and flavor of the sets are not similar; not only visually are they similar, but if you practice both you will not be able to deny the similar feeling of the tempo and style of the sets.


Sure, there might be a slightly similar feeling and style but that’s the case with many longfist styles I’ve come across. For instance, you can see a similar feeling and style in Prof. Jou’s Xiao Hongquan (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4FT_ETpcOA). Actually if you look at some other videos of his you’d find that there’s probably more techniques that are almost exactly like Bei Shaolin’s than Kanjiaquan’s. Why don’t we just say that this Xiao Hongquan from Taiwan is directly related to Bak Siu Lum too while we’re at it? I still don’t get how a style that doesn’t have any of the same lyrics can be the pre-cursor to Bei Shaolin. It’s an insult to their lineage to suggest that either Kuo Yu Cheong or Yim Chi Wen made up Bei Shaolin.


All the old traditional sets from Shaolin Monastery "run on a single line". That's one of the characteristics of Shaolin Monastery boxing systems, whereas other regional folk martial arts have a structure more similar to BSL which breaks this characteristic. In BSL history this is because it was developed outside of Shaolin as an alteration of the KJQ system.

We’re talking about styles that have developed over centuries. Are you telling me that Kanjiaquan stayed within the Shaolin Monastery since the 1100 or 1200’s? Even after all of the invasions, wars, and strife in the region? After the temple had been burned down and destroyed and all of it’s monks either killed or scattered throughout the land on several occasions? Are we to assume just because of some vague and debatably misread reference to Yim Chi Wen in some old document (that is where this whole theory came from by the way) the Kanjiaquan style stayed alive and unmodified for over 8 centuries? Even when there was no functioning Shaolin Temple at certain times?

One of the main problem with this is that a general rule with these old Shaolin styles was that lineage Masters were allowed to add techniques to their favorite set but never subtract any techniques. They could do this provided that the new technique did not ruin the flavor or rhythm of the set, and did not interfere with the transitional techniques. This is why every ancient style of Chinese martial arts evolved into different branches over time. If this hasn’t happened to a style that’s supposed to be that old then it can only mean either that the masters who were the care takers for the style forgot parts of the original sets or that the sets are a recent creation within the last 100 years. The BSL forms do run on linear lines but they evolved over centuries to include other angles of attack just like Hung Gar and other Shaolin styles. Maybe all of these styles started on a single line but as one might notice with some other styles developed by the monks within the various temples throughout history they usually didn’t end up that way.


Many Shaolin Monastery boxing sets have 2 roads or 5 roads. These are not particularly significant numbers in Buddhism either. This is a very weak attempt to place BSL at the Shaolin Monastery, or KJQ elsewhere. There are certain standards for what constitutes evidence or proof in regards to historical facts. This would be inconclusive or simply meaningless.

Perhaps this is my own theory in this whole debate, but I still find it strange that there are so many Shaolin related styles that follow this 10 hand form structure and Kanjiaquan is the only one that I know of that has the odd number of 13. If lineage masters were allowed to add techniques then the number would have remained at 10. The monks wouldn’t have just added an extra 3 sets or established 13 as the number of sets from the beginning. Just look at how significant the number 10 is in Buddhism. There’s:

The “10 Precepts”
The “10 Hindrances to Enlightenment” (or the “Ten Fetters”)
The “10 Good Deeds or Meritorious Actions”
The “10 Powers of a Buddha”
The “10 Great Disciples”
And the Zen tradition has the ““10 Oxherding Pictures”

2 and 5 are also significant in Buddhism but you know what number doesn’t appear to have any particular significance and isn’t even mentioned in any scriptures as far as I’ve seen? That’s right, 13. My point is that there’s no question the significance of the number 10 is the reason so many Shaolin related styles have 10 core hand forms. So why would the monks make 13 forms for a style within their temple when they could’ve kept them at 10. Religion revolved around everything the monks did. They wouldn’t have done this.


I'm not sure who this is addressed to, but I have never asserted such a thing.

In fact, I remember explaining to you previously how evolution works; with examples of apes and humans, and how the theory is not that just in one generation a couple apes give birth to a human. It is just as patently absurd and false to claim that Gu Ruzhang made up an entire system on his own.

You seem to have missed that part, but martial arts evolve in a similar fashion over centuries. What I said to you was that the system of BSL received by Gu Ruzhang had already undergone centuries of evolution, while the KJQ system continued in another line. Hence today we have two systems that share a root but that have evolved into unique systems that are of course not going to be exactly the same.

At least you don’t think Gu Ruzhang made up Bei Shaolin but this was what was asserted by Sal Calzonieri and the people who originally claimed that Bei Shaolin came from Kanjiaquan. The root between the two is so obscured that it was easy for them to claim such a thing without ample proof. How convenient that after so many years of the PRC “standardizing” wushu and oppressing those who tried keeping the old traditions alive that they all of a sudden “discover” this ancient style in it’s untarnished form and claim it to be the forerunner to Bei Shaolin. Of course they would never just take our own lineage masters records at face value. They have to make up a whole new history now.

RenDaHai
06-22-2011, 08:14 PM
Hey Guys,

13 is another special number. We have the 13 Claws (Shi San Zhua) fore runner to Shaolins Eagle and Dragon claws. 13 Hammers, an interesting beginning set, much more useful than lian huan quan. Da hong Quan is reputed to have 13 forms also. (dont think there is anyone left who knows them all, I have looked).

But it doesn't matter. Most of the versions of KanJia quan I have encountered have actually only had 10 sets.

http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMTQyOTE1NjMy.html

This is a bad quality video but it shows the full ten sets. These are roughly the same as Kanjia quan and certainly are from the same source. Although the later sets have diverged somewhat and the performance style is not as clear as shaolin. I have seen other versions of these 10 sets which are closer to the Kanjia quan.

I haven't seen all the BSL sets so I can't really comment, but i thought the above video might be of interest.

Siu Lum Fighter
06-26-2011, 04:41 PM
That is pretty interesting. It's interesting because it would seem there is some variation to the Kanjiaquan sets. These forms are somewhat different than the ones I have seen and at least some of them seem to run along divergent lines (like around 8:40).

One thing I know for sure though is that this proves all the more that Bei Shaolin and Kanjiaquan were developed by different masters. The fact that there came to be 13 forms as opposed to 10 like in the above example, shows that the Kanjiaquan system has been through some revisions just in the last 100 years. I would dare to guess, that just in the last 50 there have been major changes. The fact that many of the sequences and style of the moves are somewhat different shows that.

The Bei Shaolin (Bak Siu Lum) lyrics stayed more or less the same for at least the past 300 years. I know certain scholars still scoff at this assertion because there's no documents from that time to confirm this, but what they can't seem to accept is that the further you go back, the more closely guarded from the public wushu styles were. They were so guarded that they were mainly transmitted from master to student without the use of any books or documents. This is how things were done in a great many styles. Records dating back just 100 hundred years are rare. When Yim Chi Wen passed down his style to Kuo Yu Cheong he gave him the lyrics that had been passed down to him from his sifu, Yim Po. Yim Po learned these from Hsu Wei San and so on. To my knowledge there are no actual books dating back before Kuo Yu Cheong that recorded all of this as it was going on, but if there were they very likely would have been destroyed by either the Qing or the Communists if they were found. Also, there weren't printing presses pumping out books on kung fu back then and unless someone manually copied it, it's even less likely such a book would exist. The Shaolin monastery itself is probably missing at least 90% of all of the written documents that ever existed there. It baffles me how anyone could ever claim to be so sure about the exact history of a style they never learned and know virtually nothing about.

Like I said, the lyrics aren't even remotely the same therefore the styles aren't the same. It's my theory that the Kanjiaquan masters of old modeled the names of their sets after Bei Shaolin. It's there that the similarities end though.

bawang
06-26-2011, 05:26 PM
hello, please post lyrics

ginosifu
06-26-2011, 05:41 PM
To Sal and those whom feel that Ku Ye Cheong's BSL is somehow related to to the Kanji system:

My teacher told me his Bak Sil Lum history some 20 years ago or so. It is the same history that many Sifu from divergent backwards share. Every teacher (Sifu's that I have spoken with) that has come out of the Jing Wu era have the same history about Shaolin.

There was what was called the "4 Courts". These 4 courts taught 4 different Northern systems; Eagle Claw, Mi Tsung Lohan, Praying Mantis and Bak Sil Lum. Why is it that every teacher from the UK to South America to Indonesia to Australia to North America all have the same histories about Ku Ye Cheong's Bak Sil Lum. I have spoken to Eaggle Claw teachers, Mi Tsung teachers, Praying Mantis teachers etc etc and all have the same Ku Ye Cheong history.

Why is it that the Shaolin of today is coming up with a different view point?

Sil Lum Fighter: Can you elaborate on the "4 Courts"? When did they start? When were they disbannned?

ginosifu

Northwind
06-27-2011, 10:04 AM
...snip...
Sil Lum Fighter: Can you elaborate on the "4 Courts"? When did they start? When were they disbannned?


This is the first time I've ever heard this term. Are these the 4 northern styles taught in Chin Wu, or is there something else to this I am missing?

ginosifu
06-27-2011, 10:11 AM
This is the first time I've ever heard this term. Are these the 4 northern styles taught in Chin Wu, or is there something else to this I am missing?

These are not the 5 major northern styles; 4 different system that were taught at the Shaolin Temple. Each had it's own place at Shaolin and after you completed the basics, you could move on to train in any of these 4 styles.

ginosifu

GeneChing
06-27-2011, 03:07 PM
This is a common myth. According to legend, at some time during the Ming or Qing Dynasty, Shaolin Temple was divided into 4 courtyards, each overseen by different masters, each practicing different styles. Each year, Shaolin held a contest between the 4 courtyards. The style that prevailed was the one that was telling you this story.

There's still some discussion of the 4 courtyards. Even when Shi Suxi (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/ezine/article.php?article=564) was alive, the tension between Suxi's supporters and Yongxin's supporters were divided into courtyards - Suxi ruled the south and Yongxin the north, or something along those lines. My next cover story, for our Sep Oct 2011 issue, also discusses the 4 courtyards. Of course, this comes from another style's perspective, so there's no mention of BSL, Eagle Claw, Mi Tsung Lohan, Praying Mantis or Kanjiaquan for that matter. Same temple, same courtyard tale, different styles. These sorts of parallel creation tales are commonplace in CMA.

Lokhopkuen
07-01-2011, 02:49 AM
gu ru zhang boxing is obviously from shaolin. it has the ying yang salute. but u guys arent arguing about that. u guys are arguing about which branch is older so you can claim some sort of superiority.

im from gu ru zhangs hometown. ive never heard of bak siu lum until i came to america. no one in his hometown does bak siu lum. he was a nobody. bak siu lum is insignificant. the most famous boxing from that region is pei county da hong quan.

kung fu from gu ru zhang's hometown was famous for SINGING while preforming forms. SINGING. bak siu lum has shaolin roots but is very flowery, AND has cantonese taint. u guys need to know your place.

*rubs testicles

I've visited with Gu Yu Choeng's Daughter and Grandson near Guanzhou as well as spent time with a large group of practitioners that are carrying on the tradition in various places on the mainland. I've spent time with some of my Sigung's class mates in Hong Kong. I had the pleasure to work out with Leung Kai Ming's Group in Kowloon.
I maintain good relations with BSL practitioners around the world.

My point is that I have heard many stories but sadly their is no accredited written history, just word of mouth and the story changes with the teller.

Some of the senior disciples of Wong Jack Man have compiled a history that I had the blessing to read which is filled with a great deal of information couple with both fact and folklore. For the record I am no historian but have had the good fortune to be in the presence of many Great teachers and partitioners from the system. Kept my mouth shut and my ears open...

Northern Shaolin as we know it today was formulated into a teachable system during our Great Master's time at the Nanjing Martial arts (experiment) Institute. The foundational essence is very old handed down from practitioners whom had relied on it for their survival with great success. It is characterized as an outside the Temple style of Shaolin.

To quote my esteem teacher:
"The Northern Shaolin style of Kung Fu as made famous by Grand Master
Kuo Yu Chang is a cumulative set of Kung Fu techniques, both northern and
southern styles, choreographed by the Grand Master into a curriculum that he
taught both in the Nam Jing Kung Fu Institute and his Canton Kung Fu
institute. His curriculum increased throughout his teaching years to include
techniques of many styles. The Grand Master, being highly skilled in the
Northern style of Kung Fu, emphasized the Northern style of Shaolin Kung
Fu in his teachings. Since most of the stories of martial art origins, including
that of the Northern Shaolin style, are passed down by word of mouth, we
can treat all of this as more a part of a legend than facts. In my opinion, the
real history is not as important as the future of the style. The fact that the
Northern Shaolin style is time proven to be an effective and broad based pool
of martial arts knowledge, deserves our efforts to continue to enhance and
develop its values to benefit others in the future."

What makes the Northern Shaolim Style unique is that its an overall encompassing style that is well rounded and covers all aspects of training and techniques. According to my teacher most systems of martial arts emphasizes specific characteristics, techniques, philosophies, theories etc. Northern Shaolin curriculum covers techniques
for all fighting ranges (long, medium, and short). It covers the applications of
all parts of the body as weapons and tools without biasing on any particular
means such as kicking or grappling. Since most Kung Fu styles are developed to
enhance the inventorís specialty or cover for his weaknesses, (examples are Wing
Chun, Pray Mantis, etc.), the most difficult aspects of martial arts are not
covered by many styles. These aspects are speed, mobility, agility, power, and
long fighting range. Just because the Northern Shaolin style is broad and
covered these aspects fully, it actually became famous for these specialties.
From my personal insight, the uniqueness of the Northern Shaolim style is
the natural body mechanics, the foot work, the arrow like forward attack
techniques, the feather like retreat skills, and the broad variety of hand and
kicking techniques.

I've been all over China and spent time with Monks, Priests and high level practitioners of amazing martial essence and learned a great deal in observations. I have however not seen one that has seduced me to abandon my long practice of the Northern Shaolim system of Martial Cultivations.

bawang
07-01-2011, 05:09 AM
bei shaolin is far from perfect. it has absorbed a lot of negative influences from cantonese kung fu.

bawang
07-01-2011, 05:12 AM
i cant take any northern styles that do lion dancing and bang those funny pots seriously.

Lokhopkuen
07-01-2011, 05:14 AM
bei shaolin is far from perfect. it has absorbed a lot of negative influences from cantonese kung fu.


http://www.gifsoup.com/view3/1972796/kung-fu-hustle-o.gif
This is my mother, she is very trong:p

bawang
07-01-2011, 05:22 AM
i would be joking with you if you didnt spazz out and get your student to send me insults on pm.

Lokhopkuen
07-01-2011, 05:24 AM
He's passionate:rolleyes:

bawang
07-01-2011, 05:26 AM
be passionate about something else. be passionate about realizing major faults in beishaolin.


da hongquan has been practiced in jiangsu for about 200 years and can be legitimately traced by white lotus member records. in his town no one has heard of guruzhang.

the opera style yanghuquan that sings while doing forms is even well known, but not beishaolin.

beishaolin did not participate in the famous santang rebellion in jiangsu.

im saying lets be reasonable and not exagerate kung fu styles we do and look down on others.

bawang
07-01-2011, 05:47 AM
that other guy keeps bragging about how beishaolin has the older more "authentic" lyrics than kanjiaquan. someone post the full lyrics and lets do a comparison.

Lokhopkuen
07-01-2011, 06:07 AM
bei shaolin is far from perfect. it has absorbed a lot of negative influences from cantonese kung fu.

I feel any martial art you practice is what you make of it.
Since you do not practice the system brother it is difficult for me to take your opinion very seriously since although you may be familiar you are far from intimate.

Perfection is a goal, that golden belt buckle in the sky Bruce Leroy.:D

I have practice the system since 1979 with the same teacher pretty much everyday with some interesting results. I am strong, flexible, effortlessly mobile and healthy despite the gang of vicious and annoying little maladies that have attempted to group up and end my existence.

The system is well constructed in a powerfully logical progression, sprinkled with a series of interconnected rare skill set attainments ever placing higher and higher demands upon the individual practitioner.

It takes a long time to internalize the basics as it's tool kit is vast. There are so many options in terms of application that it confuses and sometimes bewilders the unmotivated. It teaches patience, finess, economy of motion, spatial and self awareness.

Good system if you are lucky enough to learn it from a skilled Sifu.
Never gotten bored but I've plateaued, burned out, made startling self discoveries, rocked out on my ego, shamed my self in choices, trained even harder, abandoned self plateaued, burned out and....

BSL from my experience is like a beautiful flower that keeps blooming.
After all of this time I'm still not very good at it, yet I pursue my practice daily with sincerity.

Peace

Lokhopkuen
07-01-2011, 06:11 AM
that other guy keeps bragging about how beishaolin has the older more "authentic" lyrics than kanjiaquan. someone post the full lyrics and lets do a comparison.

"Since most of the stories of martial art origins, including
that of the Northern Shaolin style, are passed down by word of mouth, we
can treat all of this as more a part of a legend than facts. In my opinion, the
real history is not as important as the future of the style. The fact that the
Northern Shaolin style is time proven to be an effective and broad based pool
of martial arts knowledge, deserves our efforts to continue to enhance and
develop its values to benefit others in the future."


I feel what you are saying though brother.;)

bawang
07-01-2011, 06:28 AM
Since you do not practice the system brother it is difficult for me to take your opinion very seriously since although you may be familiar you are far from intimate.


by negative aspect i dont mean any combat theory. i mean obsession about lineage and hiearchy and a need to feel superior to others.

lion dance also gives an example. there is no reason it is in bsl other than to conform to cantonese styles from social pressure.

Lokhopkuen
07-01-2011, 06:34 AM
by negative aspect i dont mean any combat theory. i mean obsession about lineage and hiearchy and a need to feel superior to others.

lion dance also gives an example. there is no reason it is in bsl other than to conform to cantonese styles from social pressure.

I totally agree with you!
So many people rest on the the accomplishments of the Great Masters of the past with out performing the work that produced those skills which made them legendary.;)

Lokhopkuen
07-02-2011, 09:44 PM
that other guy keeps bragging about how beishaolin has the older more "authentic" lyrics than kanjiaquan. someone post the full lyrics and lets do a comparison.

Northern Shaolin #1 demo by one of my uncles. (http://youtu.be/tGzJlGMZkq4)

LFJ
07-03-2011, 07:10 PM
Northern Shaolin #1 demo by one of my uncles. (http://youtu.be/tGzJlGMZkq4)

Nicely done. :)

Lokhopkuen
07-03-2011, 09:56 PM
Nicely done. :)

Sammy Cheung of NYC.

Siu Lum Fighter
07-27-2011, 04:54 PM
originally posted by bawang

be passionate about something else. be passionate about realizing major faults in beishaolin.
Well thatís rather pretentious, especially considering that Bak Siu Lum practitioners have kicked some major ass throughout history in real life and death struggles and in competition. Perhaps youíd like to point out where the ďmajor faultsĒ in our system are?

da hongquan has been practiced in jiangsu for about 200 years and can be legitimately traced by white lotus member records. in his town no one has heard of guruzhang.

the opera style yanghuquan that sings while doing forms is even well known, but not beishaolin.

Kuo Yu Cheong was well known in several provinces such as Su Chiang, Che Chiang, Hunan, Hupei, etc. When he went to Kwangtung with Wan Li Sheng, Li Hsien Wu, and Fu Chen Sung, he was a frigginí celebrity. So what is all of this, ďno oneís heard of himĒ BS? Ya, maybe if youíre asking some country bumpkin who doesnít know anything about their countryís history. Then again, Iím sure thatís common on the mainland since much of the history thatís taught in schools there is either highly embellished or just missing all together. Many people in China donít even know about the world famous ďtank manĒ from the Tiananmen Square massacre because the governmentís erased all record of the incident on the Chinese web. I feel like Iím constantly having to give a history lesson to people like you. Do you understand that practicing wushu was illegal in China from 1966-1976? During this time there were very few legitimate masters in China at all. You know why? Because they all got the hell out of there. Why do you call it a ďCantonese taintĒ just because schools in the south participate in local customs? Because youíre an ignorant Northerner who still canít accept that most of your countryís real martial traditions survived and thrived in the south and NOT in the north where your government crushes dissent with an iron fist?

beishaolin did not participate in the famous santang rebellion in jiangsu.
Who says, were you there?

im saying lets be reasonable and not exagerate kung fu styles we do and look down on others.
Iím not looking down on anyone, Iím just helping people get their facts straight. Talk about exaggerating kung fu styles, you know what style no one seems to have heard of before the 1980ís? Kanjiaquan. And now itís all of a sudden the ancestor to Bei Shaolin even though itís never been mentioned in any of the stories or histories of any of the Bei Shaolin schools in the entire world?

that other guy keeps bragging about how beishaolin has the older more "authentic" lyrics than kanjiaquan. someone post the full lyrics and lets do a comparison.
Once again, Iím not ďbraggingĒ, Iím rectifying a huge falsity concerning my style thatís being perpetuated by people like you. I used to have the lyrics but I canít find them now because at the time I didnít even think twice about them since they didnít match up to Bei Shaolinís at all.


by negative aspect i dont mean any combat theory. i mean obsession about lineage and hiearchy and a need to feel superior to others.

lion dance also gives an example. there is no reason it is in bsl other than to conform to cantonese styles from social pressure.

Where in my previous posts have I debated with a ďmy style is superior to yoursĒ attitude? Iím just stating facts and debating the issue of people thinking they can rewrite the history of my style based on flimsy evidence.

And lion dancing isnít a part of the Bak Siu Lum style itself. Who says that other than you? What, do you think some lion dance techniques have made their way into the forms? I guess youíre just a prejudiced bumpkin.

bawang
07-27-2011, 07:13 PM
post the lyrics for beishaolin and kanjiaquan and i will tell you which one is older, then you dont have to guess or theorize.

the boxer rebels still have people training meihuaquan an hours drive from funing county, but no one has heard of bei shaolin. in real life you can pretend your kung fu is super special and unique, but dont try to tell me that, because im from the hometown of your kung fu great grandaddy.

r.(shaolin)
07-27-2011, 10:20 PM
post the lyrics for beishaolin and kanjiaquan and i will tell you which one is older, then you dont have to guess or theorize.

"post the lyrics for beishaolin and kanjiaquan i will tell you which one is older" That's pretty funny.

Post kanjiaquan's Dui Da (對打)/Dui Lian (對 練)and I'll tell you which is older.
r.

YouKnowWho
07-28-2011, 12:13 AM
lion dance also gives an example. there is no reason it is in bsl other than to conform to cantonese styles from social pressure.

When I had my BSL Kung Fu Institute, in one Chinese new year a guy from Dallas called me and asked me if he could have lion dance in Austin. I told him it was OK. That guy probably didn't know that my BSL school didn't do lion dance.

Northwind
07-28-2011, 10:20 AM
The lion dance thing is a non-issue whatsoever. It is not a part of the BSL curriculum. Some BSL folks have picked it up and do it in their school simply because they enjoy it, it adds some cultural knowledge & enjoyment, provides for another avenue of leg training, yadda yadda yadda.

I've heard of some doing northern and some doing southern; some doing both lion & dragon, some doing neither. Who cares?

And Bawang...Although it's cool you are from Gu Yu Cheong's birthplace, it doesn't amount to much as compared to actually training the system.

No one here is doing a style superiority thing either, so drop that.

bawang
07-28-2011, 10:55 AM
im not going to argue and try to answer all these ignorant and naive answers. post the lyrics or stop talking out of your ass.


Th

And Bawang...Although it's cool you are from Gu Yu Cheong's birthplace, it doesn't amount to much as compared to actually training the system.


i am familiar with martial arts from my region

Northwind
07-28-2011, 11:11 AM
im not going to argue and try to answer all these ignorant and naive answers. post the lyrics or stop talking out of your ass.

That would be you. Your argument sounds just like the "video your fights in mma competition or you suck". Irrelevant and silly.

What's your beef with BSL Bawang? And what makes you the authority on the topic anyway?

bawang
07-28-2011, 11:15 AM
if you read that other guys post a few pages before, he was obviously talking down to shandong kanjiaquan with disrespect, and exaggerating the history and worth of beishaolin.

i feel a personal connection with martial arts from my region, and i have the right by my blood to critisize it.

that guy said the lyrics in bsl are older, so i am saying post them and give proof. i am familiar with martial art code words, especially from my region so i have the authority to decide.

Northwind
07-28-2011, 11:24 AM
i am familiar with martial arts from my region

And I am familiar with jook lum tang lang pai, wing chun, hung gar, hop gar, yang & chen taijiquan, xingyiquan, baguazhang and a host of others. Have I gone fully through the system enough to be able to debate their histories or subtle qualities? Hell no.

bawang
07-28-2011, 11:29 AM
im not familiar with any of them so im not going argue about them. i am familiar with longfist systems and i had lots of friends in my hometown who trained different stuff.

im familiar with the pattern and structure of northern marital art memnonics and codewords especially ones fro my region, so i have the authority.

Northwind
07-28-2011, 11:30 AM
if you read that other guys post a few pages before, he was obviously talking down to shandong kanjiaquan with disrespect, and exaggerating the history and worth of beishaolin.


I don't know about that. I think it's more of you supporting the idea that BSL came from Kanjiaquan and others disagreeing with that. Personally I have no dam idea. However I don't pick on styles. There is no exaggeration of worth, however.



that guy said the lyrics in bsl are older, so i am saying post them and give proof. i am familiar with martial art code words, especially from my region so i have the authority to decide.
I see. Now that would make sense. I have no idea of the aging of the lyrics and know next to nothing about Kanjiaquan.

bawang
07-28-2011, 11:34 AM
i dont care about kanjiaquan. i want the lyrics to compare, instead of having that guy bragging with no proof. that guy has been acting smug for a long time, talking about wondering monks and secret rebels bs.

i 200% respect bsl. what i dont respect is people with wing chun syndrome.

Northwind
07-28-2011, 11:36 AM
...snip... is people with wing chun syndrome.

I have no idea what that means but it sounds funny as hell lol :P

Siu Lum Fighter
07-28-2011, 02:09 PM
originally posted by bawang
post the lyrics for beishaolin and kanjiaquan and i will tell you which one is older, then you dont have to guess or theorize.

the boxer rebels still have people training meihuaquan an hours drive from funing county, but no one has heard of bei shaolin. in real life you can pretend your kung fu is super special and unique, but dont try to tell me that, because im from the hometown of your kung fu great grandaddy.
Oh, excuse me Mr. Scholar! I guess it was the picture of those guys having butt sex in your posts that made it hard for me to take you seriously.

And like I was saying, no one in China has heard of the tank man either because the government has deleted any mention of him on the web. What does that say about the country as a whole? That would be like people in the U.S. not knowing that the Kent State shootings had ever happened or that there was a video of Rodney King being beaten. If people don't even know about something like that then it's no surprise they don't know who Gu Ru Zhang was. That's just sad.

Do you get it, your country's martial history is largely missing because your government used to kill and imprison people for practicing kung fu. When they let everyone start training again most styles had been standardized and modified. There's even a "standard" version of Hung Gar now that's quite different from the style people were doing since Wong Fei Hung. I'll bet people there don't even know that. So now you're an authority on changquan? What "standardized" longfist styles do you know?

wenshu
07-28-2011, 03:17 PM
Do you get it, your country's martial history is largely missing because your government used to kill and imprison people for practising kung fu. When they let everyone start training again most styles had been standardized and modified. There's even a "standard" version of Hung Gar now that's quite different from the style people were doing since Wong Fei Hung. I'll bet people there don't even know that. So don't act like some kind of authority on changquan. What "standardized" longfist styles do you know?

Government censorship and suppression does not make your version any more legitimate. We are just supposed to take your word for it that your oral history is the accurate one? How pretentious. Word of mouth is not historical fact whether trying to assert a connection between Kan Jia and Bak Siu Lum by comparison of kou jue or claiming that Gu Yu Cheong was treated like a celebrity because you've been told he was.

People get too obsessed with all these minute historical details and persecution complexes try to trace lineages back to mythical Ming loyalist societies. Or tracing every movement of a form back to its origin trying to learn 8 different versions of Hong Quan with all the quasi mystical theoretical trappings that only serve to muddle what is in all likelihood an already overly complicated practice. Gong Fu is simple. Gong ma pu xu xie, shou yan shen fa bu, jing qi shen. Does your practice add value to your life? Does it seem authentic to you? Good. Why all this desperately public need for legitimacy?

You may be overestimating the effectiveness of the Cultural Revolution and historical censorship while underestimating the wealth of extant documentation not to mention the ability of cultural practices to survive even in the midst of extreme oppression. The suppression of one recent highly political news event does not erase what is the most historically documented continually existing civilization in human history.

Taixuquan99
07-28-2011, 03:22 PM
And like I was saying, no one in China has heard of the tank man either because the government has deleted any mention of him on the web. What does that say about the country as a whole?

Many hundreds of people died in Tiananmen, all with family members and guanxi, who ALL survive and know about it. I've met scores of people who know about that day, including young people, INSIDE the PRC. Only Western news has so empowered censorship in China(at least in idea) that they believe the Chinese themselves don't know about these things. I saw one documentary about how little the Chinese know about that, and, in the interviews, Chinese students clue each other in(in Mandarin) on the footage being from that year. They can pin it down to a year, and likely know about the rival general involved, whereas most Americans cannot tell the first, and even the well educated often don't know the second.

Taixuquan99
07-28-2011, 03:24 PM
And Chinese people aren't exactly unaware of what a proxy server is, or which of their friends knows how to find one.

bawang
07-28-2011, 03:50 PM
the communist government tolerates anti white, anti communist boxer rebels and let them build community centers, but bsl is too hardcore. thats why no one has heard of bsl in china, because it was so hardcore it had to be banned.
and since i am brain washed chinaman i cant know anything about kung fu from my very own hometown. third generation cantonese and white dudes who cant speak chinese know better than me.

this makes perfect sense

Siu Lum Fighter
07-28-2011, 04:09 PM
originally posted by bawang
i dont care about kanjiaquan. i want the lyrics to compare, instead of having that guy bragging with no proof. that guy has been acting smug for a long time, talking about wondering monks and secret rebels bs.

i 200% respect bsl. what i dont respect is people with wing chun syndrome.
Which version of Kanjiaquan's lyrics did you want to compare? The one with 13 hand forms or the one that was mentioned earlier with 10 hand forms? I would assume the one with 10 since that's the number of forms that have been in BSL since time immemorial.

And I once again want to emphasize that I'm not putting anyone's style down. You were the one who said BSL had "major faults". It's just as insulting to say that the history of Bak Siu Lum is completely bunk and that either Gu Ru Zhang or Yim Chi Wen just made the whole thing up and therefore lied to their disciples. The whole reason there's now this connection between Kanjiaquan and BSL is because some Kanjiaquan people pointed to some old book and claimed that Gu Ru Zhang's teacher, Yim Chi Wen, was a younger classmate of Yang Xiushan even though the characters are slightly different! This theory is obviously false and it doesn't fit with any of the histories told in any of the BSL schools around the world.

Siu Lum Fighter
07-28-2011, 04:24 PM
originally posted by wenshu
Government censorship and suppression does not make your version any more legitimate. We are just supposed to take your word for it that your oral history is the accurate one? How pretentious. Word of mouth is not historical fact whether trying to assert a connection between Kan Jia and Bak Siu Lum by comparison of kou jue or claiming that Gu Yu Cheong was treated like a celebrity because you've been told he was.

People get too obsessed with all these minute historical details and persecution complexes try to trace lineages back to mythical Ming loyalist societies. Or tracing every movement of a form back to its origin trying to learn 8 different versions of Hong Quan with all the quasi mystical theoretical trappings that only serve to muddle what is in all likelihood an already overly complicated practice. Gong Fu is simple. Gong ma pu xu xie, shou yan shen fa bu, jing qi shen. Does your practice add value to your life? Does it seem authentic to you? Good. Why all this desperately public need for legitimacy?

You may be overestimating the effectiveness of the Cultural Revolution and historical censorship while underestimating the wealth of extant documentation not to mention the ability of cultural practices to survive even in the midst of extreme oppression. The suppression of one recent highly political news event does not erase what is the most historically documented continually existing civilization in human history.

It's also pretentious to all of a sudden claim that what's been written and orally transmitted about Bak Siu Lum is false because of some flimsy, half-baked evidence. And what, Gu Ru Zhang wasn't famous? That whole story about "the five tigers who headed south," no one's heard of that? His killing horses with his iron palm and defending Chinese honor? Americans had heard about him all the way back in the 60's because Bruce Lee mentioned him in his books. It's not word of mouth, I'm talking about well documented facts. I don't need to seek legitimacy for all of this stuff, it was already considered legitimate before people started making claims that me and other Bak Siu Lum practitioners couldn't agree with. What's the point of this thread if we can't debate this?

And there weren't even that many specific documents about longfist styles before WWII and The Cultural Revolution. You're going to tell me there's a "wealth" of it now? Even after they burned every book they could find and leveled all of the libraries? That's a fact too.

wenshu
07-28-2011, 05:01 PM
It's also pretentious to all of a sudden claim that what's been written and orally transmitted about Bak Siu Lum is false because of some flimsy, half-baked evidence. And what, Gu Ru Zhang wasn't famous? That whole story about "the five tigers who headed south," no one's heard of that? His killing horses with his iron palm and defending Chinese honor? Americans had heard about him all the way back in the 60's because Bruce Lee mentioned him in his books. It's not word of mouth, I'm talking about well documented facts. I don't need to seek legitimacy for all of this stuff, it was already considered legitimate before people started making claims that me and other Bak Siu Lum practitioners couldn't agree with. What's the point of this thread if we can't debate this?

And there weren't even that many specific documents about longfist styles before WWII and The Cultural Revolution. You're going to tell me there's a "wealth" of it now? Even after they burned every book they could find and leveled all of the libraries? That's a fact too.

You cite myths and legends as your evidence. Myths and legends that you have a vested interest in perpetuating. I don't have a dog in this fight just pointing out that what you claim as evidence is just as flimsy as what your are bemoaning.

I was speaking about Chinese history in general as a counter to your apparent esteem for the ability of the Cultural Revolution to utterly destroy history.

Whats the big deal about Kan Jia Quan anyways? Why is speculating about a connection anathema to your worldview?

I haven't even started being pretentious and trust me it is not something you want to see because I am exceptionally ****ing good at it.

Siu Lum Fighter
07-29-2011, 05:44 PM
originally posted by wenshu
You cite myths and legends as your evidence. Myths and legends that you have a vested interest in perpetuating. I don't have a dog in this fight just pointing out that what you claim as evidence is just as flimsy as what your are bemoaning.

I was speaking about Chinese history in general as a counter to your apparent esteem for the ability of the Cultural Revolution to utterly destroy history.

Whats the big deal about Kan Jia Quan anyways? Why is speculating about a connection anathema to your worldview?

I haven't even started being pretentious and trust me it is not something you want to see because I am exceptionally ****ing good at it.

I wasn't necessarily saying you were being pretentious but some of these other jokers are saying I'm bragging about my style and such just because I don't agree with the new theories about where Bak Siu Lum came from. I'm not just using "myths and legends" to support my side either. Gu Ru Zhang was a real historical figure. His claims about his style were recorded by his disciples and others. The actual men he learned from were part of a lineage of masters that were famous in their own right. Sure, when one goes back to about the early 1800's and late 1700's some of this stuff starts to sound like tall tales but much of it still has some element of truth to it.

What we're really debating is the actual history of Bei Shaolin and Kanjiaquan based on historical facts and not the legends and tall tales. That's the "big deal" here. Again, what's the whole point of having a thread called "BSL vs. SSSL" if we're not going to discuss this. Why do you try to paint me out to be an obsessive weirdo when that's the whole point of having a forum. Why are you posting here?

And fine, I'm not saying the Cultural Revolution utterly destroyed China's history but it can't be denied that it did a hell of a lot of damage. You can't just ignore the significance of that.

Siu Lum Fighter
07-29-2011, 07:08 PM
The facts concerning who Gu Ru Zhang's teacher, Yim Chi Wen, learned from are somewhat debatable but the most accepted version, the one that lists Yim Po was documented by men like Hsu Szu Ya in New Martial Hero #1, HK 1972, and by Yim Shan Wu (disciple of Kuo Yu Cheong) and Hwang Ken Wang in Martial Arts Association Limited, August 1970, Hong Kong Chinese Martial Arts Association Limited. Some think it was Wan Pang Ts’ai but there’s no real evidence for that.

The research done by Sal Canzonieri in the late eighties or early nineties (?) was what yielded this theory that Yim Chi Wen was a younger classmate of Yang Xiushan. It has been debated that the character used for Yim Chi Wen’s name is not the same as how it was usually written and besides that the two styles have drastic differences. I'm not saying they couldn't be loosely related, but it shouldn't be set in stone that that is the style that should be considered Bak Siu Lum's ancestor. In the face of such questionable evidence, why couldn't we say Kanjiaquan came from Bak Siu Lum? Just in this thread alone it's been pointed out that there's a version of Kanjiaquan with 10 forms and not the 13 that were recorded when Sal first did his research.

I think because Sal’s research seems to have been done with Shaolin Temple’s blessing, people tend to want to think, "that's it, it's set in stone, no more need for debate." But Sal didn’t even discuss any of this with Bak Siu Lum schools outside the country. Maybe because he felt that most schools listing Yim Po as Yim Chi Wen’s teacher and not Yang Xiushan's teacher could just be brushed aside. I actually can’t even find the name of Yang Xiushan’s teacher any where on the net. Maybe someone can enlighten me?

r.(shaolin)
07-29-2011, 08:41 PM
Gu Ru Zhang was a real historical figure. His claims about his style were recorded by his disciples and others. The actual men he learned from were part of a lineage of masters that were famous in their own right. Sure, when one goes back to about the early 1800's and late 1700's some of this stuff starts to sound like tall tales but much of it still has some element of truth to it.


You are right. In the villages of the time there were a lot of so called 'big fish' in small ponds. In the larger cities of the time however, specially in larger coastal cities such as Shanghai, no one could hide. Gu Ru Zhang was a well known contender in that bigger arena. The man had, and has more credibility than the village styles that are being reconstructed in China today . . .which is, if what we are seeing online any indication, rather thin.
cheers,
r.

wenshu
07-29-2011, 10:18 PM
I wasn't necessarily saying you were being pretentious but some of these other jokers are saying I'm bragging about my style and such just because I don't agree with the new theories about where Bak Siu Lum came from. I'm not just using "myths and legends" to support my side either. Gu Ru Zhang was a real historical figure. His claims about his style were recorded by his disciples and others. The actual men he learned from were part of a lineage of masters that were famous in their own right. Sure, when one goes back to about the early 1800's and late 1700's some of this stuff starts to sound like tall tales but much of it still has some element of truth to it.

What we're really debating is the actual history of Bei Shaolin and Kanjiaquan based on historical facts and not the legends and tall tales. That's the "big deal" here. Again, what's the whole point of having a thread called "BSL vs. SSSL" if we're not going to discuss this. Why do you try to paint me out to be an obsessive weirdo when that's the whole point of having a forum. Why are you posting here?

And fine, I'm not saying the Cultural Revolution utterly destroyed China's history but it can't be denied that it did a hell of a lot of damage. You can't just ignore the significance of that.


The facts concerning who Gu Ru Zhang's teacher, Yim Chi Wen, learned from are somewhat debatable but the most accepted version, the one that lists Yim Po was documented by men like Hsu Szu Ya in New Martial Hero #1, HK 1972, and by Yim Shan Wu (disciple of Kuo Yu Cheong) and Hwang Ken Wang in Martial Arts Association Limited, August 1970, Hong Kong Chinese Martial Arts Association Limited. Some think it was Wan Pang Tsíai but thereís no real evidence for that.

The research done by Sal Canzonieri in the late eighties or early nineties (?) was what yielded this theory that Yim Chi Wen was a younger classmate of Yang Xiushan. It has been debated that the character used for Yim Chi Wenís name is not the same as how it was usually written and besides that the two styles have drastic differences. I'm not saying they couldn't be loosely related, but it shouldn't be set in stone that that is the style that should be considered Bak Siu Lum's ancestor. In the face of such questionable evidence, why couldn't we say Kanjiaquan came from Bak Siu Lum? Just in this thread alone it's been pointed out that there's a version of Kanjiaquan with 10 forms and not the 13 that were recorded when Sal first did his research.

I think because Salís research seems to have been done with Shaolin Templeís blessing, people tend to want to think, "that's it, it's set in stone, no more need for debate." But Sal didnít even discuss any of this with Bak Siu Lum schools outside the country. Maybe because he felt that most schools listing Yim Po as Yim Chi Wenís teacher and not Yang Xiushan's teacher could just be brushed aside. I actually canít even find the name of Yang Xiushanís teacher any where on the net. Maybe someone can enlighten me?

Fair enough. I was not trying dispute the man's existence or cast aspersions on BSL, it appeared to me that you were disputing the historical veracity of other's claims while justifying your position with myths and legends of questionable origins. I will say that I view Sal's research with the same skepticism that I view students recitation of the stories they've been told as if historical record. Unfortunately we do not have much more to rely on than word of mouth; even extant records are only someone's word.

Siu Lum Fighter
08-31-2011, 11:56 PM
So I guess it's settled then. Based on all of the evidence presented, it can be deduced that Bak Siu Lum and Kanjiaquan are related only in that they are both Shaolin related styles.

Now, it's still my opinion that if one style came from another then it is Kanjiaquan that was based on some early version of Bak Siu Lum. This probably would've happened within the last 200 years or so. For those of you who might jump all over me for saying this, realize that I have a right to my opinion and I'm not trying to claim that one style is superior to another. If it came down to it though, probably every other Bak Siu Lum school in the world except maybe the ones (or the one that I know of) in mainland China and, as ginosifu said, every sifu who came out of the Jing Wu era would agree about which is older.

I would also like to mention that if Kanjiaquan had been related to Bak Siu Lum all along, then why wasn't there ANY mention of this in any record anywhere before the 1980's? There's barely any mention of Kanjiaquan by anyone before this time and it was a totally obscure village style before it was all of a sudden discovered and propped up as Bak Siu Lum's predecessor. Bak Siu Lum, on the other hand, was famous before WWII and there was never any mention of a relation to Kanjiaquan in any way. Bak Siu Lum (or Bei Shaolin) was the only style that was referred to as "Northern Shaolin" and along with styles like Preying Mantis, Eagle Claw, and Mi Tsung Lohan, it was believed to have originated at the temple itself. Then came the massive upheaval of war and The Cultural Revolution when even Buddhists were persecuted. Now you're going to tell me that I should recognize Kanjiaquan as BSL's predecessor when it never was before during the time when there would have been more evidence to draw from? I don't think so.