For those interested in Shaolin staff I have included some translations from Cheng Zengyou’s 1624 book Exposition of Original Shaolin Staff Fighting
For the most part about “the barbarian surrendering Maneuver” first mentioned by General Qi (1528-1588) and published in his New Book on Effective Training Methods (1562). He describes the technique:
[INDENT]The applications are mysterious and limitless. From ancient times to the present other weapons have rarely matched its power. None of the other maneuvers can compare to it.[/INDENT]
[QUOTE=Tainan Mantis;968339]For those interested in Shaolin staff I have included some translations from Cheng Zengyou’s 1624 book Exposition of Original Shaolin Staff Fighting
For the most part about “the barbarian surrendering Maneuver” first mentioned by General Qi (1528-1588) and published in his New Book on Effective Training Methods (1562). He describes the technique:
[INDENT]The applications are mysterious and limitless. From ancient times to the present other weapons have rarely matched its power. None of the other maneuvers can compare to it.[/INDENT]
[b]An awe-inspiring well arranged display of military force with hundreds or thousands of soldiers in a platoon moving forward makes it impossible for the brave to rush to the front or the cowardly to hide in the rear. As the enemy troops arrange their spears or swords to attack us and we return the attack all the soldiers move together as a single unit. The platoon shape is so dense and tightly packed that even a minor movement of the hand is difficult. How can it be allowed to have everybody jump and move left and right?
At this point it would only take one person to turn back and everyone would feel doubt. It would only take one person to turn around and retreat one small step and everyone would lose their confidence.[/b]
I think in general a lot of people have mistaken ideas about the ‘martial’ part and all that entails, in the training and pursuit of these systems, and much time and angst and panty wringing is placed on ‘effectiveness’ and ‘what works’, citing to all kinds of things which are not strictly relative.
This is an interesting passage, it was written in 1621 and mentions Shaolin boxing practice. I have transcribed the characters so that if you do not trust in my translation (as presented below) you may come up with your own. Note that there is buddhist specific terminology used which may confuse you if you are not familiar with it. The first is , that is ‘Bodhi’ or enlightenment. The hope is that fist practice will ascend to the height of ‘Paramita’ which is akin to perfection. or Yaksha is also used, it is a buddhist spirit which can be a benevolent nature fairy, or it can be a wicked ghost.
[SIZE=“4”], , , [/SIZE]
It was asked: Shaolin staff is so famous, yet the monks of today practice the fist more than the staff, Why is this?
[SIZE=“4”], , , , , ,
[/SIZE] I answered: The shaolin staff is named the ‘Spirit’, it is the sacred transmission of King Luo, and until this day is considered supremely enlightened. But the fist art is not so popular throughout the land, so today the shaolin specialise in the fist with the desire that it will reach perfection like the staff.
[QUOTE=Sal Canzonieri;1250820]Doesn’t it also say in a different answer to a question, that Shaolin has their beloved Taizu Chang Quan? I remember see that.[/QUOTE]
I think so. I have not read through all of it yet but I have seen Taizu chang quan mentioned in several places, it also mentions MianZhang Duanda. It also compares various staff stances to their analogue fist techniques.
Various Martial Arts mentioned are ‘YangJia Qiang, SunJia YinShouGun, Taizu ChangQuan, MianZhang DuanDa, Shaolin YeCha Gun’. All of these names exist as Shaolin forms today, With Taizu Changquan and YinShou Gun as two of the most popular even 400 years later.
The chapter on questions on answers, where empty hand is mentioned, is chiefly on weapons. The chapter finishes with a brief mention of empty hands.
[SIZE=“4”]…[/SIZE]
Iron Fist has both Taizu and Wen Family. Short Strikes has Mian Zhang.
Something very interesting to note about this is that Short Strikes is placed in the sentence opposed to the words Iron Fist.
Iron Fist is this…, and Short Strikes is this…,
Does anyone use the term Iron Fist?
The term has been in use in Shandong to represent a form of Longfist.
Anywhere else?
[QUOTE=RenDaHai;1250827]Various Martial Arts mentioned are ‘YangJia Qiang, SunJia YinShouGun, Taizu ChangQuan, MianZhang DuanDa, Shaolin YeCha Gun’. All of these names exist as Shaolin forms today, With Taizu Changquan and YinShou Gun as two of the most popular even 400 years later.[/QUOTE]
I guess the question is…just because they have the same names, are they really the same forms?
I’ve always heard Yangjia qiang and Liuhe qiang are interchangable terms, but when you look at huge assortment of forms with those names it seems not to be true. On the other hand, filter out some of the flashy opera moves and they boil down to the same handful of techniques and strategies.
More importantly…how were these arts trained back then? I’ve seen staff training in China that involves paired training that more closely resembles Japanese formal paired kata, but teachers in China seem much more content with teaching solo taolu.
[QUOTE=RenDaHai;1250827]I think so. I have not read through all of it yet but I have seen Taizu chang quan mentioned in several places, it also mentions MianZhang Duanda. It also compares various staff stances to their analogue fist techniques.
Various Martial Arts mentioned are ‘YangJia Qiang, SunJia YinShouGun, Taizu ChangQuan, MianZhang DuanDa, Shaolin YeCha Gun’. All of these names exist as Shaolin forms today, With Taizu Changquan and YinShou Gun as two of the most popular even 400 years later.[/QUOTE]
Main Zhang Duanda, Cotton Palm Close Strikes, still exists as a style in China.
I have seen some of the routines.
But other books from the 1600s about Shaolin martial arts all mention a Yue Jia (Yue Fei Family, meaning his army) Duan Da.
Yue Duan Da is one of the most important Shaolin martial arts of ancient times, it influenced not only Shaolin close range fighting (chin na and takedowns) but many other martial arts too (Liuhe Quan, Ba Fan Shou via Wen family martial arts, Tang Lang, Xing Yi Quan, Eagle Claw, and others too).
[QUOTE=Tainan Mantis;1250835]The chapter on questions on answers, where empty hand is mentioned, is chiefly on weapons. The chapter finishes with a brief mention of empty hands.
[SIZE=“4”]…[/SIZE]
Iron Fist has both Taizu and Wen Family. Short Strikes has Mian Zhang.
(Here it is likely a typographical error, and the meaning can be Soft Palms or Continuous Palms)
No matter what the style, they all have their unique characteristics.
Something very interesting to note about this is that Short Strikes is placed in the sentence opposed to the words Iron Fist.
Iron Fist is this…, and Short Strikes is this…,
Does anyone use the term Iron Fist?
The term has been in use in Shandong to represent a form of Longfist.
Anywhere else?[/QUOTE]
Main here is generally considered to mean Soft, Cotton.
Wen Family martial arts are now known as Chuo Jiao and Ba Fan Shou. Military and Scholarly Wen Family martial arts.
I think they are from Shandong. They preserved most of what Shaolin was like during the 1500s.
So, Iron Fist could be a term from Shaondong, many martial artists from Shandong visted Shaolin during the 1500s to 1600s.
[QUOTE=pazman;1250871]I guess the question is…just because they have the same names, are they really the same forms?
I’ve always heard Yangjia qiang and Liuhe qiang are interchangable terms, but when you look at huge assortment of forms with those names it seems not to be true. On the other hand, filter out some of the flashy opera moves and they boil down to the same handful of techniques and strategies.
More importantly…how were these arts trained back then? I’ve seen staff training in China that involves paired training that more closely resembles Japanese formal paired kata, but teachers in China seem much more content with teaching solo taolu.[/QUOTE]
Yang Family were famous, men and women, for their spear play. They were always in the military. Yang Family spear play consists of routines that are based on the length of the spear. So there is the Pear/Plum Blossum spear and the Eight Mother Spear, both two routines within Yang Family Spear. Shaolin still does this “Plum Blossum Spear”, of what’s left of it.
BUT, Liuhe Spear is meant to be thought of as “SIX Combination” Spear, BECAUSE the methods combine the best ideas of 6 different martial arts masters, Yang being one of them. So Yang Spear is not Liuhe spear.
By the way, Liuhe Spear was considered the most amazingly great spear play to master and it is what Ji Longfeng (aka Ji Jike) used in combination with Shaolin Xing Quan (Shape Boxing - Rooster, Hawk, Monkey, etc) to create what is now Xing Yi Quan. Its was an internal martial art, this spear because you had to practice whole body movement and qigong to master it.
[QUOTE=Sal Canzonieri;1250899]Yecha is like a vampire, forked teeth.[/QUOTE]
A recording of the martial arts of China Mid 16th century is called Jiang Nan Jing Luo. It gives some details that are missing from Shaolin’s own book on the subject.
Shaolin’s Yecha Staff is specifically named after the “Sea Patrolling Yecha.” A detail not obvious from Shaolin’s own book on the subject.
The techniques are divided into the Greater and Lesser Sea Patrolling Yecha.
These technques include using the staff as a staff as well as sword and for using counter spear.
The Yang Family spear was alternately named Liu He Qiang-Six Harmony Spear, as well as other names no longer in popular use. This was documented in the Mid-Ming.
[QUOTE=pazman;1250871]I guess the question is…just because they have the same names, are they really the same forms?
More importantly…how were these arts trained back then? I’ve seen staff training in China that involves paired training that more closely resembles Japanese formal paired kata, but teachers in China seem much more content with teaching solo taolu.[/QUOTE]
Well probably not the same forms no, but the same name has persisted and probably a lot of the technique.
The actual taolu ‘YinSHouGunYiLu’ is represented in the text. I intend to compare this with the current versions around song shan.
As to training he mentions competition.
He is also asked a question saying that ‘The form does not seem a practical method of training’ and he answers it is to gain good control over the staff, a steady grip and fluidity and ease of movement.
Interestingly he also says that a lot of the techniques cannot be used in battle since in formation many of the transformations cannot be used. If we refine to just battle technique there are really only a few.
[QUOTE=Tainan Mantis;1250922]
Shaolin’s Yecha Staff is specifically named after the “Sea Patrolling Yecha.” A detail not obvious from Shaolin’s own book on the subject.
[/QUOTE]
That is interesting. No, he doesn’t mention that in this book. The YeCha is specifically buddhist terminology for a type of ‘fairy/spirit/nymph/demon’ type creature associated with nature, forrest or rivers or mountains etc which are usually benevolent. However on occasion they can also be malevolent.
I assume the name is to infer the magical element of the staff. I think the name YeCha is related to the name FengMo (crazy demon/crazy magic), also a common shaolin staff name. Interestingly the name ‘FengMo YeCha Gun’ is also common suggesting a shared heritage.
[QUOTE=Sal Canzonieri;1250897]Main Zhang Duanda, Cotton Palm Close Strikes, still exists as a style in China.
I have seen some of the routines.
But other books from the 1600s about Shaolin martial arts all mention a Yue Jia (Yue Fei Family, meaning his army) Duan Da.
[/QUOTE]
Mianzhang is still used as a name in Shaolin forms, though it is rare.
YueJiaQuan has many very different types around Henan, I have encountered it before. There is a specifically YueJia XinYi Quan which uses Songshan form characteristics in a village near ZhengZhou. I have yet to visit this place.
Clearly at the time in Shaolin they practiced the spear a lot, since many of the staff techniques are designed specifically to defeat the spear.
Cheng mentions that during battle formation many of the changes cannot be used. As such in formation fighting I suspect there is very little difference between the major spear styles. Only a few of the major techniques will be useful.
Cheng also wrote a book on Yang family Spear. He mentions techniques of BaQiangMu, and LiuHeFa.