some confusion with the 12/36 keywords

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Northern Praying Mantis
1

I am going by the ‘31 keyword formula’ as shown in LKWs seven star vol 1 book.

I understand most of the principles to a basic level but I am interested/confused about these particular ones.

  1. Ou (Hook)
  2. Tiao (intercept)
  3. Chan (contact)

These 3 principles seem to be pretty much the same? What are the differences between each? Here is what I have concluded so far, so please correct me if I am way off.

Starting with Chan. This is the idea of contacting the incomming attack, so in theory Chan is represented in both Ou and Tiao.

Ou is usually combined with the skills of Lou (grapple) and Tsai (pluck). Ou catches, Lou secures, and tsai plucks the opponent downwards towards the attack.

Tiao seems almost the same as Ou. What is the difference. In the above example, Ou simply catches the attack and then it is the grappling hand that pulls down the opponent.
However, in my head, Tiao does both the catching and the pulling, therefore it can be used exclusively without needing to be combined with other principles.

Am I way off?!?!?
Give me your insight

craig

2

The difference between gou and diao and is that gou focuses on the middle, ring and pinky fingers, while diao focuses on the thumb, index and middle fingers. Gou has more of a “sliding/leading” quality while diao has more of a pinching or grabbing quality. That being said, gou often immediately precedes diao. You can go for a gou and if you don’t get it, circle around the opponent’s arm into a diao, sliding down as far as the wrist, where you can pinch the joint between the wrist and hand.

Keep in mind that gou-lou-cai-gua and diao-jin-beng-da are in some ways like a parallel set and that in addition to their usual meanings of say, “beng” being a beng-chui, the characters can also have meanings in terms of strategy. Gou can help you set up a diao, lou is a means to jin, gou and lou give you cai–a method to “beng” or “break open” the enemy’s defense, setting up for gua (taking the opponent down) or da (any strike).

3

Gou Lou Cai,

I am going by the ‘36 keyword formula’ as shown in LKWs seven star vol 1 book.

Please bear in mind that different teachers have different interpretations. So I am sharing my opinion only.

I understand most of the principles to a basic level but I am interested/confused about these particular ones.

Yes, sometimes it might be counter productive to read different line’s interpretations.

1. Ou (Hook)

Gou (ou) is a middle level (face/throat/chest) and relatively long distant intercepting move. Usually making contact with the wrist area of an incoming arm. The energy can be diao (ward off/casting aside), Zhan Nian (contact and adhere) and Chan (wrapping and reeling). It’s more than meets the eyes.

2. Tiao (intercept)

Diao (tiao) is again middle level. It’s intercept and ward off and casting aside usually casting the incoming forearm away and behind you from a high line to a low line. In some ways, it’s almost like a slip in boxing term except that you have the hook hand preceeding; hence, Diao Jin (advancing).

3. Chan (contact)

Zhan (chan) is to make contact. It doesn’t have to be a hook. It can be any part of the forearm upto the tip of the elbow (back of hand included). Usually Zhan would be use in conjunction with Nian (adhere) in order to listen your opponent through his bridge. Zhan can be delivered with a Gou (hook), but a Gou doesn’t necessarily has to be Zhan.

These 3 principles seem to be pretty much the same? What are the differences between each? Here is what I have concluded so far, so please correct me if I am way off.

This is typically the idea of Bian Hua (variations and changes). Tanglang is holistic and organic in nature. When it’s broken down into cellular level, the powress of it will be diminished as well. That’s why these keywords should be drilled and emperically studied.

Starting with Chan. This is the idea of contacting the incomming attack, so in theory Chan is represented in both Ou and Tiao.

please see above.

Ou is usually combined with the skills of Lou (grapple) and Tsai (pluck). Ou catches, Lou secures, and tsai plucks the opponent downwards towards the attack.

Gou is mostly applied to the wrist area. Lou (grab) is working on the elbow and upper arm grid. Cai (pluck) can be used in conjunction with Gou and Lou. But it can also work as a single handed grab or snatch against an incoming arm (mid to high level). It requires very good hand eye coordination though.

Tiao seems almost the same as Ou. What is the difference. In the above example, Ou simply catches the attack and then it is the grappling hand that pulls down the opponent.
However, in my head, Tiao does both the catching and the pulling, therefore it can be used exclusively without needing to be combined with other principles.

Diao in Greater Meihwa Line is more of a grab/catch and pull to the side. You effectively change your opponent’s line of attack. Gou is more of an interception and follow up with the other hand (Lou). His and your relative position and distance don’t change much. Remember Tanglang (the insect) in nature uses both claws in conjunction. But we human can choose freely depending on the situation. That’s where the art is, my friend. :wink:

Am I way off?!?!?
Give me your insight

I think you are quite close IMHO. May be working with drill such as Zhan Nain and Feng Shou will help you see more. Just some thoughts to share.

Warm regards

Mantis108

4

Monkeyfoot,
I think of gou as a grasp that is maintained for a second or two, while diao merely hooks for a split second without the need to linger on the opponent’s appendage.
I compare diao to redirecting parries. A movement similar to fencing with the foil, or parrying with the gim.

Richard A. Tolson

5

Hey people

Those were all very helpful comments. I just got back from my class and spent some time breaking apart certain techniques.

You effectively change your opponent’s line of attack. Gou is more of an interception and follow up with the other hand (Lou)

This was the exact same thing that I concluded. Diao seems to be more of a redirection onto a different line, creating an opening to drive forward from.

Im going to experiment a bit more tomorrow in class.

cheers again people

craig

6

Monkeyfoot,
The principles are covered on my site also.
http://www.lawclansman.com/theory.html

Just more information to help. In LKW’s book, it is my opinion that the expanded expression of the keywords reiterates the twelve. Principles are more alive than techniques and that is what should be kept in mind. Techniques give examples of principles but a single principle can give way to many techniques.

7

Principles are more alive than techniques and that is what should be kept in mind. Techniques give examples of principles but a single principle can give way to many techniques.

Sifu Albright,

I would disagree with this statement. Principles are academic, techniques are practical. The Keywords are used to identify and organize the techniques in the system. They are expanded upon to construct strategy and tactics. But the techniques are most alive. Every different opponent offers a different variation in response either because of height, reach, distance, timing. Techniques are countless while the keyword principles for most of the Tong Long community number 12. Even with the variations on these keywords, there are more often similarities than differences. But each branch of Tong Long expresses these principles with their own distinct flavor. The principles can be the same but the techniques are different. Over the course of the history of Tong Long, more variations, modifications, evolution of techniques has occurred than the principles. It must be if we are truly adapting as martial artists to our opponents.

Vance Young

8

I think Sifu Albright hit the nail on the head.

You can not look at a single technique and expect it to represent a principle.

The common technique often referred to as Au (Ou) demonstrates all 3 of those principles.

Your opponent does a straight punch aimed at your head. In response you make contact and intercept his strike by hooking his wrist and snap him forward.

The Gim (Jim) is demonstrated once you make contact with your opponent.
The Dieu (Dil) is demonstrated by your intent to intercept his movement.
The Au (Ou) is demonstrated by the actions of your hand on your opponents wrist.

Also, as I explain to new students the differences in grabbing (grasping) and hooking, the actions are very much true to the meanings. Lou (grasp) is a solid, active grab on an opponent requiring you to squeeze, whereas Au (hook) is a hook using the hand, most common around the wrist. The hook doesn’t require a person to squeeze in order to tighten the grip, but instead it is the opponents resistance that tightens the grip. You can associate this to chinese finger cuffs… The harder you pull, the tighter it gets.

Trying to get your head around the principles will take time. I’m not sure anyone here can tell you how to really understand them. Don’t try and pin point their meaning, instead try and have an open mind and see how they define your techniques.

Disclaimer
My views are that of my personal experiences and training. Each lineage and every person has slight variations that explain these types of things. So you may take this information as simple advise, but in the end decide for yourself how you would describe such things.

BTW, I apologize for my romanization :slight_smile:

9

Young Mantis I agree with your comment in part that principles are academic and techniques applied. Taking that one step further one might say that everything on this board is academic, including the talking of techniques. Something applied would actually involve physical training.

But later on you seemed to talk about the same thing LawClansman wrote about earlier. In essence agreeing upon the idea that principles are fewer and techniques are many. In fact if I am not mistaken I think that was the driving point of LawClansmans post that a single principle can represent one and/or many different possible techniques.

IMO, principles are a nice way of chunking larger pieces of information into something a little more digestible. In this regards adding on an additional 19 princples as LKW did seems to defeat the notion of “chunking”.

BBK

10

Thoughts on LKW’s Keywords

Personally, there’s little doubt that praying mantis’ keywords have something to do with the Shaolin Authentic which in my mind is written from a mystic perspective. That’s the classical approach.

When I look at LKW’s keywords, it’s more of an exploration of techniques more so than a keyword explanation to me. BTW, I would say it’s actually 32 techniques altogether. Teng-Nuo (bounce in the book) could be broken off as 2 techniques IMHO. I also see these 31 keywords in his book as a guide to get acquinted with the techniques found in the forms in his book series. To that end, it is a great design and a well thought out book.

IMHO this book isn’t about classical Tanglang theories per se. It’s more of a personal expression and an unique neo-classical approach to Tanglang especially that of HK 7 Star line somewhat reminiscent of the writtings of WHF. I am not saying that LKW borrowed WHF’s material. I am just saying that I would categorize their work as neo-classics of Tanglang since personal interpretations are involved.

Just some thoughts

Mantis108

11

[B]Well thought out comments across the board,
I would like to expound on my post just a bit. It is the academic nature of the martial arts that separate them from one another and is devised to advance fighting to an art form.

In my teachings, techniques have a short life. That is to say after the technique is done, it is done. You must now continue with something else or repeat said technique. However, you may continue with many techniques all of which are goverened by a single principle. The principle still lives on when the technique is over.

The techniques are the practical aspect to be sure. But the grouping of the techniques using the principle as guidelines, serves as order to the otherwise chaotic/random number of techniques. This is also the purpose of forms. To create order in the limitless number of techniques at your disposal. [/B]

12

12 keywords principle

Hi Sifu Albright and All,

Very well put indeed, my friend. Establishing order out of chaos is what a system or art is about.

IMHO the reason to have a theory is to clearly demonstrate Tanglang techniques and its approach is not merely heuristics, rule of thumbs, old wives’ tales, and/or anecdotal evidences (check out Game theorum in the book - 5 Golden Rules of Mathematics). Theory is the back bone of a system. When it comes to system or style, no perminant structure of effective teaching can be established without it.

from a Greater Meiwha line perspective, the 12 Keywords principle points to the objective goal that we try to achieve within the stylistic framework set forth by the princple. All 12 converge to a single objective that is to dispatch the opponent skillfully in the shortest time possible. This prime directive (the 12 keywords) is holistic in nature. In my mind that is the Tanglang path.

The question of why is it 12? Is the number randomly picked or it is just a convention? I can say that it’s most definitely not a random number and it has roots in classic Chinese studies. However, it’s beyond the scope of this thread. So I would leave that for now.

Warm regards

Robert

13

Robert
Interesting that you ask “why 12?”! Hu Laoshi has stated that though in traditional chuan pu there are certainly 12 keywords (16 in LHTL), that in fact there are well over 20 keywords he considers “key” or important. He is constantly reminding me to not get too fixed on any certain one principle because they all intertwine with each other, one leading to another, opening an avenue for yet one more. Though the words may be very simple, the concepts/theories/ideologies behind them are as endless as 10,000 miles of space (my **** poor attempt at Chinese mystical explanation :o ).
So while our lineage certainly has the classic 12 keywords, and 16 keywords in Liuhe, all in all the words work for all Mantis styles (and many non-mantid systems as well :wink: ), and are many more than just 12.
CHeers
Jake :smiley:

14

16 Keywords

Hi Jake,

Thanks for the input. For reference purposes here’s a version of 16 Keywords (not sure if this is the 16 Keywords that you are referring to:

(Gou), (Lou), (Diao), (Cai)

(Beng), (Zha), (Gua), (Pi)

(Zhan), (Nian), (Tie), (Kao)

(Zhan), (Zhuan), (Teng), (Nuo)

Warm regards

Robert

15

Originally posted by Mantis108
IMHO this book isn’t about classical Tanglang theories per se. It’s more of a personal expression and an unique neo-classical approach to Tanglang especially that of HK 7 Star line somewhat reminiscent of the writtings of WHF. I am not saying that LKW borrowed WHF’s material. I am just saying that I would categorize their work as neo-classics of Tanglang since personal interpretations are involved.

Identifying WHF and LKW as neo-classcial interpretations of classical Tanglang is an interesting perspective.

LKWs 31 key words would be an exmaple of this.

WHFs departure from the classical written quan up approach to forms is another example.

I am interested to get your general thoughts Mantis108 on other areas, particularly in WHFs books, where you feel he has shifted to a more neo-classical framework. In a physical approach our line does seems to also have some uniuqe interpretations compared to other 7* families.

Thanks,
BBK

16

Robert
The 16 Keywords of Liuhe Tanglang as passed on to me from Hu laoshi:
(Apologies but my computer does not help in the hanzi dept. Perhaps you could help Robert??)
Guo (Hook)
Luo (Parry/Cover)
Cai (Pluck)
Kua (Suspend)
Zhan (Contact)
Nian (stick)
Bang (Bind)
Tie (ADhere)
Shan (Dodge)
Zuan (Turn)
Tang (Jump)
Nuo (Slide/Shift)
Kun (Bundle)
Feng (Seal)
Gun (Roll)
Lo (Leaking)

Where did your 16 words come from?
Thanks
Jake :cool:

17

Thoughts on WHF’s Work…

Hi BBK,

Thanks for the input. I believe many in the mantis community would have heard or read about WHF’s work. He’s properly one of the most if not the only prolific writers of our time. I am a fan of this interesting master. To be honest, I had collected his Tanglang series when I was young and that got me falling in love for northern praying mantis styles. Personally, it would be great to have his descendents to organize some kind of a celebration for this great mind of Tanglang.

Glad you find it interesting. :slight_smile:

LKWs 31 key words would be an exmaple of this.

I agreed.

WHFs departure from the classical written quan up approach to forms is another example.

IMHO WHF didn’t exactly departed from the classical style of Quanpu writing per se. In fact his 5 characters per move format and the standardized footwork-hand coordination stylus naming convention is in my mind an evidence of his exposure to Classical Tanglang Quanpu both found in Mainland Qixing and GML. The benefit of it is that it allows for easy referencing the moves. The Quanpu writings become demystified and generic. This is a good move in promoting Tanglang and moving it towards modern times. However, it is not totally without flaw IMHO. Some combinations would have to be broken down into individual moves; thus, might create an impression of mechanical and literal execution for the general readership. Now, of course, an adept from WHF’s line would disgree and point to the contrary. Anyway, I prefer the poetic style of Classical Tanglang. But I do see the value of WHF’s Quanpu; hence, I appreciate and enjoy his efforts very much also.

I am interested to get your general thoughts Mantis108 on other areas, particularly in WHFs books, where you feel he has shifted to a more neo-classical framework. In a physical approach our line does seems to also have some uniuqe interpretations compared to other 7* families.

WHF’s writings impress me as very straight forward and honest. He is also quite an visionary. I remember translating one of his article for the Mantis Quarterly, in which he talked about Judo would become a giant power in combative arts. We now see the strength of Judo and it’s revolutionary influence on BJJ (an evolution of Judo) that developed an earth shattering new paradigm for the combative sports. The science of hand to hand combat has reached a new summit because of Judo’s Randori training methodology. Now WHF saw that a good 40 years ago (?). The world back then didn’t think much of Judo let alone knowing the development of BJJ. At a time when the CMA community was prejudice against all combative arts, he called it as it is.

This is a man who did use his intellect and applied it to Kung Fu or vice versa. He didn’t try to sell the audience regurgutated information on Classical teachings. Rather he objectively observes, analyze, and reduce both ancient and current information and data to draw conclusions as well as setting new standards. He poured new insights into what was fast becoming a status quo of Kung Fu most notably proliferation of forms. IMHO He also was innovative in identifying the stages of mantis training and the use of Ling forms (partnered sets) in LGY Qixing. Comparing this to most MA teachers of his time he was “a crane standing tall in a roosters’ flock”

I hope this answers your questions. :slight_smile:

Hi Jake,

I got the 16 keywords form the mainland Chinese mantis forum. I don’t know which branch of mantis it is from other than that might be of LHTL. It seems your 16 is somewhat similar to it as well as the GML 12 keywords. If you like I could try to put the Chinese for your 16 keywords. Personally, I use the GML 12 keywords. So you use these 16 now?

Warm regards

Mantis108

18

I “use” any and all keywords that is found within my technique. So I guess one can say that I “use” well over 25 or 30.
Please do post the Chinese for the benefit of others. Dave Cater chose not to print the hanzi for the keywords in my article earlier this year on Liuhe and Hu laoshi, and I cannot do it on the computer, so I don’t think many people have seen the proper hanzi.
As always your help is really appreciated.
Cheers
Jake :cool:

19

Hi Jake,

Here’s yours 16 words with the Chinese characters:

(gou), (Lou), (Cai), (Gua)

(Zhan), (Nian), (Bang), (Tie)

(Shan), (Zhuan), (Teng), (Nuo)

(Kun), (Feng), (Gun), (Lou)

Correction:

“bang” would be “” instead.

Warm regards
Robert

20

Just to be nitpicky, shouldn’t “bang” be “” if it means “bind”?