[QUOTE=RD’S Alias - 1A;805925]Could Tai Tzu hongquan be considered any Shandong longfist mixed Tai Tzu from Shaolin?[/QUOTE]
You’re better off going back to the Hong Quan thread in the Shaolin area, for that question.
Since no Mantis people recognize anything in these 2 sets, then this thread is pretty much over with.
Thanks, BT for giving your opinion, much appreciated.
Sal,
No worries. Out of interest, I think there was slightly more in common with TLQ in the first clip (but still nothing exclusive).
BT
I found some information on the 'net pertaining to Tai Tzu and Northern Mantis:
Taiji Praying Mantis Grandmaster Chiu Chuk Kai (CE 1900 - 1991).
Grandmaster Chiu was born in Yi County, Shandong province, China. The Abbot of a Buddhist Temple in the near mountain took him in as a young disciple when he was about 8 years old. There were 2 monks, who taught him Taizu Men (Grand Emperor division), which is a famous northern style martial art. He practiced random techniques with a rudimentary wooden dummy during his training. These techniques were not strung together in a set routine. This period of training that lasted about 10 years left a profound impression on Grandmaster Chiu. After the monk teachers passed away, he returned to his hometown and then move to Yantai County where he furthered his martial arts training with 2 Taiji Praying Mantis masters. Grandmaster Chiu became proficient in both Taizu Men and Taiji Praying Mantis Kung Fu.
In early 1940s, he relocated to Macao, where he joined a brotherhood with 12 other people in a special ceremony. One of his 12 sworn brothers was Sifu Chu Chun Man, who was a Wing Chun (Forever Spring) style master. It is believed that Abbot Gi Chin used to teach a fluid, agile and short ranged style called the Huaquan (flower fist) at the Forever Spring Hall in the Fujian Shaolin temple; hence, the name Wing Chun to commemorate the teaching. Sifu Chu was teaching this style at his Kwoon (training hall), which also had a Wooden Dummy. Having the opportunity to exchange martial knowledge with Sifu Chu, Grandmaster Chiu combined the Taizu Men and Taiji Praying Mantis Techniques to create the TJPM Wooden Dummy form that was inspired by his sworn brother’s Kung Fu. The form consists of 108 moves, which signifies cosmic balance in Chinese Buddhism as well as the history connection to the Shaolin tradition. Grandmaster Chiu named the form “Shaolin Buddhist Wooden Dummy form” to commemorate his first masters, who were Buddhist monks. Through the Wing Chun inspiration, TJPM stylists now enjoy this unique legacy of a Grandmaster.
. . .
Since Taizu Men techniques are major component of the form. Individual moves can be extracted from the form and practice with the short strikes method of Taizu Men otherwise known as Taizu Duanda.
Hi Sal,
It looks like you have found my article written for the lunach of Wooden Dummy book in the west. It’s not meant to be the definitive work on this interesting aspect of CCK TCPM. New information and perspective have emerged since then. So I am in the process of rewriting that pieces and possibly length it into a book.
Regarding Taizu Duanda, we understand that there are Taizu Changquan in the Shangdong area. Taizu Changquan does have form(s). In one of my conversations with GM Chiu, he said that he trained Sau Fa/Shou Fa that is from the Taizu Men Kung Fu when he was in the temple. BTW, we have confirmed that there is indeed the said temple on the said mountain in exsitent. We have not confirmed whether there was a tangible martial tradition or activity at the temple at this point. Further investigation is needed. As much of GM Chiu’s martial background and career have been confirmed through various sources, we are confident that he is truthful in all of his studies. So personally, we have no reason to doubt that he practiced Taizu Men Kung Fu as he said it. Now, we can not confirm whether this Taizu Men Kung Fu has anything to do with Taizu Changquan other than they shared the name of the style. Given that it is passed down on to our generation as named Taizu Duanda, which indicate that it might very well be different from Changquan, I would just leave it as that until new evidence suggests otherwise.
As far as Taizu Duanda in CCK TCPM goes, there is no physical relationship between it and Mantis before GM Chiu took up both arts. It can not be used to support Taizu Men Kung Fu as one of Mantis’ founding styles from that end IMHO.
Hope this helps.
Warm regards
Mantis108
thanks 108!
Maybe that is the style I was thinking of that I had read about that was mixing tai zu and mantis.
Anyways, I want to present this information, I just spend the last few hours translating this very carefully.
This is the Shaolin version of the 18 masters names and skills. Two of the surviving books (“Records of Shao Lin Monastery” and “Records about Shao Lin Boxing”) that escaped the burning of Shaolin in 1928, mentioned a list of names of 18 skills and who they came from. They say that in the year 961, head martial art monk Fu Ju (Fu is a surname that means: blessing and Ju means to reside, most likely his honorary name). Under the auspices of Emperor Zhao Kuang Yin, Fu Ju called a meeting of masters 3 times for a span of 3 years each to develop standardized sets for martial monks to pass, because false monks were claiming that they were from Shaolin, so they wanted to devise a way to that someone would have to prove that they graduated from Shaolin (you could get good money as a body guard doing so). So, they started with Zhao’s Long Fist material and built a series of standardized sets that they assembled into a book.
Fine you Mantis people all know that by now, thanks to Ilya Profatilov and others.
It seems to me that the person in the 1790s that hand copied these Shaolin manuals and wrote the “Luohan exercising merit short strike illustrated manuscript” ( ; Luóhàn Xínggng Dun D), made mistakes in coping the characters and also people have mistranslated the characters from his version.
Okay, well here is the Shaolin version of the list, you can see that the names are sometimes different, in a different order (Wang Lang is not last) and the skills are explained differently as well or more clearer (attached also is the Chinese characters from text):
Tai Zu’s chang quan qi shou (long fist rising hands)
Han Tong’s tong bi wei you (through arm serves excellently)
Zheng En’s chan feng you miao (binding seal especially clever)
Wen Tian’s duan quan geng ji (short fist more unusual)
Ma Jie‘s duan da zui jia (close strikes best [most fine])
Kong Heng‘s hou quan qie sheng (monkey fist also flourishes)
Huang Hu’s kao shen nan jin (leaning body difficult to approach)
Jin Sheng’s mian zhang ji fei (face palm swiftly flys)
Jin Xiang’s ke-zi tong quan (knocking through fist)
Liu Xing’s gou lou cai shou (hook pulling/embracing picking hand)
Tan Fang’s gun lie guan er (rolling thunder piercing ears)
Yan Qing’s nian na yue bu (sticky hold leaps not)
Lin Chong’s yuan yang jiao – ‘mandarin duck’ kicks
Meng Huo’s qi shi lian zhang (seven forces/postures linking palms)
Cui Lian’s wo guo pao chui (nest confining cannon hammers)
Yang Gun’s kun shou lu zhi ru (tying hand capture vertically enters)
Wang Lang’s tang lang ke di (praying mantis subdues enemy)
Gao Huai De’s shuai liu ying beng (throwing grab hard collapse)
You can compare that list to that which was in Ilya’s site:
And compare to the list often seen in the HK schools:
Compare to Mantis style poem:
Question, could Tai Tzu Chang Chuan be considered everything these 18 Masters developed at Shaolin during thier time there?
[QUOTE=Royal Dragon;813145]Question, could Tai Tzu Chang Chuan be considered everything these 18 Masters developed at Shaolin during thier time there?[/QUOTE]
No, because they made subdivisions that were groupings of sets and they named each one differently.
TZ was the base that they started from, by virtue of the fact that there was already a style named this, and by adding in lots of outside elements it becomes a different style, that what logically a style is.
But, it is ‘possible’ that some lineages doing these sets just called them Tai Zu Chang Quan, to mean Ancestoral Long Fist in general.
That’s why there are so many different styles today called Tai Zu Quan, half the time they are meaning only that it is the Ancestoral sets from their founder. Not that they trace their sets back to Zhao Kuang Yin himself.
It’s a mixed up mess once you get outside of the Shaolin original sets, so much evolution and de-evolution happened from 961 AD to now.
Agreed. At least Shaolin has documentation.
As for the Tai Tzu Chang Chuan, I was referring to the system all 18 Masters developed as Tai Tzu meaning Ancestral, not related to Zhao Kunag Yin.
The story says “Initiated by Zhao Kuang Yin”, so I was thinking that Tai Tzu may be relating to both the entire 18 masters system (that Zhao Kuang Yin got started), and also Zhao Kuang Yin’s personal material specifically.
Do Mantis people care about this topic much? Just asking.
There are about 4 sources from Shaolin records that show that Wang Lang was from Song dynasty era, early 960s AD.
Sal,
It is interesting. However personally I don’t agree with a lot of it. It isn’t certain that Wang Lang even existed and if he did, when, where or who he was. No one so far has been able to verify this key piece of your puzzle. Tanglang, although these days quite commonly labelled as having Song origins, almost definitely came at the very latest Ming/early Qing. There may have been something quite independant called Tanglang earlier, but there could be very little if any connection to what we have now that clearly (and traceably) grew out of the Qing. Almost every piece of the earliest written body of Tanglang theory is ripped of from, or heavily influenced by Ming sources (as you know). Virtually the only link to the Song are these Shaolin accounts, which are also unverifiable date-wise, and almost certainly copied several times over by unknown authors. Not to mention the use of fictitional or historically misplaced characters in the ancestors story. It’s a great piece of folklore though.
BT
It has been my experience and understanding that Mr. Tunks is correct. I researched the origin of Mantis quite a bit, until I finally got frustrated spinning my wheels. One must be careful with such topics as we risk inventing, or adding to history when their are key aspects missing. Quite frankly I do not see the importance of any of it anyways. No one will ever have a solid “answer” (kind of like religion), so is there really a point in arguing and debating? Martial histroy is quite interesting, but one should not invest too much into it.
Just my 2 cents,
Jake 
I don’t agree, I think it is a good thing to know what really happened if trust worthy records allow for it.
I’d rather find out the truth, even if my dream word is shattered by it.
[QUOTE=B.Tunks;813710]Sal,
It is interesting. However personally I don’t agree with a lot of it. It isn’t certain that Wang Lang even existed and if he did, when, where or who he was. No one so far has been able to verify this key piece of your puzzle. Tanglang, although these days quite commonly labelled as having Song origins, almost definitely came at the very latest Ming/early Qing. There may have been something quite independant called Tanglang earlier, but there could be very little if any connection to what we have now that clearly (and traceably) grew out of the Qing. Almost every piece of the earliest written body of Tanglang theory is ripped of from, or heavily influenced by Ming sources (as you know). Virtually the only link to the Song are these Shaolin accounts, which are also unverifiable date-wise, and almost certainly copied several times over by unknown authors. Not to mention the use of fictitional or historically misplaced characters in the ancestors story. It’s a great piece of folklore though.
BT[/QUOTE]
Well I’m not taking a side in any direction, just looking at what comes up, hopefully one day there will be something more solid to go by.
I’m not sure if there are historically misplaced people in this particular list of masters. There is another Shaolin tradition that hold that there were 13 masters, and if you subtract the honorary people, such as the 3 people from the Water Margin: Yan Qing, Ling Chong, and his nephew (though they are all from Song Dynasty, because they all are linked via being students of legendary Zhou Tong),
and Emperor Zhao Kuang Yin (he was being emperor and wasn’t there, though his long fist was the start point) and Han Tong (he was already dead by then, having died defending the previous emperor), - both of whom are indeed from the Song, that then leaves the 13 masters.
It could be that this Song era version of Tang Lang is of course much different than the Ming dynasty Mantis that later evolved. Perhaps it served as inspiration to the Ming dynasty Mantis developers?
It is plausible that someone anti-Qing dynasty took up old Wang Lang’s identity and used it to hide from.
Sets from Shaolin that are supposed to be from the early Song dynasty do use mantis hands movements and postures that are also seen in some Shandong mantis sets. There must be a reason that as far as Shaolin is concerned Tang Lang and Song dynasty always get connected together.
So, the earliest references to Shaolin from the Mantis lineages come from people like Wang Yongchun and Fan Xudong?
People think that Fan wrote the Mantis version of the Shaolin Authentic?
Was it Lou Guangyu that went to Shaolin and spend some time there researching Tang Lang or was it someone else? I remember reading (english languge) that a famed Mantis master spent time at Shaolin (pre-1920s) researching early mantis and the Luohan Gong.
Is this article available?
I agreed with Brendan.
I believe the Luohan Xinggong Duanda Tupu is a literary frabrication using Ming dynasty military manuscripts, Ming period martial arts novels, Shandong hero folk lores, etc. As such, it can not be used to authenticate anything.
some thoughts that I shared before on the Mantis Quarterly forum:
Not necessarily. I think the Shaolin is just a namesake rather than anything substantial in it. Here’s some reasons:
Shaolin temple became really famous because of a surge in Buddhism during Yuan dynasty. The Emperors edicted to build 7 Shaolin temple through China. Possibly, there are 8 locations altogether including the Henan Songshan Shaolin.
One list of 7 Shaolin: Songshan (Henan), Helin (Karakorum, Mongolia), Ji Xian (Hebei), Xi’an (Shan Xi?), Tai Yuan (Shanxi), Luoyang (Henan), Quanzhou (Fujian).
Another list replaced Tai Yuan with Heng zhou, which is either related to or possibly origin of Southern Shaolin Temple. However, it is also believe that Heng zhou didn’t quite finish building. So essentially it didn’t exist.
Fuyu (1201-1275 CE) supervised the building of Helin Shaolin, which is also known as Northern Shaolin. This is possibly the source in which Sheng Xiao Dao Ren imagined it as the Fuju’s Shaolin.
Sheng Xiao Dao Ren, is likely to be a government run military academy “cadets” during Qing dynasty. Graduates can attend exams to become commissioned officiers. If they fail to get a commission in the military as they aged, they would be reassigned to teaching jobs in different locations. Sheng Xiao did mentioned that he had students in Sheng Jing (modern day Shenyang), which is the capital of the Manchurian territory at the time. It is possible that he had a library that included the Luohan Xinggong Duanda Tupu, which he developed or edited into another copy out memeroy since one of his student took the copy that he owned. This would explain why there are so many versions of the same book in existence. BTW, the Dao Ren designation during that period is simply someone who is learned and respected not necessarily someone who is a Daoist.
Luohan Xinggong Duanda is possibly a version of Xingquan which was used along with Fanziquan and a few other styles in the south during Ming dynasty’s time as military training styles. Xingquan and Fanziquan are both classified as Duanda pugilistic styles from the south. The Short strikes 9981 is not meant to be independent form in use. It’s meant to be use with the Fanche Lulu Chui6636 IMHO. This is symbolic represention of Yijing’s (classic of change) Yao (9 for the Yang Yao, 6 for the Yin Yao). The ancient Kingdom of Qi (Shandong) is considered the inherited home of Yijing. The LHXGDD has a lot of interpretation from the Yijing. BTW, I have found the term “Fanche” (exact charactors) reference in a commentary written by a Qing dynasty scholar arround the same period as Sheng Xiao Dao Ren about an Hexagram that has “Fanche” attribute.
6)The beginning portion of the Lanjie (Luanjie) can be divided into Taiji Pi (vertical split), Hengji Pi (horizontal split), and Wuda Lianhuan Pi (five continuous strikes). This also known as the Meihwa (plum blossom). Basic it’s a series of hooks and splits working together.
Mantis108
Sal,
I lot of us think it is interesting, and have been there done that type thing. If you like reading about history that is fine, but if you like training a fighting system, then you eventually get to a point diminishing returns, and realize time is better well spent training.
I do not have to know about history to know that there is a huge amount of crossover. Particularly looking at the systems out Shandong, Hebei and Henan. A lot of obvious cross over and similarities. Of course differences too but not that much in my opinion.
I am repeating myself here, but if you really want to compare systems, then forget about sets/forms and history - look to the physical base techniques contained in the Si Ji Fa. But the only way to really know this is to train it. Even then so trying to write about it is limiting.
It sounds to me from what you write that you spend too much time thinking about sets / forms. Interesting, but really a waste of time.
Regards,
Nate
I practice foundamentals, nei gong, and sets each day, from 4 to 6 hours.
Research CMA history is for fun.
[QUOTE=mantis108;814126]I agreed with Brendan.
I believe the Luohan Xinggong Duanda Tupu is a literary frabrication using Ming dynasty military manuscripts, Ming period martial arts novels, Shandong hero folk lores, etc. As such, it can not be used to authenticate anything.
some thoughts that I shared before on the Mantis Quarterly forum:
Mantis108[/QUOTE]
Hi;
thanks for responding.
I looked over some of your posts in the Mantis Quarterly. I have some comments.
In here you said: http://www.mantisquarterly.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1830&postcount=14
If you permit me to explain some deeper things about Shaolin, maybe it will have bearing on your thoughts on Duan Da and Chang Quan and Mantis style.
In the original Shaolin methods, not the modern crapola wushu junk, Tai Zu Chang Quan means ‘long boxing’ as in time wise, meaning movements all connected together to make a ‘long’ flowing set. As opposed to short drills. And, in fact, Shaolin Chang Quan of tai zu variety is considered a Duan Da, a ‘short striking’ methods, though it is part of Long Boxing school.
Tong Bi of Han Tong’s version was from military drills that come from Sword fighting methods. They also can be ‘duan da’ short strikes.
Most of the people on the 18 masters list are Ba Fan Men stylists, which again is duan da methods, short strikes. And Ba Fan Men (consisting of Ba Fan Shan and Ba Fan Shou) is a type of Luohan Duan da, as opposed to the a Luohan Chang Da that Shaolin normally shows people. Ba Fan Men is called fanzi Quan nowadays.
It is mentioned in General Qi’s book along with and a few styles that are also the styles of the 18 masters (Wen Jia Quan, and others).
In Henan Shaolin, Luohan Duan Da = Fanzi Quan = tong bi (which means ‘through the arms’, not the ‘through the back’ character that modern bai yuan tong bei uses). As such, Henan Shaolin Luohan Duan Da is related to Han Tong’s Tong Bi, not to Hong Dong city’s Chang Quan coiling tong bei (which is a *******ized Tai Zu/Chen Tai Ji combination - Hong Dong Tong Bei comes from a member of the Chen clan that returned to their ancestral city and his Chen TJQ was given another name to hide its source).
Most all Shaolin material can be traced back to their Rou Quan sets and their nei gong sets of Luohan 13 Gong, Chan Yuan Ba Gong, and Lie Hu (6 harmony) Gong.
These are their most ancient material and they are all clearly derived from Tong Bi sword fighting techniques, which come from Taoist sources originally, such as the Qianzai Temple, which had been practicing Wu Ji and Tong Bei 13 Gong for many centuries.
Sal, you say:
"Most all Shaolin material can be traced back to their Rou Quan sets and their nei gong sets of Luohan 13 Gong, Chan Yuan Ba Gong, and Lie Hu (6 harmony) Gong.
These are their most ancient material and they are all clearly derived from Tong Bi sword fighting techniques, which come from Taoist sources originally, such as the Qianzai Temple, which had been practicing Wu Ji and Tong Bei 13 Gong for many centuries. "
You’ve seen pre-900ad Tong Bi Taoist swordfighting and found it to look similar to c.900-1200 ad Shaolin ‘Liu He Gong’?
[QUOTE=Redfish;814709]Sal, you say:
"Most all Shaolin material can be traced back to their Rou Quan sets and their nei gong sets of Luohan 13 Gong, Chan Yuan Ba Gong, and Lie Hu (6 harmony) Gong.
These are their most ancient material and they are all clearly derived from Tong Bi sword fighting techniques, which come from Taoist sources originally, such as the Qianzai Temple, which had been practicing Wu Ji and Tong Bei 13 Gong for many centuries. "
You’ve seen pre-900ad Tong Bi Taoist swordfighting and found it to look similar to c.900-1200 ad Shaolin ‘Liu He Gong’?[/QUOTE]
ha, I wish. I guess it looks like that, but what I meant was Shaolin says that the material comes from Tong Bi originally, since the martial monks were taught, during the tang and song era by ex-military men.
Also, in having learned tong bei, tong bei sword, Wudang sword, etc., and also these Shaoin sets, I can see for myself that I am doing the exact same movements in the Shaolin nei gong sets as I am doing in these “taoist” sword and empty hand arts. they have the same breathing patterns, same body mechanics, same fundamentals concerning the moving of energy from the ground, up the legs, around the waist, up the spine and out the arms to the hands, they have the same Swing the waist, sink the elbows, pierce (point) with the fingers movements, etc.
There is nothing in these Shaolin sets that I also didn’t learn in the fundamentals and various sets of tong bei (white ape, 5 elements, etc) and sword, especially double sword and double knives.
It would give one the impression that these Shaolin sets, which Shaolin considers the oldest and most scared sets, are related to tong bei / sword.