I have no idea if this relates. But it is my understanding that HK 7* has Meihua in it. So, perhaos this would be of interest…
1st Zhaiyao, WHF book, movement 21 and 22 are called “white stork spreads wings” in Taijimeihua Tanglangquan. I saw this and was surprised that it has this parallel. BUT if you take your names from mainland 7* I don’t know if it applies.
Perhaps Young Mantis could tell us if it applies. It would be an interesting parallel and confirm a lot of things. LKW states that HK 7* does not have Meihua in it, (in his new book). Though this would not disprove the assertion, it would be interesting.
I do not study Mei Hua, but I have heard that there is some or even considerable cross over between Mei Hua and Seven Star. Not necessarily similarities in forms, or even names of techniques, but in the actual physical techniques themselves and what not. I am sure there are a few people out there who have studied both who could comment on this.
I could be wrong but I get the impression some people believe these Similarities are the result of intra school exchanges or mixing that occurred within the last few generations of teachers. For example when people say that Hong Kong 7* Mantis has Mei Hua in it, they are saying that the similarities arose only within the last 75 years or so.
Of course I could never verify this one way or the other, but my gut feeling is that it is the opposite.
Wouldnt the similarities between 7* and Meihua (not just HK 7*) have much more to do with the simple fact that both systems are close cousins with the same roots. Both are Mantis, both use to be just one Mantis, and both are from Shandong. Even before its inception there was already long history of MA development in Shandong with some probable trends already taking shape. The foundation of techniques that we find common in both 7*, Meihua, adn even Liu He today probably already pre-existed during the earlier developmental proto type phases of Mantis. IMO this would be the better common sense explanation.
What exactly did LKW write in his book about Mei Hua? Would be interesting.
Just my two American cents - which by the way is not worth as much as it use to be! Any thoughts?
I think you are right. There are common origins, stories of exchanges between masters and stories of entire sets being adopted by different styles of Tanglangquan. For example, Meihua Lu Quan, (plum flower road), was, as I was told, adopted by Seven Star from Jiang Hualong of Meihua Tanglangquan.
I don’t have LKW’s book myself but I have read exerpts on the internet.
Historian Hon chiu-wong and from others quoting Wong Hon-Fun say that:
Lu Guangyu called his school Tanglang Men. (School of mantis boxing) not Seven Star.
His school was a mix of 7*, Meihua and Guang Bang, (shiney board)
That there were three Meihua sets and that master luo intended them to function as Zhai Yao so that you had three more making a total of six Zhaiyao. (just what I have read, if someone knows better please don’t be offended if I misrepresent a position). As I understand it, Hon chiu-wong maintains he has many historical documents to support this position.
What I saw from LKW was that:
Master Luo called his school 7*
There are Five Plum Flower sets like the petals of the flower and only the inheritor of the style got all five. There are no historical documents offered for this position.
Anyway that is what I have read/ heard. Anybody knowing more can help out I am sure.
LBS,
Just to clarify, in his book on Essential #1, WHF lists #21 as “left spreads wings kick”. There is no mention of “white stork” in either the title of the movement nor the explanation although the hand movement is the same as the beginning of Tchahp Tchui which we do call “White Goose spreads wings”. #22 is a completely different move that does not relate to the spreading of wings imagery.
WM,
There are many of these names strewn about throughout the forms. For example in the form Bung Bo, some of the names are:
Snatching the pearl from the bottom of the sea
praying mantis catches the cicada
snatching the treasure from behind the back
strong tyrant invites guest
I agree that sometimes the classical name of a movement may give inspiration to how it should be played but it really depends on how one interprets or perceives the names. Two people might read the same name differently and often the names can be difficult to translate accurately.
For the most part, when we call out the forms in class, we use the standardized nomenclature passed down by WHF but when we practice our sahn sau, we learn the classical names for each technique passed down by both WHF and late GM Chiu Chuk Kai of TJPM.
In regards to the “Mui Fah” sets in Northern Praying Mantis, they are commonly referred to collectively as “Sahm Fah Sau” - Three Flower Hands. WHF mentions this briefly in his introduction for book #7 - Mui Fah Kuen. I cannot vouch for other lineages and someone please correct me if I am wrong but I believe only the CCM lineage claims to have 5 plum flower forms.
Yes, as I stated in my post, I was noting that the name of the movement was called White Stork Spreads Wings in Taijimeihua Tanglangquan. Also as I said, I have no idea if the name is the same in 7* or not.
As Dennis Prager says, “I prefer clarity to agreement”.
Get ready guys, this is a big post. I do not mean to high jack this thread, but I wanted to bring up an issue related to NAME differences and the obvious confusion they can casue.
What Issue
Specifically about the naming of the six Zhai Yao sets under the LGY lineage families and the Plum Blossom sets (#4, #5, and #6) within the Chiu Chi Man family lineage. In reality this should not be an issue, but the different names and what not seem to have created some confusion.
First Some Background:
LKW writes very clearly in his forms lists that they have three Zhai Yao sets. I do not know what other more senior students from Chiu Chi Man write. I leave it open here for their feedback. Lee Kam Wing also very clearly says that they have five plumb blossom sets Mei Hua (MH) Lu, MH Quan, MH Shou, MH Zhang, MH Tui One, & two. Actually it is six if you count MH Tui one and two separately. (http://www.hokiu.com/forms.html)
A larger number of LGYs other students appear to have at least 6 Zhai Yao sets. They also have three Plum Blossom sets (MH Lu, MH Quan, MH Shou). Students like WHF had these sets. I also suspect famous students such as Wong Kam Hung and others also had these. Can we get confirmation on this? Even LGYs kung fu brothers like Yang Wei Xin and Li Jin Shan for example had at least six Zhai Yao sets. WHF Forms List (http://users.aol.com/beishaolin/qixing.html)
Million Dollar Question:
Why would the Chiu Chi Man lineage be short three Zhai Yao forms, and possess three more Mei Hua forms? It is just too much of a coincidence that adds up pefrectly.
A Few Different Conclusions:
Some people from background #1 conclude that LGY only had three Zhai Yao sets. They also bridge the gap explaining that LGY supplemented the other missing three Zhai Yao sets with Mei Hua Zhang, Mei Hua Tui Yi Lu, and Mei Hua Tui Er Lu. This is possible but it does nto seem to fit with the other camps.
Others from background #2 conclude that LGY did in fact teach six Zhai Yao sets and three plumb blossom sets. They also bridge the gap by explaining that LGY created additional names for the fourth, fifth, and sixth Zhai Yao forms. Namely MH Zhang, Yi Lu MH Tui, and Er Lu MH Tui. Thsi is much more plausible but contradicts the Chiu Chi Man lineage…or does it?
What is really happening?
From my own perspective at least it appears obvious that the overwhelming majority of LGYs students taught six Zhai Yao sets and three Mei Hua forms. LGY obviously must have taught six Zhai Yao sets and three Mei Hua sets.
More importantly from what I have heard from a select number of teachers and students who have studied from both CCM and WHF lineages alike is that the fourth, fifth, and sixth Zhai Yao sets taught by LGYs students such as WHF are near identical to the fourth, fifth, and sixth Mei Hua forms taught by Lee Kam Wing.
In actuality the Chiu Chi Man lineage just might in fact also have six Zhai Yao sets, but simply prefer to refer to the last three Zhai Yai sets as Mei Hua (Zhang, Tui Yi Lu, and Tui Er Lu). Please forgive me if this seems out line or rude. It is not meant to be. I also remember reading somewhere from another school or something that LGY for whatever reaons decided to add another layer of names to the last three Zhai Yao sets. This seems to make sense and seems more probable than saying LGY missed out on three Zhai Yao sets and decided to make up three altogether new ones.
Anyway I think this is just one example of how different names and what not can cause a lot of unnecessary confusion.