Xiao/Da Hong Quan...the only fist forms practiced after Revolution

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Shaolin Kung Fu
1

I’m totally unsure about this but I remember reading a long time ago in one of the issues in kungfumagazine.com that following the Cultural Revolution, the only fist forms that were being practiced inside the Shaolin Temple were Xiao Hong Quan and Da Hong Quan. Many of the other styles practiced at Songshan were brought in from neighboring areas. Can I anyone support/decry this assertion? Also, my other question would be on weapon sets taught prior to when the movie, “Shaolin Temple” hit it big?

Thanks in advance.

2

well, ven. shi suxi for example was known as the “shaolin boxing king” for his extensive knowledge of shaolin boxing. he was in shaolin temple before and after the cultural revolution, and certainly knew and taught more than just these two sets.

3

Neighboring areas?

You have to keep in mind where Shaolin is geographically and historically. Zhengzhou, the capital city near to Shaolin, served as the capitol of China on five separate occasion for a sum of 3600 years. Henan Province is the very heart of China. So when you say ‘neighboring areas’ you have to keep in mind that the neighborhood was the center of culture for over three and a half millennium. That’s going to have a lot of influence.

If you’re interested in what happened during the CR at Shaolin and the effect of neighboring areas, take a look at our 2008 November/December cover story Shaolin Masters Keeping the Faith. That’s just a starter. I’ve done many articles on the other leading folk masters in the area who helped preserve traditional Shaolin forms, and not just Dahong and Xiaohong.

Weapons is another question. Start by looking at our yinshougun thread.

4

[QUOTE=GeneChing;929765]
Weapons is another question. Start by looking at our yinshougun thread.[/QUOTE]

My view is that that the staff set ‘yinshougun’ being done by the monks today and the
‘yinshougun’ referred to by Cheng Zongyou are two different weapons.
Here are my thoughts on this:
http://ironbodhisattva.blogspot.com/
r.

5

Interesting argument r.(shaolin)

When I was first taught yinshougun by Shi Decheng, we used a longer ‘rat-tail’ staff, more akin to what is depicted in Cheng Zongyou’s work. Some of the modern practitioners have converted it for an eyebrow-height staff, including my present Shaolin teacher Yan Fei (a disrobed monk). It’s worthy of note here that there’s a traditional Shaolin staff form called qimeigun (eyebrow-height) which is played more like European quarterstaff or Japanese bo staff where you strike with both ends a lot. Rat-tail staffs tend to work more like spears.

That being said, I tend to lean towards your belief that Cheng’s form is different from the modern one simply because the figures in the text don’t map well. Even given a wide latitude for variation, I don’t see the pattern as being the root of what we do now. I confess, this is based on a rather cursory examination. But I know yinshougun fairly well and I don’t see the connection. Perhaps I should look at it more carefully.

6

From the research I’ve been doing, it seems that there were different methods practiced by different factions within and nearby Shaolin grounds.

Books such as that by Cheng only show one of many different traditions, and I agree because these books are the only ones found today people assume that they are the ONLY methods taught there.

But other books from the 1500s and 1600s show that there were completely different factions doing totally different techniques with different weapons and each had their own set of followers, some in the many thousands and some in the few dozens.

7

The same situation exists today

The area surrounding Shaolin is rich with martial tradition. Many of the local masters like Tagou’s Liu Baoshan, Epo’s Liang Yiquan and Chen Tongshan (see my post above, #3) have generations of experience with secular Shaolin forms. My current teacher, Yan Fei, learned a lot of his material outside the temple from a folk master, so he has a completely different array of forms. Being a former monk, he has the standard sets too. Another example is the Wu Gulun lineage, which we’ve discussed here before. Shaolin is quite diverse that way. While there are certainly some universal forms, I find the variations more interesting.

And I completely agree with Sal. In my research, I’ve only been able to document a small fraction of the Shaolin curriculum. There’s plenty more that I haven’t even begun to penetrate. Given that there’s much more research happening now, that in our modern age of the internet, research is almost a disposable commodity, just imagine how it was back in the 16th century when the hot new thing was the printing press. Documentation was a luxury back then. Surely there’s been countless undocumented variations over Shaolin’s history. It just stands to reason. Nevertheless, the record that remains is very interesting, and the very fact that some classic names like yinshougun were recorded centuries ago is in its own way fascinating.

8

[QUOTE=Sal Canzonieri;929998]From the research I’ve been doing, it seems that there were different methods practiced by different factions within and nearby Shaolin grounds.

Books such as that by Cheng only show one of many different traditions, and I agree because these books are the only ones found today people assume that they are the ONLY methods taught there.

But other books from the 1500s and 1600s show that there were completely different factions doing totally different techniques with different weapons and each had their own set of followers, some in the many thousands and some in the few dozens.[/QUOTE]

Sal,
I’ve come to the same conclusions as you and Gene.
r.

9

Just a short Question,

The well known Xiao Hong Quan routine and first to be learned, is in its way the second part of 3 parts of Xiao Hong Quan right.

Eugene

10

@eugene

No. Although there are hundreds (possibly thousands) of forms closely related to shaolin temple, Xiao Hong Quan is by ALL accounts I have come accross, the Greatest Fist.

Some lineages have several sets of xiao hong quan, these vary between lineages. However the main Xiao Hong Quan is uncannily similar between all schools, even WuGuLun pai.

It is the main form, it is the most powerful form in shaolin. I can’t begin to emphasize the importance of this form over others. It is profound martial wisdom. It is the oldest of shaolins forms, and must be one of the oldest forms in china.

So my advice is don’t worry about the other roads of xiao hong quan.

The history of this form is fascinating, and the general thinking among masters here is that Xiao Hong Quan set the style by which all later shaolin forms followed, as did forms in many styles of wushu. Off course the idea ‘tian xia gong fu chu shao lin’ (all kung fu comes from shaolin) is nonsense, however if you look at the thousands of kung fu styles over northern china, the vast majority share the same style of recorded form. (the way forms are sequenced and performed). This could conceviably be all imitations of one style. Although there would be many candidates form this mother form, Xiao Hong Quan is one of the strong ones.

Certainly all the main shaolin sets can be constructed using only the principles outlined in xiao hong quan.

On an extra note it is unfortunate but a great deal of the xiao hong quan practiced in dengfeng now is awful. This is one form you really want to find the best of the best to teach you.

11

That province and the cities in it have had some SERIOUS history and some of the most famous spots historically & culturally are there. Not to mention a sweet spot in that road of silk…There’s LOTS of different fu there throughout history, just like the temple’s fu has changed throughout history.

12

[QUOTE=RenDaHai;998730]It is the oldest of shaolins forms, and must be one of the oldest forms in china.[/quote]

:confused:

xiaohongquan?

as far as we’ve been able to tell, the original version in laojia hongquan is only from yuan dynasty. there is a lot that predates that. and the version of xiaohongquan practiced modernly was likely only abbreviated and worked out in the last 100 years.

13

Xiao Hong Quan is Song Dynasty, (c.1000 AD)

There is a great deal of earlier stuff off course, Xiao hong quan was created to represent the basic principles of the many schools existing at the time. However I say it is the oldest because stuff from before this era is so uncertain.

It is impossible to know what xiao hong quan was like that long ago, but given the importance the great teachers place on this form it is likely the least changed form.

Last 100 Years??:confused: No. Even my masters master was born before 1900 and would have learned this form in the very early 20th century. Lets test; It is elementary to see how the form xiao Pao quan, imitates the structure of the form Xiao Hong quan. If we look at Wu Shan Lins Pao quan it is almost identical to that practiced now. Wu shan lins family lineage left shaolin temple at the time of Wu Gu Lun. Wugulun is actually pictured in the mural in the hall at shaolin, the picture of all the monks training. He is the one with the moustache in the middle. If pao quan from this time is unchanged then we can say for certain xiao hong quan of this time is unchanged… That is already more than 100 years.

But it is much older than the mural as well. Ask around, xiao hong quan is really the ultimate form. It is less loved now simply because not many people teach a good version of it anymore. Most people have never even seen a good version. The actual sequence is basically unchanged, and exists in most of the family lineages around the area, all very slightly unique, but all very similar. I don’t know why you think the structure has changed so recently, it really hasn’t, not for a very long time.

14

@RenDaHai

Thx for your big awnser, I dont know so much about the history as you guys here, but, I will concentrate on the Xiao Hong Quan as it excists now yes.

I think it has many cool things in it, so in the documentary * The Myths and Logic of Shaolin Kung Fu * the person tells when the boy does Xiao Hong Quan, that is is the mother of all boxing styles, so that is true… i wonder who the father is btw..jk

It is when performed right a fascinating form to look at

15

[QUOTE=RenDaHai;998949]Xiao Hong Quan is Song Dynasty, (c.1000 AD)

There is a great deal of earlier stuff off course, Xiao hong quan was created to represent the basic principles of the many schools existing at the time. However I say it is the oldest because stuff from before this era is so uncertain.[/quote]

we’re talking about the two “dahong” and “xiaohong” sets created by li sou in the yuan dynasty when he came to shaolin monastery with jueyuan and bai yufeng.

its apparent that the original xiaohongquan has been simplified into the xiaohongquan set of today, and the real dahongquan is lost, or missing at least.

what history on xiaohongquan being from the song dynasty do you have?

It is impossible to know what xiao hong quan was like that long ago, but given the importance the great teachers place on this form it is likely the least changed form.

the versions done today are obviously simplified versions of the laojia hongquan which has a whole beginning section that is omitted in the xiaohongquan set.

after the first section it goes into baiyun gaiding- the first posture of xiaohongquan. the rest of the set follows the same structure and sequences, but the laojia hongquan set is far more dense in technique and transitional movements.

this set can be seen here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gEop0aFSRY

I don’t know why you think the structure has changed so recently, it really hasn’t, not for a very long time.

many people call this longer set the dahongquan that is supposed to be the matching set to xiaohongquan. but folk masters in the area who have this longer set, dont even practice the shorter xiaohongquan at all, because it is embedded in this older set. it was extracted and simplified.

if you have the longer set, you dont even need today’s xiaohongquan.

in all likelihood the xiaohongquan practiced today is a modern simplified version of laojia hongquan which is the original xiaohongquan, rather than being the matching dahongquan it is mistaken for. that original dahongquan from li sou is yet to be found.

also very obvious is how in today’s xiaohongquan the inside crescent turns all the way around to face the audience (manners for performance). then the scorpion tail turns the set around. while the laojia hongquan keeps sideways after the inside crescent, so when the scorpion tail swings it turns the set in the opposite direction of xiaohongquan.

what this causes is at the end of the set, xiaohongquan has to do an awkward turn around after the final gongbu palm thrust to face the audience again to finish. while laojia hongquan is already facing forward, because it doesnt turn around to face the audience with the earlier inside crescent. so there is no need for the awkward turn around at the end…

there was an enormous topic on hongquan, which can be found in the archives. we covered all the many chinese hongquan styles in detail.

16

LFJ,

Do you mean that like they made Tai Chi 24 Yang style and 42 from the 103 original Yang style, so did they do with,
24 Xiao Hong from ( believe ) Main Xiao Hong Quan, and the Main Xiao Hong Quan from this Lao Jia Hong Quan.

In this, the name Xiao only is put because its a smaller version of Lao Jia ?

It gets all mysterius to me :slight_smile:

17

[QUOTE=Eugene;998976]LFJ,

Do you mean that like they made Tai Chi 24 Yang style and 42 from the 103 original Yang style, so did they do with,
24 Xiao Hong from ( believe ) Main Xiao Hong Quan, and the Main Xiao Hong Quan from this Lao Jia Hong Quan.[/quote]

yes, basically.

In this, the name Xiao only is put because its a smaller version of Lao Jia ?

It gets all mysterius to me :slight_smile:

not exactly, the set sometimes called laojia (old frame) hongquan is the original xiaohongquan that is a matching set with a dahongquan that is missing.

nowadays people call the simplified version of the set still xiaohongquan and mistakenly call the longer version dahongquan.

in fact, the longer version is the original xiaohongquan, and the original dahongquan has not been found yet.

18

Oh no…

I can’t watch the video (back in china already).

But i think you have made a grievous error…

Do you mean the form that starts off with spear hand-kick-spear-cresent,turn-spear-kick-pu bu slap floor-etc ?

No no no no no. To mistake this for the original xiao hong quan is like picking up jagged broken glass and leaving the finest cut diamond. I don’t know where to begin in destroying this illusion.

That form is nothing but xiao hong quan done in a larger frame. Every movement of xiao hong is replicated and extended.

  1. The cresent kick you are referring to is xuan feng jiao. Its a less than 360 xuan feng that turns back. Ending xuan feng jiao in tian pao (the uppercut) appears in several other old forms (that i’m aware of, possibly many more). You don’t need to jump, but you can. Ending facing forewards or to the side is a small adjustment of little consiquence. The turn at the end seems awkward because everyone who does it steps the wrong way. They twist one way and step the other. This is because for some reason people like to take a lot of space. Personally i prefer my forms in as small a place as possible. That same turn to ‘hai di pao’ ALso appears in tong bei quan (xiao) and other sets, its not an awkward move. But all the same you can turn at any of about 20 points during xiao hong quan and get the direction back, this is not important.

  2. Yes xiao hong quan does contain a lot more transitional moves (a lot more than in the ‘laojia hong quan’). Unfortuately you wouldn’t have had an oppertunity to see it. There are no videos of a good version of xiao hong quan anywhere.

  3. Please tell me then. How come so many of the old sets contain one common short sequence ’ shuang yun ding, qi xing, dan bian’. This move is in Xiao Hong, Da hong (all 3), xiao Pao (all 3), Liu He, ying jiao pao, zhaoyang (3 lo), luohan (many), chang hu xin yi men, Tong Bei (extended form), god knows, loads of forms. It appears in lao jia but is done differently to EVERY other form. (jumping in most versions).

  4. The sequence of xiao hong quan is mimicked by many other forms, most obviously by Pao quan, but even also by many other forms. Laojia extends the sequence at the begining too long. the symmetry is broken. It doesn’t balance right and left like xiao hong quan.

  5. The entire form of Xiao Hong Quan is fundamentally based on 1 technique. Gong bu tui Zhang. Other techniques in the form are created out of this tui zhang. The Perfection of this move is in its simplicity. It contains 10000 changes. The one in laojia contains a rear hook hand. This is just on of the variations on the move, however it is incorrect to specify it in a profound form since it narrows the applications, makes it more specific. The point of xiao hong quan is not to be specific, to be open to change. This goes for all the moves in the form. Any move in xiao hong can be applied as Ti da shuai na and be applied from the very small frame to the very large frame. This is not so easy to do for laojia.

I could write an essay on every single individual technique in xiao hong quan. THe laojia version is actually missing a lot of vital moves. At least all the versions i have seen, it seems to lose transitional moves. (then again my xiao hong quan is an unusual version).

For example, the posture Dan bian and xie xing, and the elbow in xiao hong are all related. They are different end points of what begins as the same technique. Often this technique is preceeded by a tripping sweep, on kind of like that frequently done in mantis forms. In the modern xiao hong quan people kick up with a straight leg to head height (like in basic practice), but in older versions the heel stays touching to the floor. This technique appears in many forms (e.g in Pao quan a lot). It is omitted in laojia…but not replaced with anything?? There are a lot of other small things like this but i have written too much already.

In all likelihood, Laojia is from a family style and it is just xiao hong quan that has gone through a few generations of seperated evolution. It is NOT the original. Here it is called Da hong because it is the exact sequence of xiao hong but with larger framed stances.

If you want why don’t we seperate a technique, pick one at random and I’ll explain why the way its done in Xiao HOng QUan is more profound. your choice, any move.

xiao hong quan IS shaolin quan.

19

[QUOTE=RenDaHai;999039]Do you mean the form that starts off with spear hand-kick-spear-cresent,turn-spear-kick-pu bu slap floor-etc ?[/quote]

yes, and this opening section of laojia hongquan has a sequence that is repeated at the end of xiaomeihuaquan / ditang meihuaquan.

  1. the point is you are forced to turn around at the end of xiaohongquan, which you need not do in laojia hongquan because you dont turn to face the audience with the earlier kick. you may find a more comfortable way to turn around, but from a left gongbu turning right 270 from the front foot is just awkward.

  2. xiaohongquan/s i’ve learned have many more transitional moves than others. but still lack intermediate movements. xiaohongquan doesnt even have a single xubu in it. whereas laojia hongquan is much more dense in technique, beyond just transitional moves and stances. particularly in the ending sequences after the gongbu tuizhang section.

if you put the two sets side-by-side and compare from the start you can see where things are missing. xiaohongquan will stop moving and have to wait for laojia hongquan to get through all the different techniques before it ends up in the same posture, then move on.

  1. in laojia hongquan its a different take on a very old rouquan sequence, these later forms just retained the rouquan way of doing it.

  2. thats just personal preference.

  3. its a simplified set.

regarding the technique before xiexing and panzhou, in laojia hongquan it depends on who does it. most people dont even do the second half of the set with panzhou. but the transition there both times is a more complex hand technique.

anyway, regarding its history, what do you have that puts xiaohongquan in the song dynasty, and by whom? whats your story with its development?

20

@RenDaHai,

I am now very intrested in your unusual Xiao Hong Quan :slight_smile:

Ive seen Shi Yong Wen do some moves of Xiao Hong Quan in a video where he also spins the dragons tail real fast.

Does your Xiao look a lil like the one that Shi Guo Song performes ?