Kenpo salutation question

[kenpo3631]

I thought that the beggining moves of the salutation were taken from the Chinese arts (as I've seen in most Gung Fu systems) and that the ending was put on by Mr. Parker.

Here's a question for all you EPAK people out there. Does it really matter how or whom Mr. Parker was influenced by? Couldn't this time be used for more fruitful ventures for knowledge?

Just a thought...:asian:

 

[brianhunter]

Originally posted by kenpo3631

I thought that the beggining moves of the salutation were taken from the Chinese arts (as I've seen in most Gung Fu systems) and that the ending was put on by Mr. Parker.

Here's a question for all you EPAK people out there. Does it really matter how or whom Mr. Parker was influenced by? Couldn't this time be used for more fruitful ventures for knowledge?

Just a thought...:asian:

I agree!!!! It doesn't matter where who or when it came from to be honest I know why I was taught it and the meaning behind it. I like the fact that some of it came from here some of it came from here. It was put together by Mr. Parker so I'll do it!

 

[Blindside]

What happened to the whole "warrior and scholar" concept?

A warrior learns the "hows" how to win with the technologies available to them.

The scholar knows the "whys" and the "hows". He knows the reason behind the motions. The basic chinese hand motion in the EPAK salute credits this, it is also related to in the Tiger and Dragon concepts (look down on your gi at your patch). Are you giving up on this?

Are we going to settle for not knowing because finding the history is difficult or unpalatable?

Lamont

 

[Goldendragon7]

We should always remain students. As such, we need to continue to explore more on "all" aspects of our ART. Physical is normally for the youth and the Mental is normally for the more mature (thus : Tiger - Dragon) our Journey should end in death along the road, seeing much along the way but not quite reaching the end of the pavement. Understanding of the Art comes with an attitude such as this.

:asian:

 

[kenpo3631]

Are we going to settle for not knowing because finding the history is difficult or unpalatable?

I am not giving up on anything. If you want to to know the "real" reason or who is responsible for the hand movements of the salutation you're going to have to go further back than Parker, Chow and Mitose!

I consider it enlightening to know but I am not obsessed to the point I need to have an indepth discussion over it. I have bigger fish to fry learning the "system" Mr. Parker gave us. :asian:

 

[Goldendragon7]

Originally posted by kenpo3631
I am not obsessed to the point I need to have an indepth discussion over it. I have bigger fish to fry learning the "system" Mr. Parker gave us.

Since I didn't ask the question but only commented on it....... lol, I didn't recall being obsessed about it, but someone was interested in this particular question. I find all aspects of our art unique and interesting but I also agree with you that this is not a prime topic to spend weeks on....... lol.

I know what I do often times when I feel that the topic is light or I have "bigger fish that I want to search for" .......... which is, I just don't comment on the string if I feel it is being beat to death or I have no knowledge to shed or interest there. But to others, it may be new and interesting to their knowledge base.

One thread that keeps popping up which I feel similar is the difference between Parker and Tracy curriculums........ uggggggg but we must remember that the net is "new" to many each day and many do not research the archives much to find prior threads that may cover a topic.

:asian:

 

[kenpo3631]

Thanks for agreeing GD, however I never said you were obsessed with anything.

I know what I do often times when I feel that the topic is light or I have "bigger fish that I want to search for" .......... which is, I just don't comment on the string if I feel it is being beat to death or I have no knowledge to shed or interest there.

Thant's why this is called a F-O-R-U-M...GD. It is here for ALL of us to express our own opinions whether they shed light on a subject or not.:asian:

 

[tonbo]

.....is a salutation. It is a greeting, a beginning, the overture to the tune.

Yes, there is symbolism in it. However, I have heard at *least* three different interpretations on the whole "Chinese beginning" section as well. I am sure that all are right, depending on where you stand and who you heard it from.

Personally, I don't CARE who developed the salutation or why. Knowing the interpretations are important to me, but determining which one is "right" and where they all came from is not.

Besides all that, I am no expert, my crystal ball is broken, my e.s.p. isn't working right now, and I have been having trouble communicating with the dead for some time.....so I won't get any solid answers, anyway.....

Peace--

 

[Chiduce]

I use a variation of the Mitose salutation from Kosho Sho Ryu in the system which i teach of Clandestine Black Dragon Kenpo Karatejutsu, and my system Butokutsuru Ryu Kenpojutsu which i'am founder, for reasons of the lineage back to shaolin, as well as honoring the old, new and future. Speaking of shaolin , is this not where the covered left palm over fist was created by the survivors of the temple burning to restore the chings to power?
Sincerely, In Humility;
Chiduce!

 

[RCastillo]

Originally posted by Goldendragon7

We should always remain students. As such, we need to continue to explore more on "all" aspects of our ART. Physical is normally for the youth and the Mental is normally for the more mature (thus : Tiger - Dragon) our Journey should end in death along the road, seeing much along the way but not quite reaching the end of the pavement. Understanding of the Art comes with an attitude such as this.

:asian:

Student huh? Well, go practice your forms, like right now!:soapbox:

 

[Sigung86]

Originally posted by Chiduce

...
Speaking of shaolin , is this not where the covered left palm over fist was created by the survivors of the temple burning to restore the chings to power?
Sincerely, In Humility;
Chiduce!

No.

 

[Chiduce]

Originally posted by Sigung86



No.

The temple overthrow for the five elders ( last high postioned monk survivers) was during the Ching/Qing Dynasty. The overthrow was by the Manchus. The supporters of overthrowing the Mings/Manchu's were Ching supporters. The Kenpo Fist Of Today; consisting of the Left Palm curled over the Right Closed Fist was used as a secret greeting among those Ching Survivers And Rebels which supported the cause of overthrowing the Manchu/Ming government!
Sincerely, In Humility;
Chiduce!

 

[rmcrobertson]

Um...aahh...I say, "No," too. Regrettably, this looks like another of the many myths about Shaolin--which apparently was burned more than twice.

Without characterizing anything, I should note that one of the consistent problems in kenpo has been a strong tendency to mythologize--about Mr. Parker, about the art and its origins, about its ideas.

Or maybe I'm wrong. Could I ask for sources on this material? I know mine--Parker's "Infinite Insights," and Larry Tatum, in large part, together with Donn Draeger's books and "Journal of Asian Martial Arts,"--and I'd be interested to see where the info about secret handshakes comes from, exactly.

I probably shouldn't write this, but I'd also note that a little less pretense on all our parts might help in such discussions. Look at Strunk and White's "Elements of Style," or Edw. Parker's own comments on good writing.

Thanks,
Robert

 

[Chiduce]

Yes, you are right about the ancient chinese myths; yet since the only thing that they had was story telling about the temple burning; it is safe to assume that what was passed down as story probably happened. Shaolin Temple New York is a great source of accurate history on the temple burnings during this period. From what actually is known as fact; The Shaolin Si Zhi/ Historical Record Of Shaolin, existed as far back as the Song Dynasty (960-1278 A.D.) So, it is safe to assume that this historical text also existed into the Qing dynasty and to the present day. I'am sure that the Monk Scribes of today are chronicling the New Temple Restoration in China today in this same newer version copy of this ancient text. I'am not saying that you are wrong about what Infinite Insights or the other references say about this same salute. I'am saying though, that the left palm placed over the right closed fist acutally was used as far back as the Ching Dynasty overthrow. Today, it may have many other meanings from many interpretations. Yet, it is actual fact that it was used in this historical time period.
Sincerely, In Humility;
Chiduce!

 

[WilliamTLear]

I don't understand where Chiduce gets all of his information from, but he has me interested. Sir, the salute actually came about before the Ch'ing Dynasty. I offer you the following:

Before the establishment of Shao-lin (Mandarin) or Sil Lum (Cantonese), an open left hand resting on a right clenched fist was used as a salutation preceeding a set or form.

This gesture has several different meanings:

(1) Respect to the originator of this particular system and all of those who had trained before him, with him, and under him.

(2) Respect to both scholars and men of the martial arts alike; since the left open hand represents the scholar, and the right clenched fist represented the warrior (or martial artist).

(3) Respect to the audience.

During the period of the Shao-lin or Sil Lum in the Ch'ing Dynasty (1644-1912) the meaning of the salute changed, and two additional movements were added to it. This significantly altered the original meaning of the salute.

The new definition changed the following things in the original gesture: The left open hand represented the day, and the right clenched fist was symbolic of the moon. Together they represented the chinese character Ming, identifying the practitoner as a revolutionary defender for the cause of the Ming restoration.

The first of the two added movements was accomplished by rolling the palms of both hands, down and out, ending with the back of the left hand against the back of the right hand (palms open, and facing out to the sides). The fingers at this point were formed like claws and raised to chest level. This movement meant that the practitioner was against foreign domination and that his heart was true to the real China.

The second move was done by clenching both hands into fists and simultaneously pulling both of them back to the hips in a chambered position, palm up. The pulling movement meant that by working together the practitioner and other followers of the movement could take their country back by working together.

According to what I've been told, Mr. Parker had a profound appreciation for the original meaning behind the salute, and reverted to that defintion of it for our Kenpo System.

Left over Right:
The Scholar and the Warrior come together...

Hands turned palm out:
...to defend against foreign domination...

Clenched fists pulled back to the hips:
...by pulling together.

Hands form the shape of a traingle:
I am friendly and unarmed...
(This gesture has also been interpeted as the unification of mind body and spirit)

Left open hand conceals right clenched fist:
I now cover my weapon, for I wish not to use it...

Hands placed together as if praying:
...but now that I am being forced to use my weapon, I pray for forgiveness for what I am about to do.

Take Care,
Billy Lear

 

[WilliamTLear]

Originally posted by brianhunter



I agree!!!! It doesn't matter where who or when it came from to be honest I know why I was taught it and the meaning behind it. I like the fact that some of it came from here some of it came from here. It was put together by Mr. Parker so I'll do it!

Sometimes it's good to ask questions, especially about things like this.

If you forget about the past, the lessons that lie within it cannot save you in the future.

It's not only the how and the why, but the who, what, when and where, that can be important too.

While I have an asserted appreciation for the honesty of your answer... I also have to say that it was a little shallow too.

Hasta,
Billy Lear

 

[brianhunter]

Originally posted by WilliamTLear



Sometimes it's good to ask questions, especially about things like this.

If you forget about the past, the lessons that lie within it cannot save you in the future.

It's not only the how and the why, but the who, what, when and where, that can be important too.

While I have an asserted appreciation for the honesty of your answer... I also have to say that it was a little shallow too.

Hasta,
Billy Lear

I agree with you Billy it was a little shallow but who isnt from time to time?!?!??!...Clyde said your an alright guy and I trust him so your alright in my book
Yes it can be important, I guess to futher explain my response was the thread was almost impliying that it did not belong in our art and that our founder didnt develop all of it....I like it, I enjoy its meaning and its history but sometimes people argue logistics for the simple principle that they are arguing logistics. This was a battle that I chose to stay in the "shallow" waters on. I know why "I" do it and why "I" was taught it.... sometimes thats all that is important and sometimes that is shallow
for that I apoligize
And Im all about brutal honesty....your a very honestly spoken guy yourself so the mutual respect is there. I wish more people where like that.

 

[rmcrobertson]

I seem to be feeling bit too dogged today, but in the interests of the "scholarly," part of the salute, let me note something fundamental to good scholarship in the university sense: it is never safe to assume that a historical event "must have happened," simply because the tale is so often repeated.

Much of what we think we know about martial arts and their history is the product of recent invention. If a couple of articles I've seen in "Journal of Asian Martial Arts," are to be trusted, a lot of the guff about Shaolin is the product of 19th-century Chinese fiction. More than that, there're tendencies in Chinese lit. to exaggerate in order to make a point.l And then too, we all of us have incentives to fictionalize a bit, partly in order to justify our arduous study of an art that if we do everything right, we never get to actually use.

Other stuff goes on too: the tendency to assume that if it ain't "Asian," it ain't real. (Mr. Tatum was teaching last year, walked outside to get a breath of fresh air while we fumbled around, and some guy walked up and said, "Ah, what you do is very good. But you don't have Asian eyes." Then, he tried to uppercut Mr. Tatum. Oops.) Orientalism is an enemy of understanding the history of kenpo.

Of course, the other problem is that it's a lot easier for me to point out logical/scholarly flaws than it is to offer historical records. That would be an interesting discussion though: how would we go about writing a real history of martial arts in America?

Thanks,
Robert

 

[Sigung86]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson

I seem to be feeling bit too dogged today, but in the interests of the "scholarly," part of the salute, let me note something fundamental to good scholarship in the university sense: it is never safe to assume that a historical event "must have happened," simply because the tale is so often repeated.

...

That would be an interesting discussion though: how would we go about writing a real history of martial arts in America?

Thanks,
Robert

I thought Mr. Bleecker was doing just that? :rofl:

Dan

 

[Michael Billings]

For a thread that I probably would not read all the way through, this has turned into an interesting discussion. Although somewhat contradictory, the information provided offers a sound bit of research on the contributors' part. Thanks Mucho!

Now about Strunk and White's "Elements of Style," I have it, I hate it, and I do not want to have to see it here. I get enough of it at work. Thank you very much. My copy sits on it's shelf, where it belongs!!! It is the definitive grammer text, but please, not on a forum. (You can obviously tell I have some "Issues" with people telling me how to express myself.) This is not an attack for those who do not know me .... but more of a humorous note on grammerians :rofl: (my Mom was an English major probably explains a lot.)

-Michael
UKS-Texas