OP
rox
Guest
- Thread Starter
- #41
Hmmm, thanks. I'll see what I can find on WIKIPEDIA 
Thats a generalization and not neccessarily true. You are comparing different skill sets. The military will use MA or "kung fu" for different purposes, or in different ways then "other centres outside the military". That doesn't prove greater need or greater skill.Fumanchu said:
7sm
General Yueh Fuei is credited with creating Xing-I and Eagle Claw (Probably along with another style or two) and teaching his troops. He dominated battlefields because of the advantage of better trained troops and and tactical abilities.
Wing-Chun, and Tai-Chi, for example, have histories that have nothing to do with the military.
So it depends on the style really if invented for military purposes or others.
If talking about "original" kung-fu, it is my understanding that most Chinese Kung-Fu developed starting with a kicking style called Tam-Tui. Tam-Tui is a "martial art" from the middle east and has nothing to do with asians or Indians of any type. It was supposedely brought to China before Da Mo, making all previous arguments about him irrelevent to answering the original question.
Never looked to see if what I was told about Tam Tui is real or not, just relating what my understanding is. I do know that Tam Tui is still a part of most CMA to this day.
Wing-Chun, and Tai-Chi, for example, have histories that have nothing to do with the military.
So it depends on the style really if invented for military purposes or others.
If talking about "original" kung-fu, it is my understanding that most Chinese Kung-Fu developed starting with a kicking style called Tam-Tui. Tam-Tui is a "martial art" from the middle east and has nothing to do with asians or Indians of any type. It was supposedely brought to China before Da Mo, making all previous arguments about him irrelevent to answering the original question.
Never looked to see if what I was told about Tam Tui is real or not, just relating what my understanding is. I do know that Tam Tui is still a part of most CMA to this day.
OP
Fumanchu
Guest
- Thread Starter
- #44
Stories aside, Hsing I is by far a more recent system than eagle claw. Tai Chi is derived from tam tui and is developed in the same province as Hsing I. The developers of them wrere from the military and were credited as experienced fighters.
You're right, Wing Chun's background was not from the military.
You're right, Wing Chun's background was not from the military.
Ummmm.... what???Fumanchu said:
You may want to spend sometime reading Jarek's site .... http://www.chinafrominside.com & the history of xingyi & its parent... xinyi.
Taiji developed in largely in Chenjiaguo, Henan province, about 60 miles from Shaolin & before the advent of what's now called xingyi. There's no tan tui in Taiji.
From what I have seen of CMA there seem to be many influences in the 'Kung Fu' arts.
Bodyguards especially on the road seem to have been involved in the training and evolution of the Martial Arts.
Secret societies, Triads, gangsters and revolutionaries have influenced the growth of Southern Styles especially.
The use of the spear as 'King of the Weapons' in Chinese Martial arts seems to point to village defence and the battlefield being a strong influence.
Still, it is patently obvious that Indian stretching and breathing techniques are at the core of many Chinese styles.
The Chinese seem to take great pride in their myths, even if they don't believe a word of them. In the west everybody knows that Prometheus took fire from the gods. No-one believes it, but the stories seem to tell us about ourselves. So, if the Damo story helps your training good. If not then forget it.
Bodyguards especially on the road seem to have been involved in the training and evolution of the Martial Arts.
Secret societies, Triads, gangsters and revolutionaries have influenced the growth of Southern Styles especially.
The use of the spear as 'King of the Weapons' in Chinese Martial arts seems to point to village defence and the battlefield being a strong influence.
Still, it is patently obvious that Indian stretching and breathing techniques are at the core of many Chinese styles.
The Chinese seem to take great pride in their myths, even if they don't believe a word of them. In the west everybody knows that Prometheus took fire from the gods. No-one believes it, but the stories seem to tell us about ourselves. So, if the Damo story helps your training good. If not then forget it.
Fumanchu, I think your idea of what Tam Tui is and mine are, is completely different. Tai Chi is one of the few CMA not based on Tam Tui, couldn't be furthur from the truth. You are probably thinking something else there with possibly a similar name.
Here is the point I think everyone is attempting to make about DaMo. Before him, there was martial arts in China, no real doubt there. DaMo brought meditation and yoga type knowledge to China. The Chinese over time turned his teachings into their current belief of chi and developed chi-gong exercises from this. They then learned to use chi and chi-gong to improve the power of their martial arts. In this way DaMo was the first step towards China developing "internal" martial arts.
Yoga is not a fighting art, but its principles could be used to make an existing MA stronger. Similarly, DaMo was not a martial artist or a fighter, but his teachings can easily be applied to fighting arts.
Here is the point I think everyone is attempting to make about DaMo. Before him, there was martial arts in China, no real doubt there. DaMo brought meditation and yoga type knowledge to China. The Chinese over time turned his teachings into their current belief of chi and developed chi-gong exercises from this. They then learned to use chi and chi-gong to improve the power of their martial arts. In this way DaMo was the first step towards China developing "internal" martial arts.
Yoga is not a fighting art, but its principles could be used to make an existing MA stronger. Similarly, DaMo was not a martial artist or a fighter, but his teachings can easily be applied to fighting arts.
OP
Fumanchu
Guest
- Thread Starter
- #48
dmax999,
Tam Tui from what I understand is one of the beginner forms of long fist. Tai Chi is more advanced but is built on that foundation.
The power behind martial arts was already there. Chi was their way of explaning how it worked. No, they didn't learn about chi and made martial arts more powerful.
Tam Tui from what I understand is one of the beginner forms of long fist. Tai Chi is more advanced but is built on that foundation.
The power behind martial arts was already there. Chi was their way of explaning how it worked. No, they didn't learn about chi and made martial arts more powerful.
Well I'm afraid you've been a little mis-informed. Tan Tui isn't a form. It's a stand alone long fist system. It gained notarity with the Hui Chinese minorities & their use of it. Most people only see the Road Routines (10,12,14) as exercises & that one aspect of Tan Tui was absored into other systems to teach basic long fist ideas & techniques.Fumanchu said:
About as close to a match with your statement is that some Taiji people have also practiced Tan Tui (or even still do) & that both are Northern in origin & nature. The two are independantly different.
I'll agree with that one mostly. They start with Zhuang Zhan & build from there with other exercises like Chan Si Gong & lots of repetative form practice to build the internal strength needed to properly perform taiji & apply it's principles.Fumanchu said:
brothershaw
Purple Belt
I have heard on more than one occasion ( true or not i dont know) is that the internal styles are also called internal because they were developed internally within china. Where as other arts had outside influences. Which would imply that if you believe in buddha or however you choose to call him he added internal breathing techniques and exercises to shaolin that didnt necessarily have those qualitiies. Also if you look at the movements of shaolin styles or long range or long fist type styles or other northern styles movements they have a different quality to them than the movements of tai chi,xingyi or bagua.
And if you are sending general grunts out to war to be "bullet catchers" or "arrow and spear catchers" in that time period, you are not going to waste too much time teaching them complex martial arts. More specialized troops and officers will always get the best training, they are more committed time wise and loyalty wise. So I would say 50/50 some from military some from civilan.
And if you are sending general grunts out to war to be "bullet catchers" or "arrow and spear catchers" in that time period, you are not going to waste too much time teaching them complex martial arts. More specialized troops and officers will always get the best training, they are more committed time wise and loyalty wise. So I would say 50/50 some from military some from civilan.
OP
Fumanchu
Guest
- Thread Starter
- #51
brothershaw,
I would think that the northern systems would have plenty of influence outside china but they are classified as internal. Particualy the styles were used along the silk roads which could span from Mongolia to Turkey.
Civilians in terms of body guards for rich merchants yes! The body guards can be very well trained. But alot of them come from a military background or their lineage comes from the military. But do you all them civilains or mercineries?
Yes, the average grunt is trained mostly to fight in formation. It might mean that they don't cover a 360 degree of movement as they would have their peers beside them to cover that angle. But the 3 or 4 moves say with the spear is drilled over and over again. What I would say is they can be very good at what they do.
I would think that the northern systems would have plenty of influence outside china but they are classified as internal. Particualy the styles were used along the silk roads which could span from Mongolia to Turkey.
Civilians in terms of body guards for rich merchants yes! The body guards can be very well trained. But alot of them come from a military background or their lineage comes from the military. But do you all them civilains or mercineries?
Yes, the average grunt is trained mostly to fight in formation. It might mean that they don't cover a 360 degree of movement as they would have their peers beside them to cover that angle. But the 3 or 4 moves say with the spear is drilled over and over again. What I would say is they can be very good at what they do.
brothershaw
Purple Belt
to Fumanchu
"Civilians in terms of body guards for rich merchants yes! The body guards can be very well trained. But alot of them come from a military background or their lineage comes from the military. But do you all them civilains or mercineries?"
I do recall thier being alot of well trained bodyguards who could fight in the Shaw Brothers movies( kid with the golden arms being a great example) , so you may be right!! Just kidding
Seriously though good points,
kungfu if made for war you would think it would very aggressive in nature ( strike first once its decided or necessary to strike). Not to mention the emphasis on killing the enemy.
self-defense is almost the opposite.
"Civilians in terms of body guards for rich merchants yes! The body guards can be very well trained. But alot of them come from a military background or their lineage comes from the military. But do you all them civilains or mercineries?"
I do recall thier being alot of well trained bodyguards who could fight in the Shaw Brothers movies( kid with the golden arms being a great example) , so you may be right!! Just kidding
Seriously though good points,
kungfu if made for war you would think it would very aggressive in nature ( strike first once its decided or necessary to strike). Not to mention the emphasis on killing the enemy.
self-defense is almost the opposite.
I dont know that I agree with this statement. Kung Fu is very aggressive once your committed to fighting. What makes it seem non agressive is the amount of time or issue to get to the point of fighting, but once attacked, at least my training is very, very agressive. There is actually heavy emphasis on killing the opponent, but I dont think this shows all kung fu was made for war. War is most assuredly not the only time it may be neccessary to kill, especially hundreds of years ago. Killing and serious injury are heavy points in most kung fu, thats simply the basis of self defense in my opinion. If I'm attacked with a knife or even stabbed, my self defense is to do as much damage as possible to the opponent in as little time as I can in order to secure my chances of survival.brothershaw said:
7sm
brothershaw
Purple Belt
7star - maybe maybe not-
Armies dont have time for the enlightenment, and all the other aspects that add to and also increase your training time to proficiency
NOt to mention usually saving the weapons stuff for close to the end of your training while in a war situation hand to hand tends to be your last not first option.
Unless like jujitsu after the modern era things were drastically changed.
Armies dont have time for the enlightenment, and all the other aspects that add to and also increase your training time to proficiency
NOt to mention usually saving the weapons stuff for close to the end of your training while in a war situation hand to hand tends to be your last not first option.
Unless like jujitsu after the modern era things were drastically changed.
I dont think I understood your point. ??brothershaw said:
7sm
brothershaw
Purple Belt
7 star -
My point was that alot of kungfu has alot of material that comes with it, some philosophy, esoteric concepts, internalization and so on in addition to the physical aspects. The military doesnt really have the time for all of that unless they are a warrior type society where they are training the soldiers from a very young age, and even then the grunts ( bullet catchers ) wont get that stuff just the basics.
In japan it is generally acknowledged that after the end of the feudal or samurai period ( i forget the correct term) alot ( not all ) of the jujitsu styles began to die out, also partially due to japans loss in ww2.( getting to be a long story). Anyway unarmed jujitsu was a backup to a samurai losing his sword, after the modern era, most people japan or anywhere learn unarmed jujitsu not kenjitsu. After the warroir stage passes remaining arts if any also change to reflect the times.
So bottom line if kung fu came from the military it changed just like japanese jujitsu has changed ( with some exceptions).
My point was that alot of kungfu has alot of material that comes with it, some philosophy, esoteric concepts, internalization and so on in addition to the physical aspects. The military doesnt really have the time for all of that unless they are a warrior type society where they are training the soldiers from a very young age, and even then the grunts ( bullet catchers ) wont get that stuff just the basics.
In japan it is generally acknowledged that after the end of the feudal or samurai period ( i forget the correct term) alot ( not all ) of the jujitsu styles began to die out, also partially due to japans loss in ww2.( getting to be a long story). Anyway unarmed jujitsu was a backup to a samurai losing his sword, after the modern era, most people japan or anywhere learn unarmed jujitsu not kenjitsu. After the warroir stage passes remaining arts if any also change to reflect the times.
So bottom line if kung fu came from the military it changed just like japanese jujitsu has changed ( with some exceptions).
brothershaw
Purple Belt
To simplify this thread even more- look at the history of your particular style
how many styles actually claim to have come from the military? In kungfu you everybody and their brother claims such style came from shaoling, wudang, some mysterious monk on a mountain, some guy watching an animal , but few claim such and such general, or military branch created this. And most styles claim at least a hundred years history and are meticulous about who taught who.
how many styles actually claim to have come from the military? In kungfu you everybody and their brother claims such style came from shaoling, wudang, some mysterious monk on a mountain, some guy watching an animal , but few claim such and such general, or military branch created this. And most styles claim at least a hundred years history and are meticulous about who taught who.
I agree, I'm not of the belief that all or even most kung fu came from military.
7sm
7sm
OP
Fumanchu
Guest
- Thread Starter
- #59
brothershaw,
Enlightenment, some philosophy, esoteric concepts, internalization. The reason why in the military those thongs are not dealt with is because it doesn't help soildiers in what they do. It was in times of peace where martial arts became more of a cultural 'event that' that these became part of the cirriculum - eg. lion dancing.
It's true that not all styles came from a military background. You don't have to do weapons training at the end of your training, its just that this is the way some schools teach nowadays.
Enlightenment, some philosophy, esoteric concepts, internalization. The reason why in the military those thongs are not dealt with is because it doesn't help soildiers in what they do. It was in times of peace where martial arts became more of a cultural 'event that' that these became part of the cirriculum - eg. lion dancing.
It's true that not all styles came from a military background. You don't have to do weapons training at the end of your training, its just that this is the way some schools teach nowadays.
Similar threads
