A Question From Sifu Regarding Shaolin Kungfu

[Charles David]

Dear Family and Friends,

Occasionally, when in class, or sharing a meal or tea, Sifu will pose a question. I have found that answering the question confers benefits, whether or not one gets the answer correct. (I'm not sure what my average is. Perhaps I usually get the answer wrong.--No matter!--My efforts are always rewarded.

You may find the answer simple, or maybe it will be difficult, but let us allow the more junior, or our guests try first.

From Sifu's The Way of the Master (link)

"Why is it that by using Shaolin Kungfu one can have the best advantages in both attack and defence?"--Grandmaster Wong Kiew Kit

hofattnamspar.jpg

A priceless old photo of sparring in Sigung Ho's school

[David Langford]

Hi everyone, I'll start.

Perhaps because we train powerful, simple, and profound methods of both attack and defense without neglecting one or the other, we practice for both safety and victory.

All the best,

[Charles David]

Thanks, David. Good start.

Keep those answers coming, folks. As the carnies say: "You can't win if you don't play!"

[Kristian S.]

As the carnies say: "You can't win if you don't play!"

Hahaha Is it because the very best of techniques and skills for attack, defense, counter, etc. of any art/s in the world (in a strategic/mathematical way) are found in Shaolin Kung Fu, and many that are exclusive to it alone, especially in our time?

[Charles David]

Another good answer, from Kristian S--or was that a question! since you aksed: "Is it...?"

There are many ways to answer, and indeed other ways the question could have been posed.

Give it a shot!


Yrs.

Charles

[Frederick_Chu]

My personal experience with sparring martial artists of other styles has shown me the usefulness of "safety first" in our kung fu. Not only do we spend a fair amount of time building and refining that skill through our stances, footwork, "asking the way," correct timing & spacing, and all the other skills of the basic syllabus, but the techniques themselves give us protection even while we are striking, kicking, felling, and gripping by means of appropriate angling, a "live" guard-hand, and the positioning of the opponent. When our opponent not only fails to penetrate our defense but likewise cannot counter our attacks, they are in a poor situation indeed.

And this is just at the level of form, techniques, and the strategy of keeping oneself safe. Other variables like force, more advanced tactics, and more sophisticated techniques and strategies from specialized and advanced sets only increase the depth of advantages.

[Charles David]

we spend a fair amount of time building and refining

Getting warm...



Cha

[Andrea]

"Why is it that by using Shaolin Kungfu one can have the best advantages in both attack and defence?"--Grandmaster Wong Kiew Kit

What comes to my mind:

1. It is a complete martial art, which includes techniques covering all type of attacks with their defenses (form), internal force, application and the related philosophy.
2. It allows for triple cultivation: body, energy and mind (spirit).

Why those two points:

For 1. It will for example give us an advantage against

• those martial arts who focus on a specific type of techniques only (Taekwondo for example),
• those who do not train internal force and practice only flowery movements.
• those who train no or a limited amount of applications and thus are limited in what they can defend or do not have the skills to use the techniques, as they haven't practiced them enough.
• those who do not understand basic principles, strategies and tactics.

For 2.

• Body: It will keep us healthy and "fit".
• Energy: We have enough energy to spar for some time and can use internal force. Having more energy in my experience gives us also more courage.
• Mind/Spirit: Gives us clarity to correctly judge a situation and decide whether to engage in a combat or not. It gives us compassion, inner calm and the awareness of our motivation and emotions.

My answers apply to both Shaolin Kungfu and Wahnam Tai Chi Chuan, as both arts in our school give these advantages. The assumption of course is that one learns it systematically and practices persistently.

Andrea

[Mark Blohm]

Dear Charles Siheng,

Quoting Sifu:

"All kungfu patterns, including those from Taijiquan, that we have inherited from past masters are the crystalized forms of their centuries of actual fighting experiences. In other words from countless techniques that people had used in the past, these masters stylized them into kungfu patterns and continued to improve upon them over the centuries."(link)

[drunken boxer]

My answer would be borrowing a bit from Mark and Andrea's:

1. It was developed from fighting, for the purposes of fighting, in arenas where there were no rules and it could be a fight to the death, including on the actual battlefield in the days before guns, used by the likes of General Yue Fei and his armies.

2. As a result, because it is a combat art and not a sport, it includes techniques intended to dispatch the opponents in the most efficient ways possible, but also techniques intended to keep the kungfu practitioner safe. On the battlefield the objective is more to survive, rather than to prove how tough you are.

As an example, as much as I love boxing as a sport, and admire people like Floyd Mayweather and Bernard Hopkins who can use an excellent defence in boxing called the shoulder roll, I saw a Brazilian Jujitsu advocate talk about how this shoulder roll would be totally useless against his Brazilian jujitsu because he could still kick, grip, throw, take them down etc.

Even in "No Holds Barred" / MMA fighting there are quite a few moves which are not allowed under the rules, whereas Shaolin Kungfu is designed for an environment with no rules.

That would have been my answer had I not read Charles saying that Fred was getting "warm" by speaking about building and refining, in which case I would venture that the answer might be it is the best because it is powered by the internal force we build, both flowing and consolidated, though this is not the direction I thought of with the wording of the question alone.

[Mark Blohm]

Should We Simplify Kung Fu for Fighting?

[Anton S.]

Very interesting thread!

Shaolin kung-fu has the best advantages due to it´s evolution.

The shoulder roll of Floyd Mayweather may be a weak technique. But his skill is very good.
So I think to make Shaolin Kung Fu work for us we need to train and become skillful!

[drunken boxer]

Shaolin kung-fu has the best advantages due to it´s evolution.

The shoulder roll of Floyd Mayweather may be a weak technique. But his skill is very good.
So I think to make Shaolin Kung Fu work for us we need to train and become skillful!

Very true Anton. Could he beat Bas Rutten though?!

[DarkCosmoz]

Thank you for this illuminating topic.

What is the definition of simplification? From a physical movement perspective, General Yue Fei simplified Shaolin Kung Fu into Xingyiquan. Sun Lu Tang simplified Taijiquan into high patterns and basic movements. However, the essence of the art more or less remained the same.

Best wishes,
Stephen

[Matt F.]

Thank you for this illuminating topic.

What is the definition of simplification? From a physical movement perspective, General Yue Fei simplified Shaolin Kung Fu into Xingyiquan. Sun Lu Tang simplified Taijiquan into high patterns and basic movements. However, the essence of the art more or less remained the same.

Best wishes,
Stephen

Great question, Stephen! Those are a couple really interesting examples, as well.

For me, it would be a differentiation between simplification vs. refinement.

From the perspective of technique:
Decreasing the number of techniques, while decreasing the number of applications = simplification
Decreasing the number of techniques, while retaining all applications = refinement

I think the same thing could be said about number of sets within a style. For instance, an original style has 25 sets that cover a full range of applications. From this original style, two "new" styles are developed, each with only 5 sets. Style A, focusing on basic combat, drops the more complex/high level applications, and would be now be simplified. Style B, focuses on the essence, drops certain techniques but retains all applications, and would now be refined.

Assuming Shaolin Kungfu is the original style that influenced both Karate and Xing Yi, I would say that Karate is style A, and Xing Yi is style B. Both appear quite simple, but the applications (from what I've seen) are a good example of simplified vs. refined. I intend no disrespect or judgment in this, and admit that I am pretty ignorant when it comes to the full range of Karate and Xing Yi. But from what I have seen, this holds true.

Switching gears a bit, I wonder what the pro's/con's are to simplifying an aspect of the art that seems to no longer apply to life in this time/year/age. For instance, what are the pro's/con's to dropping straight sword vs. spear applications from one's practice? Honestly, there is effectively zero chance that I will ever have a sword and need to defend myself against someone with a spear. If I do not need the practical application, what (if anything) would I lose by dropping this aspect of the training? If there are indeed benefits to this training, could I develop them with hand-to-hand training, and refine my practice by decreasing the amount of material practiced without losing the benefits?

-Matt