Core differences between Shaolinquan and Taijiquan

[Zhang Wuji]

Thank you again, StierSifu. Yes, I did notice that some of the stances in the Chen style have an L-shape though not all of them. The ones I saw were those used in Lan Zhayi (Lazily Arranging Clothes)and Single Whip which are more like Horse Stances.

Additionally...one of the remnants of 'Old Frame Lao-Jia Chen Set' in the 'Old Frame Yang Long Imperial Set' is the use of right angled 'L' shaped stances which allow more body weight to drop into the stance when striking...while also enabling more certain and easy centering and rootedness in the stance...and which require no rotations of the feet to complete steps...a boon to faster footwork.

May I ask if this also applies in a case where there is a change of direction of 180 or more?

There is one issue which I have asked my Sifu and would like to share it here, and that is the width of a Bow Arrow Stance in Taijiquan. As any Kungfu or Taijiquan student of Shaolin Wahnam know, our Bow Arrow stance is such that the front and back feet are in line, unlike that of most Taijiquan schools which teach a shoulder-width length between the feet.

The Shaolin Wahnam Bow Arrow stance, which I found very different at first, is based on actual combat, notably protecting the groin and greater stability. Sifu very kindly explained all the fine points and advantages of this stance to me during the Sabah course. Sifu could well have just told me "Don't ask so many questions!" but he very patiently clarified my doubts. One thing about Sifu, and which Antonius has echoed elsewhere is that whereas other teachers insist on a certain way of doing things (like stances, or not eating after qigong, etc) without reasons, Sifu always has a solid basis grounded on actual experience, of himself and past masters, for all his teachings.

I am curious to know what the Bow Arrow Stance in the Taijiquan of Shen Men Tao is like.

[Sifu Stier]

Clarification on Stances and Footwork

Hi Wuji!

The Shen Men Tao 'Bow and Arrow Stance' is an 'L' shaped stance as mentioned in a previous post...with the feet positioned on a line...without any width between them...so that the body weight and the chi can easily converge at a point thereby created by lines drawn from toe to toe and heel to heel. These factors are present in any posture which concludes in the 'Bow and Arrow Stance'...including those which include turns to change directions by 90 degrees...120 degrees...180 degrees...or even 270 degrees!

[Zhang Wuji]

Dear StierSifu

Thank you for sharing a Shen Men Tao teaching. I took a closer look at all my Chen style books at home and found that even today, the Chen exponents keep a L-stance, although there are the occasional 60 degree angle, but then again, no stance is every truly rigid and static.....

It is fascinating to find out about so many variations in the Bow Arrow stance. To summarise:
Shaolin Wahnam - Feet in line, both feet at 45-60 degrees angle to protect the groin and for stability
Shen Men Tao - L -shape, with front foot presumably pointing straight ahead, heels in line. I assume the length of the stance is fairly small, given the Sun Lutang lineage, known for its higher and smaller stances.
Chen Style today - Fairly long stance (same as that of Shaolin Wahnam), L-shape, but legs around shoulder-width apart.
Yang style today - Front foot pointing straight ahead, back foot 45 degrees and shoulder width apart. Lenght of stance varies but some schools like mine advocate turning the front knee and foot inwards slightly (15 degrees).

Anyone has other thoughts about this stance? I am not sure if differences such as these are core or cosmetic, but personally, I find them significant since I practice the form daily and it is important to practice my footwork correctly.

On another topic, here is an interesting general comment on Shaolinquan and Taijiquan by Sifu.

Question 7
Why has nobody combined Shaolin Kungfu and Wudang Tai Chi Chuan together?
Tom, USA


Answer 7
This is because they produce better results when practiced on their own. Both Shaolin Kungfu and Wudang Tai Chi Chuan have reached their peak after having gone through centuries of development.

Only those who have attained merely a superficial level of the two arts, or worse, have practiced merely the external forms as dance, would be egoistic enough to believe he is smarter than centuries of Shaolin and Tai Chi Chuan masters to be able to improve the arts by combining them.

This does not mean there cannot be influences between them that bring mutual benefits. Such processes constitute a natural evolution of the arts, which is going on all the time, and not an artificial combination by particular individuals.

Such an evolution usually took place over centuries involving contributions of many masters, but on a few occasions in kungfu history also took place over years in the life of a single master. For example, when the great master, Chen Harng, evolved Choy-Li-Fatt Kungfu, he did not artificially combine Choy Ka Kungfu, Li Ka Kungfu and Fatt Ka Kungfu which he had learnt from his three masters into one style. Rather, he taught his students what he practiced, which contained the best elements from these three styles.

We in Shaolin Wahnam are experiencing and benefiting from this process. I learned from four masters, and I teach my students the best of what I learned. Hence, what my students practice is different from (and better than) what I learned individually from each of my four masters. I did not artificially combine the art of one master with that of another, but the best from these four masters evolved naturally into one style that I teach.

from this series

[Robin]

Stances

Hello everyone,

Dear Zhang Wuji, It is an interesting point that you bring up about stances. There obviously must be reasons as to why these different stances came about. Im interested to know if anyone has expirienced first hand the benefits and disadvantages these different stances have on a practical level.

For example I can remember when my stance was quite high early on in my practice. I was thrown easily in push hands. I can also remeber the first couple of times I sparred my Wahnam brother Ronan, at the time I was practicing Wu (Jian Chuan) style Taijiquan, in which the front foot in Bow Arrow stance faces forward. I found that my groin was constanly being attacked! Which I found entirely uncomfortable.

Kind regards

Robin

[Hubert]

I found that my groin was constanly being attacked! Which I found entirely uncomfortable.

A nice way to put it

[Sifu Stier]

Footnote To Stance Discussion

Wuji:

Your assumption regarding the length and height of the 'Bow and Arrow Stance' in Shen Men Tao is incorrect. Although the Pa-Kua Chang and Hsing-Yi Chuan segments of our system come from Sun Lu-Tang Sifu...the Tai-Chi Chuan segment consists of the 'Yang Chia Old Large Frame Long Imperial 108 Forms Set'...and the 'Yang Small Frame Fast Form Set'...which both came from Yang Chien-Hou Sifu and Yang Shao-Hou Sifu...not the 'Sun Chia Small Frame Tai-Chi Chuan Set' you referred to.

And incidentally....the 'Yang Long Imperial Set' still exists in its original format apart from the modified version known nowadays as the Wu/Ng Style Long Form Set. As a result...the 'L' shaped 'Bow and Arrow Stance' of the 'Yang Long Imperial Set' is much longer and lower than the stances used in Sun's 'Combined Styles Tai-Chi Chuan Set'....reflecting the 'Chen Chia Old Frame Sets' from which the 'Long Imperial 108 Set' was created by Yang Lu-Chan Sifu.

Additionally...since this stance is used to defend and counter from a side angle to the line of the opponent's attack...rather than face to face on a line...we normally experience no vulnerability of exposing the groin to attack as some people have mentioned in previous posts.

[Zhang Wuji]

Greetings, StierSifu

Thank you for your correction. I should not have assumed that the Shen Men Tao system followed Sun Lutang Zongshi (which title I should have used to start with) in all respects.

I have photographs of the masters in my Taijiquan school doing the fast form. The Xiefei Shi Bow Arrow Stance is exactly as you have described, with feet in an L shape, except that in Chinese, the name of the stance is Heng Dang Bu 横裆步, not Gong Jian Bu 弓箭步. In some other postures like Brush Knee, the stance called a Bow Arrow with the more common front leg pointed forward, back leg at 45, and the stance smaller than the abovementioned one.

It is not only the Bow Arrow stance that has many variations. Even the Horse-Riding stance which I expected to be fairly consistent throughout can vary from style to style.

For instance, according to Dan Dohcerty and from pictures of every Wu2 style master I have seen, the horse riding stance is only about 2 shoulder widths with the toes pointing out 45 degrees.

In Shaolin Wahnam, our stance is the typical Southern stance - wide and lower than any Taijiquan stance I know, feet parallel, and thighs almost parallel (but Sifu has also said that low doesn't mean right, if qi is locked in the knees).

Shaolin Wahnam students know why we train in this stance this way, but maybe not visitors to the forum. Because I still find problems with this stance, I cannot as yet speak from personal experience about this stance, but I can cite Sifu, who says that the stance lowers our centre of gravity, allowing the qi to focus in the dantian, and from there it can be channelled to any part of the body.

Even other styles such as Taijiquan that do not train in such demanding stance also have their own tough stances in Zhan Zhuang practice, though in my humble view, the Shaolin horse-riding posture is by far the hardest to do and sustain, and which when taught by mediocre or worse instructors, results in tension. I look forward to being able to do the stance well. If I can conquer this stance, I can probably conquer anything.....

[Sifu Stier]

Re: Semantics!

Hello Wuji!

Of course...the so-called 'Horizontal Seated Stance' or 'Hong Tang Pu' is a more appropriate name for the 'L-Stance' than 'Bow and Arrow Stance' or 'Kong Chien Pu'....especially since the rear leg knee is bent rather than straight as in the 'Bow and Arrow Stance'. I often use the name 'L-Stance' because this name in English language is more descriptive of the proper foot placement for new students than the 'official' name....whether English or Chinese is used.

Also...the 'Horse Stance' or 'Ma Pu' as used in the Wu/Ng Tai-Chi Chuan Single Whip (Tan-Pien) is often referred to as a 'Straddle Stance' or 'Kua Pu' to distinguish it from the normal 'Ma Pu' in which the feet are positioned parallel to one another rather than outward at an angle as in 'Kua Pu'.

Thanks for your technical input regarding the Chinese names...as this is information which is probably unfamiliar to many readers of these threads.

[Zhang Wuji]

Hi StierSifu

I did not mean to delve into semantics, but as you know with Chinese Kungfu, there are no standard terms, and one system's jargon can be different from another. Thank you for making the terms clear. I agree L-shape is a much better name. In fact, many stances based on Chinese characters do not look like the character at all. For example, I had problems with the Stream character (Chuan)

If I understand you correctly, Shen Men Tao also distinguishes between the L-Shape stance (Heng Dang Bu) and the Bow Arrow (Gong Jian Bu)? Would I be correct to say the L-shape is used as a longer stance while Bow Arrow stance is used in a smaller one. From the pictures I have of the Fast Small form of Yang Shaohou, there is a distinction between the two.

[Sifu Stier]

Re: Stances

Wei Wuji!

You are correct! We view these as two separate stances....with the 'Hong Tang Pu' or 'Horizontal Seated Stance' normally played longer and lower than the 'Kong Chien Pu' or 'Bow and Arrow Stance' in any Form Set in which both are used.

The Old Yang Chia Large Frame Long Imperial 108 Forms Set...in its original manner of performance...is practically devoid of Bow Stances...preferring instead the Horizontal Seated Stance like the Chen Chia Form Sets from which it came.

The Yang Chia Small Frame Fast Form Set uses both stances as it is a Combined Style Set...and as such...incorporates the greater variety of different stances used in the individual Style Sets it borrowed from in its creation. In this Set...there is definitely a distinction between the two stances as you noted.....with the 'Kong Chien Pu' used most often in Form Postures with waist rotation toward the more heavily weighted leg and foot...such as 'Brush Knee And Twist Step' (Lou Hsih Au Pu).....and the 'Hong Tang Pu' used most often in Form Postures with waist rotation toward the less heavily weighted leg and foot...such as 'Fan Through The Back' (Shan Tung Pei) and 'Single Whip' (Tan Pien).

[yeniseri]

Zhang,

I would say that they share more similarities in that Chen synthesized Shaolin forms (hongquan for one) and came up with a different approach that we know today. Most of the shaolin Buddhist name still are present in Chen style so it is only the better trained who may show the actual feel of the specific form. If you ask me to prove it I cannot since I have seen it over the years but one excellent reference is a book called "Old Chen Family Taijiquan" by Mark Chen. One of the few better books I have bought over the years.

[Zhang Wuji]

Greetings, StierSifu

This is wonderful news. The Small Frame Fast Form (or Usage Form as we call it) is so rare that I get blank looks when I talk about it. Thank you for sharing your expertise on this form. I only wish I could see the Set you will be performing at the July tournament.

Interestingly, the feet position in Fast form Bow Arrow stances seem to be about shoulder-width apart, unlike the L-stance where the heels form a straight line. My Sifu (Grandmaster Wong) also told me of a Shaolin stance that looks like a Bow Arrow but with feet shoulder-width apart too.

I wonder why the feet are shoulder-width apart in the Bow Arrow stance. I believe StierSifu, you mentioned that with the heels in line, you can draw two lines from the heels and the toes to form a point of convergence. This is not possible when the feet are shoulder-width apart, where the triangle cannot be formed.

I would also like to share here what my Sifu told me about keeping the feet shoulder-width apart in a Bow Arrow stance. Surprising as it may seem, keeping the heels/toes in a straight line is more stable than shoulder-width apart. This seems counter-intuitive until we consider how qi flows. When the feet are in line, the qi flows down as in a pyramid, locking one firmly to the ground, whereas in the other position, the qi flow is disrupted. I think it was for this reason that the Chen style and the old Yang style have the L-stance with the heels in line (Yet another "Core Difference" demolished). I am therefore curious why there is a smaller Bow Arrow stance in both the Fast Form and in Shaolinquan with the feet apart. It must be there for a reason and has its own combat function.

StierSifu, I hope you could also enlighten me on the toe/feet movements in the Fast Form Bow Arrow stance. I observed the senior Taijiquan instructors in my school practising this form moving the rear foot during the hand strike. A few posts ago, you mentioned that in the 108 Long form, the rear foot remains at a right angle throughout during postures concluding in Brush Knee Twist Step. Since there is a distinction between the Fast Form and the Old 108 form, I believe that this may not be the case in the former. I may be wrong, but i think the rear foot does not remain at the L-shape, but moves to the front slightly. I just can't see when this happens, though.

The instructors I observed move so fast that I cannot tell if the rear foot has stopped moving before they complete the hand movement with a fajing strike (ie the whole posture is fully in place before the strike) or the toes turn around at the very instant the strike is finished.

I asked the most senior instructor and he told me that in the Fast Form Bow Arrow stance, fajing comes from the front heavily weighted leg, and much less on the rear leg, which can move, and sometimes should move. This is because this posture/stance is used when gliding forward to strike, and the rear foot is being dragged along. I think this is akin to the Bagua and Xingyi strikes when taking active steps which StierSifu mentioned earlier.

For our Shaolin Wahnam students, please correct me if I am wrong, but there is a pattern called Twin Dragons Carrying the Moon from the Dragon Tiger Set which has a double hand strike at the same time the body is moving forward, dragging the rear foot along. (This was what got me started, cos I thought that all Shaolinquan hand movements take place only after the exponent sinks into a stance for power and stability until I spotted this pattern in Sifu's book. I should have remembered that all Taijiquan movements, no matter how advanced are found in the higher levels of Shaolinquan).

[Sifu Stier]

Momentum Step Footwork!

Wei Wuji!

The Yang Chia Small Frame Fast Forms Set...as it was taught by Lee Wing-Wah Sifu...has no width in the 'Bow Stance'. The heels are positioned on a line to facilitate the triangular point of convergence where External Power and Internal Power meet for maximum Unified Power. As you noted...such convergence of the two is not possible when the feet are placed otherwise...with any degree of width between them...as often seen is exercise only Tai-Chi Forms nowadays.

Combatively...the width sacrifices Unified Power for the sake of increased lateral stability which is not needed when the stances and steps are 'rooted'...and one's steps are swift and agile...since the body's center of gravity in a rooted stance or step is always below the location of any force placed on it...including leg trips...foot sweeps...and kicks directed to the legs and feet. So...the width is a bad trade in my opinion. It is trading too much for too little in return!

Additionally...the Gong Jian Bu and Heng Dang Bu of the Fast Forms Set...are often followed by the Jiao3 Ti2 Shang4 Ban4 Bu4 from the Wu3 Style Tai-Chi Chuan...which is one of the component styles used to create the Yang Fast Form Set. In this instance...the rear foot is brought forward at the end of the Fa-Jing to follow the momentum and power to the point of convergence referenced earlier. As you also noted in your post...this same step and stance is similarly used in the Pa-Kua Chang and Hsing-Yi Chuan Sets.

[Zhang Wuji]

The Yang Chia Small Frame Fast Forms Set...as it was taught by Lee Wing-Wah Sifu...has no width in the 'Bow Stance'. The heels are positioned on a line to facilitate the triangular point of convergence where External Power and Internal Power meet for maximum Unified Power. As you noted...such convergence of the two is not possible when the feet are placed otherwise...with any degree of width between them...as often seen is exercise only Tai-Chi Forms nowadays.

Combatively...the width sacrifices Unified Power for the sake of increased lateral stability which is not needed when the stances and steps are 'rooted'...and one's steps are swift and agile...since the body's center of gravity in a rooted stance or step is always below the location of any force placed on it...including leg trips...foot sweeps...and kicks directed to the legs and feet. So...the width is a bad trade in my opinion. It is trading too much for too little in return!

Additionally...the Gong Jian Bu and Heng Dang Bu of the Fast Forms Set...are often followed by the Jiao3 Ti2 Shang4 Ban4 Bu4 from the Wu3 Style Tai-Chi Chuan...which is one of the component styles used to create the Yang Fast Form Set. In this instance...the rear foot is brought forward at the end of the Fa-Jing to follow the momentum and power to the point of convergence referenced earlier. As you also noted in your post...this same step and stance is similarly used in the Pa-Kua Chang and Hsing-Yi Chuan Sets.

I found it most interesting that StierSifu mentioned that one of the components of the Fast Small Frame was the Wu3 (Wu Yuxiang) style. That style, while respected in its own right, is often regarded as some sort of poor cousin to either the Chen or the Yang style, much like how the Wu Jianquan style is always thought of as a somewhat diluted version of Yang style. After all, it was widely believed that Yang Luchan did not teach the Imperial household or even the Imperial bodyguards (ie non-royals) all the secrets of his style. Wu Yuxiang appeared to have learnt some parts of the Yang style from Yang Luchan and then filled in the gaps with Chen Qingping.

Official writings by Yang masters, such as Wu Tunan and Zhao Bin have revealed some disbelief at how much Wu Yuxiang could have learnt in such circumstances.But i have just come across some materials on how Yang Luchan did in fact incorporate some of Wu Yuxiang's Taijiquan theories into his style.

As is popularly believed, Wu Yuxiang was the one who found the secret treatises. What I am reading now suggests that Wu3 sent the classics to Yang Luchan who then had an epiphany.

In this instance...the rear foot is brought forward at the end of the Fa-Jing to follow the momentum and power to the point of convergence referenced earlier. As you also noted in your post...this same step and stance is similarly used in the Pa-Kua Chang and Hsing-Yi Chuan Sets

Would moving/dragging the rear foot forward just as you do a fajing action not dissipate the convergence of energy or affect the sinking of the whole body? I can understand if you are striking from a steady L-stance / unmoving Bow Arrow etc, but i believe StierSifu you mentioned that the feet movement usually does not reach the correct position before the hands / body weight is shifted. (In my earlier post, I did note that my instructor's explanation was that the power comes from the front foot in a moving stance).

This is all very intellectual of course, and it may be ultimately futile and I am quite convinced if I continue practising, my qi flow will lead me to the correct form. Still, it is fun to discuss this, and I think we all benefit from answers given by people far wiser and experienced than the one who asks.

[Sifu Stier]

Wei Wuji!

You misunderstood my post. The follow-up step of the rear foot is done at the completion of the fa-jing...not during the initial part of its application...and as such...adds to the fullness of all the body weight to the front leg and foot as it follows the momentum of the strike directly on the line of movement to the point of combined...unified power convergence!