I think the question of sources is more difficult to ascertain than what has been discussed.
You can find an intersection between any art with another, yet that doesn't make one developed from the earlier one.
The entire concept of Chinese arts directly influencing the Okinawan ones, a great theory, has so little substance backing it. For example if anyone could show a Chinese form remotely similar to the earlier Okinawan ones wouldn't they be marketing it in todays world to the hilt? Of course they would, but instead you have things like Go TeKi, a Chinese tea merchant and Crane stylist shared his teachings on Okinawa, thus this MUST be the source of Okinawan karate. Nice theory even based in a little reality, but IMO far from substantiated.
Nihanchi for one is a very old Okinawan kata, done back into the 1800's. The fact the torso rotates in Nihanchi, and the fact that Baguazhang uses torso rotation doesn't make them similar. Especially as Nihanchi seems to be formulated the same time 'Baguazhang' was being codified in China. Of course the potential that the earlier Okinawan chinese community may have retained some earlier pre-baguazhang arts that influenced karate's development could possibly exist, BUT, where's the proof outside of somebody just saying it.
Answer, there is NONE. The Okinawans kept their art essentially un-literate in the 1800's. They didn't write about it, and were mostly teaching in a non-verbal manner where they just showed somebody what to do, didn't describe it with a technical vocabulary (so no-one could spill the beans). This makes hard truth very difficult to come by.
The fact the Bubishi was in existence on Okinawa, doesn't prove it was a source for Okinawa's karate development. Its techniques can be found in Okinawan karate, but as over 1/2 the text was concerned with medical matters, if it really was a souce why didn't the Okinawan's pay attention to it and develop those arts too?
I'm not trying to dismiss Chinese influence, rather rationally find a true relationship outside of some story, and most of what's discussed is just that, stories.
Shifting Islands now, Usheiba's arts are demonstratibly derived from the different arts he trained in on Japan. The prime source of his Aikido rests in Daito Ryu JuJutsu, which he took a tiny piece of for his art.
At the same time many Chinese systems have techniques which are similar to Aikido's. There are really only so many ways to grab an twist an arm. But that doesn't mean the Chinese arts were the source, and that doesn't mean they weren't depending on how far you go back for Daito Ryu.
But as I've read Daito Ryu was based on Japanese battlefield practices. Many of the locks and throws derived from sword technqiues, grabbing an arm and slicing down with it as a sword.
That Usheiba served in the illegal, immoral, insane occupation of Manchuria by Japan, doesn't make it likely he did receive any martial instruction there. After all Japan was doing fun things like developing terror bombing of Chinese cities, etc. in those years. Think the Chinese were really interested in sharing with the Japanese to any siginficent account?
But stories make wonderful ways to tuck all of us martial kiddies into bed at night, don't they?
And whether Usheiba developed mysterious ki powers is open to debate. It's obvious he was good and he has trained some very good students (his son, Tohei, etc.) But times change and perhaps todays people don't credit those students skills with the same reverence accorded to the founder of Aikido. It doesn't mean they are less, there's no way to compare.
Hey I can't prove anything. I just suggest there aren't simple wrapped answers to these questions, just more questions.
Mr. Smith: Martial Arts moved, like most everything else, from the mid-East outward. And seeing as it is widely accepted that Japanese people probably migrated from China in the first place why is it so difficult to think that a Japanese art derived from a Chinese art, or a Korean (Don't they say Isshun-ryu is derived from Shaolin, or am I mistaken? Edit: my apologies, it's Shorin Ryu).
But, to stick with your example: 1. They ARE marketing Shaolin as the source of many Asian martial arts, much to the hilt
2. Yes, a torso rotation is a torso rotation and a wrist grab is a wrist grab but combine that with a coil here, a step there, drilling, crossing, palming, and good Lord you have a readily recognizable martial art (i.e. Ba Gua is very distinctive and you know it when you see it, even in a derivative).
3. I don't know the truth, Okinawan martial arts may have spawned, unaided, in Okinawa, and I'm not one of those that touts Shaolin as the source of all things great in martial arts. So, you're right, we can't prove anything, but we can make reasonable guesses based on the evidence given by others (Frantzis studied under some of the best Ba Gua practitioners to live in the last 100 years and he also studied directly under Ueshiba).
Mr. Bell: What style of Ba Gua is this, Yin Fu? And what ever happened with that Ba Gua Zhang tournament in New York a couple of years ago that was supposed to have a full contact component? I remember it got postponed and I never heard anything else about it.
[This message has been edited by Syrio (edited 12-10-2003).]
[This message has been edited by Syrio (edited 12-12-2003).]
Sir what different do it make, what I practice is Ba Gua Zhang.
But to answer your question I practice and teach mostly Yin style Ba Gua Zhang. My Yin Teacher is Chen Xiao Ping and Xu ShiXi of Beijing China. My Cheng style Ba Gua comes from the late Master B.P.Chen. I hope this answers your question sir.
And what ever happened with that Ba Gua Zhang tournament in New York a couple of years ago that was supposed to have a full contact component? I remember it got postponed and I never heard anything else about it.
First of all I didn't throw the all Ba gua Zhang tournament I was just help out. My martial art brother Sifu Ben C. Hill hosted the event for two years in a roll now. 2002 to 2003 of this year. Everyone that knows something about Ba Gua Zhang know that this tournament happen already twice back to back 2002 to 2003 and there was full contact fighting.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by BlackTaoist: Sir what different do it make, what I practice is Ba Gua Zhang.
[This message has been edited by BlackTaoist (edited 12-13-2003).][/QUOTE]
Just curious, I've only seen Cheng style and was wondering if there was any noticeable difference. Cheng is supposed to be more chin na oriented - a "softer" style so to speak since Cheng Ting Hua's Ba Gua Zhang was incorporated into his previous wrestling skill - while Yin has more striking which reflects Yin Fu's background. As someone who trains in both, is this true in a practical sense?
It's good that the tournament has been held and is so recognized, hopefully it will help foster a new wave of popularity for the art. Is there a video available?
For a minor note Isshinryu is an Okinawan system derived from its founders studies in Okinawan Goju Ryu and Okinawan Shorin Ryu.
Okinawa has had a Chinese community for over 500 years, and there is no doubt their interaction with the others on Okinawa did assist in karate's development, but that is far different than the Chinese arts being a direct root on the Okinawan ones.
There are so many differences in overall characteristics if the Chinese arts were the true source you could say the Okinawan's were less than good students. But in all likelihood the correct aspect may have been that of 'influence' rather than of source.
But the Okinawan's kept the arts so non-literate, so un-documented, it always remains speculation.
Going back to Usheiba Sensei's stay in China, if you really consider what intensly illegal occupation the Japanese were doing in Manchuria, among the fine military arts the practiced were the worlds first terrorist bombing of civilian populations, it is difficult to believe there was open communication with the Chinese martial arts community. In fact the Japanese used their attacks to provoke Chinese boycots of Japanese goods to in turn justify larger Japanese occupation forces.
Doesn't say it didn't happen, but it does seem somewhat historical spin control at the same time.
In the case of Usheiba's Aiki-jutsu/Aikido (depending on the time frame) the fact there is similar movement to Bagua only seem to strengthen that the use of the sword, a large part of the basis of Daito Ryu, use of sword techniques empty handed to replace a lost sword, likewise would involve spinning and turning.
ive been learning ba gua zhang and hsing I chuan for a little while but concerning your question syrio i know as ive seen that the curcular walking in ba gua zhang makes light work of most martial arts thanks to the way they use straight motions, especially karate as for street application though id think an art like karate would be more effective i think we dont see it in competition because its not popular enough imo
But in all likelihood the correct aspect may have been that of 'influence' rather than of source.
...
Thats why proof is difficult to obtain.
[/QUOTE]
Understood, I apologize if I misinterpreted your earlier statement but on this (that there is no real way to obtain proof) I agree. Also, "influence" is a much more accurate choice.
Just curious, I've only seen Cheng style and was wondering if there was any noticeable . Cheng is supposed to be more chin na oriented - a "softer" style so to speak since Cheng Ting Hua's Ba Gua Zhang was incorporated into his previous wrestling skill - while Yin has more striking which reflects Yin Fu's background. As someone who trains in both, is this true in a practical sense?
Syrio,
many Bagua practitioners have this misconception about Bagua's characteristics. That Cheng style is more circular, like a swimming dragon while Yin style is more direct etc. That's bull.
All Bagua styles can be performed in either way, because it can all be found within original Bagua. Generally speaking, novice practitioners do more direct movements, while advanced Bagua stylists move "dragon-like". That's just because their movements change from rigid to flexible. It is therefore wrong to put a label on something and say: "Ah, this is this and that style". Why, does Cheng style have the monopoly on circling dragon-like techniques, while Yin style can only performed linear and directly? Obviously not. Bagua is Bagua, and its' performance depends solely on the individual. Do not create limitations for yourself by sticking labels.
Is there a video available?
Yes. If interested in buying these videos you can order tapes: All Ba Gua Zhang tournament competition 1.2002 $35 All Ba Gua Zhang tournament competition 2. 2003. $35
Each video contains Ba gua hand forms, weapons forms, Ba Gua push hands and fighting competition.
Please send a postal money order and add $5.00 for shipping and handling for each item. Please send $15.00 for overseas orders. Mail to - Novell G. Bell 38 West 90 street Apt. 3A NY ,NY 10024
Previous Topic
Index
