Kung Fu was made for self defense or for war?

[rox]

I've read that many emperors had their armies to learn kung fu, but was the chinese army relying on it? Actually, I guess the chinese, as the mongols, must have used horsery and archery, and kung fu doesn't cover that.

The question is: did the shaolin develop the martial art to fight against their 'political' enemies or against thieves and such?

 

[clfsean]

I've read that many emperors had their armies to learn kung fu, but was the chinese army relying on it? Actually, I guess the chinese, as the mongols, must have used horsery and archery, and kung fu doesn't cover that.

Sure it does. Good kung fu teaches you to stay home & drink tea while archers are out & have quivers full of arrows.

From what I've read, the Chinese relied heavily on archery for long distance fighting, calvary for assaults & infantry for mass melee/wipe up. Many soliders were not much more than conscripts who were given a weapon & said "have at it".

They way I understand the weaponry of "the day" was archers first for distance, then polearms, sabers/swords/individual weapons, flexible weapons then hands.

The question is: did the shaolin develop the martial art to fight against their 'political' enemies or against thieves and such?

Answer === yes.

 

[j_m]

Strange question indeed... but in a nutshell:


From my understanding a lot of kung fu pre-dates shaolin. And even most kung fu that does not pre-date it had little or nothing to do with shaolin. Shaolin is just one very small branch of Chinese martial arts.

So did the Buddhist monks create their art for war or for self defense? I would suspect for self defense since, being Buddhist, war was not of interest to them. As for the rest of the kung fu in China? I'd say there was a LOT of war going on and kung fu encompassed all aspects of it (horse riding, archery, pole arms, etc.).


My short 2 cents,




jm

 

[DarrenJew]

The Art of War... Sun Tzu
most of you may know of the book... for those who don't it is a book of war written in 2000 bc by Sun Tzu. The book does mention training of troops.

"Whose forces are stronger?"
"Whose officers and troops are better trained?"
"Whose rewards and punishments are clearer?"

But it does not mention "Kung Fu" specifically.

I think the Buddhist monks originally trained for self defense of their Monasteries which were subject to raids from bandits and thieves, Buddhism being such a passive religion would have appeared to be an easy mark to those so inclined.

I think most martial arts as we know it comes from rebellion. When the government oppresses its citizens and makes the ownership of weapons illegal. Many martial arts as we know them today, flourished within “Secret Sects” of normal citizenry, that may have been politically motivated to overthrow oppression.

Though the military did have its training, (don’t quote me) I believe hearing from somewhere the Eagle Claw style may have been associated with military training at one time. I think the military mostly focused on discipline, following orders and recognizing signals of command such as drums and gongs.

Could you imagine a whole army of men who trained “Drunken Man” style Kung fu… going into battle, or uhmmm should I say staggering into battle.

 

[Eldritch Knight]

This discussion seems to be quite Western-minded. Without getting into a lecture about Eastern philosophy, I'd just like to remind people that a basic principle of Buddhism is that of non-violence. From an Eastern perspective, one can't simply run away from a big, strong opponent and proscribe it to non-violence: one has to be strong and capable of meeting the threat, but still decide to withdraw. As I understand it, monks trying to understand this principle made themselves into lethal fighting instruments so that they would never miss an opportunity to be able to practice it. Eventually, martial arts gained a more spiritual focus, turning into a path of sorts, that religious people followed in order to gain enlightenment. Now, this is probably not the origin of all CMA (after all, not everyone was a monk), but it might explain something. Thoughts?

 

[clfsean]

This discussion seems to be quite Western-minded. Without getting into a lecture about Eastern philosophy, I'd just like to remind people that a basic principle of Buddhism is that of non-violence.

Quite true, but the original question dealt with first the army using kung fu & then secondarily the monks of Shaolin. So with that in mind (as a starting point) the Western minded tilt isn't so far off. The second thing is look at many who joined Shaolin. Many who joined the order & "left the world" weren't exactly upstanding citizens. They were ex-soliders, criminals, gangsters, mercenaries, etc... people who were trained or had some training or natural talent in fighting. Just because they joined the monstary doesn't mean they followed its teaching & principles to the letter. A life of luxury & privilege(by hook or by crook) isn't always an easy thing to leave behind for a life of minimalism & abstenence on many things.

From an Eastern perspective, one can't simply run away from a big, strong opponent and proscribe it to non-violence: one has to be strong and capable of meeting the threat, but still decide to withdraw. As I understand it, monks trying to understand this principle made themselves into lethal fighting instruments so that they would never miss an opportunity to be able to practice it. Eventually, martial arts gained a more spiritual focus, turning into a path of sorts, that religious people followed in order to gain enlightenment. Now, this is probably not the origin of all CMA (after all, not everyone was a monk), but it might explain something. Thoughts?

I woudl suggest looking into the writings of Dr Meir Shahir from Isreal. He's an acknowledged authority on medieval China, specifically Tang through Ming Dynasty China & Shaolin. You may be suprised to find out exactly who did the fighting & dying under the Shaolin banner & why. :supcool:

 

[RavenDarkfellow]

The following is one of my posts in another forum here, but it is equally applicable to this topic:

I'd just like to touch on the previous points of the origin and relationships of martial arts. I consider myself equally a martial arts scholar and martial artist. In fact, at this point, I'm more of a scholar than a practitioner (mostly because I have limited access to martial arts training).

I hate to say it, and I'm sure I'm going to be flogged for this one, but the fact is very few martial arts actually have any idea of when/where they were actually founded. Most martial artists (especially the originators) either didn't know their lineage, or made it up, or even changed it to make it sound better. This is especially true of the older and Chinese martial arts. Nobody can seem to keep their records straight, so what I do is collect all the information I can about each art, conflicting or not, and assume that part of all of it is true.

From what I've gathered, nearly everyone seems to concur that Bodhidarmha (a.k.a. Daruma, and at least two other names) was the originator of the martial arts. The legend goes that he went to the Shaolin temple to teach the monks about Buddhism, but they were too physically weak to keep up with his meditations. So he developed a conditioning regimine which he called "eight hands", which helped to whip the monks into shape.

From this, they added more techniques in, more and different conditioning excersices, etc., until they finally had created an entirely new art which eventually became Shaolin Gung Fu.

From there, everything branches out into hundreds of different versions, and even the arts which branched off have branches, and so on, and so forth. Even within the orriginal legend, there are various versions of how it happened and why. The version I've written above is the most common (that I've found) and even the versions which differ tend to share most of the important elements.
_______________________________________________________________

So you see, if this-- being the most agreed upon origin of any of the martial arts-- is true, then martial arts (and Shaolin Gung Fu, being the first official one) were created neither for "martial" or self-defence purposes, but instead as a means of meditation and disicpline.

Hope that answered your question.

 

[rox]

Thanks for the answers. I don't know how much trust we can put into this, but I found this article interesting, from WIKIPEDIA:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaolin

(Excerpt)
"Traditionally, the Shaolin monks developed their martial arts expertise as a defense against aggressors' attacks, as a means to promote health, and as a mental and physical discipline.

The temple's military fame began during the early Tang Dynasty (618 - 907). Records describe Shaolin fighting monks saving the life of the future emperor Li Shimin (in this record, it says that the monks were in and out of the fort before anyone could even raise the alarm) and assisting in his fight against renegade forces. Once enthroned, the gratified emperor enlarged their compound and gave permission for some monks to continue their military training. Shaolin kung fu reached its peak during the Ming Dynasty (1368 - 1644), when several hundred Shaolin monks were given military status and personally led campaigns against rebels and Japanese bandits. By this time, the Shaolin had developed their own unique style of martial arts, known as Shaolinquan."

It seems true to me. Shaolin, as the birth of "systematized" martial arts, would be seen as perfect teachers or generals for armies. And China was, for sure, full of war.

But yet, I've never read anything about traditional kung fu teaching horse riding or archery.

 

[Fumanchu]

Kung fu basically means chinese martial arts. There were some systems that had a military lineage while some were deveoped by civilans such as shaolin monks etc.

I agree in many branches of the military alot of the fighting is based on weaponary and wearing armour does change the dynamics of how you move. It's also true that chinese military relies on mass numbers - so a person who uses a broad sword or spear in battle would only know 3 or 4 main moves but they'll be deadly because they are fighting in formation.

However, not all branches of the military use mass numbers or archary. The good kung fu is generally taught to special body guards for officials or situations where you need highly trained troops to operate in small numbers.

Kung fu in the military wasn't named according to all sorts of different styles we have today, although Baji/piqua and long fist had been taught in the military. Following the take over by the Ching dynasty it would seem that practitioners of these 2 styles left the military and further developed upon the concepts resulting in Tai Chi, Hsing I and mantis. Further evolutions of these systems probably led to Bagua and Mi Zong in the late 1800s to early 1900s.

 

[j_m]

From what I've gathered, nearly everyone seems to concur that Bodhidarmha (a.k.a. Daruma, and at least two other names) was the originator of the martial arts.

Aye caramba!! No offense RD, but as martial arts "scholar" you need to do a lot more research on the Chinese martial arts so you can the difference between myth and historical reality. Or better yet, maybe you should just go back to training and leave the history lessons to the professionals. Again, no offense... but it's things like this that keep the myths propogating over and over and over ...



jm

 

[RavenDarkfellow]

I'm sorry if I've offended your sensibilities, JM, but it appears you need to brush up a bit on your history, friend. If you feel that I am entirely incorrect, please give the information you feel to be correct, please do not just discredit me with a "Nuh-uh". That is neither helpful nor informed. If you require sources for this information (which is NOT just legend-- it has plenty of legend formed around it, but it is based in fact), then I will be happy to collect and name them for you.

 

[brothershaw]

From my understanding there are some styles that were either practiced by military, and or palace guards. Shaolin was not the genesis for all kung fu.
I guess the difference between chinese martial arts and others is that there isnt generally known to the general public a history/folklore of a military class and how they operated the knights of europe, or japans samurai. The most common martial folklore tends to revolve around monasteries wudan, shaolin. I would imagine showing the different mindset of the people.
In addition china went through a period where the govt. suppressed alot of info about the martial arts and suppressed its practioners.

But as someone posted earlier nonone can ever agree on who came first, what came second, and I dont know is on third base.( old joke).

 

[j_m]

Oh my tender sensibilities! Haha. I'm just trying to help dispell some of the myths that are so widely spread across the internet

No, I do not feel that you are entirely incorrect... but then again I do. I took one sentence from your original post (as I quoted) and I was referring to that particular remark. "Bodhidarmha was the originator of the martial arts"? Surely you can't believe this? But maybe you do since you stated it. I'm here to tell you that there was kung fu before his time, before shaolin, after shaolin, and everywhere in between. There are dozens (maybe hundreds?) of Chinese martial arts styles whose histories have nothing to do with Bodhidarmha or Shaolin. On the contrary, Shaolin (and it's branches) are just a very small subset of the numerous styles/systems of kung fu. Kung fu existed in China centuries before Da Mo was even born. Find any good Chinese history book and you'll find that to be fact... I shouldn't need to quote referneces on something like that.

Now, for the rest of your post. I'm not debating whether Bodhidarmha existed or came to Shaolin or taught them Buddhism. Or maybe he even taught them some form of excersise. Some say yes, some say no. But one thing is certain: The Chinese brought kung fu to the Shaolin temple and before that it had already been practice throughout China for hundreds of years. If you and others wish to keep the Da Mo myth alive then that is up to you. But at least let it be known that you have now heard otherwise.

Next someone will be telling us Tai Chi Chuan is only for health!



jm

 

[RavenDarkfellow]

After having posted, I thought about it and realized that you probably will demand sources, etc. So I took it upon myself to collect some for you, and present further debate in favour of the Bodhidharma theory.

Now, this first source actually discredits the theory of Bodhidharma, but the fact is, it acknowledges his existence, his teachings, and his contributions to the Shaolin Monastery. Even if the Author doesn't particularly believe that Bodhidharma was the "founder", I use this source to establish Means, Motive, and opportunity.
From: http://www.pastornet.net.au/response/articles/24.htm

"In India there lived a Buddhist monk named Bodhidharma (Japanese: Daruma, Chinese: Ta-mo) who was the son of king Sughanda. Because of his high burden he was educated in martial arts by an old master called Prajhatra. Around 520 AD Daruma went to China where he finally moved in to the Shaolin Monastery in the Honan province. He is generally credited with founding the Zen Buddhism there (Indian: Dhyana, Chinese: Ch'an). Many regard Daruma to be the founder of Chinese boxing, but this is doubtful. More probable is it that the monk's mutual activity over a certain period of time is behind the development. It is presumed that the training in the Shaolin Monastery was divided in four:

Meditation (Zen is based on long periods of static meditation)

Fighting styles, brought from China

Chinese boxing styles

Three sets of physical exercises from Indian medicine which concentrated on rhythmic breathing and flexibility training.


It is likely that other monasteries existed under the name of Shaolin, where the martial arts was used as a means of spiritual expansion. Unarmed fighting techniques is mentioned in books from the Chou-dynasty (1066-403 B.C.). Some of the famous terracotta statues from the Qin-dynasty (221-210 B.C.) show the roots of Wu Shu in old Chinese fighting styles. Wu Shu signifies the Japanese term bujutsu (Martial Arts). Kung Fu means time and energy, and was originally used for any skill. Kung Fu describes the degree of skill or insight. The expression is today used more and more as a name for the external or hard forms (schools) of Wu Shu. The Chinese fighting arts are commonly divided into north and south.

Northern China consists mostly of open landscapes where people are used to walk or ride great distances, which made it natural to develop their legs into weapons. The northern style consists of kicks and graceful movements, often open positions. Arms and legs can be stretched in both attack and defense. Fast jumps, turns and sweeping movements are important. They train much in kata, which are long and complicated, and are mostly in lineal motions.

Southern China is crossed by a net of rivers, where people staked and rowed a lot, which made it natural to develop their arms into weapons. In the southern style good balance and solid positions are essential, with sudden and powerful movements. Often attack and defense occur simultaneously - both hands are used simultaneously most of the time. Also southern style is mainly lineal movements, but these are shorter and more compact than in the north.

Another important difference in Chinese fighting styles are the inner versus the outer, the soft versus the hard. Central in Chinese (Taoistic) mentality are Yin and Yang. These represent the counterparts in all existence; light/dark, positive/negative, day/night, life/death, conscious/subconscious etc. However, Yin and Yang do not represent a distinct difference between two opposites, as one often interfere with the other. Because of that one can not say that there is a distinct difference between soft/passive and hard/active. No style is only soft or only hard. Those styles that are called the outer, hard styles mainly descend from Shaolin, and are most often called kung fu. Five separate styles can be traced to Shaolin; tiger, snake, dragon, crane and leopard. From these five, singular or in combinations, was again created styles we recognize today, like Hung, Praying Mantis, Wing Chun etc. Among those under the name of inner, soft styles are Hsing-i, Pa-Qua and Tai Chi Chuan."

The following are further support of the Bodhidharma theory:
From: http://www.ohioshaolin.com/SHAOLINDO%20Images/ShaolinTemple.htm

"The saga of Shaolin begins with Bodhidharma the third child of Chieftain Sugandha (Brahmin king) of Southern India and a member of the Kshatriya (a warrior caste). The root of his training was Vajramushti. He spent his childhood in Conjeeveram (also known as Kanchipuram and Kancheepuram), the small Buddhist province south of Madras. He received his training in the Dhyana school of Buddhist meditation (which was later transliterated to Ch'an in Chinese, Zen in Japanese and Son in Korean) from his master, Prajnatara, who was responsible for changing his name from Bodhitara to Bodhidharma. Shaolin arts and Zen thought are inextricably woven."

From: http://martialarts.about.com/library/glossary/bldef-bodhidharma.htm

"Bodhidharma Definition: The name of the man commonly held to have introduced certain exercises to the Shaolin temple which are often regarded as being the origin of the Shaolin martial arts."

Also Known As: Tamo, Damo

Common Misspellings: Bhodidarma, Bodidarma, Bhodidharma

The following contains some mythological elements. . . I hope everyone will be mature and intelligent enough to sort the obvious myth from the likely fact:

From: http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/history_of_the_martial_arts/98612

"Almost every book on the history of the Asian Martial Arts begins with a reference to Bodhidharma. Somewhere in time, contact with his teachings has occurred in most of the major branches of these arts. He has been given many names over time. In addition to Bodhidharma, he was Tamo to the Chinese, he is named Pu Tai Ta Mo in Sanskrit and Daruma Daishi in Japanese. In the Buddhist world he is known as the 28th Patriarch of Indian Buddhism or the First Patriarch of the Chinese Zen Lineage.
The history is based upon many legends and stories, complicated by the many names. I have attempted to provide a summary of these stories as a starting point. The dates vary from the 400’s to the 500’s AD. I have used the most widely accepted dates in this brief history. Recommendations on his history and his Buddhist teachings can be found in the bibliography at the end of this article.
Bodhidharma was born a prince in the southern regions of India and raised as a warrior to succeed his father as king. He had been trained in the Kalaprayat technique of martial arts. Bored with his training Bodhidharma began to study with a Buddhist teacher named Prajnatara. On his deathbed, Prajnatara asked him to go to China to re-awaken the followers of Buddha. Some sources say that almost five percent of the population were Buddhist Monks even before the arrival of Bodhidharma. Legends vary in the method of his arrival, some say he traversed the Himalayan Mountains, others say he rode a ship around the coast. Regardless, he arrived around 526 A.D.
Upon arriving in China, the Emperor Wu Ti, a Buddhist himself, requested a meeting with Bodhidharma. The Emperor asked him what reward he had received for all of his good works. Bodhidharma answered that he had accrued none. Bodhidharma was unable to convince Wu Ti of the value of the new teachings he brought from India.
Frustrated, Bodhidharma set out on a northerly direction. He crossed the Tse River, and climbed Bear's Ear Mountain in the Sung Mountain range to where the Shaolin Temple was located. It had been founded forty years before by Buddhist monks and was famous for its translations of the Buddhist scriptures into Chinese. Bodhidharma sought entrance into the Shaolin temple. He was accepted after he was able to prove that he was committed to Buddhism.
When he arrived Boddhidharma was appalled to find the monks fat, and without the ability to even stay awake during his lectures. In addition, the monks were unarmed and easy pray to bandits when they attempted to go out into the world to teach. So they decided to stay in the safety of the monastery. This explained one reason that Buddhism was no longer as widespread as it had been.
Legend has it that Boddhidharma then went to a cave and stared at a wall for seven years. He is said to have cut off his eyelids to stay awake in meditation, and so is usually depicted with bulging eyes. Others say that he cut off his eyelashes and that they fell to the ground and became tea plants. Recognizing the ability of tea to help a person stay awake has made tea a part of the practice of zazen.
Bodhidharma created an exercise program for the monks which involved physical techniques that were efficient, strengthened the body, and eventually, could be used practically in self-defense. When Bodhidharma instituted these practices, his primary concern was to make the monks physically strong enough to withstand both their isolated lifestyle and the deceptively demanding training that meditation requires. It turned out that the techniques served a dual purpose as a very efficient fighting system, which evolved into a marital arts style.
His system involved dynamic tension exercises. These movements found their way into print as early as 550 A.D. as the Yi Gin Ching, or Changing Muscle/Tendon Classic. We know this system today as the Lohan (Priest-Scholar) 18 Hand Movements, which serves as the basis of Chinese Temple Boxing and the Shaolin Arts. Many of the basic moves of both tai chi chuan and kung fu can be seen in the scenes recorded on the walls of the temple.
These skills helped the monks to defend themselves against invading warlords and bandits. Bodhidharma taught that martial arts should be used for self-defense, and never to hurt or injure needlessly. In fact, it is one of the oldest Shaolin axioms that "one who engages in combat has already lost the battle." Bodhidharma also taught medicine to the monks and arranged for Chinese doctors to come to share their knowledge with the Shaolin. In three years the monks became so skilled in both the martial arts and medicine that they start to be feared and respected by the bandits. This went a long way toward continuing the spread of Buddhism and Zen thoughout China and the rest of Asia. Even the death of Bodhidharma is shrouded in mystery. Legend has it that he was poisoned by one of his followers disappointed at not being selected as the successor. Regardless of the reason, Bodhidharma died in 539 A.D. at the Shaolin Temple at age 57. They laid him to rest in a tomb there."

In conclusion:

I do not believe (nor am I trying to impress upon anyone else) that Bodhidharma (Daruma, Ta mao, etc.) was the founder of all martial arts. I think that a lot of the contradiction and contestion about this comes from this misconception. I believe that Bodhidharma was the founder of SYSTEMIZED, FORMAL martial arts, AS WE KNOW THEM.

Throughout the history of the world, people have fought and killed eachother, and as such there have always been people teaching other people how to fight and kill. There has always been war, and people teaching other people how to fight a war. These were the first "true" martial arts-- but not as we think of them today.

Some people think that Henry Ford was the founder of the automobile-- this is entirely untrue. The "automobile" is an idea, and as such was probably conceived CENTURIES before Henry Ford was even born. He WAS, however, the founder of the first company to mass-produce automobiles, as we think of them today-- thus adding to the misconception surrounding him. The same thing has happened with Bodhidharma.

Looking past the legends, the stories, the outrageous claims, eliminating it all, you leave only fact. The fact is, Bodhidharma existed, he taught the monks at the Shaolin temple, and (whether this last fact is true or not, it is still a fact) he is believed to have taught the monks at the Shaolin temple the first regimented training, which spawned the martial arts.

Your turn.

 

[DarrenJew]

I just wanted to note, taken from China’s Buried Kingdoms page 51 published 1993, Time-Life Books..

During the "Spring and Autumn" period (770-476 BC) battles were fought primarily by men of noble descent, who unlike commoners were trained as a matter of course in the skills of swordsmanship, archery, and charioteering. Conscripts drawn from the peasantry played only a minor supporting role as foot soldiers. The aristocrats observed certain proprieties in the conduct of war. The fighting of a savage, no-holds-barred battle was considered the mark of a barbarian; among the "civilized" Chinese, a battle was seen as a form of gentlemen’s duel fought on a larger scale, a test of one’s honor, character, and skill. The emergence of generals from the ranks of the shi did not dilute this aristocratic approach to war. The shi had always been taught to maintain proper courtesies in practicing the noble art of combat. (Shi, a class of men below that of the feudal lords. Gentlemen, defendants of nobles who were small landlords or served the lords as stewards, minor officials, or professional warriors.) Prior to combat Polite exchanges would be made by rival commanders before fighting commenced. For example, it is recorded that a Chu general, in 632 BC, challenged the Qin ruler with the words: "Will Your Excellency permit our knights and yours to play a game?"

I believe we can all easily see the Bushido code originating from this time period.

 

[Jerry]

Firstly, to reiterate what has already been said, gong-fu (kung fu) referrs in Chineese to any skill aquired with effort over time, and in the west to *any* Chinese martial art. Since there are an awful lot of them, there is no one answer to your question.

A quick and easy way to guesstimate wheather an art is a war art or a defense art is to look and see who can use it. When you look at the Silat arts, as an example, you see a focus on quick learning, natural stances, and things that work on unconditioned bodies. This is because most Silat's are village arts intended for "everyone to use".

When I look at some of the Chinese temple arts from which modern Wushu (literally "war art") comes, I see arts which focus on a great deal of body conditioning, strength, speed, and power. I also note that most of the weapons of Wushu are not "sticks and knives", but complex war-only weapons (there is a staff, but it's simply spear work without the point).

Add to this that the monistaries were often the refuge of rebels, and it seems likely that the majority of arts we think of when we say "kung fu" were, in fact, arts of professional warriors (soldiers, police, bodyguards, etc), and not self-defense arts of the common man.

 

[7starmantis]

I'm not quite understanding why the distinction?

7sm

 

[funnytiger]

Choosing to stay a bystander in this discussion I just wanted to pipe in and compliment RavenDarkfellow for such a well thought out and articulate post. Very rarely have I seen someone argue their point of view on the Internet in such a forceful yet nonoffensive manner.

Kudos

:salute:

 

[Fumanchu]

RavenDarkfellow:


Quote: "Northern China consists mostly of open landscapes where people are used to walk or ride great distances, which made it natural to develop their legs into weapons. The northern style consists of kicks and graceful movements, often open positions. Arms and legs can be stretched in both attack and defense. Fast jumps, turns and sweeping movements are important. They train much in kata, which are long and complicated, and are mostly in lineal motions.

Southern China is crossed by a net of rivers, where people staked and rowed a lot, which made it natural to develop their arms into weapons. In the southern style good balance and solid positions are essential, with sudden and powerful movements. Often attack and defense occur simultaneously - both hands are used simultaneously most of the time. Also southern style is mainly lineal movements, but these are shorter and more compact than in the north."

Haha. this made me laugh. Does this mean that kung fu is useless to us given that most of us don't walk for days across open landscape or row boats for a living?

Also, your understanding of how northern kung fu works appears flawed.

 

[funnytiger]

RavenDarkfellow:


Quote: "Northern China consists mostly of open landscapes where people are used to walk or ride great distances, which made it natural to develop their legs into weapons. The northern style consists of kicks and graceful movements, often open positions. Arms and legs can be stretched in both attack and defense. Fast jumps, turns and sweeping movements are important. They train much in kata, which are long and complicated, and are mostly in lineal motions.

Southern China is crossed by a net of rivers, where people staked and rowed a lot, which made it natural to develop their arms into weapons. In the southern style good balance and solid positions are essential, with sudden and powerful movements. Often attack and defense occur simultaneously - both hands are used simultaneously most of the time. Also southern style is mainly lineal movements, but these are shorter and more compact than in the north."

Haha. this made me laugh. Does this mean that kung fu is useless to us given that most of us don't walk for days across open landscape or row boats for a living?

Also, your understanding of how northern kung fu works appears flawed.

But your understanding of Southern Kung Fu is spot on.