As we all know, wushu, originated from the monasteries of the monks, specifically, for defending oneself. As a result, the Han or Chinese ethnic, is the keeper of wushu.

Now, did the Chinese train other ethnics in the art or did they know their own techniques and blend it with Chinese wushu?


It seems as if the Japanese, Korean, and Thai have their own styles. Did they all derived from China?

Many of the concepts of martial arts in Asia were derived from kung fu styles, but Korea and Japan still had their unique forms of martial arts. ie TKD, Jujistu, Judo.

And wushu did not originate from Buddhist monstaries or from Buddhist monks. It was in existence since Daoism of Zhou dynasty. After Buddhism (combined with Daoism to form Zen/Chan-Buddhism) was introduced, the monks only started practicing an already existing form of martial arts ---> shaolin kung fu.

ie. Karate means Tang Fist (now Open Fist), came from south eastern China, where it combined with local Okinawan styles. It was brought to Japan in the 19th century, where the Japanese popularized it.

Many cultures around the world have their own native styles, many developed independently from Chinese martial arts and their origins can go back to pre-history.

Wushu is today generalised to mean the modern sport as promoted by the PRC.

I don't mean to hijack this thread but I wonder whether is any historical connection between Chinese " callisthenics' and wushu?

This is because I recall that there is a very early scroll from the Ｗestern Han that depicts various individuals performing callisthenics.

Please note that additional rules on the CMA forum means that any discussion that concerns non-chinese martial arts are not allowed. If you wish, please start a new thread at the relevent forum and post a link there.

Wujiang



"Wushu" (not as in the modern dance/performance sport promoted by the PRC of course, but ancient Wuyi, with emphasis on boxing and wrestling) may have even existed earlier than that. We know that by the time of Chi You, there was a very primitive form of wrestling where combatants would butt each other with ox-horns fixed to their heads; this was probably the ancestor of the Jiao Di/wrestling of the Qin and Han. As for boxing, the Shiji (according to Kang Gewu), records that Emperor Wu Yi of the Shang used wooden dummies to practice (it might've been used as targets for Bo/striking practice). The Book of Songs also records that Zhou Wu Wang established Xiang Wu, where fighting techniques were inserted into dances; this might be an indication of the development of set practice as found in East Asian martial arts. What the historical sources seem to suggest was that Wuyi, including boxing and wrestling, originated in the military.



In reality, Shaolin "Kung Fu"/Shaolinquan, as in a uniquely "Shaolin" style of martial arts never really existed at all, at least not so until perhaps the Qing period, where spurious secret society "histories" like those of the Tiandihui/Hongmen mention such a "Shaolinquan" (the "Shaolinquan" of those secret society histories was probably just "Hung Gar"/Hongquan, the style practiced by the Hongmen/Tiandihui). Even when Shaolin was starting to become famous for martial arts during the mid-late Ming period in the midst of invasions by the Wokou pirates, their boxing techniques were not as up to par as their staff techniques, and their boxing techniques were nothing remarkable nor great by the standards of the day; their fencing/swordsmanship and spear techniques were horrible compared to the swordsmanship and spear techniques of at least Yu Dayou's Ming troops. This would explain why no contemporary source of the mid-late Ming even mentions a "Shaolinquan"; the Jixiao Xinshu chapter on boxing lists a Shaolin staff set, indicating that Shaolin staff techniques were at least worth mentioning and considering, but nothing else, and another observer Cheng Zhongdou even notes that while Shaolin staff technique was remarkable, the Shaolin monks were still working on their boxing techniques in the hope of raising them to the level of their staff techniques. Shaolin monks at the time merely practiced the known civilian styles of their day, like houquan/monkey boxing.



Karate means "Empty Hand", not "Open Fist". Te is Shou in Chinese, which means "hand", not "fist", which would be quan/kem; therefore Tote/Tangshou means "Tang hands".

If I'm not mistaken, I believe you're talking about the Dao Yin Tu manual found in the Mawangdui tomb of King Ma, located near modern Changsha, Hunan province. The Dao Yin Tu really does not illustrate callisthenics at all, but "Dao Yin" exercises, an ancient form of "Qigong"/"art of managing vital energy". If you're talking about Dao Yin exercises, it seems that they weren't necessarily associated with martial arts, but later in history "Qigong" was definitely associated with "Gongfu/Kung Fu". Interestingly, in both the Huangdi Neijing and the Dao De Jing (Chs. 10 and 42) there is mentioning of the cultivation of qi (as in the qi/"vital energy" of qigong, not just "breath") and the health benefits of harmonizing qi, while Zhuang Zi (Ch. 15) even mentions Dao Yin by name, saying that practitioners moved like bears and birds and the scholars who practiced Dao Yin aimed for longevity. "Dao Yin", therefore, might just be medical Qigong. If "controlling one's breathing" as found in Yuenu's lecture on swordsmanship to the King of Yue as found in the Han-era work Wuyue Chunqiu is any indicator of martial Dao Yin being incorporated in to swordsmanship, then there is a connection between "wushu" and "qigong" as early as at least the Han dynasty.

This is a confusing matter.
Shaolin martial arts definately existed but the question is how do you define it. Many civilian martial arts passed through Shaolin. Eventually getting reorganized, systematized, and supplimented by other systems. In essence, without Shaolin, many of the system we know as being civilian systems today won't exist. Most martial arts before this process mostly contained a few moves. The concept of a 'system' was pretty weak. Take for example Wang Lang's compiling of the eighteen systems when he founded Tanglangquan. Each of these eighteen only had one to three worthwhile moves. Therefore, Shaolin systems of martial arts is less about how many moves the monks managed to invent themselves, but rather any and all systems that went through them. Each system contributed something which after over a thousand years developed into a massive arsenal techniques and principles.

If you analyse much of the martial arts of the north, you will find that they are indeed 'uniquely' Shaolin because they all carry much of the signiture doctrine and princples which Shaolin was known for. They are merely applied differently between systems, This is why Shaolin is not a system of martial arts but a generic term for all martial arts that it had a strong influence over. All you need to do is to compare it with systems from Dongjiang or Fujian and you can find what is not Shaolin.


I think most people who read military texts of the time often make the mistake as to what they meant. When they talk about how Shaolin (or any civilian) systems of martial arts being 'inferior' to what their military practices, they are more like saying 'less adapted for warfare.' Complexity is one of the thinks that many civilian CMA stand out. It doesn't 'start with the basics and end with the basics'. It starts with the basics and it just gets more and more complicated with apparantly no limit. Thus, these are actually horrible to use when trying to train and army for war where what you need is short, quick solutions to a kill or be killed sitaution.


Try reading fiction from that era. It is mentioned a number of times. Shaolin is a civilian organization. I am not surprised that no matter how influential it was among commoners, the military hardly mentions it.

Most martial arts historians will agree that all of the Asian martial arts are derived from Chinese martial arts. Many of the Japanese karate styles can be traced back to specific styles of Chinese Gong Fu. The Japanese names in fact are a dead giveaway to their origins: Shorin-Ryu (Shaolin) for example. The Korean martial art Tang Soo Do (Way of the Tang Hand) referring to the Tang dynasty in China. Yep, we can thank the Chinese for so many things, and especially for Asian martial arts!

Sources please.

I am fairly against the belief that all Asian Martial arts derived from Chinese or Shaolin myself. Surely, influence is beyond doubt- such as the spread of Shoubo to Korea by Han troops.

But how do we know that Tang soo Do is referring to Tang?

Also, Shorin Ryu, to the best of my knowledge, has kanji not referring to Shaolin, but "Xiao Lin". Clearly not equivalent. When did this name date back to? Shaolin was not even a major force in martial arts until relatively late in history.

I'd love to hear your detailed and evidence-based explaination on how jujitsu originated from China.

I can't think of one book that I've picked up on Martial Arts history that would claim that Korea's martial arts for instance evolved on their own, except maybe there are ones by Korean authors that do. ;-) But, I was told that Tang Soo Do, means Way of the Tang Hand by several Tang Soo Do instructors from Korea. Look at the styles themselves, the blocks , stances, and strikes of the hard Korean Styles of karate are similar to the Nan Quan, or Hung family kung fu in the south of China. However, these are considered basic, or beginners movements within those systems. As the student progresses in any of these Chinese styles the moves become more circular, complex, flowing, and in a word, "softer."

I don't know what you mean about your statement that Shorin Ryu refers not to Shao Lin but to Xiao Lin??? THis is the exact same thing, isn't it? Xiao Lin is the Pinyin romanization for Shaolin, Sui Lum in Cantonese, yes?

I will look up some source material for you.

Anyone who knows anything about Chinese Martial Arts can verify that Chin Na, the grappling techniques, which are present in all styles of Chinese Kung Fu, (some more involved than others) are the basis for Japanese JiuJitsu. Just pick up a book on Chin Na by Yang, and you will see. Just start practicing bowing and throwing yourself at the floor and you'll see what the Japanese did to it. ;-) These chinese fighting techniques pre-dated Jiu-Jitsu.

\

Just casually looking around on the web, stumbled upon this JiuJitsu website wherein it reads:

The concept here is that the Shaolin temple was built in the center of China and this is where Bodhi Dharma introduced Buddhism and Boxing (senzuikyo). (ref. Aikido and Chinese Martial Arts, Sugawara and Xing) The story that supports the idea of Jiu-Jitsu coming from China takes place around the time of the fall of the Ming Dynasty. It states that a man named Chingempin came from Japan to live in Tokyo at a Buddhist temple where he met three Ronin (masterless Samurai) named Fukuno, Isogai, and Miura. Chingempin told the Ronin of a grappling art he had seen in China. The Ronin became particularly interested in pursuing the study of this art, so he then began teaching in Japan, and this art became Jiu-Jitsu.

The next theory is that there was many forms of wrestling that had developed in China. One of the most notable is Horn Wrestling, called Jiaodixi. This form of wrestling was practiced by the Mongolians and later evolved into Jiaoli, which was wrestling without the horns. This form of wrestling can be seen in Native American cultures (evident in the typical Native American Buffalo head wear) and most likely arrived there by way of Mongolians migrating through now modern Alaska. Jiaoli evolved and became Xiangpu and it is said that this form of wrestling became Sumo in Japan. Another theory says that there were practitioners of Chikura Karube, a wrestling sport developed around 200 B.C. It is said that Chikura Karube later became Jiu-Jitsu in Japan.

The last story mentioned here is that Jiu-Jitsu is Japanese and from Japan. This story follows the same basic idea but differs in that Chingempin introduced an early form of Jiu-Jitsu (not yet called Jiu-Jitsu) called Kempo in Japan, which consisted mostly of strikes and very little grappling. From there, the Japanese developed it into a more effective grappling art. One thing is certain about these stories, and that is that the Japanese were responsible for refining a grappling art into a very sophisticated grappling system called Jiu-Jitsu.


Unfortunately, I admit, I am very biased. I love Chinese Culture, and their martial arts are the most sofisticated on the planet! I have not seen anything in any other culture which goes beyond the complexity and beauty of Chinese martial culture.

Evidence... evidence... sigh... I will start looking things up... BUT basically, open hand martial arts were not a Japanese thing until Gichin Funakoshi brought it to Japan in the 1930s. He called it: "China hand."

You might start here: I googled "history jiu jitsu"... you will notice that although the author's treatment is sweeping... it is all conjecture. Although hand-to-hand combat cannot have been alien to the Japanese... no system that I know of is really special or unique there. Sure, you can say they "invented" jiu jitsu and you can say they "invented" Aikido... but what does "invented" mean in a culture that has never done anything but borrow their ideas from other countries -- right now the US... in the past almost exclusively Korea and China. The Japanese are famous borrowers... not inventors really. They even forced Funakoshi to make sure that he renamed Shotokan to "open hand" in order to eliminate the idea that it had any relationship to China.

I got into arguments years ago and had no data to back me up and was forced to concede that there were no swords in China to match those of Japan... I was dead wrong. ALL Japanese swords are derivative of Chinese and Mongolian designs.

Japan has almost nothing new at all.

No. "Shaolin" in Pinyin is "Shaolin". 少林
As opposed to 小林。

Yes, love Chinese culture all you wish, but I do not believe a love for a culture justifies a wholesale claim that all Martial Arts are derivative of Chinese Martial arts.

As for the Japanese having nothing new, I'm sure that there is plenty of evidence to the contrary, despite their borrower's reputation.

Wow Wanguo, you statement are so full of mistakes and inaccuracies I don't even know where to begin.


Mistake (1)
Earliest evidence of 'karate' exists all the way back in the tang dynasty with the migration of the 36 familes from China to okinawa. And even then, all sources points to the fact that they merged with local fighting methods. Which means even then, they had something of their own. Chinese martial arts merely gave them a boost.

But more importantly, karate is strictly speaking an okinawa martial art. So even talking about it is senseless.


Which is exactly what you would expect since martial arts history of any form becomes blurred after a few hundred years. What is important is that you can find japanese documents on jiujutsu practices all the way back to the 1000s. Which adminiting is a whole lot longer than finding any chinese sources on this subject.


Mistake (2)
The roundhouse kick are rarely if ever used in Chinese martial arts. While it can be found, it is never explicit which shower clear difference from the japanese approach.


Mistake (3)
Learning from others does not neglect their own creativity. It is like saying Chinese doesn't have any swords because they borrowed it from the Japanese wokou during the ming era.


Mistake (4)
Funakoshi decided to do that for himself. No one 'forced' him to do anything.


You are still wrong


Not without a significant level of development on their part in which did not occur in China.


Sigh.......


Having said all this...
discussion of non chinese martial arts and system vs system debates are strictly prohibited here on the CMA forum.

Hi! I'm not sure that all of your statements are acurate either, but, you are without a doubt much more knowledgable on the subject than I . So, I'll leave it at that, and not post on the subject again as per the rules. Do you think then, that all these complex joint lock techniques/throws etc., were brought into Chinese Gong Fu from Japan?

I've always thought about the "round house" kick not being very present in Chinese martial arts, but I have always thought that it was pretty useless, except in a competition/point situation for tournaments.

It's only my opinion, of course, but I'll always love Chinese Martial Arts above all others. Long ago when I used to study, I went from Jiu Jitsu, to Karate, to Tae Kwon Do, to Judo, to Kempo, to Tai Ji, then to Northern Shaolin and Tang Lang, and stayed with the Chinese arts. I found the others too boring and like being in the army.

Thanks for the education! ;-)

That being said.....what do you think about Wang Pei Sheng? And also, do you study any martial arts now? How long do you practice each day?

Sorry, I can't see the characters you sent. So, you are saying that the "Xiao" isn't the "Shao?" What do the characters mean from Shaolin? I still can't understand your statement. Could you please clarify it for me, I would like to learn what it really means. Thanks! I was always told that it meant "Young Forest." Is that true?

I understand what you are saying...and of course you are correct. However I do have some old books that do state that the Chinese started everything, but I guess they are outdated. I guess the Chinese borrowed a lot from the Japanese as as well, even though I can't see it.

I'm pretty sure neither Wujiang nor I are trying to reverse what you said and say the Chinese imported everything from the Japanese. I'm strapped for time at school, but I'm sure Wuijiang, who is much more knowledgeable than I, will be able to explain much better than I as well.

Ah, but I will back up my sources for the Chinese Swordmaking. I feel the Japanese did very little. Of course it really doesn't matter. But if you show me your sources, I'll show you mine. ;-)


Learning from others does not neglect their own creativity. It is like saying Chinese doesn't have any swords because they borrowed it from the Japanese wokou during the ming era.

I'm sure that you will source your statement from the same place as I would- Thomas Chen.

But, note that Thomas Chen himself never mentions that the Japanese never had sword technology before Chinese influence. It's a concept that I'm fairly certain would've arisen by itself. Of course, I won't deny that I take a certain pride in seeing Tang influence in Japanese swords. But I better get off of CHF, before I get busted.

But perhaps you should PM Thomas CHen.

Hi! Actually, it's not Thomas Chen. It should be a surprise then. ;-)