The Chinese language is overflowing with subtleties,
nuances, and layers-upon-layers of meanings that go far beyond the scope of
most modern Western languages. At times,
it can even be a dramatic understatement to call it “poetic”. As a result, the vernacular of Chinese
martial arts has long been complex and chaotic, especially from the point of
view of most Westerners.
There are many words, although commonly used, which are not
clearly defined. This can be attributed
to several factors. Although several
words have, strictly speaking, the same definition, their connotations are
drastically different. Understanding the
connotations of many words requires a fairly deep knowledge of Chinese history,
culture, or traditions with which most Westerners are not familiar. Also, many of the words have commonly used
English (or other Western) translations that only serve to confuse, due to the
lack of knowledge during the time period in which they were translated. This is most often the case with translations
dating from the 18th and 19th centuries. Another point of confusion is that some words
are meant to be used in combination with others, but at times some of the
“required” words are left out. This is
due to the use of slang by some native Chinese speakers. It is somewhat analogous to dropping the
understood “you” in the English sentence, “Come with me.” Although this makes perfect sense to a native
speaker of English, it is unclear to someone who is not familiar with the
practice of “dropping” the subject of some sentences.
There are several words that seem to occur quite often when dealing with Chinese martial arts terminology, regardless of style. A more accurate and in-depth understanding of these words can only serve to benefit practitioners, students, and instructors. These words are (with their corresponding pinyin tones):
- fa3
- quan2 (pronounced “chuan”)
- men2
Quan literally
means “fist”. However, this word goes
considerably beyond its dictionary definition.
Depending on context, it can mean a single fist, a variety of hand
techniques, a form or set (kata, in
the more familiar Japanese terminology), or even an entire martial arts system.
Many Chinese martial arts styles have
the word quan in their names. In the 19th century, Westerners
translated this word as “boxing” (in the sense of the Western sport). Most Westerners had never been exposed to
Chinese martial arts before, and boxing was the most similar concept they could
come up with. So even though it is
technically inaccurate, the translation of “boxing” has not only survived, but
has proliferated. It is commonly used in
the names of such styles as he quan
(Crane Boxing) or hong jia quan (Hong Family Boxing).
Names of styles like these could also be (more accurately) translated as
“Crane Fist” or “Crane Fighting”, as well.
Quan is also
commonly paired with the term fa into
the phrase quan fa, which means
“Method of Fighting”. This is usually
the case when it is used to refer to a specific form, rather than an entire
style. So, a style called “Tiger
Fighting” may be written as hu quan,
but a specific form called “Methods of Tiger Fighting” would be written as hu quan fa. Something that can often lead to confusion is
the fact that a lot of time quan fa
is what is implied, but only quan is
written; the fa is assumed. This means
the name of the specific form could also be written as hu quan. It is worth noting
that adding the word fa to the name
of a style is rarely, if ever, done.
The literal meaning of men
is “gateway”, specifically a double-doorway.
However, it is also used to refer to a school (especially a school of
thought), a system, or a sect. So a name
such as bei shaolin men could be
translated as “Northern
Shaolin School ”,
“Northern Shaolin System”, or “Northern Shaolin Sect”. As a result, it can refer to the actual
school (the physical location), the system that is taught at that school, or
the group of people that practice the style.
Sometimes, the phrase men pai
is also used, which simply means “men style”, but the pai is usually left out.
What is the difference, then, between a system named using quan and a system named using men?
Believe it or not, there are specific criteria for naming a system one
way versus the other. These differences
can give one a clearer perspective on the art they study.
There are five criteria that absolutely must be
present for a style to be a men style
(see Table
1). If any of the five are
not present, the style cannot be considered a men art, and is, by default, a quan
art.
Table
1: The Five Criteria of a Men Art
Criteria
|
Mandarin
(Pinyin)
|
English
|
Description
|
1
|
Tao Lu
|
“Forms”, or “Sets”
|
The
system must contain forms training. This
means it cannot be just a grouping of techniques.
|
2
|
Dui Lian
|
“Two-person drills”
|
Partner
training is essential for a complete art.
This can include things such as self-defense techniques, two-person
forms or exercises, or sparring. Note
that just sparring “for fun” would not qualify, as it must built upon the
comprehensive concepts of the entire system.
|
3
|
Qi Xie
|
“Apparatus”
|
This
refers to various items and tools of training. Examples would be a makiwara board or a
wooden dummy. Weapons are also included
in this, which automatically means that a system that only does empty-hand
training cannot be considered a true “men” art.
|
4
|
Li Lun
|
“Theories”
|
The
system must have accompanying information of a theoretical or conceptual
nature. Note that these concepts don’t
have to be written down in order to be considered valid.
|
5
|
Gong Fa
|
“Method of Effort”
|
There
must be a systematic structure to the style.
Concepts, theories, and ideas must be comprehensive and cohesive. The art must teach not only how to do things, but why they are done that way. Everything required for the system to be
effective must be provided by the system itself, and not be dependent on
outside knowledge. This means that a collection
of various martial arts concepts that may encompass the other four criteria
still would not qualify as a “men” style if it wasn’t systemized.
|
The primary difference is that men is much more encompassing than quan. When comparing the two
terms, it is most appropriate to translate men
as a system, and quan as one part of
that system, or a sub-system. Therefore,
men systems contain within them one
or more quan systems. However, not
all quan arts are part of a larger men style. The quan
arts that stand alone are usually incomplete sub-systems that were either never
fully developed, or were “cast out” of a larger style.
A men
system is usually considered a foundational system. Although this is not a strict requirement for
a men system, most of them satisfy
this criteria. A “foundational system”
means that the system either:
·
didn’t evolve from any other style (it is an
“origin style”), or
·
it has evolved sufficiently from its predecessor
that, for practical purposes, it can “stand on its own”
In modern usage, these terms are sometimes used in a confusing fashion. This is due to the fact that the names of many Chinese martial arts became part of the cultural vernacular, so people were reluctant to change them. So if a men art lost knowledge throughout the years, for whatever reason, it was not renamed to a quan art. This is why there are men arts today that do not meet all five of the criteria. This sometimes happened the other way, too; a quan art would, in time, acquire or develop enough knowledge to become a men art, but it would not be renamed. For example, the art of tai ji quan contains forms, two-person exercises (push hands), weapons training, extensive theories (the classics), and a solid conceptual foundation for teaching the system. It can also be considered a foundational system because, although it did evolve from other arts (most likely), it is sufficiently different from them to be able to stand on its own. Therefore, it is a men art and should, more accurately, be called tai ji men. It is worth noting here that there are those who would argue that tai ji quan really is a quan art, just as it is named. The argument is that the system is missing key components necessary for development, such as qi gong exercises. Development of qi is essential to successful tai ji quan practice, yet the system itself contains no qi gong exercises to further this goal. Most practitioners use qi gong exercises from other systems. This would violate gong fa (criteria number five in Table 1). In either case, however, the name tai ji quan has become so engrained in the culture (Eastern, as well as Western), that it would be unreasonable to change it at this point in time.
A second reason that can cause confusion is that
some arts were renamed on purpose. There
were many reasons why people renamed their arts. Some of the more common reasons were:
·
They wanted to hide the real art they were
practicing from the general public, as secrecy was common in many Chinese
arts. This was especially true of the men arts, since they contained more
complete and comprehensive knowledge and, therefore, had more reason to protect
it.
·
They wanted to try and associate their
relatively unknown or newly formed art with a more famous one in an attempt to
gain instant notoriety.
·
They were trying to disassociate their art from
past involvements, usually political in nature.
This could be due to the fear of persecution, or to newly changed
political ideals and agendas.
One example of an art that changed its name on purpose is won hop loong chuan (“Complete Harmonious Dragon Fist”). At first glance, the name of the art, won hop loong chuan (wan he long quan, in pinyin) seems to be a quan art (as a side note, pyong hwa do is a Korean phrase and, therefore, not relevant to this discussion). The key to understanding the name of this art is to first realize that the phrase won hop loong chuan was actually derived from the name of a specific form in the style, and was not the original name of the art itself. It is worth mentioning that the name of the form, won hop loong chuan, does not end in the phrase quan fa (i.e., won hop loong chuan fa), which is a usual ending for names of forms. While it could be simply assumed that this ending was implied (which is a legitimate naming scheme), it could also have been left off on purpose. The implication there would be that won hop loong chuan refers to an entire sub-system, rather than a single form. In fact, in a typically paradoxical fashion, it is most likely that the quan fa ending was left off on purpose and assumed to be there at the same time; won hop loong chuan refers to a specific form, which itself can be considered a sub-system.
Getting back to the larger system as a whole, it
becomes clear, upon closer inspection, that the art has forms training,
two-person (and more than two-person) drills, weapons and other apparatus
training, a vast repertoire of concepts and theories, and a complete,
systemized way to teach it. Also, due to
the long history and age of the art, it is almost certainly a foundational
art. Therefore, it seems to fit all the
criteria for a men art. This conclusion is an accurate one, as
further analysis of the style’s history would show that it is indeed a men art and was named so from the very
beginning. In fact, not only is it a men art, but historically it seems to be
one of the first and oldest men arts
still in existence.
Clearly the Chinese language contains a depth of
subtleties not present in most other languages, especially when discussing
martial arts. The amount of information
contained in just a few words about a style’s history and purpose can be
staggering. Of course, there are many
more words used commonly in martial arts than just the three presented
here. There are actually dozens of
martial arts terms in common usage that can help all practitioners to gain a
more accurate and effective understanding of their own art, as well as others.
NOTE:
All Chinese terms in this article were notated using the modern pinyin romanization system. The only exception to this rule is for the
name won hop loong chuan, which is
rarely, if ever, written using the pinyin
romanization system. It was left in its
more commonly seen form.
References
Bakos, Miroslav, mbskp@ms26.hinet.net,
Kung Fu Mailing List, Sep. 5, 1999 .
“Chinese Characters – Genealogy, Dictionary, Readings ”, http://www.zhongwen.com, ã1999
by Rick Harbaugh.
Choy, Rita Mei-Wah, Read and Write Chinese: A Simplified Guide to the Chinese Characters,
China
West Books, San Francisco , CA , 1990.
Kung Fu Mailing List Archives, owner-kungfu@leper.tamu.edu,
September, 1999.
Wieger, Dr. L., Chinese Characters: Their Origin, Etymology, History,
Classification, and Signification, Paragon Book Reprint Corp., New York , 1965.
0 comments:
Post a Comment