slipthejab I just stepped into this debate. So far I have notice soggycat substantiating assertions with wikipedia and /or an assortment of online resources. So far I have seen you rebutting but not supporting your counter claims and dismissals other than to say you lived in China and speak Mandarin and Cantonese. So far your argument is not looking too strong.
There are at least 7 main variants of Bagua since it descended from Dong Hai Chuan. Yin Bagua ( from Yin Fu) Cheng Bagua ( from Cheng Ting Hua) Gao Bagua ( From Gao Yi Sheng) Liang Bagua ( from Liang Zhen Pu) Fu Bagua ( from Fu Zhensong ) Jiang Bagua ( from Jian Rong Qiao) Yin Yang Bagua ( from Tian Hui ) They have similarities but many significant differences as well, for instance Cheng Bagua has more locks and throws than Yin Bagua ...... So when you compare Aikido to Bagua, which one were you refering to ? You could be right and wrong, Aikido may resemble one style of Bagua more than another. Mebbe the Bagua style you learnt was the one most different from Aikido?
Thanks for the history lesson. I am aware that there are multiple styles of Bagua. I was just commenting that the similarities between the two seem relatively superficial to me and that without some kind of conclusive evidence to the contrary I'm going to assume that Ueshiba did not study Bagua as opposed to assuming he did. I'm not ruling it out as a possibility, it just seems unlikely. Also, Soggycat always trys to back up his absurd arguments with the wikipedia (which is far from authoratative or reliable on the subject of CMA--sure it's fine for a VERY brief introduction to a subject) and STJ always makes sarcastic remarks when he thinks people don't back up arguments. STJ may not always take the time to thoroughly argue his objections, but when dealing with Soggycat why bother?
Ah good , you put the thread back on the original subject...." Who wins ?, Aikido or Tai Chi ". I suspect since many Tai Chi masters also learn Bagua and HsingI, your master had a clear advantage over the Aikido dude. Good on him !
"Ki" is part of aikijujitsu, from which aikido decended, but moreso Ueshiba's emphasis on ki was a product of his religious convictions. By this reasoning kempo (Chinese) and escrima (Filipino) both come from Japanese jujitsu, because kempo and escrima both bear similarities to jujitsu. By this reasoning karate (Okinawa or Japan) is Korean because karate bears a remarkable similarity to both taekwondo and tang soo do. By this reasoning either catch wrestling is Brazilian or BJJ is European, because the two are similar. And on and on and on. My point is that similarities in movements is not evidence of the history of the art.
Karate definitely has Chinese roots, not Korean Kempo is NOT Chinese ...that is a factual error on your part. Sigh. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kempo Karate could not have come from TKD or Tang Soo Doo because they are less than 60 -70years old. Sigh. BJJ is not European influenced because their technique is VASTLY different, other than the fact both involve ground fighting. BJJ is influenced by JuJitsu ( and variants) Sigh. “Some schools of the Okinawan martial art known as Karate have traditional stories delineating their Shaolin origins. The Goju Ryu and Uechi Ryu styles have even adopted as their foundational kata the San Chian routine of Fujian martial arts. Martial arts traditions in both Japan and Korea cite Chinese influence as transmitted by monks.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaolin_(martial_arts) Okinawa lies near the Southern China province Fujian. Fujian Shaolin is the predecessor to Karate, there is much similarity in the moves.Over the last 1000 years, many Fujian Chinese fishermen migrated to Okinawa and settled there. “The islands that now make up Okinawa Prefecture were formerly not part of Japan, but part of an independent nation called the Ryūkyū Kingdom. .... in 1609 the Japanese Satsuma clan, who controlled the region that is now Kagoshima Prefecture, invaded. " ….Okinawans are a unique blend of Malay from Formosa( Taiwan) , Philippines, Chinese from China and Japanese (Yamato) . Culturally, they are closer to Filipino and Chinese than mainland Japanese. “ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Okinawa And how the Japanese “removed’ Karate’s Chinese roots: ” Funakoshi's philosophy has been inspirational to many generations of karate students; yet historically it's worth noting that in the climate of Japan in the 1930s, removing an explicit reference to China in the art's name may well have been a politically expedient move. Sure, Karate has its roots in older Chinese martial arts by way of Okinawa….” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karate#What_Isn.E2.80.99t_Karate.3F
LOL! You're under the impression that I give a rat's ass what you think. Your wrong. Addittionally if you think Wikipedia is the be all and end all of credible reference for history then I suggest you go back to school and learn how to do proper research. Wikipedia doesn't cut it. Not before your post.... and guess what.... not now. If you want to jump in on the side of Soggycat.... do so at your own peril. Many of my rebuttals are based on common sense. So I don't feel the need to cut and paste volumes of information to get people like Soggy Cat up to a basic level of understanding. Nor do I feel the need to incessantly post links to Wikipedia to shore up my arguements. anything else?
Short of actually submitting it (I love the Wiki) here is an entry I was one button click away from putting up on "....The free Internet encyclopaedia Wikipaedia, [which] reportedly comes close in accuracy to the paid-for Encyclopaedia Britannica .....". == '''slipthejab''' == '''Birthday:''' February 19, 1971 '''Gender:''' Would rather not say Slipthejab is most notably known for his defeat of all 45 Bagua Brilelli Guardsmen in the Sentai Region of Hiratora on March the 16th 2001. And is also a valued member of [http://www.martialartsplanet.com/ Martial Arts Planet]. ---- Add a bit of formatting and a picture and you have what looks like a very credible source of information. That is if you believed Wikipaedia was the be all and end all of research.
I got it all right, see, because I scanned the arts and saw similarities and ignored history. That's what the "aikido is tai chi" crowd does. They scan the arts and see similarities and ignore history. So, I was totally correct in everything that I said. Carry on.
Personally,I don't think TC had an influence on Aikido.Pa Kua?See my first post.But today's history may change tomorrow.Widely known history-Chang,San-feng created TC.TC was created by the Chens with no outside influence.Davey Crockett went down fighting at the Alamo.And Kun Tao and Silat have never,ever borrowed from each other.But we have to go with what we know at this time as regards PK and Aikido.If the founder did do things that are hallmarks of PK masters it could point in the direction that he learned PK.Or he could have just gotten there himself.Why not?
Someone has to get off the fence and answer the question... /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ none of which has anything to do with the original question btw lol - but hey it makes an interesting waffle, so what the hell.... Aikido bears no resemblance (imo) to Bagua in either training methods or application. Ueshiba primarily developed his art as a 'do' rather than 'jutsu' from existing japanese systems with an aim at making something culturally appropriate for the 20th century rather than a barbaric killing method from the middle ages (his ideas, not mine), I do not believe he studied any chinese system in depth enough to make a major difference to the art which he based on aiki jujitsu. I am a big aikido fan but... If trained correctly, Taiji would probably (imo) wupp aikido bigtime. It has everything aikido has plus much much more, so it wins on firepower alone. It can neutralise any aiki technique plus has crushing techniques, punching techniques, kicks and is a martial art rather than a recreation/character-building artform. Aiki is designed to be safe, this is bound to dull the edge in a proper fight. Taiji isn't safe at all... Lastly, Soggy you are an unbelievable racist with no discernable interface to reality lol :yeleyes: I spent today in a room with Japanese and Chinese people getting along just fine including a half japanese half chinese person. You read too much and get out too little imo :Angel:
I knew you guys were Docherty people! I respect his martial abilities, but Dan seems to judge a system of martial arts based on the state of repair of their supposed origins. He goes to the Shaolin temple and isn't impressed by it because it's a tourist attraction. He goes to Wudang Mountain, thinks it's a prettier tourist attraction and decides his Taiji must be from there. The idea that Chen Wangting was the exclusive creator of Taiji may be an exaggeration propagated by the Chen's in an attempt to claim sole rights to the creation of Taiji, but the idea that mythical character Zhang San Feng was somehow the creator is the invention of 19th and 20th century Yang practitioners who didn't like their art being considered "junior." In fact, some historians now believe Wang Zongyue, one of the writers often cited as evidence of pre-Chen Taiji, was actually just Wu Yuxiang, trying to write something to make his art senior! The fact is Yang Luchan studied at Chen village for fourteen years. He may have taken detours to Zhaobao village and learned something descended from Jiang Fa or someone else, but that doesn't change the fact that the art done by Yang came 95% from the Chens, who were the only people known to be practicing that art at the time. The Chen's may have gotten it originally from some wandering Daoist, but that doesn't change the fact that the Chens are the first people known to practice anything resembling modern Taiji. Any attempt to discuss pre-Chen Taiji moves from the realm of documentation into wild speculation primarily fueled by an attempt to make whatever Taiji the person arguing practices out to be "the true Taiji." Dan's Taiji is Wu Taiji. Wu Taiji was created by Wu Quanyou, who studied with Yang Luchan and his son, Yang Banhou. Since Yang's Taiji came from Chen village, therefore Wu's Taiji comes originally from Chen as well. Zheng Tian Xiong and Dan may have made some changes to it, but that doesn't change its origin in Chen village. Don't get me wrong. I respect Dan's efforts to promote Taiji as a practical, approachable, serious martial art. I just think his view of history and of other Kung Fu styles (uninformed Shaolin-bashing) is skewed. http://www.magictortoise.com/100flowers.htm
I really think this thread should be locked already... this is ridiculous. The anti-japanese sentiment i get here in china isn't as bad as what i've read on here. And, for the record, if the japanese think the chinese are sub-human, that's because they live right next to them and have to see the squallar and absolute lack of ethics, sanitation, logic, freedom of thought etc. I've been to japan and i'm living in china right now, and i have to say, japan > china in almost everyway. Their superiority shines through. Using yin-yang as a way to coorelate daoism and shintoism is ridiculous, all philosophies believe in balance and dichotomy. see that word, dichotomy? it's from one of those ancient western languages, meaning opposites, maybe the greeks were really daoists...
You're the one who's going to get this thread closed, although I do think it's past its prime. You have to realize the majority of the anti-Japanese sentiment was not coming from the majority of the posters but from Soggycat. Soggycat is always wrong about everything. Of course you've now let your ignorant racism appear in the opposite direction, so really, yes, this thread should be closed.
Hmmm. I agree with everything you just said except for the underlined part. Aikido is as much a martial art as tai chi and karate. Additionally, imo, aikido bears no resemblance to tai chi in either training methods or application. Sure, tai chi has "more firepower" than aikido. It also has more fireppower than muay thai, not that it matters one bit. Fighting is not the goal of everyone, but if fighting is your goal, I think muay thai takes less time to learn than aikido, and aikido takes less time to learn than tai chi. Consequently, you'd do well to start with muay thai.
Uhhhhh....please note I said Chang,San-feng created TC, AND the Chens created it w/no outside influence.The point was the contradiction and that both were/are believed but both have been refuted.See Doug Wile's works,among others.I didn't speak of pre-Chen TC.I don't know of any older TC than Chen.I don't buy the Wudang claims.Also,it was Li.I-yu,Wu,Yu-hsiang's nephew who originally wrote that Chang created TC.20 yrs later he wrote he didn't know who created it.Nobody knows for sure why he wrote contradictory statements.This thread HAS devolved from the original question,but unless it's something obvious like shotgun vs. bean shooter we might as well have some fun, or let's all agree to shun any thread of this nature.Oh,and aikiMac,I really like reason #6.
Whilst we seem to have partly digressed onto the origins of taiji, I wonder has anyone read Marnix Well's 'Scholar Boxer' yet? It's a translation of the martial arts theories of Chang Naizhou, who came from a village between the Shaolin temple and Chenjiagou. His work pre-dates documented Chen style taiji and has some very obvious similarities, to the extent that Marnix Wells suggests that it may have been a pre-cursor to taiji...
