Unfortunately for straight heart people, I have to cite following lines from Encyclopedia volume (Routledge, 2008) about non-existing Zhang Sanfeng personality: “Zhang Sanfeng (“Zhang Triple Abundance” or “Zhang Three Peaks”) is a famous Taoist said to have lived between the end of the Yuan (1260-1368) and beginning of the Ming periods (1368-1644). His historical existence, however, is unproved.”—Martina Darga
Nevertheless, never mind.
“In the first years of the Ming period, Zhang reportedly established himself on Mount Wūdāng 烏當 (Wudang shan, Hubei), where he lived in a thatched hut. With his pupils he rebuilt the mountain monasteries destroyed during the wars at the end of the Mongol dynasty… As time went on, the legends multiplied and became increasingly exaggerated. Zhang is known as the founder of tàijí quán 太極拳 (a claim without historical evidence) and the patron saint of practitioners of this technique. During the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries a connection to the sexual techniques (fángzhōng shū 房中書) was also established and texts dealing with these practices were ascribed to him.”—Martina Darga
I cannot say I am much bothered by the fact of existing or non-existing a real person behind the name: during centuries of humanity strange and unexplained things do happen every day. What I really like is the time of texts’ creation, it is still my favorite period of Chinese history, and the time after 1644 is definitely stranger than anything else—people begin to write and print too much books and they are too long to read them all. If I have a choice to choose sources for my daytime (and I have the choice) I always prefer shorter and more ancient to prolific and modern. If I am not satisfied a bit what I have already found now I just add a bit silence to my day. This small gesture always helps a lot.—Sri Yantra Master
The idea to attach martial art techniques to sexual guides and all philosophy behind it to the one personality is absolutely marvelous and Asian:) In European culture nobody’s name comes to mind. Am I wrong?