Training in different styles and schools

[NYerRoman]

What do you think about training in two different styles at the same time?
I have been told many things about it. From one shouldn't do it to the usefulness of it to understand the forms/techniques better.

Since I've studied several - Hung Gar, Tang Lang and the 5 Animals of Shaolin - I can only say I've gotten a lot out of them. Now I study two styles at the same time. Yes at times I mix them when training...like from Praying Mantis I'll execute a Serpent strike to the throat (I never hit, obviously). I get so much out of them. Tang Lang and Hung Gar.

But some have told me that it's not constructive. Others tell me it's wrong to go to two different schools. It can be taken as betraying loyalty, but I just think that is a romanticized notion of what the schools used to represent AND probably still do in Asia. In the West, such notions are not felt. At least I don't think so.

Comments?
peace brothers and sisters.

[Chinwoo-er]

My comments will be, it is fine to train both at the same time. But don't use them during practices hours.

I think it is not a matter of loyalty. More like respect. I remember when I was holding a class, I would feel that during that class, I am teaching that particular style. And if you bring in others, I feel that it is an indirect challenge to me. Certainly don't use the other style during sparring classes unless told to. Although I am sure people did not meant any of it, it is still a kind of psychological thing.
However, I would be really glad to exchange and play around with other styles when it was not during session time. During that time, I would be studying MA with my students as Martial Artist to martial artist. Not as teacher to student. But during class, I believe that the heirachy must be respected to maintain disipline.

[No_Know]

It seems that the training for each style/system develops different muscle groups (primary and support) to different percentages. Like all colors can be produced by varying the amounts in the combinations of red, green and blue. Each style is it's own color. In a system the forms are ordered as building blocks. Each has a particular benefit. The benefits are ordered to be able to significantly do the later forms. To properly do the later forms, a usual person needs the foundation to have the materials to be awe inspiring. Truely awe inspiring.


In general. Doing two at the same time~ would interfere with the other. You could learn the movements but not have that style's intrinsic strength for doing that technique. You might do a mantis technique like a Hung gar practitioner. In essence this can be like Americans who read russian like it was English sounds. There's a stereotype that the French don't tolerate poor French speak. Doing one you would look messy and yucky. Your balance of power or timimng or muscle use or distancing might not be proper for the style you were supposed to be doing at the moment. Interchanging the different principles. Messing up each style.

You could come out strong and fast and formidible, but not anything at either Style. You would be no good as an instructor because you don't have it clear in your head or Heart what really goes where--timimg, distance, power, strength,for the various techniques or forms ~ of each Style.

You could get enough training/understanding in one that you could take the other and still advance in the one.

[Cody]

I think there is something to be said for both sides of the fence on this one. The previous answers have been very good.
I think this is a highly individual thing.

To have one style influenced by another that has been studied is certainly not unsual. Also, the influence of the First studied (in fact, this would apply to the First of almost anything that happens to us or is done by us in problem solving, etc, in terms of our lives as a whole) can shine thru in other arts studied. So, whether the arts are studied simultaneously or one after the other might become a moot point in the long run. Not sure. It would be very interesting if both are begun at the same time, and this is first exposure.

I think that the degree of overlap or kinds of differences between the two styles are important too. As well as if the student feels conflict in these studies. If so, then it's no good for that student, or the styles don't mix well for that student or at all.

My opinion. If it's right for the student, it's wonderful. There's certainly a difference between finding something you need in two different places and spreading yourself around like jam.

Mixing your learning in training is one of the perks. However, I would agree that this is a solitary activity in terms of practicing with others or sparring with others at school. I agree that it isn't right then, and not accepted.

It is best if the student is honest and presents himself/herself honestly. How I mean this. Well, if you go to two schools and act like you're there to master the system and have little interest in doing that, then I don't think it's right. On the other hand, I see no wrong in maintaining loyalty primarily to people of good heart and spirit (no matter which art is studied) and to one's self and self development. I don't think it's wrong to seek to develop yourself honestly and with responsibility in more than one art, as long as you determine whether you are seeking mastery of one or both systems, or a type of mastery that does not entail learning either system (all forms, weapons, etc.) in the expected manner. This latter route is difficult to follow.

I would add that mixing styles, when it makes sense, and smushing them are two different things. The latter can amount to carelessness or just plain getting mixed up. It can also be the way you are processing the information. At some point one needs to be able to separate things out as well, or something could be overlooked. It's a lot of work. No_Know, I'm not disagreeing with the practicalities you have mentioned, in spite of the fact that I would allow for additional studies when they are possible for that student.
I see it as what is right or wrong for the individual.

Cody

[Brad]

There's nothing wrong with training with two different schools at the same time. It can hurt your martial arts if you don't have a strong basics, but there are some that can pull it off pretty well. It's easiest when you're allready somewhat advanced in one style, but can be a major pain in the butt if you're trying to learn the basics from two different styles at the same time.


Yes at times I mix them when training...like from Praying Mantis I'll execute a Serpent strike to the throat (I never hit, obviously). I get so much out of them. Tang Lang and Hung Gar.

Is this during class? If it is that can be very disrespectful to the teacher.

[NYerRoman]

Gosh, I'm more confused than before.
All your arguments are well posed, and if I may just add that I only do Hung Gar when training HG and Tang Lang when training TL.
It is the quick moment and opportunity given when sparring. I don't think of it really.

I'm justifying.....huff.
It is not often, as we don't sparr often. But I respect the schools and never mix them during class.
I'll be attentive.

[GLW]

From an instructors viewpoint:

If you are training at another school during times that I do not offer classes and you do not make me correct that person's mistakes, you leave the other stuff outside the door and are 100% focused on what I am teaching when you are in my class, I don't worry about it.

BUT....

Make the choice to miss one of my classes to go to the other class, start telling me how the other style or teacher does this or that, or start practicing the other classes stuff in my school, and the least you will get is for me to start ignoring your development in class. The porbabilities are that I will talk to you about respect for each teacher and tell you to make a choice.

[Maestro1700]

I dont know who said this but its a great quote that all martial artists should know imo

"I dont fear the thousand kicks youve practiced, but I do fear the kick youve practiced a thousand times."

this means that, without practice and dilligence in any martial art you wont be effective basically.. no matter how many styles or forms you know.

like Wong Kiew Kit states in his book, when two masters face each other the successor will usually be the one who has had more training in force, because there are nearly countless counterattacks for every attack, and at this level your opponent will surely know them all. this isnt a direct quote but basically what he said in his book.

another good thing to know is a famous saying "the style doesnt make a fighter great, but a great fighter makes the style great." this means that if your a great fighter, almost anything you train in will be useless unless you know how to apply it correctly.

ive also considered training in two styles at once..but if you look at some of the greatest martial artists in history..or legend most didnt train in two at once..many trained in or mastered 2 or 3 but really none of them trained in twice at the same time...this is probably because of some of the points stated above but never the less it should provide you with your answer

if you want to be great in many styles..master one at a time so you truly master it and all its aspects not just its form or certain techniques, then when you have truly mastered it move onto another and start from the begining..maybe this time you will progress faster because of your previous experience

this just my oppinion anyway

gl with whatever you do though

[BrentCarey]

There's nothing wrong with training multiple styles simultaneously. You may get them confused in class, but consider your reasons for training. If you are training to be an expert in style X, then don't train in style Y.

I play the fiddle. I choose to practive Irish folk music because I want to be able to play Irish folk music well. If I wanted to be a better fiddle/violin musician, I would practice other kinds of music. This would make me a better musician, but would dilute my Irish style.

It is the same with Kung Fu. Kung Fu is an individual sport. There is no practical purpose for conformity. In reality, if you learn 1000 techniques, you are still not likely to use more than about 10 in a self-defense situation. You will use the few techniques that work the best for you. If some techniques are from style X, some from style Y, and some from style Z, then no problem.

Every person is different, that's why we have so many different styles. Someone learned style X and wasn't really satisfied, so studied style Y, then still dissatisfied came up with style Z (which is really just a combination of other styles with a new twist). In fact, I would argue there are at least as many styles as there are practitioners.

I never ask how good someone is at this style or that style, I ask how good his/her Kung Fu is. If a person if extremely effective in any style, he/she has good Kung Fu.

Peace,

- B.A. Carey

[fa_jing]

Watch out for politics!! I mean, I was training in two styles at the SAME SCHOOL, thinking everything was hunky dory, and ended up catching flack. That's all I have to say....

-FJ

[Maestro1700]

Brent for one thing Kung fu isnt a sport..if your reffering to Kung fu as all chinese martial arts then ill say most all chinese martial arts arent a sport except wushu and siamese boxing

and if all different styles came from one person "trying out" one style not being satisfied, trying out another not being satisfied then making a whole different style then, it wouldnt be much of a style

the reason there are over 500 chinese martial arts is partially becuase of peoples different needs and wants from their martial art experience

but the primary reason is that for one china is an ancient civilization that has been practiceing kung fu for a long long time, and different martial arts or "styles" had to be formed so that fighters could be spontaneous in a fight and surprising so that their style would not only be effective but unknown so it would be more likely they would win the fight..being that their opponent couldnt defend against and unknown and effective style

another reason is that from different styles you develope different atributes of skill and strengths in your training as opposed to others that may not touch into the same techniques etc untill a later time or never at all

and as i said above i dont think its very good to train in 2 styles at once, but its not because you might get some moves "mixed" up or some techinques wrong etc its because no one can master 2 styles at once, and if you think you can your just wrong..but i shouldnt be using the word style this much becuase their are some fighting styles in chinese martial arts that are much easier to master than some..some can take up to 6 years just to get the basics others..you can master in a short period of time, but a complete system like hung gar..or a praying mantis style would take considerable skill to "master" at once, maybe we all are just having a misunderstand of the word master..i dunno but to me a master is someone who knows his style inside and out and continues to grow and learn from new aspects of its training such as in other branches etc

so thats that..hopes this helps the original poster

[No_Know]

"All your arguments are well posed, and if I may just add that I only do Hung Gar when training HG and Tang Lang when training TL. "

I presume that they are Both using the same body though.

[BrentCarey]

Maestro,

Let's not argue semantics over whether or not Kung Fu is a "sport". If you look the word up in a dictionary, I'm sure you will agree that it qualifies, as a sport, especially if you are referring to Kung Fu within a particular style.

Also, at the age of 17, don't presume to educate me in martial arts. I have been practicing longer than you have been alive, and was teaching professionally when you were in kindergarten.

Finally, with regards to new styles, I have two points. First, let's not forget that many very popular and well-known styles have been around for fewer than 40-50 years, and were invented in exactly the way I described.

Mastery of a style is achieved mostly through physical, mental, and in some cases, spiritual conditioning. Only part of it is learned technique. To say that it is not possible to master two styles simultaneously is to speak in absolutes, ignorant of the details.

Many styles are quite similar and not mutually exclusive. Also, many styles are fairly narrow but complementary with little or no overlap or contradiction.

It is a romantic (and commercial) notion that one must devote oneself solely to a specific style. The subject of "mastery" is largely moot anyway. Very few people will progress far enough in any style for this issue to become relevant.

It is much better if a person is so inclined, to study multiple styles, then decide later (or not) which to pursue more intensely. For example, I spent several years studying Tae Kwon Do, completely ignorant of a much larger and richer martial arts experience. Had I opened my eyes to other styles at the same time, I would have quickly settled into my current interests.

Much of this also perpetuates the semantic argument over what constitutes a "style", which apparently means something very specific to some people. Let us not forget that many renowned and proven martial artists, not the least of which is Bruce Lee, have shown the world the benefits of an absence of "style".

You may have heard the expression, "From form, formlessness." This basically means, having conditioned your body, eyes, reactions, etc., using specifically practiced movements, you can then let go of those memorized movements and adapt to the situation.

Peace,

- B. A. Carey

[Maestro1700]

Sport N. [[ <disport ]] 1 any recreational activity; specific., a game, competition, etc. requiring bodily exertion 2 fun or play 3 a thing joked about 4 |colloq.| a sportsmanlike person 5 |colloq.| a showy, flashy fellow 6 Biol. a plant or animal markedly different from the normal type

Rec-re-a-tion (rek're a'shan) N. [[ < L recreare, refresh ]] any play, amusement, etc. used to relax or refresh the body or mind --

Ac-tiv-i-ty (ak tiv' te) N., pl. -ties 1 a being active 2 liveliness 3 a specific action

so what your saying is Martial arts or specifically chinese martial arts are similiar to tennis or basketball? i dont care how many years youve been teaching tae kwon do brent, but im sorry there is a huge difference

and i wasnt lectureing you or anything like that, nice to see you checked into my profile though :)

and try actually reading my post, never did i say its not possible to train in 2 styles at once, i basically said it was unwise, and that almost no one could master 2 styles at once yea maybe im ignorant or maybe your wrong the point being is we are talking about chinese martial arts and in systems like choy li fut,wing chun,hung gar,southern shaolin,northern shaolin,tajijuan(chen,yang,wu,sun) baguazhang,xing yi etc you actually think you could achieve everything you are meant to from these styles while at the same time training in another at the same time?

thats a joke. period. what your saying is that you are wiser than all the ancient chinese martial artists to ever live..why dont you stop and think about why almost no one trains in two of the above styles at once i mentioned above, becuase ive thought about it extensively

for one thing..taijijuan? do you really know what that means? because it was originally trained in, much like shaolin gong fu to reach enlightenment through training of the mind, conditioning of the body and spirit..actually i think the man credited for first teaching taijijuan was a taoist monk who learned techinques from shaolin temple

the point im making brent, is that chinese martial arts served more than one purpose, and had much more depth and scope then you seem to realise

but whatever, your argument is weak, just because some student may train in one style at some school doesnt mean he knows jack **** about that style or system completely, students that just walk into class and are there for a month or so and leave because it doenst suit them is becuase they are ignorant, imo you should always research your style, teacher,lineage and philosophy before training in any martial art, specifically a chinese martial art

or maybe what your thinking of as a "style" or complete system is something like muy thai(siamese boxing) or kickboxing or san shou yea those combined you could master, but thats not what the original poster meant and i doubt its what you mean

think about what i stated above, and youll find its the truth, the foundation of all shaoling gong fu was the 18 lohan kuen and sinew metamorphosis taught by the great bodhidarma, and many people credit shaolin gong fu as being the forefather of not just gong fu but all martial arts..whats the saying go the sun always sets on shaolin or something like that??

think about it brent.

[apoweyn]

maestro1700,

i don't have nearly the time to address your points in depth, but this statement:

"no one can master 2 styles at once, and if you think you can your just wrong"

just put a big dent in your credibility with me.


stuart b.

[Merryprankster]

Maestro1700,

Umm, yeah, it is a hobby...a game...a recreation...a diversion from the other things we must take care of, just like basketball or tennis.

Anybody who takes it "more seriously," is deluding themselves and not having nearly as much fun as they should.

[Maestro1700]

yea.. uhh no

ill address merrys first

Umm, yeah, it is a hobby...a game...a recreation...a diversion from the other things we must take care of, just like basketball or tennis.

Anybody who takes it "more seriously," is deluding themselves and not having nearly as much fun as they should

for one thing i cannot stress how much you people are missing the point, maybe the two of you last posters should take some reading classes..and im not being deragatory(spelling?) its the truth..for one thing i mentioned a few times in my past posts that i was reffering to CHINESE MARTIAL ARTS, and im sorry but ive played both basketball and tennis and i can confidently say that i have more experience in basketball than either of you and that was just an example heres another

chinese martial arts ie shaolin kung fu were developed to stengthen the mind, body, and spirit. shaolin kung fu was used for self defense, spiritual cultivation and mental and physical well being, which is our birthright.

basketball was developed to strengthen the body, and to entertain large audiences, the constant running is nothing compared to the stamina training in kung fu, nor is the mechanical strength training some players undergo anything compared to the internal energy a kung fu practioner usually developes (or which ALL true taijijuan practioners develope)

merry you are the one deluded..kung fu was made to enrich our lives and at a higher level reach enlightenment, it is imo the greatest form of self defense, and physical fitness as well as mental freshness and spiritual fulfillment anyone can train in and if your not having fun doing these things and progressing as you should be, then you are not practiceing what im talking about or your doing something wrong either way merry, someone whos gaining these atributes from their training, or is aspiring to is certainly not deluded, only the person who mocks this is the one deluded

apoweyn..you dont have enough time to stress your point but you have enough time to say how much my creditability sux then why did you bother posting? i dont know you, and i dont care at all what you think of me.. so why post that it wasnt making any creditable point, it was just to "slander" my name which you have no idea what your talking about

so thats just my response to the above posts, im sure in a couple hours brent will make some heroic come back on why his oppinion is better than mine on why training in 2 styles is better than mastering one and aspiring to the things i mentioned above, even though you might get a few forms or moves wrong oh but that doesnt matter..no not at all..

[Kristoffer]

"It is important to think very well before entering a particular spiritual tradition (or training). Once you have entered you should stick to it. Do not be like a man who tastes food in all the different restaurants but never actually gets down to eating a meal. Think carefully before adopting a practice; then follow it through. This way you will get some results from dedicating even a little time each day. Alternatively, if you try to follow all the various paths you will not get anywhere."

---Dalai Lama

Guess that sums it all up huh?
:D

[Merryprankster]

Not really, I don't do forms.

It's a hobby, a recreation. You miss that, you're missing a lot. Doesn't mean it can't improve your life. Lots of people feel that way about basketball (which you seem to have a lot of experience in.)

In the grand scheme of things, your mastery of a specific style counts a hell of a lot less than your standing as a good person, your abilities as a parent or how you treat others.

When I get my Black Belt in BJJ I'll have gone through a lot to get there. But that doesn't really mean much compared with raising a kid properly.

And if you're looking for spiritual enlightenment, try philosophy or a monestary.

Oh wait... you're one of those guys trying to live the "warrior spirit," aren't you? :rolleyes:

[apoweyn]

maestro1700,

it's precisely because of statements like "i can confidently say that i have more experience in basketball than either of you" that i wrote that.

how can you say that with any degree of confidence at all? did i even mention basketball? does my profile make any allusion to basketball? no. and yet you've ascertained my knowledge of basketball confidently.

we've all read the sales brochures on shaolin kung fu, enlightenment, self perfection, etc. and i'm not going to sit here and tell you that those reasons aren't valid. but your credibility is shot because of your insistence that you know and understand more than people many years your senior ever will.

have your opinions, defend your opinions, maintain your opinions. but never loose sight of the fact that they're your opinions. not gospel truth.


stuart b.

[BrentCarey]

Originally posted by Maestro1700

... blah, blah, blah ...


I don't have the time or inclination to debate this with you. Your reasoning is flawed, your experience is shallow, your facts are only about half correct and mostly misinterpreted, and you've obviously learned mostly from books, movies, and video games.

A few brief points though:

1) I've never taught TKD, but I have studied it (20 years ago), and I have taught Kung Fu professionally since 1990.

2) You continue to argue semantics. I don't care what you call it, sport, pastime, sperm whale.

3) It IS possible to master two styles simultaneously, but it depends on the styles. Some styles consist of only a few very specific techniques. It is quite possible to master two of these simultaneously provided they are not in conflict. As I mentioned before, to say that it is not possible is a declaration in ignorance of the details. To continue to argue this point underscores ignorance.

4) It is incorrect that no one studies multiple styles of Chinese martial arts simultaneously. It is also incorrect that no on has mastered multiple styles simultaneously. Many if not most teachers, whether they realize it or not, teach bits and pieces from other styles regularly.

5) You continue to try to educate me on the depth of Chinese martial arts. You don't know how foolish this makes you look. I have studied martial arts for as long as I can remember, and have studied Chinese martial arts extensively. I have taught hundreds of students, and I personally train several hours every day. All of this, and I only have a fraction of my potential understanding and am humbled by my seniors who dwarf me. The notion that you could possibly have more of an understanding than me on this matter seems scarcely credible.

5) You're not likely to be convinced of what I am saying until you have lived and studied a few more years, so I am wasting my time. I've already spent more time on this than I should.

Peace,

- B. A. Carey

[BrentCarey]

Originally posted by apoweyn
maestro1700,

have your opinions, defend your opinions, maintain your opinions. but never loose sight of the fact that they're your opinions. not gospel truth.


stuart b.

Well said.

Peace,

- B. A. Carey

[Maestro1700]

heh this is pretty funny, you guys post really freaking fast i couldnt believe it i just came back to check my post to see if i should edit, for the betterment of the original poster which heh almost all of you have obviously forgotten about..but now i have a new objective argueing with you people who take this so personally..and it never ends on forums..never no matter how mature you think you are etc..

and holy hell would you look at that, just now i look down at the posts and i see..just as im loading the freaking response page brent has posted again!!

wth is going on here do you people live at this forum?? god i was just about to start my post when i saw that and starting typing this!

alright maybe i can now post without getting flooded with posts from people with to much **** time on their hands

looking at this i cant even begin to respond to what i originally wanted to, i have not now look over alot more..

first ill respond to merry who is the easiest to respond to..since hes so simple in his posts(thanx bud!)

"Not really, I don't do forms."(hey bud, you dont know what your talking about so i suggest you just leave this post before you poison the original posters mind, this isnt wrestling.)

apoweyn for one thing..id just like to say you of all people who have responded so "harshly" to my posts i respect you the most because your basically the only one who seems to have posted not out of anger but of intellectual understanding and clarity of mind. even though i might or might not agree with some of your oppinions, i do understand that these are all oppinions even though my posts might not come off that way, its because i do post with some anger somtimes..but mostly its just from the heart and not from having a bad temper or something..

Brent! whaoo youve sunk yourself deep with this one. bahaha

here we

1) I've never taught TKD, but I have studied it (20 years ago), and I have taught Kung Fu professionally since 1990. go

you obviously missed the point when i was reffering to your TKD exp but its understandable coming from you

2) You continue to argue semantics. I don't care what you call it, sport, pastime, sperm whale.

i only argue this because other people argue it with me, and your the one who asked me to look it up in a dicitonary mr. contradiction

3) It IS possible to master two styles simultaneously, but it depends on the styles. Some styles consist of only a few very specific techniques. It is quite possible to master two of these simultaneously provided they are not in conflict. As I mentioned before, to say that it is not possible is a declaration in ignorance of the details. To continue to argue this point underscores ignorance.

yea uhh brent ole buddy i made this same point in counting out numerous times the difference between system and style, technique and form and exp required so ok..yea you really got a perceptive nature dont ya?

4) It is incorrect that no one studies multiple styles of Chinese martial arts simultaneously. It is also incorrect that no on has mastered multiple styles simultaneously. Many if not most teachers, whether they realize it or not, teach bits and pieces from other styles regularly.

again i never said this was done...and again you misunderstand! wowsers you need to take a attention defersiate(jokingly misspelling) disorder class..becuase you need it brotha

and the reason many teachers teach bits and pieces of other styles regularly is because like most people know much of the basics of kung fu is based on shaolin kung fu, and the basics of shaolin kung fu come from things like the shaolin five animals..so when a hung gar teacher might teach..a snake throat jab or arm pit strike, its no wonder


5) You continue to try to educate me on the depth of Chinese martial arts. You don't know how foolish this makes you look. I have studied martial arts for as long as I can remember, and have studied Chinese martial arts extensively both in the U.S. and in China. I have taught hundreds of students, and I personally train several hours every day. All of this, and I only have a fraction of my potential understanding and am humbled by my seniors who dwarf me. The notion that you could possibly have more of an understanding than me on this matter seems scarcely credible

that may be, but you like everyone else is taking this pretty personally and i never slandered your name like you have slandered mine countlessly..so maybe you should try some different teachers on morals and human relations

heh and 6 comes after 5 not 5 then 5 again..seems you must have really rushed this post in eh?

5) You're not likely to be convinced of what I am saying until you have lived and studied a few more years, so I am wasting my time. I've already spent more time on this than I should

and you again have missed the point of this post, it was to convince the original poster, not me ;) your argueing with me when he is still confused, but some people are to concerned with themselves..whatever ive done what i said i would do in this post and that is respond to the people who reacted to my posts

peace seems..common here(wonder how many of you know what that means)

well whatever then peace ;)

[apoweyn]

maestro1700,

i will never begrudge you a difference of opinion. only a style of presenting that opinion. if you and i can exchange opinions without anger and condescension clouding the issue (on both our parts), then we're golden. sound like a plan?


stuart b.

[Merryprankster]

Hey'd'ya hear that?! I don't know anything.

Wow.

Thanks. I'll remember that.

No offense, but it's clear you didn't seem to grasp what I posted. Read what I wrote again. It's quite simple:

Your accomplishments as an MAist of any sort mean relatively little compared to your conduct as a person.

When you die, if "He was a master of 'insert style here'" is your epitaph, then you weren't trying hard enough.

[Maestro1700]

merry i didnt say you dont know anything, but since i looked into your profile it sounds like from your experience you dont belong on this post..posting like you know what your talking about when it comes to cross training in different chinese martial arts namely kung fu. as was the original nature of the original posters question..and i didnt mean my last post to be a negative message towards anyone..its just an oppinion like this is so do what you want with it

and apoweyn i agree likewise, its a plan.

[Merryprankster]

But that wasn't what you posted ABOUT. You started talking about whether or not CMA was a recreational activity. I spoke to that.

I personally think training in two arts that aren't drastically different is a **** poor idea, but that's not at all what I was addressing in my comments--I was specifically talking about where martial arts is, on the scale of importance in somebody's life.

Martial theory is not limited to CMA.
Life experiences are not limited to CMA.

To suggest that I cannot have or express an opinion on how much MA should "count" in a person's life because I don't do a CMA smacks of shoddy reasoning.

Now, if I were to tell you something along the lines of "Well, Tai Chi is better than WC," then I certainly wouldn't be speaking from a position of authority.

[apoweyn]

maestro1700,

i think it's safe to say that dismissing merryprankster's comments on the basis of his not having studied kung fu (which i haven't done either, by the way) is missing the target.

first, he was addressing a bigger issue than just CMA. second, he's a successful crosstrainer (to which i can personally attest).
and crosstraining is the topic of this thread.

like i said before, by all means debate. but can we please do so without tactics like telling people we disagree with to shove off?


stuart b.

[BrentCarey]

Originally posted by apoweyn
maestro1700,

second, he's a successful crosstrainer (to which i can personally attest).




OK, but is he a successful cross-dresser? That's what I want to know. :D

[Merryprankster]

There's a picture that somebody has of me in a dress, yes.

I wouldn't call that endeavor successful, however. I make a phenomenally unattractive woman. Something about a long chin and a jutting browridge makes me look less feminine than say, female body builders.

[apoweyn]

you scared the cr*p out of me brent. i thought for a moment i'd actually written that. :)

[Maestro1700]

ok merry, if you want to get down to what you really meant in your post then ill pick at it

Not really, I don't do forms ( i used this to respond to you in the way that i did because this is a forum about kung fu, its a post about crosstraining in kung fu and you seem to have no interest or exp in kung fu at all thats why i said what i said on this quote)

In the grand scheme of things, your mastery of a specific style counts a hell of a lot less than your standing as a good person, your abilities as a parent or how you treat others.

this is a comment not born of oppinion as apoweyn would say, your stating it like its fact, and infact martial arts(or a good martial art/teacher) and morals/good nature go hand in hand, martial arts teaches us self discipline, to control emotion and to focus the mind, and to cultivate the spirit. when you parent a child id guess you would have to apply most of the same techniques just from a different approach, i know how much of an accomplishment it is to raise a child, and i also know that raising a child and your progress as a martial artists being more important than one or the other are just a matter of oppinion, for example the only difference between a person who raises a child for 15+ years devoting most of his/her time to work and the child and a martial artist who devotes most of his/her time to work and his art is that fact that the end result is a human being and not a high level of skill but the emotional and mental level of maturity are about the same, unless the person begining his training already possesed these qualities.

And if you're looking for spiritual enlightenment, try philosophy or a monestary.

now this is a very negative and ignorant statement. for one thing from this statement i know right away that you have no idea what it takes to attain enlightenment or even the meaning of the word..you might think you know what it means but its alot more complicated that that, and yet its not. Zen buddhisim can be found in many martial arts including the lifestyle of the samurai warrior, zen buddhisim which is known as the quickest way to reaching enlightenment is found in all aspects of shaoling gong fu(true shaolin gong fu) it was passed down from bodhidarma to the shaolin monks, and incorporated in all their gong fu. your statement is also another piece of evidence that you dont have the slightest clue about kung fu or its origins,philosophy and scope or its ultimate aim which is enlightenment.

so my short and concise post about "i dont practice forms" is why i posted what i did, i didnt want to draw it out as long as this but posts such as yours have "encouraged" me to post this one

[Merryprankster]

I think you'll find that there are many CMA practicioners on this board who agree that the primary aim of CMA is to teach you how to handle yourself in a confrontation, rather than enlightenment. In fact, an awful lot of them think that too many schools stress spiritual, vice martial development way too much. I think you'll find that most of the WC guys don't particularly feel that way, for instance, and none of the Shuai Chiao players here have discussed spirituality as an emphasis in their art. A number of folks on here have discussed people who were considered masters that were kind of shady in their personal and business dealings.

So, since even CMA'ers can't agree on what role spirituality should play in CMA, I will suggest that your blanket statement regarding the role of MA in personal development is at the very least debatable, and that therefore, to tell me that I have no idea what the purpose of Kung Fu is is probably at the very least debatable as well.

Hmm--I know nothing of buddhism. Seeing as you are presuming to know a great deal about my education, I'll just respond that that isn't exactly accurate.

I stand by my statement: If you want enlightenment, there are paths that specialize in it. CMA doesn't specialize in it. It might include some spiritual work as part of its training, but is that the primary purpose, really? I would say not.

Still, you've managed to miss the point again--I don't have to be a practicioner of CMA to make the point that there are other things more important in life than the practice and mastery of CMA.

The people who love you now and who will love you in the future will not care about your skill level in a martial art. It will be something you do--but again, if mastery of a skill set is all that can be said--that's a pretty poor epitaph.

[Maestro1700]

merry you missed the point of my posts every time i posted on this forum

i cant even begin to tell you how wrong you are and frankly im tired of arguing the same things over and over with you and others on this subject

the point is i never said the aim of kung fu is to attain enlightenment, again you dont understand...i said shaoling kung fus ultimate aim is to attain enlightenment and that is a FACT!

im not going to argue this crap anymore because its really begining to annoy me, and your lack of knowledge on the subject and your continuing misunderstadings are so annoying i want to split my skull with a hammer.

im going to end my posts on this subject now.

shaolin kung fu has the most extensive history than any other martial art in the world, imo it is the most effective form of self defense, physical and mental fitness and spiritual cultivation. its history and philosophy speaks for itself(if anyone here would care to look into it which judgeing from this forum no one has a clue) and its my oppinion that anyone who can find a good teacher, and can become comfortable in his/her style that once they master it, then there is no reason why they couldnt train in another style, but it is also my oppinion that training in 2 styles at once(and when i say styles i mean complete systems like hung gar etc) is unwise and in the long run will damage your martial arts training-this message is for the original poster and to whomever else cares to draw from it..either way i really dont care where else this post goes im leaving it now with this last message to the primary subject of the post.

[Merryprankster]

The point of Shaolin Kung Fu is to attain enlightenment? There are people on this board who do Shaolin Kung Fu and they don't necessarily agree with you. I'm not sure why this upsets you so much.

Are you supposing that should I just agree with you, and that because I don't, I am somehow not educated on the subject? Perhaps I have educated myself on the subject and I simply disagree with you.

How about the people more experienced than I am in CMA, and specifically in Shaolin styles who don't agree with you? Or does your lineage hold a monopoly on the truth?

If I lack knowledge on the subject it is because I have learned next to nothing about YOUR perspective, beyond "Shaolin Kung Fu has enlightenment as its true aim."

I shall refrain from providing a link to the usual Kalari blather that I usually indulge in when somebody claims that Shaolin arts are the oldest systematized arts known.

Oh well--next I suppose you are going to tell me that forms training coupled with bodyweight exercises are all you need to be a good fighter.

[apoweyn]

maestro1700,

"the point is i never said the aim of kung fu is to attain enlightenment, again you dont understand...i said shaoling kung fus ultimate aim is to attain enlightenment and that is a FACT!"

i don't understand the difference between the first statement and the second. you never said the aim of kung fu is enlightenment. but you did say that the ultimate aim of shaolin kung fu is enlightenment. and what's more, that's a fact. is that right?

well, i don't think that history bears that out, really. think about it. the shaolin monks spent their time doing one of two things: 1) training in gung fu and 2) studying the buddhist sutras. presumably, the aim of studying buddhist sutras is enlightenment. so why study gung fu if it ostensibly serves the same purpose?

other explanations (some more likely than others) suggest that bodhidharma taught the monks exercises to strengthen their bodies against the rigors of meditation (which presumably is also for enlightenment). a slightly more pragmatic explanation still is that the monks had to learn to defend themselves on their travels and their monestary against brigands.

now, ask yourself this: how many gung fu people would you consider enlightened? if you do know some, how are they enlightened? what does that mean? if you don't know any, have they simply not arrived yet?

and once again, here's the thing maestro1700: presentation will take you a long way. many people here have been training for a long time. in some cases, they've been training, literally, for longer than you've been alive. that doesn't mean that they're always right and you're always wrong. what it does mean, in all likelihood, is that your responses on this thread absolutely do not represent the first time that we've heard these things. personally, i came across the perspective you're presenting about 16 years ago. the people you're arguing with know what you're telling them. they've heard it. they've thought about it. and they happen to disagree with it. so stop telling them that it's fact. they've read the books, seen the shows on the tellie, and listened to the stories. but it isn't fact. it's conjecture. and you haven't supported that conjecture with any backup from buddhist thought, chinese history, etc.

did buddha (sidhartha gautama) practice gung fu? no. he may or may not have been a member of india's warrior caste (the kyshatriya). i don't know. but when he was enlightened, it was through meditation. not martial arts. or so the story goes.

how about the bodhisattivas? kuan yin? maybe they trained, but it doesn't ring any bells.

personally, i'm comfortable with the idea of martial arts as a vehicle of more esoteric goals. but to say that the primary aim of kung fu being enlightenment is fact is an indefensible position, to my mind. it's opinion. defend it as such.

cool?

"shaolin kung fu has the most extensive history than any other martial art in the world."

can you prove that, or is it simply the martial art about which you know the most? wrestling has an extremely long history as well, as do various weapon arts (both eastern and western).

"imo it is the most effective form of self defense, physical and mental fitness and spiritual cultivation. its history and philosophy speaks for itself(if anyone here would care to look into it which judgeing from this forum no one has a clue)."

that's right. we're all dumb and you're smart. you can do better than this maestro. that's not a challenge to beat me down. it's a challenge to actually debate with us rather than telling us we're stupid because we don't agree with you. in return, perhaps we can start responding to you reasonably as well.

"and its my oppinion that anyone who can find a good teacher, and can become comfortable in his/her style that once they master it, then there is no reason why they couldnt train in another style, but it is also my oppinion that training in 2 styles at once(and when i say styles i mean complete systems like hung gar etc) is unwise and in the long run will damage your martial arts training."

and that's a perfectly valid and defensible opinion. thank you.


stuart b.

[dezhen2001]

Maestro - it's Dave from russbo, just wanted to say 'welcome to KFO' and good to see u've been entered at the deepend :)

Hopefully u can learn from the ppl here, and them from you. Some guys here have a lot of knoweledge!

l8r,

david

[shaolinboxer]

If shaolin kung fu leads to enlightenment (and you are a practitioner), then your trainining should have helped you realize that there are no facts. Therefore, it cannot be a fact that the goal of kung fu is to attain enlightenment.

[sean_stonehart]

Good reply Stuart.

[apoweyn]

cheers sean. i appreciate it.


stuart b.

[Maestro1700]

Hey dave! I didnt know you posted here I thought u just looked into these from time to time! well Im responding now, I just finished my work so time to respond..

Ill first address shaolin gong fu as being a means of attaining enlightenment

Im going to address three things in this post jing,chi and shen which mean jing(essence) chi(energy) shen(spirit)

you say that the shaolin monks studied the buddhist sutras to attain enlightenment and they practiced gong fu for self defense in their travels, this is partially right and I am stating this as fact; heres my reasons.

why would a shaolin monk practice gong fu in order to attain enlightenment when so many other buddhist sects do not? it is because zen buddhisim and meditation is incorporated into their gong fu and chi kung training.

in meditation you have to be completely relaxed, everyone who meditates knows this. Thus if you are not physically, emotionally,mentally and spiritually fit you are unlikely to gain the most from your journey to a zen awakenining

Examples ;
if one is not physically fit, one can hardly fight;if one is not emotionally stable, one cannot apply one's combat skills; if one is not mentally fresh, one cannot make split-second decisions.(quoted from wong kiew kit)

if our bodies are weak we also have a low energy level(ie blockage of energy meridians etc) our chi is not harmonious and thus we are unable to perform as well in physical activities as others might(ie people who train in kung fu, chi kung, taijijuan)

Now this answers many questions why people would say, how is shaolin kung fu a complete system? well because through training you will become physically fit, mentally fresh, emotionally stable, and you will also cultivate your spirtuality. Since Chi kung is incorporated in many if not all authentic gong fu styles, meditation is also key to aspireing to higher levels of skill. as believed in buddhisim the only way to reach enlightenment is to meditate, so is the case with many other religions though it might appear in different forms such as prayer in christianity.

you asked me how shaolin gong fu leads to enlightenment, and this should answer your questions, through dedicated training you will developed a healthy body, emotional stability, through meditation and chi kung you will developed mental freshness and in a period of time enlightenment. dont take this lightly though it sounds simple(because it is) but it takes much training to reach enlightenment, even for the greatest masters to live such as bodhidarma, hui neng etc it took them up to 9+ years! and all of which i mentioned above is incorporated into shaolin gong fu.

"shaolin kung fu has the most extensive history than any other martial art in the world."

key word is EXTENSIVE, not oldest like you tried pointing out as reffering to wrestling(maybe you were reffering to the greeks?) but extensive meaning many different levels of training, technique along with history and developement

and yes kung fu is this, it has the most extensive training in weapons, open hand forms, kicks, 1 on 1, 2 on 1, 3 on 1 ++, groundfighting, grappling, joint locks-pressure point techniques,sweeps,throws etc.. and most authentic gong fu contains chi kung training which is to say internal energy or for some its external training ie iron palm, iron jacket or wooden dummys-wall bags etc but in the end we all know that both lead to basically the same results, but sometimes lacking a few details

also, gong fu is one of the oldest martial arts in the world, because china is an ancient civilization, and becuase martial art techniques have been dated back so far as to have been scribed on cave walls, turtle shells, and other common writing surfaces.

also, in refference to other buddhist sects not practiecing the same exercises taught by bodhidarma, some of course do practice exercises like the 8 brockades or wild goose chi kung like dave practices..which i think is taoist but im not sure..

so thats that..sorry for making some of you feel stupid or whatever but that wasnt my intent when i wrote the comparison to people who i didnt think knew anything about gong fu, from their answers in these posts.

[sean_stonehart]

OK... I've got a simple question because obviously the past 22 years of training have been all wrong...

Who's your sifu? What is this person's name that has so enlightened you?

I just gotta know.

[Maestro1700]

yea sean i dont ever recall saying i was enlightened

and if you do train in shaolin gong fu(which is to say you train at henan province,NYC,London etc and you havent gained ANY of the atributes etc i mentioned) then yea you have been training all wrong for the past 22 years!

im not saying that if you havent been enlightened that you arent doing your gong fu right..becuase not all authentic kung fu teaches one to reach enlightenment, only shaolin and some other gong fu systems

and the rest of your questions answer is in my profile..hehehe

[Merryprankster]

maestro1700--

Other than the various digs at different people, NOW we're starting to get somewhere--before I comment on anything else though, I'd like to point something out. You wrote:


shaolin kung fu has the most extensive history than any other martial art in the world,

To me, this means that you are saying that Shaolin Kung Fu has the most extensive (oldest/rich etc) history in the world.

Now, if you were saying it's the oldest, my standard response is to post some blather about Kalari--an Indian Martial art that may very well predate Shaolin KF.

If you are arguing that it has the richest history, this is a statement for which you might make a case, but hardly come to something conclusive about--several other arts unrelated to Shaolin can claim a rich and varied history.

The only other thing I'd like to comment on is the enlightenment issue: Nobody here--especially Ap, is claiming that enlightenment is not A purpose of Shaolin KF. However, you quite clearly stated that the MAIN purpose (ie, ultimate aim) of Shaolin KF.

And therein is the argument (from a rhetorical perspective--not from a let's all yell at each other perspective).

Ap's point, and mine is that the Shaolin Monks did things besides Kung Fu to attain enlightenment. This would suggest that the ultimate aim of the Shaolin MONKS was to attain enlightenment, and that Shaolin Kung Fu was one way to help that along.

However, it does not automatically follow that the ultimate aim of practicing Shaolin Kung Fu is to acheive enlightenment.

An example--Monks did daily chores, including such things as sweeping the floors and cooking--laboring at chores was part of their training on the path to enlightenment. Does that mean that the ultimate aim of laboring at chores is to acheive enlightenment?

I would argue that this may not be the case--while laboring at chores was thought to benefit the monks spiritually (as well as serving a practical purpose), the ultimate aim of the chores themselves was not enlightenment.

In much the same way, practicing Shaolin Kung Fu was thought to benefit the monks spiritually, and served the practical purpose of learning to fight. However, the ultimate aim of Shaolin Kung Fu itself may not be enlightenment.

Again--can it help the seeker? Perhaps...maybe even an unqualified yes! However, is that the ultimate aim? This is debatable--the fact that the monks did things besides Shaolin KF in their training is indicative that the aim of the Kung Fu training was not, in and of itself, enlightenment.

[NYerRoman]

OH MY BUDDHA!
Ok ok..I won't train in two styles anymore.....

I like it though....it has allowed me to train not only physically, but spiritually as well. It's an overall good feeling.

So I will continue until I decide I don't want to. I like both. Life is short. I live in a city, and not in a temple where one trains all day and meditates.
I'm fufilled...almost. I prefer yet another style that is not offered here. But I WON'T GO DOWN THAT PATH. So I'm fufilled enough.

Be nice to each other gentlemen. The world is going to **** and it's up to us to keep antagonism to a minimum. It's our duty.

peace.

[Maestro1700]

merry, you make some good points..but the point i was making basically was that;

shaolin kung fu served many purposes but the end being, attaining enlightenment

the fact that you related sweeping a floor as a chore, that ultimately helped the young monks in their spiritual cultivation is simple, sweeping the floor much like other mundane chores was probably used to make the disciple develope a one pointed mind, which is the primary training technique in zen buddhisim. and yea it also kept the monastery clean ;)

you are also right in say that shaolin kung fu was A way of achieving enlightenment..but at its highest level shaolin kung fu focuses on spiritual cultivation

there of course are many ways to reach enlightenment(which the buddha,and his disciples realised suited peoples different needs) such as..koans, or beatings, shouting etc found in zen buddhisim.

and yea it is nice to have a convo without all the bs that people(me included) get involved in on forums

[sean_stonehart]

Originally posted by Maestro1700
yea sean i dont ever recall saying i was enlightened

Yeah & I never said you were enlightened. I said ... What is this person's name that has so enlightened you?... i.e. opened your eyes to these ideas?

What's the name? I'm still waiting for that.



Originally posted by Maestro1700

and if you do train in shaolin gong fu(which is to say you train at henan province,NYC,London etc and you havent gained ANY of the atributes etc i mentioned) then yea you have been training all wrong for the past 22 years!


I just picked up Shaolin in the past couple of years. Taiji to boot as well. Guess what... I have been to Shaolin. Guess what... was part of a sit down q&a with Shi Yong Xin. Guess what... he never said Shaolin wushu helped to reach enlightenment. He spoke of Ch'an working on that part. The gong fu was to keep the body healthy to help the spirit with the tenents of Ch'an reach that.


Originally posted by Maestro1700

im not saying that if you havent been enlightened that you arent doing your gong fu right..becuase not all authentic kung fu teaches one to reach enlightenment, only shaolin and some other gong fu systems

and the rest of your questions answer is in my profile..hehehe

All I want to know is who your sifu is. I want the name of the person that has told you Shaolin gongfu a physical tool in reaching enlightenment. You quoted Wong Kiew Kit at least two times at least in this thread. I'm wondering how much you've studied & then how much you've read in books.

So far, you've told me & one other person that I would call older brother or possibly/probably even sifu based on his years of experience & training, that we were missing something because we didn't understand something that in your tender 17 years you have figured out or had explained to you. I wanna know who set you on that path. Just a name. That's all.

[Maestro1700]

sean..im 17 yea so i guess i have an excuse for getting upset sometimes and responding with a bit of anger on these forums..and personally if someone like you or others on this forum said this stuff to me in the manner and tone you have presented your arguments, id probably make you kiss the cement..but when you so called mature and "wiser" martial artists sink down to my level of maturity..which you criticise at the same time i feel real low and depressed about how many teachings and lessons can just *poof* in one instant..its sad really

The gong fu was to keep the body healthy to help the spirit with the tenents of Ch'an reach that.

if you didnt understand what i was talking about when i almost basically reffered to this exact same thing above than man you need to go back to kindergarten and have them read you your abc's

no one put me on my path, i live my own life the way i want to, and im sure my views will change as i grow older

[apoweyn]

maestro1700,

let's try this: what elements of your personal practice would you say are focused on achieving enlightenment? walk me through a typical practice session for you and tell me what is done for what purpose, specifically.


stuart b.

[omegapoint]

I have to agree with MP and the other guys about the "Shaolin GungFu and Enlightenment" thing. That doesn't mean that I don't understand what M-Tro and others are trying to say, but you might be using too general a term. What or where is enlightenment anyway? I don't think that it's a destination or a terminus, but a singular journey or process.

Enhanced self-actualization may be more on point. The past, present and future were/are destinations, with only one endpoint. The future which we can only guess at, is a place we have yet to visit. It is already there though, we just haven't moved through space/time to reach it. I'm inclined to believe that Providence has an image or expectation of us, and all of us will fulfill that "role", from the disadvantaged to the those with serendipity on their side.

MAs or any other physical or mental exercise, can expedite the expectations we, others and Creation has for us. I know this sounds a little esoteric. The esoteric is the glue which binds the concrete or material world. Dedicating one's self to any endeavor helps us to understand the totality of our existence. It helps us to make sense of an entropic Universe (or Multiverse). The more we are able to do physically and mentally, the easier it is to understand a greater part of the totality.

Buddhism (Ch'an/Zen, all other schools of thought), Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Deism or whatever "template" you use, serve the same purpose. They all ask us to pattern our mental and physical world after some other person's or "Deity's" interpretations or experiences. Many circumstances have similarities, but most are singular. None of these blueprints for civilized behavior has all the answers. Heck, most are nothing more than places where people can meet on "common ground". To say that the aim of traditional MAs and Shaolin Chuan Fa, in modern society, is that the practitioner reach Nirvana, already limits one's ability to interpret his/her world for themselves.

I study Shorin (Shaolin) Ryu (Flow/Way). The Orthodox form, Matsumura Seito, is strictly an interpretation of Shaolin fighting methods passed down from one Bushi (Okinawan Samurai), to another, with a little Jigen-Ryu Kenjutsu (fighting style of the Satsuma Samurai), and a lot of Okinawa "Ti/Te" influence . My Shorinkan (different ryuha or subsystem) Sensei taught many Zen-like aspects, but refused to use Buddhism as a means to reach greater actualization. For Okinawan stylists (the purists at least), Kata/Hsing/Quan were the main tools for reaching something beyond being a common thug. I guess the Japanese noticed this too, so they began to describe karate kata as "Zen in motion". That's how they understood their training, but many Okinawans understand kata and karate in their own way.

In Matsumura Seito we rarely bow, speak in Japanese terms or take part in meditation ("Makuso")! The only reflection we partake in is when we are trying to assimilate the feasibily of a tech for self-preservation. Still, I've grown leaps and bounds with the traditional Okinawan way to train vs. the more prevalent Japanized modern karate way that I partook in when I was a teen. The same can be said for BJJ/GJJ. "Jutsu" (Art/Science) vs. "Do" (philosophicallly structured "Way") is the order of the day. The abstract is enhanced by one's ability to apply concrete truths to easily perceivable situations.

Sorry for the rambling... I can hear both sides, but I agree with neither completely.

[Merryprankster]

Omega--

Actually, I think we're largely in agreeance--perhaps not completely from an over arching philosophical framework, but certainly w/respect to the specific purpose of Shaolin Kung Fu:

Maestro claims that it's ultimate aim is enlightenment.

Ap, and I are both trying to make the case that while it is a tool in the toolbox to help achieve enlightenment, surely, the ultimate aim of Shaolin Kung Fu itself is not enlightenment--part and parcel of that aim, but not the true aim, in and of itself.

[dezhen2001]

maestro: the qigong i do is for many different things, but the main aim, at least at first (for me anyway), is to be healthy... after that who knows? Certainly not me as i've only been training over 18 months... best not to get any high ideas of what things are for and just practise if u ask me - then you'll see what they're for yourself.

MP and Apoweyn - if ur interested i think there was a Shaolin Gong Fu IS Chan thread at Russbo a while ago. i'll try and find the link if u let me know? (Doc's renovating the site right now though).

hopefully this thread can stay civil lol (get enuff at the WC forum) :)

david

[No_Know]

A farmer gets enlightenment. A businessperson gets enlightenment. A merchant gets enlightenment. A child gets enlightenment.

A sudden thud and my thoughts stop whirring. And All the thoughts make a collage. Sometimes the thoughts are pixles and they form a picture. Sometimes the picture is perfectly clear. And I understand.~

Housework, homework, farming, officework, things sometimes come together from doing. And so Shao-lin people practice their hardest with each technique (as if it's the last thing they would ever do) (What I heard~ it's supposed to be like). And so (needle-and-thread), the Shao-lin have practice as part of their whatever. While others are told they should or encougared to, I think that it might actually be a written rule within Shao-lin Kung-Fu.

Budhists seem to have a reverence for Life. Except for (however many) high level greedies, do you tend to think of Shao-liners as Fight pickers? Or Kill rampagers? To learn the Kung-Fu at/from this Budhist temple, people picked-up at least some of the Ch'an principles. In a World where violence is considered the problem solver, a fom of fighting that promates do the least damage and do no harm if you can, might be considered enlightened~or be related to enlightenment. And the Exercises were done to improve health to improve their meditation sessions (to allow them to endure them). Chants done while the mind was occupied with the distraction of the physically demanding, allowed for self hypnosis, deep and varying levels of meditation. Chores or forms eithe Self or Life gets looked at eventually. Realization sometimes occures.

Enlightenment needs no spokesperson. IfShao-lin Kung-Fu has lessons embedde in the movements then the form will speak forit'self when the practitioner is ready? There are ages at which we do not explain having sex to children. They are not ready or don't Need to know that at that moment. There's a concept of thelling them when they are ready. Supposedly enlightenmet is this way.

If the Main if not sole purpose of Shao-lin kung-Fu is enlightenment...saying it does not matter, knowing it does not matter, conviencing others is not required. If it is so, then that is enough.

[Braden]

"Buddhism (Ch'an/Zen, all other schools of thought), Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Deism or whatever 'template' you use, serve the same purpose. They all ask us to pattern our mental and physical world after some other person's or 'Deity's' interpretations or experiences."

That's not quite true. All of the religions you mention (although I'm not familiar with Deism) were founded upon and have had a continual undercurrent of mysticism. This word is used inappropriately quite often. It's proper usage refers to a practice which permits direct experience of something one may call ineffable. The core of these religions is not a demand to pattern something after someone else's experiences, but rather simply to have those experiences for yourself.

[omegapoint]

Originally posted by Braden
"Buddhism (Ch'an/Zen, all other schools of thought), Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Deism or whatever 'template' you use, serve the same purpose. They all ask us to pattern our mental and physical world after some other person's or 'Deity's' interpretations or experiences."

That's not quite true. All of the religions you mention (although I'm not familiar with Deism) were founded upon and have had a continual undercurrent of mysticism. This word is used inappropriately quite often. It's proper usage refers to a practice which permits direct experience of something one may call ineffable. The core of these religions is not a demand to pattern something after someone else's experiences, but rather simply to have those experiences for yourself.

Those are singular experiences the individuals had, that apply to one person (usually a man) or a small group of "devout" disciples. I can't expect to know how you really interpret reality, let alone claim to be able to understand your life, and live your experiences in the same way. Many of the lessons of the world's great religions mirror one another, but emulation is another thing.

For example Buddha's enlightenment came after he was meditating in the wilderness and Lord Mara (Evil) tries to tempt, threaten, deceive him and get him to believe that the voice he was hearing and the reflection he was seeing in the pond was his own. Buddha's enlightenment came after he reaffirmed that he was the master of his fate and destiny and no one else. No one, not even Satan, could tell him who he was or what he should do. The hardcore ascetic mystics abandoned him b/c he disavowed their extreme mystical views on materialism. He adopted moderation and now he has his own religion.

Jesus went through a similar experience with satan, the results being similar but the experiences being singular.

The point is both cats had to find themselves or reaffirm their place in the grand scheme. Mysticism in the Eastern beliefs has always been integral. In the West the mystic tradition survives with Judaism (really an Eastern belief system), but is completely lost with severely diluted Christianity. The Eastern Orthodox Churches and Roman Catholic churches once had a strong Mystic tradition, but I think that almost all of that was lost after the Renaissance, and especially after the Enlightenment. Just ask any priest.

I know what you're trying to say. I'm not attempting to coerce or even prove my point. That's just how I see and feel it to be. One opinion out of billions. Look up Deism. It's what most of America's founding fathers believed in... Pax Egyptiana (everything is Egyptian after all).

[NYerRoman]

Actually, one can be enlightened doing just about anything. And deism doesn't cut it without first starting from the notion that GOD (meaning whatever you want that to mean) is in you.

You are God.

That's the way it works. Especially in buddhist circles...and by the way, you are most certainly enlighted doing kung fu. It is not just to keep you in shape to be enlightened. That's what I've understood in both reading and practicing my kung fu.

[Gabriel]

I don't know about enlightenment, well i do intellectually but not in a experiential sense. Supposedly, enlightenment is attained by nourishing the shen with water qi right? And then the spirit can fly free, or becomes stronger than the body or whatever, then you are a Buddha. Well, for me, thats not a very realistic goal at all. What I want to get out of kung Fu is physical fitness, Confidence, self defense, health, and also a certain spiritual element as well. To clarify, I have become more centered, aware, or whatever you wish to call it. However, I want to attune my spirit better to my body. I want to be mentally more astute, emotionally more controlled, and spiritually more focused, which can all be achieved by strengthening my Yi (wisdom mind). And, in my experience, which may or may not mean much to you guys, MA has helped me to do all this. It has helped me focus when I need to study Calculus. It has helped me persevere in tragedies. It has influenced many of my life decisions. So no, in my personal definition of MA, it is not a sport, but a way of life. Having said that, MA means different things to different people. Maestro, if CMA is a vehicle of enlightenment for you, right on. If its a sport to you Brent, more power to you. My point is that we ,as the MA community, should not be concentrating on our difference of interpretation, but rejoicing in the mutual benefits of our arts. Im done. 'Scus me, Im goin to see star wars. :D

Gabriel

P.S. - oh yeah..the question of 2 MA at one time? Well I take Tai Chi and Mantis and they compliment each other quite well i think. but they are after all, internal and external styles. I don't know what you are taking, but it is ultimately up to you. Peace.