A serious question(for research purposes)

[The Willow Sword]

What determines what IS shaolin kung-fu as opposed to what is NOT shaolin kung-fu? there have been some real heated debates on whats what with respect to shaolin kung-fu and shaolin-do kung fu. there is a saying that "THose who tell,dont know. and those who dont tell, know". i dont really know what to really think about all of this. For years Shaolin-do and grandmaster Sin has gotten a bad rap. Everywhere you turn there is something to say about shaolin-do's authenticity and the lineage of Grandamster Sin.
and yet this school has survived through all of it. from the late 60's is when the school started.
"a tribes greatness is measured by how many and mighty their enemies be" an old indian saying. WHAT, in effect HAS been PROVED OR DISPROVED(tangibley and with documentation) about the shaolin-do school,,,,,lets put all ego aside and be practical and objective about this discussion for i do not want this to become another BASH fest on schools and what they teach or claim. so if your intent is to say "this school sucks" or "SIN The' is a fraud" or "i dont believe the lineage is true" then please do not taint this discussion with that prattle. OPINIONS matter but what i am looking for is FACT. Not common sense opinions for they have proven to be invalid in a lot of discussions about this subject. i open the FORUM to a peaceful and intelligent discussion about these matters which i have written in hopes that i can and others can make a sound decision about this school and all the publicity it gets from this forum. "theres no such thing as bad publicity". with that in mind.
lets utilize our skills of PROPER communication and discuss this. my replies to this will be like questions to you about why yuou feel the way you do,,i am writing a research document about this.
again i state to you all,,ive heard all of the BASHING and INSULTS about the shaolin-do school okay. i have heard you its been recorded,,so now lets go onto the tangible reasons why we all feel the way we do about this one school...... thankyou

[Radhnoti]

I'd like to ask for a bit of clarification here...is the question:
"What determines what IS shaolin kung-fu as opposed to what is NOT shaolin kung-fu? "
Or:
"the tangible reasons why we all feel the way we do about this one school" meaning Shaolin-Do?
I'm assuming this is a thread opened specifically to debate the pros and cons of Shaolin-Do (which as I understand it is against the policy of this forum...but when has that ever stopped anyone? :rolleyes: ), but let me know if you're looking for something else. I actually may have something interesting to share that I ran into...
might surprise a person or two. :D

-Radhnoti

[Kumkuat]

I don't know if Shaolin do is authentic shaolin or not, but they are definately not internal. They should get rid of their internal program because their students, instructors, and even masters are not internal at all. I seen them give a demo where I live, and when I saw the Xingyi demo and saw a long fist punch (thinking it's Xingyi) done with pure muscle, I groaned. Not to mention the obvious arm muscle usage during the taiji demonstration.

Other than that, I don't know if shaolin do is shaolin kung fu. But I do know that they are definately not internal. Sorry for being off topic.

[shaolinboxer]

After researching and pondering this question for a few years, I believe that "Shaolin Kung Fu" cannot be used to describe any particular set of techniques. Rather, it indicates a standard of proficiency and dedication. The many masters of shaolin, if there are such masters, all have their own unique ways of teaching and their own ways about approaching martial arts.

Prime example:

Li Peng says all of his students must learn the application of the forms.

Yan Ming says applications don't work and are a waste of time.

Every master creates his/her own style. That's one vital component of "mastery".

[The Willow Sword]

There is a couple of questions here. one is the question that i posed at the beginning of my post. this question relates to the SHaolin-Do school. also there is a
question that makes a statement based on the opinions and views expressed about this school. i want to be able to compare the answers i get fron the first question with the FACTS i recieve about the SHaolin-Do School. then i, as well as others, will be able to make a sound judgement without bashing the school,about the school. i hope this clarifies what i am attempting to figure out.
so that there are no suspicions about me,
YES i am a disciple of the SHaolin-do school.
i am not thinking of leaving that realm,nor am i wanting to provoke a fight with anyone. i really truely want to understand this animosity and contempt. i always fear asking grandmaster sin about this for i do not want to make it seem like i am disrespecting him(for i am not) i have met the man, i know what he is about(in my mind). so with that being out on the open i want to now be an objective reader here and get evryones views as stated in my first post. MAny respects,,,,,,the willow sword

[BeiKongHui]

While I wouldn't want to guess what makes Kung Fu shaolin or non-shaolin I like most other martial artists can assure you that that is a moot question as far as Shaolin Do is concerned. Why? Because plain and simple Shaolin Do is not a Chinese martial art. I've seen Shaolin Do artists who trained directly under The'-they were most unimpressive and displayed only the lowest level of skill. I've seen Sin The', Bill Leonard, and other masters and have not been impressed by their supposed abilities nor by the parlor tricks they perform to amaze the unsuspecting. And yes...I have sparred and fought their students and found them quite easy to defeat due to the unrealistic training methods and lack of understanding of basics. In fact I've seen students of other martial arts with only a year or so of training easily dispatch Shaolin Do black belts. I suppose if you have no prior training or don't know what to look for they fool you, but ask any (non-SD) martial artists whose been around and the answer's always going to be the same. Of course no amount of evidence can convince a Shaolin Do cultist of reality but in closing I'll say I've been involved in some form of martial arts for 16 years...I've trained in or know someone who has trained in Wing Chun, Karate, Aikido, Brazillian Jui Jitsu, Muay Thai, Tae Kwon Do, Jeet Kune Do, Kali, Hung Gar, Long Fist, Preying Mantis, XingYi, Taiji, Sambo, Wrestling, boxing, Judo, Contemporary WuShu, etc and one thing they all have in common is a profound belief that Shaolin Do is not a legitimate martial art. As for me I believe it's for "weekend warriors" not those who take martial arts seriously.

"Gong Sao Mo Gong Ching Sao"
- When you talk with the hands,
best not to speak of polite hands.

[The Willow Sword]

What , in your opinion, is a "legitimate Martial art"? this is not to contest your views about the subject. i would like to know.
Many Respects,,willow sword

[Shaolindynasty]

Willow sword in a previous post you told me your style was 108 step. Now it's Shaolin Do what's going on?

Witness the Dynasty!!!
www.shaolindynasty.itgo.com (http://www.shaolindynasty.itgo.com)

[The Willow Sword]

i stated that the techniques i have studied are a revised version of the 108 steps,,we have 30 of these steps combined with each other. yes i am of shaolin-do,,will this be a problem for you to continue disscussion,,or have i already been discredited in your mind,,,,i hope not.
MANY RESPECTS,,WILLOW SWORD

[joedoe]

Based on the clips I saw of Shaolin Do (I haven't seen any Shaolin Do schools in Oz yet), it looked nothing like any Shaolin style I have ever seen. Maybe it was the guy doing the demos, or maybe it is the style, but it didn't even look like a CMA let alone Shaolin.

cxxx[]:::::::::::>
What we do in life echoes in Eternity

[Brad]

Most people's major problem with Sin The is they feel he has lied outright about his MA background. I think you'll have a hard time doing any legetimate research on Shaolin Do, without coming to quite a few negative conclusions about the school and teacher. As to what determines what is Shaolin kungfu and what isn't, the most basic requirement is it has to has to be Chinese(kungfu). You say it's survived but that's not a good reason to judge authenticity on. Chung Moo Doe is still around and it's a recognized cult!

[Radhnoti]

First off, nice to have you aboard TWS...I've been "carrying the torch" so to speak for two or three of the shaolin-do threads.
I'd mentioned before that someone I'd read about had an article that was pretty interesting and others here might want to see it. Before posting portions, I'd like to say that I DON'T know that what this persons says is true IS true. I've e-mailed him multiple times asking for copys but he's never answered. He claims to be a 2nd black once in Shaolin-Do who's now gone over to Master Hiang's style (same thing different brother :D ) As soon as possible, I intend to go to Grandmaster Sin's gym in Lexington and inquire as to whether I could see his 10th black certificate...and perhaps the 5th.
Now with no further ado, SUPPOSEDLY portions of Grandmaster Sin's letter from Grandmaster Ie on the occasion of his receiving his 10th blackbelt:

"Master Ie Chang Ming’s Letter to Sin The’: I was born in love with Wu Shu (martial arts or kung fu). In the early time, I traveled everywhere in China to learn Martial arts, and had been up to North Korea. It has been 50 years since I moved down to south. I had been through a lot of tough times. But when I looked it back, I surely had a lot of unforgettable memory. Now I am presenting you this level ten black belt with red honor strip, on behalf of all the colleagues in this gang. I wish you strictly keep all the rule, and develop the spirit of martial arts. This is what I want to say to you today. Do your best! To My Grandson and Disciple, Sin Kwan, Iron Palm Master Postscript: The three self-defending treasures, which have been with me through my living from place to place, are the Jade Smoking Stick, Drunk Man’s Crutch, and Ancient Money Shaped Son-Mother Biao (a dart like weapon). These three things look like necessaries for common travelers. Nobody will ever pay attention to them. Actually, you never know how powerful they are when you are in danger. They are my precious treasures. But I am already over seventy years old, and I decided not to use these weapons for a long time. Now, I give these to you as gifts. I wish you use them well and keep them properly. About “Biao”, you are better not to use it, because “Biao” is very easy to hurt people, and it is hard to control its direction, and also hard to get it back when you throw it out. So be very careful to it, especially that Son-Mother Baio, and never try to throw it out. Please keep in mind!!! Please!!! "

Now here SUPPOSEDLY is another certificate of advancement that Grandmaster Sin has shown others:

" Sin The’s 5th Degree Black Graduation Certificate Mr. Sin Kwan The’, of the Fu-Chin county, Fukien province, China, age 20, has been studying at our school for ten years. He has finished the three levels of courses as follows: 1) 1954-1955, basic course, earned Blackbelt, 1st level. 2) 1956-1958, middle course, earned Blackbelt, 3rd level. 3) 1959-1963, advanced course, earned Blackbelt, 5th level. He also studied 1) Golden Snake kung fu 2)Cyclone leg kung fu 3)Iron Finger kung fu. His kung fu was excellent and got championship awards from the kung fu contests at our school. He was honored with the best kung fu. This certificate was issued by Chung-Yen Shaolin Kung Fu School. School Master: Ie Chang Ming January 15th, 1964"

The final physical evidence that this person CLAIMS to have is a photo:

"Sin The’ claims that Master Ie died in 1976 throughout the book. But Master Hiang says he died in 1968. Master Hiang says he was even a paw bearer in the funeral, and that he left for the US, after Master Ie died (Master Hiang came to the US in 1968). Well, if Master Hiang’s word is not enough, a photo was taken of Master Ie’s tombstone by a man named Larry Hill, and guess what.....the date of death says 1968"

The person that posted this article claims that the letter AND the certificates are displayed in Grandmaster Sin's main gym in Lexington. The fellow who wrote this carries ON and ON about the differences between what these articles say and what Grandmaster Sin's book says. Dates, numbers of katas, etc. To tell the truth I only cared about ONE difference, and he never even mentioned it. Grandmaster Ie calls his school "Chung-Yen Shaolin Kung Fu School". I thought Grandmaster Ie changed the name to Shaolin-Do to avoid complications in Indonesia? The only way I can rationalize this would be that MAYBE the general public knew it as Shaolin-Do and the trusted students knew it as Chung-Yen Shaolin. Regardless, I feel this should have been mentioned...at least in the history section of his book.
Personally, I am VERY happy with my instructor AND with Shaolin-Do as a style. I believe that Grandmaster Su passed the title to Grandmaster Ie, who then passed the title to Grandmaster Sin.
I've greatly improved my fighting ability and feel healthier and happier then I've ever been in my life. I'm reading Adam Hsu's book right now, in it he defines the characteristics that he believes all Chinese martial arts share. Shaolin-Do (as I have been taught) meets or surpasses all the criteria he sets forth in his book. More importantly, it helps me improve myself and WORKS FOR ME...which is the best measure of a system in my honest opinion.
If anyone is interested I'll post what the author of the article considered to be Grandmaster Sin's inconsistancies. This may seem an odd thing to do when you note that I'm a SUPPORTER of Grandmaster Sin...but I feel that only exposing every angle from which people can attack will satisfy Grandmaster Sin's critics.

-Radhnoti

[GeneChing]

From my position, I see all sorts of martial artists and masters - all levels, all claims, all styles, all the time. I try to remain non-judgemental, since that is not only a good business philosophy, it is my personal view as a Zennist. So with this in mind, let's address the original quesiont a bit...

So what is Shaolin Kungfu vs. non-Shaolin Kungfu? Shaolin is just a name, we shouldn't be attached to it. Certainly we can go into a discussion of technical characteristics, but after so many centuries and so many variations, it's gets to be really muddy really quickly. Many get really possessive of the Shaolin name. I began my shaolin journey with Bak Sil Lum, which looks different than Songshan Shaolin and Shaolin-do. That doesn't bother me at all - in fact I celebrate it.

But, just like the popularization of Buddhism and Yoga now, it gets watered down as it reaches the masses. There is a natural reaction from the dedicated long-time students to say "that's watered down, it's not real" but this is a myopic stance. Who really knows how much water has been added and when?

Popularization of the teachings is great, in fact that's what it's all about. It has to be spoon fed at first, so don't begrudge the young for needing a little water to cut their drink. The biggest master you ever did see was once a baby. Popularization widens the breadth of our pool so we can go deeper. The role of dedicated long-time student is not to be critical of newbie nibblers. Our role is to go deeper. If we fail in that role, there is nothing more we can say.

As for Sin Te, all you need to be a valid teacher is students, and he certainly has those. As for the question of whether his material is real shaolin, well, read above. I was there when he demosntrated at Shaolin Temple, it was very amusing. I also find it amuzing, especially after all the attention he gets on this forum, that his name is Sin. But what's in a name? We shouldn't be attached to it. ;)

Gene Ching
Asst. Publisher
Kungfu Qigong Magazine & www.KUNGFUmagazine.com (http://www.KUNGFUmagazine.com)

[The Willow Sword]

These are very good posts and i thank you for the information and opinions expressed,,EXCEPT for the "dagger hidden in shirt" insult to GM Sin The's first name. that is not something that is recognized by me as respectful..anyway with that said. let me ask rad and gene a couple of questions. RAD: these letters are very intriging. and i am glad that SD works for you. AS
one who has been in the SD school for a while, when you read these posts that speak out against the SD school, does it bar your progress in your training? also, what are your feelings about OTHER schools,in general?

GENE: as an assistant publisher for the kungfu amagazine. being that SIN The' gets alot of attention here,,have you or your people,at the magazine ever considered interviewing him about his school and what he teaches, his history and posing the questions to him that everyone seems to want to pose?

Many respects,,,,willow sword

[Shaolindynasty]

Willow sword- No I will continue to dicuss martial arts with you even though your style is shaolin do, I am in no position to judge anyone else it seems there is some controversy about me too(check ou the "sifus when are they of age" thread). I was just confused. I never have actually seen footage or a performance of Shaolin Do other than a short video on the internet. Willow Sword I would still be interested in trading videos of our styles it would be interesting. Email me if your interested. Are you from KY too there seems to be alot of shaolin do there. Actually my grandparents live in Murry(spelling?)KY maybe I should pay them and shaolin do a visit and see what it is all about.

Gene- What do you mean by it was amusing when he performed at Shaolin? What happened?

Witness the Dynasty!!!
www.shaolindynasty.itgo.com (http://www.shaolindynasty.itgo.com)

[hasayfu]

You ask what makes an art shaolin. As implied in other posts, the art should expound and exhibit some of the core principles of Chinese Martial Arts and have some linkage to the Shaolin tradition.

There are numerous principles to CMAs and if you read the internal/external threads you will get a flavor. All CMAs should have the qualities that the Internal folks claim in those threads but that's another story all together. It's a fact that many of the CMAs taught in America today have lost or hide these traits so it's not a good meter (though one could argue that the "head of system" should have it all)

I've only read one Shaolin-Do book once and what caught me as strange was the lumping of all these styles under one system. Is Sin The saying that all these styles originate under one governing body?

I guess the "fact" you might be looking for is why is there no tie that binds them all together. Go to any of the styles mentioned and you won't see them grouped with the other styles.

Now maybe I have it all wrong, I didn't really follow too closely but it's this line of thinking that casts doubt on Shaolin-Do.

[Shaolindynasty]

This is just my guess as to the mystery of Shaolin Do. I am basing this on what I have heard about it so far and I usually don't believe much I hear so you decide. It is my guess that shaolin do was once what most of you would consider a "shaolin" art and I base this on Sin The's brother. Everyone seems to think he is for real and the techniques he teaches are said to be close to Shaolin Do even though it goes by a different name. With that being said we now need to look at the extra material that is always popping up. I am guessing that Sin The is rushing around all the time collecting more forms to teach since his style is so well spread they don't really need him anymore(scools are everywhere). This would explain the Bad taichi the hsing yi and on their site I saw a seminar for the Damo cane, these are all available on video this could be where he is getting these techniques from. He may be coming up with new forms, etc. to hold on to his following. We have seen this many times in martial arts it is simmalar to holding back info to keep that student coming. His following would not know about this because it is so large and I doubt they all have regular contact with him(I have heard Shaolin Do followers say that "I have met him once"). So the followers are legitamate martial artists they just may not realize what is going on they are not in on some elaborate scheme. Also the fact that the style maybe shaped from authentic shaolin arts makes it more believable. My conclusion would be that Shaolin Do is no different than the hundreds of other styles out there that have been created in recent times by people not really quailified to do so. Like Shaolin Kempo or other eclectic styles and I can't even count the number of schools that exsited in my area that did this and hid behind the lable Jeet Kune Do.
Again this is just my guess I have never seen enough of Shaolin Do to say this as truth it is just a hypothesis. I will have to see it for myself. Willow sword we should really trade those vids.
I will have to go with the saying "Believe half of what you see and nothing you hear" for this one. ;)

Witness the Dynasty!!!
www.shaolindynasty.itgo.com (http://www.shaolindynasty.itgo.com)

[The Willow Sword]

well i live in albuquerque NM (the land of enchantment) in case you all were wondering. the mother school in the SD relm originates in lexington KY. well i cannot trade videos for i do not have any videos of me doing stuff,,,i hate to watch myself do forms,,for i always laugh and say,,who the hell was that? was that me? noooo,,i dont think so,,yet they all say i do well. but in any regard yes if there is a way to get to lexington then go check them out,,,
ok now onto the research project:
Hasayfu,,,so it is the book that you feel casts doubt on the SD school and what it teaches.
well the book gives a body of information that apparently causes some to go "What?" i too as a SD disciple would like to see the "ten thousand bees attacking" form as well as the golden roaches" form too. as i understand the book it gives a curriculum on the different temples and what they taught,,now all of these temples are not shaolin,,,but one CAN speculate that the influence was shaolin so there for a connection can be established(given that the Shaolin temple wasat the forefront of martial arts study,at the time of its peak) okay so now my question to you is this: what schools do you know of that teach the arts described in GM sin The's book? ( with exception to the ones i have mentioned above that i would like to see.) Many Respects,,willow sword

well in response to dynastys post: it is my understanding that GM SIn has a cache of notes that was written down by him as he learned the forms spoken of from GM le chang ming. i have heard of the "watching videos from other styles" mentioned before as a discredit to GM Sin,,yet, in the years that i have been at the school there has not been any legal battles ensued upon the school for stealing anything. so i do not give that claim any credit for there is nothing to back this claim.
shaolin dynasty: what has been said about your school and its teaching?

[This message was edited by The Willow Sword on 06-05-01 at 08:38 PM.]

[Shaolindynasty]

I will take Shaolin Do as authentic until I see other wise.(althoug I have my suspicions) Nothing has been said about my school(we are too small). Forums are inacurate the hypothesis I put together was imformation put together from info collected from them(porbaly not true). I also think that alot of "controversy" on forums attack the most finacially successful schools(coming from an unbiased source we ar poor!). So since there is no way to tell if it is Shaolin other than your word and there is no way to disprove it, well this all comes down to what we all want to beleive. It is not my place to judge your style as much as it is anybody elses most of us don't know anything about it other than what we hear.
Again to everyone,
Believe half of what you see and nothing you hear.

Witness the Dynasty!!!
www.shaolindynasty.itgo.com (http://www.shaolindynasty.itgo.com)

[hasayfu]

From what I remember of the book, it listed things like Tai Chi, Ba Gua, Hsing Yi, Preying Mantis, eagle claw and 8 immortals. All these styles have very rich lineages, some with roots in Shaolin but all post temple origins.

I do remember something about grouping these from different temples and if i remember correctly, he claims all of them to be shaolin. Even mountains like o-mei and wudang which don't claim any affiliation in their histories.

Also, as you say, all these are supposedly in the curriculm and taught by The. It's an overwhelming amount of material so one wonders if he really knows it or knows it well. Also, nothing in the histories tie all the sets together so how did he come to know them all?

That could lead to the video claim (sorry I don't know what that is) if it means that he learned from a video and then teaches the set.

[Radhnoti]

"AS one who has been in the SD school for a while, when you read these posts that speak out against the SD school, does it bar your progress in your training? also, what are your feelings about OTHER schools,in general?"

I CERTAINLY don't feel it bars my progress or training. My typical overall feeling when someone is trashing Shaolin-Do is mild frustration...I don't think anyone who came and sat in on one of MY instructor's classes could say such negative things. The training is hard, focusing on application and form, and including sparring, etc.
Based on my own experiences I have to dismiss statements like BeiKongHui's asserting that Shaolin-Do students can't fight. I've seen SD students in sparring, tourneys and HEARD of actual fights...they do well, very well. In my mind the effectiveness of the system and the HISTORY of the system are two completely different things. Grandmaster Sin could step forth tomorrow and say, "Ok, I don't know 900+ forms to the point of MASTERY, and I changed the name of the system to Shaolin-Do when I got to the U.S. to capitalize on the then current karate craze. By the way, I've modified the system slightly since it was taught to me by my grandfather, as is my right as the Grandmaster, to include some very wonderful things other styles were doing. This is after all VERY in keeping with the spirit of form collecting and catagorizing done by the original Shaolin temples." And I'd still feel I was studying a very complete and well organized system, even without all the history we've been given. (Note: I'm not saying that I think all that, but many outside the style do seem to pick at those specific things quite a bit.) In fact, I've studied Shorin-Ryu Karate, small circle jujitsu, judo, aikido and MMA and Shaolin-Do is by FAR the most realistic and effective martial art I've run across (hardest training too).

My feelings about other schools? I think martial art training is a very personal thing...a personal thing with a few universal truths that come forth when you find the right school (and instructor) for you. I have a nephew sorely lacking for discipline, if he went to the local TKD school and found the structured classes and stern instructor there gave him the discipline he lacked then I'd say he found the best school for him. My aunt lacks confidence. If she went to the local judo club and throwing someone across the room improved her self esteem, then I think she found the school she needed as well. I think most schools offer SOMETHING, the trick is finding out if the something they offer is the something you need.

-Radhnoti

[BeiKongHui]

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[This message was edited by BeiKongHui on 06-06-01 at 11:22 AM.]

[GeneChing]

ws: OK sorry for that sin pun. I just can't resist bad puns.
In our Mar/Apr issue we ran a story about the Southern Shaolin Temple by David Theroff. The southern temple has always been of interest so we thought our readers would find it worthy. David discussed his master Sin Te and the backlash was incredible, the worst we have had for any single master. Personally, I was astounded that our readers had so many issues with Sin Te that they overlooked the southern temple. They could see the young forest for the TrEe. OK another bad pun, but I gotta throw 'em done here becasue Martha edits me in the mag.

SD: I don't feel comfortable discussing that story here. Let me leave it at this - I hold a lot of secrets, more than I care too AND there are other members of this forum who were there and might be more willing to retell it, but you'll have to find them.

Also, in regards to your reply to hasayfu, even the best masters might pull a form off video. Remember I see the accounts of almost 20,000 schools at Tiger Claw, so if I really want to, I can see who orders what and how it affects their curriculam. Personally, I don't see anything wrong with that - research is research and I would be skeptical of any master who stops their research. Your point is well taken, but its sort of a hand-w/o-Sin-casts-the-1st-stone problem. Was that another pun? At least it was biblical...
;)

Gene Ching
Asst. Publisher
Kungfu Qigong Magazine & www.KUNGFUmagazine.com (http://www.KUNGFUmagazine.com)

[Shaolindynasty]

Gene- You are right about the videos. I personally watch them to pick up some finer details of Kungfu and learn more about my martial cousins. I personally find it very difficult to learn an entire form from a video but that doesn't mean it can't be done. I personally think that someone who does learn a form from a video without ever have teken a lesson from the master who created the video shouldn't teach it though. The only info would be taken from the video and which would you rather learn from, someone who only learned from video or someone like your Sifu Wing Lam who learned directly from the masters of the styles he is teaching.

Witness the Dynasty!!!
www.shaolindynasty.itgo.com (http://www.shaolindynasty.itgo.com)

[The Willow Sword]

this is the kind of discussions that i feel make this forum worthy of staying on. in my resaerch so far the things that i have come up with are interesting; most have a problem with the claims
GM Sin has made in his book. that seems to be the focal point of the whole SD thing. Also the forms themselves not being of true Shaolin origin.
Purity is the issue here: regardless of how one thinks the martial ability of SD students and masters. i have yet to recieve any info regarding the illegitimacy of what GM Sin claims.
remember i am not looking for what i call "common sense opinions" i am looking for facts. for me facts are documentation/pictures/revealed secrets/etc.
now here is a question for all of you:
if you could sit down with Sin The' and ask him
questions(in a respectful manner) what would you ask him? try to think of it as that you both are in a resteraunt with bottomless pot of green tea chatting.(without his or your students looming overhead)
many respects, willow sword.
oh what i would ask him: would you like another cup of tea sir?

[GeneChing]

sd: Actually Lam Sifu learns quite a bit from video and books. He trained intensively in HK under his various Sifus until his late teens, and has taken an occasional lesson since (most notably from Sun Jianyun) but he is constantly reading and watches videos to further his research.
Personally for me, after writing over 100 videos, it's really hard for me to sit down and watch them any more. I have a whole stack right next to my desk here that are awaiting review.

ws: Glad you're enjoying the forum. It can be real fun as long as you don't take the trolls seriously.
So what to ask Sin Te? Hmmm, just one question? That's tough. In an interview I would react to his answers, so it would be more dynamic. But one question...
"Do you subscribe to Kungfu Qigong?"
;)

Gene Ching
Asst. Publisher
Kungfu Qigong Magazine & www.KUNGFUmagazine.com (http://www.KUNGFUmagazine.com)

[Ground Dragon]

I think what would be even better would be for Sin The' to prove what he has already said, with documentation etc. You can't go around making the claims and boasts that he does without expecting to come under some sort of fire.
I don't think very many people have documentation to disprove anything, but then again, Sin doesn't have any documentation to prove anything either. And common sense, history, general martial arts knowledge and the accounts of other people go against him.
The thing with Sin The' lifting forms off of videos is he is doing it in large amounts, like the entirety of the seven star praying mantis
material he has been teaching at seminars.
Also, it's one thing to pull a form off a video, it's another thing to go that extra step and pass it off as your own and say it was handed
down to you from your teacher and it came from the shaolin temple.
In my opinion these things are not harmless. Not in the sheer volume and outlandishness we are talking about here.
Think about it this way. For a long time material that was taught out could not be found anywhere else. None of the original material could be found at other schools, on videos etc. But a lot of the newer material that has been taught out in recent years can easily be found on video. And this started even before the advent of the internet. And as far as not hearing about anyone suing him for 'stealing' material, I doubt if that is even possible. Oh wait a minute, Sin would know about that. He tried to sue a former student of his for material. But the case was dismissed when his brother had notes for the same material, and then had notes for material he didn't have. And then Sin pulls seven star praying mantis out of the air?
The only people that will vouch for Sin The' and his stories and claims, are his students, and that is like saying John Gotti is a good guy because his mother said so (not that I'm comparing Sin to Gotti at all).
You would expect his followers to stand up for him.
It's the total lack of external respect that is telling.

[This message was edited by Ground Dragon on 06-06-01 at 04:14 PM.]

[This message was edited by Ground Dragon on 06-06-01 at 04:17 PM.]

[MonkeySlap Too]

I am more interested in what wasn't said. Who else was at the temple when The' was there? I'd love to hear the story.

For the poor folks in SD: SOmetimes it is hard to see how big your box is when you are inside the box.

I am a big beleiver in luck. The more I work, the more luck I have.

[joedoe]

I don't know what Shaolin Do are like as fighters, and I don't know their training methods. They may be good fighters and they may train very hard. All I can say is that what I saw on the video clips, and what I read of the style says "Not Shaolin" to me. I may be wrong, but that is my gut feel on this.

cxxx[]:::::::::::>
What we do in life echoes in Eternity

[The Willow Sword]

Please, if you will, outline the videos you claim GM Sin is "allegedly" borrowing/stealing from?
give me titles and authors of videos and where i can view these videos.
many respects,,,Willow Sword

[Radhnoti]

Grandmaster Sin was never at the temple...er, not studying anyway Monkeyslap Too. I'm not even sure that the shaolin-do history claims that Grandmaster Ie was there.
Ground Dragon, I do have a question for you. Why doesn't YOUR Grandmaster (Grandmaster Sin's brother) step up and do an article in KFQ telling about HIS life? He was right there training beside Grandmaster Sin, the article wouldn't have to be an assault on Shaolin-Do, just his perspective. (I GUESS he could leave out the fact that Grandmaster Sin was the one who was handed the title Grandmaster as well...but that would seem kind of sour grapes.) I have to admit Master Hiang's students attacking shaolin-do is to me the height of hypocrisy. Newsflash: Your school was started by a breakaway faction of shaolin-do students. Any attacks you launch toward Grandmaster Sin can only reflect badly upon your own Grandmaster...after all HE HELPED MAKE SHAOLIN-DO WHAT IT IS TODAY. He's still very respected by the upper echelon shaolin-do students I've talked to who learned from him.

-Radhnoti

[The Willow Sword]

Lets not turn this into bash fest or ego posturing, please. all i will say is that issue is between the brothers and that is where it must stay,,it is NONE of our buisiness.
Many respects, willow sword

[The Willow Sword]

well i just got finished reading ALL of the SD related posts,,,and i am about finished with the research project..now all i need is a few more things,,then i will make my final post on the subject. whew this has been tiresom, to say the least.
Many respects,willow sword.

[Ground Dragon]

Willow Sword -
I seem to remember more than one website with these videos for sale. One in particular I remember is Jon Funk's site (just do a search for it). Seven star praying mantis seems to be fairly widespread, I'm sure there are other sites. Point being, they are readily available.
For your research project, you may want to get in touch with the folks over at cyberkwoon.com (sorry for the rival plug Gene), I know at least one person there did some research on it.
Radhnoti-
I want to clarify something with you. I am not attacking the style, nor have I ever, just one specific person. Now if I came out and said shaolin-do was worthless and a waste of time, etc, that would be approaching hypocritical. However, I still wouldn't recommend the style to people because of Sin The', and that is the only reason. I am not calling into question your abilities, material (except for the video subject) or your teacher's abilities. While you may be willing to study a style headed by a man that likes to exaggerate (to put it kindly), I don't think most people would find that a positive trait. If someone can fudge the truth on one thing, what's to keep them from doing it on another?
When Master Hiang came to this country, he taught on his own at first. He was his own man, and had his own students. It was later on that the brothers taught together. When the brothers split, it was not 'a break away faction of shaolin do'. Far from it. The students that went with him were by and far students that had been with him and students that studied primarily under him. He doesn't use the name shaolin do because that name was a creation of Sin The' when he came to this country. We are tied to each other in terms of history, where some of the material comes from and the relation of the heads of our respective systems, but we are not a faction of shaolin do.
As to him writing an article. Why? He has nothing to prove. He doesn't go around making any certain claims about himself. And besides I can't speak for him. There are no sour grapes on his part, he just wants to teach. Appearing in a magazine would be out of character for him I would think. He is not very self promoting and anyone that knows him or has had experience with him would tell you the same. This whole mess of a thread that's going on right now? I would venture to say he could care less.
Now with all that being said, I would much rather have discussions with you and willow sword about more productive things.

[Radhnoti]

Fair enough GD.

-Radhnoti

[hasayfu]

Hi WillowSword,

First let me say I have nothing for or against SD. I'm approaching this topic from a purely academic POV since you asked for it.

OK, you state you have not seen FACTs against SD and only logical opinions. We'll ignore the fact (pun intended) that inference is a legal form of proof but at this point, it's hard for for me to give you fact when there hasn't been any definitions laid out. So what does SD claim?

Look at Radhnoti's what if post. This is the crux of the matter. If Sin did say the things in the what if, there wuld be no problem. But since he didn't say those things, there is a problem with him claiming a deep and rich history when most of it really started with him.

It would be like Bruce Lee saying that JKD was an ancient system handed down to him in secret when really it was what he made up. So the only part I disagree with the what if is saying it keeps with the shaoling tradition of collecting. It would be if he was honest in where they collecting was from.

[MonkeySlap Too]

I'm talking about Sins visit to the temple. It was alluded that it was....amusing.

I am just curious because I collect fraudulent martial arts history. Its a hoot.

Chung Moo Do anyone?

I am a big beleiver in luck. The more I work, the more luck I have.

[BeiKongHui]

If all the Shaolin-Do people are so sure of the The' brothers facts why don't you (SD people) ask one of them to come onto this forum and defend their claims?

"Gong Sao Mo Gong Ching Sao"
- When you talk with the hands,
best not to speak of polite hands.

[The Willow Sword]

I do this research for my own purposes. the fact that GM Sin will not address this forum makes no difference to me. He will not,, so i will as a loyalist to the system. HOWEVER, being a loyalist to the SD school i am in no means obligated to speak for anyone other than myself in this matter. This is what i will say about what I FEEL the SD school is: It is a hybrid system of martial arts combining that of hard and soft elements of chinese kung-fu and japanese style techniques. The SD school is a modernized school that traces its ROOTS back to the Shaolin Temple.
IS SD shaolin kung fu? NO(in my opinion) it is Shaolin-DO kung-fu. In my opinion about the book that GM Sin and james halladay wrote,,,could have been better. i think that another book is in order. As fars as what GM Sin claims as heritage and lineage, that is what he claims. There are questions to be asked about it. We all, in the martial arts relm, claim a hertiage of some sort,,either from shaolin temple or elswhere. as for the video thing; i am looking into it,,,im not quite finished yet with the research. please note: That I AM NOT doing this to disclaim GMSIN or to go against my school.
i do this for i really need to understand the feelings here and get the info i need to help ME with MY school. I feel that in my heart that i am an honest person and a good teacher and i would love to have a kindredship with all of you. for i am not an isolationist. thisis the community to which i have put myself into and i would like to be respected as i respect all of you and your lineages and systems. what i have accumilated and studied and lived for the past 15 yrs comes from several sources,,,one being SD and that being the bulk of what i have learned. And i want to learn more. when i stste that i mean that i want to learn more about what i do interms of internal systems and share knowlege and new/old ideas realized. this is why i am leading this discussion. ,,,,,,i will post my final say on this subject soon,,,,,then i will move onto more "productive things" as one member posted earlier. Many Respects,,Willow Sword.

[BeiKongHui]

So which kata teaches you the Sixth Sense that Sin The' claims to have? When do you learn to swim with your chest muscles like the GM?

"Gong Sao Mo Gong Ching Sao"
- When you talk with the hands,
best not to speak of polite hands.

[UberShaman]

I myself would rather see the Golden Cockroach form, Ive always wondered if that form was created in case you were attacked in a kitchen. For those of you who think I'm making it up. This is actually the the highest form in Shaolin-do!!

[honorisc]

At the beginning you asked for facts. The first page here and the third seem to be oppinions conjecture, supposition well more than facts. It is a fact that these people think they are right or are saying something significant.

Do is a Japanese term--Shoa-Lin is not Japanese

There have been no belts in Kung-Fu--SD ranks by belt

When there is ranking in Kung-Fu it is by sash.

The sash can function as does a weight belt.

Very some such,perhaps might have been, likely say some, some not.

[MonkeySlap Too]

While I find Shaolin-Do disapointing and not legitimate CMA, the points you make are not valid.
Teachers that have come to the US have mangaled thier languages to attract Americans so many times it doesn't even phase me anymore. (But a Chinese art using Japanese terms is unusual - never heard of the rape of Nanking, eh?)

Chang Tung Sheng insituted a belt ranking system. He is a traditional Chinese teacher. I'm not going to argue this. While most traditional schools lack any formal ranking 'system', there is almost always a form of hierarchy. Includeing sash colors, or even, gosh darn it belts.

So that does not disprove it.

The biggest arguments against SD is the material itself. The body language of its 'masters' shows a lack of any, well CMA knowledge.

As more and more becomes available on video, I am sure this will change ;).

The other argument is the complete BS history propagated by Sin The', and the ridiculous claims that go along with it.

Legit guys like Wai Lun Choi have the PRC calling them to return so that thier knowledge isn't lost in the PRC. If Sin The' was really what he says, he woulkd be treated as something other than an amusing source of income by the PRC.

I am a big beleiver in luck. The more I work, the more luck I have.