Please help, bit contraversial but i'd like honest opinions

[bungle]

Hi
I'm new here and i have a few niggling doubts about modern day shaolin i'd like to sort out in my head. I don't currently practice a martial art but i have been considering shaolin merely because of what i have read about it. Up until recently i thought shaolin must be the dogs bollocks. Movies, fan sites and certain info on the web all point to shaolin as being truly spectacular. Even my teachers at lau gar traced their roots to the shaolin temple.

I began to doubt modern views on shaolin after reading "barefoot zen". This made me look into buddhism more deeply. That hasn't helped either. I wonder if you guys encountered similar problems and convinced your self otherwise?

The questions are:
1. What do you guys think of barefoot zen?
2. Buddhists, arn't they supposed to be non violent and yet they train with weapons etc...
3. I'm currently reading an article called the 7 worlds of chan. So far the author made it pretty clear there was a hell a lot of buddhist corruption within china. Did the shaolin temple escape this corruption?
4. It makes sense that many of our ideas about shaolin could stem from the nationlistic propaganda of the qing dynasty. Do you think this had any effect on modern day shaolin?
5. I can see how martial arts can give benefit as a form of physical exercise but the exercises described in barefoot zen seem even more suited to this goal of moving meditation. What do you think?

Thanks for any help. I am a bit of a beginner when it comes to shaolin knowledge so please go easy. I really don't have a fixed point of view, even though it seems like it some of the time.

One last thing. Please try to be objective and honest. I know it is hard to be objective about things you love and dedicate your life to.

[bodhitree]

The way I understand it (which may not count for much) is that the first thing developed at shaolin was Yi Jin Jing. It was created to improve the health of the monks, however they discovered the side effects that it made them stronger. At that time in China there were warlords, outlaws and bandits, so the Kung Fu was practiced not by all the monks, but by some and there goal was altruistic defence and not defence of self. I have read some monks then left the temple and used there fighting skills for selfish reasons, so they became more discriminant in the moral qualities of the monks they chose to teach to. As for the rest I don't know:)

[wall]

1. don't know too much about it.

2. yes, however Shaolin developed somewhat detached, as it permitted a number of teachings, and adopted a number of rules, which were/are not completely aligned with mainstream Buddism. Such as combat training, weapons, eating meat, etc.
Combat training and weapons were however dispensed in a very "Buddist" way, meaning they were to be used solely for defense and to protect the weak, not for aggression or to exert control.

3. no, in fact Shaolin today seems to be quite embroiled in serious corruption, ranging from dilution of content to government control to tourist interests shaping Shaolin evolution. Fear not however, in the current generations of monks there are still quite a few "true" Shaolin monks, possessing substantial traditional martial arts knowledge and skill.

4. can't say, but Shaolin was there long before and has survived long after.

5. Shaolin martial arts started as physical exercises for standing meditation and post-meditation recovery and health, but gradually evolved towards total control of the body, for the purpose of meditation, fortitude, and defense of the temple against bandits and other assorted nasties which were rather common back then.

Hope that helps :)

[bungle]

thanks. I like the way your put that. The main niggling doubt is the evidence from barefoot zen. The author looked at some core sets from karate and white crane kung fu and realised they worked much better as grappling sets. He basically says the sets contained techniques for two man meditation using sticky hands. He goes into some lovely detail on why and how this exercise is beneficial for zen monks.

I have asked people about this book before though and i realised it is best not to judge the book until you have read it.

He seemed to think current shaolin is a distortion of the truth which has been promoted by nationalistic chinese. In some ways it is all too easy to understand how and why this might happen too. Can anyone counter his arguments?

[bungle]

that first reply was to bodhitree. thanks wall.

Good points. It seems that the current shaolin monks could be under the illusion that they are practicing genuine shaolin kung fu. The author seems to think the corruption goes all the way back to the first burning of the temple.

Bandits and the like seems to be the usual reason for the monks to develop a martial art. Although it seems slightly inadequate for some reason. If shaolin was rich why couldn't they hire guards? If they were poor and self suffficient, why the target of bandits?

http://www.zenshorindo.com/
It's not as good as the book but still, things are explained to an extent here for those who havn't read the book. Vids are interesting...

[wall]

Bungle,

I believe there is written (manuscripts) and artistic (as in mural paintings and sculptures/engravings) evidence of the monks practicing martial arts and engaging in combat, dating to well before the first burning of the temple.

I cannot recall exact dates and I'm at work (thus away from books right now :) ) but I'm quite sure some manuscripts and paintings survived the burning(s) and are therefore much older.
Thus I guess that there is unrefutable evidence of the monks genuine martial studies and their accomplishments in that field, beyond the anecdotal evidence.

Weather what we see today is a gradual "corruption" of the original ..... well I think noone could truly tell us that: after all, the line itself between 'corruption' and 'natural change' is very blurred when we are talking about something that has evolved for many centuries under drastically evolving times, regimes, lifestyles, politics, etc.

Certainly the monks at Shaolin developed amazing physical disciplines, firstly for meditation and recovery, then for fortitude of body and mind, and subsequently for defense.
Certainly they achieved amazing prowess, successfully engaging in combat to defend themselves and others (including an emperor), and introducing a discipline which then spread through the population, reaching all corners of Asia (in various modified forms).
Certainly this disciplines survived and evolved over many centuries, sometimes promoted others repressed, sometimes improved others corrupted. And they made it to today, perhaps somewhat altered but certainly alive and never more globally popular.

I guess anything else other than the above certainties will be forever a source of speculation, controversy, debate and uncertainty. Like a lot of things in martial arts, and like a lot of things which are thousands of years old :)

Wall

[bungle]

yeah, i wouldn't mind training in shaolin kung fu. I read the book though and it left me in doubt. I decided i had a choice to make between the two. That's why i'm on these forums looking for answers. I would love to hear from someone who has read the book and who could refute all the author has said. The next best thing would be a simple opinion from someone who has also read the book.

For those who havn't read the book, do you think these murals could of depicted the sticky hand sets? Any links to evidence of martial art activity before the first burning? If any of you are interested i could write the authors points straight out of his book for you to refute. It would take a while...Depends if you guys are really interested. I guess most of you have little doubt and are pretty content.

[MasterKiller]

As far as I know, the first major burning was in 845 A.D.

In 621 A.D., however, 13 monks rescued Emperor Li ShiMin, the proof of which is a carved tablet from the emperor located at Shaolin giving the monks certain rights, such as drinking wine and eating meat.

If my dates are correct, then Martial Arts were present at Shaolin at least 200 years before the first destruction.

At the end of the day...what difference does it make?

Studying kung fu makes me more complete, more healthy, and more intune with myself.

Even if smurfs from Uzbakistan invented Shaolin Kung Fu in 1973, it still does not take diminish the effects I feel through practice.

As for your original questions:

1. Never read barefoot zen.

2. The Shaolin monks kill in battle to "send the souls of their enemies to heaven"; that is, to kill them before they do evil to others and corrupt themselves. One must chose between the lesser of two evils. As a Buddhist, you are also responsible for what you don't do. That is, if you don't try to stop a bad thing from occurring you are also responsible for it's consequences.

3. Did the shaolin temple escape this corruption? I don't think every monk who ever donned a robe had good intentions. Do a search for Pak Mei.

4. It's possible.

5. In the West, we tend to think of meditation as a devotional exercise in contemplation of spirituality. Ch'an simplifies this concept considerably. Meditation simply means to be fully aware of the moment. This is not as easy as it appears. Your mind is always processing your sense perceptions, constantly contributing to mental noise. We all have that internal dialog, which inhibits our complete awareness of the moment with a head filled with presumptions and distractions. To be in the moment, all of these delusions dissolve and what remains is what it is. This is why doing nothing and practicing kung fu (in a sense doing everything) can both be acts of meditation. To a Ch'an Buddhist, any act can be meditation if you are in the moment. Although these paths may seem totally different, ultimately they are one and the same.

[weightvest]

Hi, I am quite new to this forum and I 'd like to answer these questions. I have so often seen people connect kungfu with violence of Shaolin. The key is working out EXACTLY what kungfu is/was for us and them.

1. What do you guys think of barefoot zen?

I have no idea what that is.

2. Buddhists, arn't they supposed to be non violent and yet they train with weapons etc...

The key to buddhism is that you can't be buddhist and call yourself buddhist. That is a contradiciton. The way of buddhism is to understand to "be" and that life just "is" - to call yourself a Buddhist is to label and therefore no longer just "be". The other part is then understanding what is a "fight"? To me a fight is anything that is a conflict: an argument, paying bills on time (the hardest fight of all!), the general hardships of life. Kungfu as practised by the Shaolin was a discpline. They lived by it day and night. It was their way. It was discipline in getting up at 5am (ouch!) and not being grmpuy about it, it was labouring all day long, using the forms and movements as best how to workout achieving success in "life". For example, in our world getting a parking ticket could be expressed as a punch. It is a punch we cannot defeat by physical strength, but by mental/emotional strength... in modern combat, if a good hit is coming and you know it, and you know you aren't strong enough to defeat it, what do you do? Move out of the way. So, upon getting the parking ticket, how not to get angry? Strength of mind and emotion to just be able to "let it go", to let the pain of getting the ticket go past you and forget about it. this is the way Shaolin used kungfu. By becoming adept in these arts, they could shed the biggest burdens we as humans have - fear, guilt, anger, sadness. When we reach emotional harmony, we don't cause harm to others anyway, so these four emotions are simply products. All emotions that cause us problems every day - yet how many schools have you seen that encourage anger and fear, practsing screaming, angry face, smash plank HOMER MAAAD! yet we all know deep inside not one of the master we ever see becomes agry or fearful. Instead he remains calm, almost emotionless. This then must be what a true master is, one who has mastered HIMSELF (or herself, excet my woman's a bit moody so good luck to her!) - has mastered his emotions.

Therefore, Shaolin now have two skills: emotional mastery and in your question "weapons" mastery. They could then make the decision to handle any situation as necessary.

Did they just jump in and cut off peoples heads? Not likely (unlike now when every Shaolin teacher i meet screams "I am Wong Fei Hung... DIIEEEEEEEE")

So they could then give time to decide the purest action to take for the given circumstance. In life, good and evil do not physically exist, everything lives in perpective.

3. I'm currently reading an article called the 7 worlds of chan. So far the author made it pretty clear there was a hell a lot of buddhist corruption within china. Did the shaolin temple escape this corruption?

Not all of them. They were human afterall, just as prone to weakness as the next man. However, as you probably know, those that escaped the final corruption (burning) went underground to become our modern day Triads.

4. It makes sense that many of our ideas about shaolin could stem from the nationlistic propaganda of the qing dynasty. Do you think this had any effect on modern day shaolin?

Of course. What doesn't effect Shaolin? I haven't met a single Shaolin teacher who doesn't think he's immune to bullets. Plus we all percieve Shaolin to be some supreme art intended only for beating the daylights out of someone. It wasn't and is not, when studied correctly (see above bit).

5. I can see how martial arts can give benefit as a form of physical exercise but the exercises described in barefoot zen seem even more suited to this goal of moving meditation. What do you think?

Haven't read barefoot zen, but again excercise in kungfu is buddhism: perspective. It depends on what you want. fopr example, a long distance runner needs to work aeorbically; a sprinter needs to work anaerobically (is that the right way round?). While the art has some reflection on level of fitness, you can practise any art for the purpose you so desire: e.g The forms in Chin Woo can be practised for performance, therefore you need to practise fitness in them for competition. you may, on the toher hand, want it for burst fighting, in which case you can practsie it hard and fast (not being technically correct, just giving example).

Hope this helps in some shape or form.

[bungle]

yes thanks guys. You cleared a lot of things up. Looks like i'll give the old shaolin a go. See what i think. Only problem is, i'm in leicester, UK and shi Yanzi is in London UK which makes a little bit difficult...

Thanks guys. Oh and if you guys happen to read barefoot zen if you could post a review, i'd be grateful.

[weightvest]

Geeze-Louise you got it easy! I have to fly out from Australia to UK twice a year to get my lessons!

[sweaty_dog]

"In 621 A.D., however, 13 monks rescued Emperor Li ShiMin, the proof of which is a carved tablet from the emperor located at Shaolin giving the monks certain rights, such as drinking wine and eating meat."

I have heard this as well. The thing is, if some Catholic priests rescue the president from terrorists, and he says they can ignore their vows of chastity, does that mean it's OK with God for all the priests from their seminary to sleep around? Eating meat, drinking and fighting seem pretty **** "un Buddhist" to me. As far as I can tell Shaolin monks were like the Christian priests that used to go into battle, but used clubs to kill people so they weren't technically "drawing blood". You can try to bend religious teaching however you like, but priests are still not meant to do that stuff.

[MasterKiller]

Eating meat, drinking and fighting seem pretty **** "un Buddhist" to me.

The Buddha died from eating bad meat. Was he being un-buddhist when he ate it?

Meat and wine should be avoided, but you're not going to burn in hell for doing it, whether you are a priest or not. Even Jesus said it's not what goes into a man's mouth that defiles him, it's what comes out. It's not like they were given permission to screw little boys....that would make them Catholics.

And even though killing is wrong, you have a right to protect yourself from danger.

[GeneChing]

I'll address those original questions.

1. I haven't read barefoot zen, but I remember Zen Shaolin Karate - it was such an odd title mixing Japanese and Chinese, kind of like alfredo teriyaki ravioli. I'll take a look at it as soon as someone kicks me down a free copy.

2. The violent/nonviolent paradox is always tricky for the Shaolin sect or any sect of monastic warriors (there are many others beyond Shaolin.) The easy out is taking Bodhidharma literally. The reason we are supposed to kill is because all sentient being possess Buddha nature, but Bodhidharma beleived in icchantikas - beings that were so wrapped up in illusion that they couldn't attain Buddha nature - they could be killed. Of course, this is the easy out and it's completely wrong. A more palpable solution is the warrior as a metaphor. A more mythic solution is manifestations of Manjushri.

3. There is a lot of corruption in all religions. The spiritual path is the razors edge, and many of us get cut along the way. Shaolin certainly has not escaped that. But corruption does not invalidate a religion or we'd have nothing left to beleive in.

4. The Qing was actually pretty anti-Shaolin. Actually, it was against any organized group that was not their own, so all sorts of religions fell prey to their domination. If anything, the influence of the Qing exhalted Shaolin as a righteous rebel.

5. Again, I haven't read barefoot zen. Perhaps I should. It sounds funny.

[bungle]

Thanks guys. Gene in your answer to the qing question. I was reffering to the underground nationalists that formed such groups as the triads and white lotus.

I'd be very interested to know what you thought of barefoot zen. Take a quick look at the site, it explains the basics. They do three sets. Originally the sets were thought to be block strike sets but the author believes they're grappling sets. His book is a lot more convincing however. He does seem to know what he's talking about...

http://www.zenshorindo.com/

You can see the three sets they use and how they use them in the vid section.

If any of you are interested maybe we could start a new thread where we can look at the authors arguments. At the end of the day he is in directly saying shaolin kung fu today has gone way off track and isn't really in line with buddhism.

[sweaty_dog]

MasterKiller, I am curious... have you actually killed people? Or is it just something you feel you might have a talent for? The buddha might have died from eating meat, but most chinese buddhist monks would have been expelled from their monasteries for eating it.

This is what Wong Kiew Wit has to say about it;
"Different people may have different views regarding modern Shaolin "monks" eating meat and drinking alcohol. Personally I feel that as eating meat and drinking alcohol are cardinal sins in Mahayana Buddhism, and if they are Mahayana monks, they would be blatantly disrespecting their sacred monastic order by openly flouting its rules. If a monk cannot resist worldly temptations like eating meat and drinking alcohol, he should leave his monkhood."

As far as your comment about Catholic priests being paedophiles goes, that kind of thing is hardly unknown among Buddhists either. Very classy comment, by the way. Personally I take all religions with a BIG grain of salt, regardless of how "exotic" they may seem.

[richard sloan]

WKK is not a Shaolin Monk. Nor does he seem to know much about them, unless you don't know much about them, then he seems to know quite a bit. His grip on reality seems tenuous at best sometimes as well, what with him dispersing clouds and making people move involuntarily by sending his chi to them. I'm not sure why he would be used as a source of commentary on something he is not, or for something he obviously knows little about. I once asked him if he could explain or discuss the merging of Confucian/Buddhist principles in the Shaolin discipleship ceremony and he had no idea what I was talking about. This is easy enough to see on your own, much less if you are a gong fu "Grandmaster" 4th generation removed from your very own Shaolin monk.

He once blasted them for not having cleanly shaved heads, when traditionally they shave once a month. So as you can see he's basically pretty ignorant of Shaolin monks, even though he claims a close martial heritage to one. Since he was never given a dharma name as part of a transmission from this monk, it seems pointless to look to him for commentary.

Complicating the mix is that he doesn't seem to understand the concept of the heshang or wuseng, and there really isn't a clear line of distinction between the two anyway. I've eaten with quite a few monks. Sometimes they eat meat. While Chinese monastic Buddhists are very strict, and may have even changed some of the sutras to favor this strict interpretation of the buddhist canon, buddhism itself is rife with examples of monastics who eat meat. In the other traditions outside of Mahayana, even the Dalai Lama consumes animal flesh. As stated elsewhere, the Buddha died of tainted boar's meat. There is some research to suggest it was a truffle or something that was only called Boar's something or other, but that view ignores the role of the Mythic Boar. You should try to be more open and not so inflexible.

Bungle you get around don't you!? Russbo wasn't enough eh, heh heh heh...

From within the context of Shaolin temple, there is no contradiction of practicing gong fu and practicing Ch'an Buddhism. It's pretty much as simple as that. Ch'an Chuan Yi Ti.

The author seems to make it out that monks train to be fighters and murderers, and that just is not the case.

[sweaty_dog]

Hey one Shaolin guy is much the same as another to me... I think I might have just quoted kung fu's answer to Mat Furey/Ashida Kim though!:( Mind you, I have heard more than one person say that due to the temple being burnt down and all the monks chased out so often, the tradition is stronger outside the temple than in it now.

Anyway, I think there are a lot of people who love anything Shaolin related because it is far away enough to let them project all their ideas of "oriental mysticism" onto it... they can be enlightened and a cool tough guy all at once. Like I said, I take all religions with a grain of salt, especially the ones that don't follow their own principles and have something to sell. I would have doubts about a bunch of people claiming to be the descendents of the Knights of St John and teaching genuine crusade-era sword technique, same goes for Shaolin. Not that it is all fake, just possibly diluted and wu shu-ised. Mind you the tendon changing classic is OK... although I prefer Taoist chi gung.

[MasterKiller]

MasterKiller, I am curious... have you actually killed people? Or is it just something you feel you might have a talent for?

"Shaolin MasterKiller" is the American title for "Enter the 36th Chamber." Gordon Lui, the guy in my avatar, is the actor, and is usually referred to as "The Master Killer" in U.S. articles about KF flicks. He also starred in "Return to the 36th Chamber", or better known in America as "Return of the MasterKiller."

My name has no bearing on whether or not I feel affluent in taking human life. It is an ode to the movie.


As far as your comment about Catholic priests being paedophiles goes, that kind of thing is hardly unknown among Buddhists either. Very classy comment, by the way.

What do you expect from someone calling themself MasterKiller?

Poetry?

Haiku?

Perhaps a novel? (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0887392040/qid=1054758109/sr=2-2/ref=sr_2_2/103-9320033-2695068)

[bungle]

yep, i try to get as much info on a subject from as many different sources as possible.

Sweaty. You make a good point but on the other hand if these monks are training their minds to such a high level i'm sure they would have little trouble using their ingenuity to make sure the shaolin art is passed on faithfully.

That doesn' t mean, of course, that their students wouldn't corrupt the system..It's all just one big confusing mess...

I am still waiting for an expert opinion on barefoot zen though. Still havn't had one and i'm still waiting for one....

Anyone know any other sites good for this sort of info?

[sweaty_dog]

"What do you expect from someone calling themself MasterKiller?"

I expect them to be really good at killing people.


"Sweaty. You make a good point but on the other hand if these monks are training their minds to such a high level i'm sure they would have little trouble using their ingenuity to make sure the shaolin art is passed on faithfully"

The way I see it is, the teacher who knows all the details gets an axe in the head, and the half taught student runs off then comes back later and has to start teaching because he is suddenly the most qualified. I have heard that something like that happened in the cultural revolution, but who knows.

[r.(shaolin)]

From the 400's onwards Northern Chinese Buddhism cultivated a close relations with Imperial governments in particularly with the so called foreign dynasties including the Qing. This was particularly true of the, large public monasteries in the north like Shaolin Si. Buddhism in great centers like Lo-yang, or close to imperial capitals tended to be more orthodox and stable. A further important distinguishing feature of monasteries like Shaolin, was that they were designated official places of worship.Subversive secret societies such as Hung Pang, Ching Pang, Hung Men, etc. have traditionally made much of their alleged connections to the Shaolin fighting monks. Largely their stories were fabrications with little or no basis in fact, but spread for political motives. The orthodox Chan Buddhists were in fact critical of the rebellious Maitreya societies like the White Lotus. Although, during the latter half of the Qing dynasty much imperial support for Buddhist monastism was withdrawn, official monasteries like Shaolin, continued getting imperial support. Records even show Shaolin monks involved in military action alongside governmental troops during the Qing dynasty.

One other note. Manchu factions all had to work with Chinese officials favored northerners. In turn northern Chinese tended to protect their dominant position by trying to prevent southerners from gaining important posts in the central government.

[bungle]

thanks for the reply r.(shaolin). You seem to know your stuff. What bearing do you think this had on shaolin kung fu? I gather that the general opinion and especially of kung fu practioners is that the shaolin temple has an unbroken line of shaolin fighting monks delivering shaolin to the hands of the public today.

Do you think it is at all likely that modern day shaolin is just an amalgination of various kung fu styles and that real shaolin was lost long ago or discovered by the author of barefoot zen?

I'm not sure why i'm so obsessed with this idea but for some reason it is a problem i just have to solve in my head. I'm going to read barefoot zen again and make notes to see if you guys can answer any of my niggling doubts. Thanks for any help.

[Laughing Cow]

Bungle.

Do some research on Buddhist priest and their doings in both Japan and Thailand.
Some of the things will shock you more than a bit.
Monks drivings BMW's, having sex, etc.

They are still human and as monks strive to become a Buddha but are held back by their humanity and wordly desires.

Simply doning a robe does not make one into a saint or better person.

After that look at the behaviour of some christian monks in Israel who guard old shrines.
Playing pranks on monks of a different sects and having fights are just for starters.

Cheers.

[bodhitree]

Do some research on Buddhist priest and their doings in both Japan and Thailand.
Some of the things will shock you more than a bit.
Monks drivings BMW's, having sex, etc.
Laughing Cow

And Shaolin Monks on Conan O'Brian, what the freak is that!

[MasterKiller]

and that real shaolin was lost long ago or discovered by the author of barefoot zen?

I highly doubt if the author of barefoot zen is the one true holder of Shaolin heritage. Maybe he should contact Sin The' and they could hold a pizzing contest.

[GeneChing]

The funny thing about Shaolin Temple today to me is that Kung Fu people are so fixated on the monks. Right now, there are only about 200 monks in the order. Right now, there are 80 registered schools in Dengfeng - on average these schools have 500 students each. Taguo topped out at 13,000 students last summer. Taguo has almost a 1000 teachers on staff - none of whom are monks. These are the folk masters. While the Shaolin monks are certainly interesting, if you are a kung fu student, the folk masters are even more interesting. People like Wong Kiew Kit, Sin Te and pretty much any Shaolin 'master' fall under what Shoalin would call folk masters. There is a tremendous heritage there. No one denies that (well, maybe in certain instances, but I'm speaking in general terms.) In fact, if it weren't for the folk masters, Shaolin Temple would not be what it is today. Monks exchange with folk masters, folk masters with monks. Everyone works towards unravelling the mystery of Shaolin kung fu. Only the most brash would claim that they are the one true holder of the lineage.

When were the monks on Conan O'Brien? I can't stand that guy...

[r.(shaolin)]

From a brief look at “Barefoot Zen” on Amazon.com, it appears that the book is proposing a popular idea that is not supportable by the known facts. Historical evidence points to a pragmatic reason for the development of martial arts at Shaolin. Fundamentally, that pragmatic reason was the defense of the monastery. A combinations of factors worked together to make the Shaolin Monastery a source of highly developed martial arts expertise.

r.

[shaolinboxer]

Another pragmatic reason was that when China was under foreign control, military elite often shaved their heads and hid in monastaries to avoid the death sentance.

[David Jamieson]

Personally I feel that as eating meat and drinking alcohol are cardinal sins in Mahayana Buddhism, and if they are Mahayana monks, they would be blatantly disrespecting their sacred monastic order by openly flouting its rules.

just a side note.

I do not think that the Shaolin are Mahayana anymore.
And what they were before was a new school "Ch'an" that was built out of the Mahayana school and teh Dhayana exercises prescribed by that school.

I would also second that WKK is not a shaolin monk.

Shaolin is once again a different from what it was before.

cheers

[weightvest]

I saw you all discussing about what are "sins" in Buddhism. The true study of Buddhism is not a religion at all, it cannot have "sins".

True Buddhism is the reality that life just "is". Buddhism has no sins, it has no label, and is most certainly not a religion.

Buddhism defines the state that we are, to just "be". The moment you classify Busshism, or even if someone were to call themselves a Buddhist, then the entire purpose and what Buddhism means goes out the window.

A brilliant book to read is "Sermon on the Mount" by Emmet Fox. He goes in depth about how Chrisitanity and Buddhism in their true states cannot be defined, as they are formless, and so most certaionly cannot be contained in any definition of what they are.

Untouched, raw human emotion has no desire to hurt or kill. The only reason these things are required is because of "fear", out instinct to survive. Buddhism is about losing "unnatural" desires, to find our core emotion, which when unaffected sees no cause for fear, therefore no cause for violence.

Yet at the same time, Buddhism absolutely accepts things we consider as "bad". Why? Because life just is.

I believe kungfu is hindered so much in our day and age because we are always trying to "define" things, to give it "meaning" or "purpose". We fear not having things to hold on to. Take a look at what man has done to religion over time, he was so afraid of not having anything, that suddenly religions were over-run with rules, regulations, definitions. And to what effect? We as true being cannot live by rules, and because of this self-inflicted prison we have put ourselves in, we have become restless, violent, trapped.

And the vicous cycle continues, because the more trapped we feel, the bigger the prison we make for ourselves. Once we realise and accept our own responsibility, the ket ot the prison door, then and only then can we be free.

Kungfu was a tool to express freedom, form from formlessness, formlessness from form.

[sweaty_dog]

:rolleyes:

[GeneChing]

I'm always amazed on how hung up people get on monks. Or any religious person, for that matter. Think about it for a bit. Have you ever really considered entering a monastery? What would have to be going on in your life for you to want to do that? Most people seem to beleive that people 'hear their calling' and leave it at that, but in reality, there's often much more going on. Before I had my kid, I seriously considered entering a monastery on several occasions. Accordingly, I have spent a lot of time doing intensive retreats and you meet the weirdest people in such places. Some are truly brilliant. Others are on the run. They're always interesting, but not always as holy as we'd like to believe. Just because you enter a monatery, you don't stop being human. If anything, you become more human, including all that is good, and more significantly here, all that is bad.

[norther practitioner]

. Just because you enter a monatery, you don't stop being human. If anything, you become more human, including all that is good, and more significantly here, all that is bad.

Thanks Gene, well said.


I just like the statement "fake monk." It is as if they were holograms or something, kind of like saying fake breasts to me.....

[GeneChing]

For the longest time I used to say I was the real fake monk. Since everyone was claiming they were real monks and others were fake monks, I figured I should be the real fake monk. sometimes people still say I'm a monk, and I'm not. I do live near silicon valley, so maybe, in honor of np's fake breasts, I call myself the silicon monk.

OK, that was a stretch, but it's better silicon than bulletproof....:rolleyes:

[No_Know]

"1. What do you guys think of barefoot zen?"

I think it has a cute cover that I saw.

"2. Buddhists, arn't they supposed to be non violent and yet they train with weapons etc..."

I heard something relevant to this aren't they, do not kill? The death of many who would kill a hundred times more is saving the lives of those who surely would have died. Thus preserving life.

There was a mention in a talkie, run before hurting. Hurt before maiming. Maim before killing. And if you have to kill...That's terrible, terrible...ah mi to fu~ The talkie this gist might be from is "Kung Fu."

Use a Three-section-staff constantly moving without thinking and without getting hurt. Weapons require attention of the thoughts and improve coordination, perhaps even logical processes.

"3. I'm currently reading an article called the 7 worlds of chan. So far the author made it pretty clear there was a hell a lot of buddhist corruption within china. Did the shaolin temple escape this corruption?"

Even if there was corruption there corruption is lead by few who use good~ principles to get gains. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

"4. It makes sense that many of our ideas about shaolin could stem from the nationlistic propaganda of the qing dynasty. Do you think this had any effect on modern day shaolin?"

The Qing dynasty broke the stem of Kung-Fu in China and watched Shao-lin. It seemingly restricted development.

"5. I can see how martial arts can give benefit as a form of physical exercise but the exercises described in barefoot zen seem even more suited to this goal of moving meditation. What do you think?"

"He seemed to think current shaolin is a distortion of the truth which has been promoted by nationalistic chinese. In some ways it is all too easy to understand how and why this might happen too. Can anyone counter his arguments?"

Counter not matter. His arguements might not matter. It is what it is. It was what it was. It is what it was. Propaganda and original intent. Even if both are referred to with a same name they are seperate. You have to listen to the propaganda, yet you can understand the truth~ and deal with that. No matter what is being promoted.

Both could be true, so (needle and thread) there's no refuting and it doesn't matter. This point you bring might not be anything.-ish

"Bandits and the like seems to be the usual reason for the monks to develop a martial art. Although it seems slightly inadequate for some reason. If shaolin was rich why couldn't they hire guards? If they were poor and self suffficient, why the target of bandits?"

Shao lin was not the target of bandits as to why learn defense/fighting. Everyone was subject to bandits. And the monks were pick-off-able when they went Outside the temple~ for alms~ or supplies or whatever monks might be doing outside the monesyary/ temple. And if the monks get killed, then their beliefs practices can't spread~. Therefore dealing with bandit types is within promotion of perhaps almost whatever thoughts they were interested in sharing.

People can be delusional. The greedy and desperate can speculate where to get gains and hard to convince otherwise. Monks are secretive. Some might feel only the rich keep to seclusion to hide their money. They see monks begging and think they scam a lot of money from begging and donations. Idols of gold... symbolic objects (jewel encrusted...)stereotypically people seemed to put more faith/belief value into whatever had great material value. (christian stuff made of gold...using precious jewels and metals people thought of it moreso as special-ish).

Philosophies drove the country. Literature house strategies. Shao-lin perhaps had libraries -ish. People might have paid for these informations.

If monks went wanderiung or even out of the monestary~ they might have to cross into highway person zones of ambush...no passage without payment...And people were killed because there were no immediate consequences and is caused people to be loyal by fear....theoretically perhaps.

[No_Know]

I think the author spoke of Kung-Fu and showed Karate. I think that the author wanted to sell a fresh perspective of Karate of the Push-hands claims.

I don't think it looked like T'ai Chi Ch'uan push hands, which is the most common use of which I might be aware.

I saw no White Crane Kung-Fu-ish. A Kata called related to White crane is not necessarily Kung-Fu White Crane (Perhaps it once resembled the Kata but something about being in China it got more fluid/picturesqe--the Japanese prefer Staight basics use now/looks menacing. Those forms seemd Japanese. Japanese is Not Chinese-ish. Shorin-Ryu might be Shaolin. But it's a Snap-shot--one fram in a progressive movie. Barefoot Zen seems to me so far, promotional/position gaining/recognition seeking-ish.

Kara-te Is basics-ish of Chinese works at the time~ perhaps. Japan is an Island. China is a major portion of Half a continent~.

The Japanese take a little information and look at it's parts an study libraries worth on All the little parts-ish. Karate did not have the leisure of China to advance the basics. The author is mixing things up. Saying Shao-lin as if Shaolin for all time when actually merely Shaolin for a Wee Small Point in The totality of Shao-lin.

The hands were not Chinese named. A page with six hands in the book and four in the website. The ones called dragon are in Chinese Mantis or Crane. All the hands refer to grappling (breaking grabs--a juijitsu thing (jujitsu is a Japanese training--again Not Kung-Fu as with which I was baited-ish).

He talks of these Japanese things it seems, wants to include push hands in Shori-Ryu Karate, and names the hands that have Chinese callings something I have not ever heard them called.

I hope the slight redundancy gets across at least some of what about which you might have been wondering.

I should look again at the specific questions you mentioned (that I didn't address~) and others you might have at least as a result of this post. He had a lot to say and it was informational, biased in some way (perhaps),...

I mentioned the inconsistancies to me. I hope I was somewhat on target with at least some of your wonder.~

[HuangKaiVun]

Practicing with weapons and actually practicing to KILL OR MAIM with weapons are two different things.

Just because you swing a halberd around doesn't mean that you're training to gut somebody with it. To this point, I have not heard of Shaolin monks beating each other up with bamboo shinai or chopping through logs to hone their fighting skills.

Something that people forget is that today's Shaolin kung fu bears little resemblance to old school Shaolin kung fu. In the 80s, the Chinese government brought in several Cantonese martial experts from the US (e.g. Frank Yee of Tang Fung Hung Ga) to teach "Shaolin" kung fu back to the monks. But if you look at the old frescoes of Shaolin kung fu at the temple, it bears little resemblance to the wushu longfist practiced at the temple today.

Keep in mind that Shaolin kung fu, throughout history, has helped its monks become more openminded by incorporating other kung fu styles. This reality is still true today.

[No_Know]

It seems that swinging a kwan dao won't gut one person ,just. It can gut several people as the kwan dao downand maintainedfor a bit at gut level.

Hitting logs with kwan dao eventually ruins the kwandao perhaps. Practice enough like that and there's no good weapons around when the fight actually gets there. Hitting the log also has a different occurance than hitting a person. Control can be exhibited to cut/gash a person and keep momentum. Not so well and not like with a person a log

But I liked the closing of your last post HuangKaiVun. And I think it's interesting that you instruct in what you came up with. that might be interesting to get ideas of what withwhich you came-up.

[Lao_Peng_You]

Here is a thought that I had on this subject, and it would be interesting to hear other's thoughts. Isn't the intent, weather monk or not, of someone practicing a martial art that is in essence shao lin, doing so to obtain a certain balance? In other words, hasn't this person chosen a certain path towards enlightenment through martial arts? If that is the premise, then this person would have released quite a bit of karma. If a person attacks someone who has acheived balance with the intent to kill them, wouldn't he/she by virtue be an imbalancing force? So, would there be a kind of compassion from the "neutral" person by striking back with the same intent? Ultimately, this would equalize the gains and losses of karma to restore balance to yin and yang, no?

Is this just new age bs? Is there validity to those who are well versed budhists regarding this line of thinking?

[GeneChing]

Actually, there are plenty of Shaolin monks and folk masters (non-monks) who have preserved the traditional Shaolin. In fact, Taguo prides itself on looking exactly like those frescos, especially their qixing. People always blow off the local folk masters, but they are the real key to traditional Shaolin. Shaolin always does exchanges and always has, still does, so it's not so much that it is reteaching - it's more of sharing. What's more, the internal temple forms and high level Shaolin stuff looks nothing like the Canton stuff.

As for killing, well, that's a fine paradox of zen, ain't it? If you're going to be 'in the moment' what better place than in combat? The Japanese really took this to a whole new level with warrior zen. You need only study Manjushri to see the a sword can mean many things. Killing need not be so literal. It can be symbolic of killing delusion. But at the same time, it can be literal if you beleive in icchantikas.

[HuangKaiVun]

Then I want to see their applications of their moves.

If they really look like the frescos (and I'm not doubting you), then chances are that they have the combat mentality to boot.

That said, my impression of old-school Shaolin kung fu is something that looks an awful lot like modern day NHB combat, but with much dirtier "illegal" moves.

[Richie]

It is also known as "Enter the 36th chamber " in the States. It was a very good movie. "Fist of the white lotus" is also good.

[GeneChing]

Taguo produces many of the best fighters in Shaolin. They've bred several national sanda champs and the bulk of their graduates go into the military or police. Of the schools at Shaolin now, I'd venture to say that Taguo is the most militant, but you have to be when you have thousands of students under one roof, so to speak.

I wouldn't say trad. shaolin looked like modern NHB. Despite the comment no holds barred, few people die in the practice, so obviously many holds are barred. How can you have an illegal move and say no holds barred at the same time? Perhaps they've been choked out one too many times... Biting, eye gouges, vital point striking, joint breaking, that kind of stuff you don't see anywhere but in the traditional stuff, shaolin or otherwise really. But taking that into account, I agree with what your saying, sort of. Shaolin can be a vicious killing art. Many of the trad. moves are real killers.

[TonyM.]

Thanks weightvest. My thinking has been a little scattered today and you brought me back to the place I want to be.

[bungle]

The guy isn't claiming to be the only teacher of shaolin kung fu. He claims to teach zen shorin ryu which he believes is what may of been part of the original and authentic shaolin kung fu. From what i've read of aikido the theories are fairly similar.

The crux is that the oldest antique karate kata and one from fukien white crane work much better as grappling only sets. Not your average sort of grappling though but one that works on a similar prinicple to aikido. The sets are in fact two men sets and can be completed from start to finish with a partner.

This is supposed to resolve duality as the two guys doing the set need to work together and totally let go of their ego for it to work. He goes on about how the sets help tame the animal reptilian brain and mamillian brain and how this is all represented in symbolism within the sets themselves.

The sets actually being a form of moving meditation that train the mind and body perfectly and not as a form of fighting. The grappling aspect, he says, could be used in self defense but would only help; just as weight lifting might help.

It appears to me that this might of been the case and shaolin changed either through distortion or through neccesaity.

The reason that he isn't the soul teacher of this stuff is that what he teachers is free to everyone and very simple. There are no secrets or complicated techniques that can't be learned quickly. The sets are already being taught in karate systems today; albeit, in his opinion, incorrectly.

As for the karma thing. I guess we just look at the eight fold path for guidance to whether it is right. Right action is what most kung fu men claim to be the reason for self defense, or defense of those in need. Right intention (not guided by delusion (ego)) and right action (just enough to subdue the attacker without uneccesary harm) combined to save someones life if need be.

So the authors argument for no striking doesn't hold in my opinion. Still he has good theories on the sets and the effects practice has. I still think it is worth a read.