View Full Version : The Shaolin Grandmasters Text
Just a Guy
09-03-2004, 07:22 PM
A new book on Shaolin history, Buddhism, and martial practice is available at
www.shaolintemple.org
This is not a "how to" or picture book, it is a 300 page text filled with *information* on all things Shaolin.
GeneChing
09-07-2004, 09:38 AM
And why isn't the author more forward about who he or she is?
Just a Guy
09-07-2004, 03:38 PM
As a representative of the publisher, I can say that the book contains a detailed description of why the authors have chosen anonymity, and also contains lineal information. The book is the completion of a project begun many decades ago by three deceased masters. Their names can be found on the amazon.com's description page for the book.
Very few living sifu were personally acquainted with these priests, and fewer still trained under them - but if you have concerns of legitimacy, talk to sifu who were active in NYC Chinatown between 1930 and 1965.
Curious, but which temple were these Shaolin priests supposed to be from?
Just wondering, because the list of core styles seems like kind of an odd collection:
Southern Tiger (which has absorbed Shaolin's Leopard, Eagle Claw, and Monkey styles)
Crane (both White Crane and Black Crane)
Snake
Dragon (both Southern Dragon and Northern Dragon)
Northern Praying Mantis
Southern Praying Mantis
Pak Mei (White Eyebrow)
Wing Chun (Blessed Springtime)
Also, is there any more info about all this that can be found outside of the book? What makes it different than any other "Shaolin" book on the market? Are there any photos/videos or other information out there about the OSC?
Just a Guy
09-08-2004, 08:21 AM
Brad, different temples. Abbot Li was trained at Fukien, but served as abbot at Honan (and for the entire order). Hua was his "chancellor," I guess you'd call it. Master Ben served as one of the last abbots at Fukien. These priests were joined in NY by other Shaolin priests and masters (some who were not ordained) representing a few other temples as well.
The old core of Shaolin was the Five-Formed Fist, meaning Dragon, Tiger, Cobra, Leopard, and Black Crane (in the north). But Shaolin was kind of like a university where many subjects were studied, and where martial styles were experimented with and developed. So, the priests added material to their curriculum if they felt it was up to snuff. Southern Praying Mantis is a good example. The style was originally developed 1800-1830, and practiced in Shaolin from that time, as well as in Jook Lum - but the Fukien council of masters did not adopt the style officially into the temple until the mid/late 1800s.
Regarding videos, I know of no plans to ever produce any.
I think the book is fantastic, yet I respect others' skepticism and caution. You can always wait for more reviews.
GeneChing
09-08-2004, 09:06 AM
...but the anonymity thing is really odd. Legitimacy resides not within the name but within the work.
Just a Guy
09-08-2004, 10:10 AM
Originally posted by GeneChing
Legitimacy resides not within the name but within the work.
Exactly!!!
I hope people find the book informative and useful.
r.(shaolin)
09-08-2004, 10:56 AM
.........................................
Just a Guy wrote.
The old core of Shaolin was the Five-Formed Fist, meaning Dragon, Tiger, Cobra, Leopard, and Crane.
.........................................
You are right, when you say that the core of old northern Shaolin is
wu xing.
r.
dimmakseminar
09-08-2004, 11:18 AM
Dear Just a Guy:
After viewing the website and reviewing the information concerning Shao-Lin's effort to trademark being commercially driven, I was hoping that I might ask you to send me a copy of your book, free of charge. What say ye?
Sincerely,
dimmakseminar
Pk_StyLeZ
09-08-2004, 11:41 AM
i second dimmakseminar..i want a free copy too..=)
I just bought one :D ..only thing..shipping can take up to 4 weeks (for EU) :(
Just a Guy
09-08-2004, 03:12 PM
The publisher is a non-profit (as opposed to a commercial for-profit), and proceeds all go to support the preservation of Shaolin Ch'an and arts - but that doesn't mean the publisher can give away copies!!!
Nice try, though :)
HAHA, Wen just emailed them for some information and got back "buy the book" and "T" signed the email. It's sounds a bit fishy, doncha think??
I don't know what it is about the Northwest drawing all the freaks, but we sure do seem to be getting MORE then our share.. Anyone want to come up here and take some back to your own areas?? Lets spread them out a bit so it doesn't make ALL of us Northwesterners look REALLY bad (not that it's not that bad already).
Has anyone else ever heard of Black Crane before? I've never personally heard of it, but I'm just wondering if anyone (Such as Gene or NorthernShaolin) have!?!?!?
Thanks,
~Jason
Anyone want to come up here and take some back to your own areas??
There's plenty out east too :p The Chung Moo Doe cult, Count Dante's people, Ashida Kim's Kid's Club, Shaolin decended from a wearwolf, Kun Tao people who think they can turn into panthers, and there's a Grandmaster sending me personal emails calling me Castro and threatening to sue me over things I had no idea about(see main forum) :D
Anyway, I think I'm going to see if our library will order this book for me. $40 is a bit steep for a book that I know nothing about... if I was wealthy, I'd probably pick it up in a second though :p
norther practitioner
09-08-2004, 08:13 PM
Has anyone else ever heard of Black Crane before?
Yes, but not much.
Pk_StyLeZ
09-08-2004, 09:09 PM
wanna see black crane??get a white crane and pour black paint over him...u got black crane..=)
sorrie gay joke..just wanted to type
Roc Doc
09-08-2004, 09:44 PM
LIKE...
is this some channeling or angel dust thing?
~doc
One Finger Zen
09-09-2004, 10:23 AM
Hahaha Stylez you ol' joker :D
Originally posted by Just a Guy
The publisher is a non-profit (as opposed to a commercial for-profit), and proceeds all go to support the preservation of Shaolin Ch'an and arts -
Does that mean you'll donate the proceeds to the Shaolin Temple in Henan? ;)
What you're saying, that the book should be judged on its own merit, does not apply here. The authors of this book, whoever they are, claim authority over the Shaolin arts. They expect us to listen to what they have to say and pay for it and not a small sum either. I would hope that the book isn't a rehash of things we've all heard and read before, that it contains some new information. In that case, how are we supposed to judge the veracity of said information, if the authors aren't even willing to stand behind their own work?
You say these 3 monks were from the Southern Shaolin Temple, the existence of which has been a hotly debated topic for a number of years. In fact, it has also been the subject of archeological research if I'm not mistaken. If these people had information as to the whereabouts and proof of existence of the Fujian Shaolin Temple, why didn't they come forward and help the researchers with their valuable information and put an end to this debate all this time?
Just a Guy
09-10-2004, 11:00 AM
Some good questions.
1. The authors do not claim authority over anything. Information is presented. People can take it or leave it - assess everything you read with your own brain to see if it makes sense and is wholesome. That's the Buddha's advice.
2. The authors do not expect anything, and have no desire to ram anything down anyone's throat - see #1. The book's price reflects its high quality construction (hardback, Smythe-sewn bining) and the high quality and sheer volume of information presented.
3. The copyright for the book is held by the Order of Shaolin Ch'an, and the OSC stands behind the work. There were many contributors. The primary contributors still living have chosen anonymity for many reasons, not least of which is to protect their privacy. What is wrong with wishing to live a quiet and peaceful life free of the material and egoistic burdens of "fame"?
4. Would the words of a few old monks now or 40 years ago really change the archaeological debates going on today in China regarding the southern temple? Does it really even matter? The temple isn't there anymore. The temple travels with the sangha, not the other way round. During the 1800s and the early 1900s, the Fukien Temple was located at the forest site near the river. Pre-Ch'ing dynasty, it was the site up in the mountains. There you have it. Do you think the archaeologists will stop the debate now?
1. Maybe I should write a book on Shaolin and publish it anonymously too. Would you buy it? How would you know I have any first hand information about anything Shaolin?
People who write books or teach have to show reason for why they're "qualified" to teach. This means either presenting a verifiable lineage, or if your lineage is not verifiable or you don't want to disclose it for whatever reason, by demonstrating the skills that you're talking about personally.
3. Unfortunately, the website of the "order" is also lacking in verifiable information as to their authenticity and what it is that they exactly do or teach. What is the big secret containted within the pages of this book that would catapult its authors into overnight stardom and disrupt their peaceful lives? Will kung fu paparazzi line up at their doorsteps, if their identities are revealed?
4. I'm sure if the exact location was pointed out, the researchers could find some remains and if we're lucky maybe even a couple of historical artifacts. Is that a bad thing?
GeneChing
09-10-2004, 02:14 PM
Well, I'll be the first to call BS on the high quality comment, but not in a negative way. What determines the price of any publication is not the quality unless it's extreme high quality, like an art book. Take the new Muhammed Ali book (http://www.alicenter.org/heart/goat_miami.shtml) for example (well, that's an extreme example). What determines the price of any publication is how many are printed. Print more and it costs less. Now I'm assuming from the lack of any crediting to a known publisher that this book is vanity published or self published. Generally speaking, that bodes poorly for a book because it means that it could be published by a known publisher, but in the martial arts industry, most people are do-it-yourselfers, to a fault, so it's pretty common to see independant publications. For an independantly published hardbound book of that length, $40 is reasonable. I'd be interested to see a review copy.
Slow down guys ! what's the big deal here ? Read the book first and then start to talk about the 'true/fake' things....It's just a f**ing book....:rolleyes: Or maybe You guys don't have anything better to do than talk on this board here....?I have an idea, save $40 bucks,buy the book and read it. Come back to discuss when You finished it..What You all think ?
And $40 isn't that kind of expensive.....come on...
Originally posted by xiao
have an idea, save $40 bucks,buy the book and read it. Come back to discuss when You finished it..What You all think ?
And $40 isn't that kind of expensive.....come on...
That's exactly the attitude I need for my upcoming 50$ secrets of Shaolin and Dim Mak book.
Buy it first, then you can bash me if you don't like it. While I spend your hard earned money. ;)
Oh, I can't disclose my qualifications for writing this book, other than the fact that I learned everything from an enlightened grandmaster of both Wudan and Shaolin that was Bai Mei's distant cousin. You'll have to take everything on faith.
GeneChing
09-10-2004, 05:52 PM
You guys have heard of this forthcoming title from Wisdom Publications The Spiritual Legacy of Shaolin Temple (http://www.wisdompubs.org/products/0861713524.cfm ) by Andy James.
Man, I should pull my Shaolin book together like everyone keeps telling me. Until then, you'll just have to read my articles (http://store.martialartsmart.net/19341.html). ;)
David Jamieson
09-10-2004, 06:06 PM
The only place I ever heard of black crane was at shaolin.com.
is there a connection? :p
I saw that too KL!!! lol
OSC ~vs~ TCMA the Movie! B Rated
FWK> I Fen Wen Ke have come to challenge you! ( Synthesizer SFX as FWK comes though the gate )
OSC> I will except your challenge…. and I will use my Black Crane Style, …… and I will DEFEAT YOU! (Synthesizer SFX)
FWK> So you think your Black Crane Style is good?!!...... (echo, reverb)
Well …..then ...now…….
I will use my POISONOUS DEATH KICK MONKEY FIST!!! ( echo, reverb, synth SFX)
That Tong Na Ho and I created and made a secret manual for!!!!!
***Insert Cheesy Clint Eastwood western movie theme song here***
LMAO!!!!
~Jason
Roc Doc
09-11-2004, 06:55 AM
Hmmmmmm...... the secret manual by nameless...
EXCELLENT!!!!!!!
AH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA... (echo,reverb,sfx)
.......quickly finishes the remainder of the jasmine pearls and slams the small clay cup onto the old wooden table and heads out to amazon.com.....
~somewhere in the distance a black crane cries~
David Jamieson
09-11-2004, 10:50 AM
Actuallly, I don't mean to sound all sour or anything, but hwat the heck!
That site I mentioned, shaolin.com is loaded with erroneous and egrigious materials. Some of it is complete and utter nonsense. I think it is a source of disinformation about Shaolin more than anything else.
More arguments ahve been started because of the incorrect or outright wrong information being spread through that site.
One day, the net will be governed in its publications the same way newspapers are. hopefully that day will come soon and we can be rid of all the shyte we have to sift through in our attempts to find a single pearl of wisdom.
Originally posted by Kung Lek
The only place I ever heard of black crane was at shaolin.com.
is there a connection? :p
That is a very good question!
Here's an interesting snippet from the FAQ at Shaolin.com:
9. Where did you get all this information?
All the information on this web site comes directly or indirectly from refugee Shaolin priests who fled China and emigrated to America before the temples were destroyed in the 1920's.
Hmmm.
The Shaolintemple.org website also refers people to Shaolin.com for further information, a website that sells gongfu online, and teaches exactly the same list of styles that this book claims to be about! Learn Shaolin at the comfort of your home, all you need is internet access, lol!
And this is the horse stance they teach!
http://www.shaolin.com/assets/images/site/shaolin/stance_horse2.jpg
:D
:D
Further research reveals that our mysterious Shaolin Monk is in fact a computer scientist that lives in Seattle and works for Boeing.
lol!
Our bookworm... cough... Shaolin Monk, is behind both Order of Shaolin Chan and Shaolin.com, the latter of which is a website that teaches you authentic Shaolin gongfu on the internet.
:rolleyes:
wushu chik
09-11-2004, 02:20 PM
No no...this is by FAR my fave question....
2. Is this the same as the "kung fu" TV series?
Both of the styles seen on the original Warner Brothers series (1971-1977), black crane or Chin Na (David Chow as technical advisor) in the earlier shows and praying mantis (Kam Yuen as technical advisor) in the later ones, are Shaolin kung fu styles. The philosophical content of this series was mostly accurate (in our estimation, the temple flashbacks were arguably the best part of the series). The more recent "Kung Fu: The Legend Continues" (1992--) uses a random assortment of styles, many, we suspect, devised just for a particular episode...
And people teased ME about Capo Fu Do?? :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
First off Sifu Kam- the narator in the movie says he's doing PM, it's actually Shaolin 4.
Second- WTF Black Crane = Chin Na?? I'm utterly confuseled by this....
And Third- KARATE GI'S-------need I say more??
And it STILL doesn't say who the hell teaches (not that I found) just like shaolin.org doesn't say who put out the book or anything- just got the response to my email from "T".
~Wen~
Setting:
***OSC and FWK face off with OSC in a Black Crane pose (like Daniel-San from The Karate Kid). FWK just stands there trying to suppress his laugher while holding a black Gaiwan full of Dragon Pearl Tea (-the tea compliments of Tao of Tea (http://www.taooftea.com) , Portland Oregon.)
*Rain beats upon the ground and the tables surrounding them in the courtyard at the headquarters of “The Order of Shaolin Ch'an” (hmmm…can we say very CULT sounding??? Hmmmmmmm)***
FWK> “And now, as you have dishonored the name of Shaolin and all of us that believe in it, I will now destroy you and all that you stand for.”
***FWK places the Gaiwan upon the table nearest him.
***OSC takes a step back and tries to define his Black Crane pose.
OSC> “NO- I will defeat you with my BLACK CRANE techniques. You will no longer question me and I will have DEFEATED YOU…..Muahahahahahahahahaha” (sfx, reverb echo)
***FWK moves with lightening speed before another drop of water can hit the ground. He lands and pulls of the Monkey slaps the peach technique on OSC. A high pitched screech comes from OSC while he falls to the ground.
OSC> EWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWOHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.
FWK> “SO, you think your kung fu is good?
Hmmmmmmmmmmmm.” (synth fx)
OSC> “I WILL DESTROY YOU…….”
***With rage in his eyes, he stands back up onto his feet and begins to run for FWK while flapping his arms like he’s trying to lift off the ground. We here that this is a highly efficient Black Crane technique used all over the world. (Flash back to Jim Carrey in Batman & Robin at the asylum for the next scene…….)
OSC> “I am the BLACK CRANE MAN………I……AM…..THE…..BLACK……CRANE……MAN”
***FWK- In one fatal move, he applies the Shaolin Death Kick as he watches his opponent fall helplessly to the ground. He steps back into the “Taming the Tiger” pose. He then stands up, grabs his Gaiwan with his Dragon Pearl tea (compliments of Tao of Tea (http://www.taooftea.com) , Portland Oregon) and walks to the door. He stops, looks over his shoulder and laughs.
FWK> “MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.” (reverb echo, synth fx)
***Somewhere in the distance Tong Na Ho hears a black crane cry.
I fear our friends might be more qualified to write books on the mating habits of cranes than the fighting arts modeled after them. ;)
Just a Guy
09-11-2004, 09:24 PM
Heart-warming amusements.
Black Crane is a legitimate style with very few folks still practicing. David Chow is a master of Black Crane. Call him up and tell him his style is crap. Much of the ch'in na in White Crane was adopted from the older Black Crane style. Is it so hard to believe that there may be martial styles in the world which you haven't heard of? There're plenty I've never heard of.
The Order of Shaolin Ch'an is in no way affiliated with shaolin.com. Shaolin.com is an informational website run by a student of a master who *is* a member of the Order of Shaolin Ch'an. This student runs that website as his own activity, and yes, there are inaccuracies and problems with some of the information presented. There is also a variety of useful and accurate information on that website.
If people aren't interested in this new book, that isn't a problem. Don't buy it. Ignore it.
Our organization does not make a fetish out of secrecy. But realize that this whole Confucian business of comparing lineages is a pai/gar activity. It has never been a Shaolin tradition to do anything to "make a name" for oneself or discuss who one's teachers are with anyone besides other Shaolin. We have stretched beyond our custom in putting the names of some deceased masters of our organization on the amazon.com description page for The Shaolin Grandmasters' Text (and some details about them in the book). If people lack the resources to verify who these men were, and so wish to substitute derision for curiosity or (at worst) disinterest, that's unfortunate.
It's astonishing that anonymity should upset some people so much. I can only assume those who are upset are interested, but also wary, and for some reason have decided that snide put-downs will make for a fun pastime. That's fine. Wait for reviews. We have posted a few comments by Sifu Paul Eng (who studied T'ai Chi Mantis with Chiu Chuk Kai, Tiger with Wong Moon Toy, and Seven Stars Mantis with Kam Yuen) on www.shaolintemple.org. There will be more reviews, some being published in the future which I have already received advance notice of.
Reviews: from http://www.shaolintemple.org./publication.htm#reviews
"The book is excellent...Finally, after all of these years there is a book that every martial artist should read to get the true meaning of gung fu."
Sifu Paul Eng (www.taimantiskungfu.com)
Well I have an e-mail in to Sifu Eng to see if this is true? Also Be a where that Sifu Eng is my kung fu uncle. He is my Sifus Sihing..
~Jason
Originally posted by Just a Guy
Heart-warming amusements.
Indeed...
The Order of Shaolin Ch'an is in no way affiliated with shaolin.com. Shaolin.com is an informational website run by a student of a master who *is* a member of the Order of Shaolin Ch'an. This student runs that website as his own activity, and yes, there are inaccuracies and problems with some of the information presented. There is also a variety of useful and accurate information on that website.
The Shaolin.com domain is registered under a "Small Forest Company" in Seattle.
There's a branch of the Order of Shaolin Chan called "Virtual Museum of Natural History", which can be found at curator.org. They are both registered under the order under the same PO box in WA. The president and director, Robert George Sprackland, is also the founder of the Small Forest Company(aren't Buddhists not supposed to lie?). He's a Zoologist, who I'm guessing assumes his secret monk identity on weekends and uses a pu-dao to chop onions for his wife.
Another one of the directors, Daniel J Diessner, can be identified as one of the "masters" for the Order of Shaolin Chan, since one of his email adresses begins with sibak@. This man is a computer scientist and works for Boeing. Right Livelihood in his case is working for a huge corporation. ;) Shaolin Monk indeed, I wonder how much time he's had to master the Shaolin arts that he's claiming mastery and lineage of. What's his qualification to teach?
Yet another one, secretary and director Chip E. Miller, PhD, is one of the few people recommended as a master to train under outside of their own at the website of the Order. He teaches the Black Crane style so must have learned it from these people.Once again, makes one wonder how much time he had to master it between his dissertation, his professional career and his charity work.
For all their ragging on the Henan Shaolin temple and its Monks, these are a bunch of weekend warriors that are only playing Monk. The 16 year old Wushu students in Denfeng probably have more real gongfu than these guys, because that's all they do, every day.
If people hide, it's because they have something to hide. These people know that if they came out and published a book that claimed to be written by "Two living Shaolin monks, based on materials left by three deceased Shaolin grandmasters" , they would be laughed at by the whole MA community because they are no Monks. So instead they hide their identity, and try to live off of the name of Shaolin, which they so readily abuse on their Shaolin.com website, which is commercial and not informational by the way, while all the time making a ruckus about the trademarking of Shaolin. Wonder why. ;)
I don't know if those 3 Monks ever were in NYC or if they ever taught anyone, I'm sure that'll come out soon too. What I do know is that these guys are no monks, they're just delusional enough to think they are.
The truth will set you free. ;)
Originally posted by Just a Guy
Our organization does not make a fetish out of secrecy. But realize that this whole Confucian business of comparing lineages is a pai/gar activity. It has never been a Shaolin tradition to do anything to "make a name" for oneself or discuss who one's teachers are with anyone besides other Shaolin.
I call bull.
The whole lineage thing is the traditional equivalent of having a degree, which I'm sure your members [cough] monks are all too familiar with. They are quite proud when they display their college degrees and see no need to hide them.
Being a lineage disciple and indoor student of someone who is in turn a lineage disciple is the "qualification" to teach the art, just like having a PhD is the qualification to teach at a university. When you write a book, you're essentially teaching publicly, and you're required to disclose the accurate source of information, who you are and why you're qualified to teach.
Unless, of course, who you are is nothing like who you can give the impression of being by hiding under a veil of secrecy and the latter is much more financially rewarding...
Originally posted by tao of wushu
Well I have an e-mail in to Sifu Eng to see if this is true? Also Be a where that Sifu Eng is my kung fu uncle. He is my Sifus Sihing..
No offense to Mr. Eng, since he's a legitimate master, but these guys seem to have a connection with him. They sell his books and he's on their very short "recommended list". Then he seems to have read the book before it was even published, so...
We'll need some completely independent sources to get to the bottom of the Chinatown end of the story.
r.(shaolin)
09-12-2004, 08:19 AM
Hello emre.
I'm cuorious, what CMA do you practice and who is your teacher?
r.
Just a Guy
09-12-2004, 08:49 AM
Emre is unlikely to disclose his identity, as Emre stands to lose something if the authenticity of the Shaolin monks in the PRC is damaged in any way. (It's hard to imagine another reason for so much slander and vilification.)
Eng Sifu got an early review copy of the book because we believe he is one of about a dozen premier martial artists in America, and we were primarily concerned with his input on the content of the book - not a quote to use for promotional purposes. But he said some nice things and gave us permission to use them, so we have.
An important part of the Buddha's message was to look for content in finding the Way; to look beyond appearances. In releasing this book, we have tried to minimize our involvement so that people will assess it on the basis of content - and use it or discard it as they wish. Some people insist that all information be justified by an "argument by authority" - but that's exactly what the Buddha (and Tamo) strove to get away from.
My last two teachers were Yang Jwing Ming and Bill Ryan who's a senior student of Bruce Frantzis. I recently had to relocate and I'm nursing an injury sustained in an accident. I'm practicing my Qigong before I decide on a new teacher.
Anyway, I don't see how that's relevant, since I don't write books and claim mastery of things I don't know. I have no responsibility to disclose my lineage because I'm not trying to sell people anything.
Originally posted by Just a Guy
Emre is unlikely to disclose his identity, as Emre stands to lose something if the authenticity of the Shaolin monks in the PRC is damaged in any way. (It's hard to imagine another reason for so much slander and vilification.)
Lol, look who's talking about disclosing identities. Your lies have been uncovered, now you're trying to shift the focus of the argument.
I have no connection whatsoever with the Shaolin temple or any of its monks.
Just a Guy
09-12-2004, 09:17 AM
Why are you so upset then?
Are you experiencing righteous indignation at the possibility that some group of people are lying about Shaolin heritage and using that to rip people off?
Before launching into your attack of slander and put-downs, have you also considered the possibility that the OSC is legitimate, has a legitimate lineage, is not taking advantage of anyone, and prefers anonymity for reasons that may not make sense to *you*?
Originally posted by Just a Guy
Why are you so upset then?
Are you experiencing righteous indignation at the possibility that some group of people are lying about Shaolin heritage and using that to rip people off?
I'm not upset so much as I'm passionate about doing what I can to prevent what I see as fraudulent advertising. Maybe it's just me, but when I see statements like "the only surviving grandmasters", and the like, alarm bells go off in my head.
I don't care about what your secret reasons are for staying anonymous and if they're so important then you shouldn't have written a book.
Originally posted by Just a Guy
Why are you so upset then?
Are you experiencing righteous indignation at the possibility that some group of people are lying about Shaolin heritage and using that to rip people off?
Before launching into your attack of slander and put-downs, have you also considered the possibility that the OSC is legitimate, has a legitimate lineage, is not taking advantage of anyone, and prefers anonymity for reasons that may not make sense to *you*?
I'm with Emre on this one!!!
Just a Guy!!! If this Order of Shaolin Chan is legitimate, we would be more then happy to say we were wrong. YOU and the OSC will have to prove without a doubt of it's legitimate lineage, that can be verified outside of the OSC and SGI & heritage. But you will say something like "I do not have prove anything to you.... ect ....ect..... And you are right. You do not have to. But the OSC will not get the respect from the TCMA world till Someone does this.
There have been a lot of schools here in the Pacific Northwest that claim one thing and then it's not true! We seem to get a lot of people that are trying to make money from the lack of Real TCMA here! I, for one will, fight any way I can keep the fakes out! Be honest and you will get more respect from the TCMA world! I will let you know what Sifu Eng said when I get the e-mail from him.
~Jason
PS.... If you do not like my Movie, then Please do not read it!!! I like to have fun and I'm a sucker for a good kung fu flick! Also the members here at KFM are going ez on you.... Just ask Kung Lek!
Just a Guy
09-12-2004, 11:28 AM
A passion for integrity is a good thing, but then why such virulence? "Only surviving grandmasters" is something you pulled off shaolin.com, I think. It is a claim made nowhere by the OSC or this book. Shaolin priests dispersed all over the place: America, Europe, Australia, Malaysia, Hong Kong. Our lineage hardly includes the *only* grandmasters. That would be a joke. Our lineage *does* include abbots of both the Honan temple and the Fukien temple.
But how would you propose going about validating that? You could ask Gin Foon Mark, Wai Hong or other people who were active in NYC during the time in question, but they may not give you any information. Or even if they do, it all comes down to the words of individuals.
We live in an impermanent world. Shaolin used to brand their arms with a kind of diploma, but the last of those with such brands died in the mid-1970s. And no, no one took pictures! The only proof of anything is in the teachings. The book's primary purpose is to share the philosophical teachings of Shaolin. Very few people alive are in a position to judge its "authenticity" from a historical perspective. Everyone else is relying on their notions of Shaolin which have come from movies and television and the resurrection of Shaolin under the PRC.
You express apathy about the issue of anonymity, then go to great lengths to make accusations of identity. Then you conclude that writing a book about Shaolin and anonymity should be mutually exclusive. But you don't care enough to discover the reasoning behind the anonymity, so this is a bizarre conclusion.
There were two routes to releasing this book. One was to put names on it, explain the lineage, and then some people would get all hot and bothered about "verifying" the lineage. The second route, and the one we opted for, was to just put the book out anonymously, and let people get all hot and bothered about who wrote the book - but with the hope that when people read the book, they would just try to assess it FOR THEMSELVES. There's a fundamental difference between saying, "I am mighty so-and-so, and you should believe this book because of who I am," and "I am a nobody with questionable authority and you should ONLY believe this book if it makes sense to you." Again, we chose the second option, primarily because it is most consistent with our interpretation of Buddhism. Sorry to explain this, you've already stated that you don't care - but perhaps others may.
The OSC is a religious order and a registered non-profit. The proceeds from the sale of this book do not inure to any private individual, but are earmarked to build a facility to preserve our heritage. And when we teach, we teach for free. We do not charge lesson fees to study Shaolin Ch'an and gung fu. Does it sound like the OSC is a money-grubbing organization trying to make a quick buck off the ignorant?
Is it? Only time will tell!
You know you can always drive down here to Southern Oregon and meet me. Then show this book or give a copy, and tell me all about the OSC if you like? I'm aways up for a good Dinner and chat about Kung Fu...
~Jason
mickey
09-12-2004, 11:58 AM
Just a Guy,
My money is kinda tight.
So, would it be okay if I join this discussion, generate hot chili bean funk about you and your organization, and then ask for a free book?:)
mickey
Originally posted by Just a Guy
There were two routes to releasing this book. One was to put names on it, explain the lineage, and then some people would get all hot and bothered about "verifying" the lineage. The second route, and the one we opted for, was to just put the book out anonymously, and let people get all hot and bothered about who wrote the book - but with the hope that when people read the book, they would just try to assess it FOR THEMSELVES. There's a fundamental difference between saying, "I am mighty so-and-so, and you should believe this book because of who I am," and "I am a nobody with questionable authority and you should ONLY believe this book if it makes sense to you." Again, we chose the second option, primarily because it is most consistent with our interpretation of Buddhism.
:rolleyes:
"Two living Shaolin monks, who wish to remain anonymous, finished writing this book based on materials left by three deceased Shaolin grandmasters"
Calling yourselves Shaolin monks is hardly calling yourselves two nobodies. In fact saying "I'm a mighty so-and-so" is exactly what it is and by remaining anonymous you try and render yourselves even more untouchable lest someone question your right to call yourselves Shaolin monks.
Then someone finds out some factual information about who you really are, you get all hot and bothered and accuse him of being slanderous and virulent. Is that the Buddha's teaching?
You keep repeating that people should make up their own minds about the authenticity of the book or the usefulness of the information contained within, after reading it. This is a fallacious argument. If the reader were to know the Shaolin arts well enough to judge whether something in the book written by the abbots of Shaolin from the turn of the century was authentic or not, he would surely be a Shaolin grandmaster himself, and wouldn't need to read the book in the first place. Or maybe the reader should just trust his sixth sense?
Oh, and is this (http://www.threedragonsway.com/SitePages/Classes/Teachers/BillMc/BillMcBio.htm) guy who has reached "enlightened level" in Black Crane a student of OSC? :D
Just a Guy
09-12-2004, 07:56 PM
Emre, in any journey there comes a point where you have to rely upon your own discernment. If you do not wish to do this, I suppose you will simply have to wait for other reviews to come in from people that you trust. And if such reviews never appear, well, don't buy the book. I doubt there is any proof I could provide that would satisfy you.
Right Speech is the Buddha's way, and I do no harm by asking you why your posts are filled with character assassination (as with questioning Eng Sifu's integrity and the link to the alleged Black Crane practitioner in your last post - whom I don't know). Sarcastic comments like that (and earlier ones about people involved with curator.org) are designed to provide a laugh at someone else's expense.
We have provided enough lineal information for people to make an investigation.
And Mickey, contact me with a marketing plan. I volunteered for the job of marketing and fulfillment for this book without any clue about what I was getting into, and if you provide me with new ideas that result in sales, I'd be happy to give you a copy.
By the way, I think readers should trust their sixth sense. In Buddhist thought, the sixth sense is the *mind*.
Hummmmmmmmmm!
What, no comment?
~Jason
GeneChing
09-13-2004, 09:25 AM
Let me state for the record that I'm interested in seeing any new books on Shaolin, even independant/vanity publications. I look forward to seeing this book and I'm even looking more forward to seeing the book I mentioned back on page 2 by Andy James - mostly because it's Wisdom Publications (http://www.wisdompubs.org/index.cfm) and that's a publisher of some repute. Despite the odd subtitle "Buddhism, Daoism, and the Energetic Arts" I'll still look at it when a copy crosses my path.
There's a lot of mythology about Shaolin, even our founder, Bodhidharma is myth, but that doesn't make it any less interesting or potentially valuable.
Of course, I enjoyed some of the more silly Shaolin books like Carradine's Spirit of Shaolin, so you have to take what I say with that in mind...
David Jamieson
09-13-2004, 09:35 AM
Of course, I enjoyed some of the more silly Shaolin books like Carradine's Spirit of Shaolin, so you have to take what I say with that in mind...
speaking of highly dubious publications, is there any nudity whatsoever in any of these manuals. I'm searching for the shaolin roots of nude tai chi.
GeneChing
09-13-2004, 11:16 AM
The roots of Nude Tai Chi are in Nude Yoga. If you doubt me, consult google. ;)
Serpent
09-13-2004, 03:46 PM
Originally posted by Just a Guy
And Mickey, contact me with a marketing plan. I volunteered for the job of marketing and fulfillment for this book without any clue about what I was getting into, and if you provide me with new ideas that result in sales, I'd be happy to give you a copy.
I'm not mickey, but here's a marketing plan for you:
Come clean on the authors of the book and come clean with their credentials so that potential purchasers can verify that the book is sourced from reputable knowledge. I guarantee that'll sell a few.
mickey
09-13-2004, 04:32 PM
Greetings,
The thing that intrigued me about this book is that there WERE monks in NYC Chinatown that did practice martial arts. And I got this second hand from people that I respect. The inner traditions if Shaolin are not easily accessible.
mickey
r.(shaolin)
09-13-2004, 08:27 PM
Although this does not sit well with the modern mind, secrecy was very much part and parcel of classical Shaolin wushu and I would add that, this included certain Buddhist practices and methods. Transmission by traditional methods was closely tied to loyalty to the Shaolin tradition and the teacher/student relationship. Those who became a permanent part of a Shaolin lineage were committed to a moral code and its obligations for life. Beyond discretion, 'secrecy' of 'high level' methods was also characteristic of most martial art lineages during Imperial times. At the turn of the twentieth century two major efforts were made to break this dimension of CMA which was seen by the modernists as a negative aspect. The first major effort was by the Jingwu Tiyu Hui and the other Goumindang Central Academy. Neither were completely successful as to this day there are teachers that maintain a tradition of secrecy reserving advanced methods for very close and loyal student whose life obligation includes passing on the tradition to the next generation.
mickey, I too have some reasons to believe that it is possible that there may have been a discreet presence of Shaolin monks in the NY's Chinatown as late as the very early 70's.
r.
Serpent
09-13-2004, 09:58 PM
Originally posted by r.(shaolin)
Although this does not sit well with the modern mind, secrecy was very much part and parcel of classical Shaolin wushu and I would add that, this included certain Buddhist practices and methods.
Yeah, but the key word here should be was. ;)
Just a Guy! I feel that you are loseing face here... Thats not a good thang you know! But thats ok! You can not say I did not offer to here you out...
~Jason
mickey
09-14-2004, 02:37 AM
Greetings,
I do not think that Just a Guy is losing face here. He is geting a lot of flack from people that have yet to read the book. NO ONE complained when those photo albums came out about Shaolin. Everyone believed the hype.
I prefer to read the book first. I have noticed over time that some, when confronted with truth, will cling harder to the lie. Will this be the same with the naysayers if this book contains pearls of wisdom and truth?
Let us speculate no more and read the book. Then we can talk about it. If it sucks, we can get together at Gene's or r.'s place and have a book burning. And we can toast marshmallows.
mickey
mickey
09-14-2004, 02:49 AM
And more,
For those who are looking for verifyable info:
That is incredibly difficult to do when it comes to inner traditions; more often than not, we are dealing with oral traditions--very hard to verify. Some initiates of these inner traditions will go as far as to deny the existence of something than to share it with an outsider. Shaolin is no different in this regard. That can be a double edged sword at times. It can allow charlatans to pop up claiming an inner tradition. Yet, it is those true inner traditions that can separate the true from false.
I want to read the book. It should be a good read.
mickey
Originally posted by mickey
Greetings,
I prefer to read the book first. I have noticed over time that some, when confronted with truth, will cling harder to the lie. Will this be the same with the naysayers if this book contains pearls of wisdom and truth?
And some people will ignore the facts that are presented to them.
Did I ever claim these 3 Shaolin Monks never existed? I said they may or may not have existed and they may or may not have taught these people and that I didn't know.
All I took issue with was the cultish secrecy, and the fact that the book was supposedly "finished" by "two living shaolin monks". I must be holding Shaolin monkhood in higher regard than these people, since I find it quite amusing that they really believe themselves to be monks.
I provided the information for everyone to see for themselves who these Shaolin monks are, the living ones, not the dead.
Just a Guy also denied the link between Shaolin.com and OSC, saying it was a student's independent website, but I provided the evidence that shows that Shaolin.com is registered under a company founded by a prominent OSC member.
It's not whether these 3 deceased monks ever lived and whether they wrote this book or not that has been the topic of all the negative attention, but rather the people who are now marketing this book and their attitudes.
Had these people come out openly about who they are, they would have gotten a much warmer welcome. I speak for myself, but I'm sure many others who were negative feel the same way as well.
Originally posted by mickey
The thing that intrigued me about this book is that there WERE monks in NYC Chinatown that did practice martial arts. And I got this second hand from people that I respect. The inner traditions if Shaolin are not easily accessible.
Originally posted by r.(shaolin)
mickey, I too have some reasons to believe that it is possible that there may have been a discreet presence of Shaolin monks in the NY's Chinatown as late as the very early 70's.
Dear god,
Did you guys take oaths of secrecy as well, or is this clandestineness contagious?
r.(shaolin)
09-14-2004, 06:24 AM
Although I too am skeptical, my feeling is that this is not simply an attempt to hoodwink the unsuspecting public. There are a number of provocative ideas, Just a Guy has posted on this forum on another thread that I question, but this does mean that he or this organization have nothing to offer in terms of insight and records into the nature and history of Shaolin. As someone else has said here, lets take a look at what is being offered then ask some questions - after all the book is being offered publicly.
r.
Now that I think about it, I DID meet an old guy at a Karate tournement once who claimed to have partied with a "Shaolin monk" in NYC when he was younger(60's or 70's?). I thought he was full of it and didn't bother asking questions, but maybe there was something to his story after all, lol.
Just a Guy
09-14-2004, 09:26 AM
Originally posted by emre
I must be holding Shaolin monkhood in higher regard than these people, since I find it quite amusing that they really believe themselves to be monks.
I provided the information for everyone to see for themselves who these Shaolin monks are, the living ones, not the dead.
Just a Guy also denied the link between Shaolin.com and OSC, saying it was a student's independent website, but I provided the evidence that shows that Shaolin.com is registered under a company founded by a prominent OSC member.
Emre, I think you may be putting Shaolin on a pedestal. Shaolin is nothing special. It is simply a path, just like any other path. And some people are suited to it - most aren't. It isn't good or bad.
I will neither confirm nor deny all of your "research," except to say that it is flawed. Everyone has the buddha-nature. If you feel that uncovering yours requires axe grinding, happy sharpening. I'm not being flippant here; I'm completely serious. Everyone must do what they must do.
**************************************************
On saving face, "face" is a concept that Shaolin threw out a looonnnggggg time ago. We wouldn't have published anonymously had we cared about face - we would have wanted to "establish" ourselves, and we would have published all sorts of things that verified our "legitimacy." No thanks.
Take a look at the issue of anonymity. From our perspective, the ONLY downside of it is that a certain group of potential book-buyers will feel uneasy and so will not buy the book.
But look at the downside of "establishing" ourselves. All of the sudden, we create a cult of personality revolving around our more senior people. Our students then reinforce their egos with their affiliation to those people - when we're trying to extinguish the ego! By remaining anonymous, we demonstrate to our students in a very tangible way that "status" is irrelevant. (The Order of Shaolin Cha'n is a cooperative religious order - we all work together and although some people are senior, they should not be seen as gods or heads of state.)
If we published detailed information on ourselves, our lineage, and our affiliations with famous personages, all of a sudden, it becomes much more difficult to screen the people who approach us for training. Why? Because they are coming for the wrong reasons. This is already becoming a problem for us. For 100 years, the people in our organization have sort of "fallen" into it somehow, mostly by accident. (This makes a lot of sense in Shaolin, because it is seen as the manifestation of karmic energy from previous turnings of the wheel.) Lineage was never shared with students until they were disciples - they had already proven their dedication and ability to live the Shaolin Way - WITHOUT the external justification of lineage. Shaolin has never been about lineage. Those students who require a lineage are better off training in a pai somewhere. Lineage in itself isn't bad, but it isn't considered that important in Shaolin.
Yet we had to make a compromise. We wanted to share the information in The Shaolin Grandmasters' Text, for a few reasons. One, to provide any interested party access to Shaolin philosophy. Two, to strengthen our sangha by raising enough money to establish a physical temple. And three, to inform those interested about traditional Shaolin in the face of tremendous misinformation. So, to make this compromise between complete anonymity and these goals, we published under our organization's name. We revealed the names of our deceased - which I still have mixed feelings about. But ultimately, those priests felt that Shaolin had something important to offer the world, and should continue. So I think they wouldn't mind us publishing their names.
Allow me to share another thing about our monks, both living and not: they were/are not, foremost, martial artists. Gasp! Shaolin never have been. Shaolin are Buddhists first, and martial artists second, or third, or fourth. Shaolin has never trained its members to become professional martial arts teachers. That's laughable, but one of many misconceptions currently being propagated. In fact, to become ordained in Shaolin, one MUST develop gung fu in other areas as well as the martial arts.
The message of Shaolin is that martial training can provide a dharma door - a vehicle to awakening. But so can washing dishes! Something to keep in mind.
www.shaolintemple.org
Mickey:.....
Just a Gut is ignoreing the fact that I offered to have dinner and here him out and take a look at the book... There would be know fighting.. Just to kung fu Guy's chating about kung fu and having dinner...
But he has ignored my post and has not even said "No Thank You" He is showing disrespect for ignoreing the offer and losing face for it... There are only a hand full of Real TCMA teachers in the Northwest of the U.S.. 2 in Bellingham, Most are in the Seattle area.. 2 in the Portland area, 2 in Eugene and Me in Southern Oregon.. From me south, NONE till Sacramento Ca..and the SF Bay Area.. All most all of them do not post on the net but me and rubthebuddha (From a WT School in Bellingham Wa)..
The offer still stands if he is open to the idea..
~Jason
Roc Doc
09-14-2004, 10:51 AM
just a guy,
some very interesting thoughts in your last post. i appreciate your candor.
i for one, hope to know more about your thread reaching into the past.
i understand your thought that lineage can be a stumbling block for a student. can cause him to be there for the wrong reason. cause him to attach to something that is not important. however... it is my humble opinion that in martial practice and even more so in dharma practice, lineage is very important because it provides a direct path from the original master to the student. (martial master to student or more important, buddha to student). this is not important because of the name but because of the teaching. indeed there is always attrition in long lines of transmission however i think lineage is still the best safeguard for the transmission, understanding and preservation of important knowledge. personally, i hope for pure martial and dharma jewels.
i hope you will continue to share your lineage,
~doc
Just a Guy
09-14-2004, 10:52 AM
I have no intention to slight you, Jason. Your offer is very kind, but my obligations permit very little free time. So I will have to decline.
Also, Just a Gut probably *is* a better alias for me than Just a Guy. :) Thanks for the chuckle.
Just a Guy
09-14-2004, 11:13 AM
Doc,
Good question about Dharma transmission. Shaolin operates more like most Korean Ch'an orders with respect to this, and unlike Japanese Zen and some other Chinese sects. Becoming ordained in a Japanese tradition means that the new priest has received that Dharma from his/her teacher - in effect becoming "enlightened" - a long trail of such transmitted enlightenment stretches back to Shakyamuni.
In Shaolin, becoming ordained is not equivalent to being enlightened. Shaolin, as a Buddhist sect, does not arbitrate enlightenment. Ordination in Shaolin is a recognition that the student has mastered certain aspects of Shaolin arts and is qualified to teach the Dharma. Because of this, one's specific teachers within the Order never mattered that much. If one came from Shaolin, he (or she) came from Shaolin. That's all there is to it.
We have made just enough, and no more, lineage information available for people to make an investigation should they care to. But the emphasis should really be on the teachings, and not the people. We'll try to get more material up on the OSC website. If that material resonates with people, then I would suggest that the book may be a good investment.
NorthernShaolin
09-14-2004, 11:28 AM
Just A Guy,
Nice Marketing Strategy. Keep everyone guessing who these monks are and what this book is really about.
Quote:
"Take a look at the issue of anonymity. From our perspective, the ONLY downside of it is that a certain group of potential book-buyers will feel uneasy and so will not buy the book."
By announcing that you are publishing a book under anonymously is a very good bait
What you said here is also correct:
Quote.."potential book-buyers will feel uneasy and so will not buy the book."
But you have set the table of potentialy increasing more potential buyers because you caused this "Air of Mystic" about the new book.
Anyway, excellent marketing. So my question is....Do you also fight the same way by keeping your opponent off guard too?
Originally posted by Just a Guy
Allow me to share another thing about our monks, both living and not: they were/are not, foremost, martial artists. Gasp! Shaolin never have been. Shaolin are Buddhists first, and martial artists second, or third, or fourth.
Sure, everyone expects a Shaolin monk to be a Buddhist first, there's no element of shock to that piece of news that leaves one gasping for air. Are you telling us, however, that these masters, the old ones, had average or even sub-par martial arts skills?
Just a Guy:
Sorry for the bad spelling! Wrighting is not my stong point..
Also thats ok, I new you would not take me up on it! But let me know when you are ready...
Roc Doc!
I like it! Buddha bless you!!
NorthernShaolin:
So my question is....Do you also fight the same way by keeping your opponent off guard too?
You have made a good point here! If and when Just a Guy would like to demo his skills for you, we can do it here in Southern Oregon. This way it's half way for the both of you. Then we all can go to Dinner and chat about Kung Fu!
~Jason
GeneChing
09-14-2004, 04:16 PM
There will be no book burnings at my place. Books are sacred. Even bad ones. We can still toast marshmallows though.
Independant book marketing is tricky. Have the publishers made any serious marketing attempts beyond the web? Is there a distributor for this book or is it completely vanity press? Do you have an ad budget? Are you sending out reader's copies? I'd be happy to discuss possibilities with the publishers. You know where to contact me. :cool:
BTW, here's yet another new Shaolin book (http://www.gompublishing.com/books/monk_from_brooklyn.html) coming at us this year, but we know this guy...;)
It's all about the Ch'a Ching Fist :(
Sorry!! Gene it's how I feel!
~Jason
GeneChing
09-20-2004, 09:44 AM
Hey, Ching's my name, don't wear it out! ;)
Seriously, if it were about the Cha'ching, they all have a sore come-uppence ahead. There is NO money in book publishing, especially not CMA book publishing. Independent and vanity publishers generally lose their entire investment. I mean really, where are these guys going to distribute? Do you think that BArnes & Noble, Book-a-million, Borders etc. will want to deal with a single book vendor to stock up their Shaolin section? If that were true, I'd be driving a freakin' new jaguar. Independants have to promote through advertising (and net plugs like we've seen here) and here Kung Fu Tai Chi (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/magazine/index.php) has pretty much cornered the Shaolin audience, so if they can't afford to do an ad with us, just how will they get the word out? It's not a Cha'ching you'll hear. It's more of a sucking draining sound. It's too bad really, because there are some really great CMA books that have been independantly published and the publishers just collaspe from lack of distribution and advertising.
Serpent
09-20-2004, 07:10 PM
Gene, with that in mind, do you think there's a niche for a publisher/marketter to gather all these things together to promote them? Is there any kind of central marketting for all things published about CMA and, if not, would it be viable to create one?
GeneChing
09-21-2004, 10:14 AM
The CMA market is not very big. The MA martket isn't very big. So no, I don't think it's viable. What some small publishers used to do was combine forces under a bigger distributor, like Publisher's Group West, but that would be up to the independent publishers. Generally, for a MA book to be viable, that publisher has to have a lot of other kinds of books, cookbooks, travel, etc. Tuttle and Kodansha are good examples. YMAA diversified by adding music. Unique and Ohara have the magazine, of course, but magazines are distrubted differently than books, so it's an entirely different channel. I'm afriad small publishers will always suffer, even more so now than before, sad to say.
Serpent
09-21-2004, 06:30 PM
That's what I figured. Shame.
What about Shambala? They seem quite big - what's their schtick?
GeneChing
09-22-2004, 10:09 AM
Right, they are another good publisher, but the focus more on philosophy translations than martial arts applications/histories, so I tend not to think of them as martial arts publishers. But it would be fair to include them, certainly.
richard sloan
09-22-2004, 08:42 PM
JAG...
cauldron or kettle?
Serpent
09-22-2004, 11:17 PM
Originally posted by GeneChing
Right, they are another good publisher, but the focus more on philosophy translations than martial arts applications/histories, so I tend not to think of them as martial arts publishers. But it would be fair to include them, certainly.
Like a great teacher that also has to have a day job, even the MA publishers can't go it alone too easily.
Ours is a lonely road sometimes, huh.
Brooklyn Monk
09-23-2004, 04:52 AM
My Shaolin book is out now, for anyone who hasn’t already heard. It is called, The Monk From Brooklyn. If someone has heard of another first hand account, written by a foreigner who studied at the Shaolin Temple, please let me know.
If you really love traditional Kung Fu, you might hate my book. I am mostly a boxer/fighter and I tend to evaluate every martial art, based on how well they do in the ring. Also, as a long term resident of Taiwan and frequent guest of Hong Kong, I wasn’t particularly polite in my evaluation of rural Mainland China. Anyway, the books I at barnesandnoble.com or at the publisher, gompublishing.com. I would love to hear what people think about it.
GeneChing
09-23-2004, 09:55 AM
Your book will be sitting next to this one (http://www.allbookstores.com/book/0897501411) :p
David Jamieson
09-23-2004, 10:42 AM
I tend to evaluate every martial art, based on how well they do in the ring
That's too bad because your view is biased to sportive combat within a given rule set.
Not that ring fighting is bad, but it certainly doesn't cover scope and breadth of many martial arts.
after all, have you had a cudgel vs spear fight in the ring? Have you had armed vs unarmed combat in a ring? Have you had dealing with multiple opponents in a ring?
And what about the benefits of Martial qigong? Or the Dit Dar aspects of martial training from the yin/yang p.o.v
sort of like neutering a dog and then expecting it to breed isn't it?
also, you don't really consider yourself a "monk" do you? If you go to train at Shaolin for a little while and get bilked because you are viewed as a gwai lo with money, does that give you an opening to call yourself a monk?
I liked your original article about your experience. It was raw and it showed how people are people despite what someones delusions of what it's like in a sacred place are. Sort of like if you went to the vatican and walked in on the pope while he was having a tantrum over a cardinal using his private bathroom. That is if you are catholic.
Frankly, my view is that someone trained with a staff from the Shaolin traditions would beat the living hell out of a boxer. Same as a blade would cut up the boxer etc etc.
You ever do any serious bare knuckle nhb vs a bonafide monk from Shaolin? I would think that that would probably give you a better perspective. Provided you could find a buddhist monk who would be willing to have a go with you.
GeneChing
09-30-2004, 10:30 AM
The weapons issue is tricky because you can use it to validate modern wushu as a fighting art - a blasphemous topic to traditionalists :eek: . Now I know the coutner argument, of course, that wushu weapons are too light and flimsy, and I agree for the most part, with the exception of spear. Wushu is so fast and accurate that if a wushu spear player added a little target practice into their regimen and sharpened their spear, it could be quite formidable. Spear is about speed and accuracy, not so much about power, akin to modern fencing. The reach of the weapon could conceivably compensate for the lightness of the wood. Think about it.
Just being devil's advocate here... ;)
norther practitioner
09-30-2004, 02:37 PM
Spear granted, but just because a wushu waxwood (Franx.) staff is light doesn't mean it wouldn't split some skin or leave a serious welt when swung by some of the wushu players I've seen.
Speaking of which Gene, I found another little tidbit about bark and TCM.
Brooklyn Monk
10-02-2004, 11:17 PM
Gene,
I read that book, An American's Journey to Shaolin, by demarco, before I went to shaolin. There is also a picture of demarco stadning next to my Sifu.His story sounds fascinatig. i wish he would write an autobiography.
As for shaolin, however, althlough he was given a great and admirable honor by shaolin, he never trained there. so I still havent found a book by someone else who trained there.
I am hoping to meet him when I come to USA for my book tour.
Everyone else
no, i am not a monk by any means. and it is a good question that you pose about weapons, multiple attackers, and the rules of the ring. these factors all limit the reality of what we are doing in the ring, and raise the question of which is art or style is best. If you see my new article in Kung Fu magazine. I touched on these points.
as a boxer i am not trained with weapons and multiple atatackers. once, in europe, i had a job as bouncer in a disco. the first time trouble started, I went running over to throw these two guys out, and suddenly realised that i had no idea what to. i dont know how to wrestle. so all i could do is punch them. punching people isnt really a good way to difuse a situation. in the end, I was able to take one of them in a full nelson and manhandle him out of the bar, and his buddy just sort of followed. but i realised at that moment that i had no training in that area.
the same happened to me when i was mugged in taiwan. in the end, i fought those guys off, and got away unharmed, but I realised there were holes in my training.
in the Jet Li remake of the bruce Lee film, The Student from Shanghai (fists of fury? I dont know the english title) he is fighting the japanese master who says something to the effect of.
"If you are looking for the best way to win a fight, then choose a gun."
so, all your points are well taken.
blooming lotus
10-03-2004, 06:14 AM
I just found this thread and firstly lol at Gene on pg 1 getting nose out of joint on missing the info train / loop :rolleyes:
Antonio :- Firstly , as that cashed up Gwai lo ( forgeiner for those that don't know) you went in as, I think with each one of us that does this , it makes it easier for the next and is a nice step in the procession to integrating gwailo into the temple as full - indoctrinees.
I can't believe though , that for all your training , you've never played multiple attacker training!! I guess as a boxer, and ring fighter, it's not so crazy, surprising, but understandable. Never???
SaekSan
10-04-2004, 11:47 AM
Just to get back to the original subject...
While browsing through a local bookstore yesterday, I came across the book in question. My curiosity peaked, I opened the book and thumbed through it.
The book has a nice cover and good quality paper. As I look through the book and it's pictures (they used real pictures that are enhanced to make them look like drawings) it has several chapters in it talking about exactly what "Just a Guy" explained history, philosophy, levels, there's quotes from Lao Tzu and others with beautiful photography of natural scenery (all black and white, quite tasteful if you ask me).
There's also a section on the different "levels" that a Shaolin student/master must attain and, my personal favorite, a picture of the "Grandmaster of Shaolin in the early 1970's" (or something to that effect) in which the person that is portrayed is throwing a kick and completely covering their face with their arms/hands (this is the only picture of a "Master" in the book. The only people you see depicted are three caucasian Shaolin members (students/instructors/teachers not sure though) in different "Shaolin" postures demonstrating techniques that are described in the book.
The book was marked down from $39.95 to $32.95 but after thumbing through it I couldn't bring myself to spend that much on the book, I might buy it eventually just as a keepsake but I felt the money was better spent on a nice dinner with my family.
Keep in mind that this is my first impression of this book and in no way I am making an in-detph review of the book, if someday the book's on sale for less than twenty bucks I might read it and review it completely.
GeneChing
10-04-2004, 04:52 PM
To quote Demasco from his chapter on being inside the temple, "I couldn't beleive I was training and performing with the great master's top Shaolin disciple". Sure it was only a few minutes, but you can't say he 'never trained there.' It becomes a matter of degrees. I can say I trained at Shaolin Temple, which I have, but I wouldn't say that I penetrated it as much as say, Shan Lu. In comparison to him, I haven't really scratched the surface. I think Shan Lu is probably one of the foreigners that is the deepest in the temple at this time.
Anyway, the fundamental problem in your reasoning is the presumption that there is an art or style that is "best". There would be something like that if we were all the same. But, thankfully, we aren't. So what might be best for you, say Muay Thai or BJJ, won't work for my septenagerian mom. I remember when one of my training buddies sent his mom iron palm training equipment to help with her arthritis. While it was done with the best of intentions, that's just short sighted and self centered.
You know how diverse the world is Antonio, more so from your travels than most people on this forum. And you're a fine writer - you write from the gut - which is why we publish a lot of your work. But don't lose perspective. Don't miss the biggest lesson of Shaolin - don't miss the compasssion. ;)
richard sloan
10-04-2004, 05:43 PM
Originally posted by Brooklyn Monk
"If you are looking for the best way to win a fight, then choose a gun."
I actually couldn't agree with this statement more.
To me, there is a lot of crackpot fantasy involved with training in the 'martial' arts.
SYM once said at first gong fu is about fighting, but then it becomes about something else too.
People have always historically armed themselves for advantage in confrontations. Which is why martial arts has weapons and is not just fist and foot, elbow and knee. Killing and hurting each other has always evolved. Now we have guns. Only idiots fight guns with hands and feet.
I said this in another thread, but to me, when you start to recognize a particular circle you are in, it becomes readily apparent why you hit on a 16 when the dealer is showing a face card or 10...
GeneChing
10-05-2004, 09:57 AM
It's all a cycle until you break out. ;) Speaking of cycles, Shaolin and guns, I used this very notion in my first Shaolin trips article (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/ezine/article.php?article=159).
richard sloan
10-06-2004, 10:49 AM
another thing I mentioned in a thread somewhere around here is that pic Uwe had posted up...the monks on horseback with rifles...
GeneChing
10-07-2004, 10:37 AM
I think that was the pic that was published in the back of Shaolin Kung Fu: Treasure of the Chinese Nation, one of the first Shaolin picture books ever, and argueably one of the best. The pic offered little explanation and seemed out of context with the rest of the book.
There are taluo for rifle and bayonet, although I haven't seen that as a Shaolin practice. We published some in our military/police special (Mar/Apr 2004) (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/magazine/article.php?article=453)
The book arrived.....didn't have time to start reading. I just took a very quick look inside and one sentence was bit strange, it's about Tamo and the cave :
...Wathever the truth was, after eight years years he eventually impressed the monks.... ..8 years ?:confused:
On the back, there's a picture of the chief monk of the chan order (they mention 1974..) That movement he's doing...looks like a "Daniel-san standing on a pole kick"....and of course..You can't see his face...:rolleyes:
Just a Guy
10-12-2004, 02:43 PM
Forumites may be interested in reading The Shaolin Grandmasters' Text's recent review on amazon.com from the Midwest Book Review - the premier reviewer for small press.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0975500902/qid=1097349293/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/104-0959900-5814321?v=glance&s=books
Enjoy.
Reviews: from http://www.shaolintemple.org./publication.htm#reviews
"The book is excellent...Finally, after all of these years there is a book that every martial artist should read to get the true meaning of gung fu."
Sifu Paul Eng (www.taimantiskungfu.com)
Originally posted by tao of wushu
Well I have an e-mail in to Sifu Eng to see if this is true? Also Be a where that Sifu Eng is my kung fu uncle. He is my Sifus Sihing..
~Jason
I forgot all about this till I read the post on the main...
Here is a copy of the reply.
No such statement was made!
It was unsigned...
~Jason
Just a Guy
02-03-2005, 09:29 PM
Jason,
Your post is kind of confusing. Did you speak with Sifu Eng? Did you personally correspond with him?
He sent us some kind remarks, at which point we asked (and received!) his express permission to use his remarks in our advertising materials. I can assure you that we would not put words in his mouth. The quote is verbatim.
The book, BTW, is The Shaolin Grandmasters' Text, which you can find here: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0975500902/qid=1107491239/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/103-4204202-0722203?v=glance&s=books
You will notice that it consistently comes up first in amazon.com searches for "Shaolin." The book is selling rather well, and has been picked up by Tuttle Publishing for worldwide distribution. It should begin appearing in bookstores within the next few months.
We have received a steady stream of positive comments about the book, and hope that people find it a valuable read.
Best wishes -
I e-mailed it to Eng Sifu and the school... thats the e-mail I got back...
Like I said before it was unsigned.... So I do not know who e-mailed me back.... nor do I need to now... Sorry...
I hope you all have a good new year...
GUNG HAI FAT CHOY!!!
~Jason :) :) :)
SaekSan
02-04-2005, 07:56 AM
"...and has been picked up by Tuttle Publishing for worldwide distribution."
Hopefully that means it will drop in price too.
Definately not worth $39.95
I'll, maybe, buy it for $14.95. But that's only if I'm feeling like bulking up the library.
:D
oldmonkey
02-04-2005, 04:44 PM
Ultimately, who validates who?
With all this chatter, when do you find time to train?
Just a Guy
02-04-2005, 07:36 PM
Thank you, oldmonkey.
For better or worse, I am the one appointed to take care of all marketing for our book, and that includes cruising forums and answering erroneous charges that my organization has committed fraud. Ugh.
Yours is the best forum comment I've read in a long, long time. If you'd like a gratis copy of the book, PM me your name and address.
richard sloan
02-06-2005, 10:43 PM
JaG-
"The Order offers Shaolin training up to, and including ordination as a Shaolin Ch'an priest."
From your website....
I'm curious to know if you can describe for us your san bao di zi ceremony?
you also mentioned you had a belt system. what is the story behind the adoption of that?
Gene- the caption reads:
"In 1926, Heng Lin, then Abbot of the Shaolin Temple, secretary of the Songshan temple Security Corps, gathered the monk soldiers to hold an oath taking ritual in front of the Temple's Mahavira Hall."
The picture is of several men lined up with rifles and one on horseback.
GeneChing
02-07-2005, 10:37 AM
Right. That's the one. Anybody got anything more on that? I've never tracked down more on the 'abbot Henglin'. The date is just before the fire. That picture is a bit of a riddle.
Just a Guy
02-07-2005, 06:14 PM
Richard,
As one of the non-ordained, I don't really have any juicy details to share. My apologies.
With respect to colored sashes, it is understood that they are simply a useful tool to help students set goals. Students are allowed to simply wear a white sash so long as they are students, if they wish.
I think there is an important difference between traditionalism and a more rigid orthodoxy. I believe that we can respect our traditions without being caged by them.
richard sloan
02-07-2005, 07:05 PM
just interested in seeing where the idea of priesthood comes from, what it's traditional roots are, and what the process is or actually means to be "ordained."
if your priesthood is cut loose from the traditions which created it, you may as well start banging Kpalogo and Djembes, in my opinion, with some moon chanting.
plus it would obviously go a long way towards establishing your legitimacy would it not?
Just a Guy
02-07-2005, 09:25 PM
There is some information on ordination in The Shaolin Grandmasters' Text, but I'm not going to reprise all of that information here. I can tell you that there is both a martial exam and an oral exam on the tenets of Buddhism, as well as other formal elements. We are not "cut loose" from our historical tradition, which has been continuous.
Establishing legitimacy is a strange thing in itself, and not at all what we are setting out to accomplish. That is something for others to judge, if they feel so inclined. In releasing this book, our primary goal is to share Shaolin Ch'an philosophy, and secondarily to help support our sangha (with the *meager* income associated with publishing a book).
To those who insist on badgering, "But I need to establish your 'lineal' or 'historical' legitimacy before I can accept your philosophy," let me refer you to the story of Tamo, or better yet, the story of Shakyamuni Buddha.
richard sloan
02-08-2005, 10:27 AM
Well I am not trying to badger you. This is your thread after all, posted in a Shaolin forum, headed up I might add by a Shaolin disciple, and in which other disciples sometimes peak their heads in, and I think it is a safe assumption you are putting your info out there for discussion. Discussion is not attack.
So just give us some highlights. It will help place your offer and claims and I don't see anything wrong with that. So far it seems that your tradition is a separate one from Henan Shaolin. I don't think that is any big deal really. Half the monks today at Henan don't seem to know their traditions!
Making claims as you do, you should be prepared to speak about them.
You are seeking to share information, but then you seem to complain about being asked to do so.
You might not be setting out to establish legitimacy or historical ties to legitimacy, but people who are interested in hearing what you have to say will be, and they will be looking to see if any variations from the known are logical progressions.
Pointing to Damo or Gotom aren't going to do much more than garner a chuckle, unfortunately, if that is the only basis you can provide to establish yourselves. Any whacko can do the same.
My grandma can make up a "Shaolin Grand Order of Ch'an Kung Fu" if she wanted to, then cite Gotom- that doesn't mean she knows the first thing about any of it. Still a Buddha...
Just a Guy
02-08-2005, 04:41 PM
Hi Richard,
I *do* appreciate your concerns - yet the point about the Buddha still stands. Any sadness I feel stems from the recognition that no matter what I say, there will still be people who demand more. It is like someone saying, "I will believe in God, or the Toothfairy, or whomever, if only you can give me incontravertible proof," and then not accepting anything as proof. Every miracle will have a scientific explanation, etc. If you aren't willing to accept *anything* as proof of God's existence, then you aren't really being open-minded. You are begging the question - assuming *your* answer is the correct answer before even asking the question. I am using "you" in a general sense here, and not referring to you, Richard.
If you are saying that we are a separate tradition than the current tradition at Honan, that is true. The priests in our tradition left China 70-100 years ago. They were led by the then-abbot of Honan temple (and the entire Shaolin Order), and included a handful of priests and a larger number of masters. Some people say, "But Shaolin didn't have an abbot then!" What, because the emperor failed to appoint one? Assuming the Shaolin were without leadership because of Imperial politics would be like assuming that the College of Cardinals wouldn't elect a Pope if the secular authorities in Italy didn't endorse the Vatican.
Many high-ranking Shaolin left China between 1900 and 1935, coming to America. In many cities, they helped establish and run the early tongs, before many of those organizations turned towards the criminal. Back then, the tongs were mutual aid societies, helping Chinese adapt to life in North America. Between 1925 and 1945, the priests in our tradition gathered in NYC, where they taught rather discretely until the mid-1970s. They maintained the Shaolin traditions they felt were essential, and as this group included the last two Fukien abbots, and both the last abbot and his assistant from the Song Shan temple, they didn't see the remnants/resurrection of Shaolin in China as being part of the same tradition. As a matter of fact, they felt that Maoism was antithetical to Shaolin Ch'an Buddhism.
Instructions were given to priests in the Order in China in the early 1900s to disperse, and many went to Hong Kong and SE Asia. It is around this time that Shaolin priests are teaching Dragon to Lam Yiu Kwai, T'ai Chi Praying Mantis to Chiu Chuk Kai, and aspects of Northern Dragon to Ha Hon Hung (and so on). Why, between 1895 and 1910, do you think Shaolin priests suddenly began teaching their arts to laymen outside the temple environment? The Order was dispersing, and these priests were concerned that their arts may not survive all the chaos in China at the time - so they tried to buy some insurance by teaching laymen. And fortunately, these styles have survived, evolved, and proliferated - to the benefit of their practitioners.
Looking at the actual martial practices (at Honan today) is informative, but I do not wish to draw comparisons that many will interpret as disparaging. I am not speaking here of martial skill (which is present in all traditions), but rather of the styles practiced, and the relative depth of those practices. For those that are interested in more details in this area, I suggest acquiring a copy of The Shaolin Grandmasters' Text.
I hope talking about these things is helpful and/or interesting. Also, if your grandma has good gung fu and the ability to share it with others, I would be honored to learn from her - even if it all came to her in a dream. :)
mickey
02-08-2005, 07:13 PM
Hello Just a Guy,
While you are here. Have you heard of the Shaolin Master who sopposedly held the number two position in the Shaolin hierarchy in New York City? His name (I only heard so please bear with me) was Chan Tai Sen; ironically, pronounced similarly to the recently past Lama Pai Grandmaster.
Have you heard of him? And do you have any info on him? And, no, this is not a test.
Thank you,
mickey
P.S. Do you still have pre-Tuttle books? I ask because I do not like their products. They SUCK!!!!
Just a Guy
02-08-2005, 07:27 PM
Haven't heard of him, no.
I wonder why you do not like Tuttle as a publisher? We sought them out to act as our distributor because we felt that they strove to put high quality products on the market.
Our books are published by the Order of Shaolin Ch'an, not Tuttle - so your reasons for liking/disliking Tuttle should not apply. They are our distributor only, and responsible for getting books to the shelf.
Sal Canzonieri
02-09-2005, 09:16 AM
In my opinion this book is a fabrication.
Shaolin was closed down in 1928.
the monks kept a small order going on in the neighboring countryside.
During the 10 years of the cultural revolution of the 1960s and 70s, the few remaining monks and nuns were forced to end their vows and marry each other and become layman.
Other the few old monks that were around in 1928 and who are still alive, there were no more new monks ordained.
So, how could there be any monks in NYC?
And Black crane is a new style, that David Chow does (maybe)
it is not an ancient style, though it might be based on some white crane and other stuff.
This book is a thinly veiled book of the erroneous stuff from the previously mentioned psuedo-Shaolin wesbite from Seattle area.
The Fukien temple was LONG gone by a few hundred years by the time range these people are using.
Also, they say the people were ABBOTS, abbots!
The abbots are carefully documented in Shaolin and there is only one at a time til he dies.
How can these people all be abbots from Fukien and Songshan Shoalin when both places were long gone already?
Maybe the writers are just repeating what they were told by others, but what they were told is easy to debunk since all this stuff is well documented in China.
I won't buy the book, it's a fake as far as I am concerned, based on sound research that is easy to find.
I know the Chinese KF grandmasters from NYC chinatown during the 60s and 70s, most are still alive and none of them has heard anything about what this book claims.
GenKwan
02-09-2005, 04:56 PM
Sal,
You come off sounding like an authority on the matter, but like you said, it's just your opinion.
I'm curious what your sources are for such factual sounding statements.
-GenKwan
Seven
02-09-2005, 07:21 PM
I think we need to here from some people that has read the book, and see what they say. I would go and by it, but it to much for my liking!
7
Sal Canzonieri
02-09-2005, 07:27 PM
My sources are twenty years worth of articles and books written in China by their most renowned researchers.
And most of the stuff I said is common knowledge to anyone that has studied martial arts history.
People can get away with making up stuff in this country cause barely anyone here has access to material from China, reads any historical research either in Chinese or english, knows anything more than the most rudimentary legends.
People in China have been documenting and researching martial arts history for the last 500 years.
They teach the stuff in university degrees in China and Taiwan, if you major in history and martial arts.
Much of it is no great mystery.
The average person with a degree with such a background would laugh out loud at the stuff often repeated or told by some schools.
The joke of it all is that this stuff is well documented, I have many Chinese language martial arts encyclopedies from the last 20 years that have discussed this stuff long long ago.
GenKwan
02-10-2005, 06:24 AM
Sal,
What I gather from your response is that your sources, which you did not list, are all from the PRC.
Taking you on your word for the moment that these sources exist and contain the information you claim, have you considered that these PRC sources may be incomplete, biased, and/or not factual given the source?
Also, an agrument from concensus (it's common knowledge, the average person...etc.), even if it is acurate it doesn't make for a sound argument (i.e. fallacy of argumentum ad populum).
-GenKwan
The way I've heard it (from a wushu expert with close ties to the Beijing Wushu Team) is that a number of documents relating to Shaolin were forged by the PRC government to give legitimacy to some of the "monks" brought in the repopulate the temple after the cultural revolution. Hopefully, I'll get a chance to ask my teacher about it since he was actually a researcher/historian, university prof. and wushu coach in China.
Sal Canzonieri
02-10-2005, 04:37 PM
PRC? I have no contact with PRC members or sources.
It's a bunch of silly drivel, you can believe it all you want, like Santa Claus.
I'll stick to books and documents and research that are legitmate.
GenKwan
02-10-2005, 05:29 PM
Sal,
The PRC is the People's Rebulic of China, i.e. the country of China post 1949. I wasn't asking if you were a party member or had contact with one. You stated that your sources were Chinese. Assuming these documents are from the PRC, I was asking if you have ever considered their validity.
I don't believe in Santa Claus as you suggest. I do, however, like you, believe in legitamate reseach. But the legitamacy is exactly what I am questioning.
So the question of what are your sources and are they valid still stands.
-GenKwan
Sal Canzonieri
02-10-2005, 05:56 PM
okay, so what am I going to list every single book and article I have in my collection?
Every interview I did with people?
Plus there is my teacher, who is over 70 years old, and my teacher's teachers, from Taiwan and China who have degrees in KF history and have written many articles, non-PRC influenced.
I'm not the one who wrote that book, from a group that has already had their legitimacy questioned many times in the past,
and a book that has no author names and does not list any references or source of the information?
What their website and their book states is stuff that is clearly physically IMPOSSIBLE to be, like that ABBOTS from Fukien came here in the 1960s, when they are just finding the ruins of that temple just a few years ago and the place was destroyed almost 300 years ago. That ABBOTS from Shaolin came here. Abbots, they say, not just Monks. The line of Abbots from any temple are well documented and thus well known amongst the people that live there. Shaolin was destroyed in 1928.
Already those are points that cast doubt on the whole house of cards.
Maybe someone told them confusing stuff and there was no way for them to know otherwise.
Back in the old days, many a beginner in China suddenly became Masters and Grandmasters in America, after immigration (til a real one came by and put a stop to it).
I know the KF masters from the 60s and 70s from NYC, I have asked them historical questions and they mentioned everything but any Abbots hiding out in NYC.
Maybe there is a shadow truth that is camaflaged under imbellishment, like the way people play telephone, but taking what they are saying as direct information, it doesn't pan out in comparison to any number of sources.
They wrote the book, let them tell where they get their information from, they have to proove it since they are putting it in writing as public information.
GenKwan
02-10-2005, 08:02 PM
Sal,
Let's just start with a few sources, and then we'll go from there.
Regarding the OSC's claims, they have been upfront about the sources of their claims....namely oral tradition and manuscripts left from the abbots. They have clearly stated that the information is up to the reader to decide it's validity. If you think it is rubbish, that is fine, they don't NEED to prove anything as you say. Remember what Shakyamuni said about truth!
The item of discussion here is that you are claiming you have proof that contradicts what the OSC is saying. Well if you don't provide that proof, then your claims are no more or less valid than the OSC's and you can't say the book is rubbish.
I'm sure the KF community would love to have knowledge of this evidence you have, so why not share?
-GenKwan
Sal Canzonieri
02-10-2005, 08:22 PM
Well, just off hand is the
Shaolin Da Quan, also known as the Shaolin Encyclopedia,
which was compiled by one of Shaolin's oldest monks, Da Qi,
who was there in the 1920s in Shaolin when it was burned down and he preserved historical records before they could be burned up, he compiled all the Shaolin history, forms, etc, into this 4 volume set.
There is a list in the book in the 800 page volume that lists the history, that matches what the stone stiles also list, of all the names of the Abbots of Shaolin and also the monks from the beginning of Shaolin to present times.
and who Doc from Russbo.com talks to regularly, he will be there in March and will be asking him other questions that I and others have about certain forms.
Really all one has to do is post of Doc's site and ask him to ask them to verify the information according to their direct knowledge and their written documents that have been preserved for hundreds, even thousand of years.
About the Fuijan temple, there have been newspaper articles that show that they recently discovered what might be ther ruins of that temple, up to now there has been no physical proof that the temple existed. The place of the ruins was destroyed almost 300 years ago.
norther practitioner
02-10-2005, 09:17 PM
About the Fuijan temple, there have been newspaper articles that show that they recently discovered what might be ther ruins of that temple, up to now there has been no physical proof that the temple existed. The place of the ruins was destroyed almost 300 years ago
Um, well, they've found a few places I thought... and they are all debatable from what I understand, but for the last few years they have had another tourist temple near fukien.
GenKwan
02-10-2005, 11:49 PM
Sal,
Was this Shaolin Da Quan published, or is this a private document within their group?
-GenKwan
Sal Canzonieri
02-11-2005, 07:06 AM
Originally posted by GenKwan
Sal,
Was this Shaolin Da Quan published or is this a private document within their group?
-GenKwan
It was pubished, years ago, in a limited edition, the first edition was in 2 volumes, the second edition was 4 volumes as more information was collected, I have it right here on my shelf.
SaekSan
02-11-2005, 07:37 AM
I created another thread in this forum for this question in particular, I'm not sure if you saw it or not.
Sal Canzonieri stated:
"the dozen Kan Jia Forms come from this (these are the forms that are no called Northern Shaolin style by many who do 10 of these 12 forms - the Wing Lam / Chan Kwok, etc schools)."
Do you have any more information on this? What are the names of the other two sets? Any lineage info? Any other info about the BSL style in itself?
Thank you.
GenKwan
02-11-2005, 11:32 AM
Sal,
What is the publication date, and who published it?
-GenKwan
Sal Canzonieri
02-11-2005, 12:22 PM
Here's this site will answer both of the last people's questions.
it has info about who compiled the books and it
has the English translations of the table of contents.
http://www.shaolins.com/encyclopedia/
Kan Jia 13 forms:
1.the first opening the mountain fist...................925
2.the second facing the door fist...................940
3.the third three recommendation for Zhu Ge...........954
4.the fourth puncture heart hammer...................971
5.the fifth five men palm....................980
6.the sixth Di Pan leg....................989
7.the seventh plum blossom fist...........993
8.the eighth chain hammer...............1000
9.the ninth chain leg.................1006
10.the tenth ambush palm..............1011
11.the eleventh Pu Di sand.............1017
12.the twelvth capture the enemies back to mountain.............1024
13.the thirteen protect yard hammer.........................1031
People from Chan Kwok's School in Brazil and Argentina
have looked at these forms and have confirmed that the first 10 are identical to the ones they have learned, names are a little different.
Sal
GenKwan
02-12-2005, 07:01 PM
Sal,
After reading several articles on the Shaolin Da Quan and other threads in this forum, I get the impression that this was a recent complilation (within the last several decades) from surviving Shaolin sources and Shaolin lay tradition, not a 1500 year old unbroken record of the order. As a PRC publication alone, I question it's validity, however, even if it is acurate, considering what it is, it doesn't seem to be evidence that condradicts the OSC.
-GenKwan
Sal Canzonieri
02-12-2005, 10:39 PM
The Shaolin Da Quan are reprints of the material found inside all the documents that have survived in Shaolin hands throughout all the dynasties.
It was compiled in the late 80s, and published in 1992.
Copies of many of these documents can also be found in martial art circles outside of Shaolin but nearby.
The source material is from each dynasty that Shaolin has existed through.
Also, when documentation on a form was missing, Shaolin Lay sources were used for the book.
One of the oldest Shaolin monks still around (his name escapes my at this time of the night) has stated in interviews in print and on videotape that he was there when the temple was buring in the 1920s and he helped grab the documents to preserve them.
The OSC stuff has condradicted every single other Shaolin source I have ever seen. No one from any legitimate lineage that I know of has ever been connected to them.
They might as well be martians from outer space and you can use the exact same arguement about UFOs as you can to defend the OSC, namely that there is no way to prove that UFOs don't exist as there is no way to prove that UFOs do exist.
OSC are the UFOs of Chinese martial arts.
I can make pages and pages of references, interview quotations, direct conversation, etc., etc., but in the long run you can counter anything at all with "well, you haven't proven that these UFOs don't exist", essentially.
So, there is no point other than that they you are really making to me. So there is nothing in the long run that I can ever "prove" that will satisfy someone that is running on beliefs rather than empircal evidence (just like there is NO true historical record anywhere in the world outside the Gospels that Jesus existed, people's belief that he existed is far stronger than anyone not haveing empirical evidence that Jesus once existed).
Time clouds all things.
GenKwan
02-13-2005, 02:36 AM
Sal,
UFOs, yes, very humorous. However, the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
PRC publications are highly dubious, but even if this tome in question contains truth, by your own statement it is compiled from incomplete (i.e. what survived) documents.
The fact that what seems to be practiced over there, martially speaking, is largely what the OSC considers the Shaolin lay tradition, lends credence to the claim that the core styles were lost when the ex-patriot monks fled China.
It seems unlikely, given the chaos in China in the early 1900's, that a senior Shaolin monk would have hung around, especially given their hunted status at the time.
It would seem more reasonable to me that the higher levels of the temple would have ordered a mass exodus, taking whatever they could manage in the process, then reunite in a safer location. The mass influx of ex-patriot Chinese into NY's Chinatown is no mystery. It would seem a likely place to resettle.
Of course there is no hard evidence of this, as of yet, but compared to a source like the PRC, the OSC has a leg up in one sense. The OSC doesn't have a 50 year history of spreading lies through propaganda and rewriting unsavory history.
Your personal attack, that I am running on beliefs, is unfounded. An ad hominem argument is hardly effective, at least not with me.
You give a lot of talk about empirical evidence, but you seem to have a difficult grasp on critical thinking, given by some of your logical fallacies. Also, the source you have provided has hardly been established through empirical methods. So I'm curious where are your demands to strict adherence to the scientific method? Do they not apply when it comes to your 'evidence'?
In regards to Christ, it is irrelevant here.
-GenKwan
richard sloan
02-14-2005, 01:31 AM
I believe Josephus makes mention of Jesus, I thought of the two mentions only one is a clear addition...anyway...
There is no way to "fake" a real monk, there is way too much detail you would have to have on hand and be fluent enough with to pass off a monk to another real monk...there is knowledge they would possess that would not be known to laymen- one example in gong fu would be some of the buddhist origins to gong fu movements, the poems behind the forms, certain buddhist expressions and meanings derived from characters...many characters are specific to Buddhism and in certain contexts bare Buddhist specific meanings.
Of course Shaolin is a little confusing because of the modern stresses and some "monks" punch time cards, but there is an unbroken transmission lineage from pre warlord attacks despite the fact that many of the monks who knew all the traditional stuff no longer have much to do with Shi Yong Xin after he sort of distanced them.
There are pictures of a 45 volume set copied by Shi Yong Xiang, (burned to death according to the oral tradition) the massive library had many copies extant throughout both the monastic and lay populations...De Yang once had many of these manuals and maybe still does allthough I don't think he keeps his room at the temple anymore, I could be wrong...the point is there was a long tradition of book copying at Shaolin.
Shi Su Yun, Su Goong, Su Xi- a few others, these men inherited pre-warlord Ch'an and gong fu from their pre-warlord attack masters. The lineages are there, they exhibit the knowledge of both Ch'an and gong fu that one would reasonably expect them to know, so doubts of PRC fabrications can be reasonably set aside.
Su Yun had as his master Shi Zhen Xu, for example. He was listed as an abbot sometime in the 1900s. Su Yun was born in 1913, and was 8 when he entered the temple- 1921. Yousan burnt the Temple in 1928. Su Yun was about 15 at the time. A young adult at least. During the CR he was married and had 5 kids- he returned to Shaolin, family in tow, and one of his sons also became a monk- Shi De An. One would think it reasonable to assume that if any Henan Abbots fled Cheng Xu would know about it and this would be known to his disciples. Let's not forget that the Gui Yi Fo, Fa, and Sen, within Shaolin is a serious ceremony- you are a son to your master. This of course assumes a knowledge we don't have of their relationship but I'd say it's a safe bet.
The monk De Ding (I forget which Ch'an family he was in but it was not Cao Dong apparently) inherited a large part of the martial library from his master who was one of the San Jing Gung- one of three monks charged with the keeping and protecting of the library- De Ding buried the copies of the manuscripts he had and so preserving them through the CR we have them now. Many of the monks were rather resourceful in their ability to hide such treasures- we were treated to a special viewing of one such treasure which was a finger painting of the Buddha riding a lion that was hidden in a hallway behind some paneling and curtains and remains there to this day. Anyway, De Ding passed these copies to De Qian, which were then reproduced in the book Sal mentions.
Shi Xing Zhen, the most recent recognized abbot had as his master Shi De Bao. Xing Zhen was born in 1914...his acceptance to Shaolin also predates Yousan's attack.
Wouldn't it be reasonable then, for these men to know all about any exodus and community in which "Abbots" were now retooling Shaolin abroad?
I mean, someone would have known about this foreign body of monks, no? Wouldn't there be commonality between the traditions since they are so fresh.
JAG- I'm not out to "disprove" your story. I am just interested if it is reasonable to accept...
Just a Guy
02-14-2005, 03:33 PM
I realize that, Richard - actually, thank you for your many contributions. (Pardon me for prefacing so many of my following remarks by saying "according to our tradition," but I want to make that very clear - and also respect other traditions.)
The priests in our tradition, at least some of them, reached adulthood long before the gentlemen you mention were born. Abbot Li En was 40 years old in 1900, when he initiated the exodus, for instance. I wouldn't expect those who were children when the Honan monastery was burnt in the late 1920s to know about Shaolin politics of the 1890s. According to our tradition, the martial knowledge possessed in the temples in the teens and twenties was greatly exhausted by the loss of so many masters. Also according to our tradition, the pinnacle of Shaolin knowledge was never recorded in book format, for this would make that knowledge available to any who could acquire such tomes - and thus rob the priests of the ability to match appropriate (and dangerous!) skills to those of adequate moral fiber and Buddhist understanding.
According to our tradition, the style guardians left the temples around 1900-1910. Until 1970, our order maintained contact with Shaolin in Hong Kong, and there were exchanges of various sorts (a few even documented in photos), but we've since lost those contacts. We also do not have "relics." Our priests left China with the shirts on their backs and not much more. So we don't have a physical Ark of the Covenant to whip out, or anything like that.
Some others have mentioned that "their teachers" have never heard of Li En Huo, Ben Ch'i Lo, and other priests in our tradition. This informs me that "those teachers" were not part of the inner circle of NYC Chinatown back when it was 95% Cantonese, which isn't very helpful. Sal mentions that "no one from any legitimate lineage" that "he knows of" is connected to our order. Actually, I'm certain he has at least heard of some sifu who *are* indeed connected to us - but you would not believe the secrecy of these guys. Our priests in NYC were like ghosts, and living descendents are equally "closed-door." Shaolin were/are not professional martial artists either, at least not as conceived today - and they are even more obscure for that reason. In publishing our book, we are breaking with our own tradition of the last 100 years in a major way. Consider how strange it must be for an organization of people bound by common purpose and secrecy to publicly acknowledge the existence of their own organization after the passage of so many years.
Basically, we stand behind our book, a review of which will be appearing in the upcoming issue of The Journal of Asian Martial Arts, by the way. We are considering releasing more information in a revision which may consistute "proof" of legitimacy in the eyes' of some. But this is still under internal debate.
Shaolin has never been about "proving" anything, and the order has not traditionally promoted the personal notoriety of its monks. If we can peacefully pursue our studies and raise a little money by publishing some books, that will be satisfactory.
We will soon be publishing style-specific books which will discuss styles in some depth, as well as contain forms with applications, drills, etc. People can examine them and make their own minds up about the quality of information presented.
richard sloan
02-14-2005, 05:35 PM
what I mean to say is that those monks who were teenagers pre Shi Yousan had masters who were in the temple pre 1900s...
for example Xing Zhen's master, De Bao. These men would be contemperaries of any martial exodus, especially it's flower...
just some food for thought.
Sal Canzonieri
02-14-2005, 10:32 PM
Well, I want you to know that I haven't been posting cause I want to fight with you about all this.
I do mean it in the spirit of debate between people that are sincere in their love for the martial arts.
But, Seattle area is very well know since the early 70s for having fake Shaolin schools, there have been fake books and fake schools that have been shut down after their students sued them for fraud. So, Seattle area is a warning sign to people becuse those perpetrators of fraud are still living in that area. Just let that be known, no reflection on you (unless these guys turn out to be the same ones running your places, sorry to say).
Also, the NYC old time teachers I speak of were active leaders in the Chinatown Free Mason, are very much Cantonese and are very well known still today all over the USA. They are open to me cause they value my research, and have ordered false teachers to be shutdown, and they were fast gone. They have let me march with them in the old NYC Chinatown parades holding the red poles and the freemasons "Hong Men" flag for many years.
So, I doubt they don't know who was hiding out in NYC Chinatown of the 60s and 70s, they ran the place!
No offense, but it is easy to claim secrecy, etc., etc. but anyone can claim anything, it's all UFOs til there is open discourse and comparison of lineages and real records that show the names. If find it amazing that actual Abbotts (maybe some monks, yes) are not recorded in China and known of here by the people that would have harbored them in safety here.
I mean this with no offense to you, I am just giving you the outsider's viewpoint.
Plus, when I hear about "dangerous" skills, and stuff like that, it is easy to laugh, cause there is nothing new under the sun and nothing big deal about any dangerous skills that might have come from "secret" teachings. Dim Mak is dim mak, anything beyond that is imaginary "superhero" powers.
Until something more substantial can be shown to me, I haven't seen anything presented in that book that I haven't heard already before from some other people professing to hold "secret" info, on par with Sin The" stuff.
The proof is in the pudding, by touching hands.
When I have seen forms executed by these "Secret" holders, they are ridiculous expansive movements that anyone who has mastered Shuai Jiao, Xing Yi, Ba Qua, or a really deep knowledge of a Shaolin derived art (Mantis, Hung gar), could easily hit their wide open weak spot in seconds, because these people were never trained realistically and they could not know they were leaving weakspots that were wide open to attack.
I have touched the wide open spots when someone has shown me their secret forms and they were always surprised to have their moves penetrated so easily. I could do it in slow motion even. (not bragging, just pointing out the real danger of thinking you learned something "secret" that "no one else in the world" knows and it is in actuality ineffective against the common self defense knowledge of any lineage holder.
Again, no offense, it is possible that you might really have something esoteric and valuable, but since no one can ever know, it remains a UFO.
Just a Guy
02-15-2005, 11:22 AM
Sal,
You are blending aspects of my post in strange ways.
1. Comments about secrecy are with respect to identities and relationships, not the arts.
2. The comments about not recording the most important things in books is a practice that ensures a certain kind of master-student relationship, and also allows teachers to choose what happens to their teachings. Do good martial skills have the potential to be dangerous, and to be used for ill? I would say yes. (For instance, try to find some high-quality, detailed books on Dragon or Snake or White Eyebrow. Good luck.)
3. Secret forms? Claiming to possess "secret knowledge"? You've lost me here, as claims like these are no part of what I have written. Almost everything in our tradition can be found in lay traditions, albeit typically in pieces. Our version of Bung Bo from T'ai Chi Mantis, for instance, looks surprisingly like the Bung Bo of other schools - at least as they practiced that form 50 years ago. Various flourishes have been added recently by many schools.
4. We are not in Seattle. There is a teacher living in Seattle who is part of our organization - is this what you are talking about? Also, there are quacks everywhere. On the other hand, allow me to point out that Bruce Lee began teaching in Seattle, and that today, John Leong's Hung Gar school is still going strong there.
5. We have certainly provided some 6 or 7 names in The Shaolin Grandmasters' Text for people to research, if they so wish.
Sal Canzonieri
02-15-2005, 08:56 PM
Fair enough, thanks.
The Willow Sword
03-08-2005, 11:37 AM
So will this book Corroborate an Individual at the Southern Fukien Temple by the name of SU KONG TAI JIN? According to The Lineage and History of none other than Shaolin-Do He was an Integral part of the Southern Temple being taught everything and passing it to Ie chang ming who was ALSO a young member of the Southern Temple just before it got destroyed When exactly?
Jhapa
03-08-2005, 02:57 PM
i thought shaolin monks were vegetarians(living inside temple). according to this book they were not/or had to be vegetarian or celibate
http://www.shaolintemple.org/essay.htm#celibaby%20and%20vegetarianism
"Celibacy and Vegetarianism
Celibacy and vegetarianism are minor issues in Buddhism that people like to make a big deal out of. A Buddhist is someone who follows the...............
......................................Surely, somewhere, there is also a Buddhist sect that requires vegetarianism, but not celibacy. And finally, there are some Buddhist sects that require neither, such as Tibetan Buddhism and Shaolin .............Shaolin certainly allows vegetarianism, but does not require it from students or monks..........."
to me it has temple kung fu feel to it...
GeneChing
03-21-2005, 03:04 PM
I finally slogged through this piece of crap what a horrid waste of time that was. I must concur with Henning's review in JAMA. What can you expect from 'vanity' publishing?
This book sucks. It is packed with misinformation. It attempts to appear well researched by citing previous publications, but even the most cursory review of the bibliography reveals that it focuses only on recent titles and only in English. In fact, there are some obvious gaffs in here that clearly indicate that the researchers lack even the most fundamental understanding of Chinese language, much less Chinese culture. It's more of a manifesto - some one obviously put a lot of work into this solely to perpetuate their agenda within their strange belt system school. I get sent a lot of manifestos - this has to be the best presentation so far, but it still lacked content.
There's two kickers to this - two outstanding things the just sent sent it over the top. One is that it comes with this little apology blow-in card. What kind of book does that? It's out of fear. Second, and this is why I call them 'cowards,' is that they refuse to identify themselves. They give all sorts of excuses for anonymity, but it's it's really ridiculous when you think about it. After all, this is the martial arts. If you can't lay your name and reputation down on the line with something that you publish, you have no right to stand amongst other martial artists that do.
I feel bad for any newbies who begin their Shaolin journey with this book. They will be so deluded. I can only hope that they can find the truth, in the end.
Sal Canzonieri
03-21-2005, 04:14 PM
I told you so.
PLEASE Gene, repeat your review at Amazon.com so
that newbie didn't get ripped off.
norther practitioner
03-21-2005, 05:10 PM
:p Geez Gene, why don't you tell us how you really feal. ;)
Thanks, I was thinking about picking this one up to see what it was about.. but I won't bother now.
oasis
03-21-2005, 05:25 PM
Gene, I read Henning's review too. I thought it was kind of funny how he said nearly what you said, that he tried to be openminded to sit through the book but just couldn't take it! :o i don't think i've read a review that pitiful before. it's too bad the book tries to be so secretive in such an information age. then again, they must be hoping to cater to those without background knowledge.
Stanley Henning also referenced Tang Hao's "Shaolin-Wudang Research." Is this available in the states?
Thanks for the honest review! If I had more money I might have forked out some $$ to see what this thing was all about, but luckily I'm too poor to spend money on books by mystery authors ;)
DragonflyDaoist
03-21-2005, 07:07 PM
I've seen it mentioned in a couple of places (both print and Web, I think), but I can't recall locale or other specific information. For some reason, I want to say that it was developed outside the temples in central or southern China, but place no confidence in that statement.
GeneChing
03-22-2005, 11:01 AM
Glad I saved y'all some money.
I have the utmost respect for Stanley Henning's research. I wish more academicians would follow his example - it's quite courageuos since martial arts research is somewhat frowned upon amongst scholarly circles. He really is a leader in the field. Anyway, as for Tang Hao - I can't think of an English translation available, off hand. But thanks to the net, you can get pretty much anything. Can you access Chinese Google? It's quite powerful and I'm sure you'd turn up a Chinese version there.
Sal, I appreciate your comment about Amazon and am considering a review, but why haven't you posted there already?
I don't know what it is about the Northwest drawing all the freaks, but we sure do seem to be getting MORE then our share.. Anyone want to come up here and take some back to your own areas?? Lets spread them out a bit so it doesn't make ALL of us Northwesterners look REALLY bad (not that it's not that bad already).
Thanks,
~Jason
As I said before, the Northwest is drawing all the freaks!
~Jason
Mo Lung
03-22-2005, 06:04 PM
So, Gene - what would you consider to be a really good volume on the history, etc. of Shaolin?
GeneChing
03-23-2005, 10:36 AM
There isn't one in English yet. Shi Dejian's Shaolin 'encyclopedia' is a good record of Shaolin writings and treatises, but it's only in Chinese and fairly anecdotal. Dr. Meir Shahar's work (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/ezine/article.php?article=521) will be an academic tour de force, but he's still working on it and it will be more scholarly than popular. If you were to sum up all my research, it's mostly contemporary - I'm not looking at what happened so much as I'm looking at what's happening, so I only dabble in the historical background for contextual sake. There's a few martial arts books that give some intro material, but for the most part, it's the same old stories of Tamo, Li Shinmen, and the Japanese pirates - more recital than anything else. You should start with that, surely, but once you get past it, things get pretty muddled. The history of Shaolin is so convoluted, especially when you get to the Qing and what happens in the south, that to write something comprehensive is a rather daunting task. It's easy to write something superficial - in fact, I imagine that's what most martial artists would prefer and they would be your main audience. The key to Shaolin research, whether it be history or kung fu, is not to look at one source. You must see the whole picture.
Mo Lung
03-23-2005, 06:49 PM
There isn't one in English yet.That's what I thought. My ability to read and write Chinese in less than minimal. Dayum, my ability to speak it is bad enough!
Guess I'll look forward to Shahar's work. Should be worth the wait - you've mentioned it before.
Roc Doc
03-23-2005, 07:12 PM
OSC= ORDER OF SHAOLIN COWARDS.
QUOTE~GeneChing
NOT...
OSC = order of shaolin channeling
given the location of the osc and some of the statements made it is more consistent with outer space
ie: new age kung fu
:rolleyes:
~doc
GeneChing
03-24-2005, 10:57 AM
channelling? cowards? I hear you, man. That was another big complaint I had about this book. It used a lot of quotes from Buddhism/Taoism etc. but in such a mishmash new-agey way that it was more like fortune cookie wisdom. There was clearly a personal philosophy that was being propounded, as well as the implication of justifying that philosophy by dropping these quotes out of context. With so many mixed sources, it muddled the original teachings, bending them to their agenda, not at all unlike many new age charlatans.
The funny thing is that one 'kung fu' models looked disturbingly like my disciple brother, kungfu**** (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/member.php?u=7803)/ Which reminds me - I gotta bust his chops for that. ;)
kungfudork
03-24-2005, 09:26 PM
wait it could be me. it might be some sort of newage future manifestation of my inner psyche.
no wait......
it's not me!
this thread has been interesting, to say the least.......but to play the devil's advocate (like my big bro)
GENE, how do we know you aren't paid by the PRC to debunk this book because the truths that live amongst its pages would set the Shaolin world upside down!! actaully..... how do we know the PRC didn't write this book, to make us think they were wrong, but knowing we wouldn't believe this book would make us more likely to believe them!
(ouch, my head hurts!)
***wait til i finish my book on how i learned the ancient ways of shaolin from my father, who was raised in a secret temple of the shaolin order in Germany in the 1950s. he was the only disciple to learn the sourkraut fist and ledderhosen kick!***
respect to all,
kungfud0rk
GeneChing
03-25-2005, 10:21 AM
Maybe it was kungfu**** after all. My own little brother. A traitor to the cause. :o
GenKwan
03-25-2005, 07:30 PM
...to the credibility of the book (if not in a logical form, then certainly in a pathetical one), and its value as a purchase, or at least a read.
As a Buddhist, I see all these posts that are mocking, bashing, name calling, and completely void of any constructive criticism, as not even remotely close to what the Buddha called Right Speech.
Given this, when I read these attacks on the book's views of Buddhism, among other things, it gives me pause, as the hypocrisy becomes evident.
In regards to the JAMA review, which I have read, Henning's review is no different. The article was subjective, and was not even a book review. He glossed over the majority of the book's content, only discussing the the first 30 pages or so. It seemed evident to me that after reading this far, he simply concluded that because the OSC's views did not toe the party line, or his research, that it must be worthless. He claims he is an academic, but his review does not lend credence to that claim. An academic review would have, in the least, laid out the contents of the book, and then supply counterpoints to any of the arguments that were made within it. Instead, all we receive in the way of a review, is a quick write off, leaving us (or at least me) still wondering where the review was.
Fortunately, for the OSC, when the only counterpoints to any argument are caustic and immature, intelligent individuals tend to see through the ego, the posturing, and the agendas.
You should buy the book and write a review :)
Mo Lung
03-27-2005, 05:54 AM
This book sucks. It is packed with misinformation. It attempts to appear well researched by citing previous publications, but even the most cursory review of the bibliography reveals that it focuses only on recent titles and only in English. In fact, there are some obvious gaffs in here that clearly indicate that the researchers lack even the most fundamental understanding of Chinese language, much less Chinese culture. It's more of a manifesto - some one obviously put a lot of work into this solely to perpetuate their agenda within their strange belt system school. I get sent a lot of manifestos - this has to be the best presentation so far, but it still lacked content.
There's two kickers to this - two outstanding things the just sent sent it over the top. One is that it comes with this little apology blow-in card. What kind of book does that? It's out of fear. Second, and this is why I call them 'cowards,' is that they refuse to identify themselves. They give all sorts of excuses for anonymity, but it's it's really ridiculous when you think about it. After all, this is the martial arts. If you can't lay your name and reputation down on the line with something that you publish, you have no right to stand amongst other martial artists that do.
This looks like a pretty good review to me. It's honest and explains why the views are held, and it comes from someone that I and many others respect as a scholar and a very real expert on the subject.
GeneChing
03-28-2005, 10:53 AM
GenKwan, I fail to see your logic. Bad reviews in no way add to the credibilty of the book. That's just absurd.
Henning slammed the book, one of the hardest slams I've ever seen JAMA publish, for good reason. Questioning his academic prowess versus OSC is ridiculous. Henning is a published scholar. OSC is a vanity pub. There is no comparison. The funny thing to me is that your post reminds me of the little blow-in 'apology' card, which sets the tone - calling its own advice 'excellent', saying that it's based on oral tradition, confessing ignorance, saying that its an 'inside' perspective - they all betray a certain lack of confidence, a prepared defense, if you will. When a card like that falls out into your lap the instant you first crack the book, it instills a feeling of amatuerishness. And that's just the beginning.
I hope Mr. Henning didn't read the whole book for his own good. Pretty early on, any Shaolin researcher can see how poor the work is - citing Star Wars - come on, really. That could have worked, and may work on the uneducated, but its such a simplistic model and a fantasy at that. I did read the whole work. I'm happy to criticize it point by point, but it would be such a laborious task since there are so many incorrect points. I think Henning just got overwhelmed with the ridiculousness of it, as did I. But I did finish it so if you really want to go, point by point, we can do that. That would be unwise on your part. I would much prefer going point by point with the still anonymous and cowardly OSC.
blackghost
08-19-2005, 03:55 AM
i recently read a curious/ fascinating book called 'The shaolin grandmasters text' written by guys in a group called the Order of shaolin ch'an?
basically this book is allegedly a collection of shaolin Oral history and religion from before the cultural revolution. does anyone know much about this order? i think they are based in new york. Although the book gives a very detailed account of what they claim is lif ein the temple before PRC, the order seem to heap loads of hot coal on the current/ post PRC shaolin order and its martial arts.
basically the book claims the shaolin MA practiced in the temple today is a mixture of village boxing and long fist- anyone know anything/ read this book/ or is indeed a member or student of this order.
Black Ghost is curious.
peace
They seem a bit less than honest... if you do a search, you might be able to find the past thread on them. There's a lot of groups out there that try to gain legitimacy by jumping on the "current monks are fake" bandwagon.
They are somewhat correct about the current monks martial arts though. A lot of it is material taken from local Shaolin Temple area folk masters, modern wushu(standardized long fist, and some of the animal and weapons forms), and a few old monks (some may have been imported from other temples, like Hai Deng). Some monks that ended up there after the cultural revolution had experience in martial arts before they ended up at Shaolin like Shi Guolin (some familly style) and at least one of the monks in Texas (former modern wushu champ, and some sort of Shaolin fist expert). Then you also have stuff being imported from other areas like Chen taijiquan, bajiquan, xingyiquan, etc. What's taught there is constantly changing, with some monks even developing new curriculums and forms or just changing things to suit their own styles. So what you end up with is a combination of old Shaolin forms, modernized old forms, retrofitted modern forms, standard modern wushu, and more stuff brought in from outside. Check out http://www.plumpub.com's vcd Shaolin section to see a hint at the wide variety of material found in the area. I think it even has some vids from one of the folk masters who's material probably went towards reconstructing a Shaolin curriculum.
GeneChing
08-19-2005, 09:23 AM
Shaolin Grandmaster's Text thread (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=32279&page=1)
Royal Dragon
08-20-2005, 05:06 PM
Bump.............................................. .....................
tattoed monk
09-07-2005, 11:21 AM
And why isn't the author more forward about who he or she is?
most of shaolin will prefer not to have credit for their acomplishments. read the book and you will understand.
tattoed monk
09-07-2005, 11:28 AM
many styles have absorbed other forms to enhance their style and to understand how to combat them
Curious, but which temple were these Shaolin priests supposed to be from?
Just wondering, because the list of core styles seems like kind of an odd collection:
Southern Tiger (which has absorbed Shaolin's Leopard, Eagle Claw, and Monkey styles)
Crane (both White Crane and Black Crane)
Snake
Dragon (both Southern Dragon and Northern Dragon)
Northern Praying Mantis
Southern Praying Mantis
Pak Mei (White Eyebrow)
Wing Chun (Blessed Springtime)
Also, is there any more info about all this that can be found outside of the book? What makes it different than any other "Shaolin" book on the market? Are there any photos/videos or other information out there about the OSC?
tattoed monk
09-07-2005, 10:14 PM
There is very little serious talk in these forums. Is there anyone out there who is really interested in real Shaolin kungfu or any chinese kungfu ? Or do you all just want to sit there on your asses and poke fun at something that you never have a chance to acheive?...... What is that you ask?..... to be a Shaolin or a real master of kung fu!
MasterKiller
09-12-2005, 06:04 AM
Personally, I'm just wondering what your tat-toe looks like. Must be a heck of a bunyan.
Budajoe
09-14-2005, 11:12 PM
Well, this is quite an interesting tread. But I want to go back to the issue if this book or its authors are "valid" or bogus. Not that I claim to know one way or the other, but hopefully I can find out or at least present another opinion on the subject.
So, I just got this book in the mail, and started to reading it. Only about 25 pages in so I can't really comment.
For guys like me, who in my case, know very little about Shaolin, their history, their pratices, origins, and religions, I don't really know what's "real" and what's not real. People like me would be the kind of buyer this book would be targeting, assuming of course, this book is bogus.
My background in martial arts in really only in Wing Chun. But, as many of you here, I always found "Shaolin" to be quite intriguing, from, dare I say it, the media and what have you. Flying monks, super powers, great white beards...you know, the good old school stuff! So I've watched a few too many kung fu flicks, but hey, haven't we all?
So, I will give it a complete read and will be sure to post an honest review. Take it for what's it worth, and remember, I'm no authority on this subject matter. I haven't read much else on Shaolin; a newbie shall you say. These will just be my personal opinions and observations.
But this whole thing about the authors not coming out and revealing themselves...I don't know about that. I'm kind leaning with what someone else hinted at earlier, if you go and release a book, and people question the validity of it, wouldn't you want to stand behind it?
If most of your life was spent devoted to these practices, and the perservation of them, and you felt compelled enough to release such a piece, wouldn't you want to defend that above all else. Not as a matter of pride or to "prove" anything, but rather as simply standing behind your product, or for that matter, yourself.
Taking this kind of attitude is fine, but it's this kind of attitude that makes people question things and react in a negative manner. And while it was somewhere mentioned that it you don't like it, then don't read it or buy it or believe it, but then that's what people will start doing. Ok, but then what's been accomplished? The exact opposite of what this type of book is trying to do, to perserve or pass on the history or secrets of Shaolin, or what have you.
I think "just a guy" mentioned earlier that the choice is yours, or ours, in this case. Nobody is forcing anyone to buy the book or not, and it's also your choice whether or not you should read it. Nobody is twisitng your arm here. While true,
I just gotta say that when you release a book like this on the subject matter of Shaolin, and you conceal who you are, people will be skeptical and for good reason. The person that mentioned the UFO analogy has a point. No proof, or at least not revealing who you are, will only, at least in my eyes, diminish you in the "real" world of historical texts, martial arts books, or things of this matter.
I believe, as a consumer, that if you pay good money for something, and you have something critical or postive to say about it, with good reason and explanation of course, you should definately voice your opinion and thoughts. Why? So that others, like myself can look at the big picture or at least have other opinions to compare to. If I keep hearing this book is crap, continously, from multiple people, I must suspect they actually have good reason for their opinions.
And, if I must say, the general tone of this whole discussion is lenaing toward the negative, or bogussness of this peice.
But then again, when we watch those old kung fu movies, we know they're bogus, it's entertainment, for fun. For the imagination. So if it turns out this book is just that; so be it, consider it another form of entertaiment, or fiction.
But if that's the case, I just wish they presented it as such in the first place, and not as a serious undertaking of the matter. Misleading people intentionally will eventually come back to you. Karma is a *****! I any case, I'll post my review shortly after I finsih it, which may take a while. In the meanwhile, I hope that what I've said is of no offense to anyone posting here and are simply my views on this matter. To finally conclude my tedious ramble, I leave with a couple of quotes:
1. A man stays wise as long as he searches for wisdom; as soon as he thinks he has found it, he becomes a fool.
2. Wisdom is found only in truth
3. If you are already there, you probably have not left.
And lastly...
4. The wise will spot the moment when the opponent, unable to convince, attempts to confuse.
Peace to all!!!!
Budajoe :D
No named source basically makes any kind of historical claims worthless as to what was practiced at the temple, etc. so I think anything concerning the history or historical claims can be ignored.
many styles have absorbed other forms to enhance their style and to understand how to combat them
That still doesn't answer the question. Those aren't exactly the most diverse group of styles they could've chosen from. Why not longfist, dog boxing, shui jiao, and taiji? Any combination of styles can be inserted into that and make just as much sense. Also, why would they need to defend against these styles specifically? Some have never been particularly common or even practiced in the same area of China (or developed at the same time).
There is very little serious talk in these forums. Is there anyone out there who is really interested in real Shaolin kungfu or any chinese kungfu ? Or do you all just want to sit there on your asses and poke fun at something that you never have a chance to acheive?...... What is that you ask?..... to be a Shaolin or a real master of kung fu!
There's actually quite a bit of serious talk on these boards (among the joking)... you don't seem to be too interested in serious discusion though. Half @ssed answers, ignoring serious points, and insulting people... If you're not going to put any real effort into arguing your point, then don't expect people to take you seriously. And if the author doesn't care enough about his writting to put his name on the book, he really doesn't deserve to be defended by his followers. Signing your name to something you wrote isn't about making yourself famous, it's about backing up what you say.
Gargoyle again
10-06-2005, 03:59 PM
Well, with great dread and hesitation I'd like to post a comment...
As a former student of some years with the Shaolin group in discussion here (I think I recognize "just a guy"'s writing style <waves>), I'd like to add a few comments, take it for what you will...
Martially, they are very serious and the most highly skilled individuals and instructors I have trained with. I've been full-time in a handful of different styles and schools, and personally witnessed scores of others, and my sifus of Shaolin I have the utmost respect and praise for. Any current students are in good hands.
In sparring with other partners and styles over the years, it has always been my bread 'n butter training from Shaolin that I feel is my most valuable core skillset. To say that the information and instruction is platinum level would be an insult to platinum :)
Tradition, lineage, and authenticity I will not comment upon at all, simply because I didn't live in NYC, and am not old enough to have met the original lineage of their old days. I have only their words, and the great training they imparted.
I have great respect for some of the posters on this forum (having been a member since dirt was invented) and hate to see knee-jerk trashings of what seems to be an honest attempt at opening the doors into this group's information.
Truth or fiction. The world is not absolute, everything is a shade of grey, and their information and history I'm sure lies somewhere within the two extremes.
Your friendly neighborhood Gargoyle.
shadowlin
10-24-2005, 06:41 PM
I have the book, and I must say that this group is a lot closer than most to the reality of history. They aren't even affiliated with my lineage, which makes it so exciting to read and say "yeah, that's right!". No doubt there are a few errors, and I noticed some unsolicited and unnecessary opinions, but overall, a first rate book.
Spend the $$, it's worth it.
As a side note, I find it interesting to see which people buy the book and look at it rather than "judge a book by it's cover". Shows you who is worth paying attention to, and who is just a cynic with self-limiting ideas and the righteousness to go around forcing others to be just like them, because God forbid anyone try something they wouldn't.
If you have read it, and hate it, fine. If you haven't even bothered to look, then that's ok too. But don't act like an expert when you've no clue what you're talking about.
Royal Dragon
10-26-2005, 05:09 AM
Hee, hee hee, 3 posts --- > joined on the 20th of this month :p
LOL!! ;)
Sal Canzonieri
10-27-2005, 11:12 PM
I have the book, and I must say that this group is a lot closer than most to the reality of history. They aren't even affiliated with my lineage, which makes it so exciting to read and say "yeah, that's right!". No doubt there are a few errors, and I noticed some unsolicited and unnecessary opinions, but overall, a first rate book.
Spend the $$, it's worth it.
As a side note, I find it interesting to see which people buy the book and look at it rather than "judge a book by it's cover". Shows you who is worth paying attention to, and who is just a cynic with self-limiting ideas and the righteousness to go around forcing others to be just like them, because God forbid anyone try something they wouldn't.
If you have read it, and hate it, fine. If you haven't even bothered to look, then that's ok too. But don't act like an expert when you've no clue what you're talking about.
This book is total baloney, if you don't know baloney from real kf history, then that's too bad, bad this book is baloney.
Any KF scholar that does loads of research will tell you that.
Don't want to believe it?
Either you have alterior motives or are just plain ignorant.
shadowlin
11-08-2005, 02:07 PM
This book is total baloney, if you don't know baloney from real kf history, then that's too bad, bad this book is baloney.
Any KF scholar that does loads of research will tell you that.
Don't want to believe it?
Either you have alterior motives or are just plain ignorant.
right, my ulterior motives... you know... those ones where I somehow make millions off of unsuspecting KF practitioners who buy a book from someone else... :rolleyes:
About the book being balogna, that's a matter of opinion. You nor I are old enough to judge history objectively. You base what you know off your oral tradition and your research, meanwhile I do on mine.
Speaking of outside research, I happen to practice with a friend who has been doing pakua for nearly thirty years, and he has a lot of books by world reknowned martial artists like Sifu Jerry Allen Johnson. Amazingly enough, they confirm a lot of our oral tradition.
edit - for those who are looking for logical and reasonable history for Shaolin, the book presents very sound arguements and cross-references to other materials. Being that the group remains anonymous, they don't stand to gain much selling a few books, as compared to the thousands of hours it must have taken to write the book. It is much closer to an academic work than other similar books. Only problem is, you could be easily offended by it's pro-buddhist stance. It very controversially claims you can't be Shaolin without being Ch'an Buddhist. All relligion set aside, the book is fascinating, and well worth a little $$.
If in the end, you hate it. Well, fires are fun too. And there's eBay.
DRleungjan
11-08-2005, 03:51 PM
This book is total baloney, if you don't know baloney from real kf history, then that's too bad, bad this book is baloney.
Any KF scholar that does loads of research will tell you that.
Don't want to believe it?
Either you have alterior motives or are just plain ignorant.
That wasn't too nice or scholarly. :(
What IS history?
History is part oral, part evidence an part opinion and speculation. As I follow this thread I am a little surprised, to say the least, that very knowledgable people take certain expressions and stances to certain subjects. To me there are no bad books only narrow minds. Even the father of modern history, Herodotus, based his 'Histories' on a smattering of oral legends and traditions to lend credence to the concrete evidence that he already possessed.
Until we are able to prove that people have 'hidden' agendas to what they speak about who are we to judge? If a book makes us question then has it served its purpose? This I believe to be so. I am currently reading the book in question. Am I wasting my time? To some of you the answer is a resounding YES. To me however it's an insight into the same subject that we try to discuss over and over. Can we discredit the authors with being bogus? What gives us the power to do so? For all we know they might have something that we don't. On the other hand, I don't take any of their info to heart. Like any good researcher I just look at the matter objectively and cross-reference from there.
History is something wonderful to study....it teaches us not to make the same mistakes as our forebears. Yet that's exactly what we do over and over again. Is there an absolute truth when it comes to history? Hell no....there are things that we will NEVER find out and all we can do is just wonder. It's sad when I see so much bickering and trashing when in fact we can all work together to see if we can find part of the truth. Why do I state the above? Well within the Wing Chun circles we have the same childish attittude toward our histories and legends and it really irks me.
Just two taels from the doctor. :)
Shaolindynasty
11-09-2005, 09:56 AM
This book keeps getting recommended to me by amazon.com so I bought........The Monk from Brooklyn instead.:D
richard sloan
11-28-2005, 09:36 AM
Can we discredit the authors with being bogus? What gives us the power to do so?
an orthodoxy of transmission allows us to do so.
it's bogus.
DRleungjan
11-29-2005, 10:02 PM
hmmm....orthodoxy of transmission....still gives us NO right to judge others or their work. Anyways if a book makes you smirk (in sarcasm that is) and ask questions then I believe it is doing it's job. And if it was bogus why argue on it? Dismiss it and keep on walking *shrugs*. I have said it and written it countless times...truth is truth no matter where one looks to....so be ever aware because truth usually comes from the most unlikliest of places. Yes, even from a book that is being trashed as I post.
It is little wonder in my mind why many of us martial artists and enthusiasts never seem to pass above a certain level in our quest for mastery.
gwa sow
12-12-2005, 08:35 AM
they have this book at the Borders by my house. It looks nice, hardcover and glossy black. But thats were it stops. I glanced through it and was not happy with it. I didn't read too much on the history just went to the martial arts section. um......... dont spend the money. please dont spend the money. there was stuff on choy lay fur, mantis dragon, and a few others but didn't see any ( again i didn't read everypage, just looked through it) stuff that was supposed to be shaolin - lohan, hong boxing, cannon fist, taizu or anything else like that. They might have worked hard on it but i wouldn't recomend it.
richard sloan
12-12-2005, 06:51 PM
hmmm....orthodoxy of transmission....still gives us NO right to judge others or their work.
Well that is where you are wrong. If I am a painter under Tintoretto, and another comes along and claims to be such, and he never was, I have the authority vested in my transmission to say, no...this painter is not of the school of Tintoretto because of A, B, C, and D.
Anyways if a book makes you smirk (in sarcasm that is) and ask questions then I believe it is doing it's job. And if it was bogus why argue on it? Dismiss it and keep on walking *shrugs*. I have said it and written it countless times...truth is truth no matter where one looks to....so be ever aware because truth usually comes from the most unlikliest of places. Yes, even from a book that is being trashed as I post.
Bridge For Sale. Serious inquiries only, scenic location. Needs a little work. Excellent toll potential. Send SASE for details.
dimmakseminar
02-19-2006, 08:39 AM
Dear Readers:
After much research, the name of the writer of this text can now be revealed.
The author is
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Just a Guy that goes by the name of Gen Kwan.
That is all.
Anonymously Yours,
*************
LaterthanNever
11-16-2008, 10:35 PM
I've read it an while some of it seems fairly interesting..I have to admit to raising a serious eyebrow at some of the claims made about many of the styles.
Does anyone else have any thoughts? Thanks.
MasterKiller
11-17-2008, 07:15 AM
Should be called "A bunch of white guys in Seattle watched too much Kung Fu the series on tv as kids and wrote a book."
TenTigers
11-17-2008, 07:31 AM
is that the Black hardcover book? Nicely printed, bound and published.
I received it for free from the writers I guess. They must've sent one to all the Kung-Fu schools. It makes a good doorstop.
nolte13
11-17-2008, 10:08 AM
Thats the funny thing about that book: It is nicely published with illustrations and all of that...but its still a giant steaming pile of s***.
So its a nicely covered, giftwrapped, bound and picture filled box of crap.
David Jamieson
11-17-2008, 11:11 AM
Proof that you can shellac sh1t onto a shingle and sell it!
what tedious garbage this book is.
good kindling though. :p
SimonM
11-17-2008, 11:19 AM
I've read it an while some of it seems fairly interesting..I have to admit to raising a serious eyebrow at some of the claims made about many of the styles.
Does anyone else have any thoughts? Thanks.
Haven't seen the book. My question, regarding the claims made about styles, does it cite any primary sources or any reputable secondary sources or does it just say "this is how it is" with no actual proof?
tattooedmonk
11-17-2008, 02:04 PM
...but the anonymity thing is really odd. Legitimacy resides not within the name but within the work. I am really confused as to why it is that everyone is embracing the negative and disregarding the positive . I thought we were supposed to embrace the positive and disregard the negative.
I am not saying ignore it but, if it does not follow what it is that someone believes why say it is BS?
Everyone has the right to practice and teach things with their own flavor and create their own traditions.
It is funny how if things do not fall or coincide with ones beliefs ,how quickly they are to dismiss it.
I have the book and read it . There are discrepencies but ,isnt there in everything, depending on the sources??
If you read the book you will find that 1/2 if not 2/3rds of what is in there is right on with everything else that is written about shaolin. They just have their own traditions.
David Jamieson
11-17-2008, 02:19 PM
Reiterating something that is known from other sources, and then lacing those knowns with your own set of directives that in turn back an agenda to make money is not exactly on the up and up.
It has nothing to do with embracing positives or negatives, it has to do with calling a spade a spade.
So, there are many who will not support the actions of the producers of this book and there are many others that will continue to be duped with the "traditions" associated with the people who put together said book.
Maybe I'm not so forgiving, so what, who cares, that's my tradition. :) At least I'm not anonymous about it.
SimonM
11-17-2008, 02:40 PM
I Everyone has the right to practice and teach things with their own flavor and create their own traditions.
It is funny how if things do not fall or coincide with ones beliefs ,how quickly they are to dismiss it.
I have the book and read it . There are discrepencies but ,isnt there in everything, depending on the sources??
If you read the book you will find that 1/2 if not 2/3rds of what is in there is right on with everything else that is written about shaolin. They just have their own traditions.
The question is not one of "truthiness" (to quote a colbertism) but rather one of factuality. What I am asking is not "gee it's wierd the authors want annonymity, why?" it is "is what the authors assert factually verifiable?"
Sal Canzonieri
11-19-2008, 05:57 PM
These people in Seattle have been sued in court over 20 years ago for fraud.
They keep restarting over and over.
Now they are publishing.
Its a book of pure baloney, just like their schools were.
I saw video tapes of some of their students fighting back in the early 80s, it was laughable "animal" positions like in the movies. All you had to do was step up and punch them out, they left their center lines wide open while they did funny animal hand positions with their arms above and behind them. Very silly!
David Jamieson
11-20-2008, 09:53 AM
Gene should sue them too for ripping off materials from his writings over the years, re wording it, embellishing and putting it out for a profit.
"village boxing" for instance. lol
GeneChing
11-20-2008, 10:07 AM
I'm curious who might sue them for fraud. Who was the injured party?
As for any plagiarism on their behalf, what amused me most about this book was that they did engage the body of literature that was available at the time of publication. Some of it, particularly the attempt to invalidate the wuseng (warrior monks) was clearly reactionary to material I had published. I was really the first to introduce wuseng to English readers, but it's been something that's been bandied about in Chinese for some time. As for 'village boxing', I'm not sure I'd take credit for that. It was a term that I worked out with Sifu Wing Lam, but I'd have to credit him with it more than me, albeit I was the first to publish it in that landmark IKF article on Ha Say Fu Hung Gar. Honestly, I don't know the Cantonese (Lam's native tongue) so I don't really use the term anymore since I seldom work from Cantonese. Now I usually say 'folk master', although it's a bit different to 'village'. Village implied rural martial arts practice, where I feel much of the most authentic kung fu is happening now. Folk master is more to distinguish from monastic practitioners like the wuseng, et.al.
SimonM
11-20-2008, 10:46 AM
I met one folk master in China. He was a carpenter and an expert with the Dao. He was in his sixties and practiced a village style unique to northern Shanxi (the Xinzhou district, south of Datong and north of Wutaishan). He taught me a bit of his footwork, which was pretty straightforward based on a "T" pattern.
He becried both that he could not find any young people willing to take on either his style of kung fu or to apprentice as a carpenter.
richard sloan
11-30-2008, 01:25 PM
I saw video tapes of some of their students fighting back in the early 80s, it was laughable "animal" positions like in the movies. All you had to do was step up and punch them out, they left their center lines wide open while they did funny animal hand positions with their arms above and behind them. Very silly!
I would love to see that.
first the truth is ridiculed and laughed at, then it becomes violently oppressed, finally it manifests as becoming self evident... ignorant people laugh at what they do not understand... this book is a much better read than most anything kung fu magazine publishes... no offense, just expressing myself in the true american fashion...
sanjuro_ronin
12-01-2008, 09:52 AM
first the truth is ridiculed and laughed at, then it becomes violently oppressed, finally it manifests as becoming self evident... ignorant people laugh at what they do not understand... this book is a much better read than most anything kung fu magazine publishes... no offense, just expressing myself in the true american fashion...
And you based that on what?
And you based that on what?considering i do own the book... it was a gift for a patio i did for a local kung fu school and i have been a faithful reader of the mag for several years now...
MasterKiller
12-01-2008, 10:14 AM
this book is a much better read than most anything kung fu magazine publishes
Fantasy is always more entertaining than non-fiction.
sanjuro_ronin
12-01-2008, 12:00 PM
considering i do own the book... it was a gift for a patio i did for a local kung fu school and i have been a faithful reader of the mag for several years now...
Wow, you must have done a lousy job.
:D
Wow, you must have done a lousy job.i initial did the patio just for the school for free... the book made a last minute appearance.
Fantasy is always more entertaining than non-fiction.yeah true... so better snap out of your kung fu fantasy world... like i said, it's easy to condemn what you do not understand. there are no shaolin in china, only actors. :)
sanjuro_ronin
12-01-2008, 12:43 PM
I initially did, the book was my punishment ! :)
Fixed that for you.
;)
Fixed that for you.well then it was the very best punishment i possibly could have recieved.
Songshan
12-02-2008, 12:43 AM
first the truth is ridiculed and laughed at, then it becomes violently oppressed, finally it manifests as becoming self evident... ignorant people laugh at what they do not understand... this book is a much better read than most anything kung fu magazine publishes... no offense, just expressing myself in the true american fashion...
I think this is very applicable to your comment in the Shaolin 2009 magazine thread. :D
r.(shaolin)
12-14-2008, 01:27 PM
I'm curious who might sue them for fraud. Who was the injured party?
I was really the first to introduce wuseng to English readers, but it's been something that's been bandied about in Chinese for some time.
I first saw the term "martial monks" translated into English in 1981, and the pinyin, "wuseng" (武僧) in Meir Shahar's Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies article in 2001. The term 僧兵 seng bing (monastic troops), a similar and related term but more commonly used, has been published in English at lest since the 1970's and if I am remembering correctly, as early as the 1958. Both terms have been used in Chinese at least since the 1500's. The reason I bring this
up is because I've used both terms in stuff I've written as early as 1982 and don't want to get accused of plagiarism :-)
r.
ps.
I read this thread mainly because is seemed to have staying power:-) From what is being said these "Order of Shaolin" folks sound pretty weird.They sent me a complimentary copy of their book when it was first published. After a quick read it ended up in my basement. Over the holidays I'll give it a closer look - and possibly will write a short critique.
GeneChing
12-15-2008, 12:04 PM
The term wuseng has been bandied about in Chinese and scholarly works prior to my use of it, but I think I still was the first to introduce it in a popular martial arts publication. I didn't mean to imply that it was a term that I made up. I should have specified 'pop culture English readers.' Nevertheless, I do feel that the section of TSGT that was devoted to invalidating the existence of wuseng was a reaction to some things I had published at the time. It's not only my own observation but that of others like David Jamieson above. There's no plagiary in countering arguments - quite the opposite really - and I wasn't accusing TSGT of that in my post above at all. I welcome rebuttal. If anything, TSGT's comments were a little flattering.
David Jamieson
12-15-2008, 12:49 PM
The term wuseng has been bandied about in Chinese and scholarly works prior to my use of it, but I think I still was the first to introduce it in a popular martial arts publication. I didn't mean to imply that it was a term that I made up. I should have specified 'pop culture English readers.' Nevertheless, I do feel that the section of TSGT that was devoted to invalidating the existence of wuseng was a reaction to some things I had published at the time. It's not only my own observation but that of others like David Jamieson above. There's no plagiary in countering arguments - quite the opposite really - and I wasn't accusing TSGT of that in my post above at all. I welcome rebuttal. If anything, TSGT's comments were a little flattering.
It's also worth noting that this book did little if anything at all in the way of cross-referencing with historical treatises on the subjects at hand that are extant already and it seems to be a compilation of westernized understandings of what shaolin is/was, what kungfu is/was and so on.
academically speaking, it is at best shaky and at worst, a complete and utter fraud salted with stories from some good points and heaping helpings of musings that have little if anything to do with reality, history, or Shaolin itself.
If I want to learn about WW2 I won't do it through Captain America novels even though the Captain America stories may contain references to real places or things or people or events. The comic script is not a viable source.
Most people, who can go beyond rudimentary knowledge of Shaolin, Zen, martial Arts from Shaolin and so on can clearly and readily see this book is not the greatest of works on the subject.
In my opinion, barely even a mediocre presentation.
No apologies. :) Because there is no mirror and you and I are not dust upon it.
r.(shaolin)
12-20-2008, 03:34 PM
Wow! This book is screwed up. Its a muddle of confusion written by confused people. Talk about misinformation.
They even have the basic information wrong. Here is one example:
This 'order' (more of a dis-order:-) believe that the terms, shi di, shi jie and shi xiong designate the "level of the practitioner". These are relational terms and have nothing to do with the level of the practitioner. Yikes!!! and I have only started reading it.
r.
It's also worth noting that this book did little if anything at all in the way of cross-referencing with historical treatises on the subjects at hand that are extant already and it seems to be a compilation of westernized understandings of what shaolin is/was, what kungfu is/was and so on.
academically speaking, it is at best shaky and at worst, a complete and utter fraud salted with stories from some good points and heaping helpings of musings that have little if anything to do with reality, history, or Shaolin itself.
If I want to learn about WW2 I won't do it through Captain America novels even though the Captain America stories may contain references to real places or things or people or events. The comic script is not a viable source.
Most people, who can go beyond rudimentary knowledge of Shaolin, Zen, martial Arts from Shaolin and so on can clearly and readily see this book is not the greatest of works on the subject.
In my opinion, barely even a mediocre presentation.
No apologies. :) Because there is no mirror and you and I are not dust upon it.
They even have the basic information wrong. Here is one example: This 'order' (more of a dis-order:-) believe that the terms, shi di, shi jie and shi xiong designate the "level of the practitioner". These are relational terms and have nothing to do with the level of the practitioner.
actually it depends. they can indicate either level or age depending on relationship to oneself.
take shixiong (senior brother) for example. one can be a shixiong to you if:
1. they study with the same shifu, but are year ahead of you.
2. they are your shifu's son and are older than you.
3. they are your father's student and are older than you.
it works the same respectively for shidi (junior brother), shijie (senior sister) and shimei (junior sister). you can have an older shidi who is behind you in studies with the same shifu, for example. you may also have a younger shijie.
the things that have more of a red flag to me in that book are all the ridiculous levels and associated colors of pants for which style, and whether or not you can wear shoes at each level.
things like this, not to mention their unverifiable lineage and that silly photo of their "monk" in the back of the book, who is obviously a white guy wearing a karate suit with long hair, doing a jump kick covering his face so you cant actually see him. looks like they took a still from a bruce lee movie and turned it black and white.
i had a funny little chat with one of the authors some time ago...
r.(shaolin)
12-26-2008, 06:24 AM
actually it depends. they can indicate either level or age depending on relationship to oneself.
In the tradition I practice this has had nothing to do with level or age. In the case of Shixiong (senior brother) for example, a person would be a shixiong to a brother disciple if they have a disciple relationship with the same shifu, and began this relationship earlier. This would be the case even if the student was the shifu's son. This system organizes both the disciples in the same generation as well as their relationship between generations. The most junior member of one generation is senior to the most senior member of the next.
As far as the book goes, it is rather strange. What was your conversation with them about?
r.
r.(shaolin)
12-26-2008, 05:03 PM
I finally slogged through this piece of crap what a horrid waste of time that was. I must concur with Henning's review in JAMA. What can you expect from 'vanity' publishing?
This book sucks. It is packed with misinformation. It attempts to appear well researched by citing previous publications, but even the most cursory review of the bibliography reveals that it focuses only on recent titles and only in English. In fact, there are some obvious gaffs in here that clearly indicate that the researchers lack even the most fundamental understanding of Chinese language, much less Chinese culture. It's more of a manifesto - some one obviously put a lot of work into this solely to perpetuate their agenda within their strange belt system school. I get sent a lot of manifestos - this has to be the best presentation so far, but it still lacked content.
There's two kickers to this - two outstanding things the just sent sent it over the top. One is that it comes with this little apology blow-in card. What kind of book does that? It's out of fear. Second, and this is why I call them 'cowards,' is that they refuse to identify themselves. They give all sorts of excuses for anonymity, but it's it's really ridiculous when you think about it. After all, this is the martial arts. If you can't lay your name and reputation down on the line with something that you publish, you have no right to stand amongst other martial artists that do.
I feel bad for any newbies who begin their Shaolin journey with this book. They will be so deluded. I can only hope that they can find the truth, in the end.
ditto to the above (and to many of the other criticisms of this book).
It looks to me like this group may have had some connection to one of the many Buddhist heterodox secret societies. It is also apparent that the book which The Shaolin Grandmasters' Text is based on by the person called Li En Huo - if it existed - is very thin indeed.
The description of Li En Huo's sect has all the earmarks of such societies that have a long history in China. Here are some quotes from the book that suggest this to me:
". . . imperial soldiers surrounded the Henan Temple at night and set fire to the grounds, . .and seven of the thirteen priests and some forty disciples managed to escape . . pg. 29.
This is a feature of most Triad accounts although 5 or 18 monks escaping is more common.
". . . beginning in 1902 senior Shaolin priest began arriving in the United States. They spent time in such cities as San Francisco, Chicago, Vancouver, and Toronto, before convening in New York (and established a temple). They generally kept very low profiles . . . ." pg. 45
"Our grandmasters decided in the 1940's to make efforts to ensure that any rebirth of the Order would come from the New World. . . ." pg. 14
It is not surprising, given how pervasive secretive societies were, that they would come to North America. Many, if not all, were connected with the Chinese triad societies.
" ...the unique Shaolin martial training, allowed their hair to grow back..." pg. 101
I doubt this - Shaolin was an Imperial Monastery for most of it history, as with other imperial monasteries, it tended to be more orthodox and strict in this regard. Only lay-brothers and sisters kept their hair, clergy did not.
"Shaolin makes no prohibition against fraternization between male and female monks. . . "pg. 101
Fraternization ( intermingling indiscriminately) between males and females was one of the most common criticisms of the heterodox secret societies by both the orthodox Buddhists (and Imperial governments) during the Song, Yuan, Ming, and Qing period.
"Shaolin students were also taught acting, mime, make-up costuming and ventriloquism skills. pg. 102
Again something typical of subversive secret societies. Ge Lao Hui 哥老會 as an example included martal arts and acting.
In my opinion, Li En Huo, et al. may have been connected to the 哥老會 Ge Lao Hui or a Qing Bang 青幫 society originating at 法性寺 Fa Xing Si in Hopei province during the late 1600's. It was composed of pro Ming rebels from Fujian and Guangdong who had been fighting in the north. At the beginning of the Qing period a number of them became monks and settled at Fa Xing Si. This group changed the name of this monastery to "Shaolin" and claimed connection to the Henan monastery. In an effort to evade government scrutiny, this secret society calling itself a number of different names including Five Happiness Society (伍福黨 Wu Fu Dang) and spread in the north then to Fujian and Guangdong Provinces. My guess is that the "Order of Shaolin Ch'an" group may, at one time, have had some contact with members of that society. Basically, these societies are not connected in any direct way with the real Shaolin monastery.
r.
I finally slogged through this piece of crap what a horrid waste of time that was.that's quite the tipping of the scales of balance... would you take it as far as burning it? and what truly can be called a waste of time when it the only thing that time brings, is change.
This book sucks. because the possibility would cause the collapse of the worlds martial arts as brought through your magazine?
It is packed with misinformation.yet how do you defend misinformation, if any, that is published in your magazine?
It attempts to appear well researched by citing previous publications, but even the most cursory review of the bibliography reveals that it focuses only on recent titles and only in English. akin to teaching a child the basic building blocks, from which to build their own search for the truth. naturally you first give the people something in which they can relate to... moving backwards is rising upwards.
In fact, there are some obvious gaffs in here that clearly indicate that the researchers lack even the most fundamental understanding of Chinese language, much less Chinese culture.yet oral traditions kept for thousands of years will naturally very from the language around them... and considering the the book sites that the last of the order was gone around '28 there is a strong possibility that the lack of influnence from evolving chinese culture and language would seem off.
It's more of a manifesto - some one obviously put a lot of work into this solely to perpetuate their agenda within their strange belt system school.yet isn't that called successful marketting strategy or something? if you wanted to put forth a first book, ever, to the public... wouldn't you want to make a big splash? compared to your magazine, which is more like a strewn handful of pebbles, this book, regardless of authenticity, made one hêll of a splash... and we all know that the ripples from one big splash, usually disrupt all the little chaotic ripples caused from a small handful...
I get sent a lot of manifestos - this has to be the best presentation so far, but it still lacked content.another fine example of the concept of big splashes.
There's two kickers to this - two outstanding things the just sent sent it over the top. One is that it comes with this little apology blow-in card. What kind of book does that? a truly humble jester...
It's out of fear. fear you say? i'd say it took quite a set of balls to present this book to an obviously hostile world of Modern Martial Arts.
Second, and this is why I call them 'cowards,' is that they refuse to identify themselves. They give all sorts of excuses for anonymity, but it's it's really ridiculous when you think about it. so those in an order that has suffered persecution, from their near beginnings, who have had numerous members killed over the years from ignorant minded folks, are in fact being... cowards?
After all, this is the martial arts.you see, you are missing the point entirely... shaolin is not about martials first... there no reason to even care wether or not the world accepts it or not.
If you can't lay your name and reputation down on the line with something that you publish, you have no right to stand amongst other martial artists that do.you're right!! they can stand amongst whoever they want, because they live up to no one elses set of standards and beliefs than their own.
I feel bad for any newbies who begin their Shaolin journey with this book.everyone starts their journey somewhere... better to start with one book of possible bull, rarther than a magazines worth of a thousand possible more...
They will be so deluded.delusion is relative to the individual, not the spectators.
I can only hope that they can find the truth, in the end.even as the scales of can tip from end to end without finding stability, they still cross the inflection point of of balance at the center... :)
richard sloan
12-31-2008, 08:40 PM
I can't believe I wasted a calorie reading that post Uki.
Scott R. Brown
12-31-2008, 08:59 PM
I can't believe I wasted a calorie reading that post Uki.
Not to mention the calories you wasted posting a reply!;)
I can't believe I wasted a calorie reading that post Uki.i am sure you have far worse ways to waste your calories. :)
Not to mention the calories you wasted posting a reply!yet is anything ever wasted? they say that one mans trash is another mans treasure...
Scott R. Brown
01-01-2009, 03:03 AM
they say that one mans trash is another mans treasure...
And one man's foolishness is another man's wisdom! :)
And one man's foolishness is another man's wisdom!how true... and then again, one mans wisdom is another mans folly.
Scott R. Brown
01-01-2009, 09:02 AM
how true... and then again, one mans wisdom is another mans folly.
And yet, one man's folly, is another man's fortune!:D
And yet, one man's folly, is another man's fortune!we seemed to have established this fact.
richard sloan
01-01-2009, 01:52 PM
well having invested the calorie, in for a penny, in for a pound.
actually it's good to have ignorant posts like that around, without a punching bag you never can learn to hit.
richard sloan
01-01-2009, 01:55 PM
...
so those in an order that has suffered persecution, from their near beginnings, who have had numerous members killed over the years from ignorant minded folks, are in fact being... cowards?...
LMAO!!! Gene, of course they have to hide their identity! They don't want you sending your ninjas after them!!!!
Actually Uki, I have to thank you. The day was a little dull, but now at least there is some humor.
What's your favorite Shaw Brothers flick? I'm going to guess Brave Archer 2.
Actually Uki, I have to thank you. The day was a little dull, but now at least there is some humor.theres always a rainbow when you least expect it.
What's your favorite Shaw Brothers flick? I'm going to guess Brave Archer 2.to be honest i am not much of a kung fu movies buff... i wouldn't know i a shaw brothers film if i saw one. :)
i guess gene has nothing to say of my near-latest response to his critical view of the book? :)
GeneChing
01-08-2009, 10:23 AM
there no reason to even care wether or not the world accepts it or not.
Are you the author? That would explain a lot... :rolleyes:
David Jamieson
01-08-2009, 12:24 PM
What shade of red is a man's face when he discovers he has invested into lies for so long as to come to believe them and then to have them shattered by truth?
I think it's closer to purple myself.
As far as the book goes, it is rather strange. What was your conversation with them about?
r.
basically i was pulling out all the garbage and questioning their honesty and motives with it all.
the person i was talking to, one of the authors, said they in fact considered including an entire chapter with detailed information on their lineage. however, in the end they decided their aim was for people to focus on the practice tradition explained in the book. :rolleyes:
and so they decided not to include that chapter, even though to many, that would be the critical information needed to determine whether or not it would be worth it to give a care to any of the garbage in the book. then again, perhaps thats the reason for their final choice, huh? ;)
richard sloan
01-08-2009, 05:22 PM
theres always a rainbow when you least expect it.
to be honest i am not much of a kung fu movies buff... i wouldn't know i a shaw brothers film if i saw one. :)
well Uki, I desperately need you to watch Brave Archer 2. I feel you alone would be able to penetrate it's impenetrable nonsense and explain it to the world. Just please make sure to wear your Aluminum Hat to ensure a proper broadcast.
Are you the author? That would explain a lot...i seem to have struck a nerve... point made. :)
What shade of red is a man's face when he discovers he has invested into lies for so long as to come to believe them and then to have them shattered by truth?hopefully you'll be standing in front of the mirror when the truth hits you. :p
David Jamieson
01-09-2009, 06:22 AM
i seem to have struck a nerve... point made. :)
hopefully you'll be standing in front of the mirror when the truth hits you. :p
you're so 15 minutes ago with your artificial contrarism. lol
But thanks, we can use a village idiot. everyone can, may as well be you because you are outstanding as such.
congratualtions! You win. BUt even though you've won, you are still retarded. :)
you're so 15 minutes ago with your artificial contrarism. lolatleast i arrived... you're still standing at the station.
But thanks, we can use a village idiot.good, because i see no one else with balls enough for the task at hand.
everyone can, may as well be you because you are outstanding as such.i will definitely take that as a compliment...
congratualtions! You win. BUt even though you've won, you are still retarded.i have highlighted some of the wonderful words of wisdom from such an esteemed martial artist such as yourself... kudos... you should pen down all your wise words and put a book out, might do just aswell as the shaolin grandmasters text... of course the only difference is the the fact that we will all know which idiot wrote it. :D
gene responded the way he did to my post because he simply does not have any valid defense against my words. he's so critical of others percieved errors, that he has blinded himself to his own critical errors... not too shaolin i tell you.
David Jamieson
01-09-2009, 07:01 AM
atleast i arrived... you're still standing at the station.
good, because i see no one else with balls enough for the task at hand.
i will definitely take that as a compliment...
i have highlighted some of the wonderful words of wisdom from such an esteemed martial artist such as yourself... kudos... you should pen down all your wise words and put a book out, might do just aswell as the shaolin grandmasters text... of course the only difference is the the fact that we will all know which idiot wrote it. :D
gene responded the way he did to my post because he simply does not have any valid defense against my words. he's so critical of others percieved errors, that he has blinded himself to his own critical errors... not too shaolin i tell you.
if it didn't bother you, you wouldn't bother.
just sayin. :)
sanjuro_ronin
01-09-2009, 07:06 AM
I have this book, its an interesting read.
Much BS in it based on the usual crap, but some interesting POV.
David Jamieson
01-09-2009, 07:33 AM
Interesting point of view...yeah, if you are a fan of permutations of the series "Kung Fu" from the seventies starring David Carradine with it's curious mix of judaeo-christian mythos and folklore mixed up with a hodge podge of fortune cookies and misread analects. lol
I found Meirs book to be much more well researched.
I find the teachings of various sifu to be far more useful.
sanjuro_ronin
01-09-2009, 08:10 AM
Interesting point of view...yeah, if you are a fan of permutations of the series "Kung Fu" from the seventies starring David Carradine with it's curious mix of judaeo-christian mythos and folklore mixed up with a hodge podge of fortune cookies and misread analects. lol
I found Meirs book to be much more well researched.
I find the teachings of various sifu to be far more useful.
The one by Brian kennedy and Elisabeth Guo was excellent too.
richard sloan
01-09-2009, 12:44 PM
gene responded the way he did to my post because he simply does not have any valid defense against my words.
BRAVE ARCHER 2.
PLEASE. We're desperate over here.
I now feel compelled to shout, "LEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOY JEEEEEEEENNNNKINNS!!!"
David Jamieson
01-09-2009, 01:26 PM
Holy crap, he just ran in...
Lucas
01-09-2009, 03:01 PM
Brave Archer and his Mate? (http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/274/bravearcherandhismatedvdz9.jpg)
David Jamieson
01-09-2009, 03:51 PM
wow. nice bangs.
richard sloan
01-09-2009, 04:35 PM
yup. alexander fu sheng. it's a 4 parter.
perhaps one of the most impenetrable non sensical kung fu movie series ever, matched only perhaps by the first one. we are still trying to figure out how they decided to make 2,3, and 4.
we seriously need a mind like uki's to figure that **** out.
but it might be too much even for his synapses to handle, hence my recommendation for the Aluminum Hat.
we seriously need a mind like uki's to figure that **** out. but it might be too much even for his synapses to handle, hence my recommendation for the Aluminum Hat.obviously if you need my mind to figure it out, you are establishing that your synapses are already short-circuited. :)
taai gihk yahn
01-10-2009, 09:29 AM
i wouldn't know i a shaw brothers film if i saw one. :)
but would you know it if you were in one, sir? ;)
richard sloan
01-10-2009, 02:15 PM
obviously if you need my mind to figure it out, you are establishing that your synapses are already short-circuited. :)
no. Sadly, I'm a creature of rational thought and logic. we need someone who thinks by having random synaptical firings, but who thinks it's sensical to take a stab at it and see if chaos can lead to some semblance of understanding.
I know that is not a word, but screw it, when dealing with this kind of thing like the Grandmasters Text and the Brave Archer series, we can make up whatever we want.
David Jamieson
01-10-2009, 06:05 PM
yup. alexander fu sheng. it's a 4 parter.
perhaps one of the most impenetrable non sensical kung fu movie series ever, matched only perhaps by the first one. we are still trying to figure out how they decided to make 2,3, and 4.
we seriously need a mind like uki's to figure that **** out.
but it might be too much even for his synapses to handle, hence my recommendation for the Aluminum Hat.
maybe it's a chinese attempt at outing oneself?
richard sloan
01-11-2009, 12:52 AM
maybe it's a chinese attempt at outing oneself?
until Uki watches it and tells us, God only knows.
no. Sadly, I'm a creature of rational thought and logic.it's not wise to embrace one aspect of thought... perhaps you'll become more happy when you embrace the opposite sometimes. :)
we need someone who thinks by having random synaptical firings, but who thinks it's sensical to take a stab at it and see if chaos can lead to some semblance of understanding.understanding chaos is simply to understand the nature of change...
I know that is not a word, but screw it, when dealing with this kind of thing like the Grandmasters Text and the Brave Archer series, we can make up whatever we want.making up whatever we want is called creation... it's only logical that artists create by making something from nothing. look at martial arts... it is an ever-evolving, changing, and adapting creation, what works for someone, might not work for everyone... creation is the expression of our souls(spirit) to our senses.
until Uki watches it and tells us, God only knows.i'll check netflix... you've piqued my curiosity.
richard sloan
01-11-2009, 08:07 PM
see what I mean?
he's perfect for the job.
Sal Canzonieri
01-13-2009, 11:07 PM
I would love to see that.
I saw it in the 1980s, at Johnny Wu's house in Cleveland Ohio. I was with a group of various well known masters that were judging at Johnny's tournaments he was doing back then.
It was a tape made by this Seattle school, I think they had a tv show in that area where they did some sill stuff and then promoted their school.
One of their students sued them for fraud, the chief instructor had to admit in court that his lineage was made up and so was the martial arts he taught there at the school.
I think the person's name (teacher) was Simon, forgot the last name, a skinny pasty faced guy, he even had books out.
I guess they send Johnny the videos and book to be reviewed in his Han Wei journal, where I first started writing my KF history research articles.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.