Houston Shaolin Kung Fu Academy & The Shaolin Monk Tour

[Songshan]

Just wanted to post Shi Xing Hao's school has updated the web site (finally) !!!! It is still under construction but check it out! The link is in my profile but heck if you don't want to read through my profile (I don't blame you) then you can see it here (http://www.houstonshaolin.com)


Also there is a Shaolin Monk Tour heading to the Houston area. The dates are July 1, 2006 and July 2, 2006. It will be at the Stafford Center Theater of Performing Arts in Stafford Texas (a Houston suburb). You can call 713-772-1133 for more information.

[bungbukuen]

Typical modern Shaolin crap we see everywhere. If you look at their classes they offer the standard modern wushu curriculum; taichi, chang quan, san da, longfist & kickboxing (??), and traditional shaolin (aka: a few more forms for good measure).

This is really indicative of the entire Shaolin wushu scene in China. It is a real travesty to see this kind of crap being propagated as some kind of traditional Shaolin fighting system. Essentially it is fraudulent marketing, and everyone is just eating this sh!t by the truckloads.

[jerryyang]

http://www.chineseciviccenter.org/en/houston/houstonshow.htm

[Songshan]

Typical modern Shaolin crap we see everywhere. If you look at their classes they offer the standard modern wushu curriculum; taichi, chang quan, san da, longfist & kickboxing (??), and traditional shaolin (aka: a few more forms for good measure).

This is really indicative of the entire Shaolin wushu scene in China. It is a real travesty to see this kind of crap being propagated as some kind of traditional Shaolin fighting system. Essentially it is fraudulent marketing, and everyone is just eating this sh!t by the truckloads.


Considering you have a blank profile it reveals that you have to hide behind a message board name and slander things you don't really know about. Why are you posting in the Shaolin forum anyway? If you don't like it don't click it.

[TenTigers]

hmmmm...you're both right.:D

[SanHeChuan]

I saw a touring monk show in Lubbock texas in 03? anyway I got to meet the monks and they were cool, :cool: They taught us a form (which I couldn't remember) and that was cool. :p But the show it's self was disa****ing pointing with made up sh!t like frog and scropion kung fu that looked stupid as hell. :mad:

[Songshan]

:rolleyes:

[bungbukuen]

Songshan,

Last time I checked it was perfectly within limits of the KFO forum to protect our individual privacy. If you have a problem with that take it up with the forum administrators.

Slander is when you say something about a person or entity that is not true. I said Houston Shaolin was teaching a modern wushu curriculum. The content of the website only confirms this. If you look at the curriculum it is clear that the majority of training focuses on chang quan (a single form by the way) and san da (i.e. Chinese kick boxing). Both references to modern sport wushu. And where in the website is there any reference to an actual specific Shaolin system. Answer - none.

Why are you posting on the Shaolin forum?
The question is why are you posting a clearly modern sport wushu curriculum in a Shaolin forum.

If you don't like it don't click it.
How am I suppose to know one way or the other if I like it or not if I do not click it?

Houston Shaolin is clearly teaching a modern wushu curriculum. It is also obvious that Shi Xing Hao is the by-product of a strictly modern wushu upbringing. There is nothing wrong with this and I certainly do believe that he is a absolutely phenomenal athlete and form dancer. But the teachings at this school seemingly have nothing to do with any traditional combative Shaolin system.

[BoulderDawg]

I've just started my Shaolin training 5 months ago in Colorado under the guidance of the teachings of Grandmaster The.

Now, being new to the art, I've gotten on the internet and noticed there are hundreds of different styles and schools. For me, having nothing else to compare it to, I love the school and the training. However I've also wondered how other schools compare.

As far as I know there is no regulating body. Anybody can open a school, give out black belts and train anything.

[B-Rad]

Houston Shaolin is clearly teaching a modern wushu curriculum. It is also obvious that Shi Xing Hao is the by-product of a strictly modern wushu upbringing.

Actually, Shi Xing Hao was considered a Shaolin expert before becoming a monk. Whether he teaches what he learned before, I couldn't say. I've never been to the school, and have only seen a bit of their longfist competition forms. Chang Quan is not one form, by the way, there are quite a few training forms (different than competition forms). Again, can't say whether he teaches the training forms in depth (how to use the punching, kicking, throwing, and locking techniques) or at all (lots of teachers here don't bother with anything but the performance forms). San Da also can mean different things. Asumung they're refering specifically to the sport, it at least allows them to test at least punching, kicking, and throwing in a hard contact live situation. It's a lot more than most "traditional" schools do, and they shouldn't be looked down on it for that. It's certainly better than only sticking to pre-aranged partner drills or going to the other extreme or injuring each other with maiming, crippling techniques :D


Last time I checked it was perfectly within limits of the KFO forum to protect our individual privacy. If you have a problem with that take it up with the forum administrators.
It's not a rights issue, it's an integrety issue. If you're going to insult another school (which you did) it looks pretty cowardly to give zero info on yourself or your training background. Also, your opinions won't carry as much wieght.

[Songshan]

Songshan,

Last time I checked it was perfectly within limits of the KFO forum to protect our individual privacy. If you have a problem with that take it up with the forum administrators.

Slander is when you say something about a person or entity that is not true. I said Houston Shaolin was teaching a modern wushu curriculum. The content of the website only confirms this. If you look at the curriculum it is clear that the majority of training focuses on chang quan (a single form by the way) and san da (i.e. Chinese kick boxing). Both references to modern sport wushu. And where in the website is there any reference to an actual specific Shaolin system. Answer - none.

Why are you posting on the Shaolin forum?
The question is why are you posting a clearly modern sport wushu curriculum in a Shaolin forum.

If you don't like it don't click it.
How am I suppose to know one way or the other if I like it or not if I do not click it?

Houston Shaolin is clearly teaching a modern wushu curriculum. It is also obvious that Shi Xing Hao is the by-product of a strictly modern wushu upbringing. There is nothing wrong with this and I certainly do believe that he is a absolutely phenomenal athlete and form dancer. But the teachings at this school seemingly have nothing to do with any traditional combative Shaolin system.


Well there are quite a few misconceptions here on your end. I am not saying that you have to post your personal information (ie address, phone number etc.) to post. What I am saying is that I only think it's fair that you show your background and present your credentials in what you know if your going to debunk a style. The problem these days is that people do it behind a computer and keyboard under an alias. It's amazing how many people claim to be "shaolin experts" with little to no background in this style. So nothing needs to be said to the KFO mods. If your going make a negative post then you should be able to back it up with facts and not the things you seem to have misread.

We all know what slander is. I was referring to the elite few that like to come into the the Shaolin forum and spam their flaming views about how much they dislike Shaolin, call it "crap" along with all the other negatives. Houston Shaolin Academy teaches traditional shaolin, Chang Quan (not a single form by the way), tai chi, San da and Lion dance (cultural). This is CLEARLY referenced and listed under the "school" section of the website. The school does teach Chang Quan which is considered modern wushu but is clearly stated that is not listed as "traditional shaolin". The forms are different and so are the excercises involved.

Wushu........

Unfortunately the west has come to recognize "wushu" as just being the acrobatic flowery style of martial arts. Wushu has a different meaning in the east. The very definition of of Wushu is "Wu" meaning martial and "Shu" meaning art or skill. Wushu is made up of talou (hand forms)and san da. The main wushu hand forms are Chang Quan (referred as long fist), Nan Quan (southern style), Tai Chi Quan and not to mention the weapon sets. The "wushu" we have come to know here in the states is "modern wushu". There have been timeless debates referring "modern" wushu as "traditional" wushu which leads to shaolin. Wushu is widely used loose term for martial arts in China (kind of how some people refer to martial arts as "karate" here in the USA). If you have seen "shaolin wushu" used in some cases it's referring to the traditional martial arts aspect or "traditional wushu". Needless to say, modern wushu is part of the curriculum at the Shaolin Temple today. However, there is traditional shaolin taught as well and should not be dismissed as all "wushu".

I post in the shaolin forum because that's the style I train in. I dont even train in Chang Quan. I just wanted to share the website update of our school and announce that a monk tour is heading our way for those who may be interested in it..... not to argue or offend anyone. I posted that original question because I will never understand why some people come to the shaolin forum and post such negative things about shaolin. We would be far better off if the vast majority of us respected each other, our beliefs and educate rather than disrespect and flame. The irony of it as martial artists we should be practicing that.

[bungbukuen]

It is a fact that I said modern wushu was being taught at Houston Shaolin kung fu school. I am glad you finally acknowledge this. Thank you.

I see the website Houston Shaolin and yourself like to throw around the term "traditional Shaolin" quite a bit. But when someone asks what actual system is taught, your only reply is "traditional Shaolin". "Traditional Shaolin is not a reference to any specific system of study that came out of Shaolin. I will ask again - what actual specific traditional Shaolin system is taught at your school? Simple question deserves a simple answer.

Cheers

[Songshan]

Yes I acknowledged that Chang Quan was taught at the school. I never denied it. It's not the only thing being taught and is not presented as "traditional shaolin". The basic kung fu class is the traditional class where anyone who starts training at the school must begin in this class before training in the other classes. Again the web site clearly states this under the "school" section.

I replied traditional shaolin kung fu because it is its own style and a reference to a specific system of study. This is where you should do more research. If you are referring to "system" meaning a particular style (like mantis, wing chun, etc)....you will never find it. "Systems" like mantis and wing chun have often been said that they were shaolin influenced. This is has also been a topic of debates because some schools present "systems" like praying mantis, wing chun and what not as "shaolin kung fu" and use the name. Some people agree and think its okay and some do not. This is why among other things why Shaolin Temple is trying to trademark the name.

To answer your question, the traditional Shaolin "system" consists of Shao Hong Chuan, Lian Huan Chuan, Tong bei Chuan, Mei Hua Chuan, Pao Chuan....the list can go on and on. These are just the names that I can remember off the top of my head. These are hand forms. There are also weapons and the study of qi gong that make up the entire shaolin "system". You can also tell the difference between wushu and traditional shaolin from the stances. For example in wushu, the gong bu stance (front stance) the legs are extended out straight with the toes of the front leg/foot pointed straight out. In the traditional gong bu, the legs are not strectched far apart and the front foot/toes is turned inward at a forty-five degree angle. There are other clues to look for but they hard to describe without any visuals.

In closing, I hope this cleared up some of the misunderstandings. I do not proclaim Shaolin as the only authentic style of martial arts that exits today. Shaolin is not for everyone and there are those that will never see it as real. I am just fortunate enough to live where a number of monks have settled down and opened schools here. What works for you...works for you. This is what works for me. Good Luck!

[bungbukuen]

Songshan,

I asked what traditional Shaolin system was taught at your school. From your in-depth understanding and diligent research you listed four hand forms. :confused:

"Just off the top of my head" I am guessing the rest of your forms list looks like this: Xiao hong quan, Da hong quan, Tong bi quan, Liu he quan, Chang quan, Chang hu xin yi men, Qi xing quan, Mei hua quan, Pao quan, Lo han quan.

Nowadays mainstream Shaolin has nothing to do with being a cohesive holistic system of fighting techniques, theory, and training methedology. Plain and simple it is a forms / performance based curriculum. What is propagated as traditional Shaolin is nothing more than a massive list of loosely disconnected and modified forms. They don't teach students how to fight, they add on san da or kick boxing for the so-called applied combat component, throw in standardized competition wushu forms like Chang Quan so as not to exclude themselves from competitions, and there you have the newly re-invented "traditioanl Shaolin kungfu".

The Houston Shaolin school fits this formula to a tee. Competition forms training, san da / kick boxing, shaolin forms training, and lets not forget taiji for "breathing".

If I am not mistaken some of the more famous traditional systems coming out of Shaolin included Hong Jia Shaolin, Kong Jia Shaolin, Yu Jia Shaolin, Da Sheng Men, Luo Han Men, Wei Tuo Men, Er Lang Men, Wu Xing Quan, not to mention many many more.

Cheers

[Songshan]

I was giving you a simple answer to your simple question. You do a pretty good job of misreading things. The four hand forms I mentioned were just the four that came to mind as I was typing....never said they represented all. They were just examples of traditonal shaolin forms and not wushu. The diligent research was for you to do, not me. I wasn't planning on posting a research paper here. I also am not saying that I am a Shaolin expert either. I am just a student. Perhaps there is a little more to the story on why you are just another "shaolin critic". :confused:

There are plenty of fighting applications in Shaolin forms. Considering you never visited the school, you have absolutely no idea how the training is. Your synopsis of Shaolin is just your opinion and your entitled to that. Like I posted previously, what works for you works for you. If you do not like the modern shaolin system then by all means you don't have to train in it.

Cheers

[bungbukuen]

My main point was that Houston Shaolin is predominately a modern wushu school with a forms / performance based curriculum.

Songshan agreed.

When asked what "traditional Shaolin" system is trained at Houston Shaolin, the answer was "Traditional Shaolin". When asked again the answer given was nothing but a forms list. That also is not an answer.

Overall Songshan has not been able tell us what actual system is trained. Either you do not know, or your school is not teaching any specific traditioanl Shaolin system.

Which one is it?

[Songshan]

Bungbukuen,

The phone number to the school is 832-858-3898. You can call and talk directly to Shi Xing Hao. He can answer any questions you still may have.

[bungbukuen]

Songshan - thanks for finally admitting that you do not in fact know what system of Shaolin kungfu you are actually training. Maybe you should also ask your teacher. :)

[Songshan]

Bungbukuen,

I am not admitting anything. My point is that if you think what Shi Xing Hao is teaching is not shaolin then by all means you can call him and he can answer your questions. So with that being said here is the school phone number again 832-858-3898. :)

[bungbukuen]

Songshan,

You posted a link to Houston Shaolin.

I said they were teaching modern wushu with no traditional Shaolin kungfu system.

You admited they were teaching modern wushu. You also claimed they were teaching traditional Shaolin.

I then asked you numerous times what traditional system of Shaolin kungfu you were learning. You were never able to answer the question. It was obvious that you did not know. It is also obvious that your teacher has never given you a straight answer either. You now want me to phone the school and check for you.

Is your teacher trying to pull a fast one over you?

[Songshan]

Songshan,

You posted a link to Houston Shaolin

Yep


they were teaching modern wushu with no traditional Shaolin kungfu system.

Wrong


You admited they were teaching modern wushu. You also claimed they were teaching traditional Shaolin.

Right


I then asked you numerous times what traditional system of Shaolin kungfu you were learning. You were never able to answer the question. It was obvious that you did not know. It is also obvious that your teacher has never given you a straight answer either.

Answered this plenty of times for you already. Obviously anything I say will not justify an answer for you.


You now want me to phone the school and check for you

If you really want the answers to your questions by all means you can talk directly to the source. Read the previous post for the phone number to the school.

[GeneChing]

...Shi Xinghao's traditional roots are in Chuo Jiao. I think that was a family style. He comes from a martial lineage and I've heard that his blood brother is quite talented too. Like any youth of his generation, he competed in modern wushu in his early teens, specializing in Changquan. He went to Shaolin later and was one of the first generation of martial monks who worked at the Songshan Shaolin Wushuguan teaching foreigners and touring the world giving performances.

The publicly offered curriculam at the Wushuguan consists of a cluster of fundamental Shaolin forms (see my article Bak Sil Lum vs. Shaolin Temple #3: Who's Got the Real Shaolin Kungfu? (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/ezine/article.php?article=156) for some details on that). Xinghao's program probably derives from that, but I think it's a great disservice to discount this as a "massive list of loosely disconnected and modified forms". To some degree, this has always been the history of Shaolin. It's a repository, so there are tons of different systems floating around there. Each person gives and takes to and from the institution. That's why looking at Shaolin in terms of black & white/wushu & traditional is absurd. It's so vast, you'll see everything, even TKD. There are some modifications to many of the traditional forms, to be sure. If you had to each droves of foreigners, you'd make modifications too. You'd give them something they could digest. I've always thought that what makes Shaolin interesting is those modifications. Many students go to Shaolin, take their tourist lessons, and then leave. Others dig at the roots of each form and find plenty of traditional underpinnings. That being said, I'm sure that Xinghao front ends his students with modified traditional lessons and basic jibengong, just like any traditional school that has a brick-and-mortar to maintain. But for his more advanced students, Xinghao has some fascinating old school stuff. He is one of my favorite monks to work with, in that regard.

[B-Rad]

Most of the current day monks seem to know/teach xiao and da hong quan. It could be argued that there's an old traditional Shaolin "system" right there :) It can be pretty specific too.

[bungbukuen]

Songshan:
Beyond contemporary wushu and sanda what system of traditional Shaolin kungfu do you study?

Gene:
You said it was a disservice to discount this as a "massive list of loosely disconnected and modified forms". But I just read your past article and you said the exact same thing.

Everyone knows Bak Sil Lum (aka Er Lang Men) is a very traditioanl Shaolin system. You stated Gene that Songshan Shaolin kungfu "contrasted" Bak Sil Lum. In your article you said Bak Sil Lum was a "cohesive curriculum". Then you said "in contrast", Songshan Shaolin "claimed around 200 sets.....beyond the curriculum of contemporary wushu and sanda (free sparring) taught."

You also agreed with some of my earlier comments Gene stating that "there are some modifications to many of the traditional forms."

I know Gene you have to play both sides but please do not back track on things that you have said previously.

Up to this point the facts are clear. Houston Shaolin teaches contemporary wushu, sanda, and a some modified performance based Shaolin forms. This curriculum has absolutely nothing to do with any traditional fighting Shaolin system. Avid students and supporters like Songshan do not know what system Houston Shaolin is training. No surprise. Even the Associate Publisher Gene Ching has argued in past articles that Songshan Shaolin kungfu is not cohesive, and is built upon a contemporary wushu and sanda curriculum.

Cheers

[wall]

bungbukuen ..... it's not my custom to enter other people's discussions not so much to contribute but simply to "take sides" ..... but your persistence is really overwhealming.

Instead of putting words in the "mouths" of Gene or SongShan, who obviously cannot give you "satisfactory" answers, why not just call and ask XingHao as suggested? Perhaps because it's much easier to publicly criticize based on half-infos rather than privately discuss it with the direct source?

Why your compelling need to criticize anyway? It's obviously not a need arousing from sincere interest in knowing, otherwise you would have already picked up the phone and called XingHao to satisfy your curiosity ... and then perhaps posted saying "XingHao told me they do this and that and therefore I think it is a ....... school".

Anyhow, having spent plenty of time with XingHao's brother XingHong, I assume he does a similar curriculum, let's call it the 'contemporary Shaolin curriculum': plenty of traditional, plenty of combat applications and quinna, some modern Shaolin wushu for competition / exibition, some sanda for full contact sparring practice.

I don't see what's wrong in that, what is so "non-traditional", and if you feel that these are not real fighting monks I suggest you go and test XingHao: if he's anything like XingHong I can assure you that you'll change your mind in much less than 10 seconds (XingHong's latest students are the Hungarian special forces, and his latest fans are two top heavyweight K-1 competitors who saw his last seminar at a big local MA festival :) ).

Wall

[drunkmunky]

to answer the question as to what traditional shaolin system is taught. there are many. the one who posted from houston shaolin said xiao hong quan , pao quan, etc. yes they are hand forms. but they are systems. shaolin is mainly style being taught. if you do research and know anything bou tking fu. you would know that the forms i listed and ones u know r systems taught in many villages in china. like taichi. it is a style. but yet there r different sytems. chen, yang, etc. many masters and whoever went to shaolin in the old days and they taught there sytems there. and it ended up under one style which is shaolin. shaolin doesnt teach the whole system of each style. thats impossible. but it does carry on the knowledge of different systems that was brought there. i dont know if that helps. karate is a style. but has many different variations. but yea. hope it helps. anymore questions or comments u can post here and id answer. and as far as the whole fighting thing goes. there is san da. yes it is modern. but it is fighting none the less. as far as traditional fighting part of shaolin, it is still taught. u just dont see people using it. if u know the forms well enough u would eventually understand the use of each move, or application of the form. that is when u would understand fighting aspect of traditional shaolin. yes it is not taught in shaolin schools. but then again if u dont know how to move well in the form, how to kick right, use energy right. how can u hope to understand and use the applications in the way they r supposed to be used. people like to learn everything so quickly. that y everyone pooping up with blk belt and all that in less than a yr. heck there r even 11 yr olds with blk belts these days. no one has time to understand whatr they r being taught no more

[Songshan]

There have been some pretty good points mentioned here. While I don't think it's entirely absurd to look at shaolin as wushu/traditional, I do think it's imperative that certain forms or "styles" be distinguished as to what is traditional and been handed down through the history of shaolin. I think in some ways this the only way shaolin will survive and not be entirely dismissed as "wushu". I think Gene Ching's latest editorial in the jul/aug issue sums it up the best.

I will say that as a student under a monk, I never try to overstep my boundaries with my shifu. I learn what is taught to me and I am loyal to that. Perhaps this is why I may get mixed up in these debates but on the other hand I never make demands on Shi Xing Hao for information just to fuel these debates. If your a dedicated student then the answers come in due time perhaps during class or after class in a simple conversation. This is why I posted the phone number to the school so bungbukuen can call and find his own answers out for himself. Since all of his posts were repetitive in nature after being given the phone number to the school, it is obvious the true intentions were to instigate some type of argument or just to flame Shaolin. So, bungbukuen call the school if you still would like to know the answer to your questions.

Yes, shaolin is derived from any different "elements". There is a little bit of everything in it and that is what makes it unique. It is also why it's hard to answer what "style" of shaolin is being taught. There's eagle, snake, tiger, mantis and as someone posted earlier frog and scorpion (yes). Shaolin is shaolin pure and simple. At Houston Shaolin Academy not everyone is taught the same thing. Aside from the warm up excercises, the 18 basic postures and the eight levels of the school each student is taught something that is theirs. One student will learn praying mantis, another student will learn tiger, we have students that excel in chang quan...we even have one student who practices the monk spade. So if you have the desire to seek out shaolin it's there. If you don't than by all means that is okay. Again, what works for you works for you. :p

[bungbukuen]

I have listened to everyone's words very carefully. I was very careful to quote Gene Ching within the context of his online article on Bak Sil Lum & Song Shan Shaolin. As usual Songshan hasn't told us anything except that Houston Shaolin teaches contemporary wushu, sanda, and some Shaolin forms. But still nothing meaningful on the actual traditional SYSTEM of study. In fact I think Songshan has done his school more of a dis-service than anything by presenting poor quality information.

Wall - do you mean the entire Hungarian Special Forces unit has been formally sent by their government to the US to train at Houston Shaolin? I am calling your BS on that. As for the K1 comment, fans do not train, so drop your well crafted K1 public relations BS.

Drunkmunky just screwed things up more for Houston Shaolin. One, Shaolin is not a single system or style. That's like saying I studied at Harvard, and then when someone asks me what I studied, I reply Harvard again (???). Sonshan Shaolin was a Buddhist monetary where many fighting systems were developed - examples of Shaolin systems include Hong Jia Shaolin, Kong Jia Shaolin, Yu Jia Shaolin, Da Sheng Men, Luo Han Men, Wei Tuo Men, Er Lang Men, Wu Xing Quan, and more.

Two, sanda is great, but strategically and technically it is very far away from any of the traditional Shaolin fighting systems, as mentioned above.

Three, Drunkmunky admitted that applications are not taught in Shaolin schools. Very strange (??) Then he said that if you know the forms well enough you will eventually understand the application on your own. This second part is the biggest myth being propagated out of forms based training. In a traditional system forms are simply one very small piece of the training tool. They have their place, but they have very little to do with fighting. And understanding application in theory is not enough. Applications must be drilled live thousands of times over in a progressively freeflowing approach.

So coming back to my original point: Houston Shaolin is a forms based curriculum primarily teaching contemperary wushu, sanda, and a few modifiied (but traditioanl) Shaolin forms. They do not teach anything remotely close to any of the traditional Shaolin combative SYSYTEMS. Shi Xing Hao comes from a contemperary wushu background, with some forms based training at Shaolin. It sounds to me Songshan like you are being lead by blind faith, and these so called Shaolin monks teaching a contemperary curriculum will continue to milk it for everything.

Cheers,

[wall]

Wall - do you mean the entire Hungarian Special Forces unit has been formally sent by their government to the US to train at Houston Shaolin? I am calling your BS on that...


Hi, first rule of efficient communication: listen (or in this case read) carefully other people's points.

I wrote: "XingHong's latest students are the Hungarian special forces...".
XingHONG, not XingHAO. And in fact before that I wrote: "... having spent plenty of time with XingHao's brother XingHong ...".

XingHong lives in Hungary and teaches in Europe.

So much for starting your last post with:


I have listened to everyone's words very carefully.


:rolleyes:

If this is your idea of listening to everyone's words very carefully I can see why you keep on repeating the same points without ... listening. Or perhaps the problem is exactly that you are listening ... you should be reading the posts, not listening to them ;)

Wall

[Songshan]

I have listened to everyone's words very carefully. I was very careful to quote Gene Ching within the context of his online article on Bak Sil Lum & Song Shan Shaolin. As usual Songshan hasn't told us anything except that Houston Shaolin teaches contemporary wushu, sanda, and some Shaolin forms. But still nothing meaningful on the actual traditional SYSTEM of study. In fact I think Songshan has done his school more of a dis-service than anything by presenting poor quality information.

Wall was totally correct in his post. As usual bungbukuen has misread a lot of posts, put words in peoples mouths and has jumped to a poor conclusions. As I stated before, I am not a self proclaimed "shaolin expert". I merely posted school information about Shi Xing Hao's school, where I train at. By all means if you feel I have not answered your questions about what the school is about then, again, your always more than welcome to call the school as I keep telling you. I find interesting that a simple phone call would confirm or deny your theory/opinions about Houston Shaolin Academy and yet Bungbukuen continually fails to take the opportunity. I am afraid Bungbukuen will never find an answer to his question(s). This has done a dis-service to his reputation.


So coming back to my original point: Houston Shaolin is a forms based curriculum primarily teaching contemperary wushu, sanda, and a few modifiied (but traditioanl) Shaolin forms. They do not teach anything remotely close to any of the traditional Shaolin combative SYSYTEMS. Shi Xing Hao comes from a contemperary wushu background, with some forms based training at Shaolin. It sounds to me Songshan like you are being lead by blind faith, and these so called Shaolin monks teaching a contemperary curriculum will continue to milk it for everything.

Again, another opinion here. This is probably another attempt to instigate something here. If this is what you honestly believe bungbukuen, then by all means it's ok. As I also stated in my previous posts, I am loyal to what Shi Xing Hao teaches. I do not need to prove anything to anyone.....not even you. Find out for yourself on what something is about before jumping to conclusions. Here is the phone number again 832-858-3898. If you are planning to repeat what you have already posted then there isn't really a point to continue this discussion.

Cheers

[drunkmunky]

oh really. so calling shaolin one particular system is wrong? u obviously not understanding anything anyone is saying; even gene who has more knowledge in martial arts matters than you do. shaolin is one system with many styles under its banner. and that harvard comment made no sense. harvard is a school . like shaolin. has many areas of study under it just like shaolin. so dont make a comment about going to harvard and studying harvard lol. what do u study exactly. u have not brought in anything bout what u studied. just interesting. most people who come to argue usually bring up there style into it and compare things. so what do u study? if u havent studied any aspect of shaolin i dont think u can give any good opinion or argument to the shaolin board.

[drunkmunky]

and u r misreading what i said. i did say the applications r still being taught. u just dont see it really. but this is not an argument. this is just what i know how things r done. forms r taught first. then if master wants to he would teach applications of the form to someone who understands. like qi gong for example. cant expect a student to start training that in there first week. but y u asking bout the system or whatver when u gave a list of what u say is traditional sytems of shaolin. makes no sense to attack a school about there curriculum. yet u turn around with ur own answer.

[bungbukuen]

Originally I looked on the Houston Shaolin website and all I saw was a bunch of crap contemperary wushu, some sanda classes, and "traditional shaolin". When I asked what system of traditional Shaolin kungfu is being taught all I got was a bunch misdirection. Considering the teacher is suppose to be a Shaolin monk I thought this would have been an easy question. Apparently not. What kind of crap school is this that can't even answer what system it is they teach?

Cheers,

[drunkmunky]

so what style of martial art do u study

[GeneChing]

...lord know the old SD threads were getting boring around here.:rolleyes:

You can quote me all you like, bungbukuen, but you are being selective like any good troll. Like I said initially, I think Xinghao's root style was Chuo Jiao. I'm sure he's not teaching that to his general classes. He was a performer, so he can do wushu, like many of the monks and his basic curriculam is probably based on Shaolin jibengong and the standard Shaolin basic forms. But he's got a lot for his indoor disciples that doesn't appear on the website. In fact, I'm not sure he'd be that happy about me disclosing his Chuo Jiao expertise.

Xinghao was one of the first generation tourist teachers. That's a real important point, because the first gen monks had to be able to do everything - perform, teach in many other languages and answer challenges. Challenges are fought at Shaolin all of the time. It was worse in the early years, but just do the math - 80 registered schools at 100-500 students on average, the largest coming in at around 19,000 students. Do you really think that no one ever fights there? It's really more of the second gen monks are of the wushu variety; those are the ones you want to criticize.

[bungbukuen]

Gene,
Why am I a troll if I consistently ask a pertinent question (i.e. what Shaolin system they train?), stay on topic, and keep a conservative no BS attitude? And where was I being selective in quoting you? You very directly stated in your article that modern day Songshan Shaolin contrasts Bak Sil Lum in the number of forms and cohesion of forms. You also said modern day Sonshan Shaolin had a contemporary wushu based curriculum and taught san da. Are you denying that?I am sure Houston Shaolin is exactly the same.

It sounds to me like Xinghao's traditional training has nothing to do with his contemporary Shaolin training and more likely comes from his childhood when he studied Chuo Jiao. But it still does not answer my original question: What traditional Shaolin system is being taught at Houton Shaolin? Anymore Houston Shaolin takers?

[wall]

bungbukuen ... :rolleyes:

[Songshan]

Gene,
Why am I a troll if I consistently ask a pertinent question (i.e. what Shaolin system they train?), stay on topic, and keep a conservative no BS attitude? And where was I being selective in quoting you? You very directly stated in your article that modern day Songshan Shaolin contrasts Bak Sil Lum in the number of forms and cohesion of forms. You also said modern day Sonshan Shaolin had a contemporary wushu based curriculum and taught san da. Are you denying that?I am sure Houston Shaolin is exactly the same.

It sounds to me like Xinghao's traditional training has nothing to do with his contemporary Shaolin training and more likely comes from his childhood when he studied Chuo Jiao. But it still does not answer my original question: What traditional Shaolin system is being taught at Houton Shaolin? Anymore Houston Shaolin takers?


bungbukuen, you consistently have asked the same question. I consistently gave you an answer. I have no idea what background or experience you have. The answer was not good enough for you so instead you disrespectfully flamed Houston Shaolin Academy and called it "crap". I even gave you the phone number to the school for you to call and ask your question(s) and yet you can't even do that. It's obvious why you can't because your intentions are just to instigate nonesense. All you can do is post garbage and repeat yourself.

Now, there is nothing wrong with asking the question. There is nothing wrong if you disagree or don't like shaolin. The school gets walk ins every now and then and they ask the same question. It's the way that you have presented yourself and the manner you have asked the question that makes you a troll. You have misread posts, been rude, put words in people's mouths, and been flat out disrespectful. You expect people to help you out and help answer your questions when you act like that? :confused:

So, with that being said, it looks like you will not find out any answers to your questions. Your mind has already made its decision and there is probably nothing that will change it.

[bungbukuen]

Songshan - still no answer from you. Does anyone at your school actually know what system you guys are studying? Besides contemperary wushu and sport sanda that is.

Cheers!.

[GeneChing]

Like I said, things have been a bit boring round these parts, so your 'devil's advocate discourse' is actually refreshing. There's nothing like a good troll, but a really good troll doesn't go for the old 'feign innocence' ploy, he produces the classic YHBT at the end. Do that, and we'll all respect you. ;)

But back to the 'pertinent question', last I heard, Xiaohongquan was not part of the contemporary wushu compulsories and would be useless for nandu now.

BTW, you aren't part of Deshan's school, are you? :rolleyes:

[Songshan]

Songshan - still no answer from you. Does anyone at your school actually know what system you guys are studying? Besides contemperary wushu and sport sanda that is.

What part of call the school do you not understand?? I am done with you bungbukuen, done.




BTW, you aren't part of Deshan's school, are you? :rolleyes:

:eek: :eek: :D :D

[bungbukuen]

Does anyone have any insight what so ever into what traditional Shaolin system is being taught at Houston Shaolin? It just dumbfounds me that a shcool who claims to be teaching traditional Shaolin can not even tell you what it is in fact that they are teaching. The only details they give on their website chang quan (contemperary wushu), sanda (Chinese kickboxing), and taiji. Then they have the pretentiousness to just list 'traditional Shaolin'.

[B-Rad]

Does anyone have any insight what so ever into what traditional Shaolin system is being taught at Houston Shaolin?
Yes, quite a few of us do :D

[BoulderDawg]

Does anyone have any insight what so ever into what traditional Shaolin system is being taught at Houston Shaolin? It just dumbfounds me that a shcool who claims to be teaching traditional Shaolin can not even tell you what it is in fact that they are teaching. The only details they give on their website chang quan (contemperary wushu), sanda (Chinese kickboxing), and taiji. Then they have the pretentiousness to just list 'traditional Shaolin'.


See I don't understand why you keep asking the question. You have been given the phone number to the school on several occasions. If you were truly interested in an answer you would pick up the phone and call.

Why are you dissin the school? Do you want to become a student? If not then whatever they teach is no concern of yours.:confused:

[bungbukuen]

So this is what it comes down to. When students of Houston Shoalin are pushed for a simple answer as to what system is being taught they go silient. It definitely raises some red flags as to the legitamacy of school operations and even teacher.

Simple advice for Houston Shaolin: do some face saving PR, come out with an official public statement, and clearly state what traditional Shaolin system is being taught (in addition to contemperary wushu, sanda and taiji).

It is quite interesting how one simply little question can create so much apparent chaos :confused:

Cheers,
BBK

[GeneChing]

You're fishing for some bizarre answer like "Xinghao teaches Bak Sil Lum." You can't accept the standard basic Songshan Shaolin curriculum of Xiaohong, Dahong, etc. So we're at an impasse. Now there are some lineages that run through Shaolin like Wu Gulun, etc. *and* there's no denying that there are more than a few wushu sanda 'monks' in America. As I've said before (which is the phrase most often used for trolls, isn't it?) Xinghao was a 1st-gen wushuguan monk. Anyone in that position had to be very diverse in his curiculum. Think about what that must have been like. He had to meet and greet visitors on a daily basis and more than a few were skeptics like yourself. He had to answer challenges and live up to the 'myth' of what a Shaolin monk had to be. And that position wasn't given to him, it was earned. He had to best thousands of students in the area, people that train constantly, many for more hours a week than most of us do for regular work.

Anyway, just to bait you a little more, what do you think of the other Houston monks? Perhaps someone can post their websites here too? I'll look them up when I have a few more moments, but if someone has quicker access....

[Songshan]

See I don't understand why you keep asking the question. You have been given the phone number to the school on several occasions. If you were truly interested in an answer you would pick up the phone and call.

Why are you dissin the school? Do you want to become a student? If not then whatever they teach is no concern of yours.:confused:

BD has a point. Bungbukuen can only repeat his one question over and over because he is making a statement more than a question. Maybe BBK should concentrate on his own training rather than putting down other schools.

[B-Rad]

So this is what it comes down to. When students of Houston Shoalin are pushed for a simple answer as to what system is being taught they go silient.

No they don't. You were givin a simple answer, you just chose to ignore it, or for whatever reason you don't understand it. And since the simple answers don't seem to work for you, you're just going to get more and more complex descriptions added to the chaos you created... it's kind of funny to watch :D

[Songshan]

Anyway, just to bait you a little more, what do you think of the other Houston monks? Perhaps someone can post their websites here too? I'll look them up when I have a few more moments, but if someone has quicker access....


Yep got em right here.....

Shi De Shan (http://www.houstonshaolintemple.com/)

Shi Xing Ying (http://www.internationalshaolin.com/)

Shi Yan Feng (http://www.shaolin-jingwu.com/)

Shi Xing Hao (http://www.houstonshaolin.com/)

[richard sloan]

Then they have the pretentiousness to just list 'traditional Shaolin'.

seems a little pretentious on your part actually.

maybe the part you are missing is that the form clusters in Shaolin such as Xiao and Da Hongs, the lohan clusters, etc are systemic, especially when combined with appropriate chan and other instruction vehicles.

Xiao Hong Chuan is the mother form of 18 other fists, for example...

For your basic premise to work there would have to be a provable break in transmission, in addition to the PRC influence of sport wushu, and there is where your premise falls flat on it's face. Because while there is obviously prc wushu there is also unbroken transmission within the traditional Ch'an families or camps such as within Su Xi's camp. Yong Xin himself seems to have recognized some misteps shall we say with this.

Songshan is not beholden to you to provide an answer better answered by his shifu.

Why don't you step up to your own plate, make the call, and report back rather than hound one student.

[bungbukuen]

It is clear that contemporary performance based wushu (i.e. chang quan as an example) and sanda make up a large component of the curriculum at Houston Shaolin. The school claims to also teach traditional Shaolin but makes no mention of any system. It is perfectly valid to ask what traditional Shaolin system is being taught at Houston Shaolin?

Cheers!

[Songshan]

:rolleyes:

[richard sloan]

It is clear that contemporary performance based wushu (i.e. chang quan as an example) and sanda make up a large component of the curriculum at Houston Shaolin. The school claims to also teach traditional Shaolin but makes no mention of any system. It is perfectly valid to ask what traditional Shaolin system is being taught at Houston Shaolin?

Cheers!

Of course you can ask. Duh. But you don't recognize the systemic cluster of Shaolin forms pinned together through chi kung and ch'an that is being presented by Houston Shaolin. Then you ask as if you are asking the whole world your question and pretend to be awed by the silence when only one student of Houston Shaolin even posts here. Maybe Songshan has only been training there 2 months, maybe 2 years who knows- the system is Shaolin, because while subsystems exist like the ones you mentioned, and were further developed upon leaving the temple, it is still accurate to say "Shaolin" is a system and this is what it is composed of- mother/father fist systems like tong bei and xiao and da hong, etc. You are looking to hear "Lohan" or "Black Tiger" or "Inverted Crushing Skull Fist System" or god knows what other stuff as if there is a complete list out there which you can cross reference but Shaolin has sets, form clusters, etc- styles/systems large and small- overall of it is the umbrella Shaolin which can be referred to as an umbrella system.

Your assumption is that Shaolin has no cohesive systemic curriculum to develop fighters fully in the round as it were and you are wrong for lots of different reasons.

I have news for you, if Houston Shaolin teaches san da the way I feel safe in assuming they do, then all the punches, kicks, throws come from TRADITIONAL Shaolin forms...no matter if they are used in wushu competitions- hence they are certainly accurate to claim they teach TRADITIONAL Shaolin.

Note that their claim has no need of attaching the word 'system,' since it is inherently implied.

You are probably being confused by many of the modern wushu performance team "monks" and shows, but before Yong Xin purged the temple most of the monks who came through its process were transmitted a curriculum that existed pre-1928 Shi You San attacks. And that is being unfolded piecemeal, unless you have the ability to invest 6-8hrs every day or are in the door...and even if you are in the door I would feel safe to say you are really just scratching the surface. It takes 3-5 years of just ji ben gong before you even have a foundation for the system to root in.

[kungfudork]

ok bungbukuen...i never get involved in this BS, but since you insist. i trained with shi xinghao for 3 years after meeting him in china. i didn't train chang chuan nor san da at the school. i stuck with the traditional stuff...learning basics and applications. if you have a problem with the school, which it is apparent that you do.....it sounds more personal than anything else, i can say you can come talk to me anytime you want. what is it that you train and how do you think it differs from what i have learned at shi xinghao's school. who is your teacher? why do you seem to attack the school with such enthusiasm as you do? i have nothing to hide and nothing to lose.....so tell me your story. i agree you are a troll, but you have as much right as anyone to state your opinion. so what is your problem with my shrfu's school? you doubt the ability of shi xinghao to teach application or any kind of fighting ability......i don't. just because the school has sanda and long fist in it's curriculum doesn't mean that is what it is based on....those aren't the main classes. actually you have to attend the traditional classes to even enroll for the sanda or long fist, because those aren't the basis of the school, but that is beside the point. i feel as though you are attacking the school and have something to gain from it......so let me know what that is. i would be more than happy to discuss this in any manner you like. you want to know what system we learn....it is the one that shi xinghao wishes to pass on to us. if you need to know how to contact me personally....just ask. i'm here. hope to hear from you soon!

laterz,
dieter wagner (yes, my real name...i have nothing to hide)

[richard sloan]

bong bo is a mantis form...

[Pk_StyLeZ]

BTW, you aren't part of Deshan's school, are you? :rolleyes:

HAHAHAHA LOLZ OMG HAHAHHA I CANT BELIEVE YOU SAID THAT GENE
HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHA

good one

hi my shaolin brother =)
i been missing =) and i come back and i see all this crap. i read 4 pages and i was hoping to read more info on the actualy performance it self. but boo none. im going to leave my opinion out on this, cause obvously this guy not going to change his mind and i got better stuff to do then try to convince him. he is no one to me. not on my level, got nothing to prove to him. =)

but yeah. is anyone attending this *show*. if so when?i am going on the first at 7pm. =)
say hi to me =D

[bungbukuen]

I wanted to learn more about what specific system was taught at Houston Shaolin.

Richard you are going in the opposite direction from this discussion - I am looking for specifics and you are making spectacular generalizations. I do not know what you are basing your Shaolin Umbrella system on because you provided absolutely no details on it, except for making a quick and vague reference to Tong Bei (I am assuming the system) and two forms from the Hong Jia system (Xiao Hong and Da Hong Quan). In a previous thread titled "Where did kungfu come from?" you made the same kind of braod based generalizations without providing any specific facts with regards to system techniques, tactics, principles, strategies, training protocol, etc... There you were also accused of 'blurring the lines of systems / styles'. Quite obviously you are attempting to do the same thing here again.

My only assumptions come from what I have read on the Houston Shaolin website or on this forum. It is qutie simple. I have asked numerous times on this thread but no one has provided any relevant details with regards to what specific traditional Shaolin system of combat is being taught at Houston Shaolin? From what I have gathered so far they are teaching a mish mash of contemporary wushu, sanda, and an assortment of modified forms.

Some students say they train applications (kungfud0rk), some people say the applications are all trained in sanda (Richard Sloan), some people said they do not train applications (drunkmunky), and some students do not know altogether (Songshan). You guys are making a mess of things and I just want to know what system they study. It is not a trick question. :eek:

Cheers!

[richard sloan]

accused of...?

LOL.

this has to be one of the worst distortions of an exchange I have honestly ever read.

so reading is not exactly fundamental for you.

This will help you in future exchanges and I urge you to enroll as fast as possible, otherwise this will be as tedious as ascertaining which dries faster, taupe or burnt sienna.

http://www.rif.org/

[Songshan]

so reading is not exactly fundamental for you.

This will help you in future exchanges and I urge you to enroll as fast as possible, otherwise this will be as tedious as ascertaining which dries faster, taupe or burnt sienna.

http://www.rif.org/

hahahaha :D


but yeah. is anyone attending this *show*. if so when?i am going on the first at 7pm. =)
say hi to me =D

I will be at the early show for sure...but probably not the late one (gotta work). If I do go to the 7pm show I will stop by and say hi. Its been a few years since I seen ya Mark but I remember who you are :)


and some students do not know altogether (Songshan).

My only question to you is why don't you call the school? Oh yeah by the way......bungbukuen.....we train traditional shaolin. :D

Super Cheers!

[Songshan]

ok bungbukuen...i never get involved in this BS, but since you insist. i trained with shi xinghao for 3 years after meeting him in china. i didn't train chang chuan nor san da at the school. i stuck with the traditional stuff...learning basics and applications. if you have a problem with the school, which it is apparent that you do.....it sounds more personal than anything else, i can say you can come talk to me anytime you want. what is it that you train and how do you think it differs from what i have learned at shi xinghao's school. who is your teacher? why do you seem to attack the school with such enthusiasm as you do? i have nothing to hide and nothing to lose.....so tell me your story. i agree you are a troll, but you have as much right as anyone to state your opinion. so what is your problem with my shrfu's school? you doubt the ability of shi xinghao to teach application or any kind of fighting ability......i don't. just because the school has sanda and long fist in it's curriculum doesn't mean that is what it is based on....those aren't the main classes. actually you have to attend the traditional classes to even enroll for the sanda or long fist, because those aren't the basis of the school, but that is beside the point. i feel as though you are attacking the school and have something to gain from it......so let me know what that is. i would be more than happy to discuss this in any manner you like. you want to know what system we learn....it is the one that shi xinghao wishes to pass on to us. if you need to know how to contact me personally....just ask. i'm here. hope to hear from you soon!

laterz,
dieter wagner (yes, my real name...i have nothing to hide)


Dieter???? My god, your still alive!!!! :D :D :D What's up?

[GeneChing]

bungbukuen, I must compliment you on your persistance. If nothing else, you've managed to rally some different Songshan Shaolin cousins here and it's nice to see everyone.

By strange coincidence, I saw Xinghao yesterday - it was a complete surprise. In fact, I saw all the Houston monks except for Deshan, but for anyone who knows the Houston Shaolin scene, that shouldn't be surprising. Anyway, it was great to see all of them, even if it was just for a fleeting moment. I'll report it all on the Shaolin Shows near SF (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=37527) as soon as I get a free moment.

[Songshan]

Well, it's been a few days so maybe BBK went away. He doesn't answer questions that are proposed to him. Hey Gene, glad you got a chance to say hi to SXH. Hope the event turned out well. I won't see SXH until tomorrow.

[Pk_StyLeZ]

ITS TODAy
SEE U SHAOLIN BROTHERS/SISTERS TONIGHT AT 7????
=)
ill be there

[Songshan]

Well, I attended the 2pm showing on Saturday. I must say it was a nice show....at least I enjoyed it. For some strange reason I can never get tired watching these shows. I was able to get most of it on my digital camera but my battery was dieing towards the end of the second half :mad:

I heard the 7pm show was even better!! If anyone was able to chat with the performers can you post which school they were from??

[Pk_StyLeZ]

Well, I attended the 2pm showing on Saturday. I must say it was a nice show....at least I enjoyed it. For some strange reason I can never get tired watching these shows. I was able to get most of it on my digital camera but my battery was dieing towards the end of the second half :mad:

I heard the 7pm show was even better!! If anyone was able to chat with the performers can you post which school they were from??

it was ok
i seen better
the old school generations were a lot better
they didnt impress me that much
some of the fightin scene were a little bit slow
posed too much in my opinion
poses were ugly too imo
but it was good to watch
the *fight 13 monks* were a little bit different, usually both monk *dies* and dont pas, but this one monk passes.
i found that weird.
didnt get to talk to performers cuz i have slack of chinese skills even though for some reason shifu xing hao keep talkin to me in chinese and keep thinkin i know it. lolz it was good to see him again. =)

[GeneChing]

The group demo form that reinacts two monks trying to pass the trial by combat is called Dashanmen or 'big mountain gate'. Usually it ends with a hard qigong demo with the 2nd monk losing. If he passed, did it end with the hard qigong?

Did Xinghao know these monks?

[Pk_StyLeZ]

The group demo form that reinacts two monks trying to pass the trial by combat is called Dashanmen or 'big mountain gate'. Usually it ends with a hard qigong demo with the 2nd monk losing. If he passed, did it end with the hard qigong?

Did Xinghao know these monks?

lolz gene i know the da shan men form....and yeah it usually end with a hard qi qong and the *master abbot* kicking his booty.
but this one he(*abbot*) didnt even fight the monk trying to leave, nor there was hard qi gong. so that why i said it was realy different.
and usually after the first monk dont passes, the 2nd monk dont need to start over and fight from the first person agian, well on this performance he started t fight from monk#1 again.

i dont know if xing hao knew any of the monks or not, but he took them around i heard?

[Songshan]

The dashanmen demo did not end in hard qi gong. The tour was kind of interesting. It was a combo of a general demo, did a quick story on the monks saving the emperor (like the wheel of life), the Dashanmen demo, and a few other things. The monk eating glass was a new one on me....never seen that before!!

SXH did not know the group at first. I believe he had an opportunity to spend some time with them when they arrived in town. I havent talked to SXH since the show...school was closed for the 4th of July so I should see him Thursday.

[Songshan]

Yep, SXH did spend some time with the monks. They were from one of the local villages outside of Shaolin....I forgot the name of the village :confused:. At any rate the monk tours are far and very few around the Houston area so it's nice when they come through.

My favorite produced show was the Wheel of Life that came out of the UK. Ironically, the performers were monks and theater actors.....nevertheless it was a fine show....if only I could get my hands on the soundtrack :p

[Pk_StyLeZ]

ok i don tknow who posted these up on youtube
but here is some sample clips from the demo tour

http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=prodigf5ve
*go to the right hand side and click view all videos to watch like 7-8 clips

here another one
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUrO11FsSXA&search=shaolin