Origins at Shaolin Temple

[David Jamieson]

ego-

you're burning both ends of the argument there dude.

???

cheers, happy new years!

[Gold Horse Dragon]

villiage kung fu including those from shaolin temple are not properly tested

Like I said...you need a history lesson. You are way off base here, and not just a little pompous with regard to Northern systems of Chinese martial arts. These village arts were in the front lines against the Ching and they have been tested time and time again on the streets since that time.

To say that kung fu originated from shaolin temple is to take away the rich history of kung fu which is exactly what modern wu shu has been doing for a long time

I clearly stated "The Sil Lum Temple(s) was the major source for edifying, codifying, expanding, testing etc. etc. etc. many of the major martial arts in China"....Let me explain further...Some styles were formed in the Shaolin Temples both southern and northern, others were brought into the temple(s) from already existing styles and expanded on, codified and further developed.

No. Good kung fu masters used to get paid very well in the military

Not all good Masters were in the Military...some were because they sided with the Ching, some were moles to gain info to overthrow the Ching and other great Masters resisted the Ching and fought against the Ching...need an example...Wong Fei Hung, who is one of the Greatest and most revered Masters even to day, along with his most famous student Lam Sai Wing.

The shamsters are those southern masters who promise mastery of a style after a life time and a half of training. are you one of those sucker students?

I do both Southern and Northern Shaolin. On the streets when I have had to defend myself, I used Southern to effectively and efficiently defend myself in life and death fights and numerous other confrontations (having worked in law enforcement). The Southern system gave me those skills, so...then I will gladly be a "sucker student" in your words.

GHD

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

Gold Horse Dragon:

I seriously doubt that the villages confronted the Ching armies directly. They were farmers and merchants as opposed to being professional fighters. In contrast northern kung fu has been and continues to be used in the chinese military.

Shaolin temple was not a major source. I agee some arts were brought into the temple by "monks" but that happened on an infequent basis. what was documented in the temples were accordingly second hand from the original sources. The arts have generally been tested before arriving at the temples.

Kung fu existed before the Ching. The disposed dynasty did have good fighters of nothern kung fu and had a military back ground. they became the moles etc... you spoke of. Wong fei hung is over rated. He did southern kung fu.

In law enforcement you use guns to shoot people who feel that they are lucky punks. no need for kung fu.

[Gold Horse Dragon]

Ego

History..recorded history proves you wrong...so you still need a history lesson or two and a lesson in reality.
You presume all villagers were farmers!...please come down to reality. Besides, you think farmers couldn't do good kung fu...where do you think the set with the hoe came from, or the horse bench or the wu dip do and who do you think used them...answer...farmers and butchers, blacksmiths etc.

Kung fu existed before the Ching.

Shaolin temple existed before the Ching. By the way who you gonna call...when it comes to routing Japanese pirates?...the emperor at the time called Shaolin to defeat them...not his troops...they couldn't get the job done.

In law enforcement you use guns to shoot people who feel that they are lucky punks. no need for kung fu.

You have been watching too many dirty Harry movies there guy.
Obviously you have never been involved in law enforcement. Like I said, I do both Southern and Northern Shaolin...I find Southern works better in serious encounters on the street...real life experience there guy.

Wong Fei Hung overated!...pleaaase Chinese have built a monument and building in his Honor, he is celebrated in movies and plays adinfinitum...gee how many million Chinese revere his memory, you think this occurs for just anyone without having achieved greatness through action and character?...think you pretty much stand alone there buddy on your view of him.

Well, enough said...no point in debating this further with you.

GHD

[GeneChing]

Sopme postulate that the Southern Shaolin Temple was entirely mythological. According to some, Shaolin monks were sent by the Songshan temple to defend the coast. They brought artifacts marked "Shaolin" and resided in various Buddhist temples in the area. Over time, the myths grew so much that people believed there really was a Southern Shaolin Temple. Is this the true version? It doesn't really matter now.

Right now, a massive buddhist temple/martial arts school has been erected in Fujian. Right now, they are actively researching the roots of southern styles. So far, I've heard that they are focusing on Ziranmen since it is popular locally apparently and the Songshan curriculam since many of the monks are from Songshan. Right now, many 'traditional' masters are going back to visit this new temple, bringing with them there research and legacies. Where else are martial artists going to come together on a project like this? An L.A. strip mall?

There may have never been a southern shaolin temple before. Let's build one now.

[NARVAL]

H Gene,
Spot on the right question
However, what do we need a shaolin temple for?
If u took a less positive approach, what downsides would you expect? brand issue? control issues?
Interesed to hear ur views on this.
thanks.
N.

[hasayfu]

Narval,

Not to speak for Gene but I think he means that the history of the the southern shaolin temple (whether real or perceived) will draw experienced southern shaolin people together.

The LA strip mall draws other types of people together.

[WinterPalm]

Wow. I suppose I could argue for myself with you, Ego, or, like your name forces me to, accept the pretentious attitude you display here as childish and moronic. However, does not everyone with a shred of intelligence wonder where their art's and others have come from? I don't care about arguing but really, what do you hope to achieve by insulting myself and other respected members on here. Hasayfu has it right that no matter what the arts will continue to thrive and dispite the true history there can be a unity. Kung fu stresses spirtual aspects that were probably not covered in the military and what could they have been taught? What do the armed forces learn but a couple techniques from a handful of martial arts. Is that complete?

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

Golden Horse:

I'm not saying that the local villages can't fight. I'm saying that their standard of fighting is less than the average soldier. Is this logical enough for you. In any case being a butcher or a black smith does not make you an expert a wielding a halbard or a broad sword. there are many subtleties in the weapon that need to be mastered that seperates life and death.

With regard to your comments on Japanese pritates, the chinese army is less equip to deal with hit and run raides on unprotected villages. The chinese military are not particularly sea faring so it is very difficult for them to hunt down the pirates in open waters. it makes sense to contract the shaolin monks who have outpost in the southern coast. Although the japanese steel is superior, the shaolin monks can deploy far larger numbers. it doesn't take much to fend off the pirates - they are NOT looking for a fight but easy targets to raid. It is more the case of deterence (having shaolin monks) rather than the fighting abilities which reduced the extent of pirate activity.

My experience with southern kung fu is that it is not as complete as northern styles. Uner circumstance southern could work well but the "sweet spot" is much smaller. Perhaps you're just a lucky guy!

Wong Fei Hung was never known to be a great general or a martial artist except in pop culture. he organized an underground movement that did NOT overthrow the ruling dynasty. he had to get the popular support from the Hun chinese which is why he is remembered today. Most of China now are Hun chinese.

WinterPalm:

"Kung fu stresses spirtual aspects that were probably not covered in the military and what could they have been taught? "

If spirituality is an important ingridient in fighting then wouldn't the military teach the spiritual aspects to its troops? If so and it was not taught, then perhaps it is not (important)

"What do the armed forces learn but a couple techniques from a handful of martial arts. Is that complete?"

That's actually not true. Most Generals master a number of styles. speical forces in china today master a range of northern styles. It is these forms of martial arts that slowly found their way into the general population who added more flowery and redundent moves to the system. That is why most kung fu styles today teach 30 to 100 forms. what rubbish!

[Gold Horse Dragon]

Well, I was not going to post further on this, but what the heck - one more.

I'm not saying that the local villages can't fight. I'm saying that their standard of fighting is less than the average soldier

Totally disagree...modern case in point - Vietnam.

In any case being a butcher or a black smith does not make you an expert a wielding a halbard or a broad sword.

I said wu dip do, hoe, horsebench and they also used other weapons..and used them very well...better than the average soldier who only had the rudiments of hack and slash with the Dao.

With regard to your comments on Japanese pritates, the chinese army is less equip to deal with hit and run raides on unprotected villages

On this you are right, they could not fight very well and that is why the Shaolin monks were called in to defeat the pirates. BTW this is not a swashbuckling on the highseas fight...no, no...this battle took place on solid land.

Although the japanese steel is superior, the shaolin monks can deploy far larger numbers.

Larger numbers?!...only a few monks were sent.

It is more the case of deterence (having shaolin monks) rather than the fighting abilities which reduced the extent of pirate activity.

Actually, I believe it is recorded that the invaders were soundly defeated in combat by monks wielding staffs against steel.

My experience with southern kung fu is that it is not as complete as northern styles

Well I do both...and what you say is just not the case. In fact, the Southern systems have much more intricate and complex hand work than the Northern such as Bak Sil lum. The Southern has kicks but not as many as the northern and of course not as high...instead focusing on applicability in combat.

Perhaps you're just a lucky guy!

You bet, I had the opportunity to learn great Southern Kung fu and to also learn the northern along with Kun Tao.

he organized an underground movement that did NOT overthrow the ruling dynasty.

Actually, Wong Fei Hung joined forces with the Chinese Nationalists to overthrow the Ching Dynasty in 1911 (I am pretty sure this was the year)

he had to get the popular support from the Hun chinese which is why he is remembered today. Most of China now are Hun chinese.

China has been mostly Han Chinese for many hundreds of years.
Wong Fei Hung is revered by most of the Chinese populace, not only because he was Han but for, as I stated before, for his great martial art skills, his humanity, courage, loyalty, contributions to society etc. etc.

If spirituality is an important ingridient in fighting then wouldn't the military teach the spiritual aspects to its troops? If so and it was not taught, then perhaps it is not (important)

It is not important if all you want to do is kill...but as stated martial art is much, much more than that and thank God it is...otherwise we would all just be grunts.

That is why most kung fu styles today teach 30 to 100 forms

Simply not true.
And THIS is definitely my FINAL post regarding your unfounded statements.

GHD

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

Golden Horse

"Well, I was not going to post further on this, but what the heck - one more."

and one more reply for the road.

"Totally disagree...modern case in point - Vietnam."

Not true. In fact documentaries with the vietnamese on their perspective of the war showed that they had high respect for the US grunt, the accuracy of their shots etc. The vietnamese were however prepared to take heavier casualties such as 3:1 loss to take down a US troop. Other logistical issues had the vietcong in an advantage. they were trained by the north vietnamese and supplied by the chinese. The US had to ship in the resources from 1/2 way round the world. MIG fighters were a match for US fighters so unlike the gulf war the US did not have air superiority. guided weapons were not that advance at that time such that the more nimble (and cheaper ) MIG fighters held a 1:1 kill ratio against the US jets. SAMS were also a problem for the US because ECM (electro counter measures) were in their infancy. You can see that the Vietnam war was not a military force against a peasent army. You may choose to reply!


"I said wu dip do, hoe, horsebench and they also used other weapons..and used them very well...better than the average soldier who only had the rudiments of hack and slash with the Dao."

No one fights with a Gaddam chair in a battle field. what a stupid weapon. You only see chair fights on WWF! Southern kung fu is only for show.

"On this you are right, they could not fight very well and that is why the Shaolin monks were called in to defeat the pirates. BTW this is not a swashbuckling on the highseas fight...no, no...this battle took place on solid land."

Depends on their state of combat readiness, in general they fought better then civilians. otherwise why aren't soldiers monks and monks soldiers? Some of what you say about shaolin history defies common sense.

what i'm saying is that becase the chinese cost line is so large, it is impossible even for a large army to patrol the full parameter noting that there are more pressing matters (ie barbarians) to the north. If monks have outpost in the south, it makes perfect sense to use them. afterall pirates can't deploy themselves in large enough numbers and look for soft targets to raid.


"Larger numbers?!...only a few monks were sent."

You need a continual presence. There are many groups of pirates. is not like you beat off one group and no one comes raiding again. a few monks can't patrol the coast line can they?

"Actually, I believe it is recorded that the invaders were soundly defeated in combat by monks wielding staffs against steel."

hardened wood is not so easy to chop through. If you have a group of monks with 9ft long poles, it is a difficult task even if you have swords.

"Well I do both...and what you say is just not the case. In fact, the Southern systems have much more intricate and complex hand work than the Northern such as Bak Sil lum. The Southern has kicks but not as many as the northern and of course not as high...instead focusing on applicability in combat."

northern kung fu has very few high kicks. looks like you've been learing wu shu disguized under the label of northern kung fu.

"You bet, I had the opportunity to learn great Southern Kung fu and to also learn the northern along with Kun Tao."

you're luckier than you think, with a bit of basic kung fu and wu shu you've lived the tough streets this long.


"Actually, Wong Fei Hung joined forces with the Chinese Nationalists to overthrow the Ching Dynasty in 1911 (I am pretty sure this was the year)"

armies weren't using kung fu at this time!

"China has been mostly Han Chinese for many hundreds of years.
Wong Fei Hung is revered by most of the Chinese populace, not only because he was Han but for, as I stated before, for his great martial art skills, his humanity, courage, loyalty, contributions to society etc. etc."

it's basically folk lore. put it this way the chinese have for a long time not have much to be proud about. The Chings were considered invaders, the communist were oppressive. so that leaves the nationalist - No because they were corrupt (or considered to be). thie leaves Wong Fei Hung. not because he was better, but just being an ordinary guy.

"It is not important if all you want to do is kill...but as stated martial art is much, much more than that and thank God it is...otherwise we would all just be grunts."

No it is not because you want to kill. martial arts should teach you better ways of killing if need be. The objective is combat orientated. if you want spirituality then go to a church.

"Simply not true.
And THIS is definitely my FINAL post regarding your unfounded statements."

which part have I said does not make sense?

[GeneChing]

Hasayfu is right. Kungfu is about family. Our family has spread out around the world now, even to those LA strip malls. Our ancestors keep us together. So it's nice to have a place to honor them, somewhere in the world, and it might as well be one of these reconstructed temples. People have been trying to build stuff like this since Bruce made up Han's island. Now a few such places are really open for business. Of course I'm going to support that.

I can't follow ego - too much reading for me. I can't spend THAT much time on the forum. Can you resubmit your points 100 words or less?

[Ego_Extrodinaire]

GeneChing:

If kung fu is about family, then the southern kung fu family must be dysfunctional. Actually, I find it very had to percieve kung fu as being family. isn't it just a set of movements - what ever stle one is studying.

I perceive that kung fu is prone to more ancesteral acknowledgement than other forms of human endeavor probably with the exception of religion. I find it very difficult to comprehend why this is the case when kung fu should be about fighting plain and simple.

I speak to many people in economics and they do not feel compelled to visit where Adam Smith was born or the lecture hall in which he taught his subjects. Economist tend to be more focused on current events and adapting existing theories to solve real life problems.

why is it then kung fu people dwell on the past. Isn't it good enough to say that the style was developed some how or other and that having learned it, one can beat up haighly skilled fighters? Isn't this considered to be problem solving in kung fu language taking the economist analogy?

[GeneChing]

The Kung Fu family is definately disfunctional. But then, I often think all families are dysfunctional. That is the heart of sitcom.

The thing about kung fu is that it aspires to a spiritual level. It's implicit in the term 'kung fu' - that's the 'fu' of it. But on a basic level, when you really start thinking about studying the art of war, it has to become spiritual, otherwise it's just killing. Even on that level, you have to either become a detached cold blooded butcher or take some refuge in the spiritual realm. Now, I've never killed anyone, not in this lifetime anyway, but I imagine that it would have a negative effect on my personality and the negativity would have to be balanced with some sort of spiritual work. Given such spiritual ramifications, a pilgrimage to the place of origin, whether real or symbolic, is fitting.

Perhaps there is no spirituality in economics, so few are interested in Adam Smith's lecture hall. It's too bad. With the current economic state of the U.S., perhaps it's spirituality that is lacking. The leaders are too detached from the commoners and are commiting crimes against the people. They have become cold blooded killers. Perhaps it's time to lead that pilgrimage to the lecture hall. After all, we need to remember who owns which acorns, yes?

[Ming Fai]

To EGO:

They were farmers and merchants as opposed to being professional fighters. In contrast northern kung fu has been and continues to be used in the chinese military.

Chinese history is filled with cases in which military discipline deteriorated and many soldiers did not train/could not fight. There's even this saying: "During Late Qing, a soldier always carried two weapons: his gun... and his Opium Pipe." If the Qing soldiers were that good, why were they defeated by the Hakka peasants of the Taiping Rebellion?

he organized an underground movement that did NOT overthrow the ruling dynasty.

Yes, but none of the underground movements did actually overthrow the Qing. The Qing's fall was more or less its' own doing.

To Gold Horse Dragon:

Actually, Wong Fei Hung joined forces with the Chinese Nationalists to overthrow the Ching Dynasty in 1911 (I am pretty sure this was the year)

Actually that wasn't Wong Fei Hung, it was his student Lam Sai Wing.

Wong Fei Hung overated!...pleaaase Chinese have built a monument and building in his Honor, he is celebrated in movies and plays adinfinitum...gee how many million Chinese revere his memory, you think this occurs for just anyone without having achieved greatness through action and character?...think you pretty much stand alone there buddy on your view of him.

Well, not really... EGO is rude and annoying, but he's got a point here. Many heroic things credited to Wong Fei Hung were actually done by Lam Sai Wing. Wong Fei Hung, although a superb martial artist, did not do any heroic deeds which can be verified. Lam Sai Wing did many good things for society but somehow his teacher got all the credit (mostly due to the movies).