question on North and South Shaolin Temples

[passing_through]

Has anyone on this forum done research into the veracity of the legends of a Southern Shaolin in the Fukien area of Southern China?

I know that Chinese archeologists found ruins of a temple that was raized to the ground in Southern China in 1995. That temple was rebuilt and is now open to the public.

Some people say there was a Southern Shaolin while others say it was just a myth. Do the "southern styles" share a similar origin point? Why are the "southern" styles different from the "northern" styles? Do these differences point to different thinking which led to the creation of new styles in the south? Was this different thinking housed in a temple not known for kungfu before the Manchu take over in 1644?

From the evidence I've seen to date, I think there was a Southern Temple that served as a focal point for revolutionary, anti-Qing activity in the late 1600s. The temple probably wasn't called Nan Shaolin Si (South Young Forest Temple) (BTW, as I understand it, this is the name of one of three newly built temples in Southern China). After the temple was destroyed, the survivors of that temple might have referred to it as Nan Shaolin Si to separate it from the Bei Shaolin Si (North Young Forest Temple) that was still standing.

Regardless of my own thoughts, I keep an open mind and would like to read some over views...

... opportunityisnowhere...

[reemul]

The southern Temple was created by Monks from the northern temple in an effort to train fishermen and farmers to defend themselves against the likes of japanese pirates and such. The difference in style was simply that given these people did not have the luxury to train all day like the monks, the monks felt training them in Northern style would be too much of an undertaking. So they created "watered down" off shoots of some of the Northern styles to make the process easier.

[joedoe]

Sounds like a pretty daring statement. I think a lot of Southern stylists would disagree on Southern styles being watered down. ;)

I was taught that the differences were due to environmental factors, and different body shapes.

Environmentally, much of the south has tropical or near-tropical climate. The general environment receives more rain, and much of the populace were involved with fishing. Add to this the crowding in Southern cities. Because of the fact that the ground was often wetter and people lived and worked on boats, the Southern styles could not afford to use the longer stances of the Northern styles. Also, in crowded city situations, there isn't much room to fight in, so the more upright stances and lower kicks were more useful.

The Southern Chinese also tend to be shorter and a little more stocky than the Northerners. Upper body movements were naturally more useful to the Southerners, as were more upright stances so as not to exacerbate the height disadvantages.

Northern styles can utilise the longer stances and high kicks because the Northern climate is generally drier. Also, the taller build of the Northern Chinese meant that using the kicking range was to their advantage.

This is just what I was taught. Someone will probably shoot me down over it :)

-------------------------------------
You have no chance to survive - make your time.

[WenJin]

A lot more fights and battles happen in the south than in the north so one would think ten times the experience ten times the improvement of the arts (watered down as you say is ridiculous as "everything had a beginning" and the henan temple had many periods through history of closure inactivity and lack of progress)

[GLW]

The existence of the Southern temple has been in contention for a good while.

There are many reasons for this doubt. For example, the temple at Songshan (Henan - northern shaolin...) was destroyed more than once and rebuilt. It was said that the southern temple was founded from thenorthern...sort of a sister temple...but no exact record of the location was noted. This seems strange considering that most of the other temples that were destroyed no matter what reason were well known in location at least.

If the temple did exists...and many think this mya be true... there are about 3 or 4 places that often claimed to be that site. In fact, in those areas, there was a lot of local pride about it...but they can't all be right.

The site found in 1995 may or may not be true. BUT, given how much of a moneymaker putting up a restored Sonshan temple is and filling it with 9 to 5 monks...training Shaolin Wushu...when in reality they were all trained by the profssional wush coaches ... well, money talks.

It is not too big of a stretch of the imagination to have someone in the government saying "Hmmm..we can make a lot of money if we rebuild this thing and do what we do in Songshan"

the real proof will be if after it is opened, they move in "Southern monks" and then in a couple of years you have people claiming and believing that the southern temple is 'real' too. I would say that such a thing would pretty much prove it was false. Otherwise, they would say they were allowing a new temple to start and the wushu training was a training center and re-enactment.

[reemul]

daring or not, thats what happened.

[Shaolin Master]

not known whether called Shaolin necessarily but many temples in south china had the practice of martial arts. In the south a few that come to mind include : Ching Xi Si, Guang Lau Si etc...

For a factual comprehensive (non PRC) analysis of Southern Shaolin please visit the site below :
http://www.oceanet.com.sg/~shaolin/yizhi.htm

Regards
Shi Chan Long

[GLW]

To Wenjen

check your history more...

Beijing is in the north, the great wall...more north, many of the major battles of history were central and north.

Great fighters went to the capitals...Beijing, Shanghai, all more north.

The southern style get a lot of press..but in the west, the simple truth is that most of the people who came west were from the south. First wave was Toisan (similar in dialect to Cantonese). Then came Hong Kong folks...then Taiwan, then PRC...

Prior to WWII, there was the Chinese exclusion act and most of the Chinese immigrants here in the US were Toisan or Cantonese. Why? poverty and problems. Poor people in china do not practice Kung Fu so much. There is a saying "Poor men do scholarship, rich men Kung Fu" This is because of the need for more strdy clothing, more washing, weapons, time to practice...all cost money.

Thre are some very good books on Chinese history out there. Check into where most of the Boxers' came from....and where the big trouble was - Beijing...and around there.

[WenJin]

I guess you practice some northern style like chang quan or cha quan for you to have a silly outlook. I just mean that martial progress occurs everywhere and southern styles have as much to offer if not more at times. :)

[joedoe]

Unless you were there, you can't be sure of that. Like many different historical events, the telling of the history can be tainted by the author's viewpoint. What you said may well be true - that the Southern styles were simplified Northern styles. But it also may not be.

-------------------------------------
You have no chance to survive - make your time.

[reemul]

The fact is, the Shaolin maintained an oral tradition of passing on knowledge and this debate will go on forever because there is no proof either way of what transpired. All I know is this. Our masters father and Grandfather where there, they were also the head of the Northern Shaolin Tiger system at honan. I have to say our master acts more like a monk than any of the so called monks coming from the temple these days, however he does not claim to be one. He recieves no money from the school. He does not promote the school and as far as the MA community is concerned he doesn't exist and he has no plans to change this as far as I know. So when he tells us "this" is what happened, I have no reason to doubt him, our system speaks for itself. I only mention all of this because I'm sure many here, will most likely question the credibility of the source, so I thought I would give you a brief profile for general reference.

For clarity my reference to our "master" is my instructors teacher not my instructor.

Also in our system, there is a very close connection to the source(the monastary) Although our master was not there, his father was and his granfather was. So while some of you have your history books based on someones speculation and Legend rather than fact mine comes from, in my opinion, the source. However as mentioned this as well cannot be proven as fact and can be debated.
So what we are left with is what we choose to believe, who is credible.

[This message was edited by reemul on 05-06-01 at 06:24 PM.]

[This message was edited by reemul on 05-06-01 at 06:26 PM.]

[This message was edited by reemul on 05-06-01 at 06:26 PM.]

[This message was edited by reemul on 05-06-01 at 06:27 PM.]

[Shaolin Master]

Quote - "Our masters father and Grandfather where there, they were also the head of the Northern Shaolin Tiger system at honan"

Have you heard of Liang Yi Quan, Liu Bao Shan, Hai Deng, De Gen or even Miao Xing. These people were there and have written testemonials of what it was like. That also all coincide (though done at different times and places). Also they all share some things in common.

Regarding your Granmasters - Then what were there Lay names?, what lineage within the temple did they have?. Believe or not there is a register of any "major" monk or lay disciple through history especially only 4 generations ago.[I'm sure a Head of a style(?) would be there]

Also let us know a bit about this "Northern Shaolin Tiger" what is included, I have seen/heard/read/etc....many many things some parts of your system must coincide impossible that it does not exist anywhere in the world other than dowtown USA. At least fundamental Qigong or Xiao Hong Quan even....something anything to even remotely relate it! How about theories (poems) or the like about proper methodology in kung fu....?

I seriously would like to understand from a greater(more meaningful) point than you have given.

Sincerely

Shi Chan Long

[r.(shaolin)]

Good questions/comments Shaolin Master.
Along with Xiao Hong Chang Quan
most Songshan Shaolin lineages include
Da Hong Chang Quan and Tan Tui Shi Er Lu
as well.
r.ˇ

[This message was edited by R. on 05-07-01 at 08:20 AM.]

[reemul]

The history as it is coming out of the Temple today is in our opinion revisionist history in an attempt to lagitamize the current temples occupants. As far as registry, doubtful. Fact is our masters grandfather was targeted for assasination, as were other masters at the time.
So even if the registry exist it would not reflect his existance. Why do you think that the few remaining northern Shaolin animal systems exist outside China and the form of Kungfu at the temple these days is generalized. Our history is too long to go into here, and whether you believe me isn't really my concern. I do know this if you concentrate your efforts to learn about Shaolin in China, your answers will be skewed to the revisionist perspective. Why don't you try looking to Honolulu and california/San Francisco area. This is where a lot of the Shaolin Masters escaped to.

Some say there are no secrete organizations of Shaolin. I would have to disagree. Although our school is not a secrete we are selective in our membership.

If you have questions, I have answers, but keep in mind I am not at liberty to discuss everything.
I know this seems a bit cloak & daggerish, but considerring what has happened to other systems of MA with regard to theft and misrepresentation, we go to great length to protect our information.

[sifuchuck]

"Although our school is not a secrete we are selective in our membership.

If you have questions, I have answers, but keep in mind I am not at liberty to discuss everything.
I know this seems a bit cloak & daggerish, but considerring what has happened to other systems of MA with regard to theft and misrepresentation, we go to great length to protect our information."

Ok--very interesting. Selective in what way? Does the word gullible ring a bell? It sounds like a cult...

Now I just gotta say this. Either you are playing a little game here or someone has pulled major wool over your eyes. I think that if your group really goes to great lengths to protect your information then you wouldn't be dancing around this forum trying to get attention. If you're not at liberty to discuss everything, then why discuss anything? It doesn't look cloak and daggerish, it looks kinda dumb. Sorry if I seem disrespectful..this is probably the harshest comment I've ever made on the forum, but sheeeesh! You gotta be kiddin' me!

Chuck