How do you explain the Japanese Influence on Shaolin-Do??

[lxtruong]

shouting down your detractors en masse doesn't make your point any more valid.

Ok, well let's examine the basic "SD is teh inauthentic!!!oneoneone!!" reasons:

1. Japanese trappings: gi, "dojo", "kata".
2. "Forms are obviously karate with tiger hand thrown in"
3. "omgz! 900 forms, who can remember that!"
4. "omgz! Hairy grandmaster! History fake!"

Did I get it all? GT was obviously addressing #2. I just looked at the video myself, and like he said, aside from the stroke the beard thinger (reminds me of a move in drunken spear though), the basics are the same. The "around the head" move that JP did is even in your black tiger staff kata. While this doesn't instantly refute #2, it does weaken the arguement.

Feel free to bash us on #1, 3, 4. That being said, I would say that any of you that are calling GM Sin a liar have obviously never met the man. Anyone that spends even a short amount of time with him knows that he's a genuinely nice guy, and certainly not the type that would go about living a lie for 40 years. Perhaps he, or someone back down the line was lied to. I think that you will find that most SD students care little about that. For the most part, we follow the man - not the lineage.

GT/JP: Check out his demo of his black tiger set. Beginning looks very similar to the beginning of tiger/crane kata. It's freaky.

[Golden Tiger]

shouting down your detractors en masse doesn't make your point any more valid.

David, I have always tried to answer the detractors and never shout them down. And I was only making a valid observation concerning the way you did your form versus the way JP did SD's. No critisms (other than the playful one at the end hence the ) just trying to see what made yours CMA and what made ours not CMA.

drifting off into the minutia of a single form doesn't answer any of the questions or sufficiently rebutt the complaints of those who are your detractors.

Not sure what keeping an armed reserve of civilians has to do with this , but we were discussing a single form.

[Judge Pen]

David, I've never shouted on this topic (except maybe at MK a long time ago ) I thought we were having an rational conversation on this topic. Just because we don't agree 100% with your postion doesn't mean that our position is irrational. And I asked you some legitimate questions that you haven't answered yet:

1. Does my "pole arm" set display CMA techniques or JMA (such as a naginata)?
2. Aside from the chi gung aspects of stroking the beard, what are the real fighting applcations of the other standards? Other than performance and homage to the General, why do them? Why is it ok for some of them to be removed and still be considered a Kwan Dao set.
3. Why, other than the performance standards of stroking the beard, etc) was your form CMA and mine was not?

Thanks for getting back to me and furthering our rational conversation.

[godzillakungfu]

This thread is going to get ugly soon so I'll say my piece and continue to observe or PM people.

Yes, I think there are some falsehoods in Shaolin-Do and Chinese Shao-Lin Center. I think this happens in many if not all MA to some extent.

TKD 2000 history
Damo
Yang Lu Chuan fight record
Wing Chun's Nun.
Aikido
The list goes on and on.

If the stuff I read about Sin The's upbringing true, I think it is an amalgam. The few times I talked to Sin The' I got the impression there is a lot more going on than anyone suspects. Of course this is my opinion. I mean there is conjecture that there were at least 4 teachers in his original school. What's to say one teacher didn't have direct roots to Shaolin?

Remember at one time it was frowned upon to do more than one art. I remember these days vividly. You were supposed to stay in one art forever. Unless you read Chinese you only had the word of other translators. We see what happened to the word Chi. Crosstraining was a big no no. So, here comes a teacher that teaches a little of everything (yes I have a problem with this) in his school. It bypasses the old ways of one art one teacher and you get to train multiple arts. Now, as years pass, it is harder and harder to get out from under this as the MA community opens up to foreigners(Americans).

Now, I could start blasting the CSC's and Shaolin-Do but what purpose would it serve? There are huge gaps and things in the history that cast doubt on the veracity on many of the claims. People can fight with what they are taught and many people get a good work out. They do let you read up on history (which led me to leave) and the East at least lets you crosstrain. So, if we are going to enter the preservation of CMA argument, we need to beat up the New Shaolin Temple which has now imported Tae Kwon Do.

This is coming from someone who would be considered an outcast, with an axe to grind, by the CSC's.

[Judge Pen]

This thread is going to get ugly soon.

Nah. I don't think it will get ugly. It seems that there's always going to be an SD thread that pops up where the SD faithful can debate whether what they do is CMA, JMA or other. The only time it gets ugly is when a person new to the forums reads these threads and takes offense to the dialougue.

I would like to continue the discussion though. I think it's interesting to actually compare concepts in SD to other examples of people here to see what is applicable and where SD's roots really lay. David?

[David Jamieson]

David, I've never shouted on this topic (except maybe at MK a long time ago ) I thought we were having an rational conversation on this topic. Just because we don't agree 100% with your postion doesn't mean that our position is irrational. And I asked you some legitimate questions that you haven't answered yet:

1. Does my "pole arm" set display CMA techniques or JMA (such as a naginata)?
2. Aside from the chi gung aspects of stroking the beard, what are the real fighting applcations of the other standards? Other than performance and homage to the General, why do them? Why is it ok for some of them to be removed and still be considered a Kwan Dao set.
3. Why, other than the performance standards of stroking the beard, etc) was your form CMA and mine was not?

Thanks for getting back to me and furthering our rational conversation.

there was some spiraling occuring. I think you guys are totally allowed your perspective, but on a few of the claims, which is really what was at issue , the claims of the csc, sd and thé himself, those claims that have been redacted or removed and so on.

I never said or implied that sd as an exercise regimen was useless. My concerns were dealing with not just the 900 forms etc etc and were/ are more along the lines of calling something one thing when it is not really that thing and the inference that other arts are untrue.

The Shaolin Temples were the equivalent of universities for the martial arts. Masters were professors, each of them a specialist in a particular area of training. Temples were known for a particular style, just like medical schools of today. Monks at each temple still practiced the forms from the other temples, but they specialized in the style for which their particular temple was known for.

This is highly debateable and is an issue that detracts from teh fact that there is one shaolin temple, it is in henan. While many different types of temples may have had influence from teh shaolin way, there is not evidence of other shaolin temples and in fact the whoe southern temple is still the subject of debate amongst the archeologists, anthropologists and various other experts on the subject. Also, Shaolin was/is first and foremost a buddhist religious temple and not a focus point for martial arts alone. The temple has three treasures, of which martial arts is one third. The primary pursuit of Shaolin was Ch'an (zen) it is paramount to Shaolin practice. Do you practice Ch'an?

Shaolin Do is the most complete and comprehensive martial arts system in the world.

Is this statement mere marketing? If not it is a spurious claim and infers that other asian martial arts are lacking. Would it not be better to say that you would consider it a robust and complete system of martial arts? As opposed to what that says?

Shaolin Grandmaster Sin Kwang The'

How exactly did Thé garner this honour and where is his name in the rolls at shaolin?

All rights are reserved. No part of this document may be reproduced or duplicated in electronic or magnetic media or translated to another language without the written consent of Grandmaster Sin Kwang The' and the Shaolin Do Association.

The Shaolin Do Association makes no warranty of any kind with regard to this material including but not limited to the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose. The Shaolin Do Association shall not be liable for errors contained herein or for incidental or consequential damages or loss in connection with the furnishing performance or use of this material.

The Shaolin Do Art, its logos and graphics and its written materials are protected by federal copyright. Only those individuals with valid Shaolin Do teaching certificates may teach the Shaolin Do Art. Videotaping of any aspect of the Shaolin Do Art is strictly prohibited.

If one is not confident in what they think is a truth, is it a truth? Or should a statement like this give pause?

Ie Chang Ming
1880 - 1976

no photo? no bai si? no record.

Su Kong Tai Djin
1849 - 1928

name in the rolls destroyed in the fire? Lost to the cultural revolution?

Your form, does not bear the hallmarks of kwan dao sets. For most, it would be this alone that would allow one to surmise it is a creation of it's own based upon something else and without knowledge beforehand of teh cultural context of the use of the weapon. Classical weapons, whilc still practiced and while still inclusive of many of the applicatrions the weapons were designed for also have come to bear hallmarks.

'Shaolin' Broadsword is often opened with a single handed salute to honour the Monk Hui Ké for instance. By this hallmark, the broadsword set is identified as Shaolin.

Kwan Dao, on the other hand is outside of Shaolin in particular and it's set performances pay homage to the legendary general who weilded the weapon, ergo the hallmarks of ride the horse, sweep the beard away and so on.

Your halberd set is fine, like I said JP and yes there are inherent logical things that one can do with a weapon because that is dictated by the size shape and design of the weapon. Your halberd set employs logically sequenced moves that can in turn be extrapolated into applicable moves with the weapon. the influence is denoted by what is not included with the particular weapon and the name you have chosen to call your weapon. were you not told that that is not a kwan dao?

so, all inconsistencies aside, besides the mixed terms and the mixed curriculum is it not safe to say that sd can have it's roots in shaolin but still be what it is? an american hybrid of asian martial arts? Just think, if you congeled it with mma, you'd probably evenb get a broader spectrum of students.

[godzillakungfu]

so, all inconsistencies aside, besides the mixed terms and the mixed curriculum is it not safe to say that sd can have it's roots in shaolin but still be what it is? an american hybrid of asian martial arts? Just think, if you congeled it with mma, you'd probably evenb get a broader spectrum of students.

Of course. I think JP agreed in one of the combined threads. Most of us believe it is a hybrid, I know I do. Yet, many people feel we would be coping out by saying this or ask why we don't fix things.

Well, unless you start an offshot you can't. If you enjoy training on the west questioning or cross training WILL get you kicked out of the art.

There is a school in Texas that has a BJJ teacher coming once a week.

[lxtruong]

Of course. I think JP agreed in one of the combined threads. Most of us believe it is a hybrid, I know I do. Yet, many people feel we would be coping out by saying this or ask why we don't fix things.

Well, unless you start an offshot you can't. If you enjoy training on the west questioning or cross training WILL get you kicked out of the art.

There is a school in Texas that has a BJJ teacher coming once a week.

Wow, cross training will get you kicked out? That seems silly. What you do on your own time seems like your business. Of course, where people find time to cross train is a mystery to me, but you know to each their own.

[kwaichang]

David,
Just curious who taught you and what style (s) did / do you study , is it from Shaolin, have you seen the actual papers or just copies? , if it is the one you do now then other than what your teacher told you and your research, you make claims that have no basis of fact. You cant prove something is not Shaolin just because it does not have a beard pull or doesent look like what you have seen or do or what ever.
My first teacher said you have to adjust your Jock for it to be Shaolin haha
" how stupid". I assure you SD is not Japanese or Korean or Okinawan or Phillipino or a mixture of them I havwe studied them and know the 5 elements of power of those countries styles. SD is CMA from Shaolin
Admit you have seen all the over 450 styles of CMA and have seen all their forms and perhaps we will give you credit for your statements. Until then admit you are not 100% sure and let it be. Also even the old TV series implies that there was a Fukien as well as Henan/Hunan ive heard both , Temples. So to say there was only one temple is Ludicrous.
SD has many different "styles" Black Tiger Mantis Hua Chang Chuan Hung Gar Lohan thus it is more than just one style from one temple by just one teacher. KC

[brucereiter]

<<Quote:
"The Shaolin Temples were the equivalent of universities for the martial arts. Masters were professors, each of them a specialist in a particular area of training. Temples were known for a particular style, just like medical schools of today. Monks at each temple still practiced the forms from the other temples, but they specialized in the style for which their particular temple was known for."

This is highly debateable and is an issue that detracts from teh fact that there is one shaolin temple, it is in henan. While many different types of temples may have had influence from teh shaolin way, there is not evidence of other shaolin temples and in fact the whoe southern temple is still the subject of debate amongst the archeologists, anthropologists and various other experts on the subject. Also, Shaolin was/is first and foremost a buddhist religious temple and not a focus point for martial arts alone. The temple has three treasures, of which martial arts is one third. The primary pursuit of Shaolin was Ch'an (zen) it is paramount to Shaolin practice. Do you practice Ch'an?>>

hi david,

the above quote from the sd website i think is a laymans decription of how the shaolin temples operated. it was probably geared towards people who have very limited knowledge of cma and chinese culture.

in a few of yang jwing mings books he also states that there were several "shaolin" temples in china and that they were all loosly connected. i have also seen a few other source's that say the same thing. you might want to check and see where he got his information.

the school in bandung indonesia that grandmaster sin the learned at was not a religious organization it was a martial arts school. fwik.

i happen to follow the teachings of buddha (total coincidence i became buddhist as a child and started shaolin do as an adult.) i do think it is important to at least have a basic understanding of chan when studying shaolin martial arts but it is not necsessary to become buddhist or even for the teaching to be part of your life, in the american culture most or many people are christian and i think they should stick with that part of their culture. on that note one of the best ways to express chan is to not even know it exists. do your work eat sleep and poop.

b

[Judge Pen]

If you enjoy training on the west questioning or cross training WILL get you kicked out of the art.

That's just wrong. My teachers have no problem with what I do in my spare time. Sorry to hear that godzillaking.

As for the rest of this, David never did tell me his martial aplication for the moves that are not present in my form. I pressume from his answer that my form did not, in his limited perception, display JMA pole arm techniques in it. So, and David correct me if I'm wrong, wouldn't you admit that at least this one form appeared to be of CMA origin even if it wasn't a Kwan Dao form by your standards. If those standards were once in the form but removed (as I've seen done by some other CMA schools) then you might have had a different opinion.

And I think that SDIC is right. There was the main temple, but there were others that developed their own brand. If you want to consider the henan/hunan temple THE temple that's probably the most accurate perception. But more CMA styles than SD consider there to be more than just THE temple. Maybe the old kung fu show had it right after all.

[B-Rad]

I think it's very hard to make any kind of solid convincing historical arguement either way without a solid understanding of Chinese. While more and more translated books are showing up here in the U.S., there's still a great deal of material most of us just don't have any kind of access to. Most just rely on what our teacher's tell us. Even recent events get warped horribly in retellings (anyone remember the BS surounding the Shaolin-Do tablet at the rebuilt temple?) I can only imagine what happens to older oral histories.

[MasterKiller]

And I think that SDIC is right. There was the main temple, but there were others that developed their own brand. If you want to consider the henan/hunan temple THE temple that's probably the most accurate perception. But more CMA styles than SD consider there to be more than just THE temple. Maybe the old kung fu show had it right after all.

Here is what Wong Kiew Kit has to say about Shaolin-Do:
http://wongkk.com/answers/ans05a/apr05-1.html

Question 1
My school's grandmaster claims lineage from a monk who was purported to be a grandmaster from the Fukien Temple when it was burned down in the late 19th/early 20th century. However, in my research the only places I see that mention him are affiliated with my school, and he does not seem to be mentioned in other historical accounts.

Have you ever heard of this man? How does he fit in with the history you described in one of your question and answer series? My feeling is that he would be hard to miss because of his unusual appearance and him supposedly being the first to master all styles of kungfu at the Shaolin Temple.
Chris, USA


Answer 1
The southern Shaolin Temole in Fukien (Fujian) Province was burnt down by the Qing Army in the middle 19th century, which is about 150 years before now. The one burnt down in the early 20th century was the northern Shaolin Temple in Henan Province, and that happened about 80 years ago.

In kungfu circles, when one talks about the burning of the Shaolin Temple by the Qing Army, it was the southern Shaolin Temple in Fujian, and not the northern Shaolin Temple at Henan. Many people may not be aware of this fact.

They are also not aware that the burning of the northern Shaolin Temple had nothing to do with kungfu. Traditional kungfu was no longer practiced there for a long time. During the Republican period after the Qing Dynasty had fallen, the northern Shaolin Temple was occupied by a warlord, and a rival warlord attacked and burnt it.

Further, most people are unaware that there were actually two southern Shaolin Temples, one at the city of Quanzhou and the other on Nine-Lotus Mountain. Both were in Fujian Province, and both were burnt down by the Qing Army.

The southern Shaolin Temple at Quanzhou was public. It was built during the earlier Ming Dynasty. When the Qing Dynasty replaced the Ming, Ming royalists relayed around the temple in an attempt to restore the Mong. The Qing Emperor, Yong Cheng, burnt the temple with help from Lama kungfu experts from Tibet.

The other southern Shaolin Temple at Nine Lotus Mountain was secret. It was built by the Venerable Chee Seen, who escaped from the first southern Shaolin Temple. This second southern Shaolin Temple was burnt by the Qing Army led by Ko Chun Choong, the military governor of Guangdong and Guangxi, with the help of his master, Pak Mei.

It was the northern Shaolin Temple in Henan that the present Chinese government has restored. Neither traditional Shaolin Kungfu nor Zen (Chan) Buddhism was practiced at the northern Shaolin Temple at the time of its restoration. It was only in the 1960s or 70s (I can’t remember the dates exactly) that the Venerable Hai Deng, a well known Shaolin kungfu master and monk, was invited to the northern Shaolin Temple to teach kungfu. However, probably due to policy differences, he soon left the temple, and modernized wushu was then taught in numerous wushu schools around the temple.

I have read in the internet about the grandmaster you mentioned but do not know much about him. As both southern Shaolin Temples in Fujian were burnt about 150 years ago, it would not be possible for the grandmaster to be at either one of the temples. I agree with you that as his outward appearance was so unusual, he would not be missed had he been at the temple.

No genuine master would claim that he had mastered all styles of kungfu at the Shaolin Temple, because doing so would simply reveal his ignorance that the Shaolin arts were (and are) so wide and deep that it was impossible to do so. It was also not necessary. Mastering just one style at the temple would be sufficient for all his kungfu purposes, although some talented masters might have mastered a few styles. But attempting to master all the styles of Shaolin Kungfu is like attempting to master all the languages in the world, which would show that he was not only unwise in his use of time but also ignorant of kungfu philosophy.

The grandmaster might be quoted out of context. Or the claim might have been made by his over-zealous followers.