New SD Videos at Shaolin Center

[illusionfist]

Not to sound cynical or stand off-ish, but I wouldn't put much faith in any dates for anything in CMA oral tradition because they often change. Then of course there is the dubious nature of the existance of the Nam Siu Lam Gee (southern shaolin temple), couple that with spurious dates and you'll get a rather annoying research experience. Just the story of Wang Lang alone has a 200-400 year gap, because the exact time between the two dynasties he lived is not known (one of which was a dynasty which extended to 1911).

Now one thing that needs to be taken into account is the specific lineage of praying mantis. The date inaccuracy above only takes into account the founding of mantis and is not taking into account the varying origin dates of the other types of praying mantis such as Seven Star, Tai Chi, Plum Flower, Six Combinations, Flat Plate, Secret Door, Jade Ring, Dragging Hand, Eight Step, Jut Sau, etc. So if further depth has to be reached, we need to narrow it down to a specifc lineage of praying mantis so we can streamline the discussion.

However on a geographic level, a preponderence of the practitioners of northern mantis were found in the Shandong region- nowhere near Fukien. This is obviously not to say they didn't spread, but the existence of northern mantis is not very prevalent in the south. I'm also basing the emphasis on northern mantis from the video- which doesn't show ANY remnant of southern praying mantis at all. So i default the overall larger lineage to at least some variant of northern mantis.

I personally feel that no validity can be placed on anything coming out of the Fukien Shaolin temple, not because there is no proof it existed (most of the legends based from this temple have roots in martial pulp fiction novels), but there are systems within SD that are basically in no way affiliated with arts that lay claim to a lineage to a southern shaolin heritage- i.e. tai ji, bagua, hsing yi, govt produced forms, Hua boxing, etc. Even going by commonly told stories of the southern shaolin temple, the abbots of said temple stopped after the displacement of Gee Sin and his compatriots. There is no mention of the patriarchs of the SD lineage.

So I would rather put weight into an entering date by a person that can be recognized within the same mantis lineage from which the SD forms originate. That way, if there is record of said persons exploits, it can be cross-referenced with the other lineages. Not only would it show where the form came from, but it would also give insight as to where and when that person would have entered a temple.

Peace

[brassmonkey]

I didnt sthink the Mantis guys used that hook type hand formation to strike with or do they?

[shaolinarab]

Originally posted by illusionfist
Not to sound cynical or stand off-ish, but I wouldn't put much faith in any dates for anything in CMA oral tradition because they often change. Then of course there is the dubious nature of the existance of the Nam Siu Lam Gee (southern shaolin temple), couple that with spurious dates and you'll get a rather annoying research experience. Just the story of Wang Lang alone has a 200-400 year gap, because the exact time between the two dynasties he lived is not known (one of which was a dynasty which extended to 1911).

Now one thing that needs to be taken into account is the specific lineage of praying mantis. The date inaccuracy above only takes into account the founding of mantis and is not taking into account the varying origin dates of the other types of praying mantis such as Seven Star, Tai Chi, Plum Flower, Six Combinations, Flat Plate, Secret Door, Jade Ring, Dragging Hand, Eight Step, Jut Sau, etc. So if further depth has to be reached, we need to narrow it down to a specifc lineage of praying mantis so we can streamline the discussion.

However on a geographic level, a preponderence of the practitioners of northern mantis were found in the Shandong region- nowhere near Fukien. This is obviously not to say they didn't spread, but the existence of northern mantis is not very prevalent in the south. I'm also basing the emphasis on northern mantis from the video- which doesn't show ANY remnant of southern praying mantis at all. So i default the overall larger lineage to at least some variant of northern mantis.

I personally feel that no validity can be placed on anything coming out of the Fukien Shaolin temple, not because there is no proof it existed (most of the legends based from this temple have roots in martial pulp fiction novels), but there are systems within SD that are basically in no way affiliated with arts that lay claim to a lineage to a southern shaolin heritage- i.e. tai ji, bagua, hsing yi, govt produced forms, Hua boxing, etc. Even going by commonly told stories of the southern shaolin temple, the abbots of said temple stopped after the displacement of Gee Sin and his compatriots. There is no mention of the patriarchs of the SD lineage.

So I would rather put weight into an entering date by a person that can be recognized within the same mantis lineage from which the SD forms originate. That way, if there is record of said persons exploits, it can be cross-referenced with the other lineages. Not only would it show where the form came from, but it would also give insight as to where and when that person would have entered a temple.

Peace

illusionfist,

i respect your comments and analysis on the forms and history based on your experience. not to start another thread discussing SD history b/c it has already been expounded, but i felt that some of your thoughts warranted clarification. One common misconception of SD is that we lay claim to all the forms found in our system as having been all taught in fukien. that is not the case at all in our tradition. according to our narrative, the great-great GM had travelled around to different temples where he learned the other styles (such as some of the northern ones, or even of the internal arts). i guess, u can liken his martial education to the way wang lang travelled around to master different fighting styles.

the other thing i'd like to clarify is that su kong tai djin was not the chief abbot of the temple (whichever temple in the fukien province he came from), but the grandmaster of the martial arts instruction in the temple. but as you said, there is so much clouded in chinese history that who knows what the final resolution will be regarding which was the real 'southern temple,' etc. or the specific origins of a given form and/or its variation (will the real slim shady please stand up?)

[illusionfist]

shaolinarab,

Although it can be said its a common misconception, I've been hearing stories since the 80's that have basically insinuated or outright said that ALL of the systems were once taught at varying shaolin temples throughout China (which the idea of many Shaolin temples teaching martial arts around China is debatable itself). Even the main SD website likens the temples to "universities" where the monks were "professors" of martial arts. It is a well known fact that a majority of the temples were solely devoted to their religious practice and did not partake in the training of martial arts.

According to Joe Schaefer's site- http://www.swshaolin.com/kungfu.html - "Since its creation, Shaolin has collected, refined and retained over 980 katas (forms), representing more than 50 different open hand systems and many different weapons. Contrary to the popular belief that Shaolin monks only practiced the "hard styles", every major form of internal kung fu was practiced in the Shaolin temples. This includes every major family of Tai Chi and Pa Kua, as well as Hsing Ie and the very rare Liu Hsing (meteor fist). Shaolin monks also possessed an awesome body of knowledge on esoteric Taoist and Buddhist Chi Kung (breath training) and Nei Kung (internal training) techniques."

So even there it says that the internal arts were practiced at Shaolin temple(s), which by most internal schools accounts outside of the SD org, that doesn't jive well. Considering that Yang, Wu, Hao, and Sun style Tai Ji (which including Chen are the major branches of Tai Ji) ALL originated outside of the Shaolin temple and have never had any ties to a temple makes that statement above false. Bagua itself didn't even become mainstream until after Dong Hai Chuan's stay in Beijing around 1875 and its region of focus stayed in that area surrounding Beijing, Tianjin, etc.

Returning back to the south, it has been a common consensus amongst historians that the Southern Shaolin Temple (the one in Fukien) was destroyed by 1768 (some say 1763- with either date it was the second burning of the temple) and it was never rebuilt because the Ching influence in the region lasted until 1911, where afterwards foreign invaders took hold of many spots in the region. Considering that many systems after that time went underground and led to the formation of secret societies like the Hung Mun, etc, it is highly unlikely that numerous temples remained with hundreds of practitioners learning from these martial "universities". There is much speculation on just the one Nam Siu Lam Gee, much less several. A majority of southern systems have more to do with the Hoi Tong temple (which was a refuge for many after the temple burned).

So taking the common date of 1768 and comparing it to Su Kong's life (as stated at Union Shaolin Do ) the dates dont add up. According to the Union Shaolin Do site, "Great Great Grandmaster Su Kong Tai Djin (1849-1928) spent his entire life in the Fukien temple. Away from society, he dedicated himself to the mastery of forms from all seven Shaolin temples, and was named Grandmaster of Shaolin. His special area of mastery was the deadly art of tin Shieh Kung, or Death Touch." Even if the common date of 1768 is wrong, there is pretty much no way that he was able to remain in a temple past 1911.

Another thing to note is that the Union description says, "the" fukien temple and it doesn't make reference to "a fukien temple" or "one of the fukien temples", etc. In Deng Feng there is a bell that was cast in the 1330's and it has a inscribed list of monasteries that had proponents of the Shaolin faith (not necessarily their martial arts) and it lists 23 monasteries, all of which are in surrounding areas of the main Shaolin Temple- none are in the south. Now there are many ways to interpret this, but some think that this is merely because the temples changed sects and embraced different beliefs (as well as different rulers). If this is true, at the very least it debunks the theory that the Shaolin temples were this grand network of temples exchanging ideas on faith (much less martial arts) all based from one head school (in this case the main Shaolin temple in Henan).

Ie Chang Ming's history also does not make much sense considering that it says he received his grandmaster title after the Shaolin temple was burned. If he was born in 1880, this obviously doesn't coincide with the timeline as well. Even giving the benefit of the doubt and saying he was somehow at a temple that was burned down, we'll give him say 20 years to master his art, starting maybe at the age of 5 (which would still be inline with the statement that Sin Kwang The' himself mastered the art at 25, making him the youngest shaolin grandmaster in history-i.e it took him 18 years), that would bring us to 1905 and still be within the regime of the Ching dynasty. Now, whereas using the much older date of 1768 could raise the idea that there was time for the ruins to be destroyed, excavated and materials used, built over, etc. I think there would still be ample evidence of a temple razed as early as circa 1905. Then there is the question of who burned the temple. If the temple burned later than the aforementioned hypothetical date, who burned it? It's pretty much implied by the varying histories throughout the SD org that this burning that is mentioned is in fact the actual burning of Southern Shaolin. If this is the case, the dates just totally dont add up.

Peace

[The Willow Sword]

hope all is well with you.
peace,,,TWS

[BeiTangLang]

Excellent post illusion fist; I'm glad you wrote all that so I wouldn't have to.

An adept student can look at SD's history & tell its suspect.
A non martial artist can compare traditional systems forms to the sd versions & tell they are not the same.

What is the dire devotion to SD that makes people blind to facts?
I have been asking myself this since I saw their schools start popping up. No answer yet except this is America; Land of the free, Home of the brave & the exotic stuff collectors (authentic or not....The more the better!).........I wouldn't live anywhere else.

[Golden Tiger]

Well, I am new here so I guess that I should throw my two cents in. I will start by saying that I am somewhat biased in that I have been a student of Master Sin and instructor for close to 25 years. In that time, I have seen just about every arguement that there is about Shaolin-Do not being this or that. It still amazes me that it continues today. I see the indepth research that must have taken weeks to compile just to try to discredit our art. Each time I see these threads, I sit back and ask myself why is it so important for others to send their precious time fighting about this when I am sure that there are more productive ways that it could be spent.

So I now pose this question to you. What gain or benifit can come of trying to discredit another style of martial arts?

Say that you prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Shaolin-Do was created in the mind of Master Sin to bilk the unsuspecting out of their money. During that time, he has still allowed thousands of people to learn something that they could have never learned if it was not for him. He has taught forms and movements that let people improve their confidence and conditioning. His schools have allowed people to meet and form life long friendships that perhaps would have not happened otherwise. In essence, he has bettered the lives of many people. Can you say the same?

Say that you prove that the history of Shaolin-Do could not have happened the way it is stated. Does that change the content of what was taught and the benifits that were gained?

Say that you prove that the forms (mantis, tiger, snake, etc.)are not from the original "system". Can you think of another person that would or could for that matter put the time and the effort into creating all these forms and systems just to make a few dollars?

What needs to be understood is that in my opinion, when someone tries to discredit or put down something that someone truly believes in, they are wasting their time.

A very wise person once told me that when someone puts another person down, they are just trying to make themselves look better but can't do it on merit alone.

Again, I just felt like putting my two cents in on the thread and actually could care less what others think of Shaolin-Do. I am fully aware of what it has given me over the many years that I have been involved with it and if it was discovered tomorrow that Master Sin is actually an out of work carpet salesman from BFE it would do nothing to change my opinion.

Well, have fun and practice hard...

[BeiTangLang]

Originally posted by Golden Tiger
Well, I am new here so I guess that I should throw my two cents in. I will start by saying that I am somewhat biased in that I have been a student of Master Sin and instructor for close to 25 years. In that time, I have seen just about every arguement that there is about Shaolin-Do not being this or that. It still amazes me that it continues today. I see the indepth research that must have taken weeks to compile just to try to discredit our art. Each time I see these threads, I sit back and ask myself why is it so important for others to send their precious time fighting about this when I am sure that there are more productive ways that it could be spent.
***
Not fighting, conversing. Students of all scholarly sects do the same thing. Obviously you enjoy conversation as well or you would not have replied....
***

So I now pose this question to you. What gain or benifit can come of trying to discredit another style of martial arts?

***
Opening a childs eyes to the fact that the "rock candy" he just bought from another kid was just a rock, and no matter how long it stays in his mouth it will not be sweet, is worth it.
I do not call it discrediting when something is not acredited.
**

Say that you prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Shaolin-Do was created in the mind of Master Sin to bilk the unsuspecting out of their money. During that time, he has still allowed thousands of people to learn something that they could have never learned if it was not for him. He has taught forms and movements that let people improve their confidence and conditioning. His schools have allowed people to meet and form life long friendships that perhaps would have not happened otherwise. In essence, he has bettered the lives of many people. Can you say the same?
***
No,..but Mr.Banks could & he never claimed to have a fighting art...
***

Say that you prove that the history of Shaolin-Do could not have happened the way it is stated. Does that change the content of what was taught and the benifits that were gained?
***
Nope, by definition they'd still have what they paid for.
***

Say that you prove that the forms (mantis, tiger, snake, etc.)are not from the original "system". Can you think of another person that would or could for that matter put the time and the effort into creating all these forms and systems just to make a few dollars?
***
Nope,..just choreographers.
***

What needs to be understood is that in my opinion, when someone tries to discredit or put down something that someone truly believes in, they are wasting their time.

A very wise person once told me that when someone puts another person down, they are just trying to make themselves look better but can't do it on merit alone.
***
No one is puting anyone down I think,....just discussing & arguing a bit. Its done by more than just anti-sd'ers. Its not a bad thing because the subject gets publiciy & usually bennefits (unless discovered to be fraudulent). As a 25year student, you hould know nothing will become of the art due to this thread! Why worry!
***


Again, I just felt like putting my two cents in on the thread and actually could care less what others think of Shaolin-Do. I am fully aware of what it has given me over the many years that I have been involved with it and if it was discovered tomorrow that Master Sin is actually an out of work carpet salesman from BFE it would do nothing to change my opinion.
***
I would expect nothing less.
***

Well, have fun and practice hard...

Excellent post as well.
Best Wishes,
~BTL

[Golden Tiger]

Point proven......

[BeiTangLang]

point poven that any reply would have warranted "point proven"?? LOL!

[Brad]

Say that you prove that the history of Shaolin-Do could not have happened the way it is stated. Does that change the content of what was taught and the benifits that were gained?

No. But wanting others to know the correct history isn't exactly unreasonable. IF Shaolin-Do is spreading incorrect history about the arts that non-shaolin-do people practice, then they have every right to discredit what shaolin-do says. Unlike most of us, Illusionfist is being 100% respectful to you Shaolin-Do followers, backing up every argument with solid edvidence. The least you could do is respond in the same manner instead of questioning his motives.

Well, I am new here so I guess that I should throw my two cents in. I will start by saying that I am somewhat biased in that I have been a student of Master Sin and instructor for close to 25 years. In that time, I have seen just about every arguement that there is about Shaolin-Do not being this or that. It still amazes me that it continues today. I see the indepth research that must have taken weeks to compile just to try to discredit our art. Each time I see these threads, I sit back and ask myself why is it so important for others to send their precious time fighting about this when I am sure that there are more productive ways that it could be spent.

I seriously doubt most of the in depth research was done solely to
discredit Shaolin-Do. Many of us choose to research for our own benifit to learn more about our own martial arts. No different than if I go to art school and learn about art history, or football players learning about Joe Nameth.

[QUOTESo I now pose this question to you. What gain or benifit can come of trying to discredit another style of martial arts?[/QUOTE]
At the very least, a well thought out argument against SD's history can serve to educate others. For example, I never knew about the Deng Feng bell until this thread.

Say that you prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Shaolin-Do was created in the mind of Master Sin to bilk the unsuspecting out of their money. During that time, he has still allowed thousands of people to learn something that they could have never learned if it was not for him. He has taught forms and movements that let people improve their confidence and conditioning. His schools have allowed people to meet and form life long friendships that perhaps would have not happened otherwise. In essence, he has bettered the lives of many people. Can you say the same?

Life long friendships, bettering people's lives, learning something unique(very arguable in SD's case), and increased health could be gained at any number of places outside of Shaolin-Do. It's no excuse for lying.

Say that you prove that the history of Shaolin-Do could not have happened the way it is stated. Does that change the content of what was taught and the benifits that were gained?

No, but it does improve the average persons ability to judge for themselves the content of what Shaolin-Do teaches.

Say that you prove that the forms (mantis, tiger, snake, etc.)are not from the original "system". Can you think of another person that would or could for that matter put the time and the effort into creating all these forms and systems just to make a few dollars?

Yes I can. In fact I've personally had contact with two such individuals right here in central Ohio.

What needs to be understood is that in my opinion, when someone tries to discredit or put down something that someone truly believes in, they are wasting their time.

This is not a religion it's a martial art. If someone is spreading false information and you know it, why stay quiet?

A very wise person once told me that when someone puts another person down, they are just trying to make themselves look better but can't do it on merit alone.

Illusionfist didn't put you or anyone else down. He put out a solid arguement that published information was false. It's not his fault if that hurts anyone's feelings, it's the fault of the person puting out the false info in the first place.

Again, I just felt like putting my two cents in on the thread and actually could care less what others think of Shaolin-Do. I am fully aware of what it has given me over the many years that I have been involved with it and if it was discovered tomorrow that Master Sin is actually an out of work carpet salesman from BFE it would do nothing to change my opinion.

That's your opinion, but others may not be so willing to give money to a con man, and when making a decision to hand someone their money, you can't fault them for wanting to look at all the info available.

[Golden Tiger]

Looks as if I have struck a nerve....


As I mentioned before, I have seen all these arguements before. In no way did I question the motives of illusionfist. I am sure that his motives are honorable.

Brad, you also have taken some time and quiet a bit of effort to respond to my post. I am glad that I facilitated that sort of a response from you.

That said, I will just sit back and relive the past as I read thru the threads.

Thanks

[PHILBERT]

None of the links are working on the Shaolin-Do page to download the videos. What happened? I wanted to see Sin The doing his forms.

[cho]

Originally posted by Golden Tiger
As I mentioned before, I have seen all these arguements before. In no way did I question the motives of illusionfist. I am sure that his motives are honorable.

so could you refute them?please
or are you going to pull an Ashida Kim on us?

anyone ever wonder why no other style or anyone will give any acknowledgement of SD, besides its own members? How come SD schools are only in the midwestern and southern states, instead of the usual east and west coast?

[tnwingtsun]

It just does not look like kung-fu,sorry SD guys,there are some of you out there that I like but it just does not have the look or the feel of the real Chinese MA.

It may be good carpet though............