Shaolin Literature

[KubanLink]

I am a fiend when it comes to studying things I get involved with. Are there any good books out there (in English) that discuss Shaolin kung fu history or Shaolin kung fu conceptually? Most of the knowledge I have gathered is from forums and websites. Thanks.

[NorthernShaolin]

One real good book that you may still be able to purchase in English is part of the Chinese Wu Shu Series called:

Essential of Chinese Wu Shu by Foreign Languages Press, 1992, Beijing, ISBN 0-8351-2830 X or ISBN 7-119-01477-3

[Roc Doc]

kubanlink,
you should check out this research paper by Dr. Shahar entitled;
ming period evidence of shaolin martial practice
you can find it in the harvard journal of asiatic studies
i think it is in the nov/dec issue/2001
enjoy,
~doc

[GeneChing]

Our most recent Shaolin Special was last years Nov Dec 2003 issue and in it, you'll find a listing of all of our previous Shaolin issues. Plus you can search through all of our old magazine table-of-contents for more. There are a lot of stray Shaolin articles that never made it to the specials - overflow, if you will.

Speaking of Dr. Shahar, our families just had dinner together last Friday. In fact, our wives and kids were supposed to get together for an outing this President's Day sinc eth sschools are closed, but my kid fell sick over the weekend, so it was postponed. Expect more from him to come. He's a truly brilliant researcher, and delightful company. We've been trading a lot of research lately. Expect to see some of his work here soon.

[Just a Guy]

Shahar's work has great historical merit. What's really nice is that he has drawn information together from disparate Chinese sources and put it all in one place. However...

I believe his speculation that Shaolin martial practices violate the Buddhist doctrine of non-violence and his hypothesis that 16th century Shaolin justified those practices, especially staff work, by invoking the celestial example of Jinnaluo is way off-base. I won't write a book here about it, but his premises deserve some serious scrutiny.

[KubanLink]

Does the full extent of Dr. Shahar's writings on the topic consist of "ming period evidence of shaolin martial practice" or is there more?

thanks.

Trying to figure out where to get a copy of that article. IF anyone is willing to provide me with a copy via email (pdf format or something) let me know, and I'll provide you with my email address.

[canglong]

I am looking for that article as well I was going to chime in earlier and mention you have to be a member to read the article online but if some one is sharing a copy I would like to get one as well. Thanks, I have emaild Dr. Shahar but no reply as of yet...

[mickey]

Greetings Brothers,

I would have to recommend "Shaolin Kung Fu" by Ying Zi and Weng Yi (1981). This one is very hard to find. The first four chapters are about Shaolin history and includes very nice photographs of the frescoes. The last chapter is on Shaolin Kung Fu. Special mention is made of the Jingang Chan Natural Style and Shorinji Kempo. One can see with this book the agenda toward the rebuilding of Shaolin. What's missing? The monks that we now all see. A lot has changed in 23 years!

mickey

[Just a Guy]

Good luck finding that book!!

It does have some nice tidbits, however. Of note, the authors mention T'ang Dynasty martial arts at the temple. However, the book is not a scholarly one. They don't really say where they get their info. Fortunately, Jeffrey Broughton's "The Bodhidharma Anthology" also has some info about early martial activities at the temple - recorded in Ch'an literature. And Broughton's book is widely available. Just a warning, the book isn't really about Shaolin - buried in the notes, there just happens to be a little history recovered from the Tun Huang Manuscripts about martial activity at the temple.

Shahar's article talks about how Shaolin were famous in the 16th century for staff work. But the Ch'an literature records famous staff masters at the temple even as early as Tamo's time - monks such as Seng-Ch'o. So when military commanders in the 1550's were talking about the staff techniques at Shaolin being ancient, they weren't a' kidding! (Of course, the stuff they do at the "temple" today is completely different.)

[Fen]

I have been looking over Dr. Shahar paper for over a month now, and this is just one thinking I have seen..

In the research paper by Dr. Shahar entitled;
Ming period evidence of Shaolin Martial practice.

Info only::::
On page 376. The last paragraph on this page says:

The Shaolin Monasstery has a staff-fighting method called " Five Tigers Interception" (Wuhu lan).
"One strike down, one strike up" (yi da yi jie)

And in BSL of today (?-2004) we have:
"Five tigers catch the lamb Staff "

Thesaurus
Entry: intercept ion
Function: verb
Definition: interrupt
Synonyms: ambush, appropriate, arrest, block, bug, catch, check, curb, cut in, cut off, deflect, head off, hijack, hinder, interlope, interpose, obstruct, prevent, seize, shortstop, stop, take, take away
Concept: prevention/restriction

I do feel that this is the same set as todays. Just with add name (the lamb Staff) on it. Why, I do not know yet.

But if this is the same set, then it poves that the set is older then 1562 (gessing on date do to the info on pages 375-377) that makes this set over 442 years old.

But this is just what I've gotten to at this time.
Any info that you all have will help....

~Jason

[blooming lotus]

For me, an important part of researching gongfu/shaolin martial arts has been chinese history in general...I think even if it seems unrelated, it gives good broader perspective and understanding...but you may have gathered that already

[GeneChing]

Dr. Shahar actually has a fair amount of research that he is developing, but keep in mind that this is academic research, which operates at a much higher standard. If you really think you have solid evidence that refutes his claim, then by all means publish it in an academic journal. That's what real scholarly research is all about. I'm at odds with some of his research, in particular his analysis of staff, but I cannot refute it academically. In fact, his staff premise was challenged by a young monk at Shaolin at the Shaolin Academic Symposium who cited the stele of Li Shinmin. Of course, Dr. Shahar did major work on the stele and no where on that stele does it mention that the monks actually wielded staff - that was added to the legend later - so the good doctor shot that ipetuos monk down with stunning academic flair. And the rumor is that the monk got a severe dressing down from the Abbot abou this.

As for Five Tigers Catch the Lamb, it's a classic movement in martial arts, akin to White crane spreads its wings. I'm reading General Yue Fei now, and it is mentioned even in there.

[canglong]

Hmmm ok Gene, I'll bite where exactly do you and Dr. Shahar differ on staff?

[rik]

Tao of wushu - Wu Shu's record was written in the seventeenth century so I'm not sure where you are getting your conclusion about 'five tigers interception' .

Also it is my feeling "wuhu lan," as mentioned in that document, refers to a tactic not a form.

Gene - I gather that you're not so much at odds with Dr. Shahar's research as you are with some
of his conclusions. I suspect that Dr. Shahar is questioning whether there was formal
staff combat training at Shaolin, before the Ming Dynasty.

[MasterKiller]

Is there an online copy of the article anywhere?