Is Shaolin-Do for real?

[templefist]

I know there is a 10 and a 12, but a 30?

Has anyone else heard of this......or am I just completely off track?

-templefist

[crazymaddrunk]

Hey Shaolindynasty-

"The only real problem I see with the Shaolin Do system is the 900(or more) forms that Sin The teaches."

You need to go over to the Kung Fu Form and read about the Green Dragon guys (who claim 900 forms) and also the Master from China that has 1200, or the Korean guy that has 700.

In other words, don't go pointing fingers at SD when other lineages/styles offer the same thing.

[trilobite]

The reason for which that and our Short Form (a 108 posture form from Shaolin now lowered to 30 postures) is because quite frankly, people from 1960's Kentucky couldn't grasp it. It confused them a lot apparently. So (at that time) Master Sin made it so that they could understand it. I assume he did this with he brother Master Hiang.

[templefist]

So it isnt the same thing as a tan tui 10 or 12 road spring leg exercise? I was unaware that it was ever 108 roads, I thought that was an entirely different thing all together.

templefist

[templefist]

So it isnt the same thing as a tan tui 10 or 12 road spring leg exercise? I was unaware that it was ever 108 roads, I thought that was an entirely different thing all together.

templefist

[Ralphie]

Going by what I have read on different web pages, there are quite a few versions on the number. One page states that they were set to 15 about 70 (?) years ago at some martial art meeting. I am not certain on the date. Another page had 28 as their number and goes on to say that they are several different sets out there.

You're confusing Tan Tui with something else. Your short forms are not like TT at all. Tan tui is generally 10 or 12 roads, although there may be variations. It has general attributes that are unique and distinctive. The stances are higher, the momentum carries the practitioner through the technique. This creates a constant recycling of kinetic energy, produces strength and speed attacks at odd angles. The profile of the practitioner is generally minimalized as well in order to reduce incoming attack angles.

SD short forms tend to be low to the ground, a bit more "snappy" when strikes are applied, and not as mobile.

There is a 108 lo han form that focuses generally on just a few techniques per lo han movement, but again is different than SD short forms. However it may be that SD SF were derived from a southern flavor of this.

Not trying to dis you, but you are not deriving your information on experience outside of SD it seems. By this I mean that reading a web site does not give you an exact idea of these methods, as you still look at them as a SD practitioner.

[First-Chevalier]

All,
I am new to your forum, and am a practitioner of Shao-Lin Tao. I'm told I'm not smart enough to leave sleeping dogs lie, as it where, so I've come to see what all the fuss is about Shao-Lin?

I welcome any and all comments, so long as they are civil. I ignore name callers as I consider the discussion won when the only responses a person can make involve name calling and four letter words.

With that said, away we go . . .

[First-Chevalier]

All,
I am new to your forum, and am a practitioner of Shao-Lin Tao. I'm told I'm not smart enough to leave sleeping dogs lie, as it where, so I've come to see what all the fuss is about Shao-Lin?

I welcome any and all comments, so long as they are civil. I ignore name callers as I consider the discussion won when the only responses a person can make involve name calling and four letter words.

With that said, away we go . . .

[Radhnoti]

I have been told by some folks that the 30 short forms SD have are not all based on tan tui. And, that at least a few of them were adapted from linkage or training sets.

I suspect that most are adaptations of some version of tan tui though, the similarities are just too great. I do, however, admit my exposure to other school's tan tui is mostly from still photos so Ralphie's 108 lohan theory could be dead on. Ralphie, if you don't mind could you direct me to an example of this 108 lohan form...a school, website, book, etc.?
Thanks.

[Vash]

Originally posted by Okami
Karate practitioners who make up the lineage of the four main Okinawan styles (Shotokan, Shinto-Ryu, Wado-Ryu, and Gojo-Ryu)

(Just to be an ass, I'm gonna argue over Japanese/Okinawan arts on a CMA thread about a questioned CMA . . .)

Shotokan
Classified Japanese. Yep, Okinawa is a part of Japan now, but the arts developed from either tend to be separated by their practitioners (or maybe I'm a tight-ass). Developed by an Okinawan practitioner of Shorinryu. Speaking of Shorinryu . . .

Where is it? It's one of the more wide-spread styles on Okinawa, next to Gojuryu.

Wadoryu

This too is a Japanese art, post-dates Shotokan (founder Hironori Ohtsuka was inspired by, and worked out with, Gichen Funakoshi, Shotokan founder). Ohtsuka was the first Japanese to form a karate style as a Budo.

Gojuryu kicks major @$$.

Oh, where was Uechiryu?

Time to throw together a crappy paper for comp II. Yay!

[Kymus]

Originally posted by Vash


(Just to be an ass, I'm gonna argue over Japanese/Okinawan arts on a CMA thread about a questioned CMA . . .)

Shotokan
Classified Japanese. Yep, Okinawa is a part of Japan now, but the arts developed from either tend to be separated by their practitioners (or maybe I'm a tight-ass). Developed by an Okinawan practitioner of Shorinryu. Speaking of Shorinryu . . .

Where is it? It's one of the more wide-spread styles on Okinawa, next to Gojuryu.

Wadoryu

This too is a Japanese art, post-dates Shotokan (founder Hironori Ohtsuka was inspired by, and worked out with, Gichen Funakoshi, Shotokan founder). Ohtsuka was the first Japanese to form a karate style as a Budo.

Gojuryu kicks major @$$.

Oh, where was Uechiryu?

Time to throw together a crappy paper for comp II. Yay!

I saw a license plate once that read "Goju2Ryu" . And a friend of mine who is a 2nd or 3rd degree black belt in Shotokan saw 3 biker friends each with a license plate named after a Shotokan form .

[Vash]

I've heard it takes hell and a day to go up through the ranks in Shotokan, after the initial dan grade. Any idea why, or if that's even true?

I prefer the OMAs, but those JMAs can kick @$$ when necessary. But, the CMAs . . .

[Ralphie]

I suspect that most are adaptations of some version of tan tui though, the similarities are just too great. I do, however, admit my exposure to other school's tan tui is mostly from still photos so Ralphie's 108 lohan theory could be dead on. Ralphie, if you don't mind could you direct me to an example of this 108 lohan form...a school, website, book, etc.?

I know there is some kind of desire to connect your short forms with tan tui, but they are more dissimilar than similar. There are some "kung fu" like movements in your short forms that may look somewhat like tan tui, but the way they are taught is much much different. By this I mean the essence of the of the movements are very different. Like I said as well, the 108 lohan might be similar in a way as well, but again, are very different to your short forms. I actually don't know how to direct you toward information on these, as I learned them from someone.

I got my black belt in SD several years ago. I know first hand what you guys teach, and what the methods are. I can, with first hand experience, tell you that both tan tui and the 108 lo han are very northern, and if I could pin point the SD short forms, I would say they "look" more southern. Although, that is debatable as well.

SD is what it is. It has its own paradigm that is unlike any other CMA. Some in the SD clique will say that is because it is directly from the temple, etc. However, I personally don't believe that it is. It really does not fit into any other CMA method or paradigm. While it teaches many forms from many systems, it does not teach the nuts and bolts of any particular system. Therefore, it lacks the essence of any of the systems it proclaims to teach. I may not be clear, so here is an example:

When The Willow Sword fought Reemul, I remotely observed the occurrence. I even contacted TWS afterward, and told him I thought he won a lot of respect for doing what he did. I then described the event to my instructor. After describing "Reeemul" to him, he immediately said "He (Reemul) was probably a Tiger practitioner." I, knowing that he was, affirmed this. When I asked how he knew, he said, "he seemed like a Tiger practitioner." Reemul, because he has trained in that system, holds the essence of that system. Even his general attitude takes on the essence of that system. Like a SD practitioner holds the essence of the SD system. If you were taught a tan tui form, you would do it like a SD practitioner. Maybe that's why your short forms look nothing like tan tui. When you do ba gua, you look like a SD practitioner doing ba gua, not like a ba gua practition doing ba gua. These are my observation based on experience.

I hope this helps in one way or another.

[Kymus]

Originally posted by Vash
I've heard it takes hell and a day to go up through the ranks in Shotokan, after the initial dan grade. Any idea why, or if that's even true?

I prefer the OMAs, but those JMAs can kick @$$ when necessary. But, the CMAs . . .

My Grandmaster Started out learning in Okinawa. He has something like 6 different black belts in Okinawan Karate (dunno the exact styles off hand), Then he went to Taiwan and learned there. He prefers the CMA. He actually doesn't care for Karate at all now.

As far as Shotokan goes, I'm not sure. I'll have to ask her.

[Ralphie]

Bluesman,

I think the SD debate here is just one that comes up every once in a while. There have been a lot more SD guys on the forum lately, and this has increased the attention to it. I think that once people get past the uniforms thing, the problems are with the claims made by SD itself. To me, SD practitioners should be happy practicing what they do, and really if you visit one of their kwoons, they are. This is a good thing. Many people have found what they are looking for at SD. However, it is when claims are made to the contrary of facts that it rubs people the wrong way on these type of anonymous forums.

Let me put it this way, what if I started a SD school, when in fact I only knew some things on the surface regarding SD? Now maybe I knew a lot of forms, and this and that, but really what I did was modern Wu Shu. Would it make you mad if I told you I did SD because I knew some similar forms? What if you said, "but you don't do SD short forms", and I said "I do a variation called the Shaolin Dao Center short forms, but we do 48 instead of 31". What if my short forms looked nothing like yours save for a few generic KF moves, but I claimed a variation of them? Would my claims concern you, as I diminish the essence of what you do? What if my version of your Mantis looked and felt nothing like how your mantis is taught, or any other version of authentic mantis that you've seen or felt? Would this raise questions in your mind? Now, really this is small potatoes to you and me, but in this forum these questions can be asked.