View Poll Results: What to do about the 'Is Shaolin-Do for real?' thread

Voters
57. You may not vote on this poll
  • Unlock IS-Dfr. Merge all S-D threads together so it clears 1000 posts!

    22 38.60%
  • Unlock IS-Dfr. Let all the S-D threads stand independently.

    13 22.81%
  • Keep IS-Dfr locked down. All IS-Dfr posters deserved to be punished.

    5 8.77%
  • Delete them all. Let Yama sort them out.

    17 29.82%
Page 1312 of 1335 FirstFirst ... 312812121212621302131013111312131313141322 ... LastLast
Results 19,666 to 19,680 of 20011

Thread: Is Shaolin-Do for real?

  1. #19666
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    kentucky
    Posts
    350
    No it realy doesn't. You know how it goes on here, it can be dead for weeks and then add three pages overnight. And then as I am sure you know somepeople just hang out and watch this madness.

    Hope your training is going well, and that God is blessing.
    ...or is there something i have missed a glimpse of phantoms in the mist. Traveling down a dusty road bent forward with this heavy load..

  2. #19667
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    376
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by shen ku View Post
    No it realy doesn't. You know how it goes on here, it can be dead for weeks and then add three pages overnight. And then as I am sure you know somepeople just hang out and watch this madness.

    Hope your training is going well, and that God is blessing.
    I wasn't there, but if it's the shaolin 7 stars form then you can find countless instructional videos on YouTube. I'm sure The' learned it from a video. He taught all the material he knows a long time ago.

  3. #19668
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    kentucky
    Posts
    350
    Have you been to any of his seminars over the last 5 years or so?
    ...or is there something i have missed a glimpse of phantoms in the mist. Traveling down a dusty road bent forward with this heavy load..

  4. #19669
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    376
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by shen ku View Post
    Have you been to any of his seminars over the last 5 years or so?
    The last one I attended was the 5 animal seminar. By Bill Leonard. I was super excited to attend it. I wondered how similar it would be to the form in Doc Fai Wong's book. Imagine my surprise to see it was the exact same form! Now this form is long. I expected an 8 hour seminar. But he wanted get through it in record time. It was like a 3 hour class. Impossible to learn.
    The last Sin The' seminar I attended was one of the ground monkeys. I'll admit, I liked this one. But here's the thing...you had guys who have been with Sin 30+ years learning this for the first time. Along with people with less than 2 years. Does this really make sense? I mean, wouldn't they already know it?

  5. #19670
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    kentucky
    Posts
    350
    i have thought the same thing. SD is the only art i have directly trained in, i have crossed hands with a few others, but i have known of others that did seminars very much as SD does. I go to SD seminars but not so much as for the form but to get the chance to talk to others in SD that i respect.

    But i did also enjoy the ground monkey, both of them. I have looked for things like it and the only things i have found have been called dog kung fu or ground kung fu.
    ...or is there something i have missed a glimpse of phantoms in the mist. Traveling down a dusty road bent forward with this heavy load..

  6. #19671
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    376
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by shen ku View Post
    i have thought the same thing. SD is the only art i have directly trained in, i have crossed hands with a few others, but i have known of others that did seminars very much as SD does. I go to SD seminars but not so much as for the form but to get the chance to talk to others in SD that i respect.

    But i did also enjoy the ground monkey, both of them. I have looked for things like it and the only things i have found have been called dog kung fu or ground kung fu.
    I agree it is a good way to reunite with friends.
    But how can it be that Sin's most senior and private students with 30+ years devotion hadn't already learned this material. And then learn it for the first time along side yellow belts. The only reasonable answer is it was recently picked up by Sin.
    I still believe that the core material shared between Sin and Hiang is the only legitimate material they learned. And it's the stuff I really like.

  7. #19672
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    152

    Class participation

    Quote Originally Posted by bodhi warrior View Post
    I agree it is a good way to reunite with friends.
    But how can it be that Sin's most senior and private students with 30+ years devotion hadn't already learned this material. And then learn it for the first time along side yellow belts. The only reasonable answer is it was recently picked up by Sin.
    I still believe that the core material shared between Sin and Hiang is the only legitimate material they learned. And it's the stuff I really like.
    It has been said that GMS picks the material he teaches in some random order from what he knows or has learned, according to what he chooses to teach and when. That's why even the older students haven't learned it yet, because he hadn't taught it yet, to anyone. No point in debating where it came from or when, only he knows for sure.

    There have been some required prerequisites, like when Golden Leopard was a mandatory prerequisite for The Meteor Fist (Liu Hsing). But not usually the case.

    And it has also been said that in the early 80's, when GMS started teaching more new material, that it was offered to the senior students first, exclusively, and THEY chose to open it up to everyone GMS wanted to teach it to, and be inclusive. That is why new material is taught to everyone at the same time.

    Doesn't mean its a good thing, or a bad thing, that yellow belts and high end black belts are learning the same material, that is at least in part for them to decide. One can plant the seeds, some falls on fertile soil, some doesn't. As with everything, its what the individual makes of it. Doesn't necessarily mean that a beginner shouldn't get to see and experience the material.

    But its also commonly known that GMS does teach some material only to the highest rank/longest tenured students, but who do not discuss it outside of that forum. That material is a far cry from a new empty hand animal form, like Monkey-Tiger or Seven Star Fist, which in complexity is not far from other brown belt or lower black belt forms.
    Just One Student

    "I seek, not to know all the answers, but to understand the questions." --- Kwai Chang Caine

    (I'd really like to know all the answers, too, but understanding the questions, like most of my martial arts practice, is a more realistically attainable goal)

  8. #19673
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    152

    Don't be so presumptuous

    Quote Originally Posted by bodhi warrior View Post
    I wasn't there, but if it's the shaolin 7 stars form then you can find countless instructional videos on YouTube. I'm sure The' learned it from a video. He taught all the material he knows a long time ago.
    Unless you've seen both the YouTube versions of the Shaolin 7 Star fist and the SD Monkey-Tiger/Seven Star Fist, you cannot say what they are much less that one came from the other. Even if they had some very common movements or common sequences, but also have variations from each other, moves the other does not, or differences in some of the motions, movements, steps, and directions, that by itself doesn't mean anything.

    And of course, the "monks" on YouTube do martial arts much differently in "style" than most SD practitioners, but that's also been discussed a lot.

    So as with some other forms, all it (probably) means, if the forms have similarities and differences, is either that one of them came from the other, or they both came from some common source some steps removed from each other. One explanation is no more or less likely than the other, on the face of it -- but someone with a particular mental bent in one direction or the other will naturally go that way, regardless of the truth of it. If you've seen both GMS's version and the YouTube versions, AND they have similarities, you can't say that GMS's version didn't come from his own recollection or notes of it, because it is different, which yes can be on purpose or can be by accident, or can also be just because they are different. The point is, especially around here, unless you have it on tape or in writing from the source (GMS), no one can be "sure" the SD version came from a video. Or for that matter, that GMS has already taught everything he learned from home. One forgets that his "specialty" was in the Shaolin Golden Snake system. Has it been openly taught to anyone?
    Just One Student

    "I seek, not to know all the answers, but to understand the questions." --- Kwai Chang Caine

    (I'd really like to know all the answers, too, but understanding the questions, like most of my martial arts practice, is a more realistically attainable goal)

  9. #19674
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    376
    Blog Entries
    3

    Presumptuous

    It is presumptuous. I know. But it's based on the untruths that came forth in the deposition. Sin The's greed and ego also play their part. But in the end it's just my opinion.
    Another point on forms. Back in the early days we had much fewer forms but a lot of sparring and conditioning. This is when some very good fighters were produced. Eric Smith, Bill Leonard, Bob Green, etc. they didn't know 5 animals, Chen tai chi, golden leopard, liu shing, etc. so in the end all these new forms are just to make money. They don't really add anything. Especially when they're skimmed over in a seminar.
    I really do find the common material of sin and Hiang that was taught pre 1990 to be very good and applicable. Simple and effective. Not fancy at all. But again this is just my opinion.

  10. #19675
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    kentucky
    Posts
    350
    AMEN, I love the lower stuff, old stuff. But some of it is now not being shown like it was, or worked to the level it should be. That is where my focus is, in the details that I was first shown.
    ...or is there something i have missed a glimpse of phantoms in the mist. Traveling down a dusty road bent forward with this heavy load..

  11. #19676
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    152

    True, but . . .

    Quote Originally Posted by bodhi warrior View Post
    It is presumptuous. I know. But it's based on the untruths that came forth in the deposition. Sin The's greed and ego also play their part. But in the end it's just my opinion.
    Another point on forms. Back in the early days we had much fewer forms but a lot of sparring and conditioning. This is when some very good fighters were produced. Eric Smith, Bill Leonard, Bob Green, etc. they didn't know 5 animals, Chen tai chi, golden leopard, liu shing, etc. so in the end all these new forms are just to make money. They don't really add anything. Especially when they're skimmed over in a seminar.
    I really do find the common material of sin and Hiang that was taught pre 1990 to be very good and applicable. Simple and effective. Not fancy at all. But again this is just my opinion.
    I think your point might be, assuming what you say is true about the untruths, greed, ego, etc., it means that some or all of his "new" material might not be his stuff, either. I'm not sure that qualifies as an opinion as much as it does a guess, but none of us can say you might not be right, unless of course someone knows more about the source than anyone here is saying. But someone else's opinion, or guess, the other way is just as valid.

    As for the new forms and what they "add": I look at in a few different ways. First, doing new things is good for fitness, cross-training, "muscle confusion" and all that, even if I can't fight with such and such a form like I (think or hope I) can with the early base material. So there is the pure fitness and conditioning aspect.

    Second, doing a new form might make one see something in an old form that wasn't noticed before. I can remember learning the classical Pa Kua set, and years later learning the Dragon Pa Kua form, and seeing things in the other set that I hadn't thought of before. Not that much different than what the later "old" material helped add to the lower forms. It all builds on itself, and the new builds on the old.

    Also, since it is supposed to be an "art" as well as a fighting system, there is nothing wrong with putting aside old ways and techniques, and learning how to adapt and apply new ones. I've heard it said that learning new things is good for the brain, helps fight off diseases like Alzheimer's and dementia. Someone wiser than I said, "be like water, always changing and moving and adapting."

    And, someone thought that there was a fighting benefit to every form, style, and system, at some point, and there is a benefit in trying to find it. As someone else also said, the journey IS the goal -- or something like that. Those who became more proficient without new material, might actually be able to find gems of fighting in a new form, style, or system. If they haven't just gotten plain bored with the old stuff, after doing it for decades, and dying for something new to try. I do not claim to be so wise and skilled that I can say that any new form might not add some fighting skill or technique to someone's arsenal, even if it doesn't immediately add to mine.

    And if nothing else, I can think of it this way: I first started reading, to learn how to read. And there are some things that come along that I read now, not because it makes me a better reader, or teaches me something new, but because its fun to read it. That might be all there is to it -- its just fun, to see and learn something new. Vanilla ice cream is good, but I like a little chocolate every now and then. Might be the case with new forms, too. And that isn't all bad. And not a waste of time, either. Even if someone is making some money from it. Doesn't every teacher make something by teaching, whatever? I'm sure there are some that don't, but I don't know very many. But that doesn't, by itself, make them bad.

    Of course you have a point about the benefit of just skimming the surface of something in a seminar. I'm not convinced that is the best way to get the most out of something. But on the other hand, it forces someone to get the gold out of it themselves, instead of being handed the gold up front. And it has been said there is a benefit to finding somethings on your own, instead of being spoon fed.

    Its all just our opinions though, isn't it?
    Just One Student

    "I seek, not to know all the answers, but to understand the questions." --- Kwai Chang Caine

    (I'd really like to know all the answers, too, but understanding the questions, like most of my martial arts practice, is a more realistically attainable goal)

  12. #19677
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    36th Chamber
    Posts
    12,423
    Quote Originally Posted by One student View Post
    I think your point might be, assuming what you say is true about the untruths, greed, ego, etc., it means that some or all of his "new" material might not be his stuff, either. I'm not sure that qualifies as an opinion as much as it does a guess, but none of us can say you might not be right, unless of course someone knows more about the source than anyone here is saying. But someone else's opinion, or guess, the other way is just as valid.

    As for the new forms and what they "add": I look at in a few different ways. First, doing new things is good for fitness, cross-training, "muscle confusion" and all that, even if I can't fight with such and such a form like I (think or hope I) can with the early base material. So there is the pure fitness and conditioning aspect.

    Second, doing a new form might make one see something in an old form that wasn't noticed before. I can remember learning the classical Pa Kua set, and years later learning the Dragon Pa Kua form, and seeing things in the other set that I hadn't thought of before. Not that much different than what the later "old" material helped add to the lower forms. It all builds on itself, and the new builds on the old.

    Also, since it is supposed to be an "art" as well as a fighting system, there is nothing wrong with putting aside old ways and techniques, and learning how to adapt and apply new ones. I've heard it said that learning new things is good for the brain, helps fight off diseases like Alzheimer's and dementia. Someone wiser than I said, "be like water, always changing and moving and adapting."

    And, someone thought that there was a fighting benefit to every form, style, and system, at some point, and there is a benefit in trying to find it. As someone else also said, the journey IS the goal -- or something like that. Those who became more proficient without new material, might actually be able to find gems of fighting in a new form, style, or system. If they haven't just gotten plain bored with the old stuff, after doing it for decades, and dying for something new to try. I do not claim to be so wise and skilled that I can say that any new form might not add some fighting skill or technique to someone's arsenal, even if it doesn't immediately add to mine.

    And if nothing else, I can think of it this way: I first started reading, to learn how to read. And there are some things that come along that I read now, not because it makes me a better reader, or teaches me something new, but because its fun to read it. That might be all there is to it -- its just fun, to see and learn something new. Vanilla ice cream is good, but I like a little chocolate every now and then. Might be the case with new forms, too. And that isn't all bad. And not a waste of time, either. Even if someone is making some money from it. Doesn't every teacher make something by teaching, whatever? I'm sure there are some that don't, but I don't know very many. But that doesn't, by itself, make them bad.

    Of course you have a point about the benefit of just skimming the surface of something in a seminar. I'm not convinced that is the best way to get the most out of something. But on the other hand, it forces someone to get the gold out of it themselves, instead of being handed the gold up front. And it has been said there is a benefit to finding somethings on your own, instead of being spoon fed.

    Its all just our opinions though, isn't it?
    LOL. Yeah, put that on a flyer and hand it out to prospective students. See how rich you get.
    He most honors my style who learns under it to destroy the teacher. -- Walt Whitman

    Quote Originally Posted by David Jamieson View Post
    As a mod, I don't have to explain myself to you.

  13. #19678
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    kentucky
    Posts
    350

    Sd

    So as for SD, what groups are "in" & witch are "doing there own thing"?
    ...or is there something i have missed a glimpse of phantoms in the mist. Traveling down a dusty road bent forward with this heavy load..

  14. #19679
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    kentucky
    Posts
    350

    Sorry

    Sorry "which" lol must have been thinking of my ex
    ...or is there something i have missed a glimpse of phantoms in the mist. Traveling down a dusty road bent forward with this heavy load..

  15. #19680
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    kentucky
    Posts
    350
    budhi warrior, check your PM, i hadn't been on much.
    ...or is there something i have missed a glimpse of phantoms in the mist. Traveling down a dusty road bent forward with this heavy load..

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •