Is Shaolin-Do for real?

[The Xia]

One should know what he is doing. That is why lineage is important. Martial arts history isn't something to be disreguarded.

[lunghushan]

You're not going to find the history of martial arts in the oral history.

You're not going to find the history of martial arts in the written history.

You're not going to find the history of martial arts by ad hominem attacks.

CMA/Kun Tao/Karate, etc., is highly political and many stories have been made up for political benefit.

Do you analyze DNA by asking the human carrying it? Do you determine the father of a child by asking the possibly cheating wife? No, you do not ...

End of story.

[The Xia]

"neil", there is plenty of credible martial arts research. There is even archeology involved.

[lunghushan]

"neil", there is plenty of credible martial arts research. There is even archeology involved.

They lie. If the teachers lie do you think you'll get the truth out of archaeology?

[The Xia]

Last post TWS there was only one pic taken of Soo Kong the one we all see. If the doctors who did their research researched at all they would have seen all the other pics of Li Baoshu and called the pic that name . They did not because it is not Li Bao shu. That has been your argument all along. No researcher of medical illness would dare make a claim that was not true because it would discount his whole study.
The point is I stand on a rock not sand as you do your claim of Soo KOng being Li Baoshu has been defeated by a non martial art site with no bias. So basically it is only your word with "lost" proof against a web site displayed by multiple researchers with alot more riding on their findings than you do on yours. They are researchers and scientists you are not in their class. You cannot discount the fact it is there and says what it does. Lastly if you found that site in 2002 then why didnt you print it ? Because it would dispute what you have said all along. KC Sorry you lose.

The doctors were writing about hypertrichosis. They just used those pictures as examples of people with the disease. Even if they got the names of all them wrong it wouldn't discredit their research. The research was about the disease, not the people in the pictures.

They lie. If the teachers lie do you think you'll get the truth out of archaeology?

"neil", respectable martial arts researchers don't lie and archeology is a science. That statement of yours is absurd.

[lunghushan]

One more, then I'll stop. If you don't get this, then you don't get anything.

What is a 'respectable' martial artist? What is a 'respectable' martial arts teacher? If you know anything about Chinese culture, lying or bending the truth is considered very acceptable, much less worse than many other crimes, especially if you are trying to make money or save face.

As for archaeology being a science, it is entirely based upon people's interpretation of evidence according to their underlying hypotheses and premises. It isn't a science with reproducible results like physics, it's a soft science more akin to psychology.

Anyway, this is an extreme waste of time. If you like wasting your time then continue, but I won't.

[Judge Pen]

I have yet to see one Shaolin-Do form. Not one. Therefore how can I possibly pass judgement on their martial arts?

Here's one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m203c8l6B7w

[Baqualin]

KC, the site you posted seems to be an online course in Europe.....the contact email they list is A.J.Lock@massey.ac.nz. maybe they can verify where their picture came from. I too agree there are differences in the nose between the pictures, even the one from Hiang's site.....I will believe GMS over his brother anytime....I have studied under both. This debate is nothing new..it's been going on for the 30 plus years that I've been in the system. NOBODY HAS YET TO PROVE OR DISPROVE ANYTHING. Like KC I have study other MA...worked out with people from a wide variety styles and OBSERVED a lot of CMA and others down through the years and I'm very proud and thankful of what GSM has brought to us. TWS there's nothing wrong with asking questions or questioning your style.....we all have done that and once again I'm sorry for your experience with SD....but DUDE you have issues.

[BM2]

Thats not really true BlueTravesty. The Five Elders story about the Southern Shaolin Temple is present in many lineages and folk tales. The Su Kong Southern Shaolin Temple story is only present in Shaolin Do. In fact, the Su Kong story contradicts the Five Elders story.

It doesn't contradict its story as SD's tale has different time frame.
What about the possibility that a tale about the Five Elders had others jump on the band wagon too to add credibility to their style? There are other MA sites not associated with SD that use the list of styles taught at the different temple locations that were cut and pasted from SD sites. That doesn't add any proof that just because others have on their web site too, it is correct.

Somewhere in this thread a poster who I will not name stated that Chen family Tai CHi can trace their roots back several generations. I have been to Chen village and seen a stele with their lineage. There were several gaps with ..... where names should have been but where missing. Once it was three generations in a row missing in the lineage. This doesn't make Chen family style any less a real MA or that it in any way distract from its lineage but to show even Chen has gaps. There is a nearby village that teaches a somewhat similar style of MA that may be a parrallel style though they claim it as the original but not as well known. Seems as if it has Zhao something in its name.

[Yao Sing]

Well I was really hoping someone with access to face recognition software would come along because that would cut through the hair and measure the relationship between between points on the face.

The 2 pics I put side by side look very similar but when you look close to the distance from lower lip to chin and width of nose it becomes questionable. Obviously they look very much alike but are they one in the same?

Another question would by why didn't he just shave every day? Or at least shave his head like the rest of the monks?

[Yao Sing]

Ok, I tried polarizing, solarizing, drawing lines from inside of eyes to tip of nose, etc. but haven't come up with anythoing definitive.

I thought about trying to edit out some of the hair and simplify the pics but it's difficult.

So here are 3 pics put side by side. Li Baoshu, Hiang's Su Kong, Sin's Su Kong. I think they're similar enough to say they are the same person but that's personal perception, not fact.

[BlueTravesty]

I'll cast my vote in the "Lineage is NOT important" ballot box. Maybe that's just because the style I practice is a relatively recent fusion of two older styles. I still have fun practicing and I'm fairly confident I could handle myself decently in a fight, though that's not my primary concern.

[BlueTravesty]

Ok, I tried polarizing, solarizing, drawing lines from inside of eyes to tip of nose, etc. but haven't come up with anythoing definitive.

I thought about trying to edit out some of the hair and simplify the pics but it's difficult.

So here are 3 pics put side by side. Li Baoshu, Hiang's Su Kong, Sin's Su Kong. I think they're similar enough to say they are the same person but that's personal perception, not fact.

Wow. I don't know a WHOLE LOT about this debate, but I take it that Hiang and Sin are two different SD masters? You know, I'd go so far as to say that Hiang's Su Kong pic looks less like Sin's Su Kong than Li Baoshu. Wait, let me figure out what I just wrote... ok, basically Li Baoshu looks more similar to Sin's Su Kong than does Hiang's Su Kong. So either they're all the same person, one of them is a different person, or we just have three different pictures of hairy asian dudes.

Did I just hear a can opening? Wait a minute, where did all these worms come from?

[BM2]

Another question would by why didn't he just shave every day? Or at least shave his head like the rest of the monks?[/QUOTE]


I think that Gene also raised the question of shaving. That would be quite a job to do and I am not sure what quality razor you could find then. But in the SD story, he was not a monk, that he wanted to be known as for something other than his hair so he learned all the forms.

[Golden Tiger]

Absolutely amazing. I have stayed out of this latest line of debate because as one person stated, it has been argued to death. Something like 30 years worth. Now it has come to the point that the "anti-SD experts" are challenging the lectures of some professor far removed and the research of some fellow simply doing his job. Now we need to bring in face recognition technology to prove or disprove something that now one that actually studying SD cares about.

I find it funny that no one that I have trained or trained with over 30 some odd years, and I am talking numbers into the thousands, has ever cared a bit about any topic that is discussed here. Its generally a non issue. They hear the history, see the photos and thats about it. They are more concerned with learning and training the material offers.

It seems only those heII bent on proving that SD is not a good martial art even cares. And even if they do prove it, no one except them will care. Of course, they will be able to wear a big shlt eating grin and proudly claim "I brought down SD on an internet forum!!!". Then what? Will you try to get a 5 minute spot on Dateline to expose the shocking truth? Will you get some sort of twisted thrill knowing that you have caused me to stop training after 30 years because even though on most days I could kick you a$$, the history wasn't factual? I just don't get it.

This whole lineage thing, in my opinion, is silly. It doesn't prove a thing. Does it mean that everyone that studies from a pure, great lineage will be great? Or that everyone that studies from a crappy one will suck?

Watching a form on video and trying to slam it is silly too because unless you are doing it yourself, you can't tell what the form is like. You can't tell is it is being done exactly as was taught because everyone will adapt it to their own limitations.

Ok, I am off my soap box....have at it.