Is Shaolin-Do for real?

[MasterKiller]

All I'm saying I hear this 1,500 years of blah blah from a lot of SD guys (and lots of other kung fu people as well, but mostly these days from SD folks), but Tang Hao claims that as late as 1560, Yú Dàyóu went to Shaolin because he heard of their great staff techniques, but was so disappointed in what he found that he had to teach the monks how to use a staff.

It's like you guys watched 36 Chambers of Shaolin and thought it was documentary. :-O

[Judge Pen]

All I'm saying I hear this 1,500 years of blah blah from a lot of SD guys (and lots of other kung fu people as well, but mostly these days from SD folks), but Tang Hao claims that as late as 1560, Yú Dàyóu went to Shaolin because he heard of their great staff techniques, but was so disappointed in what he found that he had to teach the monks how to use a staff.

It's like you guys watched 36 Chambers of Shaolin and thought it was documentary. :-O

So this "Tang Hao" is a reliable source? Heck, 20 years ago I went to Brazil to meet the Gracies because I heard they had amazing skills, but I was so dissapointed I had to teach them how to 'rassle. Or so I claim.

Anymore, I just care less about history and lineage (of all styles) because all that matters is does it get me in shape and can I effectivley use it to defend myself. Everything else is gravy.

[Baqualin]

All I'm saying I hear this 1,500 years of blah blah from a lot of SD guys (and lots of other kung fu people as well, but mostly these days from SD folks), but Tang Hao claims that as late as 1560, Yú Dàyóu went to Shaolin because he heard of their great staff techniques, but was so disappointed in what he found that he had to teach the monks how to use a staff.

It's like you guys watched 36 Chambers of Shaolin and thought it was documentary. :-O

Sorry MK, I was being silly and you were being serious.....I totally understand where your coming from, I personally don't dig to deep into the history of Shaolin as much as I research the internal styles....forms, principals, applications, breathing & meditation. The history is neat to know (everybody has their own take), but it will not make me a better or healther MA

[MasterKiller]

So this "Tang Hao" is a reliable source? Heck, 20 years ago I went to Brazil to meet the Gracies because I heard they had amazing skills, but I was so dissapointed I had to teach them how to 'rassle. Or so I claim.

Yeah, I would say Tang Hao is a reliable, credible source. The fact that you don't know who he is just underscores my initial observation.

[Judge Pen]

Yeah, I would say Tang Hao is a reliable, credible source. The fact that you don't know who he is just underscores my initial observation.

Maybe it does, but I think you missed my point. History in general, and history regarding martial arts specifically, are inherently unreliable. I make no secret that I don't buy every SD story on history and lineage nor do I believe every story regarding any CMA lineage. It's all smoke and mirrors designed to further ones claim that their style is the best.

And, now that you mention it, Yú Dàyóu is the person reporting the "staff" issues at shaolin. How reliable is his word? Reporting something that someone claimed 500 ago years does not make any statement accurate.

[MasterKiller]

It's all smoke and mirrors designed to further ones claim that their style is the best.

Tang Hao was the first "myth buster" of martial history. He also debunked the Bodhidharma connection to martial arts well before you and I (or even that old fugger GT) were a twinkle of a twinkle in our Grandpappy's eyes. My point is that the 1,500 years of blah blah recited about 689 times in this thread is the smoke and mirrors verison.

[Baqualin]

Tang Hao was the first "myth buster" of martial history. He also debunked the Bodhidharma connection to martial arts well before you and I (or even that old fugger GT) were a twinkle of a twinkle in our Grandpappy's eyes. My point is that the 1,500 years of blah blah recited about 689 times in this thread is the smoke and mirrors verison.

Maybe the proper term is Martial Histonics

[Judge Pen]

Tang Hao was the first "myth buster" of martial history. He also debunked the Bodhidharma connection to martial arts well before you and I (or even that old fugger GT) were a twinkle of a twinkle in our Grandpappy's eyes. My point is that the 1,500 years of blah blah recited about 689 times in this thread is the smoke and mirrors verison.

I don't think that we are disagreeing. I just refuse to accept the accuracy of any martial art "historian".

[MasterKiller]

I don't think that we are disagreeing. I just refuse to accept the accuracy of any martial art "historian".

You don't have to accept that the earth travels around the sun, or that birds came from dinosaurs, either. But that doesn't make it not true.

[beiquan]

i'd just like to say that i dream of a day when you all find somewhere better to discuss your "art" and this post is no longer at the top of a forum on traditional Chinese Shaolin martial arts.

although i suppose this post isn't doing anything to bring that day closer.

crap.

[Baqualin]

You don't have to accept that the earth travels around the sun, or that birds came from dinosaurs, either. But that doesn't make it not true.

Come on MK your slipping.....that doesn't make it true either.....only what you believe

[Baqualin]

i'd just like to say that i dream of a day when you all find somewhere better to discuss your "art" and this post is no longer at the top of a forum on traditional Chinese Shaolin martial arts.

although i suppose this post isn't doing anything to bring that day closer.

crap.

What, give up all this free exposure......besides wouldn't it be awfully boring around here without us. By the way you don't have to accept that were TCMA, but that doesn't make it not true.
BQ

PS: Surely you can find something more exciting to dream about

[The Xia]

Hey Xia,
Glad to see your still around...

Yeah, I'm still around. The way I see it, this thread is like a local bar in a rough area. There's a set of regulars, occasional visitors, and people who pay a few visits then never come back. Heated debate is common and sometimes this turns into fights. When a fight becomes a brawl someone or several people call the metaphorical cops (Gene and/or other mods). Despite all this, chit chat still has a place here. After all, it’s a local bar. I walked in and engaged in debate. I didn't see eye to eye with everyone here but I never started fights and most people I debated with didn't cross the line either. Lately, I stopped debating but I still come in for a metaphorical glass of beer every now and then.

hope you had a great holiday

Right back at you Baqualin.

[Zen Archer]

Sorry to leave everyone hanging; Tu, Wed, Thu, Sat, & Sun are my heavy training days. Gotta respond to MK though.

Thanks for the welcome BQ!

BM2 sorry to hear about your ADD, I'll try and make my posts shorter. Besides, it seems I'm wasting my breath anyway.

MK, you are a riot! I laugh my butt off when I hear some of what you write! There are some serious flaws in your reasoning.

First of all the roots of Shao-lin quite probably did begin 1,500+ years ago. Most historians agree on this, though, it was more like between 1,300-1,400 years ago that it came to be somewhat organized and to be known as Shaolin.

Second of all, nobody in our school or really any very knowledgeable & realistic history experts would credit Bodhidharma or Tamo with founding the martial arts aspect of Shaolin. Shaolin IS Chan or Zen Buddhism and related meditations as well as having alot of Taoist philosophy included. It is from his impact on the meditative aspects of Shaolin, Buddhism in Shaolin, and certain Chi Kungs that cause many Shaolin to pay Bodhidharma homage as a founder of Shaolin. It is not known, nor will it probably ever be known whether he taught them any fighting techniques. However, it stands to reason that since the monks were so weak & out of shape that he had to teach them exercises just so they could stay awake to meditate properly, training in Kung Fu was probably at least 50 or more years after his time.

What I find extremely humorous in your line of reasoning is this: JP and others are absolutely correct when they say that history is inherently flawed & biased. Much is completely unverifiable due to the repeated destruction of literature & records in China. The funny part is you can't believe something said by a living, breathing person from firsthand experience (GT), but you regard something written by someone nearly 500 years ago regarding something 1000 years before his time as gospel truth.

Lastly, I find more and more people who are respected masters with ties & verifiable lineage relative to Shaolin who confirm things that I learn from Masters Soard & GT regarding technique & history of Shaolin, thus no reason to doubt. I also keep what's worthwhile in what I hear and dicard the rest. BQ thanks for your comments, I agree. I think a lot of this argument over lineage and history is crap, though entertaining. I also am much more interested in the essence of training, and how to apply it to my regimen (as well as buddhist & taoist philosophy), than this debate.

JP, wish you the best with the little one!

BM2, hope this was an easier read...

[Zen Archer]

Oh yeah, almost forgot.

I'm working on a new style, though I don't have the go ahead from GMT yet.

I'm not sure he'll let a lowly 1st level Shaolin disciple create a new style, but this forum has inspired me.

It's called Tuxedo Tiger Style, named after my cat DJ.

So far techniques are called:
Tiger Shreds Hand
Jumping Sideways Tiger Attacks
Lying Tiger Disembowels Forearm
Attacking Tiger Hangs On Like Pit Bull

Good night to all and to all a good night!