Is Shaolin-Do for real?

[Baqualin]

I've been recently told by a student / teacher from another kung fu school that doesn't practice forms...even in their Tai Chi, that all forms were developed in the last 100 years & that the old masters never taught forms....this goes against what I've always been taught...Sal, Gene, Xia, MK, JP, KC, CS..... what are your or anyones opinion on this.
BQ

[MasterKiller]

I've been recently told by a student / teacher from another kung fu school that doesn't practice forms...even in their Tai Chi, that all forms were developed in the last 100 years & that the old masters never taught forms....this goes against what I've always been taught...Sal, Gene, Xia, MK, JP, KC, CS..... what are your or anyones opinion on this.
BQ

The emphasis on forms is a modern invention, starting with the Jing Wu academy. Once public schools opened, they needed something to teach in order to bring in $.

I believe forms have always been around as a training apparatus in one way or another, but most systems would only have a handful, between 3 and 10.

[Sal Canzonieri]

I've been recently told by a student / teacher from another kung fu school that doesn't practice forms...even in their Tai Chi, that all forms were developed in the last 100 years & that the old masters never taught forms....this goes against what I've always been taught...Sal, Gene, Xia, MK, JP, KC, CS..... what are your or anyones opinion on this.
BQ

Last 100 years? Nah. Also depends on if you are looking at military or non-military sets.

Original CMA is only Shuai Jiao (named that in 1930s but existing for over 3,000 years) and Tong Bei and Sword Fighting (existing for over 2,000 years). These styles had no forms, they were composed of many sets of moves and exercises.

Actual sets or forms of pre-arranged movements have been around at the earliest since the mid or late Song dynasty, before that there was no forms, just sets of techniques. These pre-arranged sets became the fastest and easiest way to train a lot of people at the same time for military purposes. Also at Shaolin and other temples they began creating some form-like material (Tai Tzu, XinYi Ba). Before that Shaolin and other places had nei gung sets (Rou Gong/ ROu Quan, Luohan Gong.

And even these early forms were the same as when there was no forms, meaning that originally forms were collections of loose techniques that could be done interchangably with each other as far as order of movements was concerned.

What was like a "form" is the nei gong sets of a style though.

Shaolin, Wudang, Emei, etc etc began to have sets of nei gong that the movements could be used for self defense for a very long time.

Ming Dynasty there were many forms already created as styles were pretty solodified by then. General Qi Chiqang's famous military manual named styles that were already known for their forms by this time.
Ching Dynasty has tons of form in every style.

100 years ago is only 1907, the styles from that time had roots in forms from the 1600s on.

So, that's not correct statement.

[BentMonk]

My unique training requirements have limited the number of forms I know. Not because there isn't always a new and interesting place to land a knee or an elbow, but from a practical stand point. The more I practice the forms I know, the more power and effectiveness the technique will have when applied. IMO it all goes back to the old saying, "I do not fear the 10,000 techniques you have practiced once. I fear the one technique you have practiced 10,000 times." I think I'm getting close to 10,000 punches...given and taken.

[Citong Shifu]

I agree, BUT they (the old masters) surely, whether using deep or not deep stances when executing an application, used CORRECT CMA body mechanics.

Whether deep or not deep, they kept their knees in alignment with their toes, they opened or closed the Kua, they kept their knees slightly bent (even in the not deep stances), they kept their shoulders in alignment with waist, they didn't move their arms independent of the waist, they kept their centerline, etc, etc.

Breaking any of these rules would have destroyed their root.

I agree! Well most of the time they did, lol... sometimes we just find ourselves in crazy positions, lol.... Yes, your right though....

[BoulderDawg]

Last 100 years? Nah. Also depends on if you are looking at military or non-military sets.

Original CMA is only Shuai Jiao (named that in 1930s but existing for over 3,000 years) and Tong Bei and Sword Fighting (existing for over 2,000 years). These styles had no forms, they were composed of many sets of moves and exercises.

Actual sets or forms of pre-arranged movements have been around at the earliest since the mid or late Song dynasty, before that there was no forms, just sets of techniques. These pre-arranged sets became the fastest and easiest way to train a lot of people at the same time for military purposes. Also at Shaolin and other temples they began creating some form-like material (Tai Tzu, XinYi Ba). Before that Shaolin and other places had nei gung sets (Rou Gong/ ROu Quan, Luohan Gong.

And even these early forms were the same as when there was no forms, meaning that originally forms were collections of loose techniques that could be done interchangably with each other as far as order of movements was concerned.

What was like a "form" is the nei gong sets of a style though.

Shaolin, Wudang, Emei, etc etc began to have sets of nei gong that the movements could be used for self defense for a very long time.


100 years ago is only 1907, the styles from that time had roots in forms from the 1600s on.

I would say that was probably a fairly accurate statement. So much has been lost in the unheavel in China. I think if you could go back in time you would find the forms back then were nothing like how we preform them today.....and going back to the 1600s.....more myth than fact there.

However is that a bad thing? I don't think so....as with everything MA has to evolve.

[Baqualin]

Last 100 years? Nah. Also depends on if you are looking at military or non-military sets.

Original CMA is only Shuai Jiao (named that in 1930s but existing for over 3,000 years) and Tong Bei and Sword Fighting (existing for over 2,000 years). These styles had no forms, they were composed of many sets of moves and exercises.

Actual sets or forms of pre-arranged movements have been around at the earliest since the mid or late Song dynasty, before that there was no forms, just sets of techniques. These pre-arranged sets became the fastest and easiest way to train a lot of people at the same time for military purposes. Also at Shaolin and other temples they began creating some form-like material (Tai Tzu, XinYi Ba). Before that Shaolin and other places had nei gung sets (Rou Gong/ ROu Quan, Luohan Gong.

And even these early forms were the same as when there was no forms, meaning that originally forms were collections of loose techniques that could be done interchangably with each other as far as order of movements was concerned.

What was like a "form" is the nei gong sets of a style though.

Shaolin, Wudang, Emei, etc etc began to have sets of nei gong that the movements could be used for self defense for a very long time.

Ming Dynasty there were many forms already created as styles were pretty solodified by then. General Qi Chiqang's famous military manual named styles that were already known for their forms by this time.
Ching Dynasty has tons of form in every style.

100 years ago is only 1907, the styles from that time had roots in forms from the 1600s on.

So, that's not correct statement.

Thanks!!!,
BQ

[Citong Shifu]

Last 100 years? Nah. Also depends on if you are looking at military or non-military sets.

Original CMA is only Shuai Jiao (named that in 1930s but existing for over 3,000 years) and Tong Bei and Sword Fighting (existing for over 2,000 years). These styles had no forms, they were composed of many sets of moves and exercises.

Actual sets or forms of pre-arranged movements have been around at the earliest since the mid or late Song dynasty, before that there was no forms, just sets of techniques. These pre-arranged sets became the fastest and easiest way to train a lot of people at the same time for military purposes. Also at Shaolin and other temples they began creating some form-like material (Tai Tzu, XinYi Ba). Before that Shaolin and other places had nei gung sets (Rou Gong/ ROu Quan, Luohan Gong.

And even these early forms were the same as when there was no forms, meaning that originally forms were collections of loose techniques that could be done interchangably with each other as far as order of movements was concerned.

What was like a "form" is the nei gong sets of a style though.

Shaolin, Wudang, Emei, etc etc began to have sets of nei gong that the movements could be used for self defense for a very long time.

Ming Dynasty there were many forms already created as styles were pretty solodified by then. General Qi Chiqang's famous military manual named styles that were already known for their forms by this time.
Ching Dynasty has tons of form in every style.

100 years ago is only 1907, the styles from that time had roots in forms from the 1600s on.

So, that's not correct statement.

Our Shaolin and Tongbei forms are what we call "pre-1900's" so I think some of the forms people train today are more than 100 years old. And, I do agree on how forms are taught today compared to 100, 200, 300 years, etc. As I was told by my teacher, forms were originally taught in short combo's. After each section or combo you would then learn the application for that particular set of moves. Now, as you became proficeint and mastered those sets of moves, you were then taught another set or combo of moves, once they were perfected, you were taught the applications, etc. This would go on until you reached the end of the form or style (styles were sometimes on super long form or tao lu). Now, at the end of your form or style, you would connect all the section or combos giving you the form or the style and knowledge of all the application within. This is why is took sometimes 1 to 2 years to train or complete a single set. Unlike today, 3 sets in a month, lol... I can see why forms training is looked down on by some, they just aren't taught the way they were in the old days.

Also, even though our forms are pre-1900's, I have been told that there is some differences in the way we train them apposed to the old teachers or students. Of course, this is due to every master who carries his lineage adds a lilttle of their own spice here and there, hopefully leaving the style just as functional or more efficeint than the first, etc...

Anywho, just something to think about..

Take care everyone!

[Baqualin]

Our Shaolin and Tongbei forms are what we call "pre-1900's" so I think some of the forms people train today are more than 100 years old. And, I do agree on how forms are taught today compared to 100, 200, 300 years, etc. As I was told by my teacher, forms were originally taught in short combo's. After each section or combo you would then learn the application for that particular set of moves. Now, as you became proficeint and mastered those sets of moves, you were then taught another set or combo of moves, once they were perfected, you were taught the applications, etc. This would go on until you reached the end of the form or style (styles were sometimes on super long form or tao lu). Now, at the end of your form or style, you would connect all the section or combos giving you the form or the style and knowledge of all the application within. This is why is took sometimes 1 to 2 years to train or complete a single set. Unlike today, 3 sets in a month, lol... I can see why forms training is looked down on by some, they just aren't taught the way they were in the old days.

Also, even though our forms are pre-1900's, I have been told that there is some differences in the way we train them apposed to the old teachers or students. Of course, this is due to every master who carries his lineage adds a lilttle of their own spice here and there, hopefully leaving the style just as functional or more efficeint than the first, etc...

Anywho, just something to think about..

Take care everyone!

Hey CS,
I like the short combo routine...seems like that would be a great way to really understand the form...our first Pakua form is taught this way, learn a section first, then the applications are taught for that section before the student moves on. It takes about 2 to 2 1/2 years to teach out......students have a better grasp this way.
BQ

[Judge Pen]

Hey CS,
I like the short combo routine...seems like that would be a great way to really understand the form...our first Pakua form is taught this way, learn a section first, then the applications are taught for that section before the student moves on. It takes about 2 to 2 1/2 years to teach out......students have a better grasp this way.
BQ

Short form is taught that way too.

[Citong Shifu]

Hey CS,
I like the short combo routine...seems like that would be a great way to really understand the form...our first Pakua form is taught this way, learn a section first, then the applications are taught for that section before the student moves on. It takes about 2 to 2 1/2 years to teach out......students have a better grasp this way.
BQ

BQ, Yea, that is the best way I think. We teach this way at our school. Of course, I dont drag each form out for a year or two, I wouldnt have any students, lol. The members in my professional program, now they will spend months learning a single set, but they know this before signing up in this particular program.

I feel it is important to learn the application while learning each section, then one will have san da or self-defense if the need ever arises, apposed to waiting a year or so to learn how to defend themselves... Well, this is the traditional way of learning kungfu (as to my history and lineage). I guess every school has their specific goals and focus, which is ok with me...

Have fun!

[Baqualin]

BQ, Yea, that is the best way I think. We teach this way at our school. Of course, I dont drag each form out for a year or two, I wouldnt have any students, lol. The members in my professional program, now they will spend months learning a single set, but they know this before signing up in this particular program.

I feel it is important to learn the application while learning each section, then one will have san da or self-defense if the need ever arises, apposed to waiting a year or so to learn how to defend themselves... Well, this is the traditional way of learning kungfu (as to my history and lineage). I guess every school has their specific goals and focus, which is ok with me...

Have fun!

Other simple forms are taught along with this so as not to be bored.
BQ

[Citong Shifu]

Other simple forms are taught along with this so as not to be bored.
BQ

BQ, Yea! Gotta love public class, lol. I find myself trying to add a little this and a little that just to make sure they dont get bored. Gotta love modern times, lol...

Seriously, we have a public class and a professional class. You can see the difference right away, as well as the students in each... I dont really like teaching that way, but what do you do. I keep in mind that the martial arts are good for everyone regardless of their intrest level. I just want everyone to get the most out of their training, rather they want to or not, lol... I'm getting better at not pushing those who are not totally into the arts 100%. Oh well, I have a place for everyone now....

Take care.

[kwaichang]

Just thought I would wake you guys up KC

[Mega-Foot]

I was wondering if perhaps Shaolin-Do taught the art of the Shaolin Katana? Since my Grandmaster Sensei is half-chinese, half-japanese, I've been looking into other hybrid, cross-culture arts. Shaolin-Do caught my attention.

Well, I followed some of the links around, and found a picture of your Sensei doing a jump kick, holding what appear to be a pair of katanas. Do any of you know if Sing Kwan Tie is a master of Shaolin Katana? And if he is, would he be willing to workshop with Takeshi Shaolin?