Is Shaolin-Do for real?

[Shaolin Wookie]

I wasn't trying to disrespect anyone. I thought I had a legitimate question. If you feel I disrespected M Grooms or GMS by claiming to be under M Grooms instead, I'll apologize for that now. But it doesn't change how I view M Grooms and GMS's statements and it also doesn't nullify my questioning of GMS.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy the school and the material. But I do think there is room for improvement on GMS's part especially on clarification of his lineage.

Personally, I tend to respect a more humble attitude. So telling stories about beating up 6 guys with poison knives and having a secret antidote

I've only heard this story in the Shaolin-Do book. Never heard it mentioned anywhere else. I sincerely doubt he tells this story everywhere he goes. I've never heard it in the two lengthy lectures I heard him give (one via video afterwards). I'm sure the makers of the book just really liked that story, plus, they were telling the story of GM Sin--and since, I dare say--his life probably wasn't as action packed as John McLane's, a little action and martial play in the story helps keep you interested, and shows you he can handle himself, and has some kind of handle on Chinese meds.

He seems like a humble guy to me. Just ltwo weeks ago, I was invited by one of my friends, Richie, from that Longfist school I used to go to. He has a cousin staying with him this month who was going to show him an Emei Snake routine , and he knew I really wanted to learn a little snake, so he invited me. I went, and sucked at it (wushu is really friggin' hard), and he's supposed to show us the rest today, if I can make it. I ordered the HElen Liang DVD of it off MartialArtsMart, so I could practice in between lessons. Anyways, we were talking all that evening while learning, and I was relating some of the movements to stuff I'd seen at CSC. They were familiar with the controversies, but were surprised I knew as much about the body mechanics, techniques, applications, etc., that go along with CMA. They started in on meditation and such, and I mentioned some stuff I'd learned about Hou Tien Chi at green sash in the internal division of CSC, and they were surprised I knew about some of that. They said they'd had to spend years in service of their teacher before he was willing to teach this or that technique, this or that meditation technique, or this or that form.

--oops...edit--not meditation, they're not into that.....just the breathing and chi stuff.....

GM The' is humble enough to teach it to those who are willing without demanding anything but hard work and dedication, and standard prices, where martial arts are concerned. As far as I see it, he's one of those humble teachers CMA students are always trying to find, and complain about not having.

and also claiming the GM of all of China's Shaolin temples seems very far fetched to me. It's just my opinion. I'd like clarification.

Happy to oblige. He's never claimed to be Grandmaster of all of China's Shaolin Temples. Neither did GGM Ie, nor did GGGM Su Kong. That's a misinterpretation taken by some outsiders, who read a couple of sensationalized statements, and figure we think we're a part of the Shaolin Temple govt in service today. He's the Grandmaster of the Shaolin-Do system, which draws from the martial knowledge of all the Shaolin temples. But GM SIn has no authority or ranking privelges at any of the Shaolin temples. He is not abbot, nor has he ever claimed to be. When he visited the Henan or Fujien temple, he was a tourist like anyone else. He wore street clothes, somtimes his gi (I've only seen pics), and his ubiquitous fanny pack (not poking fun, it's just he needs it 'cuz his gi doesn't have pockets) and probably had a camera, too. Su Kong was not an abbot, nor did he ever claim to be. Su Kong helped run the martial arts activities of the Southern Temple at Fujien as a secular monk (and there were plenty of those in the temples---criminals claiming assylum, and those deemed unfit for religious service [i.e.--not everyone's cut out for chastity, pacifism, and endless meditation---I certainly wouldn't be...hahaha....])

Ask him for clarification and we won't have to debate on a thread called "Is Shaolin-do for real" for 300 something pages.

peace,
synack

He probably doesn't care. He gave what information he had, and as far as I know, he's never changed the story. Some people don't like it, so they bicker. What can he offer that will end the bickering?

Nothing.

If he pulled off this little miracle and proved without a shadow of a doubt that Shaolin-Do was pure shaolin, people would still say: "But it still looks like karate, so it sucks." or "Why are you wearing gi's then?" or "Then why isn't Su Kong listed on the temple records?"

It's the same reason almost every lineage on this forum, and in the chinese martial arts world, is subject to debate.

[synack]

SWookie - Thank you for your response. I don't care about what we wear or don't (frog buttons or shoes) wear. When I read about GM Sin, I got the same impression that he was claiming to be the GM of all Shaolin arts/temples.

Maybe the wording is sensationalized or should be clarified.

As far as the six guys with poison knives is concerned. I read that on his site under his bio. I did a lot of research before joining SD (Tao). And yet I still joined. When I read that it made me roll my eyes and further question the man in charge of the school. If what you say is true, whomever does his writing (if not him). Needs to chill out a bit. Wild statements can bring you business but they can also deter business.

For now, I'm sticking around. I like everyone I've met in SD (even on this board). And yes, even the ones who called me disrespectful. Everyone has a right to their opinion.

Meditation... I practiced some meditation some number of years ago and am now recently back at it. I'm no pro and don't know most of the traditional aspects of it. But I can get to clear and calm state during my practice. The way it makes me feel has caused it to an almost mandatory daily practice.

[Shaolin Wookie]

Marketing is marketing. When you're a part of such a large system as ours, there is going to be lots of marketing, and everything looks bad in marketing unless there's a scantily clad chick in a thong spread out over whatever you're trying to sell. Since SD people don't go that route, sometimes there's some sensationalization. No big deal. Most people that come into ATlanta CSC's sometimes have sensationalized notions about kung fu and the system (ususally through movies, and are sometimes disheartened to learn that a properly executed butterfly kick/twist combo won't take out a legion of super-ninjas armed with machetes and samurai swords), and they're quickly stripped of their delusions and illusions.

As much as GM Sin is a legitimate martial artist, he is also a business man. His duty as a martial artist is to maintain the integrity of the system he teaches, to hone his personal skills, and to help teach others so the art survives. If you've ever looked at the schedule he keeps between Shaolin-Do and CSC schools, it seems like hte man basically lives on an airplane. He jets out constantly to teach forms seminars, and personally sees to every black belt given out through the system, both divisions. He is definately dedicated. The black belt stipulation is the most amazing part of his dedication.

He is also a businessman, and as such, has to market, keep people interested with the newest and deadliest technique and style, and represent the best martial art he knows......and what he knows is Shaolin-Do.

But sometimes guys like you or I see one part, and don't really see the other. He's a very busy guy, and I doubt he cares whether some teenagers and internet MA's think his system is bogus, or misrepresentative, or Indonesian Karate-fu.

[MasterKiller]

Happy to oblige. He's never claimed to be Grandmaster of all of China's Shaolin Temples. Neither did GGM Ie, nor did GGGM Su Kong. That's a misinterpretation taken by some outsiders, who read a couple of sensationalized statements, and figure we think we're a part of the Shaolin Temple govt in service today. He's the Grandmaster of the Shaolin-Do system, which draws from the martial knowledge of all the Shaolin temples. But GM SIn has no authority or ranking privelges at any of the Shaolin temples. He is not abbot, nor has he ever claimed to be. When he visited the Henan or Fujien temple, he was a tourist like anyone else. He wore street clothes, somtimes his gi (I've only seen pics), and his ubiquitous fanny pack (not poking fun, it's just he needs it 'cuz his gi doesn't have pockets) and probably had a camera, too. Su Kong was not an abbot, nor did he ever claim to be. Su Kong helped run the martial arts activities of the Southern Temple at Fujien as a secular monk (and there were plenty of those in the temples---criminals claiming assylum, and those deemed unfit for religious service [i.e.--not everyone's cut out for chastity, pacifism, and endless meditation---I certainly wouldn't be...hahaha....])

SD students are horribly misinformed about the style's history, and Sin's connection to anything Temple related.

For example, all the bad information about his Steele at Shaolin. Many...MANY.. SD'ers think Shaolin donated it. There are several versions of the story.

1) Shaolin donated it to honor Sin.
2) The Soards only paid because Shaolin couldn't afford the high-quality marble.
3) It's not a steele, but an actual statue of Sin.

Notice, none of them ever come here with the correct story--that the Soards paid $2,000 to have it erected, just like the every other Steele.

That kind of "misinformation" comes from the top. Probably not from Sin himself (at least I hope not), but the Soards have to have had a hand in it.

The movie rumors are just as bad. I've heard dumb @ss statements like the CHinese government was going to fund it.

Before the internet, you could get away with this kind of bullsh1t because people really had no way of knowing unless they traveled and came into contact with other schools. That's not the case anymore.

It's fine if you want to train....but put down the grape Kool-Aid.

[Erasmus Mingatt]

"If you call Su Kong under your own logic a "Tall Tale" you are also insulting GM Sin and Ie. The logic is just a way to discredit the messenger and not the message".

Shrugs shoulders. And if people do? There are worse things. While I don't go out of my way to INTENTIONALLY offend others. It's better to say it "like it is" then to be PC too often. As per: discrediting the "messenger" and not the "message"..well..the messenger is a deliverer of the message. You don't have one without the other.

As far as what you said about the monks engaging is disrespectful attitudes etc..I don't know how we got on this topic nor why so much time is being devoted towards it.

"I think it should rest on the shoulders of Sin Kwang The not his students or instructors under him to answer the illogic behind the statements of "Grandmaster of Shaolin", Katas vs. Forms, 900 forms/"learning all of Shaolin" and other factually inaccurate statements. And if the former "grandmaster" who was taught by Su Kong Djin used Karate GIs and called them Katas in Indonesia in order to disguise the art from the Indonesian officials as the website claim, I think it would behoove the style to change it's phraseology and wear to reflect true kung fu. The style has been brought out of Indonesia so it should reflect true traditional characteristics of kung fu.

There would not be a thread almost 400 pages long if what SD claims was reflective of what actually happened in the history of Shaolin. If someone started a thread entitled "Is Choy Li Fut kung fu real"(just for the sake of illustration)..the thread would most likely be less than a page long and someone would reply with "Yes"..end of story!

"Read American Shaolin by Matt Polly."

No thanks. I'll pass. For the same reason..I put the book by Steve DeMasco down after a few pages of reading his "kung fu" training there.

"They were impolite to many people, and they got in plenty of fights, sometimes over trivial stuff."

More tangent time boys and girls.


" And they were verty touchy on the issue of Buddhism and Taoism, because they didn't practice it religiously (figuratively and literally)."

LOL. This is where I scream "BULLS-IT!"!!!

"BTW......before immense popluarity of the movie Shaolin Temple, there were only like two monks living at the temple, for the sake of upkeep."

Again. I can make a claim such as "There were only 3 monks there and most of the time they were knitting sweaters and break dancing". Do you believe everything you read? It seems so!


"Apparently, they didn't really know much or any kung fu, and Shaolin Chan was pretty much gone."

Wu shu as a demonstration sport is a separate issue. Monks are not going to demonstrate kung fu just by a request to a westerner.

[Shaolin Wookie]

SD students are horribly misinformed about the style's history, and Sin's connection to anything Temple related.

For example, all the bad information about his Steele at Shaolin. Many...MANY.. SD'ers think Shaolin donated it. There are several versions of the story.

1) Shaolin donated it to honor Sin.
2) The Soards only paid because Shaolin couldn't afford the high-quality marble.
3) It's not a steele, but an actual statue of Sin.

Notice, none of them ever come here with the correct story--that the Soards paid $2,000 to have it erected, just like the every other Steele.

That kind of "misinformation" comes from the top. Probably not from Sin himself (at least I hope not), but the Soards have to have had a hand in it.

The movie rumors are just as bad. I've heard dumb @ss statements like the CHinese government was going to fund it.

Before the internet, you could get away with this kind of bullsh1t because people really had no way of knowing unless they traveled and came into contact with other schools. That's not the case anymore.

It's fine if you want to train....but put down the grape Kool-Aid.

We're in agreement. The SD book was propagandish. The shaolin steele story was propagated, I think, from Denver. I don't know any senior student that credits that story as being true. I know this from having asked, and reading on this forum, which led to me giving a blistering review on Amazon as a comic-kung fu book (which I took down recently, 'cuz it seemed a little immature and harsh....but there's a reason for that).....hahaha.....

More than anything, the authors seemed to have skewed the facts. In their wording, paraphrased "amdist a large celebration", GM Sin was honored with a steele presented by the Shaolin Abbot himself, who almost never comes down to greet his guests.

Probably not. Sure, they might have presented it, but I doubt the monks threw a party. More likely than not, they came down to watch a demo and try to find paying students, then went back to their practice while the SD guys threw a party in celebration of their Master's return.

No big deal. But I don't think it should be romanticized as the hailing of hte absent Grandmaster of all Shaolin Temples. And to be honest, I thought that that was what the book was saying the first time I read it.

[dragonf1y]

sometimes there's some sensationalization. No big deal.

Sensationalization?

That's an awful nice way to say LIE.

No big deal?

Are you serious?

Car companys always put out ads that are sensationalized .

Thay also ALWAYS and BY LAW put disclaimers along with those ads.

If they didn't it would be ILLEGAL.

Most people that come into ATlanta CSC's sometimes have sensationalized notions about kung fu and the system (ususally through movies, and are sometimes disheartened to learn that a properly executed butterfly kick/twist combo won't take out a legion of super-ninjas armed with machetes and samurai swords), and they're quickly stripped of their delusions and illusions.

Which is it? You say they are stripped of their dilusions, but aren't you using delsusions (sensationalism) to recruit them in the first place?

Nice double standard.

His duty as a martial artist is to maintain the integrity of the system he teaches.

Integrity? As in truth? Hmmmm...

He is also a businessman, and as such, has to market, keep people interested with the newest and deadliest technique and style, and represent the best martial art he knows......and what he knows is Shaolin-Do.

Which is it? Does he represent what he knows best or market the newest techniques (aka FADS)? Does he market one and teach another? Bait and switch?

Maybe you should step down as an SD internet MA PR guy.

[Shaolin Wookie]

"Read American Shaolin by Matt Polly."

No thanks. I'll pass. For the same reason..I put the book by Steve DeMasco down after a few pages of reading his "kung fu" training there.

Hahaha....you're obviously well informed. Matt trained at a Shaolin Institute under actual monks, and was apprenticed to a very well respected master at Shaolin. Ask Gene.

'nuff said.

"They were impolite to many people, and they got in plenty of fights, sometimes over trivial stuff."

More tangent time boys and girls.

I'm always happy to correct incorrect statments. And I'll laugh every time when the chastened issuer of said statement rebuts with: "But that's not the point...."

" And they were verty touchy on the issue of Buddhism and Taoism, because they didn't practice it religiously (figuratively and literally)."

LOL. This is where I scream "BULLS-IT!"!!!

Well, they didn't practice it, chief. Between teaching the lowai, teaching their private pupils, and putting on shows, they don't have time for the religious aspect; furthermore, the govt. didn't let them. Over the past decade or so, the abbot has instituted a restoration program aimed at rehabilitating the long dormant practices of Shaolin Chan. PM Gene for more info.

"BTW......before immense popluarity of the movie Shaolin Temple, there were only like two monks living at the temple, for the sake of upkeep."


Again. I can make a claim such as "There were only 3 monks there and most of the time they were knitting sweaters and break dancing". Do you believe everything you read? It seems so!

Sorry, Charlie. Seems you've been misinformed. Sad to say, Jet Li and the Hong Kong movie industry was as much the reason Shaolin is thriving today as anything else. The movie created a market, the government funded the restoration of the temple, and paid martial artists to staff the temple and train monks. Shaolin kung fu thrived in Taiwan, in China (off temple grounds), in Japan, in Indonesia, etc. Just not at Shaolin.

Not as romantic as you thought, right? I thought the same thing.

"Apparently, they didn't really know much or any kung fu, and Shaolin Chan was pretty much gone."

Wu shu as a demonstration sport is a separate issue. Monks are not going to demonstrate kung fu just by a request to a westerner.

Of course not. But if you dangle a dollar, they'll teach traditional sets to you with a big smile on their face. 'Sall business, baby.

Here's what a little webfu digs up:

http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/maga...hp?article=122

In 1988, the Chinese government erected the Shaolin Wushuguan. This facility was designed to disseminate Shaolin kungfu to the public. It remains the world's largest martial arts training complex. Upon opening, the government requested that the Shaolin monks teach at the Wushuguan and Guolin was one of the first monks to respond. In due course, he was asked to teach full time, but he declined. He told them, "Shaolin Temple is my home." Before this governmental support, Shaolin Temple was in a bad state of disrepair. Opening the Wushuguan was one part of the government's program to increase tourism and finance the restoration Shaolin, but Guolin is careful to point out that Shaolin Temple and the Shaolin Wushuguan are separate entities. Some of the monks have taught there, Guolin included, but now most of the instructors are no longer monks, just martial arts masters and layman discipl

[Shaolin Wookie]

Sensationalization?

That's an awful nice way to say LIE.

No big deal?

Are you serious?

Car companys always put out ads that are sensationalized .

Thay also ALWAYS and BY LAW put disclaimers along with those ads.

If they didn't it would be ILLEGAL.



Which is it? You say they are stripped of their dilusions, but aren't you using delsusions (sensationalism) to recruit them in the first place?

Nice double standard.



Integrity? As in truth? Hmmmm...



Which is it? Does he represent what he knows best or market the newest techniques (aka FADS)? Does he market one and teach another? Bait and switch?

Maybe you should step down as an SD internet MA PR guy.

Go back and read my posts, chief. I laughed my ass of[edit: add an f] reading this. I'm far from a PR guy for the system. I'm the biggest skeptic here...........I train it 'cuz I can use it, it's difficult, and it's fun

Get a clue.

The only advertisement Shaolin Tao (CSC) uses is demos, and school signs. I've never seen anything else. I saw a sign that said Kung-fu/Tai Chi. I said: "Hey, I want to learn kung-fu, and tai chi."

Not quite the Dark Empire you envision.

Meanwhile, I've walked into schools where they cram stories down your throat before you even step onto the practice floor. My first day of SD? Bow when you enter and leave, bow to your teachers, practice sparring tech 1. It was refreshing, b/c I'd talked to two schools that talked my ear off concerning their superiority as a fighting style before I stepped into SD and learned to throw a simple punch.

The only controversy I've seen in-school is whether or not this or that technique can be used in this or that way, how deep of a stance is too deep (answer: when you can't get out of it), and how hard is too hard in sparring. Everyone's too busy training and learning to quibble over this ****. Why do you think we come to this forum? It's the proper venue for *****ing, *****.

[synack]

"If you call Su Kong under your own logic a "Tall Tale" you are also insulting GM Sin and Ie. The logic is just a way to discredit the messenger and not the message".

Shrugs shoulders. And if people do? There are worse things. While I don't go out of my way to INTENTIONALLY offend others. It's better to say it "like it is" then to be PC too often. As per: discrediting the "messenger" and not the "message"..well..the messenger is a deliverer of the message. You don't have one without the other.

As far as what you said about the monks engaging is disrespectful attitudes etc..I don't know how we got on this topic nor why so much time is being devoted towards it.

"I think it should rest on the shoulders of Sin Kwang The not his students or instructors under him to answer the illogic behind the statements of "Grandmaster of Shaolin", Katas vs. Forms, 900 forms/"learning all of Shaolin" and other factually inaccurate statements. And if the former "grandmaster" who was taught by Su Kong Djin used Karate GIs and called them Katas in Indonesia in order to disguise the art from the Indonesian officials as the website claim, I think it would behoove the style to change it's phraseology and wear to reflect true kung fu. The style has been brought out of Indonesia so it should reflect true traditional characteristics of kung fu.

There would not be a thread almost 400 pages long if what SD claims was reflective of what actually happened in the history of Shaolin. If someone started a thread entitled "Is Choy Li Fut kung fu real"(just for the sake of illustration)..the thread would most likely be less than a page long and someone would reply with "Yes"..end of story!

"Read American Shaolin by Matt Polly."

No thanks. I'll pass. For the same reason..I put the book by Steve DeMasco down after a few pages of reading his "kung fu" training there.

"They were impolite to many people, and they got in plenty of fights, sometimes over trivial stuff."

More tangent time boys and girls.


" And they were verty touchy on the issue of Buddhism and Taoism, because they didn't practice it religiously (figuratively and literally)."

LOL. This is where I scream "BULLS-IT!"!!!

"BTW......before immense popluarity of the movie Shaolin Temple, there were only like two monks living at the temple, for the sake of upkeep."

Again. I can make a claim such as "There were only 3 monks there and most of the time they were knitting sweaters and break dancing". Do you believe everything you read? It seems so!


"Apparently, they didn't really know much or any kung fu, and Shaolin Chan was pretty much gone."

Wu shu as a demonstration sport is a separate issue. Monks are not going to demonstrate kung fu just by a request to a westerner.

That was my comment about disrespect because I was accused of it without my questions on Sin's comments being addressed. It was not serious, it was by their logic and was to make a point. I don't believe that myself.

What I meant was the logic used against me to say I disrespected GM Sin and M Grooms by saying I prefer to say I'm under M Grooms and not GM Sin.

If you read my posts, you would see that I hold a different opinion on GM Sin's comments. An unpopular opinion.

For the most part I agree with you. And I'm a Shaolin-Tao student.

[Erasmus Mingatt]

"Ask Gene.

'nuff said."

Since you are fond of asking Gene..why don't I return the request? Why not ask Gene about his real thoughts of Shaolin-Do? I'd be interested to hear them. Not what he might only be able to say since he is editor of the magazine..but the "off the record" thoughts.

"I'm always happy to correct incorrect statments. And I'll laugh every time when the chastened issuer of said statement rebuts with: "But that's not the point....""

Sorry to ruin the parade wookie..but I could care less if they got all upset about some arrogant Americans or whatever they tried to "start fights" about. Sin Kwang The has not..to my knowledge addressed the issues that I and others have read about Shao-lin Do making the claims about the Shaolin temple that they do. Which further exacerbates many peoples skepticism. If he fervently believes what he does..he should address those concerns in either kfmagazine or Inside KF--not online--but in an actual issue!!

"Well, they didn't practice it, chief."

I'm not your chief.

"Between teaching the lowai, teaching their private pupils, and putting on shows, they don't have time for the religious aspect; furthermore, the govt. didn't let them."

Let them? In China if the government tells you that you have to be a monk..that's it! You don't have a choice in the matter.

"Over the past decade or so, the abbot has instituted a restoration program aimed at rehabilitating the long dormant practices of Shaolin Chan."

I'm not concerned about what restoration has taken place(though it's interesting to consider). Ask the abbott about Su Kong Djin's claim about being "grandmaster of the temple". Better yet..let Sin Kwang The ask. I'd bet my right gonad that he would refute it!

[Erasmus Mingatt]

Dear Gene,

I apologize if it seems that I was trying to "speak for you" in the above post when I said "ask Gene Ching what he thinks about SD". Perhaps you think it's solid..I can't say.


EM

[DPL]

Dear Gene,
Please don't ban me. Also, please say something negative about Shaolin-Do.

Thanks,
Erasmus

[Erasmus Mingatt]

"Dear Gene,
Please don't ban me."

I have to seem hyper defensive about SD to everyone or my SD teachers wont promote me to the next level. Without adequate a-s kissing I'll stay at this level of a "style" whose history and foundation are "iffy" at best. But if I attack anyone who objectively raises an eyebrow at the claims made by the founders...then I will gain their respect. Instead of taking an honest look at the claims made by the naysayers, and compare it to what is ACTUALLY known about the Shaolin temple..I'll live in a cubby hole forever. Its safer to do this than to realize that some people do not have my best interests at heart.


"Also, please say something negative about Shaolin-Do."


I not only know ALL of Shaolin..but I also know everything that goes thru the minds of others. Especially..I will in my arrogance, assume that EM's sincere apology was something that it was not. I've never met EM but since I know the ultimate self defense system..this qualifies me to make judgements on people whose character and integrity I for all practical purposes..know absolutely nothing about.


Thanks,
DPL

[Judge Pen]

Here's what Gene has posted in the past:

http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/foru...earchid=431667

I think he's happy to let well enough alone as long as people disagree respectfully here (and I feel that I can safely make that assumption). Which is an area where this thread is skirting close to given the tone of some of the more recent posts.

BTW, EM, most of us do talk objectively about the history of shaolin and make the comparisons, so I take offense to your reply to DPL's accurate interpretation of your more recent posts. I believe it was you who said that when the attacks turn start to get more personal and insulting to your character, then they must be hitting pretty close to the mark.