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 4 of 1333 FirstFirst ... 2345614541045041004 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 19994

Thread: Is Shaolin-Do for real?

  1. #46
    Radhnoti Guest
    Ope, I hope that most traditional schools do as well...my point was that we are training hard, and that's what it's all about, no?
    BeiKongHui, I'll take your advice on comparing the forms I learn to those similar but taught in other styles. My teacher encourages us to learn whatever we can, where ever we can so I see no conflict of interest there. Right now, I'm reading the book Dr. Yang Jwing-Ming co-authored about Hsing Yi Chuan as a sort of warm-up for what I'm supposed to learn later.

    -Radhnoti

  2. #47
    Inquisitor Guest

    *sigh* Response

    Radhnoti:

    One of the basic points of my argument against Sin The was that his lineage *couldn't* be substantiated. It is common knowledge that in kungfu, masters travel in circles. Why cannot even *one* other sifu say "Yes, I know Sin The, and I know or knew of his sifu. He is legitimate."? I then followed this argument up with the next one: Even were his lineage to be unsubstantiated, *the skill would speak for itself*. From what I and others have seen, along with what is easily accessible on the Internet ("masters" doing forms, two man drills, etc.), that is clearly *not the case*.
    Also, the basis of my argument for his "vast knowledge" was that all of his knowledge is FAKE. The fact that he claims to have all this knowledge and the FACT that it can be proven that this knowledge is either a) gotten from other materials, b) inconsistent with traditional Shaolin kungfu (and yes, this is a valid argument, as even with the dozens of "Shaolin" styles, they all share inherent characteristics that are not found in Shaolin-Do) or, c) *NOT EVEN FROM HIS CLAIMED LINEAGE*. He claims to know the sum all knowledge of Shaolin Temple kungfu. He has had no other sifu other than Ie Chang Ming. Well, if that is the case, and his lineage is to be believed, why the hell does he teach *NON-SHAOLIN* kungfu? He teaches Tai Chi Chuan, which is TAOIST. Not only that, but the Tai Chi Chuan he teaches is not even consistent with the traditional styles! He teaches the widely known "conglomerated" forms created by the Communist Chinese government! If anything, that should say something about his other knowledge that is supposedly descended from the Shaolin Temple, and whether or not that information is actually legitimate. Strangely enough, according to you, one must have "advanced training" in Tai Chi Chuan before one can go into the higher ranks... Am I the only one that sees something wrong with that?
    As for the argument that "we don't call it kungfu, so it isn't kungfu, so there!"; well, I have to tell you something that you might not like: IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE KUNGFU. The term kungfu has changed over time to mean the Chinese Martial Arts. As the Shaolin Temple was located in China, the martial arts that was taught/developed/systematized/etc. there was Chinese in origin. The simple fact of the matter is that what Sin The claims to teach is KUNGFU. It is supposed to be Chinese Martial Arts from China. I don't care if it lasted two generations outside of China, it is still Chinese in origin and, in fact, he claims that it is still Chinese in substance as well. Supposedly, there have been no changes to the martial information from when Su Kong Tai Djin was "abbot of Shaolin Temple" down to Sin The. If we are to take his claims seriously, then yes, what he knows is in fact kungfu. Karate, on the other hand, is a specific style that has its origins on the island of Okinawa (although there are substyles of Karate-do that "started" on the main island of Nippon). Obviously, kungfu from the Shaolin Temple is not a part of Karate (although Karate has some roots from certain styles of kungfu). Your "superiors" may not protest that Shaolin-Do is called karate, but that is not the point. What is being debated is whether or not Shaolin-Do is kungfu, or even has its roots in kungfu. And, for the record, I know of many, many kungfu practitioners who would take offense if their chosen martial art were to be referred to as "karate."
    Your other argument was that "Hey, we work hard and we try, and that is all that really matters anyway, right?" is ludicrous. Just because you work hard at it doesn't mean it actually works, that it is legitimate, or that it "makes everything okay." Take a good long look at Chung Moo Doe. Are you going to tell me that the people who practiced it didn't work hard or didn't do lots of pushups/situps/etc.? The fact that they put a lot of effort into Chung Moo Doe did not change the fact that it is fake, not useful, inapplicable, and does not qualify as a martial art. That also brings me to another point: the whole idea of "bashing" Shaolin-Do is to prevent other people from starting or continuing their "education" in it. I know for a fact that Shaolin-Do is complete and utter bull****, is not what it claims to be, does not teach actual martial arts, and is cheating a lot of people out of their hard earned money. If you wish to continue learning Shaolin-Do, then you should at least know that much. LoL it isn't like what I am saying will get through to most of you anyway. There are proven psychological processes that will either ignore or discredit the FACT that Shaolin-Do is fake, just because *you don't want to be wrong*.


    SanHeChuan:

    For starters, you need to refer back to my original reply to your post about how we are all supposedly "contradicting" each other. Secondly, kungfu learned from videos *does not qualify as actualy kungfu*. Also, certain things cannot and should not rely solely on personal experience. Yes, personal experience can be a good teacher (although most of the time it isn't anyway). However, do you want to personally find out about how people can scam you for your entire life's savings? Or, better yet, do you want to learn personally about how jumping out of a plane two miles aboveground will kill you? Hey, why don't you go personally learn how shooting someone is a bad thing? Give me a break. Yes, there are a lot of ignorant statements and BS made on the internet; that does not exclude the possibility that there are those of us who do know what we are talking about.

  3. #48
    UberShaman Guest
    What gets me is this guy Sin The used to teach Karate . He must be the best martial artist in the world The sole inheritor of the shaolin system over 900 forms, 33 flavors of ice cream and he he still had time to learn Karate!! I wonder why he doesnt mention this in his book?
    "would you like fries with that black belt sir?"

  4. #49
    Brad Guest
    Radhnoti,

    Please don't take everything we say as personal attacks or hatered towards yourself. We don't doubt that you put a lot of effort into what you do. But if you were to put as much effort into a legitimate style with a good teacher you would probably be surprised by how much better you become. The sooner you leave Shaolin Do the better off you'll be.

  5. #50
    Radhnoti Guest

    My "*sigh* response"

    First off, Inquisitor let me compliment you upon an extremely appropriate name. :)

    " LoL it isn't like what I am saying will get through to most of you anyway. There are proven psychological processes that will either ignore or discredit the FACT that Shaolin-Do is fake, just because *you don't want to be wrong*."
    Neat bit of wordplay there. So, it's impossible that anyone would defend Shaolin-Do without a "psychological process" coming into play? Tell you what, you assume that I'm coming into this with an open mind and I'll assume that you're listening to what I have to say. We may both be fooling ourselves, but the alternative is that this is just an online diary in which we are only writing for ourselves. Right?

    "Why cannot even *one* other sifu say "Yes, I know Sin The, and I know or knew of his sifu. He is legitimate."?"
    It seems to me that this would be quite insulting to Grandmaster Sin and quite presumptive of anyone else. I've read other articles on these boards with members saying that Grandmaster Sin's brother is "the real deal"...and they both learned from Grandmaster Ie.

    "It is common knowledge that in kungfu, masters travel in circles. " The last issue of Kungfu Qigong mentions that Grandmaster Sin was welcomed by Eagle Claw Master Li li Hong, stating that he has been "a friend...for many years".
    I'm fairly new to CMA, so, I can't speak knowledgably about the skill of my instructors vs. the skill of other masters. I CAN speak of the poor quality of video viewed over the internet. And I CAN state that watching my teacher perform the higher level tiger forms is awe inspiring for me. You can feel the intensity he radiates.

    As for the "yeah, but does it work?" argument. I have met an instructor in a nearby city who works as "security" at a local bar. The bar was KNOWN for the fights that erupted regularly. A rough place. He has since greatly improved the bar's reputation for safety. Yes, he did have to fight. And, yes, it did work. He's about 5'10'' and weighs about 165 lbs. and subdued players for the college football team weighing 300+. You can say, "maybe he got lucky" or "yeah, but maybe none of them could fight" or "imagine what he could have done with a REAL art!" if you want, but it sounds like sour grapes to me.

    "I know for a fact that Shaolin-Do is complete and utter bull****, is not what it claims to be, does not teach actual martial arts, and is cheating a lot of people out of their hard earned money." What I know for "a fact" is that I'm improving myself and I see my fellow students doing the same. Shaolin-Do has been all it claimed to be for me. I am learning an "actual" martial art. And I don't feel cheated at all.

    UberShaman, I believe that Grandmaster Sin teaching "karate" goes back to the fact that he doesn't really care how his system is classified.

    Brad, thanks for the good word. None of you know ME and I don't claim to know any of you. So, really there's no way for me to take anything said personally. I HAVE begun to see why senior Shaolin-Do students don't bother to interact or contradict statements made by other martial artists though. It would have been much easier for me (still would be, in fact) to just ignore this thread. Maybe I'll know better next time. :D

    -Radhnoti

  6. #51
    BeiKongHui Guest
    <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> I HAVE begun to see why senior Shaolin-Do students don't bother to interact or contradict statements made by other martial artists though. [/quote]

    That would be because they can't contradict the statements made here and it's much easier to ignore the truth for some people.

    "Gong Sao Mo Gong Ching Sao"
    - When you talk with the hands,
    best not to speak of polite hands.

  7. #52
    dragon797 Guest

    Correction

    To correct a comment about Sin The's brother, Hiang The.

    Hiang The learned material not only from his grandfather, Ie Chang Ming (who Sin still strangely does not acknowledge as his grandfather) but from three other of Ie's peers, one of whom taught Hiang his complete Tai Peng (Bird) system. Ie's specialty was the internal.

    To BeiKongHui:
    I am sure you have met or had bad experiences with some Shaolin-Do people over the years, especially if you were involved with John Ng, John Drefrense, and Mark Burgher. Many of them can be extremely arrogant. But don't lump everyone into his group or dismiss the skills of others who have studied the material from Ie and his contemporaries. Sin The is not the only source, just the main problem.
    n

  8. #53
    BeiKongHui Guest

    dragon797-

    I've only seen Hiang in action on old video tapes and he was ok. The 2 people I know that trained under him appear to have the same skill as your average Shaolin-Do black belts.

    However, my question is if there is not some level of scam involved why Then don't they just call it The' Family Fist or something and tell the truth about it's origins? Does Sin The have so little faith in his art?

    "Gong Sao Mo Gong Ching Sao"
    - When you talk with the hands,
    best not to speak of polite hands.

  9. #54
    Radhnoti Guest
    Apologies, Dragon 797 if you're a student of Master Hiang's, no disrespect was intended. The black belt I talked to about Master Hiang only said, "We all learned a lot from Hiang The' before he left, it's a family squabble and we (meaning the senior students I assume) try not to get involved." I'd also read or heard somewhere that he had stayed in Indonesia to continue studying with local masters before coming to the U.S. under his brother as an instructor in Shaolin-Do. Everyone in Shaolin-Do that knows him or OF him speaks of him with high regard...except Grandmaster Sin who speaks of him not at all.
    BeiKongHui, it's interesting how everyone assumes they have cornered the market on "the truth". ;)

    -Radhnoti

  10. #55
    Inquisitor Guest

    Radhnoti...

    Thanks for the compliment on my UserName. I felt it was appropriate. =) Now, on to the reply:

    ================================
    First off, Inquisitor let me compliment you upon an extremely appropriate name.
    " LoL it isn't like what I am saying will get through to most of you anyway. There are proven psychological processes that will either ignore or discredit the FACT that Shaolin-Do is fake, just because *you don't want to be wrong*."
    Neat bit of wordplay there. So, it's impossible that anyone would defend Shaolin-Do without a "psychological process" coming into play? Tell you what, you assume that I'm coming into this with an open mind and I'll assume that you're listening to what I have to say. We may both be fooling ourselves, but the alternative is that this is just an online diary in which we are only writing for ourselves. Right?
    --------------------


    The point I was trying to make when I commented on certain psychological processes was that it is near-impossible for me to change your mind using any sort of ethos, logos, or pathos. I was not making any sort of comment about your defending Shaolin-Do...


    --------------------
    "Why cannot even *one* other sifu say "Yes, I know Sin The, and I know or knew of his sifu. He is legitimate."?"
    It seems to me that this would be quite insulting to Grandmaster Sin and quite presumptive of anyone else. I've read other articles on these boards with members saying that Grandmaster Sin's brother is "the real deal"...and they both learned from Grandmaster Ie.
    --------------------


    Actually, now that you mention it, it was intended to be quite insulting to "Grandmaster" Sin. To put it simply, I have no respect for the man (for reasons that you can probably guess). As for the comments about Sin's brother: if memory serves me correct, those statements were insinuating that Sin The is misrepresenting himself. Apparently Sin The and his brother learned an actual legitimate style of kungfu from their family, but Sin The decided to take that small knowledge and suddenly become the "Grandmaster Inheritor of All Shaolin Styles." As I have no information which cannot prove nor disprove those accusations, I will refrain from saying anything more about them. You still have yet to give me any sort of proof that would discredit the simple fact that no one would dare vouch for the skill of your vaunted "Grandmaster."


    --------------------
    "It is common knowledge that in kungfu, masters travel in circles. " The last issue of Kungfu Qigong mentions that Grandmaster Sin was welcomed by Eagle Claw Master Li li Hong, stating that he has been "a friend...for many years".
    I'm fairly new to CMA, so, I can't speak knowledgably about the skill of my instructors vs. the skill of other masters. I CAN speak of the poor quality of video viewed over the internet. And I CAN state that watching my teacher perform the higher level tiger forms is awe inspiring for me. You can feel the intensity he radiates.
    --------------------


    I have never heard of this "Eagle Claw Master Li li Hong"... Also, I would not accept your evidenced based on the simple fact that Kungfu-Qigong magazine is paid to publish certain articles (and I am 100% sure that they were either paid to publish that article or the information from that article came from Shaolin-Do). Oftentimes, they write articles which contain false or unverified information simply because they were paid to. This is not only in reference to Shaolin-Do. I, along with several others on these boards I am sure, have my beef with the credibility of anything published in both Kungfu-Qigong and Inside Kungfu.
    LoL also, thank you for pointing out something for me. First, you said that you have very little experience in the CMA. You then follow up that statement by declaring "I CAN speak of the poor quality of video viewed over the internet. And I CAN state that watching my teacher perform the higher level tiger forms is awe inspiring for me. You can feel the intensity he radiates." If you have very little knowledge in kungfu, and say yourself that you cannot really compare the differences between legitimate masters and your own instructors, what suddenly gives you the ability to compare the quality of the internet videos (which were not my only source of evidence) *and* the skill level of your teacher performing "higher level tigher forms." It may be "awe inspiring" for you, but to those who have been studying the traditional Chinese Martial Arts for several years, it looks like crap.

    --------------------
    As for the "yeah, but does it work?" argument. I have met an instructor in a nearby city who works as "security" at a local bar. The bar was KNOWN for the fights that erupted regularly. A rough place. He has since greatly improved the bar's reputation for safety. Yes, he did have to fight. And, yes, it did work. He's about 5'10'' and weighs about 165 lbs. and subdued players for the college football team weighing 300+. You can say, "maybe he got lucky" or "yeah, but maybe none of them could fight" or "imagine what he could have done with a REAL art!" if you want, but it sounds like sour grapes to me.
    --------------------


    One word: hearsay. Actually, make that two: unsubstantiated. Give me documented proof, or at least a widely-known and recognized story (i.e. the way of Wong Shun Leung and his fights in HK), of the skill of Shaolin-Do practitioners. I can say for a fact that there is none of the latter, and I have yet to see any of the former.

    -------------------
    "I know for a fact that Shaolin-Do is complete and utter bull****, is not what it claims to be, does not teach actual martial arts, and is cheating a lot of people out of their hard earned money." What I know for "a fact" is that I'm improving myself and I see my fellow students doing the same. Shaolin-Do has been all it claimed to be for me. I am learning an "actual" martial art. And I don't feel cheated at all.
    --------------------


    Again, I am forced to use your own words against you. I thought you had very little knowledge of the Chinese Martial Arts? How do you know that you and your fellow students are in fact "improving"? The people who practiced Chung Moo Doe, the people who studied at their local McDojo, they all felt like they were "improving." Does that actually mean that they were learning the actual art of pugilism, or that they are being spoon-fed a bunch of BS? Give me a break. So far you have done nothing but show that Shaolin-Do does not have any sort of information that can disprove ANY of the arguments which prove that it is a fraudulent martial art.


    --------------------
    UberShaman, I believe that Grandmaster Sin teaching "karate" goes back to the fact that he doesn't really care how his system is classified.

    Brad, thanks for the good word. None of you know ME and I don't claim to know any of you. So, really there's no way for me to take anything said personally. I HAVE begun to see why senior Shaolin-Do students don't bother to interact or contradict statements made by other martial artists though. It would have been much easier for me (still would be, in fact) to just ignore this thread. Maybe I'll know better next time.

    -Radhnoti
    ==============================

    None involved in Shaolin-Do "bother to interact or contradict statements made by other martial artists" because they have no information to the contrary. Look, I am not doing this out of any sort of spite for you or most of those involved with Shaolin-Do (note I say most, not all). As I have said before, this is for the benefit of those who have yet to make up their minds or have doubts about Shaolin-Do and simply need someone to tell them that it's okay to look elsewhere. I'm sorry that I can't get you to realize that Shaolin-Do is, in reality, a fake martial art.

  11. #56
    dragon797 Guest
    *****************************
    However, my question is if there is not some level of scam involved why Then don't they just call it The' Family Fist or something and tell the truth about it's origins?
    ********************************

    Ie Chang Ming was the only family member. The other teachers were not related to Hiang. All of them immigrated to Indonesia from China where they had learned material from a variety of sources, some as a group and some individually. Those are the facts and Hiang has never presented them as anything else.t

  12. #57
    Radhnoti Guest

    ...this is getting ridiculously long...maybe a new thread?...

    dragon797 as one of the original teachers of Shaolin-Do I doubt you'll be able to distance Master Hiang from Grandmaster Sin. His association with the art lasted...what?...decades? He certainly never stepped forward and told any of Grandmaster Sin's students that the historical account they'd been given was false. Many senior students seem to hope that someday the brothers will patch things up and Master Hiang will return to Shaolin-Do.
    Inquisitor, I feel like we're "point sparring" with these quotations...but such is the nature of message boards I suppose.
    "The point I was trying to make when I commented on certain psychological processes was that it is near-impossible for me to change your mind using any sort of ethos, logos, or pathos. I was not making any sort of comment about your defending Shaolin-Do..."
    You were saying that it's impossible to change my mind about Shaolin-Do because of "psychological processes". I was saying that you should probably drop the psycho-babble and save it for your patients. :rolleyes:
    "As I have no information which cannot prove nor disprove those accusations, I will refrain from saying anything more about them. You still have yet to give me any sort of proof that would discredit the simple fact that no one would dare vouch for the skill of your vaunted Grandmaster."
    I also have no information to prove or disprove, no one does. That's the problem with the shadowy history of the Shaolin Temples. No one vouches for Grandmaster Sin's skill, but I've yet to hear of a "master" from another style stepping forward to discredit him.
    " If you have very little knowledge in kungfu, and say yourself that you cannot really compare the differences between legitimate masters and your own instructors, what suddenly gives you the ability to compare the quality of the internet videos (which were not my only source of evidence) *and* the skill level of your teacher performing "higher level tigher forms." It may be "awe inspiring" for you, but to those who have been studying the traditional Chinese Martial Arts for several years, it looks like crap."
    What I was saying I COULD speak of was the quality of internet videos in general. Even with a cable modem RealPlayer videos have been compressed and seem choppy. I won't pretend experience enough to judge CMA forms, I can only offer what I feel. It impresses the hell out of me.
    "One word: hearsay. Actually, make that two: unsubstantiated."
    Unless someone has seen something themselves it's unsubstantiated and hearsay. The existance of China for me is hearsay, I've never been there. I've never met a Hung Gar student or instructor, does that make the effective reputation of that art form untrue? All we have to judge things we've not seen by is the word of others. I used to hear, "Don't go there. Too dangerous." when reference to the bar was made. Now I hear, "It's a nice place, they've really cleaned it up."
    Yes, it may be hearsay but that doesn't make it not so.
    "I thought you had very little knowledge of the Chinese Martial Arts? How do you know that you and your fellow students are in fact "improving"? ...Give me a break. So far you have done nothing but show that Shaolin-Do does not have any sort of information that can disprove ANY of the arguments which prove that it is a fraudulent martial art."
    No, so far YOU have yet to prove Shaolin-Do is a fraudulent martial art. :D Improvement is in the eye of the beholder I suppose. I can do more push-ups...so I assume my upper body strength is improving. People that I've sparred in karate (I've been in a few other martial arts previously) that used to be able to beat me easily now say I'm tougher to handle. Long attempts to keep horsestance have strengthened my legs, helping me with my work in which I lift things regularly. I feel increased confidence in myself and my wife says I seem happier. All in all I don't think anyone could say Shaolin-Do hasn't improved me.
    "I'm sorry that I can't get you to realize that Shaolin-Do is, in reality, a fake martial art."
    And I'm sorry that I can't get you to see Shaolin-Do is a fine art for me, and probably for many others.

    -Radhnoti

  13. #58
    Johnny Hot Shot Guest

    Brads Videos

    hey Brad is this guy in your videos from USSD "Kung- fu" ?

  14. #59
    Brad Guest
    All I know is the guy from those vids I posted is a 7 degree blackbelt in Shaolin-Do certified by Sin The(according to the website). He's located in Tennessee.

    I think I'm going to post a new thread and list links to sites with video's of chinese martial arts just so anyone who wants to can compare and contrast.

  15. #60
    Falcor Guest
    Well, I guess if Shaolin-do makes you happy, despite what everyone says and despite the evidence that is in plain view, then I guess we (the general CMA community) really have nothing more to say. But consider this:

    I may be an excellent guitar player. I may have learned it on my own, or learned it from a known teacher. And what I play may not exactly be jazz or blues, or rock or such, but what the hey, it makes me happy and that's that. Right? Now, if I were to open up a guitar school saying that I will teach you to play the guitar and simply that, witout making claims as to what particular style of guitar playing I teach, then I am being truthful and honest and I may actually make a good teacher. But, on the other hand, if I make claims to have studied jazz and blues from the greats, and that what I teach is the jazz and blues of BB King and Stevie Ray Vaughn and such, when my playing style i different from those of the greats and anyone who may have learned from them for real, then I am lying. I may still end up teaching you to play the guitar decently, but what I am claiming is a lie. If you don't care and you just wanna learn to play, well alrighty then. But if you wanna learn the particul;ar styles of King or Vaughn, legitimately tranmistted by them, then what I teach you will be false and you should look for someone else. It's the same thing with martial arts.

    ...don't think you are, know you are...

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
  •