Is Shaolin-Do for real?

[Mas Judt]

Well, I took it as I read it. Honestly, I've encountered SD directly - and always been honest about what I saw.

This is not style vs. style - I could care less about your school. I do care about a pattern of deceit and misrepresentation that continues to this day.

Look, John Wang always tells the story of a guy who practiced different ways of hitting a coconut on a string - and won a big Lei Tei match with no formal training. So who knows, SD coulld produce some Ker-Snappy skilled guys. But to claim everything you claim insofar as being the 'original, pure' methods and the 'true Shaolin' while disparaging todays Shaolin as 'just wushu' is silly.

Someone earlier in this thread did the math on how much time it would take Sin The' to 'master' 900 forms by his teens. Simple logic disproves much of the nonsense. Observation of Sin The' doing his mantis makes things very clear.

I'm done. Go rationalize. Think I'm some kind of troll. Whatever. Just keep drinking the Kool-Aid, and I guess you'll be happy - and your life will be chocked full of deceit as you continue to spread a tradition of lies.

[kwaichang]

There is right and wrong you my friend are RUDE thats all. You are not all knowing or all seeing and very opinionated. I dont se how you learn anything you are so closed minded. KC

[brucereiter]

Well, I took it as I read it. Honestly, I've encountered SD directly - and always been honest about what I saw.

This is not style vs. style - I could care less about your school. I do care about a pattern of deceit and misrepresentation that continues to this day.

Look, John Wang always tells the story of a guy who practiced different ways of hitting a coconut on a string - and won a big Lei Tei match with no formal training. So who knows, SD coulld produce some Ker-Snappy skilled guys. But to claim everything you claim insofar as being the 'original, pure' methods and the 'true Shaolin' while disparaging todays Shaolin as 'just wushu' is silly.

Someone earlier in this thread did the math on how much time it would take Sin The' to 'master' 900 forms by his teens. Simple logic disproves much of the nonsense. Observation of Sin The' doing his mantis makes things very clear.

I'm done. Go rationalize. Think I'm some kind of troll. Whatever. Just keep drinking the Kool-Aid, and I guess you'll be happy - and your life will be chocked full of deceit as you continue to spread a tradition of lies.

which "you" are you speaking about?

if it is me you are speaking about. what lies have i spread? i have never said anything disparaging about another martial art or artist on any forum.

i have never claimed "my" methods to be the best, or the original or pure.
i do not think you are a troll but i do think you are misinformed on the subject at hand.

best,

bruce

p.s. this is silly to go back and forth. like i said before i would rather discuss the material presented and discuss how others express and apply the material they have learned.

[Leto]

I don't believe anyone has "mastered" 900 forms. I don't like that the history and origins of the forms we do know are obscured. I don't even like the way a lot of the material is initially taught. But there is something there, wherever it came from. It's not worth bothering about if you've got your own teacher and your own so-called "legitimate" style to practice. But for people who have already invested time and effort into this, and possibly don't have any other options for training besides generic karate or tae kwon do...it is important. We know that there is something useful here...and I don't think anyone who knows about Chinese history, martial arts, and the Shaolin temple actually believes that Sin The is the master inheritor of every style of kung fu ever to come from Shaolin.
If it's just a mix-match personal style invented by Sin The, or his teacher, or whoever, so be it. But it is a "real" style, that has some good techniques and forms. Someone who trains the right way, and has developed insight, will have just as good "kung fu" as someone who trains in any "authentic" style, with masters from Hong Kong or Taiwan or Shanghai.

I am disappointed that the style's history has been based on tall tales, and disappointed that the long time teachers perpetuate the mythology as truth. I want to know where it all really came from, and what traditions/lineages to look at as "ancestors" of the style. But I know that such answers are not coming from anyone who really knows anytime soon. Should I just stop practicing, and forget all the things I know? I could just go back to my Okinawan karate style exclusively, which has a traceable lineage back to the 18th century (that means it must be better, right?). But I tell you, what I learned at the CSC was valuable. Whether it's really "shaolin" or not...I don't care. It doesn't mean I won't accept other avenues of training, but I will not forget or discard the things I have learned. Whether what I was taught as "hsing i" is really hsing i...I don't care. Maybe it's not as "effective" as "real" hsing i...I know it teaches a method of power generation for short range attacks which is quite effective. It probably is different than what the shanxi and heibei lineages call hsing i. Oh well.
I was taught two very common tai chi forms, but maybe the way they are practiced is not common. Doing straight punches from a horse stance is also a common method, however almost everyone has some variation and their own preference for what is "right". One teacher says the chamber must be as high as it can go...another says the chamber should be near the hip, or the ribs, or wherever. One teacher says vertical punches are more effective than horizontal punches, another says horizontal has more power, and a third says it doesn't matter. One says the knees must be out, another says the knees must be in. One says you squeeze the ground with your toes, another says you must be totally relaxed. Balance near the balls of the feet, or balance near the heels, or on the blade. One says the torso should not move perceivably, another says you should twist as you punch , or sink, or whatever. The only thing which is the same is the actual act of punching. Every one says their way is the "right" way, and those other guys are wrong and aren't as good as we are.
How is this different than what is happening here with SD?

If you put aside all the lineages, the folklore, the coutries of origin, the politics and pride, and just look at what's actually there...what basis does anyone have for saying one way is wrong and the other way is right? It's subjective and personal. You can't judge effectiveness in fighting unless you constantly fight with people. Aesthetics of performance is subjective according to your tastes. You may be able to see whether someone's spine is straight, and posture correct to allow correct qi flow, but you can't (usually) see their mentality, what they are visualizing, or whether their mindset is "correct".

[Judge Pen]

I don't believe anyone has "mastered" 900 forms. I don't like that the history and origins of the forms we do know are obscured. I don't even like the way a lot of the material is initially taught. But there is something there, wherever it came from. It's not worth bothering about if you've got your own teacher and your own so-called "legitimate" style to practice. But for people who have already invested time and effort into this, and possibly don't have any other options for training besides generic karate or tae kwon do...it is important. We know that there is something useful here...and I don't think anyone who knows about Chinese history, martial arts, and the Shaolin temple actually believes that Sin The is the master inheritor of every style of kung fu ever to come from Shaolin.
If it's just a mix-match personal style invented by Sin The, or his teacher, or whoever, so be it. But it is a "real" style, that has some good techniques and forms. Someone who trains the right way, and has developed insight, will have just as good "kung fu" as someone who trains in any "authentic" style, with masters from Hong Kong or Taiwan or Shanghai.

I am disappointed that the style's history has been based on tall tales, and disappointed that the long time teachers perpetuate the mythology as truth. I want to know where it all really came from, and what traditions/lineages to look at as "ancestors" of the style. But I know that such answers are not coming from anyone who really knows anytime soon. Should I just stop practicing, and forget all the things I know? I could just go back to my Okinawan karate style exclusively, which has a traceable lineage back to the 18th century (that means it must be better, right?). But I tell you, what I learned at the CSC was valuable. Whether it's really "shaolin" or not...I don't care. It doesn't mean I won't accept other avenues of training, but I will not forget or discard the things I have learned. Whether what I was taught as "hsing i" is really hsing i...I don't care. Maybe it's not as "effective" as "real" hsing i...I know it teaches a method of power generation for short range attacks which is quite effective. It probably is different than what the shanxi and heibei lineages call hsing i. Oh well.
I was taught two very common tai chi forms, but maybe the way they are practiced is not common. Doing straight punches from a horse stance is also a common method, however almost everyone has some variation and their own preference for what is "right". One teacher says the chamber must be as high as it can go...another says the chamber should be near the hip, or the ribs, or wherever. One teacher says vertical punches are more effective than horizontal punches, another says horizontal has more power, and a third says it doesn't matter. One says the knees must be out, another says the knees must be in. One says you squeeze the ground with your toes, another says you must be totally relaxed. Balance near the balls of the feet, or balance near the heels, or on the blade. One says the torso should not move perceivably, another says you should twist as you punch , or sink, or whatever. The only thing which is the same is the actual act of punching. Every one says their way is the "right" way, and those other guys are wrong and aren't as good as we are.
How is this different than what is happening here with SD?

If you put aside all the lineages, the folklore, the coutries of origin, the politics and pride, and just look at what's actually there...what basis does anyone have for saying one way is wrong and the other way is right? It's subjective and personal. You can't judge effectiveness in fighting unless you constantly fight with people. Aesthetics of performance is subjective according to your tastes. You may be able to see whether someone's spine is straight, and posture correct to allow correct qi flow, but you can't (usually) see their mentality, what they are visualizing, or whether their mindset is "correct".

Bravo Leto. Well said.

[Judge Pen]

I assure you that I would say the same thing to the man's face. Not being a member of your cult, he just looks silly to me, so you won't find me hiding.

It seems highly dubious to me that NO ONE ever brought this up to him, particularly out of any implied reason such as fear or that Sin The' is the 'one.' COME ON.

More likely, most people are polite. But this is simply dishonest BS.

Grow up.

I'm surprised by this post. Frankly with your reputation and knowledge you didn't have to resort to this type of attack to make your points. Really Joe this was uncalled for.

SD is many things. Leto made some very fine points. You can debate the "right and wrong" of its forms, what they are called, and the dubious lineage. But SD is not a cult. That is patently unfair.

If you want to know about martial arts cults, then read "Hearding the Moo" written by a "Joe Smith". I'm sure that you know all about Chung Moo Doe (a style I'm sure you've had experience with with your roots in Chicago). I have never been told what to think. I've never been asked for money or told to change my life based upon any silly superstitions. I've never been yelled at or demeaned or asked to worship anyone. My teachers and Sin The do not have any degree of control over me outside of the time I give to them in training. They have never tried to exert it. I hear stories about history and I take it in and keep punching and kicking. I respect them because they take the time to teach me something that is useful.

Bruce was asking some legitimate questions in order to explore your criticism. He has done a thorough job documenting, with video examples, different forms and styles and wondering how they compare to how he practices his art. Since you comand so musch respect on this board he was taking the time to have an objective dialogue with someone who says they know. I comend him for not sticking his head in the sand and comparing other arts. He wanted your opinion on the technique--not the history or lineage.

You could have taken the time to look and comment. Or you could have not taken the time at all. This is an internet forum--who really cares what happens here? Its the proverbial tempest in a teapot so I can't blame you for not putting at least the same amount of time Bruce did into his posts. This thread is like a tv, you don't like what's being said, you can just turn it off. But there's no excuse for being rude to him and everyone else who practices SD with an objective and open mind.

Its been some of your insights that have helped me look at my own art from different perspectives. You know how the Indonesan martial culture loves the tall tale and the fantastic element. You know how this is tempered with a brutal practicality. In our discussions on these forums and by e-mail you have always been polite and respectful even while being honest. Bruce did not do anything to not deserve the same treatment.

[Shaolin Wookie]

In answer to someone's question as to the likeness between the forms, here goes:

As in Tai Chi, the Crane form works best when there is little to no tension in any of the shoulders, wrists, or elbows. Before any martial arts practice, I always loosen up my joints, even before stretching.

After the initial opening and down strike into a bow stance, there's a flurry of three attacks/blocks. The body position isn't too unlike the "fair lady and shuttle" movements of tai chi. Only, in this crane form, you can think of the strikes as useful in three ways. One, the outside hand is clearing an incoming arm, and the inside arm is striking. Two, the twisting of the torso clears the attack, and both hands strike the neck. Three, the torso clears the punch, and both hands strike at the arm (hitting bicep and forearm press. points, like in blue belt technique # 7), providing the opportunity to move for a sweep, etc. In terms of applicability, I'd probably do these motions in reverse, after taking a step back at an angle. I also make sure to twist the torso and hips, to avoid the punch, so that I can apply this in advancing. (This same basic motion is present in the ippons at yellow belt, just dressed a little differently and stepping at an angle).

My favorite movement: after the right side hand movement forward/crane beak to back, the left arm rises in a semi-circle (ending overhead) as the right hand shoots across the chest in a clear, and the feet move into a cat stance. This is the most important and useful technique in the entire form, IMO, and one not a lot of people consider (as is evidenced by their looks of confusion and roboto body mechanics). The left hand should move first, providing for a strong block to the side--reinforced by the body's movement into a cat stance (but the arm begins the motion by building momentum and whipping strength). The right hand clears across the body, for protection, once hte body's in motion. I've been experimenting a little with some dudes to work it against a jab and straight combo, and it works just fine, using the right hand clear as a slap block (works well if you direct the punch up and across his body)---and it doesn't require a body twist. You can do it quick with a small pivot, if you bring the left hand up quick in a diagonal, or even a smaller semi-circle, making sure to clear in front of the face. But since the left is such a strong block, it's a little unnecessary, unless you're trying to get a big opening (and considering the way the form fucntions, you're trying to get a big opening, to open the way for a slap to the abdomen.) PErsonally, I see it as a crane defense against a mid-high range round kick, or a haymaker, where you need good strong blocks--and this arm doesn't just block with the enitre arm...it blocks with the entire body moving behind it---and it can be performed successfully by just pivoting from a sparring stance (more like the beginning of 3rd Crane). And the hand that clears across the torso: could just as easily strike with a side hand if the clear is unneccessary. The motion is dressed differently, but it reminds me of the ridge-hand strike at the beginning of Yang section 2. Bit of a stretch, I suppose, but it does remind me of it.

3 crane slaps (side hands): Incorporates movement of the hips and floppy (relaxed arms), generating power through whipping strength. Same principle as single whip, although the second set, performed with dead hand slaps, is more directly reminiscent of it. Single whip movements occurs in many SD techs: In several chin-na's, almost every crane (excepting only 2nd Crane).

The most tai chi oriented movement: The circle clear and push. The forward foot chambers into a high crane stance as the hands pull into a small circle; then, the body pushes back out into a bow stance, accompanied by a push.

Ward off, roll back, and push are all present (maybe even a press, as well).

Some people incorporate the motions of the hands more than I, but I generally keep them in front of my shoulders (close enough to the body to be able to close in front of the face), and make it a point to get waist and torso rotation, more than arm rotation. When I perform it, I don't even move the hands (for several reasons). The hands are in position to ward off a punch across the body, then extend into a full-body push (just like tai chi). In a more yang way, they can simply provide cover by being there in case something swings towards the head (just like the beginning one-legged stance blocks performed in short forms 27 & 28--may differ for SD folks than CSC). The foot that comes in chambers into a crane stance. This can be used as protection against a roundkick, catching it with the shin; also, as evasion or retreat against a sweep or low kick from outside). During such a movement, you'd want the hands high, elbows low across the midsection, to protect the upper body against a roundkick/punch combination. It also puts you in good position for extension into a strike.

As I push out, I keep my hands chambered until the last second, when my torso begins to turn up and into the opponent, making a point to gather all the momentum I need through the chambered leg and extension into a bow stance. When helping classmates with this one, I demonstrate first by using my arms in a big circle, then using no circle (keeping them chambered). I can push someone harder and with more force with the latter every time, much harder than a bigger and heavier person can throw me using only his arms). This motion is very tai chi-ish.

These are just a few. Note: when I practice any crane, I try to keep as relaxed, calm, and fluid as possible, utilizing snap and whip power. It feels more internal than external. And sometimes I run through it very slow, to consider the movements in their smallest increments. It's about as internal as I enjoy; and I can and do utilize the more unorthodox movements some people tend to gloss over.

[brucereiter]

thanks jp ... well said ...

[brucereiter]

keep up the hard work wookie ...

receiving lessons + practice + perseverance + research + patience + practice + experimentation + sharing knowledge + testing theory + more practice! = path to skill

[Shaolin Wookie]

Basically, in any form you have some snap kicks, roundhouses, straight punches, reverse fist punches, thrust kicks, hook kicks(rarely), side kicks, and varying hand forms.

I have something like 20 forms, and all of them use these striking techniques (weapons included). They're not especially difficult. The hardest and most important thing to learn is the delivery system--getting the body into and out of position, moving, balancing, and rotating. I can learn 20 forms, no problem. I can show you a technique for almost any movement, and it doesn't take great intuition to figure them out--just a bit of reflection and creativity. I haven't had all of them given to me by a teacher; and I kind of like it that way, sometimes. Basically, an athletic person can learn any martial art and make it work (capoiera, for instance). But I prefer one you have to reflect about and analyze from several angles. Some of the techniques I was spoon-fed do not work well for me. But I can use the same movements in another way that is infinitely more effective, IMO. I don't really need to be "shown all the techniques". I've been shown them in other material, within that system. Seriously, if I can't figure out why I'm clearing and punching, then I'm a retard. Or if I can't figure out why I'm standing on one leg, with the other chambered(for a defensive block, or an offensive kick), then I'm not very imaginative. I have been shown sparring techs, ippons, and street fighting techs, and chin-na in other SD training material (most of which was learned before any forms whatsoever)---guess what? They're almost all present in the forms, sometimes directly, sometimes dressed up a little differently. If you understand the principle, you can genrally apply it pretty broadly. Its up to you to do that, however. Relying on a teacher to show all the apps is a bit lazy, and kind of demonstrative of a student's lack of intuition. When I ask a teacher a question, it's generally a structural one. But I guarantee that someone who's watched me perform a form one week, will generally see something different in the way I do it the next week. It's generally because of the insights into the movements I get by reflecting on them, and then getting a feel for what feels good, and what doesn't feel good structurally. When I move up a rank, I don't lose any material I've learned up to that point. I just expand on it. I'm still punching, kicking, hopping, sweeping, etc. I just deliver it differently.....and even then, it's not that wild and exotic. Thanks to the stuff I learned at brown belt, my lower belt material is 1000X better. I'm sure that doesn't end. I've seen third degrees perform lower belt forms and barely get through them; and then I've seen other third degrees perform them and totally blow my mind.

Note: the dude Bruce was doing push hands with in his first posted vid----he showed me Jin Gung Fu Hu Chien once, and it was hands down the best I've ever seen it done.

[brucereiter]

Note: the dude Bruce was doing push hands with in his first posted vid----he showed me Jin Gung Fu Hu Chien once, and it was hands down the best I've ever seen it done.

that "dude" :-) is one of my training brothers and is a inspiration to me for his work ethic.
he trains very hard and works even harder to apply what he has learned and keeps a very humble attitude.

he is one of the few people i know who can do all 49 postures of our version of ie chin ching and do them well. there are many postures i can not do and may never do ... lol ...

[Mas Judt]

Eh, I can't read all of this as I am rather busy, but my response was to what I read. If I inferred something wrong, I apologize, but I do not apologize for my statements.

It comes down to veracity. It is obvious that SD reveres it's founder and beleives him over any objective work or the fact that nobody of consequence takes him seriously.* If it wasn't for the silly claims, there would be no disagreement. However it looks like there may not be an SD either without the melange of stuff.

While you guys are NOT Chung Moo Quan - and I wager you have SOMETHING buried in that melange of misunderstanding, being party to a line of BS and spreading that lie purposely just rubs me the wrong way. Heck, I'm used the being lied to, but the scale of this, the relentlessness of it, it just got to me.

So enjoy it. You can have it. Can't really explain other than you can only take so much dishonesty before felling the need to say 'excuse me, your emperor over there is missing his pants.'




*Because of his issues with honesty.

[Mas Judt]

Some of the private communication I receive gives one hope - there are some decent folks in the SD world - and understand I do not attack you as people, but I do question the ethics of passing on things that are just plain lies.

It is one thing to pass on a questionable oral history. It is another to openly manipulate facts to try and support it (such as the Stele's at the Shaolin temple) or to claim to practice systems in a more complete or accurate fashion than the folks that actually do those original systems.

It's just absurd.

And with today's overwhelming amount of data available it is easier to toss information around gleaned from media - but not learned completely. Heck, even I do that, but at least give credit where credit is due. So, a good analysis of the system would have to be based on SD itself - Sin The' or his brother Hiang.

Based upon the video of NPM by Sin, I hope to god he isn't claiming NPM.

Now I'm done.

And for those of you that shared information on misinformation - thank you. You guys are Kun Tao brothers in some way, even if you don't know it. But remember, just knowing the truth isn't enough, you must live it.

[Leto]

I would love for nothing more than to compare and contrast and talk about the various styles that I have learned and seen. I tried to start such a conversation at an earlier point in the thread, and there was another thread devoted to this which petered out when no one had any more contributions.
The fact of the matter is, I haven't found videos of any crane style which is quite close enough to our crane and bird forms to say that there's a link. I haven't found anything like our black tiger forms anywhere, the shantung black tiger book that is in circulation looks nothing like our hei hu forms. Our brown belt "tiger family" forms, while sharing names with those from some other styles, don't equate. The closest was Lian Wu Zhang, which we talked about for several posts. Not to mention the Lohan short forms, which don't really match up with any other style exactly. Even if not the case with anything else, at least these forms make up a core "style" which is unique from any other. It is evidence, in my eyes, that this wasn't all learned from books or videos. Some part of it, at least, seems to have come from a unique community/family style. A collaboration of various martial artists in the Chinese community of Bandung? Something similar to the jing wu school on the mainland? We can only speculate.

As always, I am more than anxious to see anyone's examples of styles which have an equivalent in SD/CSC, to compare to.

[Mas Judt]

Leto, your going to force me back into this...

The stuff you can't identify is either a.) 'original SD material' or b.) your actual core system. Kung Fu methods get all mixed up in Indonesia - even the Karate influence is not surprising to me... it is the syncretic way of things there.

Any links to these sets or their training methods? This is way more interesting than the SD 'be everything' line.