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 853 of 1326 FirstFirst ... 353753803843851852853854855863903953 ... LastLast
Results 12,781 to 12,795 of 19882

Thread: Is Shaolin-Do for real?

  1. #12781
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    right there
    Posts
    3,235
    Quote Originally Posted by kwaichang View Post
    Should tell you a little about my fighting style , pressure baby pressure. oh yeah man oh yeah KC
    um what?

    I am pork boy, the breakfast monkey.

    left leg: mild bruising. right leg: charley horse

    handsomerest member of KFM forum hands down

  2. #12782
    Quote Originally Posted by kwaichang View Post
    Should tell you a little about my fighting style , pressure baby pressure. oh yeah man oh yeah KC
    LMAO!!!

  3. #12783
    Quote Originally Posted by Tao Of The Fist View Post
    . I don't know how anyone got the idea that the 24 form or the Cheng Man Ching 37 were 'temple forms.'
    as many young students do they look for books to supplement what they are learning. and when i joined the school i was a "internal only student" so for ht e first 2 years i only learned yang 64 form. i looked at every tai chi book i could find and i did not see anything that matched up until i came across cheng man chings book. when i asked my teacher he said he did not know. then he said he did not think it was cmc as it was different than some cmc form he had seem but in the end he said he did not know. i never though it came from old monks or what ever and i really wanted to know its history so i dug and dug and found out as much as i could about sin the and about tai chi. i found that sin the allowed or out right gave mis-information regarding tai chi chuan.
    i do however unpopular it may be to some people think sin the' did learn the yang 64 from his teacher as a teen or early 20's based on all of the evidence available to me.

    but i also think he has "left things out" "lied" "stretched the truth" and "flat out made things up" about much of the various arts history, his own history, his teachers history and his teachers teachers history. that is sad since he really does seem like a nice man and is very fast and in great shape. i wish him well though.
    best,

    bruce

    Happy indeed we live,
    friendly amidst the hostile.
    Amidst hostile men
    we dwell free from hatred.

    http://youtube.com/profile?user=brucereiter

  4. #12784
    Quote Originally Posted by Tao Of The Fist View Post
    . I don't know how anyone got the idea that the 24 form or the Cheng Man Ching 37 were 'temple forms.'
    this is second hand information so you know how that can go but i was told that the soards were the first to say those tai chi forms were from the shaolin temple.

    i could be wrong and if i am i retract that statement.
    best,

    bruce

    Happy indeed we live,
    friendly amidst the hostile.
    Amidst hostile men
    we dwell free from hatred.

    http://youtube.com/profile?user=brucereiter

  5. #12785
    I did the 24 combined form until I was blue in the face. Probably David or Sharon or both mentioned the origins but to honest I didn't really give a S........still don't!

    My favorite BS was about the 49 postures!

    "Some instructors have up to 30 of them but we have all 49!!!!!"

    The Soards made it sounds like a valuable collection of something! Like the art of putting your leg behind your head has been lost!

  6. #12786
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    right there
    Posts
    3,235
    Quote Originally Posted by BoulderDawg View Post
    I did the 24 combined form until I was blue in the face. Probably David or Sharon or both mentioned the origins but to honest I didn't really give a S........still don't!

    My favorite BS was about the 49 postures!

    "Some instructors have up to 30 of them but we have all 49!!!!!"

    The Soards made it sounds like a valuable collection of something! Like the art of putting your leg behind your head has been lost!
    did they do the yang forms too fast and used really loud forceful inhaling and exhaling like they did when i was there?

    I am pork boy, the breakfast monkey.

    left leg: mild bruising. right leg: charley horse

    handsomerest member of KFM forum hands down

  7. #12787
    Quote Originally Posted by BoulderDawg View Post
    My favorite BS was about the 49 postures!

    "Some instructors have up to 30 of them but we have all 49!!!!!"
    i know! that struck me as funny too. all the crap aout how they "preserved" all 49.

    i have found several different systems of i chin ching/yijinjing and some have been only 12 postures and one of the systems i have seen had over 100 i chin ching postures.

    it is i think a very old practice but it is not i think a specific system.
    best,

    bruce

    Happy indeed we live,
    friendly amidst the hostile.
    Amidst hostile men
    we dwell free from hatred.

    http://youtube.com/profile?user=brucereiter

  8. #12788
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    152
    Quote Originally Posted by brucereiter View Post
    i keep hearing people talk about

    >>When you are in a school that only makes contact with it's own, you start believing that its history, techniques, and whatever are absolute and that everything else doesn't apply. I felt so stupid afterwards... <<

    my teacher said "you must train and touch hands with as many people as you can to really understand ma. from day 1 of my training at the csc atlanta i trained with people outside of the system with the blessing of my teacher. i never hid it and many times talked to him about what i had seen or felt.

    in maybe 1998 0r 99 a student who was very sr to me said that the 24 tai chi form was a old old form and is "exactly what the shaolin monks practiced" i asked my teacher about it and he said it was the most popular tai chi form in the world and sin the learned it from a friend in bandung and thought it had some value so taught it to him students. i do not know how the atl csc student came to the ideas he had when as far as i could tell my teacher was not telling any of the legends.

    i think i did have a very different experience than most sd students.
    For some reason I feel compelled to give a different perspective.

    I started martial arts at 14, mid 70's, in tae kwon do, learned from a Vietnam combat vet, who was also a SD blackbelt. Progressed to brown belt, started SD. Participated or visited at least 5 different SD schools/teachers overall. During the same time, participated in judo, ninjitsu, and tien shien pai. I do not think I have a jaded perspective. Saw a wide variety of teaching and instruction methods. Was surprised at how much similarity there was from SD to the tien shien pai school, especially in internal forms both taught. And the variety was very wide. Some pitiful, all the way to amazing. Everywhere. There are those in SD, especially in what I would call the first or second generation of GMT's students, that can hold their own with anyone and who's skills equal or surpass anyone I've ever seen in martial arts, in person, TV, or internet. Others are embarrassing. What it comes down to is there can be no doubt GMT knows more about martial arts than most people, and he teaches some of it to others. Where it comes from only he really knows. But I have benefitted from it, and more so because I have studied independently and from other sources. One very popular author professes the method of not spoon feeding a student, but give them tools, and MAKE them figure it out, as the only way to truly learn anything.
    Just One Student

    "I seek, not to know all the answers, but to understand the questions." --- Kwai Chang Caine

    (I'd really like to know all the answers, too, but understanding the questions, like most of my martial arts practice, is a more realistically attainable goal)

  9. #12789

    tai chi

    I learned yang 64 from GM sin back in 1985 at the sportscenter. And I can tell you he never mentioned anything about it being temple style. The history he told us was mostly about Yang lu chan. Back then it was just called yang taichi not even yang 64. And this was the only empty hand taichi form we had. There wasn't a 24, or chen. He never even mentioned he knew a chen style.

    And I would agree with one student. The first generations of SD had some very talented people. And part of the reasons for that, I think, was because of a more focused curriculum. There just wasn't an abundance of forms. You focused on a few external sets, then tai chi and pakua, meditation. Not to mention lots of sparring and physical conditioning. But we americans always want more, and are willing to pay for it. GM sin saw an opportunity and ran with it. Sad.

  10. #12790
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    1,086
    The real question is... for all these forms... have the people teaching it mastered all the relevant jibengong, qigong, equipment and two partner skills for eaxch of these systems so that they can say they truly undertand them and can 'preserve' them?

    This should be an obvious question to answer and perhaps the biggest challenge SD has in making its case. (Besides the fanciful history.)

    However, things aren't as cut and dried and many 'traditional' systems - especially JMA and KMA have just as messed up stuff gong on. Oh, and some CMA too. Doesn't mean I agree with the SD line, but just taking a broader view.
    www.kungnation.com

    Pre-order Kung! Twisted Barbarian Felony from your favorite comic shop!

  11. #12791

    Good Morning Everyone......

    How are we all doing today???

  12. #12792

    Sin the letter on the other ma forum

    Just read the letter from sin the' to some instructors kicking them out. it's on that other bovine ma forum. Disgusting.

  13. #12793
    Quote Originally Posted by bodhi warrior View Post
    Just read the letter from sin the' to some instructors kicking them out. it's on that other bovine ma forum. Disgusting.
    where is this???Bull-shido??

  14. #12794
    Quote Originally Posted by Mas Judt View Post
    The real question is... for all these forms... have the people teaching it mastered all the relevant jibengong, qigong, equipment and two partner skills for eaxch of these systems so that they can say they truly undertand them and can 'preserve' them?

    This should be an obvious question to answer and perhaps the biggest challenge SD has in making its case. (Besides the fanciful history.)

    However, things aren't as cut and dried and many 'traditional' systems - especially JMA and KMA have just as messed up stuff gong on. Oh, and some CMA too. Doesn't mean I agree with the SD line, but just taking a broader view.
    There are a handful. And almost all are from way back. Most of the master level teachers that I have seen today do not have any knowledge of the principles that make these arts what they are.

  15. #12795
    Quote Originally Posted by tattooedmonk View Post
    where is this???Bull-shido??
    yes. the name of the thread is "my experience with shaolin do"

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
  •