Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 19

Thread: Monk Fetish!

  1. #1

    Exclamation Monk Fetish!

    Quite a title huh?
    Believe it or not, I do have a topic and it's not Shaolin iron crotch porn. Sorry Gene.
    Anyway, what is with the obsession that many people have with Shaolin monks? These obsessors have an idealized view of the monks that seems based on Kwai Chang Caine or something. Suddenly, all of Kung Fu revolves around Shaolin monks. The concept that not everyone who did Kung Fu in the past was a monk and that martial monks weren’t all Kwai Chang Caine clones doesn't seem to cross their minds. I think this fetish probably started with the Kung Fu TV series but has deeper roots in Orientalism. Gene pointed out in another thread that modern Western society isn't that exposed to monasticism whereas other areas of the world such as Thailand are. I think this is a good point and accounts for some of the mystique surrounding the Shaolin monk concept. What thoughts do you have on this topic folks?
    Last edited by The Xia; 03-06-2007 at 10:03 PM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Ithaca, NY
    Posts
    192
    I think for some people, that has simply become a part of the training. I would be willing to bet that back in the old days, the monks, the ones who did train to fight, but also heavily practiced the philosophical and peaceful side, also "talked down" to those who only trained to fight. There's probably always been a "You're missing the point!" argument between martial artists.

    I do think that the lack of monasticism, as you/Gene put it, is a big factor. Maybe in simpler terms, there are those of us drawn to the esoteric and extremes. In practicing martial arts, we look for the parts that are most difficult or foreign to us, and cling to that. Maybe because the philosophy is often the hardest part to "get," we put it on a pedastal, strive harder to achieve that, and claim that, since it is **** near impossible to get to, that must be the hardest part, and thus the most important.

    Ultimately, for me, it boils down to the fighting. I've learned a lot about life and philosophy from my teacher, but it all stems from the training to fight. The lessons for life are simply learned in conjunction with the lessons of training. If you don't do the philosophy, you can still be a martial artist, but if you don't do the fighting, you're just a philosopher.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Evanston
    Posts
    218
    I agree with Ninthdrunk.

    When I started taking martial arts, my intent was to be able to defend myself first and foremost. Now I haven't gotten into any fights for several years now, but the training has boosted my confidence to the point where I can focus on other aspects of life (philosophical or otherwise) without the constant underlying fear of getting my ass kicked by somebody with too much testosterone in their system. I think that's where the conception of martial arts being of a spiritual/philosophical path as well as physical evolved into the current frame of mind.

    Look at bowing. Originally, bowing was meant to show a sign of respect and thus a tool to avoid confrontation and hurt feelings. Now bowing can mean a number of things, either respect for the teacher, the form you're about to do or even as a habit to get the practioner's frame of mind into focusing while doing the form.

    The west's infatuation with eastern monks has been around since the Shaolin temples were first introduced to western society. Look at it from the viewpoint of someone who isn't familiar with anything from Asian society, and has no clue who Buddha is. You have a bunch of bald guys that wear orange pajamas and live in an exotic temple, and all day they either sit in weird positions with their eyes closed, do some humming and fly around like acrobats doing all kinds of crazy moves. How can Western society NOT associate the philosophy with the martial?

    Nowadays, we have access to the history of martial arts in China and we know (those of us that bother to do the research), that not all incarnations of kung fu had anything to do with anything outside of fighting, but the way I see it, that doesn't nor shouldn't mean that the student of any style of kung fu should drop the philosophical teachings (if any) that they learn from their sifu. If it floats your boat then go with it.
    We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act but a habit.
    - Aristotle

    The only way of finding the limits of the possible is by going beyond them into the impossible.
    - Arthur C. Clarke

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Fremont, CA, U.S.A.
    Posts
    47,947

    Shaolin monks are an icon in the martial arts

    When you think about it, there really aren't that many martial icons - Shaolin monks, samurai, ninja, that's really about it. The rest are all Rex kwon do. Any icon is placed on a pedestal by the uneducated. We pedestrians worship the icon whether it be a rock star, political leader, or shaolin monk.

    But for the sake of discussion, I think fighting without philosophy is like a loaded gun in the hands of a ignorant child. So many people here just focus on fighting and that's really a shame. Of course, fighting lies at the essence of martial arts, but the definition of the fight is usually so limited (street fights, MMA) that it's really move of an attempt to create exclusivity than to spread martial arts to needy communities. What's more, with fighting, it's more important to know 'why' then 'how'. A fighter without an underlying moral philosophy is the tool of the devil.
    Gene Ching
    Publisher www.KungFuMagazine.com
    Author of Shaolin Trips
    Support our forum by getting your gear at MartialArtSmart

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    998

    come to think about it!

    Why is it that the guy in Asian face is always better appreciated then the real Asian! The Kung fu character dies a hard death, if ever it will die.
    It is not mystique, it is brainwashing and it seems to be working on the "kungfu capitalism", both here and the homeland!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Evanston
    Posts
    218
    Also, have you noticed that the butch posturing "I'm gonna kick your a$$!", chest thumpin' martial artists out there that are all about the K1, MMA, and other excuses to get into bloody brawls are well versed in the external forms of martial arts, but not the internal?

    When I first started taking classes at Shaolin Do, I was only interested in the external (kung fu) and not the internal (tai chi), and so my ego promptly swelled up and there was nothing I wanted more than an oppurtunity to put my martial skills to the test (though I never acted on that impulse). Years later in my training I started to study tai chi as well as kung fu and found a harmonious balance between the two. I just didn't want to kick a$$ and take names anymore, I knew I could fight, but why?

    So for me, I discovered the philosophy along with the martial on my own, in the balance of hard and soft and I feel I've become a better and more well rounded student because of it.
    We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act but a habit.
    - Aristotle

    The only way of finding the limits of the possible is by going beyond them into the impossible.
    - Arthur C. Clarke

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by GeneChing View Post
    When you think about it, there really aren't that many martial icons - Shaolin monks, samurai, ninja, that's really about it. The rest are all Rex kwon do. Any icon is placed on a pedestal by the uneducated. We pedestrians worship the icon whether it be a rock star, political leader, or shaolin monk.

    But for the sake of discussion, I think fighting without philosophy is like a loaded gun in the hands of a ignorant child. So many people here just focus on fighting and that's really a shame. Of course, fighting lies at the essence of martial arts, but the definition of the fight is usually so limited (street fights, MMA) that it's really move of an attempt to create exclusivity than to spread martial arts to needy communities. What's more, with fighting, it's more important to know 'why' then 'how'. A fighter without an underlying moral philosophy is the tool of the devil.
    I think I know what you mean. I do see value in Wu De/Mo Duk but the monk fetish I'm talking about is a whole different viewpoint on martial arts and life. I think it's more of a viewpoint that can be summed up as fantasy esotericism for the sake of feeling cool or selling that feeling to others. I don't think there's really anything deep about that (other then the deep hole of silliness and perhaps even insanity that some dig themselves into if they take it far enough). Fighting is key to martial arts. They wouldn't be martial without that. You'd also be lying to yourself if you say that martial arts were not created or used for fighting. However, martial arts do yield other benefits besides fighting ability. I don't deny that. I guess what you mean by defining fighting by fights on the streets or MMA being limited and exclusive is that fighting can also mean combating health problems, boredom, whatever. When I mentioned other benefits besides fighting ability that was what I'm talking about. It’s the same thing but with different words.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    America
    Posts
    1,860

    Odd

    I find it odd Xia that on the other thread you argue with me about this very point and Gene writes very close to what I feel and you agree. I see it like this. A 17 year old boy gets a 1967 GTO with a 454 and goes out and kills himself and others because he was not taught respect and to be humble with that power. We in the MA are the same way. We are taught this Tao and forget the need for a philosophy to guide that same power. Otherwise we end up being a bully. The thing with the Monks is this they are the Ideal unrealistically speaking, I know what we know and see is not how it was but by visualizing and imagening it that way one can strive for that imaginary Ideal. I find it humbling and am hapy to think that if some one came up and hit me that I dont have to break their neck or even a finger to know I would "win" since I did anyway by avoiding the conflict. The easiest fight to win is the one you avoid. KC
    A Fool is Born every Day !

  9. #9
    Gene didn't make or post sweeping statements. That was mainly my point of contention with some of the things you posted. Basically, if you say that you feel martial artists should only use their skills to defend themselves or others and not attack, that's fine. However, if you say that martial arts were created and used specifically for self defense and a pacifist philosophy was always the order of the day, then that's being historically inaccurate.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    America
    Posts
    1,860
    Hard for you to know since you werent there. True if you are in the Army etc. you are supposed to kill but to me that is not MA. That is war. I feel it is what history do you speak of the Shaolins or just power hungry warlords whose philosophy is like that of Conan. Who also is fictional. If you dig deeper I am saying the higher level MA are those based in a philosophical or Spiritual realm. And it aint all about fighting KC
    A Fool is Born every Day !

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by kwaichang View Post
    Hard for you to know since you werent there.
    That's why we have evidence. Not to mention there are still people alive who have experienced quite a lot in the martial arts world. For example, Sifu Wing Lam is open about what Leung Wah Chew did for a living. This kind of stuff isn't really that big of a secret if you've done enough research.
    Quote Originally Posted by kwaichang View Post
    True if you are in the Army etc. you are supposed to kill but to me that is not MA. That is war.
    Martial arts by literal definition are arts pertaining to war. I like to expand it by defining martial arts as arts of fighting. So how would fighting styles practiced by soldiers not be martial arts?
    Quote Originally Posted by kwaichang View Post
    I feel it is what history do you speak of the Shaolins or just power hungry warlords whose philosophy is like that of Conan. Who also is fictional.
    Conan the Barbarian is a fictional character but power hungry warlords are not. Also, Shaolin history has a lot more variety then people think. Heck, the aformentioned Leung Wah Chew practiced Hung Gar, a style with Southern Shaolin lineage (some even believe his Hung Gar, Ha Say Fu, to be original Jee Sim Kung Fu). So isn't he part of the broader Shaolin history?
    Quote Originally Posted by kwaichang View Post
    If you dig deeper I am saying the higher level MA are those based in a philosophical or Spiritual realm. And it aint all about fighting KC
    I would say that CMA is based in things like Taoism and Buddhism but I would say they apply Buddhist and Taoist principles to create fighting arts. I think it is self evident within martial arts that they were created for fighting. However, it is also evident that certain religious practices often accompanied martial arts for some people. For example, many Taoists sought immortality through certain practices but unless you are seeking immortality I don’t think this kind of thing really applies to you does it?
    However, it is more likely that you and others wish to derive health benefits from Taoist martial arts.
    Last edited by The Xia; 03-11-2007 at 06:56 PM.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    America
    Posts
    1,860
    I would say that CMA is based in things like Taoism and Buddhism but I would say they apply Buddhist and Taoist principles to create fighting arts. I think it is self evident within martial arts that they were created for fighting. However, it is also evident that certain religious practices often accompanied martial arts for some people. For example, many Taoists sought immortality through certain practices but unless you are seeking immortality I don’t think this kind of thing really applies to you does it?
    However, it is more likely that you and others wish to derive health benefits from Taoist martial arts.[/QUOTE]
    The Martial arts are based upon these concepts whether you seek Immortality or not. There are a few that want to kill anyway but since there is more evidence that philosophy applies in greater instances than not then I choose to believe that it isnt all about being a hoodlum or Bully. KC
    A Fool is Born every Day !

  13. #13

    What are you trying to say kwaichang?

    Martial arts in of themselves aren't about philosophy anymore then a gun is. Martial arts are a weapon and a tool. They were developed to give the practitioner fighting abilities but they yield other benefits such as health, self-discipline, fun etc. As with a gun, what a person decides to do with martial arts depends on the individual. This is where philosophy enters the equation.
    Last edited by The Xia; 03-11-2007 at 08:25 PM.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    America
    Posts
    1,860
    With out Philosophy everyone that has a gun Kills and every MA ist fights for no reason. KC
    A Fool is Born every Day !

  15. #15

    smile

    Quote Originally Posted by kwaichang View Post
    With out Philosophy everyone that has a gun Kills and every MA ist fights for no reason. KC
    Thank you. I guess he missed Gene's post . Hi-Gene!! LMAO THe XIA thinks he knows everything and has no humilty. Something that is taught in kung fu classes,( something I believe he has never seen inside of), along with philosophy, and discipline; training that produces orderliness ,obedience, and self control.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •