The Only Truly Authentic Shaolin System

[r.(shaolin)]

In my opinion, the Shaolin taught by Wu Gulun, and his son Wu Sanlin are some of the most authentic and oldest lineages.
In fact, didn't they wind up having to re-teach Shaolin temple their own stuff?
See: http://www.shaolinwugulun.org

Being of that lineage, no one can ever say that (the fourth successor of the Wu Gulun branch of ChanWuYi) Shi De Gian's Shaolin is not "real" or "authentic".
See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CR-7E5xXs4c

Their lineages trace their material back very far.

Their stuff is as good as the material seen in, and comes from the same roots as, the Bei Shaolin 10 sets. It all comes from the same source, everywhere but the temple itself.

Hi Sal,
In my conversation with these folks I was told that very few sets survived in their lineage. In some cases they only have the names of some sets. My rhetorical question is, can one claim to represent Shaolin martial arts if one represents only a small portion of the repertoire of a very large system?
r.
ps
But I do agree that what they do is traditional and 'old school'. In fact it is the only place I've seen
a correct height Qi Mei Gun 齊(齐)眉棍 demonstrated:
http://www.shaolinwugulun.org/media8.asp

[r.(shaolin)]

[I]
The Sung dynasty sets come from an era where forms were in thier infancy, so they are cruder and not as smooth, but record a method that is just as powerful, and maybe even more direct and to the point compared to the Bei Shaolin from the Yuan dynasty. The Yuan dynasty stuff seems a little more physically demanding and energetic in execution to me.

I think the Sung dynasty material is individual isolated techniques strung together, where as later, when forms technology had advanced a bit more from thier beginning, the forms were combos strung together. Anyone care to comment on that theory?

Hi Royal Dragon,

I would suggest that by the early Song period, sets were not so much "individual isolated technique strung together" but rather were composed of techniques and counter technique groupings.
It is quite clear that "sets" and "fighting (2 person) sets" have been instrumental in TCM for many hundreds of years - even before the Song Dynasty. There are images of two person weapon training in Chinese stone painting going back at least to the Eastern Han Dynasty.

As documented in ancient literature during the Tang Dynasty and the Northern Song Dynasty, some sets, (including two + person sets) became very elaborate and 'flowery', many mainly concerned with esthetics. During this time, some martial arts systems de-evolved to the point that they became popular forms of martial art storytelling entertainment shows. This created an entire category of martial arts known as "Hua Fa Wuyi" (花法武藝 - fancy patterns for developing military skill). During the Northern Song period, it was noted by historians this type of training had a negative influence on martial training in the military.

'Sets' were used in training during pre-Song times, not just in testing or documentation. This is clearly suggested (by the use of the characters "lian 練" meaning "to drill" and 'tao 套', meaning, 'a set of something') in old terms for 'set':
lian quan tao (練拳套) – practicing sequence of fist;
lian quan jiao (練拳腳) – practicing fists and feet;
lian bing qi (練兵器) – practicing weapons;
dui da (對打) and dui lian (對 練) – fighting sets

“Taolu- 套路” (a shortened term for “Tao Lu Yun Dong - 套路運動)” is a relatively newer, de-militarized term made popular by modern wushu and suggests “exercise sets” - as in athletics or sport.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

What part of the Northern Sung? If I understand this right, forms were developed at Shaolin around the beginning (961).

I have never seen anything that shows forms were common that far back, only loose techniques.

[Lokhopkuen]

Master Wing's Book on Shaolim #5
http://www.jingmo.com/book_thumbnails.html

Hey, everybody.

I know that this is somewhat off topic but I was wondering if any of you could recommend a good BSL book?

The only one I have seen is Combat Shaolin. Any reviews?

Thanks,

WF

[Lokhopkuen]

I thought he died due to an illness?

There are a few stories related to the cause of his death.
What is most important to me is that we remember him with respect.

[David Jamieson]

There are a few stories related to the cause of his death.
What is most important to me is that we remember him with respect.

I think correct histories unembellished are important if there is to be credibility attached to combining cultural tradition to artistic practice.

we are talking about systems of not only artistic merit but of actual martial skills.

One lie will muddy the clearest of water and should not be tolerated. there is no excuse for "stories". They only take away from everything else because they begin the ball of inaccuracies rolling.

If you doin't know where you came from, you don't know where you are and worse, you don't know where you're going.

Respect is great and all, but respecting a lie is a fools game.

just an observation.

[r.(shaolin)]

What part of the Northern Sung? If I understand this right, forms were developed at Shaolin around the beginning (961).

I have never seen anything that shows forms were common that far back, only loose techniques.

I'm not sure what you mean by "What part of the Northern Sung?".
Never-the-less choreographed weapon routines existed by the 700's (Tang Dynasty 618 AD - 907 AD). By time of the Tang Dynasty there were even martial arts routines which included acrobatic maneuvers for performances specifically designed for public enjoyment.

It should be noted, that some choreographed routines developed during this time by highly skilled practitioners, were seen and used as an improvement in military training.

As far "forms being developed at Shaolin around the beginning (961)"? Well, specific dates are speculation and conjecture, however, tradition tells us that although some 'sets' were developed at Shaolin, it also tells us that most sets there were adopted then adapted over many generations.

cheers,
r.

[mkriii]

There is an old motivating Chinese saying I love:

"The Great Times create the hero, but the Great Hero creates The Time"

Just some thoughts.

Sounds like a Zen riddle to me.

[Sal Canzonieri]

Hi Sal,
In my conversation with these folks I was told that very few sets survived in their lineage. In some cases they only have the names of some sets. My rhetorical question is, can one claim to represent Shaolin martial arts if one represents only a small portion of the repertoire of a very large system?
r.
ps
But I do agree that what they do is traditional and 'old school'. In fact it is the only place I've seen
a correct height Qi Mei Gun 齊(齐)眉棍 demonstrated:
http://www.shaolinwugulun.org/media8.asp

How many does does one really need after all? It takes a lifetime to master even a few sets in many styles.
As long as they are able to teach the fundamental body mechanics to correct way, then one can apply that to any set.
The few sets that they do have, such as Xin Yi Ba, are so important, that should be plenty of work right there.
Their lineage also has a Tai Tzu lineage as part of Wu Gu Lin's background.
The sets I have seen attributed to their lineage are great, I think there are around 10 sets anyways.
Better than learning 300 plus sets that are just variations of each other.

[Sal Canzonieri]

What part of the Northern Sung? If I understand this right, forms were developed at Shaolin around the beginning (961).

I have never seen anything that shows forms were common that far back, only loose techniques.

All depends on what you are calling a "form". Some are like 8 move, and people would call these "drills".

Better to not get hung up with names.

Also, there is Shaolin set tradition and outside Shaolin set tradition.
I wouldn't mix them up.

As far as Shaolin tradition goes, they didn't have full blown sets til they did the exit exams, which tradition attributes to 961 AD event.

[buddhapalm]

Not so much a riddle as much as saying that great events shape smaller hero's, greater hero's shape events. Gotta love the old riddles, sayings....

Ciao


"The Great Times create the hero, but the Great Hero creates The Time"

[Lokhopkuen]

I think correct histories unembellished are important if there is to be credibility attached to combining cultural tradition to artistic practice.

we are talking about systems of not only artistic merit but of actual martial skills.

One lie will muddy the clearest of water and should not be tolerated. there is no excuse for "stories". They only take away from everything else because they begin the ball of inaccuracies rolling.

If you doin't know where you came from, you don't know where you are and worse, you don't know where you're going.

Respect is great and all, but respecting a lie is a fools game.

just an observation.

I am not sure what you are saying here exactly but just to set you strait:

Gu Ruzhang (Ku Yu Cheong) was born in 1894, in Funing county of Jiangsu province (present day Zhenghong village, Binhai county, Yancheng city, Jiangsu). His father
Gu Lizhi was a skilled fighter and expert in Tantui. Grandmaster Gu followed
his family tradition from an early age, devoting himself to wushu, and following
his father's wishes apprenticed himself to Yan Jiwen to study martial arts,
applying himself diligently to attain the true transmission from Mr. Yan.

He was especially proficient in Northern Shaolin boxing and weapons, as
well as the Greater and Lesser Golden Bell internal practices, and also
practiced the Iron Sand Palm technique. Later, Grandmaster Gu studied Yang
Jianhou 's Taijiquan and Taiyi Sword from Li Jinglin, Zhaquan from Yu Zhensheng,
and Xingyiquan and Sun style Taijiquan from Sun Lutang. In all of these
efforts he was very successful, and was known in martial circles as "Golden
Spear Iron Palm Gu Ruzhang."

Grandmaster Gu Ruzhang followed the profession of martial arts his entire
life. In October of 1928 he attended the first National Wushu Fighting
Examination sponsored by the Zhongyang Guoshu Academy. After more than
400 people had been eliminated, he was among the top 15 competitors. In
winter of that year he accepted the offer of the senior officer Li Jichen
of the Guangdong Armed Forces and became an instructor at the Guangdong/Guangxi Guoshuguan, becoming one of what became known as the "Five Tigers who went to Jiangnan [the area south of the Yangzi River]," and was responsible for propagating Northern Shaolin in the south. In 1929 he established the Guangzhou Guoshu Society and continued to take students as the head of the society. From then on, the flower of Northern Shaolin martial arts, as represented by the ten hand sets and various weapon sets, blossomed in the mainland, Hong Kong, Macao, Taiwan, and around the world. This was a remarkable contribution to the propagation of Chinese martial arts.

In 1932, Grandmaster Gu became an instructor in the Hunan Guoshu Academy in Changsha, Hunan province. In 1934, he became the chief instructor in the Guangdong Military Yantang school at the request of Chen Jitang, senior officer in the Guangdong Armed Forces.

Grandmaster Gu Ruzhang was open-minded and generous, breaking down the boundaries between styles by getting along well with other martial arts teachers in
the area. The story of his friendship and student exchange with the Cailifo
teacher Tan San was well known in Guangzhou. Long Zixiang, Yan Shangwu,
Lai Ganqing and others were sent to study with Tan San, and Jiang An and
Liu Jindong were sent by Tan San to study with Gu Ruzhang. Other accomplished
students of Gu Ruzhang were Zhou Shenzhi, Hu Xianglin, Tang Qixian, Hu Shaobao,
Pan Zhu, Li Yaoshan, Chen Nianbo, Zheng Baili, Xie Zhongsheng, Feng Dean,
Song Yuwen, Chen Xianmin, Chen Xiantong, and others, including Gu's son
and daughter Gu Naixi and Gu Naixian.

During that period, Grandmaster Gu was often invited by various organizations
to perform his feats of Qigong and Iron Sand Palm at public ceremonies.
Even today the pictures of his performance of "Supporting a thousand pounds"
and "driving a car over the stomach" at the Guangzhou Primary Park (present-
day People's Park) survive.

Grandmaster Gu Ruzhang was completely dedicated to the study and refinement
of wushu, publishing such works as "Dragon Shape Sword," "Eight Steps Three
Palms," and others. Among his works was the manual "Taijiquan" published
in 1936, which contained two parts. The first part discussed the origins
of Taijiquan and the Taijiquan form, and the second part dealt with Taiji
Push hands. Gu Ruzhang performed the postures himself in the book's photographic
illustrations, and this work is now a classic of Gu style Taijiquan, which
has spread to many places throughout Hong Kong, Macao, and the rest of the
world nowadays.

In 1938 on the eve of the Japanese invasion of Guangzhou, Gu Ruzhang went
along with the military academy along the West River through Guangxi to
Guizhou. During his time in Guizhou he still devoted his strength to promoting
Northern Shaolin. In that area he had a great influence in martial circles,
and was known in the Southwestern martial scene as one of the "Three Gu
of the Southwest."

In 1952, Grandmaster Gu passed away from illness in
Guiyang, and his remains were returned to his hometown for burial.
The Northern flower has blossomed in the south, and we cherish the memory
of the man who sowed the seed. Grandmaster Gu devoted his strength for
a long time to the promotion of traditional culture and popularized Northern
Shaolin wushu. For this he should be remembered eternally.

As far as credibility the style of Master Gu's legacy lives on and is practiced world wide and we are all known for our martial skill as well as expertise in combat. As far as LIES I do not know of what you speak. There seems to be some confusion related to when and how he died. The above document is a press release by the Bak Siu Lum association in Guangzhou as related to the construction of a stone bust of the Great Master at the site of his grave. Again i politely suggest a tone of respect in association with our great Master's memory.

[David Jamieson]

you cannot demand respect for someone.

It is not only inappropriate, it takes away from that which you seek to gain respect for.

Confusion perpetuated is tantamount to lies in my opinion. Turns me off.

My comments had nothing to do with whether or not Ku Yu Cheong was a good martial artist or not.

[Lokhopkuen]

you cannot demand respect for someone.

It is not only inappropriate, it takes away from that which you seek to gain respect for.

Confusion perpetuated is tantamount to lies in my opinion. Turns me off.

My comments had nothing to do with whether or not Ku Yu Cheong was a good martial artist or not.

I am not demanding anything friend, I simply asked that the Great Master be remembered with respect. Although there is some confusion related to the oral history I have run across no blatant lies related to the exploits of Master Gu Yu Cheong. Why go there especially when you could offer nothing to clarify the misunderstanding.
I could retort with something nasty connected with the ancestors of your lineage or even mount a personal attack on your character and skill level but this would serve nothing good.

I had withdrawn from these forums for a bit due to the cowardly sass and petty nitpicking that crops up now and again here. As a fifth generation disciple of BSL I am active in the practice and promotion of our system of self cultivation and extend respect and fellowship to all practitioners of traditional martial arts. I am hoping to convince you to do the same and if not at least appeal to you not to contribute to the confusion.

With all due respect to trash the memory of a great Master is disrespectful and can cause real problems plain and simple. I am sure that this is not your intention so I hope this brings closure to any misunderstanding.

Best Wishes

[Siu Lum Fighter]

One lie will muddy the clearest of water and should not be tolerated. there is no excuse for "stories". They only take away from everything else because they begin the ball of inaccuracies rolling.

If you doin't know where you came from, you don't know where you are and worse, you don't know where you're going.

Respect is great and all, but respecting a lie is a fools game.

just an observation.

This is one of the reasons I started this thread to begin with. Although, like I said earlier, I do regret naming it what I did (even though, I do believe in the lineage of BSL and I do believe it to be a more complete and authentic system than what's, for the most part, being touted as "Shaolin kung fu" these days). The propaganda machine of the current Shaolin Temple and many Shaolin stylists would have you believe that Kuo Yu Chang traveled to the south and just.."made up" Bak Siu Lum out of all of the myriad styles he learned.

I couldn't help feeling a certain degree of outrage at this, since, this goes against, not only the oral tradition, but the written records and lineage of Bak Siu Lum. To perpetuate the false belief that Master Kuo would disrespect his own teachers and throw out the systems that they taught him so that he could promote a newly concocted style, is to dishonor Kuo Yu Chang and invalidate everything BSL masters and practitioners have believed and said throughout the centuries. I just can't sit by while some historians would claim that our BSL forefathers just, "didn't know what they were talking about," and that they were ignorant of the true history of their own style.