Thats right, I wasn't taking about "something like censure".
Basically my view is that Shaolin was restored by government order,
and the monks there were assemble by government design. That's straightforward.
r.
Registered User
Thats right, I wasn't taking about "something like censure".
Basically my view is that Shaolin was restored by government order,
and the monks there were assemble by government design. That's straightforward.
r.
Last edited by r.(shaolin); 12-16-2008 at 10:10 AM.
meteor
That doesn't make a lot of sense.
Registered User
Which part dosn't make sense.Originally Posted by richard sloan
that I wasn't taking about "something like censure".
or that the system practiced at Shaolin today was put together during the 1980's?
r.
the ass assassin
henan temple is real shaolin,bei shaolin also real shaolin ,shaolin temple had hundreds of styles,no one has the only real style
to me when you fight and spar and it looks like what you train and not sport sanshou you have real shaolin
if someone talk about shaolin this shaolin that then when they fight u go into a western boxing stance or muay thai or sanshou someone should not talk
Honorary African American
grandmaster instructor of Wombat Combat The Lost Art of Anal Destruction™®LLC .
Senior Business Director at TEAM ASSHAMMER consulting services ™®LLC
meteor
I'd be curious to see the biographies of the monks which you have read which lead you to believe that Shaolin's transmissions were broken, lay fallow, and then were reformulated by some kind of oddly- extremely detailed and accurate PRC orchestration of what the PRC thought Ch'an was, and why they would even bother to do that to such detail, when they could get away with a much easier fabrication such as a lot of what we see now in quite recent times...
If you have some time I'd love to read this literature as it is quite a different story from the one that both myself, and several others have pieced together.
Itinerant practitioner
I don't think there's a need for biographies to illustrate the point of the collapse and rebirth of shaolin at the hands of the prc.
In 1928, it is know that the temple was abandoned and that was that. Whatever monks there were dispersed back to wherever they went or disappeared entirely.
Later on, interest was revived because of a movie.
After that, there was recognition of value and reformation followed. Committees were formed and the curriculum was gathered together and changed a few times until it took the form it has now.
This is simply fact. Hai Deng was one of the first, if not the first to return at the behest of the PRC, this is all documented and known.
are you saying to put forth the idea that shaolin went on, unbroken through the cultural revolution and through the 20th century? Because that would be highly inaccurate if that is the case.
as for Ch'an, that has been upheld without Shaolin for a great deal of time. It has spread to the world. In a sense, Shaolin grew beyond it's actual physical walls long ago.
the current iteration is just that, the current iteration and it has no more or less value than any iteration of it, spread away from the temple or otherwise.
Many believe the current shaolin is still lacking in it's fullness because of the PRC connection and the fact that the very abbot of the temple is installed by the PRC and functions under the auspices of the PRC and is in fact a card carrying member with dubious claims to Shaolin himself. Worth thinking about.
I wouldn't be so quick to go after perceived holes in someones armor when your own may very well be riddled with leaks.
Kung Fu is good for you.
Registered User
man, mr. jamieson....
what you are trying to suggest to say the least seems a bit disrespectful of the sacrifice many of those masters made to defend and prolong the life of the shaolin tradition through those rough times. you have no idea. we owe so much to them. i dont know how you can come up with such an illogical story without backup for anything and keep saying its fact. i'm not sure if you're serious, or what exactly.
Registered User
So much hearsay, I am glad we are not putting the Shaolin Si on trial, the arguments would never stand up. So many people claim that what they have heard is fact. Are the leaders of the Shaolin Temple members of the PRC, of course. What I am sure of is that to protect the greater good and traditions of Shaolin Temple they probably had to join. Given the choice I am sure they would not have though or there would be no Shaolin Temple at all. If the Republicans came to your Kung Fu school and said you must join our party or we will close you down and you must put a life size portrait of Commrade Bush in the middle of your school. For the greater good of your students and the school would you allow it to close, grudgingly keep it open and play their game while most of your curriculum remains in tact, or flat out become a card carrying party member and espouse their party line and the curriculum they have chosen for you. I am sure that the monks took the middle road because there was no other choice. Sometimes it is easier to get what you want and change things from the inside rather than fight a losing battle which could end in your death or imprisonment.
Itinerant practitioner
?man, mr. jamieson....
what you are trying to suggest to say the least seems a bit disrespectful of the sacrifice many of those masters made to defend and prolong the life of the shaolin tradition through those rough times. you have no idea. we owe so much to them. i dont know how you can come up with such an illogical story without backup for anything and keep saying its fact. i'm not sure if you're serious, or what exactly.
what do you mean? are you saying that shaolin functioned unbroken all throughout the 20th century? No it didn't.
are you saying that ch'an buddhism thrived in China throughout the cultural revolution? No it didn't.
are you saying that the temple wasn't pretty much empty and void of full practice until after jet li's movie?
what are you saying?
You don't really expect anyone to believe that Shaolin was unbroken and remained unfettered by the will of the PRC do you?
You don't really expect anyone to believe that the current abbot actually went through the rigours of shaolin training do you?
I mean, come on. A spade is a spade. People accept shaolin temple for what it is, but to throw out what has been spread about by the dispersed is an even bigger insult to the practice as a whole.
zen is stronger in japanese practice than in Chinese version of origin that is Ch'an.
How is Shaolin upholding that? There is more focus on wushu than zen, more focus on money making, branding and sales.
please don't send me platitudes and admonishments for pointing out a problem and not accepting that shaolin is only at the temple proper. It's not.
I think teh followers of songshan shaolin need to recognize that they are not the only source of shaolin. They are "a" source, but not "the" source. There is in fact no "the" source anymore and there hasn't been for a very long time.
you cannot take back what was never yours to begin with in other words.
Kung Fu is good for you.
Registered User
it doesnt require many to remain unbroken. our masters are living proof of that, and their masters were too.
you can say "no it didnt" "no its not" all day. but you have no real experience or hard evidence to back anything you've said about it.
doesnt need to "thrive" to be known. there were a handful of masters who revived shaolin tradition after the time of chaos. i'm talking about ven. suxi, suyun, dechan, etc.. they never let it die. in fact, they went through tortures to preserve it and pass it to the next generation. thats why what you say is so disrespectful. you're calling them all fakes and liars after what they went through.are you saying that ch'an buddhism thrived in China throughout the cultural revolution? No it didn't.
what does "pretty much" mean?are you saying that the temple wasn't pretty much empty and void of full practice until after jet li's movie?
i'm saying you have no experience of what you're speaking on, and you have no proof to back any of your illogical claims.what are you saying?
i'm saying you're disrespectful toward the masters who went through such things as beatings and public humiliations to protect the shaolin tradition.
i'm saying the gov. cant recreate traditional wushu and somehow the experience of chan.
i havent suggested either.You don't really expect anyone to believe that Shaolin was unbroken and remained unfettered by the will of the PRC do you?
You don't really expect anyone to believe that the current abbot actually went through the rigours of shaolin training do you?
that is not shaolin. the real tradition of monasticism, chan and wushuchan exist behind the actors and politics. i'm sorry your experience is so limited.How is Shaolin upholding that? There is more focus on wushu than zen, more focus on money making, branding and sales.
not sure if you're speaking to me. i never suggested otherwise, neither have any of the traditional monks.please don't send me platitudes and admonishments for pointing out a problem and not accepting that shaolin is only at the temple proper. It's not.
I think teh followers of songshan shaolin need to recognize that they are not the only source of shaolin. They are "a" source, but not "the" source. There is in fact no "the" source anymore and there hasn't been for a very long time.
Registered User
The communist regime is still desperately trying to undo self-inflicted damage and reconstruct "tradition". In order to further their political objectives, they feel it is critical to appear as the legitimate and sole representative of Chinese traditional culture in the eyes of the rest of the world. Its about creating cultural legitimacy in the eyes of the international community
"Orchestration" is not only accurate but a very good word for what happened. As far as training at Shaolin goes, at first is was wushu champions like Lu Xiaolin who were assigned by the Chinese government to go to the Shaolin temple and help re-establish kung-fu training there.it's not quite accurate to make it sound like all the people playing in the Shaolin orchestra are doing that from the government's music or that Xingzheng and Suxi and the others like Wanheng and Dechan sat down and plotted how to secure the PRC a colonial williamsburgh several decades down the line... according to most internal histories from people who would know, these monks had to put up with quite a bit they didn't find agreeable- privately- and often made that known at great risk to themselves - publicly- despite their various "government" positions,
In 1979, in an effort to save the martial heritage of pre-communist China, the Physical Culture and Sports Commission issued the document titled "Circular of Unearthing and Establishing Wushu Heritage". Some Shaolin was documented at the National Martial Arts Exhibition of Exchange and Emulation held in Nanning in the Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region that year. In the summer of 1980 in an attempt to specifically collect and systematize Shaolin kung fu, government officials held a conference and exhibition in Dengfeng County.
it was called "Shaolin Martial Exhibition for Exchange and Emulation". This event documented 129 masters from twelve different communes in the the Dengfeng region as well as a few specially invited masters of Shaolin from other regions.
In June of 1984, the Report on the Meeting for the Discovery of the National Wushu Heritage was issued in Chengde. This first report included written records and
videotapes of demonstrations. The second report was issued in Beijing in March of 1986. It should be point out as well that during the mid 1980s Chinese masters living abroad were solicited to "come home" and have their systems documented.
By the way I did not say, "biographies" or "literature", those are your words. I said "bios" In vernacular bio means "a biographical sketch or outline". There have been a number of articles and interviews as early as the 1980.
Again, I did not say, "something like censure, or a fine" those are your words."well for one, we are not talking about something like censure, or a fine, when discussing persecution of a monk like Shi Suxi,
Many people even those high up in the Communist party were at various times persecuted. By persecuted I mean they were treated unjustly. This unjust treatment included being beaten,imprisoned, hard labour and even murdered. In fact Mao had the Red Guards first target teachers, many of whom were "good" communists, then he targeted communist administrators.
If you want a to put your "pieced together" account in context, I do suggest you read at least:If you have some time I'd love to read this literature as it is quite a different story from the one that both myself, and several others have pieced together.
Wild Swans - Three Daughters of China" by Jung Chang
'Red China Blues', by Jan Wong.
'Chen Village under Mao and Deng', by Chan
r.
Last edited by r.(shaolin); 12-22-2008 at 11:33 AM.
Registered User
I've actually been wanting to read those myself. Another interesting book about that time is "Mao: The Unknown Story" by Jung Chang and Jon Halliday. It's amazing how little love there was even within Mao's own ranks let alone within the populace. It would seem he was so paranoid that he was going to lose control because of some rogue teachers or "traditionalists" that he actually banned all teaching that wasn't 100% state sponsored! Remnants of that culture of fear and paranoia still survive today. It's sad to say, but the affects on Shaolin traditions and Shaolin gung fu are also still apparent.
One question I have for some of the monks: In the current versions of Shaolin Mantis gung fu, why do you do that little bouncy back and forth movement as if you're trying to mimic the insect or something.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wb2Bs...eature=related
I have only seen it performed that way by the post 1980's era monks and I can only assume that it was because of Jet Li's movies in the early eighties that this style has been perpetuated. I remember reading an interview with the guy who plays The Master Monk in "The Shaolin Temple" (I can't remember his name) in which he says that his Mantis gung fu was his own completely made up version. It's not authentic at all and yet the monks are now, basically, mimicking his style. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGf_F...eature=related (you'll see him start doing it around 1:21). At this point, they would be better off practicing any one of the myriad Mantis styles that are practiced outside of the temple. I still can't believe they're mimicking the movies! Are they trying to pass off their Mantis as authentic? Don't get me wrong, I don't want to bash the monks. It's only because I care about preserving Chinese martial culture in it's original form that I would make such comments. The fact is that true Chinese martial culture was kept more alive outside of mainland China during all of the decades in which Mao and his Red Guard were busy destroying all of it's remnants. And yes, maybe there were some battered and sparse pieces left over by the time the government realized they could make money from it, but these remnants were incomplete. Most of the true TCM systems remained complete and untampered with outside of this mess.
Last edited by Siu Lum Fighter; 01-06-2009 at 04:40 PM.
The three components of combat are 1) Speed, 2) Guts and 3) Techniques. All three components must go hand in hand. One component cannot survive without the others." (WJM - June 14, 1974)
Itinerant practitioner
you are taking offense where none was given. You are also attempting to put the current teachers above all others when even they would not cotton to that. I never once said that any shaolin masters were not for real and I also stated quite clearly that shaolin in the here and now is what it is by virtue of what it is. I am saying that there are those involved with shaolin who are not shaolin masters and that is true in and out of the temple.
However, if you think that there has been no PRC hand in the comings and goings of the shaolin in the here and now, then I am afraid your eyes are simply shut and you actively do not wish to know the truth.
don't create my "disrespect" by projecting your anger and your words onto me. I challenge you to quote me where I have stated what you say I have.
Please do not do that as it merely serves to muddy things and to detract from clarity.
"pretty much" means "virtually" as in no Ch'an transmitters, no Kungfu transmitters, no shaolin transmitters. None of these were in the temple in 1980.
So, the arts thrived outside the temple and yes, they must thrive to be known! If something is dead, it is buried and unknown.
Shaolin thrived away from the temple and what is there now is a reconstruction that is still taking place.
Also, you have no idea whatsoever what my experience is, but you reveal that yours is quite recent and not open to understanding the true diaspora of shaolin that has occurred not only once or twice, but many times over hundreds of years.
who do you think keeps those alive and what gives you the right to say they are NOT shaolin?
nothing.
Kung Fu is good for you.
meteor
thank you r.shoalin, however I still fail to see how any of that explains away close, family style ch'an transmission of master to disciple, in an unbroken link from pre 1928 Shi You San attacks to the descendents of these monastic lineage holders today, which were transmitted as they always were with or without PRC involvement. I am not speaking to the colonial williamsburgh aspects of the temple today.
very much like what we see in modern times, there are several tangential sometimes divergent, sometimes convergent histories as it pertains to Shaolin Temple. I am not an advocate of black and white discussions, nor having straw men concocted for me for a poster to triumphantly tear up. So I will keep it brief. First of all, I have absolutely not a care in the world to prove or disprove various claims of authenticity or legitimacy, when it comes to those who claim Shaolin heritage, unless it is something glaringly false like Steve Demasco and USSD, or the silliness of our Oregon friends. But the point is, why on earth do you think there was anything that needed 'reconstructing.' Because the PRC organized a conference and titled it?
That's quite flimsy!
You really think EVERYTHING was wiped out? Where is the proof? Where is the list of men who were wiped out, who to a man also had their descendents and disciples wiped out? Where is the break? The fact is there is no break in the lineage charts at all. You have listed a few conferences and some visits yet you don't allow for the possibility of closed door, hidden from public, transmission despite or besides all that? You really spent time in China training with the monastics and could still draw such conclusions? That's preposterous on the face of it if I do say so myself. I think it is a little hilarious that you would think that a wushu champion brought back Shaolin training. That might be news to a few lineages lol, who can trace their transmission back to monks in the murals! lol.
I'm sorry, but in regards to this discussion, permit me an analogy, I think you would be looking at something like, Master De Yang's DVD series and not realizing a marked form when you see one. No doubt there are quite a few people who present themselves as the end all end all of authorities on Shaolin's history. However, I will rely on what I have "pieced" together, lol, because it makes quite a bit of sense and is externally provable beyond what the people telling it say.
You can't just make up how to bless an altar and hope people who know won't notice. You might not show everyone how to do it, you might even pretend not to know.
My own shifu had several masters who were folk transmitters, who certainly had no inclination whatsoever to fit into some PRC scheme to reclaim heritage, in fact, the PRC never even knew one of these guys knew gong fu- to this day I would imagine. They already had heritage, and were already transmitting it, despite any government policy or action.
Your ideas and this presentation of them beg quite a bit of assumption for them to make sense.
Thanks for the links to the materials, but that wasn't exactly what I thought you were in possession of and I apologize for mistaking your language usage to mean you had something else in your hands than what is available publicly.
Thanks anyway.
Last edited by richard sloan; 12-22-2008 at 04:31 PM.
meteor
you know something David, if I may be so bold, you tend to conflate quite a bit of stuff into some of your replies which don't exist in the posts you are replying to.
not to speak for LFJ, but he never said, nor would he ever say, anything like "there has been no PRC hand in the comings and goings etc etc...." since his own master has experienced the hands of the PRC directly.
it would be beneficial for all involved in these discussions, which so often become pointless, if we would take time to read each other better.
your posts are indeed a bit insulting to the legacy of people who fought to maintain the links which you state- somehow- were snapped. You say there were no Ch'an transmissions throughout the recent times at Shaolin, and that is wrong, and disrespectful to the people who are living proof that there was, and who say there was. First of all, the monastics would be the first to explain the compound is only one sense of Shaolin and I'm not sure why this is so hard of a concept for people to grasp. So long as there is one monk, there is a viable Ch'an lineage. That is all it takes, and there were in fact several. Their geographic location and position is quite irrelevant, as we can all agree that plenty of lineages both lay and monastic exist outside the temple.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote