Page 11 of 18 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 165 of 267

Thread: Cirsus of Shaolin or not ?

  1. #151
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    149
    Quote Originally Posted by bawang View Post
    because I already talked about that document 4 5 times, if u tightey whitey shaolin fetish guys didn't listen to it before, why would you listen now?



    his book was called NEW METHODS.
    You have something against white people Bawang? You must have something missing in your life to continually put others down. You may be educated but you are still a troll. You are no better than anyone else. BTW, there are plenty of lousy Chinese kung fu practicioners.

  2. #152
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Pound Town
    Posts
    7,856
    Quote Originally Posted by kfman5F View Post
    You have something against white people Bawang? You must have something missing in your life to continually put others down. You may be educated but you are still a troll. You are no better than anyone else. BTW, there are plenty of lousy Chinese kung fu practicioners.
    its a method in chan Buddhism to awake you to reality. you wouldn't understand.
    Last edited by bawang; 08-22-2013 at 11:16 AM.

    Honorary African American
    grandmaster instructor of Wombat Combat The Lost Art of Anal Destruction™®LLC .
    Senior Business Director at TEAM ASSHAMMER consulting services ™®LLC

  3. #153
    Quote Originally Posted by bawang View Post
    the poem says shaolin boxing was good, it didn't say it was ancient.
    in the mid Ming dynasty, about 1500s, boxing got much popularity. many manuals were written at those times. so, that may delude people to think of mid Ming dynasty as the starting point of boxing.
    bear in mind, even many of those manuals track back the styles generation to generation to the Song dynasty (500 years before those times) or even before. even if they've been wrong, that means those styles have at least been a few generations, something like some hundreds of years, older than those times.
    Last edited by SHemmati; 08-22-2013 at 11:15 AM.

  4. #154
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Pound Town
    Posts
    7,856
    Quote Originally Posted by SHemmati View Post
    in the mid Ming dynasty, about 1500s, many manuals were written. before that time, it seems that writing such manuals has been rare. so, that may delude people to think of mid Ming dynasty as the beginning point of boxing.
    bear in mind, even many of those manuals track back the styles generation to generation to the Song dynasty (500 years before those times) or even before. even if they've been wrong, that means those styles have at least been a few generations, something like some hundreds of years, older than those times.
    in the yuan dynasty the scholars came in contact with a lot of criminals and poor. so fancy boxing as we know it today was probably formed around 1200.

    boxing became popular in china in 1550 and became popular in shaolin in 1600.
    Last edited by bawang; 08-22-2013 at 11:29 AM.

    Honorary African American
    grandmaster instructor of Wombat Combat The Lost Art of Anal Destruction™®LLC .
    Senior Business Director at TEAM ASSHAMMER consulting services ™®LLC

  5. #155
    Quote Originally Posted by bawang View Post
    in the yuan dynasty the scholars came in contact with a lot of criminals and poor. so fancy boxing as we know it today was probably formed around 1200.

    boxing became popular in china in 1550 and became popular in shaolin in 1600.
    You are probably right about that. All the stuff I have seen, that is suppose to be way older than that is ugly and focused on kicking the guys ass, not looking fancy.

  6. #156
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Fremont, CA, U.S.A.
    Posts
    48,028

    looking fancy

    Quote Originally Posted by SHemmati View Post
    in the mid Ming dynasty, about 1500s, boxing got much popularity. many manuals were written at those times. so, that may delude people to think of mid Ming dynasty as the starting point of boxing.
    Well, a major factor here is that print publishing became more readily available during this period. Prior to this, books were predominantly handwritten and literacy was very limited. But China had a renaissance akin to Europe, and suddenly, books - and more importantly gazettes - became accessible to more of the common folk. We don't really know when Kung Fu got formalized. Our opinion is based on evidence in the literature. But it may well be that it was the expansion in literature availability that grew to encompass Kung Fu and that it had been present all along. What we may be seeing is the advancement in records, not the birth of Kung Fu.
    Gene Ching
    Publisher www.KungFuMagazine.com
    Author of Shaolin Trips
    Support our forum by getting your gear at MartialArtSmart

  7. #157
    Quote Originally Posted by RenDaHai View Post
    This monk demonstrates even greater marvels
    for in the mountains depths the white monkey has instructed him
    The alluding to the White Monkey as a shifu supports my position that Gong Fu actually emigrated to China from Eastern Europe, not India.

    I'm taking back Kung Fu for the tightey whiteys.
    Last edited by Kellen Bassette; 08-22-2013 at 01:52 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by YouKnowWho View Post
    This is 100% TCMA principle. It may be used in non-TCMA also. Since I did learn it from TCMA, I have to say it's TCMA principle.
    Quote Originally Posted by YouKnowWho View Post
    We should not use "TCMA is more than combat" as excuse for not "evolving".

    You can have Kung Fu in cooking, it really has nothing to do with fighting!

  8. #158
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Fremont, CA, U.S.A.
    Posts
    48,028

    nuh uh

    Quote Originally Posted by Kellen Bassette View Post
    I'm taking back Kung Fu for the tightey whiteys.
    Brontosaurus Fu was the progenitor. Tighty whitey eyebrow was a Brontosaurus drop out who went Daoist and then created his own style. That was either in the Song dynasty or the Jurassic era...I can't quite remember which.
    Gene Ching
    Publisher www.KungFuMagazine.com
    Author of Shaolin Trips
    Support our forum by getting your gear at MartialArtSmart

  9. #159
    Quote Originally Posted by GeneChing View Post
    Brontosaurus Fu was the progenitor. Tighty whitey eyebrow was a Brontosaurus drop out who went Daoist and then created his own style. That was either in the Song dynasty or the Jurassic era...I can't quite remember which.
    Did I ever mention that I am the only know living Grandmaster of Caveasaurus Combat? It's humanities very first martial art.

    Of course, back then there were not many techniques. You only had

    1. The "Prehistoric Punch"
    2. The Cave Man Kick
    3. The Predatorial pounce
    4. Pterodactyl toss

    and the weapons

    1. Cave Man Club
    2. Pointy stick


    The above bit was first used by me in the mid 1990's on the "Martial arts TOC" BBS board.

  10. #160
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Midgard
    Posts
    10,852
    Quote Originally Posted by GeneChing View Post
    Actually, there are much older records of sword dancing, stuff that predates the 16th.
    there's a story from the Records of the Grand Historian. It's said that during the Chu-Han Contention in the late Qin Dynasty, Liu Bang and Xiang Yu met each other in Hongmen. At the banquet, Fan Zeng, an advisor to Xiang Yu, ordered Xiang Zhuang (Xiang Yu’s cousin) to do a sword dance as part of the entertainment and to stab Liu Bang to death during the dance....

    only about 1700ish years older lol
    For whoso comes amongst many shall one day find that no one man is by so far the mightiest of all.

  11. #161
    Quote Originally Posted by GeneChing View Post
    Brontosaurus Fu was the progenitor.
    Much like the Marrow Changing Classic, Brontosaurus was a forgery.
    Quote Originally Posted by YouKnowWho View Post
    This is 100% TCMA principle. It may be used in non-TCMA also. Since I did learn it from TCMA, I have to say it's TCMA principle.
    Quote Originally Posted by YouKnowWho View Post
    We should not use "TCMA is more than combat" as excuse for not "evolving".

    You can have Kung Fu in cooking, it really has nothing to do with fighting!

  12. #162
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    149
    Quote Originally Posted by bawang View Post
    its a method in chan Buddhism to awake you to reality. you wouldn't understand.
    Chan Buddhism has nothing to do with your racist whitey remarks. But you wouldn't understand.

  13. #163
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Fremont, CA, U.S.A.
    Posts
    48,028

    Just because it was apocryphal doesn't invalidate it

    Quote Originally Posted by Kellen Bassette View Post
    Much like the Marrow Changing Classic, Brontosaurus was a forgery.
    The brontosaurus was originally an apatosaurus of the purple robe (Daoist surely, not Buddhist) and there were camarasaurus elements mixed in with the teachings, but despite its mythic origins, what remains is still useful as a means of qigong.
    Gene Ching
    Publisher www.KungFuMagazine.com
    Author of Shaolin Trips
    Support our forum by getting your gear at MartialArtSmart

  14. #164
    Quote Originally Posted by GeneChing View Post
    The brontosaurus was originally an apatosaurus of the purple robe
    So it's like the Shaolin Do of the Dinosaur world?
    Quote Originally Posted by YouKnowWho View Post
    This is 100% TCMA principle. It may be used in non-TCMA also. Since I did learn it from TCMA, I have to say it's TCMA principle.
    Quote Originally Posted by YouKnowWho View Post
    We should not use "TCMA is more than combat" as excuse for not "evolving".

    You can have Kung Fu in cooking, it really has nothing to do with fighting!

  15. #165
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Midgard
    Posts
    10,852
    rare image of the purple robe apatosaurus

    For whoso comes amongst many shall one day find that no one man is by so far the mightiest of all.

Posting Permissions

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