Can't we all Just get along?

[Radhnoti]

Yep, psyop specialist...that's you.
:rolleyes:
Good idea to establish the "natural fighters" concept right now, BTW. Come November you MIGHT need a good excuse. And I disagree with you on another point. You've said numerous times that SD is ineffective. When speaking of a martial art I've assumed that you're saying SD folks can't fight. Anyone who wants to review your posts can see for themselves and judge for themselves your intent.
Since reemul was so kind as to point out our reading comprehension problems, I think it's a good idea for folks to number their actual questions. Two reasons spring to mind:
1. It lets us see you have a question and aren't speaking rhetorically. i.e. "I also want to know what other evidence there must be about SD and its curriculum in China and Indonesia."-MonkeySlap Too, is not a very good question. I don't think he actually expected someone to try to answer that (I can't), but someone might consider that a question.
" Why does the Spam not look like beef?"-also MonkeySlap Too. While witty, this question is vague. My assumption is that he's asking, "Why isn't SD like the CMA I know?" This presumes that your way is the only right way and it's been covered before.
2. It would make things simpler for everyone involved.

OR, we can keep answering as we have been and anyone that REALLY wants an answer can ask however long it takes us to notice.

Up front, I admit to not knowing how our Tai Chi 24 form compares to the Chinese communist form. Let's number that as one. It's the question I'm currently most interested in having answered. I'm willing to buy the video if anyone can think how that might bring us a step closer to resolution.
What's question number 2? :)

-Radhnoti

[reemul]

As of late it seems you and Willow seem to be under the impression that I'm scared of the intended meeting in Nov. Let me just say for the record, I'm not. I am not impressed with SD or any of the SD people I have ever met. Having studied SD long ago and having sparred many a SD student I find that SD is lacking in martial practicality. My issue with SD is not however whether it is effective its the infringement of the name Shaolin. As far as Nov. is concerned, when I'm done with Willow you guys can send Joe in, or maybe even GM Sin.

If this is what offends you, too Fu#$#n bad.

Also I'm curious what excuses you guys are gonna
come up with in Nov.

[shaolin_knight]

Radhnoti, go the the Tai Chi site that one guy posted. You can see the 24 form there. It was created in 1954 by some guys that worked for the government of China. They wanted Tai Chi to be accessable to everyone for it's health benefits. They simplified the Yang style long form, and there you go. It's also used in Wushu tournaments I think. It is probably the most practiced Tai Chi form in China. It should look pretty much the same no matter who does it, as it is a new form.

[shaolin_knight]

Question number two:
(That's #2)

How can you possibly teach an internal style after studying for a few years? Most Bagua masters, for example, trained in Shaolin methods for maybe 5-15 years. Then trained in Bagua for another 5-15 before teaching. Even after teaching they were still learning. How are you a master of the internal styles if you know four or five tai chi forms, a couple bagua forms, and three hsing yi forms. Mastery is not forms. Hell, I could learn a bunch of forms from a bunch of styles and not do them real well, but why would I want to? To achieve mastery of a style, you must study it almost exclusively. I'm not saying it's impossible, but all the styles Shaolin-Do teaches don't really blend well.

Question number three:
(#3)
Why does Sin The's brother Hiang not claim the same lineage and not teach all the material. He says Ie Chang (or whatever his name is, I mean no offense if this is wrong) is his grandfather and that he travelled China picking up some stuff here and there from different teachers. I understand that Sin may have learned more material, but why the differing stories?

Question number four:
(#4)
Undiluted pure shaolin style. Why haven't we heard more about this from people in Indonesia who may have studied from Ie? Most kung fu styles there were well known, and sometimes blended with native arts. Knowing you have learned pure undiluted shaolin, wouldn't you be teaching it, helping to spread the art? No word yet from Indonesia on Shaolin as passed down from Ie. As you can see, there are more than one question here (#3 and #4) but they are all about the same thing: why doesn't anyone else acknowledge Sin's mastery?

[Radhnoti]

OK, number one I don't know...as mentioned. I'll pick up the video and compare it to the online version.
Number 2 should probably be handed over to TWS as internal is his forte, but I'm willing to hazard an educated guess or two. My instructor has studied for a bit over 15 years, mainly focusing on the Tiger forms in SD. He has all the requirements for his 3rd black. I THINK that associate mastery of SD is declared at fifth black. When I asked him how long it might take him to achieve associate master status, he chuckled and said, "A LONG while." The higher you climb through the SD ranks the harder it becomes to advance. Grading is tougher, your character, dedication and history of helping the organization becomes a factor almost as important as martial ability. Most high level instructors in SD end up focusing on a specific aspect in SD. I know of an instructor nearby who has focused on the Tai Chi forms in SD for...well...I'm guessing it's been about 20 years, but he's not even considered an associate master in SD. Twenty years of doing the SD Tai Chi forms...I'm tempted to call the man a SD Tai Chi "master", although he's never made that claim.
Mastery is a difficult thing to quantify.
Number 3. Hiang The' does claim the same lineage. He says he learned from GM Ie (he also learned from other students of Su), who learned from GM Su. GM Ie MIGHT have travelled and picked up lots of things...that doesn't necessarily mean he integrated what he learned into what GM Su taught. My PERSONAL opinion is that GM Ie was the grandfather of the The' brothers. GM Sin doesn't mention this fact, perhaps to avoid the implication that he was "given" the title of GM. Somewhere I have read about GM Sin being "introduced" to GM Ie. It may be naive but I've always imagined GM Ie as having two personas for the The's. One as grandfather, and one as grandmaster. It's not hard for me to imagine a young Sin The' "meeting" a man he already knew, perhaps even requiring a "sponsor" already in the school. I wouldn't be surprised if GM Ie was harder on his two grandsons than he was with the rest of his school.
The differing material. Hiang The' learned from a few different students of GM Su. GM Sin learned from GM Ie almost exclusively. This is my only answer for the differences in what is taught. I hope I have not misrepresented either GM Sin or Hiang in this, and if I have done so no disrespect was intended.
Question number 4. Tough one. I may have to revert to the "party line" on this one. GM Sin was the only one to receive the entirety of Shaolin-Do knowledge. It could be that folks that studied under GM Ie went on to found their own styles from the portions of SD they were taught...or maybe they joined styles closely resembling what they were taught. Regardless, GM Sin and Hiang both acknowledge that the school existed, I have no idea why nothing has been heard from other students of Ie. Unfortunately, my contacts in Indonesia are a bit thin at the moment. :)
Why does no one acknowledge GM Sin's mastery? I'd say because HE (or his top students) proclaimed his mastery a long time ago...and did so loudly and with no reservation. You CAN'T step on people's toes like that and expect everyone to just fall into line. Hurt feelings mixed with hearsay and a sizeable amount of "I don't care" attitude from the SD students have all combined to make this mess. At least that's MY take on the situation.
I HOPE I've been able to pass on my perspective with clarity shaolin_knight. Take care.

-Radhnoti

[The Willow Sword]

In answer to your question about the internal mastery. you know it is other people who give people the rank of master,,most masters do not think of themselves as masters. and not because they are being humble,,but because themselves they kknow ,,as i do that the internal path is a LIFE LONG process and goes far beyond any fighting or technique. i will say that i have been an internalist for about 15 yrs and that is a relatively short time to be one,,during this time i have learned the external as well(which is essential to internal training) a balance of both. in direct answer to the question you can teach if you have the aptitude and the know how to teach or to even facilitate the concepts to people. for only doing internal stuff for a few years i would not suggest that ANYONE try to teach it at first. focus on the external first as this will get the people more interested in what you are doing. as for mastery it is a state of most other peoples mind i would think,,since it is the old saying that a master will never say that he/she is a master,,they will often times renounce what master means ands simply state that they have been on the path for a while now and are eager to share what they have learned.
i hold a certification to teach and i have the blessing of my superiors to teach. as for myself i have taught people for 4 yrs now and of the 15 yrs that i have been a part of this path those 4 yrs gave me more experience in learning than 15 yrs of study. interesting huh? well for some maybe. Reemul's problem is that whether or not he wants to believe this Has no real knowlegde of what the learning or teaching process is about, with himself or any other,,,,i wonder if he truly knows what HE is doing,,rather than being all surface and talk about everything,,,,he hides himself and presents this air of mystery about him which might be good for him and his ego..but hollywood trains of thought and a fantasy is not the way of the masters nor is it the way of those who truly respect what they and others do. being able to beat up others from another school does not really make one a superior adversary. neither does thinking that one has the upper hand on any givin situation,,,i wonder if Reemul has any clue as to what a Tiger Principle is............
Many respects ,,willow sword

Whatever you think i am or want me to be,,, i am.
oh and,,,Jesus loves you, everyone else thinks you are an a$.