How do you explain the Japanese Influence on Shaolin-Do??

[Invisible-fist]

Judge,

Where are your videos?

I want to see.

[kwaichang]

Thanks JP. I enjoyed dinner. It is well known that the Chinese community did not want to teach the Gwailow??, the real Kung Fu so if this is true perhaps what you are learning is just flowered up moves to resemble what they once were. Anyway I am happy with what I do and believe from my own experience that it is real CMA. In Japanese there is a term called Bunkai it means to breakdown or analyze the moves of a kata,form, dance, whatever, anyway as far as my art SD is concerned I can take any move from a form and show an application for it. I would find it hard to believe from what I have seen of the CMA forms displayed on the web that the moves can be applied that easily. The Shaolin were fighters as well as Holy men so I feel the moves would be more direct in their application. This being said I will continue to believe that what I do is a Unique CMA derived from the way things were once done not as they are done now or are being taught in some schools now. Since there is no way to prove or disprove it then lets say we are both right and SD is an art of Chinese Origin that you are not familiar with. KC

[Songshan]

Man can we move these Shaolin-Do threads to another forum ?.....has nothing to do with Shaolin Kung Fu!!

[brucereiter]

however, in the chinese community, it's always been around and the chinese community has always been part and parcel to North and South America with many chinese having roots in these countries for more generations than a lot of euro-heritage folks.

i wonder how large the chinese community was in lexington kentucky from 1965 to 1980?

[Judge Pen]

Judge,

Where are your videos?

I want to see.

http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/foru...ad.php?t=41609

Or just look a couple of threads down. It's the one called "shaolin-do video"

[Golden Tiger]

I just took the time to watch DJ's kwan dao form http://www.davidjamieson.com/kunglek/klkf/olvids.htm

I understand that it was just a part of a form but in it, I see nothing different that would make it CMA if what JP did wasn't. I assume the point that he stops and makes a breathe in/out motion is the "stroking of the beard". Also, the charging sequence seems better suited for a spear than a bladed weapon. Otherwise, all the cuts, slashes and what not are in the SD form. (We just do them with a little more speed and power )

The other links that somebody posted, yeah, they are nice. But they could also be open for a lot of critiques. Thankfully, I am not a nit picker.

[David Jamieson]

shouting down your detractors en masse doesn't make your point any more valid.

drifting off into the minutia of a single form doesn't answer any of the questions or sufficiently rebutt the complaints of those who are your detractors.

sd-er's I give pause and think about what I learn and where I am learning it from and who I am learning it from.

keep in mind that the man with one eye is king in the land of the blind.

and I've probably spent too much time arguing with you about it already.

("we do ours with more speed and power"...nice lol )

[lxtruong]

shouting down your detractors en masse doesn't make your point any more valid.

Ok, well let's examine the basic "SD is teh inauthentic!!!oneoneone!!" reasons:

1. Japanese trappings: gi, "dojo", "kata".
2. "Forms are obviously karate with tiger hand thrown in"
3. "omgz! 900 forms, who can remember that!"
4. "omgz! Hairy grandmaster! History fake!"

Did I get it all? GT was obviously addressing #2. I just looked at the video myself, and like he said, aside from the stroke the beard thinger (reminds me of a move in drunken spear though), the basics are the same. The "around the head" move that JP did is even in your black tiger staff kata. While this doesn't instantly refute #2, it does weaken the arguement.

Feel free to bash us on #1, 3, 4. That being said, I would say that any of you that are calling GM Sin a liar have obviously never met the man. Anyone that spends even a short amount of time with him knows that he's a genuinely nice guy, and certainly not the type that would go about living a lie for 40 years. Perhaps he, or someone back down the line was lied to. I think that you will find that most SD students care little about that. For the most part, we follow the man - not the lineage.

GT/JP: Check out his demo of his black tiger set. Beginning looks very similar to the beginning of tiger/crane kata. It's freaky.

[Golden Tiger]

shouting down your detractors en masse doesn't make your point any more valid.

David, I have always tried to answer the detractors and never shout them down. And I was only making a valid observation concerning the way you did your form versus the way JP did SD's. No critisms (other than the playful one at the end hence the ) just trying to see what made yours CMA and what made ours not CMA.

drifting off into the minutia of a single form doesn't answer any of the questions or sufficiently rebutt the complaints of those who are your detractors.

Not sure what keeping an armed reserve of civilians has to do with this , but we were discussing a single form.

[Judge Pen]

David, I've never shouted on this topic (except maybe at MK a long time ago ) I thought we were having an rational conversation on this topic. Just because we don't agree 100% with your postion doesn't mean that our position is irrational. And I asked you some legitimate questions that you haven't answered yet:

1. Does my "pole arm" set display CMA techniques or JMA (such as a naginata)?
2. Aside from the chi gung aspects of stroking the beard, what are the real fighting applcations of the other standards? Other than performance and homage to the General, why do them? Why is it ok for some of them to be removed and still be considered a Kwan Dao set.
3. Why, other than the performance standards of stroking the beard, etc) was your form CMA and mine was not?

Thanks for getting back to me and furthering our rational conversation.

[godzillakungfu]

This thread is going to get ugly soon so I'll say my piece and continue to observe or PM people.

Yes, I think there are some falsehoods in Shaolin-Do and Chinese Shao-Lin Center. I think this happens in many if not all MA to some extent.

TKD 2000 history
Damo
Yang Lu Chuan fight record
Wing Chun's Nun.
Aikido
The list goes on and on.

If the stuff I read about Sin The's upbringing true, I think it is an amalgam. The few times I talked to Sin The' I got the impression there is a lot more going on than anyone suspects. Of course this is my opinion. I mean there is conjecture that there were at least 4 teachers in his original school. What's to say one teacher didn't have direct roots to Shaolin?

Remember at one time it was frowned upon to do more than one art. I remember these days vividly. You were supposed to stay in one art forever. Unless you read Chinese you only had the word of other translators. We see what happened to the word Chi. Crosstraining was a big no no. So, here comes a teacher that teaches a little of everything (yes I have a problem with this) in his school. It bypasses the old ways of one art one teacher and you get to train multiple arts. Now, as years pass, it is harder and harder to get out from under this as the MA community opens up to foreigners(Americans).

Now, I could start blasting the CSC's and Shaolin-Do but what purpose would it serve? There are huge gaps and things in the history that cast doubt on the veracity on many of the claims. People can fight with what they are taught and many people get a good work out. They do let you read up on history (which led me to leave) and the East at least lets you crosstrain. So, if we are going to enter the preservation of CMA argument, we need to beat up the New Shaolin Temple which has now imported Tae Kwon Do.

This is coming from someone who would be considered an outcast, with an axe to grind, by the CSC's.

[Judge Pen]

This thread is going to get ugly soon.

Nah. I don't think it will get ugly. It seems that there's always going to be an SD thread that pops up where the SD faithful can debate whether what they do is CMA, JMA or other. The only time it gets ugly is when a person new to the forums reads these threads and takes offense to the dialougue.

I would like to continue the discussion though. I think it's interesting to actually compare concepts in SD to other examples of people here to see what is applicable and where SD's roots really lay. David?

[David Jamieson]

David, I've never shouted on this topic (except maybe at MK a long time ago ) I thought we were having an rational conversation on this topic. Just because we don't agree 100% with your postion doesn't mean that our position is irrational. And I asked you some legitimate questions that you haven't answered yet:

1. Does my "pole arm" set display CMA techniques or JMA (such as a naginata)?
2. Aside from the chi gung aspects of stroking the beard, what are the real fighting applcations of the other standards? Other than performance and homage to the General, why do them? Why is it ok for some of them to be removed and still be considered a Kwan Dao set.
3. Why, other than the performance standards of stroking the beard, etc) was your form CMA and mine was not?

Thanks for getting back to me and furthering our rational conversation.

there was some spiraling occuring. I think you guys are totally allowed your perspective, but on a few of the claims, which is really what was at issue , the claims of the csc, sd and thé himself, those claims that have been redacted or removed and so on.

I never said or implied that sd as an exercise regimen was useless. My concerns were dealing with not just the 900 forms etc etc and were/ are more along the lines of calling something one thing when it is not really that thing and the inference that other arts are untrue.

The Shaolin Temples were the equivalent of universities for the martial arts. Masters were professors, each of them a specialist in a particular area of training. Temples were known for a particular style, just like medical schools of today. Monks at each temple still practiced the forms from the other temples, but they specialized in the style for which their particular temple was known for.

This is highly debateable and is an issue that detracts from teh fact that there is one shaolin temple, it is in henan. While many different types of temples may have had influence from teh shaolin way, there is not evidence of other shaolin temples and in fact the whoe southern temple is still the subject of debate amongst the archeologists, anthropologists and various other experts on the subject. Also, Shaolin was/is first and foremost a buddhist religious temple and not a focus point for martial arts alone. The temple has three treasures, of which martial arts is one third. The primary pursuit of Shaolin was Ch'an (zen) it is paramount to Shaolin practice. Do you practice Ch'an?

Shaolin Do is the most complete and comprehensive martial arts system in the world.

Is this statement mere marketing? If not it is a spurious claim and infers that other asian martial arts are lacking. Would it not be better to say that you would consider it a robust and complete system of martial arts? As opposed to what that says?

Shaolin Grandmaster Sin Kwang The'

How exactly did Thé garner this honour and where is his name in the rolls at shaolin?

All rights are reserved. No part of this document may be reproduced or duplicated in electronic or magnetic media or translated to another language without the written consent of Grandmaster Sin Kwang The' and the Shaolin Do Association.

The Shaolin Do Association makes no warranty of any kind with regard to this material including but not limited to the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose. The Shaolin Do Association shall not be liable for errors contained herein or for incidental or consequential damages or loss in connection with the furnishing performance or use of this material.

The Shaolin Do Art, its logos and graphics and its written materials are protected by federal copyright. Only those individuals with valid Shaolin Do teaching certificates may teach the Shaolin Do Art. Videotaping of any aspect of the Shaolin Do Art is strictly prohibited.

If one is not confident in what they think is a truth, is it a truth? Or should a statement like this give pause?

Ie Chang Ming
1880 - 1976

no photo? no bai si? no record.

Su Kong Tai Djin
1849 - 1928

name in the rolls destroyed in the fire? Lost to the cultural revolution?

Your form, does not bear the hallmarks of kwan dao sets. For most, it would be this alone that would allow one to surmise it is a creation of it's own based upon something else and without knowledge beforehand of teh cultural context of the use of the weapon. Classical weapons, whilc still practiced and while still inclusive of many of the applicatrions the weapons were designed for also have come to bear hallmarks.

'Shaolin' Broadsword is often opened with a single handed salute to honour the Monk Hui Ké for instance. By this hallmark, the broadsword set is identified as Shaolin.

Kwan Dao, on the other hand is outside of Shaolin in particular and it's set performances pay homage to the legendary general who weilded the weapon, ergo the hallmarks of ride the horse, sweep the beard away and so on.

Your halberd set is fine, like I said JP and yes there are inherent logical things that one can do with a weapon because that is dictated by the size shape and design of the weapon. Your halberd set employs logically sequenced moves that can in turn be extrapolated into applicable moves with the weapon. the influence is denoted by what is not included with the particular weapon and the name you have chosen to call your weapon. were you not told that that is not a kwan dao?

so, all inconsistencies aside, besides the mixed terms and the mixed curriculum is it not safe to say that sd can have it's roots in shaolin but still be what it is? an american hybrid of asian martial arts? Just think, if you congeled it with mma, you'd probably evenb get a broader spectrum of students.

[godzillakungfu]

so, all inconsistencies aside, besides the mixed terms and the mixed curriculum is it not safe to say that sd can have it's roots in shaolin but still be what it is? an american hybrid of asian martial arts? Just think, if you congeled it with mma, you'd probably evenb get a broader spectrum of students.

Of course. I think JP agreed in one of the combined threads. Most of us believe it is a hybrid, I know I do. Yet, many people feel we would be coping out by saying this or ask why we don't fix things.

Well, unless you start an offshot you can't. If you enjoy training on the west questioning or cross training WILL get you kicked out of the art.

There is a school in Texas that has a BJJ teacher coming once a week.

[lxtruong]

Of course. I think JP agreed in one of the combined threads. Most of us believe it is a hybrid, I know I do. Yet, many people feel we would be coping out by saying this or ask why we don't fix things.

Well, unless you start an offshot you can't. If you enjoy training on the west questioning or cross training WILL get you kicked out of the art.

There is a school in Texas that has a BJJ teacher coming once a week.

Wow, cross training will get you kicked out? That seems silly. What you do on your own time seems like your business. Of course, where people find time to cross train is a mystery to me, but you know to each their own.