Is Shaolin-Do for real?

[Shaolin Wookie]

Thought that there might be someone who would be inspired in this article. You may have to scroll down to read it http://http://www.bjjcenter.com/mult...hp?ArticleID=4

Two http://'s in your link. I'll type it in.

Edit: where?

[shadowlin]

*Hand grinding into forehead*

For, as Rabelais says:

"Heark, what our Privy sayes to the Skyters:

Shittard
Squirtard
Crackard
Turdous
Thy bung
Hath flung
Some dung
On us:
Filthard
Cackard
Stinkard:
St. Antonie's fire seize on
thy toane,
If thy
Dirty
Dounby
Thou do not wipe ere
thou be gone.

Will you have any more of it? Yes, yes, (answered Grangousier.) Then said Gargantua,

In shiting yesday I did know
The sesse I to my arse did owe:
The smell was such came from that slunk,
That I was with it all bestunk:
O had but then some brave Signor
Brought her to me I waited for,
In shiting:
I would have cleft her watergap,
And joyn'd it close to my flipflap,
Whilest she had with her fingers guarded
My foule Nockandrow, all bemerded
In shiting."

That was fairly unconstructive. It's funny when people read posts not addressing them and take them personal. I always found it strange, and always will.

[Shaolin Wookie]

That was fairly unconstructive. It's funny when people read posts not addressing them and take them personal. I always found it strange, and always will.

Are you sure that you are not a student, waiting for your teacher?

Behold, I have returned unto you, and you know me not.

And lo, you have read my post, and you comprehend it not.

And not for the post, not not of the understanding of it not.

[Judge Pen]

Are you sure that you are not a student, waiting for your teacher?

Behold, I have returned unto you, and you know me not.

And lo, you have read my post, and you comprehend it not.

And not for the post, not not of the understanding of it not.

Wookie, why the animosity toward shadowlin? So you don't like people quoting the Bible? Why make fun of it? It wasn't directed toward you. What does that add to this conversation?

[shen ku]

where did everyone go?

[Shaolin Wookie]

Wookie, why the animosity toward shadowlin? So you don't like people quoting the Bible? Why make fun of it? It wasn't directed toward you. What does that add to this conversation?

1) It was out of context.
2) It was rather lengthy.
3) I fight dogmatism. It's what I do.
4) It was directed at everyone and no one.
5) It adds an atheists perspective, just as it added a Christian perspective. It's not detracting anything either way. Quid pro quo. An exchange, a challenge, an equation of ideologies, etcertera.
6) What did quoting the bible add to this conversation about Martial Arts? What did my quotation from Rabelais on Pantagruelist fecal poesie add to the conversation? The answer...........nothing.
7) For all nonsense there is an equal and opposite nonsense.

[Judge Pen]

1) It was out of context.
2) It was rather lengthy.
3) I fight dogmatism. It's what I do.
4) It was directed at everyone and no one.
5) It adds an atheists perspective, just as it added a Christian perspective. It's not detracting anything either way. Quid pro quo. An exchange, a challenge, an equation of ideologies, etcertera.
6) What did quoting the bible add to this conversation about Martial Arts? What did my quotation from Rabelais on Pantagruelist fecal poesie add to the conversation? The answer...........nothing.
7) For all nonsense there is an equal and opposite nonsense.

I can certainly understand frustration for "in your face" christian dogma, but man (and I'm not saying shadowlin's post was wrong) Two wrongs don't make a right either.
1. It wasn't directed at you so out of context or not, you're butting in;
2. so was you assine rebuttal;
3. You should have that put on a t-shirt so people would take you more seriously. And a cape--capes are cool--I take everyone I meet seriously if they are wearing a cape;
4. What's that psuedo intellectual crap really mean?;
5. I'm all for a dialouge and seeing other perspectives, but your post was destracting in every way. There can be no quid pro quo without a meeting of the minds my friend.
7. It added nothing---bingo---if your points were meaningless (as you seem to acknowledge) then maybe you shouldn't take the time to type them.
8. Because one believes in God or quotes the bible for moral support or perspective does that make it nonsense? Not everyone who believes in God (any god but specifically the christian god) thinks that atheism is nonsense. They might not agree, but if they are really paying attention to what they say they believe, then they don't pass judgment on others and their beliefs (no matter how misguided they think their beliefs may be).

My point in all of this is not to be so presumptions that you think you should be the thought police to everyone who professes a belief in a higher power. Certainly not when it involved butting in on a conversation that had nothing to do with you. If you're really interested in "exchange, a challenge, an equation of ideologies, etcertera" then start a thread on that where it has context.

Sorry to rant, man. I just hate seeing conversations derailed by anothers grinding axe. Let's get back to the axe grinding of SD and its many issues.

[Shaolin Wookie]

I can certainly understand frustration for "in your face" christian dogma, but man (and I'm not saying shadowlin's post was wrong) Two wrongs don't make a right either.
1. It wasn't directed at you so out of context or not, you're butting in;
2. so was you assine rebuttal;
3. You should have that put on a t-shirt so people would take you more seriously. And a cape--capes are cool--I take everyone I meet seriously if they are wearing a cape;
4. What's that psuedo intellectual crap really mean?;
5. I'm all for a dialouge and seeing other perspectives, but your post was destracting in every way. There can be no quid pro quo without a meeting of the minds my friend.
7. It added nothing---bingo---if your points were meaningless (as you seem to acknowledge) then maybe you shouldn't take the time to type them.
8. Because one believes in God or quotes the bible for moral support or perspective does that make it nonsense? Not everyone who believes in God (any god but specifically the christian god) thinks that atheism is nonsense. They might not agree, but if they are really paying attention to what they say they believe, then they don't pass judgment on others and their beliefs (no matter how misguided they think their beliefs may be).

My point in all of this is not to be so presumptions that you think you should be the thought police to everyone who professes a belief in a higher power. Certainly not when it involved butting in on a conversation that had nothing to do with you. If you're really interested in "exchange, a challenge, an equation of ideologies, etcertera" then start a thread on that where it has context.

Sorry to rant, man. I just hate seeing conversations derailed by anothers grinding axe. Let's get back to the axe grinding of SD and its many issues.

Point taken.

[Shaolin Wookie]

http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/national...01TDY02307.htm

Lol...."Qin is believed to have been trained at the Songshan Temple in Henan Province, China, and to have succeeded the grand master there."

--Just how many Grandmasters of Shaolin can there be? LOL.......and, where have all the abbots gone? Why do even "legit" guys claim such and such generation Grand Master.......? Gene? Anyone? Not being snotty...just curious as to translation and such (like, is it customary for the Japanese to take Grand Master, or the Chinese, and why translate it like that in English?)

Anyways, has anyone ever heard of Sung Tao Chien, or someone with a name like that? I'm just curious, because in this old documentary "This is Kung Fu" they mention this Sung Tao Chien (I don't know the spelling..poss. Tao Qian?) was a Japanese guy who went to study at Shaolin and brought the martial art back to Japan to form an association that has wide membership of a million or so. Anyways, at this National Chinese wushu tournament in the 80's, these two Japanese Shaolin practitioners go up onto the floor and put on a sparring match (choreographed, but choreographed very well) that has body mechanics and postures much like Shaolin-Do. There's a definite divide between the wushu tournament (both contemporary and traditional) and the Japanese practitioners, but you see the same ideas in both (and not with a stretch of imagination).

They're not doing Shorin-Ryu, and I don't think the story they were talking about with Sung Tao Chien was in reference to the old story of Okinawan masters learning crane from the Chinese. Then again, the narrator is talking out of his ass most of the movie, so it's hard to judge his reliability. Still, when he drops a name, he's usually accurate.

Just curious.

Edit: Zong Daochen...I think that's how it's spelled.

http://www.kungfuhome.net/Htmls/Scenic/Scenic_177.shtml

Partway down the page: Japanese Shaolin Kung Fu Allies

Also:
http://tgsh169.blog.hexun.com/12199776_d.html

**Note**I'm not suggesting some kind of Shaolin-Do link, just that they looked alike, probably because of the heavy Japanese influence. The documentary (again, not reliable) mentioned an integration of judo and karate into the Shaolin material.

[Citong Shifu]

http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/national...01TDY02307.htm

Lol...."Qin is believed to have been trained at the Songshan Temple in Henan Province, China, and to have succeeded the grand master there."

--Just how many Grandmasters of Shaolin can there be? LOL.......and, where have all the abbots gone? Why do even "legit" guys claim such and such generation Grand Master.......? Gene? Anyone? Not being snotty...just curious as to translation and such (like, is it customary for the Japanese to take Grand Master, or the Chinese, and why translate it like that in English?)

Anyways, has anyone ever heard of Sung Tao Chien, or someone with a name like that? I'm just curious, because in this old documentary "This is Kung Fu" they mention this Sung Tao Chien (I don't know the spelling..poss. Tao Qian?) was a Japanese guy who went to study at Shaolin and brought the martial art back to Japan to form an association that has wide membership of a million or so. Anyways, at this National Chinese wushu tournament in the 80's, these two Japanese Shaolin practitioners go up onto the floor and put on a sparring match (choreographed, but choreographed very well) that has body mechanics and postures much like Shaolin-Do. There's a definite divide between the wushu tournament (both contemporary and traditional) and the Japanese practitioners, but you see the same ideas in both (and not with a stretch of imagination).

They're not doing Shorin-Ryu, and I don't think the story they were talking about with Sung Tao Chien was in reference to the old story of Okinawan masters learning crane from the Chinese. Then again, the narrator is talking out of his ass most of the movie, so it's hard to judge his reliability. Still, when he drops a name, he's usually accurate.

Just curious.

Edit: Zong Daochen...I think that's how it's spelled.

http://www.kungfuhome.net/Htmls/Scenic/Scenic_177.shtml

Partway down the page: Japanese Shaolin Kung Fu Allies

Also:
http://tgsh169.blog.hexun.com/12199776_d.html

**Note**I'm not suggesting some kind of Shaolin-Do link, just that they looked alike, probably because of the heavy Japanese influence. The documentary (again, not reliable) mentioned an integration of judo and karate into the Shaolin material.

From my understanding, The Fujien (fukien) Shaolin Temple masters modified their kungfu when teaching the Okinawan martial artist, so this would probably be true for the Japanese who trained Shaolin at the Temple... This is why the Okinawan & Japanese karate, who claim lineage with Shaolin Temple share similar body mechanics & technique uncommon to Shaolin kungfu or CMA. The point is this, Non-Chinese who traveled & trained at Shaolin Temple "DID NOT" learn "ALL" aspects of Shaolin kungfu, only modified versions of external/internal conditioning, forms/drills, etc... No, big suprise. However, I'm sure that someone, somewhere will disagree & the merry-go-round will continue to go round & round, lol...

Take care everyone.
CS

[Judge Pen]

From my understanding, The Fujien (fukien) Shaolin Temple masters modified their kungfu when teaching the Okinawan martial artist, so this would probably be true for the Japanese who trained Shaolin at the Temple... This is why the Okinawan & Japanese karate, who claim lineage with Shaolin Temple share similar body mechanics & technique uncommon to Shaolin kungfu or CMA. The point is this, Non-Chinese who traveled & trained at Shaolin Temple "DID NOT" learn "ALL" aspects of Shaolin kungfu, only modified versions of external/internal conditioning, forms/drills, etc... No, big suprise. However, I'm sure that someone, somewhere will disagree & the merry-go-round will continue to go round & round, lol...

Take care everyone.
CS

I'm not disagreeing, but I wonder how much of this is being taught differently or the techniques becoming something different altogether based upon cultural, conceptual and geographical factors? That is to say how much of the techniques evolved into something different because the people passing down the techniques put their own spin on it to the point that the fundmentals changed to a degree?

[Citong Shifu]

I'm not disagreeing, but I wonder how much of this is being taught differently or the techniques becoming something different altogether based upon cultural, conceptual and geographical factors? That is to say how much of the techniques evolved into something different because the people passing down the techniques put their own spin on it to the point that the fundmentals changed to a degree?

JP,

Yes, this happened as well. Of course, this was after the fact. Non-Chinese from other countries that were allowed to train at shaolin temple were treated and trained differently than the chinese practitioners.

I dont hold too much stock in the whole geographical factors analogy. I've heard the whole northern and southern explanation; northern has more of this and that because of its open grass lands, etc, and southern does this and that because of over crowding, had to train on boats, etc... I'm just making a long story short, lol...

Anyway, I believe that geographically, kungfu styles did adapt to their enviornment, but they also trained in multiple level technique/s... This one aspect "geopgraphical" didn't exclude full body and range training, but gave the respected styles their own characteristics....

Now, this is how the history and culture of CMA (generally speaking) that is passed down from my teacher to his students...

Overall, your absolutely correct in your post. Things were changed on both sides... It's all about how one understood what was being taught...

Take Care.
CS

[Judge Pen]

JP,

Yes, this happened as well. Of course, this was after the fact. Non-Chinese from other countries that were allowed to train at shaolin temple were treated and trained differently than the chinese practitioners.

I dont hold too much stock in the whole geographical factors analogy. I've heard the whole northern and southern explanation; northern has more of this and that because of its open grass lands, etc, and southern does this and that because of over crowding, had to train on boats, etc... I'm just making a long story short, lol...

Anyway, I believe that geographically, kungfu styles did adapt to their enviornment, but they also trained in multiple level technique/s... This one aspect "geopgraphical" didn't exclude full body and range training, but gave the respected styles their own characteristics....

Now, this is how the history and culture of CMA (generally speaking) that is passed down from my teacher to his students...

Overall, your absolutely correct in your post. Things were changed on both sides... It's all about how one understood what was being taught...

Take Care.
CS

I should have spoke more accurately. I was thinking more of geographic isolation (as opposed to geographic topography etc). Being isolated would limit one's opportunity to compare the material with the source (or other branches of the source) and allow more individual modification and interpretation to creep in and eventually become part of the material. Does that make sense?

[Citong Shifu]

I'm not disagreeing, but I wonder how much of this is being taught differently or the techniques becoming something different altogether based upon cultural, conceptual and geographical factors? That is to say how much of the techniques evolved into something different because the people passing down the techniques put their own spin on it to the point that the fundmentals changed to a degree?

JP, I forgot to add one important fact to this conversation. Some people were only trained in one maybe two aspects of CMA, thus leaving them incomplete in their studies. These people then move on to teach or create a new style which focuses on what they themselves were taught...

The CMA is very deep or comprehensive. There is never one way or one intent / focus.... CMA incorporates all aspect of the mind, body, and its range of motion/s. I feel this is the one thing that CMAist fail to understand, which explians the gaps or distortions within many of the teachings or styles.... As I've said, where does it start or begin? Some people were just taught one or a few training aspects or ways to train technique/s, so this is the direct affect of teachers teaching without complete understanding of this very in depth comprehensive art.

I'm not pointing fingers, this most likely started several hundred years ago, if not longer...


Take Care.

[Citong Shifu]

I should have spoke more accurately. I was thinking more of geographic isolation (as opposed to geographic topography etc). Being isolated would limit one's opportunity to compare the material with the source (or other branches of the source) and allow more individual modification and interpretation to creep in and eventually become part of the material. Does that make sense?

JP,
Absolutely, More than you know, lol.... This happens quite a bit.... The ever changing and evolving world...

CS