Is Shaolin-Do for real?

[Shaolin Wookie]

In the end, I think I've wound up exactly where I started.

I think SD might not be the right approach to CMA for all students, but it is the right way for the right kinds of students.

[The Xia]

Nevertheless, it is flawed logic, and often contradicts itself...........

So is it really logic?

Aquinas isn't one of the world's greatest thinkers. He was one of Christianity's greatest thinkers. But in the world of philosophy, he was pretty much a pedant, and not much more......

I don't see flaws in his logic and many people do see him as one of the world's greatest thinkers.
He was even included in a book titled, "One Hundred Philosophers: The Life and Work of the World's Greatest Thinkers".
http://www.amazon.com/One-Hundred-Ph.../dp/0764127918
Whatever though, this is all one big derailment from the original point I was discussing with kwaichang. I stated that one cannot be a technique. One can use, do, perform, practice, etc a technique. I gave examples. His retort was that his statements are true but illogical. I maintain my stance on this. I can do, perform, use, and practice a jab. I can jab. I can jab well. I can be a jabber. But I am not a jab. What do you think Wookie?

[Shaolin Wookie]

KC's a big Bruce Lee fan (philosophy, at least), and I think he's kind of gelling with the idea that you don't throw a punch, the punch is the body's response to a particular scenario, which may or may not occur with significant "active thought."

If you practice something enough, and it becomes habitual (like flipping your wrist with the right amount of flip on a jump-shot in b-ball), then it occurs out of body-memory.....hence, it's not premeditated, it kind of becomes instinctual. In that regard, the punch occurs, because you are there in that particular situation. The punch cannot occur without you. You are a significant part of the punch. But if you arent' really thinking about it, it kind of is like an extension of yourself......

My feet work that way with footwork/doding/stances, but my hands don't do that. I don't think, hey, let me step off the line at like a 45 degree angle to open up for this or that technique......but I did think that way when I started. Now I just do it from habit.....so I am the technique, in that I embody what the technique was in place to teach me. Now it isn't a technique anymore. It's me, my body, moving at a 45 degree angle.....it's not a technique that my body follows. My body is the technique. (Like forms, you learn a form until you don't have to remember it anymore, and you just act, rather than "remember")....

Sounds kind of fortune cookie though, I admit it.

[Shaolin Wookie]

I don't see flaws in his logic and many people do see him as one of the world's greatest thinkers.
He was even included in a book titled, "One Hundred Philosophers: The Life and Work of the World's Greatest Thinkers".
http://www.amazon.com/One-Hundred-Ph.../dp/0764127918
Whatever though, this is all one big derailment from the original point I was discussing with kwaichang. I stated that one cannot be a technique. One can use, do, perform, practice, etc a technique. I gave examples. His retort was that his statements are true but illogical. I maintain my stance on this. I can do, perform, use, and practice a jab. I can jab. I can jab well. I can be a jabber. But I am not a jab. What do you think Wookie?

As for Aquinas......Augustine and William James were also listed on that book....'nuff said. (I'm not a big fan of Augustine at all)...

Funny thing about philosophy. Almost everything Aristotle had to say regarding Physics and science was wrong. Is it worthless? Nope. But wrong nevertheless (he debunked the atomists, and his ontology/astronomy was warped). His paideia of principles regarding philology and other matters was spot on........but much of what he said was right out.... Nowadays, we prize him for the fact that in his day and age, he was considering hte world around him in a rational manner without the instrumentation needed to verify his suppositions. That is laudable.

But he was wrong, nevertheless..........so being a good philosopher is like being all that you can be.......but it doesn't mean you got accurate results.

Proof's in the puddin', and not a lot of philosophers are very "right" in the end. Knowledge is syncretic.....kinda like MA.

[kwaichang]

SW pegged it but I am more a B Lee historian than fan. The point is MA w/o philosophy or greater thought is just fighting. Many of the traditional MA those tried and true over time has at their core Philosophical or religous concept. Taoism , Budhism, Christianity , Muslim, Shinto , Zen, Etc KC

[Meat Shake]

Where do I send the money?

To my paypal account. Ill have you the certificate in the mail tomorrow.


Kwaichang-
Theres no point in arguing with you because you dont make points. You just make philosophical statements that arent really philosophy, closer to the ramblings of a drunkard that watched too many kung fu flicks.
Good luck with whatever you do, I cannot show colors to those who choose to remain blind.

[kwaichang]

What ponts do you want me to make ??? KC

[kwaichang]

I have shown you that God is formless and that MA are what you make it what else do you wish me to address I will but I warn you I do not pull punches when I address a topic. KC

[Meat Shake]

I have shown you that God is formless and that MA are what you make it what else do you wish me to address I will but I warn you I do not pull punches when I address a topic. KC

You dont make sense when you address a topic either, so whats your point?
The points I want you to make are the ones that you dodged with cheesy kung fu answers for the last 3 or 4 pages.

[kwaichang]

MS refresh my memory what points do you speak of I do not recall you wanting my point on anything. KC

[kwaichang]

OK MS I went back through the pages and saw a couple of points you tried to make and I guess you wanted me to address. But 1st I want to say you are one rude a// and do not deserve any answers to any questions.
1. SD training and principles . Not all SD people train the same way I dont and many dont , you have apparently met those who are solely into "getting in shape".
2. You have trained for 16 years ? Maybe if you say so . You speak of peace and happyness and then insult those you dont know, you are rude.
3. I have trained for 36 years this August hard style and soft real and more real.
Does this tell you what you want to know. ?? KC

[Shaolin Wookie]

But 1st I want to say you are one rude a// and do not deserve any answers to any questions.

Someone just laid the smackdown....

[Shaolin Wookie]

Alright, in the interest of making this thread run onto 300 pages ASAP , I'm interested to know some of the tales that surround our forms. I'm a literary man, so it's kind of a thing I'm interested in, plus I love Chinese literature....

For instance: Hai Lun Chong=the Monkey King rampaging through the Eastern Sea Dragon's kingdom in Journey to the West.

In the form, concerning animal attidues, etc., you flip around and whirl a lot like a monkey thrashing through a kingdom would, have that cool kneeling stance with a side hand extended and the eyebrow-stick over the shoulder, and that downward strip which hits the ground in a monkey stance in full grip. Although it's not typically considered a monkey form, I do consider it to be one based on its structure. Hell, you're using an eyebrow-height-staff.....and the form refers to the time where he obtained the staff for the first time (while he was squatting in the king's chambers and making general mischief)....

I was sifting through some old SD threads (man, "work" is boring), and found some discussion about translation of SD forms, etc:

Lol, no but that term has apparently stuck around. I didn't know about it until that thread actually. The form in question is "Ching Kang Fu Hu Chien" I always called it "Golden Mountain Tiger Trap" (Which seems to be the consensus looking at the various SD websites' translations. Some variations include the SDA site, which has it listed as "Golden Metal Man Tiger Trap" Atlanta's site has it listed: Jin Gang Fu Hu Quan - "Wu Sung Defeats the Tiger"

http://forum.kungfumagazine.com/foru...&page=82&pp=10

The link to the page where GT says the misnomer was funny and kind of stuck.

The discussion concerned the translation of "Jingang" from Jingang fu hu chien.....and Gene posted a link to a WuSong article, because apparently ATL sometimes calls the form "Wu Song defeats the Tiger."

Quotations from the article: http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/maga...hp?article=237

"In the novel (Water Margin), Wu Song has finished a special mission and passed by a small village (Mount Jinyang) on the way to visit his brother. He reads a notice warning travelers to avoid going out after sunset because of a big, man-eating tiger in the surrounding woods. The villagers are terrified and refuse to leave their homes at night.

For the safety of the people, Wu Song decides to kill the tiger himself. After drinking three bowls of wine, he went in search of the tiger with his staff. When the tiger leaped out at him in the woods the staff broke, and Wu Song grabbed the neck of the tiger. Finally, he killed it with his bare hands. One might also read the battle with a man-eating tiger as a political allegory."

Well, "Jinyang" is pretty much the same flavor as "Jingang", so this would mark a link between this form and the Water Margin. And at the very end of the form, you have that elbow followed by a face rake, neck grab, then the smashing of the face on the knee....kind of imitating grabbing a tiger by the neck and killing it with the knee....which summarily ends up closing the form pretty much, aside from the salute.

Pan Long Bong, from what I gather, is a form that comes from the son of a famous general who used a spear (I don't remember the names...or teh source....if anyone can supply these for me, I'd be veeeeeery appreciative ), but became an outlaw when the general was killed. He entered the Shaolin Temple to hone his skills so he could get revenge, a la Masterkiller , and faced a contraption like a Metal Wolf in one of the chambers, and used his staff to knock out the teeth using the circle/winding motions. Someone in class said there was a Shaw Bros. movie that had a scene like that or something. Any references would be cool....

If any of you guys know some of the tales that surround the forms (in terms of literature), and you post them, I'll PM you a link to real nudie shots of Jessica Simpson......just kiddin'...

Or am I?

[BM2]

[QUOTE=Meat Shake;741591]To my paypal account. Ill have you the certificate in the mail tomorrow.


If you send it to MY paypal I will send you a link where you can download your certificate and print it out today! Why wait? Send it now!

[Shaolin Wookie]

[QUOTE=BM2;741668]

To my paypal account. Ill have you the certificate in the mail tomorrow.


If you send it to MY paypal I will send you a link where you can download your certificate and print it out today! Why wait? Send it now!

Yeah, but then the signature won't be authentic, b/c it would be in computer ink. I want to be a real flying ninja. That's why I'd rather get the certificate in the mail. Sooner I get the authentic one, the sooner I can start builing my Technodrome. BTW, if you're willing to send it overnight shipping, you've got my business, dude.

Plus, if you've got any extra mutagen lying around, I'll buy that for a dollar.....