shaolin-do? [Archive] - Kung Fu Magazine Forums

02-27-2001, 07:35 PM

I began training at a shaolin-do school three years ago. My story.

To begin, my sifu is an amzingly talented martial artist and teacher. And his teacher, Masters David and Sharon Soard, are even better. The seminars I have attended by them, for Buddha Fist, 7 star Paying Mantis, and 2 Roads of Shaolin Double Daggers were excellent, and the level of skill demonstrated was what I would expect of a Master.
My sifu trains very traditionally, with chi kung and internal forms in the morning, iron body training ect. Watching him you have no doubt of his skill.
My problem began when I met Grandmaster The'. While amazed at his physique for his age, and the fact that, the year before, he made a statement to the fact that he was interested in learning spanish, and now arrived speaking fluent spanish to our spanish speaking students. I was a little amazed at his rambling, sometimes bizarre religious philosophies, and the fact that he talked so long the class ran over two hours longer than it should. I felt very strongly that something was not right. My subsequent meeting with him accelerated that. Comments on the web fed my doubts. A minor crisis ensued. At my brown belt test, I was about fed up. I had been practicing my full set of some 9 forms, chin na, weapons and tai chi, and Lohan Tan Tuy short forms twice a day, and sparring with a ranked kickboxer to sharpen my sparring skills for that part of the test. The day of the test ( and I understand people are nervous on ranking test days) people who perhaps studied less than I did were sticking spears into the ceiling, smacking each other with short sticks ect. Now these things happen on test days, when people suddenly realize they haven't fully prepared themselves, but they should learn thier lesson by failing the test. I was horrified when these people passed with me into Brown. It devalued all the work I had done. I felt sick.
I began studying Jeet Kun Do with an instructor with a direct lineage to Lee. The training has improved my skills incredibly, and has been an excellent complement to traditional training. But I had worked a great deal to get to Brown Belt, where you start to see more advanced forms and combat theory. So I went back.
So heres the short of it. Regardless of the Grandmasters shadiness, I have recieved an excellent elementary training in basic Kung Fu forms and theory that will help me immeasurably when I move to a larger city with a school with a more reputable lineage. I plan to study until I finish the Tiger Claw forms in the system, and then study them hard to form a basis for extended study at a school elsewhere, at a later date. With all my suspicions about The', I still respect and admire my teacher and his teachers. The's inflating his lineage and training in no way puts dishonor on his students, who have trained in good faith. So, if like me, you live in a city with no traditional school except a shaolin-Do school, it does no harm to study there, the basictraining is comparable to eclectic Kung Fu schools everywhere, and you will at least have an understanding of different Kung Fu styles and combat concepts that will help you immeasurably when you find another Kung Fu school.
With all respect to my Sifu,
Johan

Brad

02-27-2001, 11:59 PM

If the "master" in those vids is representative of high level Shaolin-Do I would say stay very far away from any Shaolin-Do school if you want to learn Kungfu. It is absolutly not kungfu that he is doing. Just a really bad imitation.

qwackdragon

03-04-2001, 06:33 AM

with only 7 yr exp with yang tai chi chuan and shaolin i would no recomend thes master for these styles. his expertiese may be in other areas. :confused:

soy

03-05-2001, 03:42 AM

man the guy in that video is worse than me..

Vankuen

03-11-2001, 09:46 AM

I have studied with a Sin the lineaged system of "kung fu", and even earned a black sash ranking within approxiately two to three months. Now keep in mind that I previously had - oh about 18 years experience in other gung fu systems and what not, so the only thing I had to learn was a different sequence of movements.

I thought that the training was very non-gung fu...it looked more like shotokan karate with a few gung fu movements thrown in. They even had japanese names for some of the drills!!! The only good thing that came out of it was that it wasnt "shaolin do" but rather a break away and thus, I had some real exposure to more actual gung fu through "seminars" by friends of the teachers, which were of real gung fu lineages such as tang lang and Pow chuan.

I have left them since then (even though that was the only "gung fu" in the area) and begun to simply study the gung fu systems that I already knew, but had not mastered. I figured that training in pre-learned things even though my original sifus werent around was better than learning crap that would end up hurting me in the long run with sifus that werent as good as me.

And that is being humble about it. One of the most important things in learning gung fu is respect for the master and faith in the system, without those two things, you will not progress to your desired levels.

Train hard and always question the "unquestionable"

Vankuen

03-11-2001, 09:58 AM

those videos were embarrassing to think that he was a "kung fu brother"

Fu-Pow

03-15-2001, 08:59 AM

Hi ya!!!!

Falcor

03-15-2001, 09:17 AM

You know, if you do see earnest practitioners of a cr@ppy art (good people, but they're just doing cr@ppy stuff), how do you...enlighten them that what they are doing is, well - BAD - without insuling them? They, being good people, are of the opinoin that it is the artist and not the art (and I can't fault them for that attitude), and that everyone does what they like and suits them each follows his own path. Fine, but then again, some things are so blatantly wrong! Dilemma...

...don't think you are, know you are...

illusionfist

03-15-2001, 11:56 AM

I have been faced with this dilemma myself and it was really hard to make the decision i did. I opted not to tell the people what they were practicing was straight up fake. I took a lot of factors into account, the major one was that most of the students were what i would call a "Rec Martial Artist", someone who is not in it for the long haul and they are just kind of dabbling. Later on it all worked out cuz i saw many of them outside of their training atmosphere and every single one of them told me that they had a suspicion, so they left.

I was really torn by the whole thing in the beginning, but it all worked out in the end. If i were presented with the problem again, i would have to look at all the factors before i made my decision. I think that certain situations would necessitate an immediate answer. It is good that most of the people left that one school, because the teacher is now teaching Falun Gong material. I think that in some instances people need to learn on their own. Its part of the path.

Peace :D

Waidan

03-15-2001, 07:33 PM

You don't necessarily need to tell them "your kung fu is very not good." With many people, this will invoke a defensive response, and end any constructive conversation on the subject (of course this isn't true of everyone, I'm generalizing).

Maybe a better approach is to offer to box with them a bit (in a friendly manner obviously). Once they realize they're being uprooted and handled like a chew-toy, they'll probably draw their own conclusion regarding the authenticity of their training.

As a classmate would often say, "It's easier to show then tell."

Falcor

03-15-2001, 10:45 PM

You're right of course, I wouldn't just go up to them and say "your kung fu no good! Let me show you the power of real Chinese pugilism." And most are what I would call dabblers as well, and hopefully when they get exposed to some real stuff they'll wake up and smell the fishes. But this is what happened once; I was at a tournament, and met this really nice, very cool guy. He's wearing the white gi and is a brown belt in Shaolin-Doh. But he's a swell fellow, he even lends his opponents some of his own extra sparring gear when they fall short. Anyway, I see him on the floor and he moves well, and he performs admirably, but WHAT he does is just...cr@ap. Of course I didn't say anything - just offered my good luck and complimented him on a good effort. But inside I wanted to scream "dude, that is not shaolin kung fu, that ain't kung fu!!!" Makes me think of something my teacher told me once: good kung fu done well speaks well of the teacher and the student. Good kung fu done badly speaks ill of both student and teacher. Now, bad kung fu done badly is...well, you get the picture. But bad kung fu done well speaks well of the student but ill of the teacher.

...don't think you are, know you are...

Waidan

03-16-2001, 12:26 AM

Yeah, I get what you're saying. That is pretty tough. I think in a tournament situation, I'd be very hesitant to say anything too (don't want to take the guy out of his game, or ruin his enjoyment). However, I think in a more relaxed setting I'd try to extend some help.

JJMantis

03-16-2001, 05:18 AM

The last issue on KFQ, with Master Chan on the front, in the article about Shaolin-Do. If you didn't, listen to this. The Shaolin-Do people take a big trip to China to visit the long lost southern shaolin temple. They get there and of course, find wushu. duh! It's almost not worth saying. But they go on to say that since the shaolin wushu of China doesn't look like their style, that is the reason why the Chinese wushu is incorrect. Because we all must agree that shaolin-do is pure and unadultered. Amazing. Why don't they compare themselves to the multitudes of Shaolin outside of China? Lineages from the many authentic masters who fled from the cultural revolution?

Radhnoti

03-26-2001, 07:04 PM

This is my first post. I've REALLY enjoyed reading the posts in this forum. Very informative. When I signed up for the forum I was a bit surprised that one of the rules was to not put down any other styles though...especially considering some of the comments in this specific thread. Let me say upfront that I've been studying Shaolin-Do for just the past 6 months...having said this, I feel I can provide a different perspective than what's been offered so far.
First, the Japanese "cover" of the style. My understanding is that our style's second Grandmaster (Ie Chang Ming) was forced to flee into Indonesia during the fall of the Manchu dynasty. Indonesians (at that time...maybe even now, not sure) hated the Chinese and everything Chinese, but not Japan. Grandmaster Ie went "underground" so to speak and adopted the outside appearance of a Japanese style without changing the content of the system. Karate gis were worn, a karate belt ranking system was implemented and the "do" was added to the system name. Upon Shaolin-Do reaching the U.S. some thought was given to switching to kung fu style uniforms, but Grandmaster Sin The' decided to keep the gi as a nod to the history of our style. (I'm sure that the practicality of the gi was also a factor.)
JJMantis mentioned that in the KFQ article the Shaolin-Do students weren't very happy with the Wu Shu forms they see the current Shaolin temple inhabitants perform. The artice goes on to state that two "elderly gentlemen" stand up and perform routines that the visitors are familiar with, and are given a standing ovation.
My understanding is that Shaolin-Do is taught in such a way as to be progressively more difficult. The lower belt ranks have a specific curriculum for advancement and Grandmaster Sin's book states that, "Below brown belt, it is assumed that the student is studying for the purpose of learning some self defense only. At brown belt, it is now assumed that the student is serious about the style as an art form." From first brown you start to get choices about the forms you study for advancement. Most of the black belts I've met seem to have a "specialty" they seem to focus upon. My teacher has learned six of the tiger forms, his teacher seems to be focused upon Tai Chi forms that are mandatory for advancing beyond first black. I hope that johan moves into the realm of brown belt and finds that the "less serious" and unprepared students fall by the wayside as he is shown more and more that piques his interest.
Finally, concerning Grandmaster Sin The', I've been witness to some of his behavior that I found odd. But, I've been operating under the assumption that since he comes from a different culture, religion and base language than me it's probably simply a communication problem. I know that he smiles a lot, and upon passing my two year old son he stopped to lean down and pat his head and say "hi". I've never heard HIM talk about the things he can do, it's always one of his higher ranking black belts. He's been there for all my belt tests so far (how many Grandmasters with as many schools to oversee as Grandmaster Sin could say the same?) and made a point to talk with the students, even asking us if we wanted to go to eat with him at a local restaurant. In short, he seems to be a great person. A friend of mine went to Grandmaster Sin's tournament in Lexington and had the fortune to see the Grandmaster spar. This is a man almost in his sixties, but his movements were supposed to be really impressive. One fellow that tried to sweep his legs was shocked as Grandmaster Sin jumped over his head. Snapping out 3 kicks while jumping through the air, seeming to "glide" forward, sending Master Leonard sailing through the air almost as soon as contact was made. :)
Wish I'd seen it.
I hope I've given some of you a glimpse into the martial art I've been fortunate enough to begin studying. And thanks for plowing through this whole post. :D

-Radhnoti

JJMantis

03-27-2001, 03:23 AM

I will admit I haven't met or seen shaolin-do personally, is there any input from others that have met, trained, or touched hands with them? I just read all I could on the net, and independantly (before coming to this board) have seemed to come to the same conclusion as the others here. One thing they definitly have is a lot of material. IMHO too much material. But if can do 100 forms correct and well, then you must be good, right? That being said, let's get to that history.

Karate uniforms to hide behind during exile - I can believe that. Although most kung fu people I've seen don't wear "uniforms" when training anyway, we tend to wear shoes with black pants and a t-shirt. But why continue to say "katas" with an art that uses the word "shaolin"? Also the words "bo" and "numchaku" (that's how they spelled it) are Japanese. A practicioner of Chinese kung fu would say "stick/cudgelstaff" or "rice flails". Sorry I don't know the Chinese equivalents.

http://www.shaolin-do.com/masters/index.shtml

Su Kong Tai Djin was supposed to be a hermit who just had to stay in hiding in the wilderness. Why, then, did he get a professional photo taken wearing a suit?

The picture of Ie Chang Ming I saw on another site. It is a painting, and its in color. It appears to have been grey scaled to make it appear like an old photo.

Inquisitor

03-27-2001, 04:47 AM

I will say the following for the benefit of those who would spend years of fruitless hard work, dedication, and training learning this so-called style.
Shaolin-Do is a style that is clouded with "legendary" history and unsubstantiated myth. None, other than "Grandmaster" Sin The have ever heard of (let alone met) Ie Chan Ming or Su Kong Tai Djin. All of the forms taught in the system of Shaolin-Do are forms that can be found in books, videos, and other forms of media. Sin The claims that Shaolin-Do is simply the sum of Shaolin Temple kungfu knowledge. However, within his so-called style he teaches non-Shaolin forms and styles, the most prominent of which are Tai Chi Chuan and those styles descended from Wudang (which was Taoist, not Buddhist). And, for the record, the Tai Chi forms taught in Shaolin-Do are not actual, legitimate forms of the family styles. They are the, for lack of a better word, *******ized forms created by the National Sport Association of the Communist Chinese government. The traditional family Tai Chi styles of Wu, Yang, Chen, etc. do not teach the new "wushu" forms as part of their curriculum. Also, Shaolin-Do practitioners are notorious for their inability to see the differences between the way in which traditional stylists perform their forms, and the way in which they perform them. A true master of kungfu is like a great painter. He may not know of all the other painters or their paintings, but if he comes across the work of another great painter, he will recognize it for what it is, great art. If this is true (and trust me when I say that it is), then why is it that those in the legitimate, traditional kungfu community see Shaolin-Do and then say to themselves "This is kungfu? No, it can't be kungfu. It must be Karate or Tae Kwon Do... ."
"Grandmaster" Sin The's prowess in kungfu is also unsubstantiated and has yet to be seen by an unbiased, impartial observer. All instances of his "great skill" that I have heard and seen have all been hearsay; "Well, I wasn't there but my master was there and he told me that it was great!" or "The older students told me that once they saw him and that he was spectacular!" None can vouch for Sin The's actual skill and knowledge, and none can say that his lineage is real or legitimate. Even if for some reason he could not substantiate his lineage, if he had learned "real" kungfu, it would be evident either through his obvious skill or the skill of his better students (which it, sadly, is not).

There is more that could be said, but I'll leave it at this. If you are a practitioner of Shaolin-Do, or are considering learning the so-called "style," do not waste your time. Find a legitimate style and a legitimate master under which to learn. You will be wasting your hard-earned money and will be dedicating your life to something that is fake and will be of no real benefit to yourself.

joedoe

03-27-2001, 04:54 AM

I have never trained or seen Shaolin-Do before either. All I can say is that if you enjoy it and it is working for you, then stick with it. Having seen the clips, I'd have to say that it doesn't look like my cup of tea.

And I'd have to say that the Japanese influence seems to extend further than just the uniforms :).

Guns don't kill people, I kill people

Abstract

03-27-2001, 08:42 PM

yo no dis to anyone who practices Shaolin-Do, but after watching those vids, it looks like USSD SYNDROME :rolleyes: to me. I've legit kung fu practiced & seen some serious nonsense, & that was borderline in my eyes...To be honest, what I saw at USSD looked EXACTLY like what I was watching on those clips, that, coupled w/all the Japanese 'Kata this' & pinion that, I had to take my leave...if it works for u, then that's cool....just my 2 cents... ;)

brassmonkey

03-28-2001, 08:31 AM

To be fair I've seen Tai Chi Chuan done equally as bad(well almost) from legitimate lineages.

Oldguy

03-30-2001, 09:24 PM

Hey you guys-
We are all consumers. We chose to stay with our respective teachers/schools because what we were being taught made sense, hopefully. Kungfu comes in a myriad of shapes and sizes, just like its practitioners. Certain styles work better for certain people.
Now this Shaolin-do may very well have roots deep in China. Why should we dispute a claim which we would be hard pressed to prove one way or the other, just because it looks different?
If we disagree with the way a technique is performed, we should be able to explain why. That way we train eyes and mind and allow a good person to save face. If you are friends with someone who does something "strange", take him to task and ask why he does something one way and not another. He might know something you don't. There was an old German, maybe Swiss mystic, Bernhard von Clairvox(sp) who said "Lerne alles, und du wirst spaeter sehen, dass nichts ueberfluessing ist". tr. Learn everything and later you will see that nothing is superfluous.
This makes sense to me. Take care

Royal Dragon

03-31-2001, 12:32 AM

Hello,
I have been perusing this post, and I am wondering if there is a Shaolin do school here in Chicago or not. I've never heard of one here, but I would like to check it out and see for myself what all the hub'bub is.

To be honest with everyone, I am a survivor of Chung Moo, so I am extreamly skeptical of anyone that claims mastery of large amounts of knowledge. The Master I am now under, Got his masters degree in the internal division of our system. although he "knows" the external division, He does not and never did claim to have mastered it. When I discuss the external aspectes of my style with him he often reminds me of his lack of mastery in that division and the fact that his specialty is the internal. This is one of the reasons why I trust him. I really could care less if he knew the whole system to the point of mastery . In fact, the fact that he doesn't, and whole heartedly admits it generates a lot of trust in me. It has allowed me to make contacts with others that DO specialize in the area's he is lacking guilt free. I know, that if I want to master the external division, he can give me the "template" to do so, but It will be up to me to do it through blood, sweat and tears.

Now, this brings me to this, I don't see how Sin The' can possibly be teaching an effective system with so much to teach. Our system, when including ALL the styles that make it up, AND the addition of styles that our 10th century founder learned prior to developing it, TOPS, AT BEST, INCLUDING VARIATIONs OF THE SAME FORMS!! has (And I am REALLY stretching it here) 100 forms. Our Tai Chi has 7 Forms (if you count the little 8 postures form and it's 4 and 8 gate varietys of practing it as 3 seperate forms), our Southern division has 6!, and our Six Step Monkey boxing has only 8 that I've heard of (do the math, you get the idea).

Now, I could, if i wanted too, memorize all those patterns in maybe a year or two (including all the stuff I'd have to make up out of thin air just to have 100 forms), But if My Master, after 30 + years has only mastered the Tai Chi himself, How on earth could I master 100 of them? Let alone 900 as claimed by this Sin The' charcter? HEll, how does he remember them all? How does he keep them pure? I Mean, when you specialize in one aspect of the system, you tend to do all the other stuff with that same flair, right?

Now, that being said, how did Sin The' do it?

I'm sure he can jump and stuff, (so can I) but does that make him special? Does patting a kids head make him a master?

I don't know guys, I'm sure he's not the Cult master my former school followed, But it sure sounds like 8 martial arts taught as one to me.

Kymus

04-01-2001, 06:16 PM

This guy is a fake and a try hard. Looking at the forms, you can easily tell this. I know nothing about the forms done in the videos or if they're "done properly". I have 12 years experience in martial arts. Just by watching someone perform a form, you can tell alot about them and the system. The forms shown used alot of wide open circular repetitive movements. You see this alot in KF movies to make things seem more exaderated. Another thing is that the practitioner performs them very slopily, without much controll. Also, this thing with 900 different forms, gimmie a break, that is BS. No one has ever seen the man perform. That is a little queer. Now, some may say that he has nothing to prove to anyone. I can understand that, but, if he was smart he would do some tornaments or seminars or something to show how good he is so that he will get better recognised and gain a higher student body. The only thing I can recomend for a student of this school is to take a look at some other KF schools and see how things are really done, then look at the Shaolin Do school and ask yourself, which one seems more for real? Sin The' is nothing but a con artist, not martial about him.

-Kymus

~Crosstraining is the key~
-Sifu Rick Tucci
www.pamausa.com (http://www.pamausa.com)

fungku

04-02-2001, 08:21 PM

I am sorry, but the man in those clips has VERY LITTLE skill at all, he is sloppy, not controlled, ... just plain awful?
This is not 'Shaolin' AT ALL.

OK, THE RULE ON NOT PUTTING DOWN ANOTHER STYLE.
I am not insulting this STYLE OF KUNG FU, I am SAYING THIS IS NOT KUNG FU. It may be a martial art, but it is NOT shaolin kung fu, nor does it look related to shaolin kung fu. It looks like a japanese martial art, with Chinese weapons, or 'imitated' Chinese movements.

I have studied Hung Gar kung fu for many years, and have started studyin Wing Chun kung fu. I have also two really close friends who both came from China (exchange students), and we practiced kung fu together, I have learned 2 northern shaolin forms from them. They seem authentic, though there is no way to be sure, but the exchange of kung fu was fun.

Anyway, like I was saying the whole SHaolin-Do thing...

It is NOT and I will repeat NOT kung fu.
(and if the guy in the clip is a seniour student of this Sin The guy, then it does not say a lot about Sin The)

BeiKongHui

04-03-2001, 02:47 PM

Don't make him beat you with his chest muscles!
He is the worlds most dangerous man anyway.

Dangerous Man (http://www.kentuckyconnect.com/heraldleader/news/032301/weekenderdocs/sin_the23.htm) :D

"Gong Sao Mo Gong Ching Sao"
- When you talk with the hands,
best not to speak of polite hands.

SanHeChuan

04-10-2001, 01:03 AM

you guys couldn't agree on the color of sh!t ;)

some of you say it's kung fu form videos
some of you say it's modern communist wushu
some of you say it's not even kung fu at all
some of you say it looks like karate (where you get that i don't know)
some of are just plain ignorante
some of the people who have been in shaolin-do seem to have been impressed with the martial side.

(there have been other shaolin-do posts by the way
)
so what the fuc!

With so many conflicting opinions i say screw them all and find out for youself, mabe it's not kung fu but that doesn't mean it cant be a good martial art. Mabe it is kung fu and these fuc sticks dont know what there talking about.
looking into the shaolin-do school if you like it best go there and if a more reputable kung fu school becomes avalible to you then try it out too and then after you have gained upper rank in both you can tell us what YOU think.
but tell us about the techniques and skills not about the kinda uniforms they where or wheather they say kata or form because that sh!t dont mean Sh!t

but you will only get out of your training what you put into it :eek:

"Civilize the mind but make savage the body"

BeiKongHui

04-10-2001, 01:59 AM

uhhhhhhm, the main problem I see is that I've met people who've been black belts (or sashes whatever it is this week)for 10-15 years and couldn't fight their way out of a paper bag. I've also been told by people that trained at the main headquarters that the GM sells belts to those who can't actually pass their tests.

"Gong Sao Mo Gong Ching Sao"
- When you talk with the hands,
best not to speak of polite hands.

Radhnoti

04-10-2001, 06:41 AM

Well, I can discount the "selling belts" idea, I know a guy that failed at LEAST one attempt to pass into brown from my hometown and have heard of several others from other schools.
And as for not being able to fight...well, maybe you're just SO unstoppable that anyone ELSE put next to you looks pathetic? ;)

-Radhnoti

Inquisitor

04-10-2001, 07:46 AM

You say that: "some of you say it's kung fu form videos some of you say it's modern communist wushu some of you say it's not even kung fu at all some of you say it looks like karate (where you get that i don't know)"

Could it not be *all of them*? I don't see why the fact that he teaches "modern communist wushu" somehow excludes him from also teaching "kung fu form [sic] videos." They aren't mutually exclusive. The problem isn't that what he teaches is not combat effective (although I believe so), the problem is that he claims to teach "Shaolin kungfu" when in fact he doesn't. Half of what he teaches is not from Shaolin, and none of it looks *real*. Why is it that even though a Choy Li Fut master and a Northern Shaolin master learn completely different styles, they can look at each other and say "He knows good kungfu" ? Because they both still do *kungfu* which, even across styles, shares several very basic similarities in both combat principle and technique (yes, that was an oversimplification). They may do things differently and study in a different manner, but they recognize martial mastery when they see it.

And then you have to gall to say "go do both and *then* compare." Well, I hate to break it to you, but time and money are limited resources. I am not about to waste my time or my heard-earned money (*gasp* money from a JOB *gasp*) learning some bull**** martial art from a bull**** "grandmaster" who, as far I know, couldn't punch if his life depended on it. I would not want others to do the same. This is the martial arts. I have seen, in person, and sparred with, several high-ranking Shaolin-Do students, including a "1st Dan" Blackbelt (I met them through a mutual friend). From my own *personal* experience, I can say that the Shaolin-Do that I have seen isn't kungfu. The "1st Dan" couldn't even tell me what a basic concept such as fa jing was. It was one of the *lower ranking* students who had "heard of it," and even then he couldn't explain to me what it was. Keep in mind that it is supposed to take "several years" for someone to reach the rank of "1st Dan," which in the system of Shaolin-Do is supposed to denote some form of mastery of at least the basics, if not the "advanced" knowledge. In fact, from what I have seen, Shaolin-Do doesn't even qualify as a martial art. Go watch a class. See how the instructor or a high-ranked student does the forms. For anyone that has had several years of study in the traditional Chinese Martial Arts, what they see is complete and utter bull****. The Seven Star Praying Mantis and Eight Step Praying Mantis branches both do the same basic forms, but do them differently. Do they say "oh, that branch doesn't know *real* Praying Mantis"? No. They say "oh, they do them *differently*, but it's still the same thing." When they see a Shaolin-Do master doing a Praying Mantis form, they cringe. Why is that?
Unfortunately, we live in a different time. In the past, one could have simply walked up to the nearest Shaolin-Do "dojo" and challenged the instructor/master of the school. Now, such a thing would be pretty much impossible (you think any Shaolin-Do "master" would agree to such a fight in the first place? Good luck, heh).

Look, I realize that you weren't really picking sides, so I apologize for reaming you. It just really, really gets to me when I hear about crap like this. You make statements like "find out for yourself" when the proof is lying there, right in front of you. Why ask someone to waste their time and money doing something that is fake just so they can learn that IT IS FAKE? It gives the real martial arts (not just the Chinese Martial Arts, but all of them) a bad name. And, for the record, I believe that in this thread Vankuen professed to learning Shaolin-Do before, as did several others in previous "Shaolin-Do" threads.
Anyway, that is my angry little spiel on the subject of Shaolin-Do. =P

Brad

04-10-2001, 04:31 PM

I have a feeling Shaolin-Do has stolen forms from a lot of different styles including standardized wushu. 24 Taiji?! Defenitely not Shaolin in any way. It was created in the 50's! A lot of us say it looks karate(if it does, it's the most god awful karate I've ever seen) because we probably don't know a whole lot about karate. We're kunfu guys.

Abstract

04-10-2001, 05:37 PM

if you're gonna call people "ignorant" then spell it without the 'e'... ;) ;)

Radhnoti

04-10-2001, 06:14 PM

First I studied aikido. I couldn't mesh with the totally nonaggressive philosophy, and HATED standing with my arms to my side inviting attack. I left. Next I studied with a guy teaching multiple japanese arts, one of which he was recognized as a Shihan (sp?) by a nationwide organization. He taught small-circle jujitsu, judo (not his strong suit), and shorin ryu karate. He had plans to integrate them into his own "eclectic" martial art. I stayed there for a year or more before figuring out it really wasn't for me. He felt there was no need to observe too many of the "useless traditions" his sensei had forced upon him. He still taught kata, but he felt sparring and tournament competition was more important.
Now, I'm in Shaolin-Do. I'm working harder than I had to in any martial art I ever studied before (there are some more that I studied back in college, but I'll skip the boring story about each of them). We're taught conditioning techniques. (Ever do push-ups on your wrists? Forearm toughening drills? Finger tip pushups? We do.) We study kata and our teacher goes into great detail about the possible applications of each movement within the kata, stressing that techniques can and must be modified slightly in real life situations. We observe all courtesies, extending them even to visitors from other styles. Now, onto (I believe, but forgive me if I misrepresent you) Inquisitor's primary problems with Shaolin-Do. Grandmaster Sin claims to be the sole and direct inheritor of grandmaster status from the Shaolin temple. I have no way to verify OR deny this, neither does anyone else. His supporters would say, "Look at all he knows and teaches! Anyone who says he isn't is just jealous." His detractors would say, "Isn't it convenient that nothing and no one exists to dispute or prove your claim." This seems to me to be a pointless arguement for BOTH sides. Personally, I could care less whether his system is the "pure" one handed down from "The Temple". It has within it all the elements that I require. I DO believe him, but it's based solely upon my interactions with him and some of his higher ranked students, no hard facts. The other problem folks seem to have regarding Shaolin-Do runs along the lines of, "That ain't Kung-Fu man!" I would, respectfully, point out that kung-fu is different things to different folks. It's ridiculous for someone from a specific style to say, "That style is wrong, because it's not like mine." In addition, Grandmaster Sin's book goes into great detail about why Shaolin-Do isn't kung-fu... A Cantonese term which refers to the effort a person makes when he devotes himself to some task. They seem to prefer the Mandarin phrases Shaolin Ch'uan-fa (Ch'uan-fa meaning, "the way of the fist") or Shaolin Wu kung (wu kung being an expression that denotes any and all types of martial endeavor performed in a skillful and dedicated manner). But, instead of fretting about what category Shaolin-Do is placed within, it was decided that "generic" terms were unimportant. Shaolin-Do has since been referred to as both Kung-Fu and even karate with no protestation from any of the high ranking students or Grandmaster. So, maybe that'll make you feel better...you're right, it ain't kung-fu! ;)
In closing, (finally, eh? :rolleyes: ) I'd like to apologize for having to be the one to present the "other side" of this argument. I'm sure that someone with more experience in the system would do a better job...maybe they're just tired of this circular argument and have let it go. Or maybe they're practicing their forms the way we all should be. heh

-Radhnoti

SanHeChuan

04-10-2001, 07:56 PM

ok, but if they got it from videos wouldn't you still be able to reconize the forms as at least bad kung-fu.

so i was saying that people saying that it isn't even kung-fu, and people that are saying thats it's video kungfu are contradicting each other.

i don't think that he should wast his time with crap either but i believe in using personal experiance rather than what some internet jocky says to form your own opions :D

whether fooled or not alot of people seem to like shaolin-do and some of them come from other martial arts including kung-fu styles,so maybe doing "internet research" isn't going to give you the real story.

i'm not trying to defend shaolin-do, i'm just saying personal experience is best, or something.
i think i've confused myself :D j/k

"Civilize the mind but make savage the body"

BeiKongHui

04-10-2001, 08:24 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Well, I can discount the "selling belts" idea, I know a guy that failed at LEAST one attempt to pass into brown from my hometown and have heard of several others from other schools.
And as for not being able to fight...well, maybe you're just SO unstoppable that anyone ELSE put next to you looks pathetic? [/quote]

Yeah, everyone who "studies" shaolin-No's teacher is "different". No, I'm no tougher than anyone else I just study legitimate martial arts-Wing Chun & BJJ-in which actual fighting basics are taught as opposed to getting a belt for memorizing a "kata". Sorry, buddy, I've seen Sin The' & the boys here at the Sin The' gym (this is where this travesty all got started)I wasn't impressed nor where any of my Sihings who pounded many SD people into the ground back in the 70's & 80's when The' tried (unsuccessfully) to send his black belts around to other schools to start fights.
I'm no Kung Fu expert but I & most everyone else here know more than you...save you time & money and move on to a legit art.

"Gong Sao Mo Gong Ching Sao"
- When you talk with the hands,
best not to speak of polite hands.

BeiKongHui

04-10-2001, 08:27 PM

Just for your piece of mind I have seen it all first hand not through the internet. If I wanted to subject myself to it again I could walk out my door and walk about 1/8th of a mile to the nearest Shaolin-Do McDojo.

"Gong Sao Mo Gong Ching Sao"
- When you talk with the hands,
best not to speak of polite hands.

Radhnoti

04-11-2001, 12:14 AM

BeiKongHui, thanks for your "expert" opinion. I, too, live in KY and I agree to disagree with you. And just so no one thinks my comment that you quoted was rude, I'll point out that the "you're so awesome" comment WAS followed by a smiley face...in this case I meant it as humor, not mockery.

-Radhnoti

ope

04-11-2001, 03:21 AM

Push ups on your fingers we do this as well push ups on your wrist (crane push ups) all these things should be basic training i would hope most schools train using these methods..

BeiKongHui

04-11-2001, 02:50 PM

Where are you in Kentucky? There are plenty of more legitimate Kung Fu schools in this state. If your going to invest the blood, tears & $$$ into training you should seek out a style worthy of your dedication. At the very least I would urge you to do some heave research into the "katas" you are being taught and seek out the advice of more experienced non shaolin-no martial artists who will tell you how it is. Sorry, man I just see too many people who've been through the Shaolin-No system & come out totally disillusioned with the entire world of martial arts because they saw the truth too late.

"Gong Sao Mo Gong Ching Sao"
- When you talk with the hands,
best not to speak of polite hands.

Radhnoti

04-13-2001, 05:57 AM

Ope, I hope that most traditional schools do as well...my point was that we are training hard, and that's what it's all about, no?
BeiKongHui, I'll take your advice on comparing the forms I learn to those similar but taught in other styles. My teacher encourages us to learn whatever we can, where ever we can so I see no conflict of interest there. Right now, I'm reading the book Dr. Yang Jwing-Ming co-authored about Hsing Yi Chuan as a sort of warm-up for what I'm supposed to learn later.

-Radhnoti

Inquisitor

04-14-2001, 08:47 AM

Radhnoti:

One of the basic points of my argument against Sin The was that his lineage *couldn't* be substantiated. It is common knowledge that in kungfu, masters travel in circles. Why cannot even *one* other sifu say "Yes, I know Sin The, and I know or knew of his sifu. He is legitimate."? I then followed this argument up with the next one: Even were his lineage to be unsubstantiated, *the skill would speak for itself*. From what I and others have seen, along with what is easily accessible on the Internet ("masters" doing forms, two man drills, etc.), that is clearly *not the case*.
Also, the basis of my argument for his "vast knowledge" was that all of his knowledge is FAKE. The fact that he claims to have all this knowledge and the FACT that it can be proven that this knowledge is either a) gotten from other materials, b) inconsistent with traditional Shaolin kungfu (and yes, this is a valid argument, as even with the dozens of "Shaolin" styles, they all share inherent characteristics that are not found in Shaolin-Do) or, c) *NOT EVEN FROM HIS CLAIMED LINEAGE*. He claims to know the sum all knowledge of Shaolin Temple kungfu. He has had no other sifu other than Ie Chang Ming. Well, if that is the case, and his lineage is to be believed, why the hell does he teach *NON-SHAOLIN* kungfu? He teaches Tai Chi Chuan, which is TAOIST. Not only that, but the Tai Chi Chuan he teaches is not even consistent with the traditional styles! He teaches the widely known "conglomerated" forms created by the Communist Chinese government! If anything, that should say something about his other knowledge that is supposedly descended from the Shaolin Temple, and whether or not that information is actually legitimate. Strangely enough, according to you, one must have "advanced training" in Tai Chi Chuan before one can go into the higher ranks... Am I the only one that sees something wrong with that?
As for the argument that "we don't call it kungfu, so it isn't kungfu, so there!"; well, I have to tell you something that you might not like: IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE KUNGFU. The term kungfu has changed over time to mean the Chinese Martial Arts. As the Shaolin Temple was located in China, the martial arts that was taught/developed/systematized/etc. there was Chinese in origin. The simple fact of the matter is that what Sin The claims to teach is KUNGFU. It is supposed to be Chinese Martial Arts from China. I don't care if it lasted two generations outside of China, it is still Chinese in origin and, in fact, he claims that it is still Chinese in substance as well. Supposedly, there have been no changes to the martial information from when Su Kong Tai Djin was "abbot of Shaolin Temple" down to Sin The. If we are to take his claims seriously, then yes, what he knows is in fact kungfu. Karate, on the other hand, is a specific style that has its origins on the island of Okinawa (although there are substyles of Karate-do that "started" on the main island of Nippon). Obviously, kungfu from the Shaolin Temple is not a part of Karate (although Karate has some roots from certain styles of kungfu). Your "superiors" may not protest that Shaolin-Do is called karate, but that is not the point. What is being debated is whether or not Shaolin-Do is kungfu, or even has its roots in kungfu. And, for the record, I know of many, many kungfu practitioners who would take offense if their chosen martial art were to be referred to as "karate."
Your other argument was that "Hey, we work hard and we try, and that is all that really matters anyway, right?" is ludicrous. Just because you work hard at it doesn't mean it actually works, that it is legitimate, or that it "makes everything okay." Take a good long look at Chung Moo Doe. Are you going to tell me that the people who practiced it didn't work hard or didn't do lots of pushups/situps/etc.? The fact that they put a lot of effort into Chung Moo Doe did not change the fact that it is fake, not useful, inapplicable, and does not qualify as a martial art. That also brings me to another point: the whole idea of "bashing" Shaolin-Do is to prevent other people from starting or continuing their "education" in it. I know for a fact that Shaolin-Do is complete and utter bull****, is not what it claims to be, does not teach actual martial arts, and is cheating a lot of people out of their hard earned money. If you wish to continue learning Shaolin-Do, then you should at least know that much. LoL it isn't like what I am saying will get through to most of you anyway. There are proven psychological processes that will either ignore or discredit the FACT that Shaolin-Do is fake, just because *you don't want to be wrong*.

SanHeChuan:

For starters, you need to refer back to my original reply to your post about how we are all supposedly "contradicting" each other. Secondly, kungfu learned from videos *does not qualify as actualy kungfu*. Also, certain things cannot and should not rely solely on personal experience. Yes, personal experience can be a good teacher (although most of the time it isn't anyway). However, do you want to personally find out about how people can scam you for your entire life's savings? Or, better yet, do you want to learn personally about how jumping out of a plane two miles aboveground will kill you? Hey, why don't you go personally learn how shooting someone is a bad thing? Give me a break. Yes, there are a lot of ignorant statements and BS made on the internet; that does not exclude the possibility that there are those of us who do know what we are talking about.

UberShaman

04-14-2001, 05:00 PM

What gets me is this guy Sin The used to teach Karate . He must be the best martial artist in the world The sole inheritor of the shaolin system over 900 forms, 33 flavors of ice cream and he he still had time to learn Karate!! I wonder why he doesnt mention this in his book?
"would you like fries with that black belt sir?"

Brad

04-14-2001, 10:45 PM

Radhnoti,

Please don't take everything we say as personal attacks or hatered towards yourself. We don't doubt that you put a lot of effort into what you do. But if you were to put as much effort into a legitimate style with a good teacher you would probably be surprised by how much better you become. The sooner you leave Shaolin Do the better off you'll be.

Radhnoti

04-16-2001, 05:40 PM

First off, Inquisitor let me compliment you upon an extremely appropriate name. :)

" LoL it isn't like what I am saying will get through to most of you anyway. There are proven psychological processes that will either ignore or discredit the FACT that Shaolin-Do is fake, just because *you don't want to be wrong*."
Neat bit of wordplay there. So, it's impossible that anyone would defend Shaolin-Do without a "psychological process" coming into play? Tell you what, you assume that I'm coming into this with an open mind and I'll assume that you're listening to what I have to say. We may both be fooling ourselves, but the alternative is that this is just an online diary in which we are only writing for ourselves. Right?

"Why cannot even *one* other sifu say "Yes, I know Sin The, and I know or knew of his sifu. He is legitimate."?"
It seems to me that this would be quite insulting to Grandmaster Sin and quite presumptive of anyone else. I've read other articles on these boards with members saying that Grandmaster Sin's brother is "the real deal"...and they both learned from Grandmaster Ie.

"It is common knowledge that in kungfu, masters travel in circles. " The last issue of Kungfu Qigong mentions that Grandmaster Sin was welcomed by Eagle Claw Master Li li Hong, stating that he has been "a friend...for many years".
I'm fairly new to CMA, so, I can't speak knowledgably about the skill of my instructors vs. the skill of other masters. I CAN speak of the poor quality of video viewed over the internet. And I CAN state that watching my teacher perform the higher level tiger forms is awe inspiring for me. You can feel the intensity he radiates.

As for the "yeah, but does it work?" argument. I have met an instructor in a nearby city who works as "security" at a local bar. The bar was KNOWN for the fights that erupted regularly. A rough place. He has since greatly improved the bar's reputation for safety. Yes, he did have to fight. And, yes, it did work. He's about 5'10'' and weighs about 165 lbs. and subdued players for the college football team weighing 300+. You can say, "maybe he got lucky" or "yeah, but maybe none of them could fight" or "imagine what he could have done with a REAL art!" if you want, but it sounds like sour grapes to me.

"I know for a fact that Shaolin-Do is complete and utter bull****, is not what it claims to be, does not teach actual martial arts, and is cheating a lot of people out of their hard earned money." What I know for "a fact" is that I'm improving myself and I see my fellow students doing the same. Shaolin-Do has been all it claimed to be for me. I am learning an "actual" martial art. And I don't feel cheated at all.

UberShaman, I believe that Grandmaster Sin teaching "karate" goes back to the fact that he doesn't really care how his system is classified.

Brad, thanks for the good word. None of you know ME and I don't claim to know any of you. So, really there's no way for me to take anything said personally. I HAVE begun to see why senior Shaolin-Do students don't bother to interact or contradict statements made by other martial artists though. It would have been much easier for me (still would be, in fact) to just ignore this thread. Maybe I'll know better next time. :D

-Radhnoti

BeiKongHui

04-16-2001, 07:34 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> I HAVE begun to see why senior Shaolin-Do students don't bother to interact or contradict statements made by other martial artists though. [/quote]

That would be because they can't contradict the statements made here and it's much easier to ignore the truth for some people.

"Gong Sao Mo Gong Ching Sao"
- When you talk with the hands,
best not to speak of polite hands.

dragon797

04-17-2001, 12:40 AM

To correct a comment about Sin The's brother, Hiang The.

Hiang The learned material not only from his grandfather, Ie Chang Ming (who Sin still strangely does not acknowledge as his grandfather) but from three other of Ie's peers, one of whom taught Hiang his complete Tai Peng (Bird) system. Ie's specialty was the internal.

To BeiKongHui:
I am sure you have met or had bad experiences with some Shaolin-Do people over the years, especially if you were involved with John Ng, John Drefrense, and Mark Burgher. Many of them can be extremely arrogant. But don't lump everyone into his group or dismiss the skills of others who have studied the material from Ie and his contemporaries. Sin The is not the only source, just the main problem.
n

BeiKongHui

04-17-2001, 04:55 AM

I've only seen Hiang in action on old video tapes and he was ok. The 2 people I know that trained under him appear to have the same skill as your average Shaolin-Do black belts.

However, my question is if there is not some level of scam involved why Then don't they just call it The' Family Fist or something and tell the truth about it's origins? Does Sin The have so little faith in his art?

"Gong Sao Mo Gong Ching Sao"
- When you talk with the hands,
best not to speak of polite hands.

Radhnoti

04-17-2001, 05:50 AM

Apologies, Dragon 797 if you're a student of Master Hiang's, no disrespect was intended. The black belt I talked to about Master Hiang only said, "We all learned a lot from Hiang The' before he left, it's a family squabble and we (meaning the senior students I assume) try not to get involved." I'd also read or heard somewhere that he had stayed in Indonesia to continue studying with local masters before coming to the U.S. under his brother as an instructor in Shaolin-Do. Everyone in Shaolin-Do that knows him or OF him speaks of him with high regard...except Grandmaster Sin who speaks of him not at all.
BeiKongHui, it's interesting how everyone assumes they have cornered the market on "the truth". ;)

-Radhnoti

Inquisitor

04-17-2001, 06:41 AM

Thanks for the compliment on my UserName. I felt it was appropriate. =) Now, on to the reply:

================================
First off, Inquisitor let me compliment you upon an extremely appropriate name.
" LoL it isn't like what I am saying will get through to most of you anyway. There are proven psychological processes that will either ignore or discredit the FACT that Shaolin-Do is fake, just because *you don't want to be wrong*."
Neat bit of wordplay there. So, it's impossible that anyone would defend Shaolin-Do without a "psychological process" coming into play? Tell you what, you assume that I'm coming into this with an open mind and I'll assume that you're listening to what I have to say. We may both be fooling ourselves, but the alternative is that this is just an online diary in which we are only writing for ourselves. Right?
--------------------

The point I was trying to make when I commented on certain psychological processes was that it is near-impossible for me to change your mind using any sort of ethos, logos, or pathos. I was not making any sort of comment about your defending Shaolin-Do...

--------------------
"Why cannot even *one* other sifu say "Yes, I know Sin The, and I know or knew of his sifu. He is legitimate."?"
It seems to me that this would be quite insulting to Grandmaster Sin and quite presumptive of anyone else. I've read other articles on these boards with members saying that Grandmaster Sin's brother is "the real deal"...and they both learned from Grandmaster Ie.
--------------------

Actually, now that you mention it, it was intended to be quite insulting to "Grandmaster" Sin. To put it simply, I have no respect for the man (for reasons that you can probably guess). As for the comments about Sin's brother: if memory serves me correct, those statements were insinuating that Sin The is misrepresenting himself. Apparently Sin The and his brother learned an actual legitimate style of kungfu from their family, but Sin The decided to take that small knowledge and suddenly become the "Grandmaster Inheritor of All Shaolin Styles." As I have no information which cannot prove nor disprove those accusations, I will refrain from saying anything more about them. You still have yet to give me any sort of proof that would discredit the simple fact that no one would dare vouch for the skill of your vaunted "Grandmaster."

--------------------
"It is common knowledge that in kungfu, masters travel in circles. " The last issue of Kungfu Qigong mentions that Grandmaster Sin was welcomed by Eagle Claw Master Li li Hong, stating that he has been "a friend...for many years".
I'm fairly new to CMA, so, I can't speak knowledgably about the skill of my instructors vs. the skill of other masters. I CAN speak of the poor quality of video viewed over the internet. And I CAN state that watching my teacher perform the higher level tiger forms is awe inspiring for me. You can feel the intensity he radiates.
--------------------

I have never heard of this "Eagle Claw Master Li li Hong"... Also, I would not accept your evidenced based on the simple fact that Kungfu-Qigong magazine is paid to publish certain articles (and I am 100% sure that they were either paid to publish that article or the information from that article came from Shaolin-Do). Oftentimes, they write articles which contain false or unverified information simply because they were paid to. This is not only in reference to Shaolin-Do. I, along with several others on these boards I am sure, have my beef with the credibility of anything published in both Kungfu-Qigong and Inside Kungfu.
LoL also, thank you for pointing out something for me. First, you said that you have very little experience in the CMA. You then follow up that statement by declaring "I CAN speak of the poor quality of video viewed over the internet. And I CAN state that watching my teacher perform the higher level tiger forms is awe inspiring for me. You can feel the intensity he radiates." If you have very little knowledge in kungfu, and say yourself that you cannot really compare the differences between legitimate masters and your own instructors, what suddenly gives you the ability to compare the quality of the internet videos (which were not my only source of evidence) *and* the skill level of your teacher performing "higher level tigher forms." It may be "awe inspiring" for you, but to those who have been studying the traditional Chinese Martial Arts for several years, it looks like crap.

--------------------
As for the "yeah, but does it work?" argument. I have met an instructor in a nearby city who works as "security" at a local bar. The bar was KNOWN for the fights that erupted regularly. A rough place. He has since greatly improved the bar's reputation for safety. Yes, he did have to fight. And, yes, it did work. He's about 5'10'' and weighs about 165 lbs. and subdued players for the college football team weighing 300+. You can say, "maybe he got lucky" or "yeah, but maybe none of them could fight" or "imagine what he could have done with a REAL art!" if you want, but it sounds like sour grapes to me.
--------------------

One word: hearsay. Actually, make that two: unsubstantiated. Give me documented proof, or at least a widely-known and recognized story (i.e. the way of Wong Shun Leung and his fights in HK), of the skill of Shaolin-Do practitioners. I can say for a fact that there is none of the latter, and I have yet to see any of the former.

-------------------
"I know for a fact that Shaolin-Do is complete and utter bull****, is not what it claims to be, does not teach actual martial arts, and is cheating a lot of people out of their hard earned money." What I know for "a fact" is that I'm improving myself and I see my fellow students doing the same. Shaolin-Do has been all it claimed to be for me. I am learning an "actual" martial art. And I don't feel cheated at all.
--------------------

Again, I am forced to use your own words against you. I thought you had very little knowledge of the Chinese Martial Arts? How do you know that you and your fellow students are in fact "improving"? The people who practiced Chung Moo Doe, the people who studied at their local McDojo, they all felt like they were "improving." Does that actually mean that they were learning the actual art of pugilism, or that they are being spoon-fed a bunch of BS? Give me a break. So far you have done nothing but show that Shaolin-Do does not have any sort of information that can disprove ANY of the arguments which prove that it is a fraudulent martial art.

--------------------
UberShaman, I believe that Grandmaster Sin teaching "karate" goes back to the fact that he doesn't really care how his system is classified.

Brad, thanks for the good word. None of you know ME and I don't claim to know any of you. So, really there's no way for me to take anything said personally. I HAVE begun to see why senior Shaolin-Do students don't bother to interact or contradict statements made by other martial artists though. It would have been much easier for me (still would be, in fact) to just ignore this thread. Maybe I'll know better next time.

-Radhnoti
==============================

None involved in Shaolin-Do "bother to interact or contradict statements made by other martial artists" because they have no information to the contrary. Look, I am not doing this out of any sort of spite for you or most of those involved with Shaolin-Do (note I say most, not all). As I have said before, this is for the benefit of those who have yet to make up their minds or have doubts about Shaolin-Do and simply need someone to tell them that it's okay to look elsewhere. I'm sorry that I can't get you to realize that Shaolin-Do is, in reality, a fake martial art.

dragon797

04-17-2001, 03:39 PM

*****************************
However, my question is if there is not some level of scam involved why Then don't they just call it The' Family Fist or something and tell the truth about it's origins?
********************************

Ie Chang Ming was the only family member. The other teachers were not related to Hiang. All of them immigrated to Indonesia from China where they had learned material from a variety of sources, some as a group and some individually. Those are the facts and Hiang has never presented them as anything else.t

Radhnoti

04-17-2001, 06:22 PM

dragon797 as one of the original teachers of Shaolin-Do I doubt you'll be able to distance Master Hiang from Grandmaster Sin. His association with the art lasted...what?...decades? He certainly never stepped forward and told any of Grandmaster Sin's students that the historical account they'd been given was false. Many senior students seem to hope that someday the brothers will patch things up and Master Hiang will return to Shaolin-Do.
Inquisitor, I feel like we're "point sparring" with these quotations...but such is the nature of message boards I suppose.
"The point I was trying to make when I commented on certain psychological processes was that it is near-impossible for me to change your mind using any sort of ethos, logos, or pathos. I was not making any sort of comment about your defending Shaolin-Do..."
You were saying that it's impossible to change my mind about Shaolin-Do because of "psychological processes". I was saying that you should probably drop the psycho-babble and save it for your patients. :rolleyes:
"As I have no information which cannot prove nor disprove those accusations, I will refrain from saying anything more about them. You still have yet to give me any sort of proof that would discredit the simple fact that no one would dare vouch for the skill of your vaunted Grandmaster."
I also have no information to prove or disprove, no one does. That's the problem with the shadowy history of the Shaolin Temples. No one vouches for Grandmaster Sin's skill, but I've yet to hear of a "master" from another style stepping forward to discredit him.
" If you have very little knowledge in kungfu, and say yourself that you cannot really compare the differences between legitimate masters and your own instructors, what suddenly gives you the ability to compare the quality of the internet videos (which were not my only source of evidence) *and* the skill level of your teacher performing "higher level tigher forms." It may be "awe inspiring" for you, but to those who have been studying the traditional Chinese Martial Arts for several years, it looks like crap."
What I was saying I COULD speak of was the quality of internet videos in general. Even with a cable modem RealPlayer videos have been compressed and seem choppy. I won't pretend experience enough to judge CMA forms, I can only offer what I feel. It impresses the hell out of me.
"One word: hearsay. Actually, make that two: unsubstantiated."
Unless someone has seen something themselves it's unsubstantiated and hearsay. The existance of China for me is hearsay, I've never been there. I've never met a Hung Gar student or instructor, does that make the effective reputation of that art form untrue? All we have to judge things we've not seen by is the word of others. I used to hear, "Don't go there. Too dangerous." when reference to the bar was made. Now I hear, "It's a nice place, they've really cleaned it up."
Yes, it may be hearsay but that doesn't make it not so.
"I thought you had very little knowledge of the Chinese Martial Arts? How do you know that you and your fellow students are in fact "improving"? ...Give me a break. So far you have done nothing but show that Shaolin-Do does not have any sort of information that can disprove ANY of the arguments which prove that it is a fraudulent martial art."
No, so far YOU have yet to prove Shaolin-Do is a fraudulent martial art. :D Improvement is in the eye of the beholder I suppose. I can do more push-ups...so I assume my upper body strength is improving. People that I've sparred in karate (I've been in a few other martial arts previously) that used to be able to beat me easily now say I'm tougher to handle. Long attempts to keep horsestance have strengthened my legs, helping me with my work in which I lift things regularly. I feel increased confidence in myself and my wife says I seem happier. All in all I don't think anyone could say Shaolin-Do hasn't improved me.
"I'm sorry that I can't get you to realize that Shaolin-Do is, in reality, a fake martial art."
And I'm sorry that I can't get you to see Shaolin-Do is a fine art for me, and probably for many others.

-Radhnoti

Johnny Hot Shot

04-17-2001, 09:52 PM

hey Brad is this guy in your videos from USSD "Kung- fu" ?

Brad

04-17-2001, 10:56 PM

All I know is the guy from those vids I posted is a 7 degree blackbelt in Shaolin-Do certified by Sin The(according to the website). He's located in Tennessee.

I think I'm going to post a new thread and list links to sites with video's of chinese martial arts just so anyone who wants to can compare and contrast.

Falcor

04-17-2001, 11:05 PM

Well, I guess if Shaolin-do makes you happy, despite what everyone says and despite the evidence that is in plain view, then I guess we (the general CMA community) really have nothing more to say. But consider this:

I may be an excellent guitar player. I may have learned it on my own, or learned it from a known teacher. And what I play may not exactly be jazz or blues, or rock or such, but what the hey, it makes me happy and that's that. Right? Now, if I were to open up a guitar school saying that I will teach you to play the guitar and simply that, witout making claims as to what particular style of guitar playing I teach, then I am being truthful and honest and I may actually make a good teacher. But, on the other hand, if I make claims to have studied jazz and blues from the greats, and that what I teach is the jazz and blues of BB King and Stevie Ray Vaughn and such, when my playing style i different from those of the greats and anyone who may have learned from them for real, then I am lying. I may still end up teaching you to play the guitar decently, but what I am claiming is a lie. If you don't care and you just wanna learn to play, well alrighty then. But if you wanna learn the particul;ar styles of King or Vaughn, legitimately tranmistted by them, then what I teach you will be false and you should look for someone else. It's the same thing with martial arts.

...don't think you are, know you are...

Falcor

04-17-2001, 11:09 PM

Another thought struck me. I checked out all the Shaolin-Do sites and addresses of schools and such, and it seems that they are all located in areas of the country with a low Asian population density. Places where the general public would have been l;ess exposed to legitimate CMA and thus would not have a standard to compare with. Interesting, isn't it?

By the way, are there any Shaolin-Do schools in places like NY, LA, or SF, or similar locations?

...don't think you are, know you are...

Radhnoti

04-17-2001, 11:50 PM

I really liked your first post Falcor. Great analogy. I suppose that if someone watched some movie and they KNEW somehow that what they were watching was a specific style of Kung Fu...and that's what they wanted to study, to get something different might be a let down. For me, I just wanted a well-rounded, effective martial art with a serious and traditional TONE. Meaning emphasis on courtesy, forms, discipline and application. Had Shaolin-Do been presented to me as a brand new fighting discipline I doubt I'd have cared after meeting my instructor and sitting in on a few of the classes. There is a basic flaw to your analogy however. There's documentation and recordings of the blues and jazz greats, when it comes to the Shaolin temples there's only supposition and word of mouth. You have no proof that what I am studying is not Shaolin in it's purest modern form. Nor do I have proof that it is. I think it's a great system (from what I've seen, I've only studied about 8 months now), and you'll note that MOST those who claimed to have studied it for any length of time say it's a fine style.
Maybe we can get dragon797 to bring Master Hiang onto the boards and settle the whole issue?
It seems to me that if he and his brother had a falling out, he WOULD be willing to discredit his brother with some sort of overwhelming evidence if any exists? :)
Hey, Inquisitor...when you rip into me next, you think you could open another thread to do it in? This is getting a bit long. ;)

-Radhnoti

Brad

04-18-2001, 04:35 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>You have no proof that what I am studying is not Shaolin in it's purest modern form. [/quote]

Shaolin-Do teaches Taiji 24. This form was created in 1956 outside of the Shaolin Temple. Also Sai and Nunchucku(sp?) are Japanese weapons. Yang style Taiji is a family style created away from the temple also. Same goes for the other Taiji family styles. Also I would think if these styles were learned legitamately there would be some record or knowledge of Sin The or someone from his lineage among the Chen or Yang family. To tell the truth, I don't think any respected teachers have spoken out against Sin The because they either don't know about him, or they don't care as long as he stays away from them.

Inquisitor

04-18-2001, 08:38 AM

Thank you for proving my point. I was unable to change your mind because of, you guessed it, certain psychological processes.
What really gets to me is that you have the gall to mock me and say that *I* have not done my job of discrediting Sin The, when I have very simply and clearly done so. The fact of the matter is that I did my job, and it was your job to defend against those arguments. You failed. Sin The is a fraud for all the reasons that I and others have mentioned. I am not going to waste my time reiterating myself when it is painfully visible to me that you have no intention of even listening to a word of it. If you had, then you would have never said something as utterly ludicrous as "No, so far YOU have yet to prove Shaolin-Do is a fraudulent martial art." The problems with your own self-styled "successful" defense against all of my arguments are that: A) You chose your battles. You ignored several of my key arguments such as the fact that Sin The teaches forms/styles outside of that which he claims knowledge of. Also, you ignored the fact that not only does Sin The teach things outside of his supposed system, but that he teaches things that are not even a part of the traditional Chinese Martial Arts. I could go on about other arguments, but I'd rather not. And B) You used flawed, runaround logic in each and every one of your rebuttals against my statements. When I made a statement like "No one can substantiate Sin The's claimed lineage," you would counter with something like "Well...we can't prove that he's what he says he is, but you can't prove that he isn't!" Give me a break. This isn't the 3rd Grade anymore. Try actually using information to rebut my statements, rather than inane and argumentatively useless accusations (go ask any professor that teaches logic if that sort of rebuttal holds any sort of water). My argument was that HIS LINEAGE IS FAKE. I have already given my proof as to why I believe it to be so. Now it is your job to disprove me, or provide evidence to show that his lineage is in fact legitimate. Oh, I'm sorry, I was expecting too much of you. I was expecting you to respond intelligently.

Okay, I'm sick and tired of arguing about this. The proof is rampant throughout this entire thread that Sin The is a fake. If you wish to ignore the truth, then do so at your own folly.

Caveat Emptor

Radhnoti

04-18-2001, 04:27 PM

Sheesh Inquisitor, I didn't expect you to fall apart like that. Was it because I liked Falcor's arguement? Sue me, I like it when people use small words and analogies to bring about a revelation. ;)
"And B) You used flawed, runaround logic in each and every one of your rebuttals against my statements. When I made a statement like "No one can substantiate Sin The's claimed lineage," you would counter with something like "Well...we can't prove that he's what he says he is, but you can't prove that he isn't!" Give me a break. This isn't the 3rd Grade anymore. Try actually using information to rebut my statements, rather than inane and argumentatively useless accusations."
So, it's ok for you to say you can't prove anything, but I need to produce some sort of documentation? I don't think (though I may be wrong...this has been a long discussion) I ever said nothing new had been incorporated into Shaolin-Do. Obvious things would be the Japanese gi and belt system. You obviously know more about the history of Taiji...or maybe that was Brad, anyway, perhaps other peripheral things have been added. Isn't that what the Shaolin Temples did for centuries? Catalog and Incorporate styles and forms?
"What really gets to me is that you have the gall to mock me and say that *I* have not done my job of discrediting Sin The, when I have very simply and clearly done so. The fact of the matter is that I did my job, and it was your job to defend against those arguments. You failed."
:rolleyes: Yes, I'll try and live with the shame. All I can do is go on and try to live day to day. First, I don't think it's my "job" to defend Grandmaster Sin...and it's sort of pathetic if you think your "job" is to discredit him. Your posts were long, I broke down each point as I could and tried to respond with my admittedly amateurish responses. All in all, I feel I've given the best account of myself that someone who's been in a style for just 8 months might be expected to give. If you saying I'm a failure makes you feel better, good, this is an online forum with pseudonyms and you shouldn't feel bad, no matter what some joker writes about you or to you.
"I was unable to change your mind because of, you guessed it, certain psychological processes."
Fair enough, we can assume I'm a close minded psychotic, brain washed Sin The' chanting flunky. While YOU from your impartial view on high offered me truth and knowledge which, due to my indoctrination, I ignored. The fact is that I have listened to you, and I'll measure what I learn with your grain of salt. Have you heard anything I've said? Anything positive I've said you seem to brush away. Is your hatred so strong that you refuse to acknowledge even the POSSIBILITY that someone could study Shaolin-Do and be happy?
"Oh, I'm sorry, I was expecting too much of you. I was expecting you to respond intelligently."
Ok. Again, if a personal attack makes you feel better...it won't keep me up nights. ;)
"Okay, I'm sick and tired of arguing about this."
Wow! We agree on something. :D

-Radhnoti

Anarcho

04-18-2001, 06:06 PM

Let me start by saying that I have no emotional commitment to Shaolin-Do being fake or genuine. I have looked at the website with the dog guy on it, and heard about the 984.713 forms involved, the weird Japanese stylings etc. all of which leads me to believe that it's probably bollocks...But who knows? Maybe I'm wrong, it doesn't worry me.

The question I have, though, is about how Shaolin-Do is seen by the rest of the CMA community. Several styles have more or less bitter political situations (Wing Chun, Northern Mantis, etc.), but noone seems to really doubt the skill of their rivals, just claims about being the sole inheritor of the system and that kind of thing. So, if Shaolin-Do is genuine, why do you think that it occupies this special position? Only the people who practice it seem to support its effectiveness, a situation which I've never encountered before except with really, really dodgy frauds. Anyway, I'd be interested in responses from any Shaolin-Do students.

BeiKongHui

04-18-2001, 09:01 PM

How many of you Shaolin Do guys teachers will let you train at other places while doing Shaolin Do?

"Gong Sao Mo Gong Ching Sao"
- When you talk with the hands,
best not to speak of polite hands.

dragon797

04-18-2001, 10:27 PM

Radhnoti: I am not a student of either man. I recently restored a friendship from my old days in school in Lexington that gives me an accurate account of events concerning Hiang The. I am here only to correct misinformation about Hiang, not get embroiled in this impossibly ridiculous debate that rears its ugly head on the internet from time to time.

Actually, Hiang does not speak poorly of his brother. He just wants to build his own group and establish its own identity based solely on the material he was taught. Most of the history and claims that generate the negative comments about Shaolin-do took their altered shape after the two brothers split around 1982. Before then, any silence on Hiang's part can be attributed to something called respect for the family's oldest brother, a very strong principle in Chinese culture.

Also, it's good to hear that some of those who have been around since the early days still have a positive opinion of Hiang. There are many good people from back then. It's sad that events turned out the way they did and that people had to choose between one brother or the other.
b

dragon797

04-18-2001, 10:31 PM

To BeiKongHui:
Concerning training in other styles: Hiang always told his students that if they could find a better martial arts practice, to let him know because he would send his kids there. I believe his children are still with him at the YMCA. (Sorry, I couldn't resist) If a student can keep up with 10 separate long forms per each rank (Black Belt levels), spar and attend classes regularly, then Hiang said they could always study whatever else they wanted. I say why go somewhere else when you haven't even learned everything one system has to offer? That's a personal choice.

From my own experience, I find that sparring with people from other groups usually turns into trouble. If you are getting the best of them, they resort with cheap shots and with more than the agreed on contact. Defending yourself on the street is one thing, ANYTHING goes, but I'm past walking around with loose teeth and black eyes from "friendly" sparring with strangers. If you're in Lexington, try a pick-up basketball game at UK or Douglas Park some Sunday. Once you start throwing it down on a guy, half the time he'll start to foul you, then there will be an argument, and then a fight. I'll just rent a gym and play with my buds.

Radhnoti

04-18-2001, 11:26 PM

Anarcho, as far as I can tell (I've been wrong before though) MOST don't question Shaolin-Do's effectiveness, just the lineage. It might also be said that SINCE the lineage is so questioned some question the effectiveness. Several posters who weren't/aren't Grandmaster Sin's students have commented that they feel Shaolin-Do is an effective martial art in this thread.
BeiKongHui, my instructor believes much as dragon797 has said Master Hiang does. He and I have attended seminars given by local instructors from other styles. My teacher's teacher is another story entirely. I was once told of a fellow he had taught into the lower black belts who went to another SHAOLIN-DO instructor. He refuses to speak of him or acknowledge that he exists. "He is dead to me.", is a phrase reported to have come from his mouth. So, I suppose that it depends upon the teacher.
dragon797, I also feel it is a sad situation. The respectful tone used when anyone speaks of Master Hiang seems to indicate that he is a fine person as well as an excellent martial artist and teacher.

-Radhnoti

Talon

04-19-2001, 06:41 PM

Why didn't Master Hiang ever say anything before? Nobody knows for sure I don't think. The fact is, he came over to this country separately
from his brother and taught on his own for quite a while. They teamed up for reasons I'm not sure on, but on the surface it would look to be a
perfect situation. Two high ranking brothers teaching an art together. Maybe they thought they had a better chance of success working
together. However, Master Hiang never submitted himself to Sin's version of the story and it can be assumed he didn't like what Sin was doing so that is why they split. Sin's storytelling has grown leaps and bounds over the years, and the more it has grown, the more Master Hiang has distanced himself from his brother. Master Hiang has never made extraordinary claims about himself or the art he teaches. He is very upfront about what he knows and what he doesn't and who he learned what from. As to someone else's comment earlier, the only students that would ever want Sin and Hiang to get back together are maybe Sin's students. I'm not even sure on that.
Hiang's students only view Sin with the same questions as does the rest of the martial arts community. Maybe even worse. Sin is an
embarrasment to their art and they will probably never be able to completely distance themselves from him. As to what Master Hiang thinks, from what I'm told he rarely says a lot on the subject. This is due to lots of reasons I'm sure. He wants to concentrate on his own
stuff, he is embarrassed by the whole thing, and maybe a lingering sense of respect to his older brother.
To Bei Kong Hiu (I know that's misspelled, sorry), I'm sure your teachers are reputable and are well known masters in their own right. Just out of curiousity, and I do mean that sincerely, other than the wing chun, the other style of kung fu taught at your school is simply titled "Chinese Martial Arts". What type of kung fu is that and what are it's origins?

BeiKongHui

04-20-2001, 12:59 AM

I have always heard that Hiang is on the level but I've never personally met him. I do know his students speak highly of him and if what you say is true it is a tragedy he has been victimized as such by his brother.
Ah, you must have a phone book ;)
The owner of the school has trained in several different styles of Kung Fu and several other martial arts and is an NHB competitor. I do not train under him so I really can't give your more specifics. Go in & talk to him he's a cool guy! I do know that they call the class chinese combatives and it seems to work pretty well because he's taken many multiple black belts, etc who couldn't fight and taught them how. I think a former student of Hiang's trains in it (who speaks well of him, btw) perhaps you know him and can get a better answer.

Also, can you tell us Hiang's side of the story? I'm sure people would love to hear the truth about Shaolin-Do.

"Gong Sao Mo Gong Ching Sao"
- When you talk with the hands,
best not to speak of polite hands.

[This message was edited by BeiKongHui on 04-20-01 at 04:13 PM.]

Talon

04-20-2001, 01:37 AM

Well, I know a lot about what has gone on in the past, not from personal experience, but the info comes from the people that were there. However I don't think it is necessary to spill out the entire past for everyone to see, not because it's a secret but mainly because Master Hiang doesn't want that, again it goes back to the fact him and Sin are brothers and I'm sure he doesn't want to badmouth him. His actions speak for themselves. As dragon797 said, Hiang is now teaching his own art and is trying very hard to make his own identity. Again, the actions speak for themselves.
One little factoid that is well known among Hiang's students, and maybe some shaolin-do students is that Sin tried to sue a student of Hiang's years back for copyright infringement, trying to keep him from teaching the material out (because he says he is the grandmaster). When the day in court came and Sin produced notes for the material that he had back from his days in Indonesia, Hiang matched him note for note. And then there were notes for material Hiang had, that Sin didn't, including at least one very basic piece of material (the short stick form taught at green belt). Does this mean Hiang has 950 katas (the # Sin claims)? No, Hiang has somewhere around 100-150, I'm not sure exactly. So where does Sin keep picking up new material trying to reach that self proclaimed # of 950? I'll leave everyone to their own theories.
There is a very good reason a lot of Sin's senior students respect Hiang. He taught them a lot of stuff Sin can't, because he never learned it himself.
I'm not trying to stir up any bad blood, but, the facts are the facts. I don't see anything wrong with people knowing the facts. And living in Lexington, I'm sure you are very aware of the type of marketing that goes on with Sin's school. They pay off the Shaolin temple to put a tablet up, then they pay the Horse Park to let them demonstrate during the China exhibit last summer, then they pay Joseph Beth to do demonstrations at the book store. All the while acting like these were all honors and invitations thrust upon them.
I guess I should stop for now, I'm starting to go off .
:D

BeiKongHui

04-20-2001, 01:47 AM

That's cool. The Sin The' thing can be really frustrating. Do you currently train? They also have a Wushu teacher & a Jeet Kune Do teacher if your interested in CMA's.

"Gong Sao Mo Gong Ching Sao"
- When you talk with the hands,
best not to speak of polite hands.

[This message was edited by BeiKongHui on 04-20-01 at 04:56 PM.]

Talon

04-20-2001, 11:52 PM

Unfortunately right now I don't. I do a lot of travelling with my current job so that prevents me from keeping up regular attendance at a school. I do however practice on my own and continue to work out.

SanHeChuan

04-21-2001, 01:17 AM

so where does Hiang teach and what styles does he teach? do he have a web site? 100+ form still seems like alot.

"Civilize the mind but make savage the body"

Talon

04-21-2001, 02:19 AM

Hiang teaches in Ky. His homebase is Lexington and there are students of his teaching in various parts of central and eastern Ky.
His specialty is a type of bird called tai peng I think (should probably verify that with someone more in the know).
100+ forms is a huge amount, too much for me to be honest. But in all fairness to the system, I have seen quite a few other styles that have way more than that. I have heard of a style of praying mantis (it was either seven star or 8 step Im not sure) that has 120 empty hand forms alone! Not to mention the weapons. Choy li fut comes to mind as another style that has a lot of forms (close to 200 is what I've heard on various occasions).

Radhnoti

04-21-2001, 04:28 AM

Just a quick update, Hiang The' has declared himself to be the Grandmaster of CHUNG YEN SHAOLIN. The forms are exactly the same as what is taught in Shaolin-Do, there are still belts, and a gi. :cool:
Hope he does well. If anyone wants the website, I got this from I'll try to post it...especially if someone explains how to do it. :)

-Radhnoti

SanHeChuan

04-21-2001, 04:50 AM

to post the web site just type the ULR (web address) it's nothing special

"Civilize the mind but make savage the body"

Inquisitor

04-21-2001, 12:47 PM

==============================
Sheesh Inquisitor, I didn't expect you to fall apart like that. Was it because I liked Falcor's arguement? Sue me, I like it when people use small words and analogies to bring about a revelation.
--------------------

Hah okay, I don't know where you got that I somehow "fell apart," but if you say so... And your reply to Falcor's post was typical to your, shall we say, "style" of writing. You disregarded the whole point of his argument and went on a tangent.

--------------------
"And B) You used flawed, runaround logic in each and every one of your rebuttals against my statements. When I made a statement like "No one can substantiate Sin The's claimed lineage," you would counter with something like "Well...we can't prove that he's what he says he is, but you can't prove that he isn't!" Give me a break. This isn't the 3rd Grade anymore. Try actually using information to rebut my statements, rather than inane and argumentatively useless accusations."
So, it's ok for you to say you can't prove anything, but I need to produce some sort of documentation? I don't think (though I may be wrong...this has been a long discussion) I ever said nothing new had been incorporated into Shaolin-Do.
--------------------

No, it is not okay for me not to prove something. The whole point that I was trying to make (and you so deftly avoided) was that I had already proven certain things, such as the fact that Sin The's lineage cannot be substantiated. Go look back in my previous posts. I said something like "No one has ever heard of Su Kong Tai Djin or Ie Chang Ming, and no one can vouch for the skill of Sin The." Also, your little trick to use say that you never said that anything new wasn't incorporated into Shaolin-Do... I have news for you: the fact that you never said that nothing new was incorporated into Shaolin-Do doesn't change the basis of the argument being made. "GRANDMASTER" SIN THE CLAIMS TO HAVE THE SUM OF ALL KNOWLEDGE OF SHAOLIN KUNGFU. HE ALSO CLAIMS THAT HIS ONLY TEACHER IN THE CHINESE MARTIAL ARTS IS IE CHANG MING. IF THAT IS TRUE, WHY DOES HE TEACH NON-SHAOLIN FORMS? HOW CAN HE CLAIM THAT TAI CHI CHUAN, A STYLE DESCENDED FROM WUDANG, HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE SHAOLIN TEMPLE? NOT ONLY THAT, BUT WHY IS THE TAI CHI THAT HE TEACHES INCONSISTENT WITH THE TRADITIONAL STYLES?
Also, since one can prove that he got some of his vaunted "knowledge" from things such as books/videos/etc, could it not be viable that *all* of his knowledge stems from such materials?
Hopefully the uppercase made things more clear for you.

--------------------
Obvious things would be the Japanese gi and belt system. You obviously know more about the history of Taiji...or maybe that was Brad, anyway, perhaps other peripheral things have been added. Isn't that what the Shaolin Temples did for centuries? Catalog and Incorporate styles and forms?
--------------------

Actually, I was the first one in this thread to point out that the Tai Chi Chuan being taught in Shaolin-Do was in fact non-traditional. Brad helped to clear things up by bringing in more details. Yes, but the way the Shaolin Temples did things were completely different from the way that Sin The is doing things. Okay, let's say that Sin The supposedly *did* somehow incorporate Tai Chi Chuan into the Shaolin-Do curriculum (hypothetical situation). If that were true, why does he use the modern wushu Tai Chi forms? Would it not be better for him to contact one of the traditional Tai Chi masters and learn from that person? Oh, of course not. He can just go buy a book and learn the forms from there. It'll be just as good as the original stuff! Give me a break. Again, you used faulty logic and tried to divert attention from the argument.

--------------------
"What really gets to me is that you have the gall to mock me and say that *I* have not done my job of discrediting Sin The, when I have very simply and clearly done so. The fact of the matter is that I did my job, and it was your job to defend against those arguments. You failed."
Yes, I'll try and live with the shame. All I can do is go on and try to live day to day. First, I don't think it's my "job" to defend Grandmaster Sin...and it's sort of pathetic if you think your "job" is to discredit him. Your posts were long, I broke down each point as I could and tried to respond with my admittedly amateurish responses.
--------------------

Blah blah blah blah blah. You took up the position of defending Shaolin-Do. When I and others presented you with arguments, you were supposed to defend against them. Just because I chose to use the word "job" does not detract from those facts. Also, if you did not think that it was important to you to defend "Grandmaster" Sin, then why did you start? Apparently you don't know how the human brain works. The only reason you would put time and effort into doing something like this would be because, on a certain level, Shaolin-Do (and hence, "Granmdaster" Sin) is important to you. And to claim that it is "pathetic" to be on my side of the fence... No comment.

--------------------
All in all, I feel I've given the best account of myself that someone who's been in a style for just 8 months might be expected to give. If you saying I'm a failure makes you feel better, good, this is an online forum with pseudonyms and you shouldn't feel bad, no matter what some joker writes about you or to you.
--------------------

Again, blah blah blah blah blah. You diverted the argument from the fact that you could not adequately defend Shaolin-Do to the idea that it is somehow wrong of me to point out that you failed. LoL and then you suddenly present the idea that it somehow makes me feel better (a.k.a. "helps my self-esteem" or "makes me a bigger man") by putting you down (which I did not)...

--------------------
"I was unable to change your mind because of, you guessed it, certain psychological processes."
Fair enough, we can assume I'm a close minded psychotic, brain washed Sin The' chanting flunky. While YOU from your impartial view on high offered me truth and knowledge which, due to my indoctrination, I ignored. The fact is that I have listened to you, and I'll measure what I learn with your grain of salt. Have you heard anything I've said? Anything positive I've said you seem to brush away. Is your hatred so strong that you refuse to acknowledge even the POSSIBILITY that someone could study Shaolin-Do and be happy?
--------------------

For starters, I *have* listened to practically everthing that you have written in this thread. That is why I reply to each and every word that you have written (and separated them into coherent paragraphs, at that). It would be very hard for me to rebut your arguments unless I were able to read and understand what you wrote. Secondly, you insinuate that somehow this debate should have been completely impartial. I hate to break it to you, but that isn't the way the world works. It is a given that you are on the side of Shaolin-Do, and that I am on the side against Shaolin-Do. What I say is biased, and what you say is biased. That should be recognized, as it is true. However, it should not detract from the fact that I and others have presented arguments against Shaolin-Do that make perfect sense, and that you have either completely ignored or "rationalized" in some way.
I'm getting more and more annoyed when you start bringing feelings and emotions into this whole mess. You say things like "I am in awe of Shaolin-Do" and "Well, Shaolin-Do makes me happy!" when they bring no merit to your defense. So what if it makes you happy? That has no bearing on whether or not Shaolin-Do is fake. And yes, Shaolin-Do is FAKE. It is FRAUDULENT. IT DOES NOT QUALIFY AS A MARTIAL ART. IT IS NOT WHAT IT CLAIMS TO BE. I'll address that new thread on the main forum when I have the chance. For now, let's stick to this one...

--------------------
"Oh, I'm sorry, I was expecting too much of you. I was expecting you to respond intelligently."
Ok. Again, if a personal attack makes you feel better...it won't keep me up nights.
"Okay, I'm sick and tired of arguing about this."
Wow! We agree on something.
-Radhnoti
===============================

Nice try, but that won't fly with me. I said that I expected you to respond intelligently. That can be taken to mean that your responses were not intelligent, but it is a stretch of the imagination to somehow imply that I somehow think that you are stupid or that you are unintelligent. The fact that I expected *better* of you should show you how I feel about "how smart you are." Never, ever insinuate that I would resort to personal attacks to win an argument. That is the tactic of George W. Bush, not me.
And, BTW, just because I'm sick and tired of arguing about Shaolin-Do doesn't mean that I will stop. =)

dragon797

04-21-2001, 06:30 PM

After returning from a 5 year stay in Indonesia to be with his family, Hiang The (The "The" family name can also be translated from the Chinese character as Chen), he began to actively teach full-time again in Lexington, KY last year in conjunction with the YMCAs of Lexington. To clearly separate himself from brother Sin's group and establish his own identity, Hiang decided to return to the ORIGINAL name his teachers used for their style in Indonesia: Chung Yen Shaolin, or Central Area Shaolin. The name Chung Yen Shaolin is inscribed on the specialty medallions and rank certificates Hiang earned from his teachers. The Shaolin-Do name was started by Sin when he came to the US in 1964 and started teaching.

Hiang received his sixth degree rank before he came to the US in 1968 to attend college at the University of Kentucky. Grandmaster Ie passed away in August 1968 (note that Sin claims Ie died in 1976! There is a picture of Ie’s gravestone with the correct date) and then Hiang returned to Indonesia in 1974 to receive his seventh degree from Liu Su Peng, one of Ie’s original partners and then head of the school after Ie’s death. Hiang returned again in early 1978, but Liu Su Peng died shortly before that and the original group was beginning to split up. Hiang was offered control but turned it down to return to the US.

Hiang is the highest-ranking student of the original Chung Yen Shaolin group. Sin’s certificate from January 15, 1964 shows that the last rank he tested for was 5th degree and he never returned to Indonesia for rank advancement. When Hiang made the decision to re-create the original group in his own name here, he rightfully claimed to be its head. He has approximately 120 long forms, of which he has taught around 85-90. One proof of this is that Hiang requires students to make a video tape of their material as part of their test for higher ranks. He currently has one student who just tested for seventh degree and another sixth degree that have performed all these forms on video. Hiang continues to teach new material to his advanced group and plans to teach the rest his material within the next 5 years.

By the way, the web site you may be referring to is from one of Hiang’s student’s students and is mostly, but not completely accurate. One of Hiang’s senior students is currently working on an official website for the group in conjunction with the Lexington YMCAs.