This is a continuation of the “Who has trained with a Shaolin Monk” topic that GeneChing started.
I am “picking” on you, GeneChing, because you are a well known BSL stylist and am my training superior in that method.
Personally, I feel that BSL is a complete style that really can go any which way the practitioner chooses.
You mentioned that some of the Shaolin monks have a very “Chen Taijiquan” influence on their SSSL. I myself regularly do the BSL sets in a Chen Taijiquan manner, as the “Planting Technique” from “Tun Da” reminds the practitioner to focus his yang energy into and outwards from his Dantien.
I am interested in “comparing notes” with you, GeneChing, on what you feel could be emphasized better in BSL.
from my point of view, as a BSL practitioner, BSL is BSL, taiji is taiji, and bagua is bagua. to a certain extent, one can draw comparisons, but to overdo it is to deny the specialties of each art which make it unique. i’ve never studied any Chen taiji so i can’t comment on the specific move which you are referring to, but i try to keep the different systems which i study separate.
also, i’m curious about the comparison which you made between the two moves in #7 and bagua’s single and double palm change; i was hoping that you could elaborate on this? i’ll have to go look at my (wing lam) #7 book to see which move it is that you are referring to as “fairy scatters flowers”, but if it’s the one i’m thinking of (right palm strike/stealing step), to me it is a move with a very straight ahead (linear) energy and has none of the rolling/drilling/overturning energy which to me characterizes bagua (unless you choose to add this kind of emphasis, which, although it may be quite effective, is not the way i learned it).
In fact, I often do my BSL sets all sorts of different ways.
Sometimes I do them slow and smooth like Taiji, sometimes slow and reeling like Chen Taiji, sometimes hard and powerful like Hung Ga, and sometimes even short and contained like Xingyi 5 Elements.
I guess I should have started this thread after I wrote that article, then maybe the shaolin monk training thread would have stayed on topic.
I chose the bsl vs. sssl title to be controversial an generate some dialog, but personally (and I hope this was clear in my article) I find the two very harmonious.
HKV: I wholeheartedly agree that “BSL is a complete style that really can go any which way the practitioner chooses.” But that also opens pandora’s box. It’s sort of the JKD problem, at what point does it cease becoming “kungfu” or “bsl” and start becoming something new? My own answer is somwhat zen - it ceases being kungfu when it stops becoming something new. But that’s an even bigger pandora’s box.
The power in SSSL is similar to Chen, but it’s not silk reeling. Honestly I don’t feel prepared to answer this question adequately at this time. You have to see it and I can’t replicate it yet. How does that fit into BSL? Well, theoretically I’m starting to bring it over, but I have yet to master SSSL power (or even get a good handle on it) so it’s presumptious for me to say yet.
BTW, thanks fot the superior comment, but please, let’s just meet as equals here. I don’t believe in rank at all, especially on the forums
BQ: I tend to agree with you on this move, but I’m willing to experiment. I’ve never been totally happy with the applications I’ve been shown for it, so the jury is still out on it. Let me get back to you guys on it after a few months or so…
I’m totally comfortable with BSL being a “Pandora’s Box”.
I practice BSL with a decidedly Buddhist flavor, as it was Shi Guolin that wrote in an Kungfu/Qigong article that “Shaolin kung fu is an entry into Ch’an”.
As far as beiquan’s linear move goes, I’ve pulled that move off on more than a few unsuspecting opponents - in a variety of ways.
In general, I prefer to do my BSL sets (particularly THIS move) with a more rounded application because the soft round stuff works better for me against resisting opponents.
What’s the story with Wing Lam? Do any of the styles he teaches have roots at the Shaolin Temple? Were they ever practiced there by monks? Do they have anything really to do with the Shaolin Temple? What is the Shaolin Temple view on Wing Lam and the style?
I don’t have time to read it all right now, but here’s my question:
It says “this style is no longer practiced at the temple today”. But I thought this guy learned Shaolin Temple styles and then went south and created his style, Bak Sil Lum, based on what he learned in the north (bak being north in canto) and it shares the Shaolin name to give respect to it’s origins.
I have also spoken to another person who practices this style and says he was told monks at the Shaolin Temple in Henan actually practiced this style once and then it’s no longer there. Is this true? Was it practiced by the monks of the Henan Shaolin Temple at one point in history? Or was it just created outside the temple and based on that style? This is what I’m interested in knowing. Thanks for sharing.
…haven’t we discussed this before? Any of the other BSL members remember what thread that might be on?
I could not find any evidence of the exact forms of BSL at Songshan Shaolin, save but a slightly parallel Kwan Dao form (ver similar opening). However, there a hundreds if not thousands of forms still practiced at Shaolin. Clearly, Gan Fengchi, and other great BSL ancestors like Ku Yu Chueng, had tremendous impact upon the evolution of BSL. If they didn’t, we probably wouldn’t remember much more about them than their names. Now I’ve shown some BSL to Shaolin monks and they all concur that it’s definitely Shaolin style, it has all the ‘kicks and chops’ characteristic to contemporary Shaolin, but no one has recognized the exact form yet. Note that there are a lot of other proponents of BSL beyond my old Sifu, and many of them post here too.
Hmmmm,
In the old days, were forms not more a collection of techniques? Was a style not defined more by it’s principals, techniques, and HOW they were used, than the organisation, and order of the form’s performance?
Yes, there are many ancient Shaolin forms, like Louhan, and Hong Chuan sets that are considered sacred and thus maintained, BUT could it be that Shaolin was originally taught a technique at a time, based on a student’s needs, and thus forms were created and forgotten to such a degree that the exact coreography of anything would surely be lost today?
Forms preserved the “Curriculem” of an individuals practice. Thus the contex and choreography of forms is as unique, and individual, as the many persons who trained at Shaolin. Only those who taught passed on thier personal forms, and that is how the many styles were born.
This being said, BSL may very well have been practice at Shaolin ONLY during the few years it’s creators were there. When they left, so did thier school of Shaolin Kung Fu (it went with them).
It gets to be rather messy if you start chipping at when forms practice actually originated. The tricky part is how to define forms practice. Are sword dances forms practice? Are qigong routines forms practice? Both of those are traceable to very ancient times. Are line drills, like tan tui or xingyi, forms practice? Those also bleed over into basic military training. Another tricky question to navigate (but we do it here all the time) is what defines Shaolin kung fu? Be careful where you tread here.
Did you find the time to read those articles yet, rickyscaggs? Because you ain’t even gonna get no answers, if’en ya don’t read.
I know legend has it that forms practice goes back at least to the early Shaolin with the first Louhan form, but I was under the impression that it didn’t become wide spread untill the Yuan dynasty.
Yes I read it. And your reply to me about your interactions with different monks was very helpful. If you have found no evidence of the exact forms being trained there then that answers my question. There may still be a possibility. If you were able to find it then that would answer yes, they were trained there. Having neither a yes or no answer is a good answer for me.
Well, here’s the weird thing, while I was there, and while many of my BSL family have been there, BSL was present at Shaolin Temple. Many of the monks and disciples bring in outside influences to Shaolin all the time - in fact, a major tradition of Shaolin is that it is non-traditional, if you can follow that. It’s well within the realm of possibilities that if BSL does not exist at Shaolin at this moment, it could easily be brought in once again at any moment. With literally tens of thousands of practitioners living there, there’s a constant influx of material. No one ever gets to the end of Shaolin. No one ever gets it all. But that’s a Shaolin secret. You don’t need it all. Sometimes you can find all you need just staring at a rock…
I’m sure this has been discussed a bunch over the years, but my search fu sucks.
Since i’m a relative newbie to kung fu in general, i’m curious as to the stylistic differences in KYC’s Northern Shaolin style and the stuff that you see the more traditional monks practice today, I.E. Shi De Yang.
Not sure which NYC Northern Shaolin school that you are talking about. If you are talking about the old “5 tigers club”, my longfist brother Nelson Zou used to teacher there. It’s quite different from the Shaolin monk style.
[QUOTE=JamesC;1096538]KYC Shaolin Vs Shaolin Curriculum Today[/QUOTE]I merged your thread into a 10-year-old thread as well as another about my BSL Master Wing Lam. There are a few other threads that touch on this subject.
Ku Ye Cheong Shaolin curriculum is an older system going back to the late 1700’s. The forms are not quite as flashy as the new Shaolin Temple stuff of today. Back in the early 1900’s they was a “Destruction” of the Temple and a “Burning” of all the historical manuals and books. Any of the surviving Monks fled (Hong Kong, South East Asia, Europe, America’s etc etc), taking this Ku Ye Cheong system with them.
Any remaining Monks were either killed or went into hiding. Eventually the Temple reopened and Monks returned, only to follow and teach what the Chinese government would let them. This included more flashy stuff that made money for the Government!
They have a curriculum now, but it is more of a San Shou / Kickboxing / San Da curriculum that an old school fighting / self defense system.
Thanks for sharing.