Official Shaolin Temple Cultural Centers

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Shaolin Kung Fu
1

I dropped by the new Shaolin Temple USA school

Well, I’ve come a long way since my bold proposal that Bei Shaolin should be considered the “only truly authentic Shaolin System”. Though I still believe it to be a truly authentic Shaolin system that did, indeed, leave the temple in the 1700’s, I would no longer say with any confidence that the styles being propagated at the current Shaolin Temple are wholly “unauthentic”. Perhaps my visit to the new Shaolin Temple USA school on Geary St. in San Francisco has had something to do with my slight change of heart. After talking with Shi Yanran briefly and watching a class, I suppose I got sort of swept up the in whole experience. I’ve since gone there again just to watch an adult class and, I have to say, I was impressed with the monks and their over-all demeanor. After all, it was the whole mystique and image of Shaolin Temple and it’s monks, that made me want to practice Shaolin kung fu in the first place.

Originally, one of the reasons I felt a need to be critical of Shaolin Temple was because there’s this theory going around (and it was told to me by the woman at the front desk) that Bak Siu Lum was created by Kuo Yu Chang out of numerous northern and southern temple-related styles. That this was being spread as the “official” history of the style seemed completely outrageous to me. It goes against all the written and orally transmitted history of Bak Siu Lum. To me, stating this is sort of like saying, “sorry, all of the previous masters of your style were just plain wrong, and you are wrong for believing in them.”

The fact that this is still believed is disturbing to me, but I’ve sort of been more willing to brush these feelings aside after seeing them teaching at their school. I must say, I greatly admired their skill, speed, and accuracy. They’re also really nice guys. I’ve come to realize that if you meditate every day and live the sort of lifestyle they do, you’re going to be a sensilble, nice person. It’s almost hard for me to believe that people who practice getting kicked in the crotch and bludgeoned over the head with wooden poles and sledghammers could be such nice, even-tempered folks.

Who knows, there might come a day when I’ll find myself saying, “Oh, whatever, it’s all Shaolin anyway. My style is just another branch of the tree.” Though in order for that to happen, there would have to be some recognition of Kuo Yu Chang’s lineage. His master Yim Chi Wen was a real flesh and blood master who taught NORTHERN Shaolin which, according to him, originated in the NORTH at the Honan Shaolin Monastary. Just because there isn’t some 300 year old book that lays out our lineage master by master all the way to monk Chih Yuan doesn’t mean there’s no truth to what these masters claimed.

That being said though, I still enjoy watching the monks training and performing. They’re dedicated martial artists with lifetimes worth of training.

2

I’m really glad you took a look at what the monks are doing. It shows a real depth to your desire to understand. Most people are pretty impressed by the way classes are run even if they don’t ever sign up to train.

3

Hey SLF,

It always impresses me when someone actually does the research by going and seeing for himself and asking questions to someone who is in the know. Much more than the average person who relies on heresay from others. As I had posted before, when I had asked my previous Master about what he thought of the monks, he replied that they were just teaching wushu. I am so glad that I went to find out for myself and didn’t just accept that explanation. Obviously, I am not with that master anymore. You should go one step beyond and try the class out. The Songshan Shaolin workouts are hard, but man are they a blast to do!

Don’t judge a book by its cover, I bust those bars and sticks over my head and body and I think I am a pretty nice guy.

4

My story is the exact same as Sha0lin1’s. I studied BSL from a teacher who was convinced that this this was the only lineage teaching real Shaolin and that the monks couldn’t do anything but dance around and had no real power. When the monks showed up one year for Chinese new year celebration and did demonstrations, I saw the truth. This was not dancing around just being flashy. It was powerful, precise and beautiful to watch. They were actually doing the hard qigong that my previous Sifu never demonstrated. Within the month I was taking a couple of classes a week with the monks and before another month passed I was full time with them.

I was never mad about what that Sifu said about the monks, just disappointed that this kind of negative view was passed on openly to the students and it obviously was unfounded.

My Shifu tells us that we should always respect other traditions and schools and never talk badly of them. Any pride we feel shouldn’t be used to brag to others, but to apply to our own practice to become even better. I think everyone, whether Songshan, BSL, Wing Chun, Southern, grappling, or MMA have waaaay too much to work on to worry about what other schools are saying or doing.

5

My thoughts on this is that a lot of the kung fu schools out there (by no means am I saying all) that claim to be teaching Shaolin are just teaching crap and a lot of students have been deceived into believing they are being taught real shaolin.
I have seen these schools at various tournaments doing their forms and if they were truly teaching shaolin temple kung fu then there would be some resemblance to the Songshan style. In a lot of the cases the forms look nothing like ours, not even close. Then when you talk to these students about their lineage they give you a line that could be taken from any kung fu movie. I think that a lot of these so called Shaolin masters say this in an effort to legitimize their schools and discredit what is truly Shaolin so they can stay in business.

I wish more people would do what SLF did and go and check it out for themselves instead of believing in and reciting the same old tired lines. I am glad there are more and more wuseng coming to the States and the world for that matter. They will set the record straight. There is a big difference when you find a true Master. I could see it right away the first time I went to observe my Master’s class. As the years have gone by I consider myself privledged to have learned what I have learned and continue to learn and what has been transmitted to me by my Master.

6

[QUOTE=sha0lin1;912356]My thoughts on this is that a lot of the kung fu schools out there (by no means am I saying all) that claim to be teaching Shaolin are just teaching crap and a lot of students have been deceived into believing they are being taught real shaolin. I have seen these schools at various tournaments doing their forms and if they were truly teaching shaolin temple kung fu then there would be some resemblance to the Songshan style. In a lot of the cases the forms look nothing like ours, not even close. Then when you talk to these students about their lineage they give you a line that could be taken from any kung fu movie. I think that a lot of these so called Shaolin masters say this in an effort to legitimize their schools and discredit what is truly Shaolin so they can stay in business.

I wish more people would do what SLF did and go and check it out for themselves instead of believing in and reciting the same old tired lines. I am glad there are more and more wuseng coming to the States and the world for that matter. They will set the record straight. There is a big difference when you find a true Master. I could see it right away the first time I went to observe my Master’s class. As the years have gone by I consider myself privledged to have learned what I have learned and continue to learn and what has been transmitted to me by my Master.[/QUOTE]

I think many kung fu schools used the name “shaolin” as a blanket name to their school/style. In reality, they might not even be associated or affiliated with the Shaolin Temple, have no lineage to a Shaolin system or might just be teaching some other style of martial arts at the school.

I think when the monks started emerging in the USA and other countries there was a sense of “shock value” towards them. There was this crusade to find proof that the monks were fake, they were teaching just wushu, etc. Just a lot of mud slinging in general. If you really think about it New York/Jersey, Texas, California and Nevada are only 5 states that host songshan shaolin schools (forgive me if I missed a state). Compared to the rest of America, it’s really not that many. The rest of the martial artists that live in areas where there is remotely no signs of songshan shaolin go by what is told to them or by the internet.

It’s nice to read a post like SLF’s where he said he took time out to visit a school and the monks. I guess for some of us when we walked through the doors of the school for the first time we knew we were in the right place, for others they walked in and walked right out. BTW, Sha0lin1 do you have a youtube page? I am trying to network :wink:

7

Songshan,

I do have a you tube account but not a page. It just contains a few playlists. I do have a myspace though. I PM’d you the link.

8

got it…Thanks!!

9

Shaolin Temple USA is significant

It’s opening is in preparation for Shaolin Temple Day 2009. The Abbot is coming out for that.

See my post on China Songshan Shaolin Temple Day - March 21st, 2009 - Union Square, San Francisco, CA. I missed the opening of his Fremont school last year. Yanran took over the roles in Long River, High Sky. My last printed article on him was The Temple and the Auto Shop in our 2009 January/February Shaolin Special.

We’ll be at China Songshan Shaolin Temple Day. Hope to see you there!

10

Once I moved into the Shaolin Temple kung fu, I never really thought back to whether the lineage of other schools might be questionable. Technically speaking, I’m sure it is all questionable since there’s not any real written history.

I enjoy going to the tournaments because there are some very interesting things going on in the martial world. Nowadays, I’m seeing a fair amount of wushu and modern CMA mixing it up at the tournaments and at the other side of the spectrum there are some obviously very ancient forms that are still in play. At the end of the day I’m so glad to have seen everyone there.

I feel that at tournaments more and more people are getting used to seeing the Songshan students as well as seeing the wushu and non-‘traditional’ styles. The gap is closing. Everyone, regardless of where they come from, gets up and gives 100%. If we all smile and enjoy one another’s performance it’s all the better.

11

[QUOTE=DeHui702;913599]Once I moved into the Shaolin Temple kung fu, I never really thought back to whether the lineage of other schools might be questionable. Technically speaking, I’m sure it is all questionable since there’s not any real written history.

I enjoy going to the tournaments because there are some very interesting things going on in the martial world. Nowadays, I’m seeing a fair amount of wushu and modern CMA mixing it up at the tournaments and at the other side of the spectrum there are some obviously very ancient forms that are still in play. At the end of the day I’m so glad to have seen everyone there.

I feel that at tournaments more and more people are getting used to seeing the Songshan students as well as seeing the wushu and non-‘traditional’ styles. The gap is closing. Everyone, regardless of where they come from, gets up and gives 100%. If we all smile and enjoy one another’s performance it’s all the better.[/QUOTE]

Agreed. My last school had their own tournaments and we never competed at other CMA tournaments. So when I hit the tournament circuit after I changed schools it was a real eye opener to see other legitimate styles and their forms. It was definitely a very cool experience seeing what was out there.

12

[QUOTE=Siu Lum Fighter;912003]
Originally, one of the reasons I felt a need to be critical of Shaolin Temple was because there’s this theory going around (and it was told to me by the woman at the front desk) that Bak Siu Lum was created by Kuo Yu Chang out of numerous northern and southern temple-related styles. That this was being spread as the “official” history of the style seemed completely outrageous to me. It goes against all the written and orally transmitted history of Bak Siu Lum. To me, stating this is sort of like saying, “sorry, all of the previous masters of your style were just plain wrong, and you are wrong for believing in them.” [/QUOTE]

But you know that people say that because of the fact that Kuo did study some other styles beside just the Bei Shaolin 10 sets? It’s just because of that, nothing conspiratorial. His life experience might have modified the sets somewhat, maybe even improving them?

There’s nothing that disputes that the original line of sets from Shaolin didn’t come from out of the 1700s and passed from one to another person til you get to Ku Yu Chang.

Between 1735 and 1780, it is known that many monks left Shaolin and went to Hebei and Shandong. The styles known to have passed on at this time out of Shaolin from Henan was Hong Quan, Luohan Quan, and Kanjia Quan. Kanjia was found to have been the prototypical material that became Bei Shaolin 10 sets, they share the same names and rough versions of the movements.

The histories all fit together, so there is nothing that would dispute that Ku Yu Chang eventually received these material, by the time it got to him, I’m sure that the sets became more condensed and improved upon from the original 12 sets of Kanjia Quan.

13

Ah yes, but the the sets were supposedly kept secret throughout most of their history. From what I understand, a great deal of information was not copied down. The bare remnants of what was copied was likely destroyed. Hebei and Shandong were victims of so many wars and invasions. It’s very possible that there is an incomplete history there.

14

you guys dont understand lineage and shaolin doesnt matter its the quality of the prodact

i dont do shaolin kung fu and i dont do bei shaolin. but i respect gu ru zang more than any shaolin monk why? he is from jiangsu province funing area. i am also from jiangsu province funing area. im proud of him. he has more my respect

15

[QUOTE=bawang;916696]you guys dont understand lineage and shaolin doesnt matter its the quality of the prodact

i dont do shaolin kung fu and i dont do bei shaolin. but i respect gu yu zang more than any shaolin monk why? he is from jiangsu province funing area. i am also from jiangsu province funing area. im proud of him. he has more my respect

shaolin monks would have my respect if they teach how to use the forms. but they only teach sanda[/QUOTE]

The real Shaolin left the temple and went into the countryside.

I just wrote a 120 pages about what styles happened when and where they went.
I am almost done and then will get it published or will publish it myself.

It is about 25 years of research I did, all finally laid out so that it all makes some sense.

16

[QUOTE=Siu Lum Fighter;916690]Ah yes, but the the sets were supposedly kept secret throughout most of their history. From what I understand, a great deal of information was not copied down. The bare remnants of what was copied was likely destroyed. Hebie and Shandong were victims of so many wars and invasions. It’s very possible that there is an incomplete history there.[/QUOTE]

Correct, the sets were kept secret, during the Qing dynasty, that’s one factor.

The other factor is that as long as someone studied more than one style, it will have an effect of improving and condensing movements in sets.
3 thousand years of Chinese martial arts has shown that.

It’s not a big deal if Ku Yu "improved’ the original 12 sets of Kanjia Quan, made them into ten sets. That’s just want a master can do if he is truly a master.

BUT, don’t forget, the he might have changed nothing and the sets had evolved over time from the 12 sets of Kanjia Quan to the 10 sets of Bak Silum, via all the people that taught it from 1780s to Ku yu’s time period.

Lots of time for condensing and making the sets more ‘efficient and effective’.

17

ok mister salzeroni when u done tell me ill buy one

having used to have access to the beijing library that scanned all of their books online, the old hard to understand shaolin quanpu say they are “hard and forceful” , “simple and direct”, “dodging punches waist moves like willow”, “dodging punches head moves like ocean wave”, “punches like falling meteor” “footwork like drunk man”

basically saying shaolin fist has a lot of dodging and head bobbing, and circular strikes and random footwork. you can back me up on this mister salzeroni ths is legit info from their own quanpu. it is totally different from what they are doing right now

a lot of common northern techniques in their forms is done wrong but people dont notice because their graceful and powerful performance covers it up. common wrestling takedown “looking down at lake” is done as a back kick. blocking punches too high. doing the northern taizu men salute backwards. doing the sprawl “luohan slap ground” and “subdue tiger” comepletely wrong i cant even explain. circular punch “luohan carries burden” is done as a linear strike. double leg takedown is done as a double upward punch.
i suspect that maybe they just relearned forms from instruction manuals that survived the burning, that they know the ending poses for each move but dont know the transition movement

18

I agree. Their “subdue tiger” looks kind of hoopdie. I don’t see the circular strikes either. Many of the moves seem like they are taken directly from postures pictured in the old books or murals without the fluidity that would be characteristic of a complete set of techniques. No matter how hard I try, I just can’t help feeling that the Song Shan and Kanjia Chuan forms are missing something that, it seems, should be there. I guess you could say it’s a sort of “flavor” to the sets that seems like it’s missing. When you see forms from, let’s say, Bak Siu Lum or some other Northern Longfist Styles, there seems to be more naturalness to the moves and their transitions. Besides the technicalities as to which style is authentic, for me, as a Shaolin practitioner, it just “feels” as if styles like Northern Shaolin, Mizong Quan, Taizu Longfist and various Northern Shaolin Longfist styles I’ve seen practiced in Taiwan and elsewhere are characteristic of how the monks would have actually fought. The dodging, head bobbing, circular strikes and random footwork that bawang mentions are characteristics found in Northern Shaolin. You can’t help but feel like you are in a real fight with devastating and deadly techniques being used all throughout the forms.

19

[QUOTE=bawang;916704]ok mister salzeroni when u done tell me ill buy one

having used to have access to the beijing library that scanned all of their books online, the old hard to understand shaolin quanpu say they are “hard and forceful” , “simple and direct”, “dodging punches waist moves like willow”, “dodging punches head moves like ocean wave”, “punches like falling meteor” “footwork like drunk man”

basically saying shaolin fist has a lot of dodging and head bobbing, and circular strikes and random footwork. you can back me up on this mister salzeroni ths is legit info from their own quanpu. it is totally different from what they are doing right now

a lot of common northern techniques in their forms is done wrong but people dont notice because their graceful and powerful performance covers it up. common wrestling takedown “looking down at lake” is done as a back kick. blocking punches too high. doing the northern taizu men salute backwards. doing the sprawl “luohan slap ground” and “subdue tiger” comepletely wrong i cant even explain. circular punch “luohan carries burden” is done as a linear strike. double leg takedown is done as a double upward punch.
i suspect that maybe they just relearned forms from instruction manuals that survived the burning, that they know the ending poses for each move but dont know the transition movement[/QUOTE]

Exactly what my research has shown from translations of Shaolin manuals from the 1700s.

20

[QUOTE=Siu Lum Fighter;916731]I agree. Their “subdue tiger” looks kind of hoopdie. I don’t see the circular strikes either. Many of the moves seem like they are taken directly from postures pictured in the old books or murals without the fluidity that would be characteristic of a complete set of techniques. No matter how hard I try, I just can’t help feeling that the Song Shan and Kanjia Chuan forms are missing something that, it seems, should be there. I guess you could say it’s a sort of “flavor” to the sets that seems like it’s missing. When you see forms from, let’s say, Bak Siu Lum or some other Northern Longfist Styles, there seems to be more naturalness to the moves and their transitions. Besides the technicalities as to which style is authentic, for me, as a Shaolin practitioner, it just “feels” as if styles like Northern Shaolin, Mizong Quan, Taizu Longfist and various Northern Shaolin Longfist styles I’ve seen practiced in Taiwan and elsewhere are characteristic of how the monks would have actually fought. The dodging, head bobbing, circular strikes and random footwork that bawang mentions are characteristics found in Northern Shaolin. You can’t help but feel like you are in a real fight with devastating and deadly techniques being used all throughout the forms.[/QUOTE]

Correct in that is what REAL Henan Shaolin Kanjia and other styles MUST have to be authentic.

It’s common knowledge that the monks today (not the ones learning traditional Shaolin, which you won’t generally see in public) are doing the postures but don’t know how to do the in between movements generated from the waist, where all the action is!