The Modern Southern Shaolin Temple

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Shaolin Kung Fu
41

“Yes, warrior monks are a problem if you are defining monks in such narrow terms.

But to be a monk, one only has to belong to the order. Each order defines it’s own.
The defination of western monks and nuns have little bearing on buddhist monks. “

Dictionary definition:
Monk – a member of a RELIGIOUS brotherhood living in a monastery AND devoted to a discipline prescribed by his order.

If you use a different definition than the standard for the language you are using, then it is up to YOU to state and often restate your definition. To not do so is to mislead, either intentionally of unintentionally.

“And the definition of Buddhist monks change from instance to instance, just as it does in western religions.”

So, the idea here is that situational ethics and re-definition of terms is fine if it fits the needs of the person? The basic idea of what it is to be a monk, nun, priest in western religions has not changed much at all since….Oh I would have to say Martin Luther’s Reformation. That ended in the split of the Church’s and the idea of PROTESTants. The same applies to what I can find from the Buddhist monks I have encountered from several orders…tradition rules.

“Shaolin defines its order to include warrior monks and has so since the Tang. “

And exactly which of the vows or any of them are “Warrior Monks” supposed to follow? What distinguishes them from any individual that just happens to practice martial arts? You definitely open the door for a lot of misrepresentation

“If you ask a promoter, of course they will tell you he (or she) has the ‘real’ Shaolin monks. But if you ask the monks themselves, they will tell you if they are a martial monk, or an indoctrinated monk on a mission, or even an ex-monk (see our jan/feb 2002 cover story.)”

I have no problem with those who are honest. Problem is, I have yet to meet one. I HAVE met real monks from Chinese and Vietnamese Ch’an sects…and they DO follow the rules and ARE clear about who is and is not indoctrinated.

This is where the problem is. Misrepresentation.

If the idea is to rebuild the temples to fully functioning temples that have Buddhism AND Wushu (in the strict sense of the words Zhong Guo Wushu), the first step is to do away with the misrepresentation and confusion.

Are YOU working toward this goal?

42

“Dictionary definition:
Monk – a member of a RELIGIOUS brotherhood living in a monastery AND devoted to a discipline prescribed by his order.”

you seem to have confirmed gene’s comments, not gone against them. the martial monks are devoted to a discipline prescribed by “HIS” order…what the full details of this devotion is, is most likely more understood by the abbot and the temple than to the laymen. even at shaolin they seem to keep each other distinguished as martial or buddhist monk. it isn’t that they train one or the other, it seems to be more of which type of discipline they spend more time on. my sifu is one of the martial monks here in the US, shi xing hao. he was living at shaolin for about 11 years, and he had a buddhist master and a kungfu master. he spent most of the day training kungfu, but he also had buddhist training on a daily basis. he lived there and followed the discipline prescribed by his order, so that means he is a monk, by following the standard definition of the language.

"And exactly which of the vows or any of them are “Warrior Monks” supposed to follow? What distinguishes them from any individual that just happens to practice martial arts?

well what distinguishes them from any individaul that practices martial arts is that they take vows and become desciples of monk in the order, which gives them an order name and makes them not just a martial arts practitioner. as for the exact vows they take, i don’t know…but they are indoctrined to some level, now the differences, if any, from a non-martial monk is unknown to me. i feel the point is that they are brought into the order in some way. i guess to find out to what extent, would mean going to the source. go ask abbot yongxin.

respect to all,
dieter wagner

43

That is EXACTLY the point…to what degree do these people take oaths and vows.

If I studied under my teacher for 2 years, was haphazard in my approach, and then went and demo’ed in their name - or opened a school, I would be guilty of misrepresenting my teacher and what my teacher and style stood for.

To knowingly promote me, a person then becomes party to my misrepresentation.

I do not see the distinction between types of monks being made clear…if this is indeed a distinction. I DO see a lot of people promoting individuals who in NO way deserve to be honored in the way they uphold ANY tradition or ANY concept of martial ethics. this is NOT only for Shaolin but throughout the Wu Lin.

I am saying be honest. This is NOt happenning…

I have yet to read the background of ANY monk that stands up to the scrutiny of what really happened in China in regards to the temple.

All it would take for people like me to say “no poblem” is for the temples to openly state that they are using wushu foks as monks to promote an awareness of Shaolin to raise money so they can rebuild the temple and the Shaolin order.

When you have been involved in the staging of the monk shows and see the behind the scenes stuff…or talked with those in China who make fun of the 9 to 5 monks with families…well, let me just say that there is a lot of stuff to be cleaned up to regain the stature that should be there.

44

GLW,
i understand where you are coming from, but i feel it is ingnorant to stereotype every monk from shaolin. if you have had personal experience with some of the monks and the tours then you can state your opinion on them.
i know alot of these tours are made up of regular students sometimes and usually only couple of indoctrined monks. and alot of times their skills are not that impressive, but this isn’t always the case.
i agree if you study under your teacher for 2 years and open a school then you are misrepresenting the art, because you have not grasped the true wealth of your art. i can only speak for my teacher, he studied at shaolin for over 10 years and studied other martial arts prior to that. he loves the martial arts and he learned as much as he could. he knows the contemporary stuff and the traditional. i feel that anyone who sees the way he moves when performing tradtional forms would never question his power and precision of technique. it looks nothing like contemporary wushu…there is a big difference.
i am not trying to tell you that your interpretation/opinion is wrong…you can speak the truth as much as i do, but i feel that you are doing wrong by stereotyping those from shaolin into some kind of disgraceful worthless conspiring group. i cannot speak for the other monks, because i don’t have any real one on one contact with them. so i feel i can’t defend or condem them…i don’t have that knowledge. i just don’t see why everyone is determined to make shaolin out to be a big conspiracy, what do you gain from this…how do you feel you are helping. this type of thing goes on for every style of martial arts…there is always someone misrepresenting and taking advantage of people, and i think it will always go on. i am not saying it is right by any means, but it is part of life and misrepresentation exists in every aspect of life. what is the big crusade against shaolin. if you find a good teacher then you are on the right track, if you find you are with a bad teacher then you move on to another. you will always gain some greater knowledge from any kind of experience good or bad. there are only 5 monks in the states and 1 ex-monk…so that is 5 schools in the US and i think there are only about that many throughout europe. where is the big threat, why all the hype?
do any of you here that are bashing the whole shaolin lot, train with or ever trained with any of the monks. have you spent time with of them…not a few hours, but months or years getting to know them? if you have then you can talk about that person anyway you like, because you really got to know them to a descent extent. lets just please try to stop stereotyping and being prejudice. maybe i could say everyone who is trying to discredit the monks are just on a mission to promote themselves or their school as being the “real thing”. now this statement might have some truth, but 100% of the people discrediting shaolin don’t fall into that category, so i can’t really say that. see my point…if you want to wax intelectual(sp?) then you have to stop stereotyping and try to look deeper into the situation.

man, i am sorry for rambling on and on!!!respect to all and good luck in your training, may you find the truths you seek!

thanks,
dieter

45

KFD,

I understand…and I am voicing my doubts and misgivings over them.

They ARE indeed based upon a number of personal experiences with said monks over the past few years at various national level events as well as in dealing with their students.

I will say this…they ARE in my experience quite qualified to teach. Their students, when they show up to compete, have good solid basics and strength (some of the adult ones can be total space cadets…but then again, that is in anything you do).

However, watching a monk insult his students in public and call them stupid for a simple thing that anyone would do is not pleasant. Seeing two monks who started out teaching together have to be removed from professional duties because they had a falling out and would score the other student’s down is not a good thing.

So…I am a major Doubting Thomas. Then again, I am also a major gadfly in the strictest Socratic sense. I tend to scream the emperor has no clothes on instances where the acclaimed “Masters” exhibit less than masterful manners and such. Never on emotion…always on points of principle…and that is where my problem is here.

Pledging to a teacher is a serious thing. The things expected of a Tu Di (disciple student) are serious business. I just think that on the other end of that, the things that SHOULD be expected of a teacher, master, monk, etc… are equally serious.

46

Houston, TX

GLW,
wow…do i know you? i just noticed that you are here in houston. you know about the dallas competition. i was there too. as far as the duties thing, i don’t think it was brought on by either of the monks personally…but a member of one party complained and made a big deal out of it…so, jimmy wong handled it quite professionally and decided if there was any possibility of a problem, then both sides will step down from their duties. smart.

i agree that calling a student stupid seems insulting and could have been, but i have also found that the limited english vocabulary these monks have lends them to saying things differently. you have to be around them enough to really understand the thinking behind some of the english words.

i hope this is the case here, so maybe you can ease your feelings. i visited shaolin temple for a month in 1996 and i was shocked to see how cruel the teachers seemed to be to the students. yelling at the students, sometimes popping them in the legs with a small stick. they really dig down and push the students, but i feel now that this is the way they help the student find their full potential. it is really unorthodox, but let me tell you what changed my mind. i was watching some kids train near the tagou school down the street from shaolin temple. they were between the ages of probably 8-14. the were practicing forms i think, and one kid kept getting it wrong. the coach yelled at him and he just kind of laughed it off. he did it wrong again, this time he recieved a swift hit with a stick…i was shocked, it really caught me off guard. the kid still kind of laughed it off. he did it wrong once more…this time the coach told him to come over and sit down, stop training. the kid went into a fit, he was screaming and crying and begging to please keep training. this opened up a whole new world to me. these kids were willing to get beat a little, yelled at all day and that was fine, but if you told them they couldn’t train…it was like you were killing them.

i guess my point was, or was supposed to be, that the monks in houston haven’t been in the US that long and they still have the mindset of training the way they were trained. they have come a long way already. i visited them here in 1999 and watched a few classes, they were very strict and hard on the students. i think that is why they only had chinese students…any non-chinese would have walked in and thought these guys were crazy teaching like this. i can speak for my teacher, he is learning the way of the west. he thinks it is funny that here you must tell the kid they are doing good and to keep trying even if they haven’t got a clue about what they are doing. good old US posotive re-enforcement theory is what i like to call it. i don’t know if i think it really works. i mean if you are told you are doing good all the time, why would you ever want to try harder and improve…you think you are doing just fine. that is why the skill level of the US compared to the Chinese at this point in history is so different…they use “negative re-enforcement” to make the student reach their full potential and maybe even then some. i guess both methods have posotives and negatives.

well once again i have rambled on and on. hey GLW if you want to talk more or even visit the school you can send me an email. go to my webpage and there is a link there for “contact”.
i am currently training with Shi Xing Hao. Our school is Shaolin Kung Fu Academy and we are located inside the Chinese Civic Center.

respect to all! again, sorry for the ramble.

thanks,
dieter

47

yelling at the students, sometimes popping them in the legs with a small stick. they really dig down and push the students, but i feel now that this is the way they help the student find their full potential.

Yeah, this seems to be the norm in China. When my coach first started teaching here, he was kind of like that. He had a stick and gave one of the kids a light smack. I was like :eek: Of course, then we had to explain to him that that’s not legal here :stuck_out_tongue:

In regards to positive reenforcment, my old coach said the key was to just point out something good the student is doing with every criticism. Like “Nice expresion, but you need to work on your posture.”

48

martial ethics

Wude is a big concept and while I would hope all masters and students ascribe to this ideal, only a very few of us achieve it successfully. Monk or not, any teacher should ideally uphold martial ethics, but in reality, such ethics are hard to uphold, especially when you get into the charity part. This is not the best ruler for judement, for when applied to any religious order, you will certainly find flaws. Such is the nature of dealing with real humans. We are all flawed. But we can all aspire, and a few of us, a very few, can achieve.

There is great variation in Buddhist monks - from which way they face when they meditate to what they eat. Some Tibetan Buddhist orders practice ritual meat eating - even eating forbidden meats like human - which flies in the face of stereotypic vegetarianism. Even the Dalai Lama eats meat daily. He has some weird dispensation that allows him to take chicken soup for his health.

I’ve have been working very hard to distinuguish the warrior monks and their role at Shaolin. Most westerners are limited about their knowledge of monks and temples. While the Kung Fu TV show did a lot to open CMA to the public, it left some serious perceptual distortions. Ironically, since I’m in CMA, the martial monks are theones that capture our interest. Buddhism, while an amusng back story, only attracts a scant few - the Buddhists among us. But the warrior monks espouse Buddhism too - they have been trained in it and while they are not necessarily Buddhist masters, they express it in their practice much as the Ikebana or Kyudo masters might.

If you examine the message that Abbot Shi Yongxin extended to our Shaolin special issue, you will find that he fully acknowledges to wuseng (warrior monks) - He states that they “should meet the standards of monks” but he doesn’t go so far to say that it is mandatory or they will be ejected from the order. Surely, Yongxin would like to bring all the wuseng back to the fold so to speak. But I think, because of that weird rebirth Shaolin has just undergone, Shaolin owes the wuseng so much that they might not be ready to draw that line, at least not right now.

49

Gene wrote an article awhile back that would clear allot of things “shaolin skeptics” bring up when trying to discredit the temple. It was called the 8 truths of shaolin temple. It was in an inside kungfu mag so he can’t put it up on this site. Gene I hope you could do a rewrite and put it up right along side the sections on this site about “how to find a kungfu school” cause I think present day situations demand somthing like this.

It’s hard enough that we have so many frauds in america, but I can’t really beleive how many people try to corrupt the source. Shaolin temple is real students still train in kungfu and buddhism there. Whatever is official there or whatever it’s external shell may look like it’s spirit still lives. Why so many people are bent on burning their bridges to an incredible amount of knowledge is beyond me. Maybe jealousy, I don’t know.

50

Shaolin Dynasty

I’m amazed you remember that article. I don’t feel right about doing a rewrite of that article, nor can I reprint it since it was for IKF.

51

I remeber it cause of all the shaolin bashing that goes on here. It’s a great article to show people to debunk allot of the misconceptions they have on what a Shaolin Monk should be. Not to mention I have a stack of magazines that have articles about Shaolin. It just happened that I looked at that issue again the other day.

I still think you should write a book or reprint your old shaolin articles.

52

sd

The book idea again… Maybe someday. Right now, I’m too busy with other projects. But thanks for your encouragement and support. At least I know I’ll sell one copy. :slight_smile:

53

It’s hard enough that we have so many frauds in america, but I can’t really beleive how many people try to corrupt the source. Shaolin temple is real students still train in kungfu and buddhism there. Whatever is official there or whatever it’s external shell may look like it’s spirit still lives. Why so many people are bent on burning their bridges to an incredible amount of knowledge is beyond me. Maybe jealousy, I don’t know.

I think there are a number of reasons.

  1. Jealousy/resentment. Not nesesarily their of their skills, but because of the celebrity status their given, and the “monk worship” atitude of some people.
  2. Complete distrust of any religous org. sponsered by a government. Esp. a Communist government that has been very anti-religion/freedom of thought.
  3. Hatred of anything that has to do with the Chinese comunist government. The cultural revolution wasn’t that long ago.
  4. Poor examples set by the monks in the US.
  5. Frauds in the US will also talk bad about the monks, claiming only they have the real thing. Although people in this category might be more likely to try to asociate themselves with the current Shaolin Temple. The old “buy a lineage” scam :wink:
  6. Then there’s others who genuinely feel that the monks are just outright fakes, and are trying to educate the public on the “true story”.

Just some ideas.

I don’t hate the monks myself, but I kind of fall into #2, which makes me a little suspicous of any monk(official or not), and a little bit of #4. Overall, I try to take things on a monk by monk basis. :slight_smile: It’s really learn a lot by reading these pro/anti Shaolin arguments, though.

54

Hi All.

Here is my understadning of the differences between Christian Monks and Buddhists Monks.

A Christian monk has to abide by all the Rules of the order.

A Buddhist Monk has eleven vows that they can take, they more vows they take they more esteemed they are.
Do not eat Meat.
Be chastise.
etc.
One of the vows is not to take a Life.

So, yes, a Warrior Monk can be Buddhist Monk who hasn’t taken that particular vow.
I think some Temples burned or painted dots on their Monks head to show which vow they had taken in order to differentiate them from fake monks.
Pls,correct me if I am wrong, but this is my understanding

55

I don’t have any problems with the monks. They have the right to make a living, raise money for reconstruction etc., etc. From what I can see they are contributing to Chinese society, as well as here in the west, in very positive ways. And lastly we are martial brothers.

My objections are about the implication that historically martial arts were integral to the the practice of Ch’an as practiced at Shaolin. I believe this is a fiction. The evidence points that monks of Shaolin did practice martial art, but it all points to the proposition that it’s primary function was the defense of the monastery.

Secondly the notion that the martial practices at Shaolin represents the martial arts as practiced at Shaolin Temple prior to the 1900’s. I don’t believe it. Some of the reasons I’ve stated in other posts.

Shaolin Monastery was a ‘shih-fang ts’sung-lin’ during its entire history. This means it was a state monastery which was constructed and supported by the state. One could say it represented official Buddhism and was responsible to the imperial state. The number of these state monasteries were few. They were responsible for conducting official ceremonies for the imperial government. Their members were ordained by the Emperor and had supervisory members (san-kang) which were appointed by the emperor. One of the characteristics of the large monasteries was that they were much ‘stricter’ than the monasteries built by the nobility and commoners.

Official records were kept for monks residing in state monasteries. “Fraudulent monks known as ‘wei-lan seng’ was common and an ongoing problem for the government though out most of Buddhist history in Imperial China. Much of the reason for the growth of ‘wei-lan seng’ was financial, as monks were exempt from taxes and from from doing unpaid labor for the state. (These exemption however were at times reneged on).

How did the large public monasteries like Shaolin make their money?
It wasn’t from begging as someone suggested. Their revenues came from rent of lands, industrial operations (such as mills), interest on loans, and thirdly from donations and fees for various religious services. These large monasteries were often granted the right to collect grain and other produce from households ((seng-ch’i hu) allotted to them (in many cases through forced deportation of farmers to the isolated and underpopulated areas where the large imperial monasteries were generally located.). I would like to point out that it was not uncommon for a large number of army households known as ‘ chun-hu’ to be assigned to the large state monasteries.

These large monasteries, during some dynastic periods, housed both large numbers of monks as well substantial wealth in goods. Furthermore many, and in particular the Chan monasteries, were in remote, underpopulated and under protected regions. This explains why architecturally they were walled and why ‘chun-hu’ were assigned to them as samgha (Buddhist) households.
Their exposure to threats was real. As an example, during the Sui Dynasty bandits in fact succeed in occupying Shaolin Monastery for a short time before finally being driven out by the monks.

One other little known fact concerning the military and Buddhist monks, took place in the years 574 to 577. Because of the fighting taking place in the region where Shaolin Monastery is locacted, the imperial government ordered all monks to preform military service. This was about 79 years after the construction of the Shaolin.

kind regards
r.

56

r. (shaolin)

The rent income aspect is very astute. Most people miss that. Goes all the way back to that old Li Shinmin legend, but landowning was a definate parrt of Shaolin. I addressed this in an article - was it the Shaolin special? Anyways, yourpoint is well taken.

As for martial arts being an integral part of Ch’an, that’s an interesting dichotomy and the one that’s the most problematic amongst most Buddhists. It’s easy to disregard the Tamo creation myth (we had a thread on that earlier too) but this raises a chicken and egg problem. Ch’an is all encompassing. Once you get it, it infiltrates everything you do - painting, cooking, sitting or kungfu. But what is the door to Ch’an? A lot of Tamo’s point was to reject dogma, to not get it through sutra, to consider the possiblity of spontaneous enlightment. So it doesn’t come from conventional instruction, it comes from practice of arts like painting, cooking, siiting or kungfu. The answer to the koan is simple - the chicken is the egg.

57

hello i study 2 forms of southern shaolin from the temple in fukien, which my master has trained at studying chi gung and fist forms, basically our forms do resemble nan quan alot thou of course being self defence oreinted not display, we learn a fist form and a kiking form to supplement our pak mei training and teach us the difference between internal and external styles, from what i have seen of traditional southern shaolin it has far less flashy kiks and more complecated hand techniques than its northen sister system, thou it doesnt have the complexity that later southern styles contain such as hung gar or choy li fut, that is just my opinion.

58

Modern Southern Shao-lin

All arts including the “Wheel of Life” demo team currently practiced in the temples is MODERN WU SHU as this is the only style the RED CHINESE government will allow.For information on the AUTHENTIC SHAO-LIN MARTIAL ARTS of the SOUTHERN FUKIEN TEMPLE see the website"shao-lin.com".The current GRANDMASTER as well as his top students have trained & demonstrated at the modern SHAO-LIN temples in China.Please note:REAL SHAO-LIN KUNG FU is alive & well in commie China it is just underground at this time.

59

I was wondering when Shaolin-Do would come into the picture :stuck_out_tongue:

All arts including the “Wheel of Life” demo team currently practiced in the temples is MODERN WU SHU as this is the only style the RED CHINESE government will allow.For information on the AUTHENTIC SHAO-LIN MARTIAL ARTS of the SOUTHERN FUKIEN TEMPLE see the website"shao-lin.com".The current GRANDMASTER as well as his top students have trained & demonstrated at the modern SHAO-LIN temples in China.Please note:REAL SHAO-LIN KUNG FU is alive & well in commie China it is just underground at this time.

All I have to say is… :smiley: lol!

60

arrrgggh.. what a f..ing moron Army Dog is!

I’m sorry can’t help it, gotta speak… true yes most of what the various ‘monks’ do from Shaolin is in fact Wushu. However what they do is a **** site closer to REAL Shaolin then that piece of crap ‘Shaolin Do’ Kenpo bull s**t!!! Shaolin Do; the poser wanna be pretend Kenpo art for middle America white folk who don’t wanna actually train too hard while they run around in Karate uniforms (cause that what’s they’re programming tells they should wear)…

As to those freakin lame ass white folk demonstrating at Shaolin temples in China… god **** anyone who can pay for an air ticket & present a small amount of money to ‘whomever’ in China can demonstrate, have stone markers placed, have ‘fan’ pictures with monks, etc… THIS SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN AS VALIDATION of those EFC Kenpo, mass consumption, martial art for middle America, pot bellies hanging over their black belts… as real ‘Shaolin’… arrrrggggh…

They are every bit ‘REAL’ Shaolin as Temple Kung Fu, Villari, etc… at least the current monks have some genuine skill…

Uhhh, gak, gak… Gotta curb my emotions… Willow Sword might challenge me online…