The Shaolin Monastery: History, Religion, and the Chinese Martial Arts by Meir Shahar

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Shaolin Kung Fu
, , , ,
21

[QUOTE=GeneChing;828794]It’s one of the leading publishers of research on Asia. Academic texts, like academic journals, are seldom sold in general bookstores; you almost never see them in the megachains. The scholarly book industry is almost a completely different animal. They tend not to do major runs, which is why they are so expensive. If you want one, you’ll probably have to order through the site.[/QUOTE]

Or look in a university library. I found this microform file at GSU about Taiwan’s research into traditional kung-fu uniforms. I could scan some and try to email them to interested parties, if anyone is interested. Boring stuff, but it was a Taiwanese committee that conducted the research.

Just puttin’ it out there for anyone interested.

22

Meir Shahar Shaolin book

Is really great. I’ve been reading it. And it proves Shaolin has been doing martial arts for far longer than Ming dynasty.

Most of my own personal research has been verified in his book (not trying to be a **** or tooting my own horn, but hell, I’ve gotten so much **** from people who didn’t believe it, so it is great to have been pointing in the right direction all this time. Makes me go “WooHooo!” though.

I have long said that all of Shaolin’s Nei gong and Quan sets can be done with the Staff and that all shaolin material is first derived from movements of using a staff and THAT stuff comes from Double Sword movements that arose from Tang dynasty military martial art weapons drills (essentially what is called Tong Bei or Tong Bi today). Yuo can date the sets from how much this is true in the movements.
He already points this out in the introduction of the book before he even gets to the whole proving in the rest of the book.
Looks like he went through hundreds of ancient books that had direct references to martial monks and what they did.

After I read the whole book I’ll post any great things I come across.

Meanwhile over the the last six months, I’ve been proving this theory by making a giant comparison chart that move by move, posture by posture, lines up the direct correspondence the exact same sequences of movements in the Wu, Wu (Hao), Yang, Chen Yi Lu sets with each other AND with Shaolin Tai Zu Chang Quan, Shaolin Rou Quan, Shaolin Chan Yuan and 6 Harmony Nei Gong AND with Tong Bei Strange Flower Intersecting Striking Cannons set and Tong Bei drills.

I show in a giant 11 x 17 chart that all these TJQ, Shaolin, and Tong Bei sets and drills follow the SAME exact sequences of movements, with slight variations, in order and you can see the evolution of the movements from Tong bei on to TJQ.

Next step is to have links for each set of movements in each style available so that people can see exactly how the movements evolved and developed from Tong Bei to TJQ with Shaolin in the middle making the evolution happen.

Meir Shahar’s book shows how the martial monks brought in military training to Shaolin and it evolved from sword and spear weapons to staff to empty hand from the Sui and tang dynasties to the Ming dynasty.

It’s a great book!

Gene, if you would like to publish my new article with chart, that would be great, you can do an online version that shows the movements being done and a paper version?

23

the Shaolin book

I am half way through the book- its a good book. I may comment more when I am through.

joy chaudhuri

24

[QUOTE=Sal Canzonieri;847892]Gene, if you would like to publish my new article with chart, that would be great, you can do an online version that shows the movements being done and a paper version?[/QUOTE]

that would be most interesting, as i have not been able to visualize that for the life of me! :slight_smile:

25

[QUOTE=LFJ;848064]that would be most interesting, as i have not been able to visualize that for the life of me! :)[/QUOTE]

Well, it will be published in the Ezine version of Kung Fu magazine soon, so you can see it there.

Also, I am willing to hold seminars in NY or NJ or go to other states if someone will host a seminar to teach this.

I am going to Spain in May to teach the Shaolin transition nei gung sets that are between tong bei and TJQ.
If any one wants to attend that, contact me privately and I will put you in touch with the people holding the seminar.

26

I finished read the book.

Well, I answered most of my questions and verified all the research I have been doing on my own, so I am pretty happy with the book.

He answers questions people have had without realizing he is doing it, because he is not a martial artist.

A whole other book can be written in follow up to this own from a martial artist’s perspective.

There’s info in the book on origins and connections to Shaolin of such styles Tai Tzu, Mizong, Plum Flower, and many others. Stuff that has baffled people for ages.

27

Meir Shahar Shaolin book

I bought this book on Gene’s advice. I have a love/hate relationship with it. On one hand it has a lot of useful info in it for some upcomming articles I’ve been working on for the mag. On the other hand now I have to rework allot of projects that I had going because of the research:o

Gene is right though, you shouldn’t even attempt to write about shaolin until you read this.

28

One of the things I enjoyed about the book was how even in ancient times there were “lineage” issues and oen master or another berating anothers technique saying that there is the best and they they have the real insert MA here.

Somethings never change.
And the more “secret” or “esoteric” and the more it was passed down by oral traditions alone, the worse.

There is a lesson here…

29

I’ll get a copy for my b-day. :slight_smile:

Sal, I always thought it was common knowledge that Shaolin had MA practice long before Ming Dynasty.

Even when I was a kid (I’m 44 now) I was hearing the info about them having martial arts practice during Tang Dynasty.

edit
looks like amazon is outta stock! agggh, gotta purchase fast!

30

[QUOTE=David Jamieson;849725]I’ll get a copy for my b-day. :slight_smile:

Sal, I always thought it was common knowledge that Shaolin had MA practice long before Ming Dynasty.

Even when I was a kid (I’m 44 now) I was hearing the info about them having martial arts practice during Tang Dynasty.

edit
looks like amazon is outta stock! agggh, gotta purchase fast![/QUOTE]

Already out of stock? They’ll get it again soon.

Well, common knowledge with the emphasis on “hearing”.
There are a lot of Shaolin haters out there from all time periods that kept wanting to say that Shaolin was all bull and their art was the only true art, etc, etc.
So, many people today started doubting the history of Shaolin and their connection to martial arts.

Shahar did a very thorough job research all the written records that are out there about the topic and proved things for Shaolin.

He couldn’t prove EXACTLY what martial art sets and drills they practiced, since that is not in written records, but he did prove that many historical records show that they did practice something, mostly because their martial education came from outside the temple, from the military. Shaolin was basically the National Guard for the Tang Dynasty and later for the Ming.

Being that Shahar isn’t a martial arts that knows Shaolin sets, often in the book he is providing all these great proofs for other Shaolin based martial arts (Tai Zu, Mi tsung, Mei Hua, and others) without even realizing it, in my opinion.

For people that do know and research the actual martial art sets and drills, they can build from this book and provide further research.

31

I was told that this book makes the claim that Shaolin martial arts began with the worship of a Hindu deity named Vashalutherpalshujaj at or some such at the shaolin temple and that Bodhidharma’s exercises came later. Any truth to this claim?

32

[QUOTE=NJM;849740]I was told that this book makes the claim that Shaolin martial arts began with the worship of a Hindu deity named Vashalutherpalshujaj at or some such at the shaolin temple and that Bodhidharma’s exercises came later. Any truth to this claim?[/QUOTE]

He thoroughly proves the point in the book, there is no doubt now.

33

Amazon - pah!

Go direct to the source, I always say.

As for the Vajrapani issue, we actually leaked that (with Professor Shahar’s blessing) way back in 2004. Meat, Wine, and Fighting Monks: Did Shaolin Monks breach Buddhist Dietary Regulations? by Dr. Meir Shahar was from an earlier draft of this book. Of course, if you’ve been keeping up with Kung Fu Tai Chi (or even just this thread), you knew that. :wink:

34

I don’t really have a comment, but I wanted to post under my real profile for once.

It sounds like this book is a must have for Shaolin researchers though. I am putting it on my list.

35

[QUOTE=Sal Canzonieri;849742]He thoroughly proves the point in the book, there is no doubt now.[/QUOTE]
Can you post some citations from his bibliography so I can read up on it? I’m curious now.

36

The conversion from Vajrapani to Bohidharma as the mythical founder of shaolin’s fighting methods was very interesting to me. Especially the reason for it. It was also interesting that even though the credit for the creation of shaolin martial arts shifted to Bohidharma the monks still credited Vajrapani for their staff techniques.

37

These points I found interesting:

There is a part in the book that is very cool, it makes note of a manual written in the 17th century in which the author mentions a few systems that were “popular” at the time, systems like, " eight evasive manuvers, egale claw wang’s grappling, Zhang Jinbais striking" and so forth and then goes on to say that eacj is quite wonderful in its own aspects but, thay are all guilty of either emphasizing “top to neglect the bottom or bottom to negelct the top”, its goes to say that EVEN if they can successfully overcome an opponent, they cannot be considered perfect in every respect.

Even back then there were issues of about the lack of “all around fighting ability”.

Another interesting passage comes from a book written in the 16th century by QI Jiguang called “essentials oo the hand combat classics”:
Qi was critical of flowery postures that while they looked good had very little combat implications, he said that without obvious postures or techniques you will be effective in one move, if you do make the mistake of of posturing and posing you will be ineffective with 10 moves, this view was echoed by Tang Shunzhi that said, " the reason of postures in the MA is to facilitate transformations…forms contain fixed postures, but in actual practice there are no fixed postures,When applied they become fluid but still maintain their structural characteristics".

Both men were Generals with military experience.

38

Yes, as I have always said, it’s the movements between the postures where the action is.

So, it’s not the forms are no good, it’s not understanding them that’s the trouble.

They are a means to an end.

The book says that like Chan (Zen) teaches you have to use something until you no longer need it. “If you see the Buddha in the road, kill him” is a famous Zen saying.

39

[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;849953]
by Tang Shunzhi that said, " the reason of postures in the MA is to facilitate transformations…forms contain fixed postures, but in actual practice there are no fixed postures,When applied they become fluid but still maintain their structural characteristics".
[/QUOTE]

I wrote an article about this with the complete translation:

“The maneuvers of pugilism are what enable us to produce its changes.
Regardless of whether you move horizontally, diagonally, sideways, upwards, forwards or downwards there exists walls and doors for defending and attacking.
This is the meaning of maneuvers.
Within pugilism are the fixed maneuvers, but during their application they are no longer fixed.
And when using them their changes also have no fixed maneuvers, yet the maneuvers are still there.
This is what is known as ba shi.”

The article is actually about Mantis Boxing, but this was a relevant passage.

http://www.plumflowermantisboxing.com/Articles/Seizing%20the%20Opportunity.htm

Kevin

40

old uniforms

[QUOTE=Shaolin Wookie;829120] I found this microform file at GSU about Taiwan’s research into traditional kung-fu uniforms. I could scan some and try to email them to interested parties, if anyone is interested. [/QUOTE]

Yes, I am interested. I have some of the Taiwan Gv historical research on MA in Taiwan, but nothing on uniforms.

I would very much like to see this.

kevinbrazier@yahoo.com

Kevin