[QUOTE=David Jamieson;893183]?
Besides the martial art you practice, what makes you in particular a bonafide shaolin practitioner?[/QUOTE]
Shaved head, silly robes and rust resistent crotch.
Attitude & Approach
[QUOTE=David Jamieson;893183]?
Besides the martial art you practice, what makes you in particular a bonafide shaolin practitioner?[/QUOTE]
IMO Shaolin is an ideal, not a label. For me being Shaolin means constantly trying to perfect the techniques I know. It means keeping my mind open so that I am always learning. It means making every effort to maximize my own physical, mental, and spiritual potential. Of course these things are not exclusive to Shaolin. Some Shaolin warriors of old were just living examples of the things I mentioned. Some of them were also ruthless criminals, but that’s a topic for another discussion.
[QUOTE=David Jamieson;893183]?
Besides the martial art you practice, what makes you in particular a bonafide shaolin practitioner?[/QUOTE]
there are some monks at Shaolin who train in Ch’an, and do not pursue martial arts.
what’s the difference.
[QUOTE=richard sloan;898930]there are some monks at Shaolin who train in Ch’an, and do not pursue martial arts.
what’s the difference.[/QUOTE]
maybe so, but not the subject of the topic. 
munching popcorn and enjoying the show
Yup, i agree that shaolin kungfu is consist of wu (martial aspect), yi (medicine aspect), and chan (enlightment aspect).
[QUOTE=David Jamieson;898951]maybe so, but not the subject of the topic. :)[/QUOTE]
yes but point being the original premise of the definition being sought is actually not complete or accurate…
[QUOTE=richard sloan;899218]yes but point being the original premise of the definition being sought is actually not complete or accurate…[/QUOTE]
Please start another thread then if you feel this way. I think it’s a pretty cut and dried question but would be happy to discuss what shaolin means to you in another thread about that topic.
[QUOTE=achien;899217]Yup, i agree that shaolin kungfu is consist of wu (martial aspect), yi (medicine aspect), and chan (enlightment aspect).[/QUOTE]
so this is what you consider to be your connection to being shaolin?
[QUOTE=David Jamieson;899243]…I think it’s a pretty cut and dried question but would be happy to discuss what shaolin means to you in another thread about that topic. :)[/QUOTE]
I think this thread is sufficient, and there is sufficient proof in the pudding to show you need to expand your definition to suit what the reality of Shaolin is, it’s not my opinion of what Shaolin is.
Does that make sense?
A Certain Point Of View
[QUOTE=richard sloan;900719]I think this thread is sufficient, and there is sufficient proof in the pudding to show you need to expand your definition to suit what the reality of Shaolin is, it’s not my opinion of what Shaolin is.
Does that make sense?[/QUOTE]
“You’ll find that many of the truths we cling to, depend entirely upon our point of view.” - Obi Wan Ken-obi
The term Shaolin has been reinvented so many times over the centuries. It is now IMO a term used to embody all of the mythical abilities within TCMA training. The term is more an icon now, as opposed to the, who is and who isn’t “real” Shaolin. There are current teachers in TCMA that I would consider to have excellent lineage. I think the point of this thread was to discuss what Shaolin means from your point of view. How has practicing what you consider to be “Shaolin” altered your approach to your training vs. say if you had studied traditional Muay Thai? Saying you are “Shaolin” is as much an inspirational practice, as it is a documented fact. But, this is just my point of view. 
[QUOTE=BentMonk;900748]“You’ll find that many of the truths we cling to, depend entirely upon our point of view.” - Obi Wan Ken-obi
[/QUOTE]
That may be, but I can state and anyone can empirically verify that any given triangle has three sides. That is a truth which does not depend on one’s subjective point of view.
So far there is a lot of stick whacking going on.
My Point Exactly
[QUOTE=richard sloan;900852]That may be, but I can state and anyone can empirically verify that any given triangle has three sides. That is a truth which does not depend on one’s subjective point of view.
So far there is a lot of stick whacking going on.[/QUOTE]
That is my point exactly. There is no one unquestionable, indisputable, absolutely positively “True Shaolin” anymore. The authenticity of lineages that claim connection to “True Shaolin” is constantly debated in China, the U.S. and anywhere else more than three people have heard of TCMA. The “truth” concerning Shaolin as it exists today, doesn’t settle the debate either. It it is a creation of the PRC, and not as old or genuine as the ideal that the term Shaolin embodies. At it’s best Shaolin refers to a high standard of excellence one could aspire to in order to continually push towards mastery of body and self. At it’s worst Shaolin is a term that uses naive fascination with Chinese mythology to make a profit. Show me. Don’t tell me. I train where I do because I have seen, not been told about the abilities of my instructors. Their concept of “Shaolin” and mine are alike. They walk their Shaolin talk. I don’t need some ancient scroll to tell me I study Shaolin. I don’t need some historian to validate my school’s lineage. I’ve used what I have learned, and it worked great. It’s also made me a better person as a whole. That’s all the validation I think anyone should need from the MA they choose to study. JMO
[QUOTE=BentMonk;900861]… There is no one unquestionable, indisputable, absolutely positively “True Shaolin” anymore.
[/quote]
the ONLY way to make this statement, is out of ignorance. Which means your point is not mine. A Shaolin monk should have provable knowledge of Ch’an Buddhism, according to their sect, knowledge internal to the sect which is knowable to other members, and should be exposed at the very least to Shaolin Gong fu if not exhibit mastery or proficiency, should be a member in a traceable lineage that predates at the very least, the 1928 Shi You San attacks- and when you look for these triangles you find, and it isn’t that hard actually, that such triangles do in fact exist- despite whatever people might choose to believe or disbelieve- and they do in fact exhibit such knowledge. There is zero way any secular government could recreate esoteric Buddhist knowledge to the degree needed to pass the litmus test, nor could there be any provable motivation.
NONE of the actor monks have need of this kind of information and people STILL think they are the ‘full deal.’ So for the sake of the theory that the government recreated the Shaolin Temple, they clearly did. And to anyone who knows, no performance monk can hold a candle to, their existence and the existence of all the other shams, that does not delegitimize the recipients of the true transmissions. I have met several troops of these wushu players, they don’t know the first thing- usually- about Ch’an. In fact I’ve taught them a few things!!!
Serious scholarly work has in fact been done, and while the current state of the temple may not help the case for these legitimate lineages existing in the public’s collective mind, and of course the public arena especially as occupied by those without the necessary credentials to even offer a valuable opinion, is rife with debates and opinions, what are they worth?
They aren’t worth jack ****.
The “debate” such as it is, doesn’t even exist in Shaolin itself, or the surrounding area of temples and such, where many of these monks are well known and in fact many, like Xing Zhen, were precepted by their abbots. Can we really, seriously, truly expect the average Shaolin aficionado to know Xing Zhen’s lineage and history? how would anyone find such information, if they did not go to the source, understand how to find out the information, and a host of other problems which need to be surmounted.
… I train where I do because I have seen, not been told about the abilities of my instructors. Their concept of “Shaolin” and mine are alike. They walk their Shaolin talk. I don’t need some ancient scroll to tell me I study Shaolin. I don’t need some historian to validate my school’s lineage. I’ve used what I have learned, and it worked great. It’s also made me a better person as a whole. That’s all the validation I think anyone should need from the MA they choose to study. JMO
Nothing you have stated here is exactly relevant to my point at all.
I’m happy for you? Plenty of legitimate Shaolin lineages have left the temple? As you say.
I’m happy you have found a good place and have become a good person. This can be said of any number of disciplines and practices, from playing chess to knitting, to joining a bridge club.
It doesn’t change the fact that EVERY triangle has 3 sides, and it is not up to the triangle to fall over itself to SHOW YOU it’s angles and shape.
The Merry Go Round
I’m glad that you have all this knowledge, and I’m happy it makes you secure in your argument. I’m not as ignorant as you might think. I just feel that Shaolin is to most people, an ideal rather than something that needs to be supported through documentation, and “litmus tests”. The whole “real vs. not real” Shaolin argument is IMO, no different than Rep. vs. Dem. Ford vs. Chevy, or a religious debate. Both sides are completely convinced that they are right, and the other is wrong. Both sides can present mountains of “documented proof” that supports their argument. Despite all of this “proof” neither side will budge on their position. The whole thing becomes a merry-go-round. The OP was, “What makes YOU a Shaolin?” not, how much proof do you have that you’re Shaolin. Sometimes merry-go-rounds are fun… for a while, and I do like a good debate. I’ll ride this one at least 'til I get bored.
There are a lot of ways to regard how many sides a triangle has.
if it is 2 dimensional and consists of lines, then it has three sides outside, and three sides in! plus a top side! that’s seven! Or, it can even be said to have nothing more than an inside and an outside.
If its 3 dimensional it has 5 sides!
and so on.
you could stretch your head.
It is important to acknowledge where information you have be given has come from. I agree. Not so much that you have a piece of paper. More so that you have demonstrable understanding.
The buddhism aspect is a sect all it’s own, the martial arts aspect, not so much. because of diaspora over time, shaolin methods and ways have spread far and wide.
It is safe to say as well that even someone who lives or lived their entire life in the temple at any time in its history does not have the body of knowledge that is available through it.
Even more so now after 1500 years of accumulating said knowledge and spreading it to every continent on the planet. And it is changing in every iteration it has become.
No 2 monks are the same in what they know or what they teach or even how they teach. There can be a defined curriculum I suppose for everyone to delve into, but if the goal is to make it a lifestyle, is a curriculum enough?
most lines of teaching lean towards giving up whatever it was you learned and keep the principles intact more so than patterned memories .
So, if one is actively using the methods on whatever level, why cannot they be shaolin or at least be able to acknowledge that aspect of them self?
I can play the theme song to “Kung-Fu” on the recorder.
Interesting statement. I can tell from experience I have trained under a 32nd generation monk and a 34th generation monk. The two teaching styles are different. The 34 gen monk has explained it to me in this regards…“this is new shaolin” when I asked him why were certain excercises and movements different. He referred to my beginnings as “old shaolin”.
I say the curriculum is just the outline or the guide for you to follow. The goal of making it a lifestyle is up to the practitioner. Some never see past the outline.
From who’s view? Ford or Chevy’s? I disagree with this also. richard sloan adressed this quite well. The wushu players, demo tours, actor monks, even broadway does not “delegitimize the recipients of the true transmissions”. So because all of these exist today at Shaolin doesn’t mean a big red rubber VOID stamp is slammed on Shaolin.
To answer this question I say it’s the way of life you live. To me shaolin symbolizes good, justice, martial arts and buddhism. I do the best to incorporate this into my everyday life, even on the job. Though my buddhism learning has a big need for improvement.
…
[QUOTE=Hendrik;900995]
…[/QUOTE]
care to translate that or risk having it transliterated.
Only fair as this is an english forum. I mean, I could, but it might not have the same context as what you are trying to say with the statement.