# Question shaolin temple



## ggg214 (Feb 13, 2008)

shaolin temple used to be the heart and key resourse of CMA, which has great history. but i doubt in nowaday how many real CMAs are handled by shaolin monks?
there were two person,who once have lived in shaolin temple and practised shaolin kungfu for years,visiting my master. they didn't believe taiji can be used in a fight. so they had a try with my master, i was standing by. they didn't have even once to hit my master, they defended all the time.
later, they showed us shaolin MABU standing. they couldn't stand by my master's 2 finger's push. in the contrary, they couldn't push my master down with their whole enegy. 
after that, my master told me shaolin MA seemed to lost.
these years, shaolin monks made reputation around the world. there are many MA training schools estashed near shaolin temple. they change the traddtional teaching way into class teaching.i don't think they can make any progress for CMA's inherit.
where is the real shaolin MAs?
if some one asks me where to find a real shaolin MA, i will tell they not to go to shaolin temple but find in nearby parks where they are living. maybe there are more chance to come across the real shaolin MA.


----------



## terryl965 (Feb 13, 2008)

I'm sure if you look around you can still find them, like anything else in life. Take the time to find the truth and be flourish with amazement.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Feb 13, 2008)

To have lived at Shaolin does not make them Shaolin Monks there is an, as some Chinese put it, almost Monk. They live there and train about 7 years, I think, they are not actual Shaolin.

But with that said much of Shaolin today is made up of forms training with sports sanda for fighting.

Are there any Shaolin left like you are talking about? Maybe


----------



## Tames D (Feb 13, 2008)

I wouldn't judge the quality of Shaolin based on what you saw two guys do. They could have had a bad day, they may not have been good representatives of the Art or your Master may have had superior skills to them. Another day may have produced different results.


----------



## ggg214 (Feb 13, 2008)

i believe that there are still real shaolin MA existing. 
what i doubt is whether the real one is in shaolin monk or in the monks who are called group of shaolin MA monks?


----------



## ggg214 (Feb 13, 2008)

DE JIAN
this is some kind of shaolin martial art i have not seen in other shaolin monks.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Feb 13, 2008)

ggg214 said:


> DE JIAN
> this is some kind of shaolin martial art i have not seen in other shaolin monks.


 
That is not Shaolin that is Xinyi


----------



## ggg214 (Feb 13, 2008)

that's out of my knowledge!
i have been told that the key parts of shaolin MA are two things: one is xin yi ba(&#24515;&#24847;&#25226,one is damo yi jin jing&#65288;&#36798;&#25705;&#26131;&#31563;&#32463;&#65289;&#12290;there is another video showing xin yi ba also by DE JIAN.it's so soft and smooth, quite different from other shaolin forms.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Feb 14, 2008)

ggg214 said:


> that's out of my knowledge!
> i have been told that the key parts of shaolin MA are two things: one is xin yi ba(&#24515;&#24847;&#25226,one is damo yi jin jing&#65288;&#36798;&#25705;&#26131;&#31563;&#32463;&#65289;&#12290;there is another video showing xin yi ba also by DE JIAN.it's so soft and smooth, quite different from other shaolin forms.


 
I am not sure about Xinyi being a key part of Shaolin but Damo allegedly is, assuming Damo existed. 

Regardless, something being Xinyi does not mean it is Shaolin. There is a Xinyi person on MT, that trains in China too, maybe he could shed more light on it than I


----------



## ggg214 (Feb 14, 2008)

there is a school called Xinyi Liuhe. it comes from one of minorities in china
do you mean this?
i think they are different, but i am not a xin yi practitioner. so i don't know much about this. all i know it's the most MA for application in shanghai.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Feb 15, 2008)

Actually there are multiple styles of Xinyi

There are xingyiquan and Xinyiquan discussions here. 
Note: Xingi and Xinyi are not the same

Dai Xinyi

More right here on MT


----------



## rickster (May 17, 2012)

Whenever someone gets into a martial art- Especially attaching to one for namesake, glorified influences, fad, or curiosity, their expectations are high.

With these high expectations, the desire for results, or any progress, is so great. But, given that every individual is different, and that some do not develop like others, only time and hard practice will prevail. Unless, the instructor is not qualified or does not have the knowledge.

To get into a martial art for the sake of performing something specific, or special feats because of seeing others do it, or the namesake of it, has some fallacy and illusion.

This is why I have stated that Shaolin gets to the point of namesake. Although someone had stated that Shaolin, per its Buddhist practice, is not separated from its martial art one-it is definitely recognized for martial arts first and foremost. Therefore for its martial art namesake. Therefore, people are lead by namesake/fame instead of the wholeness or full aspect of it.

Everyone that states that they teach or learn "Authentic Shaolin Kung Fu", I find disturbing. Even those that state they teach or learn Shaolin Kung Fu, are curtailing on the name for namesake. Something to be recognized or gained.

Now if this is the case with other systems, per stating that they have a lineage to Shaolin, then for that matter, many other Asian arts, if one is to study the ancient civilization of Asian man, would see that some of theirs had come from other sources like India, for example. (Including Shaolin.) And those others, in the surrounding provinces, can state a lineage to Shaolin.

Authentic Shaolin Kung Fu would be kung fu practiced the same way it was in Shaolin, with the same methods, techniques, etc. What I am trying to say is that if there was "Authentic Shaolin Kung Fu" out there, its still not what many people believe it is. I don&#8217;t think Shaolin Kung Fu even older days of Shaolin, is actually what so many people think it is. Given that the term, of its development, martial arts way back then were not called Kung Fu.


Authentic Shaolin is like Authentic Christianity. Everyone wants it, need it, uses it, capitalize off it, without truly &#8220;following it in authentic form&#8221;. (For sure, Christ had over-turned the tables of money in those temples. Where is it written that he wanted to open a temple and collect like those priestans?). Trade marking it (Shaolin) would find the same difficulties such as trade marking Christianity/Jesus Christ.

Many people get the impression that the Shaolin monks are merely Kung Fu practitioners. These same people fail to realize that Shaolin was built for Buddhist priests.

From Logical Deduction and Questions;

How can they devote so much time (or all their time) to MA's?
What is the connection between MA and their religion?
Shouldn&#8217;t they be studying, praying or meditating and not fighting?

If Buddhism opposes violence, would it best be thought that monks don&#8217;t fight at all its just exercise, they are free from thoughts of violence

 Think of something that is just pure joy without inhibitions, doubt or fear. Think of yourself in your most open and relaxed state and you might understand where monks are at when training or begin.

Martial arts were in China and Asia long before Shaolin. Some scholars believe after Shaolin was established, retired generals and criminals sought refuge there, and brought "Kung Fu"  to the monks.

In order to understand Shaolin, one has to understand its very underlying principals, which were not martial art related. I am very skeptic of those claiming instruction and lineage to something so controversial and lack total concrete evidence. There exists no actual documentation or certification from such a temple devoted to the Ch'an study of Buddhism, to state anyone is authentically Shaolin. Does this mean that he does not have skills or the ability to teach? No. I believe he is an instructor whom has skill, but not a Shaolin instructor.

Now, oh wow, with the popularity and commercialism of martial arts, everyone comes out of the "woodwork" claiming to be a descendant from Shaolin. Archives, records and documentations are fabricated. Obvious-yes to one that "believes". The same as Chi/Ki-God, etc. Denial or truth is painful. Ignorance is bliss. I had even had a Korean instructor whom informed me that the Korean martial arts are not as "ancient" as the Koreans appoint them to be. Again, like my discovery of authentic Shaolin no longer existing, my understanding of Korean martial art history was shattered and painful. As I talk to many Buddhists, including monks, my eyes are continued to be "opened". I have overseas letters, correspondence, and met Buddhist monks and practitioners to understand many things about Buddhism, the foundational soul of Shaolin. A nice Buddhist tale is of the Kalama, any Buddhist/Shaolin monk should know of it. Seek this tale and learn its meaning.
___________________________________________________________

I just have a little strange feeling when I see something worded that is  beyond the actual representation. (Like Ultimate Fighting-which has a  set of rules and is not truly "ultimate".) So, let it be noted, that I  do not intend to bash or discredit any school, or anyone, I think that  the term and usage gets way out of proportion.

The Shaolin controversy is evident. Any instructor or school, or any for  that matter, should strive to hold true to its own merit than to show a  link and usage in the name of Shaolin.


Martial arts, per Shaolin and other problems associated are a controversial subject like trying to convince people that Chi/Ki does or does not exist. In essence to religion, that God does or does not exist. They all are a matter of opinion. Opinions are not totally righteous or wrongful. Opinions are actually individualized beliefs. Despite any given evidence, positive or negative, such beliefs that are strong, individuals will not be swayed away from their beliefs-their opinions.


----------

