Shaolin-Do Curriculum?

[Orion Paximus]

Authentic or not......traditional or not, it has always bothered me how the majority of SD people slop through their forms. They come across as untrained people pretending to know kung fu.
I say this as a former practitioner of this system ( 14 years). My teacher learned from Sin The back in the 60's and left his organization over some various disagreements.
He had only learned up through 3rd or 4th black and so he didn't have the glut of material that other SD schools had.
He took what he had and was very strict on stances and technique ...to the point that there was barely any recognition between our forms and the other SD schools.
say what you want about SD, but I can say it got me in shape, taught me about body mechanics and power generation, taught me to fight, and gave me a hunger to pursue other CMA when I reached the ceiling of my teacher's material. I went on to study Wing Tsun and it is the foundation I achieved in SD that has helped me to succeed in WT that I have been studying now since 1995.

LOL I think we have the same instructor. I also trained with another of Sin's students for 5 years prior to being with the instructor I have now, but for me, SD forms offer tons of practical applications if you approach them with a traditional CMA mindset. Something the typical SD student never does. I have trained in Xingyi and Bagua outside of SD and within SD and the basics are the same, so Sin The got that stuff from somewhere and got it mostly right.

 

[Orion Paximus]

Actually my issues with SD (and i say this as an SD person) is that the training mindset is all backwards. These schools are set up with belt advancement in mind, so the "basics"; stances, drills, Fa jing, etc, are all put on the back burner with the assumption that you'll develop this as you progress up the ranks instead of making you learn it before you are allowed to progress. Horse stance not steady enough? No prob, you'll have it before you get to black belt, don't worry. Having trouble with utilizing your hips and rooting? Hey who cares you have a life time...

If they would utilize traditional CMA training methods, I think less people would scoff at their material because with a proper foundation, those forms would be truer representations of CMA material. As it is it just looks sloppy and weak. Thankfully, due to my training with more traditionally minded CMA masters, I'm able to apply that knowledge to what SD material I have.

 

[clfsean]

Actually my issues with SD (and i say this as an SD person) is that the training mindset is all backwards. These schools are set up with belt advancement in mind, so the "basics"; stances, drills, Fa jing, etc, are all put on the back burner with the assumption that you'll develop this as you progress up the ranks instead of making you learn it before you are allowed to progress. Horse stance not steady enough? No prob, you'll have it before you get to black belt, don't worry. Having trouble with utilizing your hips and rooting? Hey who cares you have a life time...

True enough there...

If they would utilize traditional CMA training methods, I think less people would scoff at their material because with a proper foundation, those forms would be truer representations of CMA material. As it is it just looks sloppy and weak. Thankfully, due to my training with more traditionally minded CMA masters, I'm able to apply that knowledge to what SD material I have.

But see that's the problem. The SD curriculum (as it is) is so diverse, there's no way to build a proper foundation. There's no "real" foundation training, except for the SD basics. Which that's fine for the SD material, but when you start doing things that are decidedly NOT SD forms (see my list), then you start getting picked apart on what's missing or just 'wrong' based on lack of foundation training. Know what I mean?

 

[Orion Paximus]

True enough there...



But see that's the problem. The SD curriculum (as it is) is so diverse, there's no way to build a proper foundation. There's no "real" foundation training, except for the SD basics. Which that's fine for the SD material, but when you start doing things that are decidedly NOT SD forms (see my list), then you start getting picked apart on what's missing or just 'wrong' based on lack of foundation training. Know what I mean?

I completely agree. I think that they should stop trying to feed everyone everything, and start setting up specialized programs. Like okay you got to black belt/sash/discipleship so you have the basics, now it's time to specialize in a particular style. But instead you're expected to know a bunch of crap only partly instead of knowing a few things thoroughly.

 

[clfsean]

I completely agree. I think that they should stop trying to feed everyone everything, and start setting up specialized programs. Like okay you got to black belt/sash/discipleship so you have the basics, now it's time to specialize in a particular style. But instead you're expected to know a bunch of crap only partly instead of knowing a few things thoroughly.

Only problem there is... they can't really do that since that's missing!!

But you're right... and it looks like we see about the same on the topic.

 

[Doomx2001]

I completely agree. I think that they should stop trying to feed everyone everything, and start setting up specialized programs. Like okay you got to black belt/sash/discipleship so you have the basics, now it's time to specialize in a particular style. But instead you're expected to know a bunch of crap only partly instead of knowing a few things thoroughly.

I'm curious as to how different or how much the same SD will be in 30 years. From the videos links I posted it looks like they are heading in a positive direction. But, in the end it requires leadership from the top to 'tweak' the curriculum and how it's taught, so it can be spread out to the majority of SD practicioners. The only man with the say so to do that is GM Sin, but I don't see him doing that at this point. I think in the end, there will be multiple Shaolin-Do's that differ from each other more and more over time as each instructor interprets the SD curriculum his/her own way.

 

[Orion Paximus]

It's already happening. My current instructor trained directly under Sin The, my original instructor was twice removed from Sin, and there are many differences between the two.

 

[Doomx2001]

It's already happening. My current instructor trained directly under Sin The, my original instructor was twice removed from Sin, and there are many differences between the two.

What was the fallout between the two about if you don't mind me asking?
And another similar question: why isn't GM Sins brother with SD anymore? I can't really find much info on that subject.

 

[Punchy]

What was the fallout between the two about if you don't mind me asking?
And another similar question: why isn't GM Sins brother with SD anymore? I can't really find much info on that subject.

My teacher was a room mate of Sin The's back in college in the 60's. he said back in the day, Sin The was a total hard ***. They would be in a horse stance and punch for hours. He would test the students and leave the room for a while, come back in and tell them " you all stink, you all fail".... this went on for a while until Sin's brother came over and told Sin to tone it down so he could make money. We Americans couldn't do martial arts anyway.
That's the story as it was told to me back in the early 80's

 

[Doomx2001]

My teacher was a room mate of Sin The's back in college in the 60's. he said back in the day, Sin The was a total hard ***. They would be in a horse stance and punch for hours. He would test the students and leave the room for a while, come back in and tell them " you all stink, you all fail".... this went on for a while until Sin's brother came over and told Sin to tone it down so he could make money. We Americans couldn't do martial arts anyway.
That's the story as it was told to me back in the early 80's

Wow. Thats all I can say about that! Not sure what to say. Its both bad and good. Good that fundamentals were stressed, but bad about the money part.
There is hardly any information about the early days of SD back in the 60's, so little nuggets of info like this are gold.
Thanks for taking the time to share the story.

 

[Orion Paximus]

And another similar question: why isn't GM Sins brother with SD anymore? I can't really find much info on that subject.

I'd say the only real answer is "it's tough to have two grandmasters". Sin and "Shawn" were able to act as dual instructors back in the 60s and 70s, but once they started to build up their... uh... lets call it history, there wasn't room for both of them really. I mean was Shawn going to be content to be a 9th Degree Senior master his whole life? I dunno.

Shawn used to be Sin's enforcer. When someone within the organization was doing something Sin didn't like, it was Shawn that addressed that person/school/whatever.

I have no idea what Shawn The is up to these days though, I hear he still has schools in and around Lexington.

 

[Doomx2001]

Well, he seems to be doing well with his brand of SD. It has spread out to the surrounding areas of Lexington and a few other places in Kentucky (Cynthia, Danville, Paris, Richmond..etc).

I noticed that GM 'Shawn' in his bio lists him as a master of 'Tai Peng Bird' I think, and it's interested how GM Sin in his bio lists himself as a master of the 'Golden Snake'.

I really haven't looked in detail of both their curriculums, but GM 'Shawns' curriculum seems to have alot more forms in it, especially the 'Tai Peng Bird' stuff.

Here is a link to the News Section of the GM 'Shawns' site: http://www.centralshaolin.com/cshaolin_pages/news.html

Thanks for the info Orion. This stuff helps understand some of the history SD in 60's and 70's.

 

[Flying Crane]

I really haven't looked in detail of both their curriculums, but GM 'Shawns' curriculum seems to have alot more forms in it, especially the 'Tai Peng Bird' stuff.

Here is a link to the News Section of the GM 'Shawns' site: http://www.centralshaolin.com/cshaolin_pages/news.html

Thanks for the info Orion. This stuff helps understand some of the history SD in 60's and 70's.

Seriously, that curriculum is just way way way too much for anyone to grasp in a meaningful way. I think that's the big problem in my opinion. They are trying to do everything, and it creates a reality where none of it can really be any good. Spread way too thin, and I'd bet a lot of it is even conflicting in some ways, in the practice and foundation methods.

It's a collection of forms, and nothing more. It cannot be taught properly.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Seriously, that curriculum is just way way way too much for anyone to grasp in a meaningful way. I think that's the big problem in my opinion. They are trying to do everything, and it creates a reality where none of it can really be any good. Spread way too thin, and I'd bet a lot of it is even conflicting in some ways, in the practice and foundation methods.

It's a collection of forms, and nothing more. It cannot be taught properly.

Which translates as

Shaolin...

 

[Doomx2001]

Seriously, that curriculum is just way way way too much for anyone to grasp in a meaningful way. I think that's the big problem in my opinion. They are trying to do everything, and it creates a reality where none of it can really be any good. Spread way too thin, and I'd bet a lot of it is even conflicting in some ways, in the practice and foundation methods.

It's a collection of forms, and nothing more. It cannot be taught properly.

I think everyone is missing the point here altogether. I agree totally that Shaolin-Do in no shape or form even resembles authentic Shaolin martial arts or training methods, I also agree that Shaolin-Do doesn't even resemble in no shape or form any traditional Chinese martial art for the most part. I'm not really debating that or even discussing that, because there is no point. I also totally agree based on lack of evidence and collaberating witnessess that the Shaolin-Do history is not legit based on what we know now.
Again, that horse has been beat to death. But, I feel like I have to say all that because I feel everyone is getting the impression that I am a apologist for Shaolin-Do. I'm just interested in all martial arts whether they are legit or not just for the sheer curiosity of it all. But, I'm having trouble getting info on the net because there is not real 'inbetween' on the subject.

I really wanted to avoid saying any of that because I don't want to offend any practitioner of Shaolin-Do and their beliefs on what they do. I'm not here to pooh on anybody. I just want info that is constructive, helpful, and indepth that is neither a SD terd throwing contest or putting SD on a shrine to be praised. No matter what forum you go to, there is always those two extremes, hate SD or SD is the greatest thing since sliced bread.



The points of discussion that I am trying to get across is this:

- SD is not going away. It's still growing, nation wide, gradually spreading to Europe and the rest of the world. No matter how we shake or scream at the practitioners of SD or scoff at their offense claims to the Shaolin Temple, the art of SD is not going anywhere.

- SD will evolve. All martial arts evolve to fit the demands of the times we live in. I would wager almost half of traditional martial art schools today do Brazilian Jujutsu for their ground work. Some traditional martial art schools are incorporating Arnis knife/short stick fighting/defense in their curriculum. Brazilian Jujutsu itself evolved from Judo.
And with all that being said, I feel, I know, that is SD as a whole will evolve. Some schools will incorparate Brazilian Jujutsu in what they do, others will study authentic Chinese martial arts to bring more 'life' to their curriculum, and some SD schools may even refine their curriculum focusing on the basics and building on that, teaching few forms with more applications, and traditional methods.

- The Curriculum of SD As funny or strange as it may sound, I enjoy learning about martial arts even if some of those arts are scoffed at by others. I have heard all these negative things that have been said about the SD curriculum before. In some ways, I think the negative criticism (and thats putting it 'nicely') has actually helped motivate (as well as inform) some SD practitioners to study authentic Traditional Chinese Martial Arts outside of SD to make what they do much better and authentic.

Anyway, much like a forensic scientist, I look at forms and curriculums of different martial arts and think to myself, "Why do they do that, and what was it originally intended for? Is it modern or ancient? Was the techniques/forms originally done with weapons or empty hand? If this martial art has a bogus history, where did this stuff actually come from?" The thing is I can't find out much about SD because more people are interested in joining the 'poop on SD' bandwagon than actually having a conversation pointing out the cons and PROS of SD. I think sometimes practitioners of authentic Chinese martial arts get so offended at the claims of SD they project their 'hate/distaste' at anything positive or constructive said about SD making an informative conversation impossible.

So anyway, back on the curriculum topic, there really isn't that much indepth info on SD forms and training on the net. What few videos you can find on SD are short, and really don't explain much. Though the SD curriculum is heavily criticized, myself, and other people, may like to get more indepth info on the forms, training, and self defense methods of SD for no other reason than curiosity. It is my hope with this post that I can get more info on that, and many of you have been very helpful in that regard. Thank you.

- Finding out the 'true' history of SD. This is also very interesting to me. To find the history of SD we have to have info on GM Sin's life in Indonesia from friends, family, and just people that knew him when he lived there. Also, more information on the formation of SD once he moved to Kentucky, and how it has changed over the past several decades since the 60's. That is not stuff you can look up at a SD site, or I wouldn't trouble anyone with asking here or elsewhere.


Now, I'm not expecting anybody to agree with me on any of this. Which is fine. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. The only thing I want, is just a real conversation about SD that doesn't involve saying, "Their stuff isn't Chinese martial arts of authentic Shaolin, its not real, and you can't learn nothing from the forms...etc" or " SD is real becasue of this or this...blah...blah...blah...". We've all heard that before. I just want an healthy conversation about SD. Thats all.

Also, one quick note, I took the time to post several videos on how different schools of Shaolin-Do are interpreting their curriculum, but I still haven't heard anyone's thoughts on what they seen in the videos.
Other than that, I thank everyone for taking the time to answer my questions. I do appreciate it.

 

[clfsean]

Multi parted to address topics/thoughts directly....

I think everyone is missing the point here altogether. I agree totally that Shaolin-Do in no shape or form even resembles authentic Shaolin martial arts or training methods, I also agree that Shaolin-Do doesn't even resemble in no shape or form any traditional Chinese martial art for the most part. I'm not really debating that or even discussing that, because there is no point. I also totally agree based on lack of evidence and collaberating witnessess that the Shaolin-Do history is not legit based on what we know now.

Ok... but from your previous posts, your point hasn't been exactly clear.

Again, that horse has been beat to death. But, I feel like I have to say all that because I feel everyone is getting the impression that I am a apologist for Shaolin-Do. I'm just interested in all martial arts whether they are legit or not just for the sheer curiosity of it all. But, I'm having trouble getting info on the net because there is not real 'inbetween' on the subject.

Legit or not. Yes legit... it is a martial art & it does teach self defense. Not legit... see above in your statement.

I really wanted to avoid saying any of that because I don't want to offend any practitioner of Shaolin-Do and their beliefs on what they do. I'm not here to pooh on anybody. I just want info that is constructive, helpful, and indepth that is neither a SD terd throwing contest or putting SD on a shrine to be praised. No matter what forum you go to, there is always those two extremes, hate SD or SD is the greatest thing since sliced bread.

You can't make an omlette without breaking a few eggs, no matter how gently you try.

The points of discussion that I am trying to get across is this:

Let's see how this goes...

- SD is not going away. It's still growing, nation wide, gradually spreading to Europe and the rest of the world. No matter how we shake or scream at the practitioners of SD or scoff at their offense claims to the Shaolin Temple, the art of SD is not going anywhere.

Ok... what's the point here? That I can recall, there's never been a public uproar & torch bearing hordes trying to eradicate SD.

- SD will evolve. All martial arts evolve to fit the demands of the times we live in. I would wager almost half of traditional martial art schools today do Brazilian Jujutsu for their ground work. Some traditional martial art schools are incorporating Arnis knife/short stick fighting/defense in their curriculum. Brazilian Jujutsu itself evolved from Judo.
And with all that being said, I feel, I know, that is SD as a whole will evolve. Some schools will incorparate Brazilian Jujutsu in what they do, others will study authentic Chinese martial arts to bring more 'life' to their curriculum, and some SD schools may even refine their curriculum focusing on the basics and building on that, teaching few forms with more applications, and traditional methods.

Again... ok. Again... what's the point? You don't study SD so I'm not getting your direction.

- The Curriculum of SD As funny or strange as it may sound, I enjoy learning about martial arts even if some of those arts are scoffed at by others. I have heard all these negative things that have been said about the SD curriculum before. In some ways, I think the negative criticism (and thats putting it 'nicely') has actually helped motivate (as well as inform) some SD practitioners to study authentic Traditional Chinese Martial Arts outside of SD to make what they do much better and authentic.

That's not possible within the confines of SD. The only way to do that is to exit SD & study a TCMA. You can't paint a zebra brown & call it a horse. It's still a zebra.

Anyway, much like a forensic scientist, I look at forms and curriculums of different martial arts and think to myself, "Why do they do that, and what was it originally intended for? Is it modern or ancient? Was the techniques/forms originally done with weapons or empty hand? If this martial art has a bogus history, where did this stuff actually come from?" The thing is I can't find out much about SD because more people are interested in joining the 'poop on SD' bandwagon than actually having a conversation pointing out the cons and PROS of SD. I think sometimes practitioners of authentic Chinese martial arts get so offended at the claims of SD they project their 'hate/distaste' at anything positive or constructive said about SD making an informative conversation impossible.

To a large degree, no. Sure there are some that do that. The uproar about SD & the 70's/80's/90's marketing machine is the claiming of material as "theirs" and "original" when clearly it is not, never was & is lacking basic fundimentals of said sets.

So anyway, back on the curriculum topic, there really isn't that much indepth info on SD forms and training on the net. What few videos you can find on SD are short, and really don't explain much. Though the SD curriculum is heavily criticized, myself, and other people, may like to get more indepth info on the forms, training, and self defense methods of SD for no other reason than curiosity. It is my hope with this post that I can get more info on that, and many of you have been very helpful in that regard. Thank you.

And you won't find what you're looking for on the Net. You just won't. You either have to go by what ex-SD'ers like my, Yao Sao, Flying Crane or others have to say about it or try it yourself.

- Finding out the 'true' history of SD. This is also very interesting to me. To find the history of SD we have to have info on GM Sin's life in Indonesia from friends, family, and just people that knew him when he lived there. Also, more information on the formation of SD once he moved to Kentucky, and how it has changed over the past several decades since the 60's. That is not stuff you can look up at a SD site, or I wouldn't trouble anyone with asking here or elsewhere.

That's his business & you're not likely to come across it easily or readily. He shares/shared what he felt like & the rest is left up to faith.

Now, I'm not expecting anybody to agree with me on any of this. Which is fine. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. The only thing I want, is just a real conversation about SD that doesn't involve saying, "Their stuff isn't Chinese martial arts of authentic Shaolin, its not real, and you can't learn nothing from the forms...etc" or " SD is real becasue of this or this...blah...blah...blah...". We've all heard that before. I just want an healthy conversation about SD. Thats all.

Ok... that's fine. BUT... honestly, truly... how can you have the conversation you want without a) first hand exposure to carry on said conversation, and b) not hear the thoughts of people who have left for TCMA's & then do a comparison to what was taught in SD vs TCMA.

It'd be like me trying to have a conversation about the military & it's inner workings with a member of the armed forces without having served myself.

Also, one quick note, I took the time to post several videos on how different schools of Shaolin-Do are interpreting their curriculum, but I still haven't heard anyone's thoughts on what they seen in the videos.
Other than that, I thank everyone for taking the time to answer my questions. I do appreciate it.

Take the quiet as an answer. :angel:

 

[Flying Crane]

I think everyone is missing the point here altogether. I agree totally that Shaolin-Do in no shape or form even resembles authentic Shaolin martial arts or training methods, I also agree that Shaolin-Do doesn't even resemble in no shape or form any traditional Chinese martial art for the most part. I'm not really debating that or even discussing that, because there is no point. I also totally agree based on lack of evidence and collaberating witnessess that the Shaolin-Do history is not legit based on what we know now.
Again, that horse has been beat to death. But, I feel like I have to say all that because I feel everyone is getting the impression that I am a apologist for Shaolin-Do. I'm just interested in all martial arts whether they are legit or not just for the sheer curiosity of it all. But, I'm having trouble getting info on the net because there is not real 'inbetween' on the subject.

...

My comments were not meant to beat a dead horse, and I don't think my comments were really on the same track as what you are saying here.

I was not stating that SD is or is not legit, does or does not have a legit history, or is not at all effective for those who practice it.

I was making observations based on what I saw on a website and based on what I know from my own experience in SD and in other traditional Chinese martial arts.

There is a trend in some schools/lineages/systems, to want to have EVERYTHING in their system. These people somehow acquire a huge amount of material and incorporate it into what they do. They borrow from outside sources, they study under many teachers of many different systems, maybe they even "learn" some things from DVD and claim it as their own. They end up with a huge list of things that are sort of cobbled together like Frankenstein's monster: it's a hodge-podge of unconnected material that is forced together into one "system", but much of it really does not fit together, does not work well together, even directly conflicts with the methods of other components in this "system".

The individual aspects of the system may be legit and fully functional all by themselves, IF they are properly understood, with the proper foundation upon which they were built. BUT... when too many different things get thrown together, different things that are built upon different foundations, and that fact is not acknowledged, and all the material is practiced as if it actually works on the same foundation, it really starts to fall apart and most of it becomes dysfunctional.

When I see a huge list like what was on that website, and the list includes things that are vastly different from each other, I cannot help but believe it's a jumble and it's gonna cause some serious problems because I cannot believe that people are truly able to learn all those different systems, with the proper foundation and basics for each system, and be good at them all. It is simply too much material, it's impossible to practice it all to build meaningful and real skills with it all because there are only 24 hours in a day and every day we all need to spend a few of those hours sleeping and eating and ******** and most of us work a job and have some sort of family obligations as well. With those obligations on one's time, it is impossible to practice hundreds of forms, from dozens of different systems, much less do it with any real quality. And it is even worse when all those different systems are treated as if they work from the same foundation, and the correct foundation for each system is simply ignored.

I know about one quarter to one third of the formal curriculum of the system that I am studying. This puts me solidly in the intermediate level of our curriculum. I practice five empty hand forms plus a couple variations, and five weapons forms. That alone is a lot of material to work on, I usually feel like I don't have enough time to practice and I'm never satisfied with what I've accomplished. I hope to learn the entire system eventually, and it does disturb me to realize that having the time to practice it all will be an ever increasing challenge. But that's what I hope for.

I DO NOT hope for hundreds of forms. I have studied several other systems along the way, including Shaolin Do, kenpo, wing chun, capoeira, taiji, and some elements of northern shaolin. If I counted up the forms that I've learned along the way, it would probably reach up in the neighborhood of 60 or 70, depending on how one counts them. In the past, I've tried to keep up with these, or at least some of these. It's too much. None of it is given the justice it deserves and all of it ends up being mediocre at best, and poor if I'm being honest.

One does not get better by learning MORE. One gets better by working to gain a deep understanding of LESS, and then GRADUALLY learning more, but only at a pace in which one can continue to gain that same deep understanding with all the material. This process means that over a lifetime, one will have a curriculum that is much smaller, but it will be worth a whole lot more because of that depth of understanding.

When I see a huge curriculum list like on that website, I cannot believe it is possible.

That's really what I was getting at.

 

[Flying Crane]

Additional thoughts: once I began to really understand my primary system, once it started to really make sense to me and I could grasp what it is that we are working to accomplish in the training, then I realized that I did not need any of the other systems, to continue to practice them was actually a waste of my time and was damaging my practice in my primary system, and I actually did not want to waste any of my time and energy on the others. Practicing these other systems was not adding anything of value to what I was doing, and was in fact taking away from it.

The fact that the SD curriculum is so large and includes so many different systems, suggests to me that nobody really understands any of it very well. If they did so, they would realize that they had no need and no use for any of the rest of it, and the curriculum would have become much more focused on that material and the rest of it would be jettisoned.

 

[Orion Paximus]

The fact that the SD curriculum is so large and includes so many different systems, suggests to me that nobody really understands any of it very well. If they did so, they would realize that they had no need and no use for any of the rest of it, and the curriculum would have become much more focused on that material and the rest of it would be jettisoned.

There is something to be said for preserving history though. I mean assuming the forms are historical then they do have a sort of value and should be passed down.

 

[clfsean]

There is something to be said for preserving history though. I mean assuming the forms are historical then they do have a sort of value and should be passed down.

Not if they are in error in the present state.