I'm looking for a history of the Shao Lin, its customs, beliefs, anything. And if anyone has any good info on the Wu Dang Mountain.

A few months ago, I did some extensive internet research on the history of Shaolin. Here are the weblinks I found most useful:

-- Links related to Shaolin monastery itself --

http://saolim.tripod.com/shaolin_frame/sha...emple_intro.htm <= Shaolin visit website with maps, photos

http://www.shaolin.nl/index.html <= great history of Shaolin, Bodhidharma, and Gung Fu

http://www.marcobresciani.com/songshan.html <= Shaolin Monastery visit, good photos

http://www.chinatravelclub.com/destination...gshan/index.asp <= ancient sites at Mount Song

http://www.geocities.com/ottawakungfu/100Shao002.htm#01 <= good history of Shaolin monastery

http://english.ctrip.com/destinations/sigh...p?resource=7954 <= description of visiting Shaolin today

http://www.chinavoc.com/kungfu/brief/shaolin.asp <= good history and description of visiting Shaolin today

-- Links about Bodhidharma --

http://www.zenmind.com/bodhidharma.html <= Bodhidharma's biography

http://www.mvkarate.com/who_is_bodidharma.htm <= another good biography with his image in paintings

http://www.mindground.net/bodhidharma.html <= has complete translations of Bodhidharma's four famous sermons

http://gojuryu.net/historicaloutline.htm <= Bodhidharma history and Buddhism history

http://www.alohazen.org/texts/daruma.htm <= good analysis of Bodhidharma's teachings and impact on Buddhism

-- Links about China's history during the time of the Shaolin monastery's founding --

http://www.fsmitha.com/h1/ch28.htm#s3 <= History of China from 3rd - 6th centuries CE, emphasis on Buddhism

http://depts.washington.edu/uwch/silkroad/...nwei/essay.html <= excellent Northern Wei Dynasty history

http://www.san.beck.org/AB3-China.html#3 <= another excellent history of Northern Wei (includes civil war)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Wei_Dynasty <= Northern Wei Dynasty history (rulers reigns)

http://www.chinaknowledge.de/History/Division/tobawei.htm <= Northern Wei Dynasty history

Many scholars of Zen Buddhism consider Bodhidharma to be more a legendary figure than a real one. According to the legend, Bodhidharma first arrived in south China by sea during the reign of Xiao Yan, emperor Wudi of the Liang dynasty (r. 502-547). He was unimpressed by Xiao Yan's lavish spending on Buddhist monuments, and went up north to Mount Song 嵩山 near the Northern Wei capital of Luoyang, where he founded the Shaolin monastery.

I've been to a few websites about Shaolin history. What intrigued me was the account of 13 (113?) monks who helped Emperor Tang Taizhong fight the rogue general and rescue his son, and Li Shimin's gratitude towards the monks when he became Emperor.

Did these monks wear armor? What weapons were used?

In general, I'm curious about the history of Shaolin temple, particularly the fighting.
I'm also interested in the time during Ming in which upper class would send their sons and daughters to learn from the monks (like a university)

and about Shaolin martial arts/kungfu in general today.
Do you think that what passes as kungfu today is only a shadow or warped version of the fighting arts used in the past? Shaolin temple was burned down by Qing, suffered a fire in 1920's, and was practically wiped out during the cultural revolution, only reinstated by the government a few decades ago. How much was lost?

Try this on the story of of the monks who rescued Tang Taizong:

http://www.zhengzhou.org.cn/english/Cultur...ory/story08.htm


And this for the history of Shaolin Shi:

http://goasia.about.com/od/chin2/a/shaolin.htm

That's a cool story. Another account I heard makes it sound like the rogue general was defeated by an army, with the aid of warrior monks. Quite different from this 13 man commando raid.

From my reply to another thread in the Asian History section:

OK, according to this article in Chinese: http://culture.people.com.cn/GB/40479/40482/3176905.html

The Shaolin monks' capture of Wang Renze at Baigu Fort did happen, but it was far less dramatic than popular culture made it out to be. They basically conspired with one of Wang's staff officers to capture him and hand him over to Li Shimin. There was really not much of a battle at all. The event is not recorded in the dynastic histories, but is in a letter to the Shaolin abbot by Li Shimin, and also a stele erected in the Shaolin monastery in 728. The monks clearly turned against Wang Shichong because he had taken over their property at Baigu for military use without compensating them, and not out of any loyalty to the newly-founded Tang.

The monks weren't really as overblown as popular culture makes them out to be.
They were not the begginings of MArtial arts, etc....18 weapons of Shaolin is also bull crap.

completely agreed. nice to meet a fellow traditional Wu Gong practioner that isn't blinded by these nonsense Shaolin legends.

I have always find it amusing how people think that martial arts started out from shaolin. Because if that was true, than all the soldiers before the wei dynasty would have been completely untrained in combat.......

why do people say that shaolin kung fu now is for demonstration only?
are sholin tricks like getting hit by a spear and not getting hurt
1.some sought of majic trick
2.hardening the skin like karate guys do
3.qigong +hardening the skin
who is better and kung fu bruce or jet li?

I think to say that Chinese Wu Shu today is completely for show is a overstatement that what the Chinese call "一竿子打翻一條船"

First, Wu Shu is a insanely broad term that simply can not be generalized.

The schools around Shaolin are indeed very commercial, with the majortiy of their student wanting to become actors, but many also become body guards/securitiy guards etc.

The Wu Shus on the film screens are obviously mostly acting, that to generalize that into Wushu = acting is a very broad overstatement to say the least.

The spear on the throat thing is not a magic trick, however that doesn't really equat the monks that can do such a feat super martial artist, because it is simply a special way to work your body to make it happen, some people can do it without martial arts training too, its just that the Chinese did seem to find a way to "train" people to know how to do it instead of the usual case where people are simply naturally gifted.

As for Jet Li and Bruce Lee, both men are real martial artist that will certainly dominate any untrained person in bouts. it is pure guess work but Bruce may be slightly better because he developed much of he's own stuff, but then again, part of the reason he did it was also because he couldn't access the true ancient arts that Jet was previliaged to.

Actually, I think that Jet Li is actually only a Wushu artist, not really an Wugong practitioner. I know he was on the Beijing Wushu team, but I'm not sure if he learned real Wugong.
You know why the Shaolin stuff is said to be all demonstration? Because it IS all demonstation. Breaking slabs of stone with your head, getting spears stuck into you, that's all looks. When are you going to use it? It looks nice, but it's the same as Wushu nowadays.
Oh, and mind you...the spears they use...they're wushu spears. Nothing real. So it's not as dangerous as it's made out to be.
And breaking things on your head...frankly, it turns you into an idiot, qigong or none. I remember when I used to take Shaolin with Shi De Shan in Houston...there was something wrong with his head...he broke things on it alot. That's probably what turned him into the meanest, sickest B****** in the world. You can IM me for details.

Well, Bruce Lee is dead so Jet Li could dig up his grave and stomp his bones.

I hope readers realise I have the greatest of admiration for Bruce Lees ability and contribution to the martial arts as I have quoted his ‘Dao of Jeet Kun DO’ on several occasions when discussing the shortcoming of Wushu.

Wushu to me is not a confusing term. Any martial artist who hears it and is famialir with current world styles should know it refers to an acrobatic form of ‘martial art’ that has come about in the last 50years.
It is certainly more correct to call it ‘modern’ Wushu as it has little to do with the more correct or tradtional meaning of Wushu, which at the most simple level would be more correct than ‘Kung Fu’(time/energy).
Kung Fu is much more broad in the modern usage (again thanks to Bruce Lees influence on the West) and in everyday use has now replaced what once would have been Wushu (=martial art).
(If you follow).
I think Chinese martial artists are better to refer to their school to provide clarity as both Wushu should apply to the PRC, and Kung Fu is far too broad (as Wing Chun is completely different to another long fist ‘Kung Fu’).

As for Jet LI I believe in his day they did teach more traditional aspects of the martial arts to the selected students although undeniably from the beginning his rigourous training was for competition through form and not for combat. I suggest a google search or a visit to tribute pages as I found one good one with several pages of biographical info. He seems to have been taught a bit more than the standard student, as it named specific traditional stlyes, rather than just the official Wushu competition form which is now taught according to age groups.

HOWEVER Bruce Lee was a 100% real fighter, putting his spiritual & personal aspect aside he appropriated any useful or strong technique or lesson from world martial arts and rejected the idea of national ‘stlyes’ (i.e Karate, Kung Fu, Taekwando) and said we all have 2 arms and 2 legs, so as human beings why do we have stlyes for different cultures? Some things must be in common, and somethings simply work better than others. Why promote an inferior technique just out of tradition?
He took combat elements from sport or anything that worked so as to use the best techniques from any.
In this way he wasn’t beautiful in form but he was unusually effective. He was challenged many times and kicked a lot of tough guy A**.
He said when people ask me ‘Are you really that good?, if he said yes he would appear arrogant, but if he said No, he would be lying’
He is a very interesting character and sought out and learnt all he could and deduced many valid observation about martial art mentality. It is a great shame he died so young as he only developed these ideas over a very short time in his later life. He even critically listed the strengths and weaknesses of his own background style, which was Wing Chun. His common sense approach is quite valid. Nothing wrong with traditional forms, but if a boxers simplified hand technique can out punch a complex traditional martial artist fist then why not add western boxing to the training?

Lets be clear, I don’t learn Jeet Kun Do even though a school linked to his original students is here but I accept all of his observations…even if I do still like the traditional karate, or modern Wushu for its art aspect I do admit freely a lot of what is taught at both is really a load of nonsense and will get your head knocked off on the street.
Bruce lee is not the only person to say this, but he did a lot to encourage a new interest in the martial arts.

back to the question;
Yeah, they (Jet & Bruce)are both incredibly fast and can leap 10 feet in the air, but Bruce would use any and all tricks, bust kneecaps if possible, and spit in an eye, and never sacrifice safety for aesthetics or form.
Anyone adopting a fancy but flawed Wushu stance against Bruce Lee would have lost before they had even moved.

AIIIIEEEEEE!! (says Bruce)
Pow! POW POW!!!

Hope that answers the question.

Did Bruce Lee know how to grapple though? I think he did.

In modern mixed martial arts, it's been found that people trained only in striking, even if they are very good at it, are dead if they don't know the basics of grappling.

The greatest unarmed fighters ever are alive and competing today, never in world history have people from all over the world come to participate in mixed martial arts tournaments.

I geuss you are talking about ulitimate fighting?
Yeah, Bruce lee adapted wrestling and Judo and Aikido...but it would just be base elements of each. He died young remember.I dont assume he mastered every art.
I arent familiar with specifics of JKD techniques, just the ethos.

Yes, certain strikes just dont work in the ring fighting...and a wrestler might tie up a kick boxing type...but just the same a knock out can win it.
I have seen those sort of fights where the fitter person wins if each are in equal skill and cant lock or choke the other...
It will depend who is really the best. The wrestler is going to have to be lightenign fast! becuase he has to topple the kicker/puncher type or lock up his limbs before he gets caught with an elbow or knee as even one good hit can still end those fights, but granted if the wrestler get to tie up and is in his element then the boxer is in trouble.
I know they say in MA that '80% of fights end up on the ground' but that is still the last place you want to be as you might get stomped by his buddies while you are trying to tie him in knots. Perhaps 80% of dumb schmucks end on the ground but I think learning to wrestle instead of box isnt a good idea, better off just to have a famialrity with some ground techniques but try like hell not to get into any grappling.
Again, some stlyes unfortunately dont even have this, like sport karate.

The best ulitmate fighters dont have to be elegant...they just have to be fast, tough and very good!....and 'styles' go out the window...it all looks the same when you try to take off the other persons head.

Pretty gruesome stuff.

If you want to end a fight bloodlessly or without causing too much harm, then choking them or making them submit would be better than beating them down with fists.

True, strikes can still knock people out. Just as having no grappling skills is a serious disadvantage, having no striking skills is bad, you still have to close in to grapple.

Not sure how true but I've heard that the combat form of Silat is one of the most deadly in the world because it is the most elemental and raw undiluted by centuries of ritual and form like the Chinese, Japanese or Korean forms.

martial arts, like all things, have evolved to suit their surrounding. We cannot make any absolute claims of what techniques and systems are effective and what isn't simply because context of fighting changes over time and over situations.

Ring fighting evolved in the ring. While their techniques can be used elsewhere, their specialization is the ring. Which means when used in other context, there will be weakness and those are weakness which the enemy will exploit and ultimately make you pay with your life. Namely, if you use those techniques on a battlefield, grappling and mounting an opponent would be an invitation for the lovely concealed dagger-to-kidney technique.

Civilian fighting styles evolved in cities. Military systems evolved for war. If you used the military system for civilian fighting and killed someone, then you will simply get arrested and executed for murder. If you killed someone of higher places in imperial china, it would mean your family's execution also. So it is basically a lose-lose situation. If you use civilian styles in war, you would be spending too much time trying to subdue the opponent while his conrads will move in and dice you from behind.

What we can differentiate is the reason behind a style. Some style was not designed for fighting. But their techniques just happen to be able to get used for fighting. Just to given an example, I can pretty much kill anyone if I was armed with a sword and swung it like a tennis racket. Hell, I can kill someone just by swinging a tennis racket like a tennis racket (come on, the overarm smash can break skulls open. Especially with the old school wooden rackets).
Some styles were based on other styles (which were practical) but forced itself to evolve just to establish an independent identity. In both cases, I don't consider them to be real martial arts.

I've heard of Russian Sambo as being very effective, taught to Russian special forces. The idea of that is to make the Russian soldier as deadly as possible, in any environment, with anything in hand (guns, chairs, etc.)

i have to disagre with kenneth saying that bruce lee invented a style which showed the shortcomings of wushu.Wushu taught today has its shortcomings but thats cos theres hardly anyone good teaching it,bruce lee invented an effective style because he hadnt been taught wushu move properly like in the pre CCP era.

Actually, Bruce Lee did get some instructions of traditional styles during his time in Hong Kong. However, the character of Bruce himself was well known throughout the martial arts community as being questionable at best and therefore no master were willing to teach him any more than the elementary level. It was because of this that he studied non-chinese styles to suppliment what he didn't get from the Hong Kong teachers.

His theories were nothing new. He was only the first to say it in english. The idea of not being constrained by what you have learnt, the nessessity to adapt the techniques given to you into something your body can use effectively, trying to bring the people of different schools together and learning from different schools, it was all done before.

I would be the first to admit that he is the best thing that happened to the Chinese people back then but certainly one of the worse to haapen to traditional chinese martial arts.

Actually, modern Wushu forms have little to know application.
There's punching, kicking, yes. A wushu practitioner can probably beat up Joe Schmoe because of some more strength and endurance. But if you examine the Wushu stances and moves, they are all elongated to provide maximum eye candy but minimum fighting value. Just Think. If you stretched your Gong Bu stance to be as wide and low as they do it, you'll look d**** pretty, but you're gonna get buttwhipped by someone who knows a real art, such as Muay Thai. In fact, the rotation of the knees and locking of the knee joint in stances provides excellent opportunities for practitioners of styles, particularly Muay Thai, to deliver a shattering kick to the back of the knee, which is particularly dangerous if your joints are locked.
Also some of those things are simply outrageous. Sure, you can flip and somersault and aerial in movie fights. But it doesn't work that way in the real world. Neither do splits.
Also, Wushu...unlike real martial arts, provides no way whatsoever to decisively defeat larger opponents, since its punching and kicks are soley based on raw force, something a large opponent has more of than you, as opposed to oblique tecniques as grapples and force redirection (Yin Kong).
And the techniques for weapons in wushu forms? Well, you can selectively use some stick techniques to beat someone up, of course, after you throw out all the flashy, useless moves. But who doesn't know to swing a staff at an opponent? Whereas, if you learned a staff form dedicated to real combat, you would probably know more techniques than "Beat beat swing swing" for the staff. The swords and sabers in wushu are just outrageous. Aluminum foil weapons. You can't expect to be able to do the same form if you use something real. So that form is COMPLETELY useless. Of course, you could use some basic techniques for real fighting. But those techniques are universal, it doesn't take a genius to learn to slice with a sword. Better off learning something real, like Lang Tao Jin's Hua Lin Pai swordsmanship, which is suited for REAL combat.
So I strongly disagree that wushu has ANY sort of practical application, despite what ih8eurocentrix says. The tecniques are rather rigid for maximum "pose" value (ie knee joint locking during stances or stiffening of the entire arm during punches) are liable to give you a bunch of broken bones in a fight against someone who know how to break your arms and legs. The form itself is useless in its entirety for fighting, and you cannot blame the instructors for not being good enough. They're plenty good. It's just that Wushu is a performance art, not a Martial art. It's only useful in the competitions, which judge by beauty, not usefulness of tecniques. Just think. Should REAL martial arts be graded like...a beauty pageant?

I don't think he was talking about the new post-CCP wushu. Rather, I think he was talking about what is commonly known as Kung Fu.



Yang Zongbao, you should understand that 'wushu' means by definition martial arts of any form. It is the contempoary western understanding of the term which equate it to the performance-oriented art you refered to. To Chinese, there are no such thing as 'kung fu' or 'wushu'. Only old school and new school. The new school is the performance art and the old school is the fighting art.

My mistake then, Wujiang.
To me, Wushu means a very perfromance art...and Wu Gong means real fighting.

......actually Yang Zongbao made a lot of true observations. Having started in Muay Thai in my teens and more recently Wushu I know that Muay Thai for a stand up fight is the real business, and I used to make a habit of going once a fortnight up untill last year into my old club just for the sparring nights so as to get a bit of perspective on the watered down fighting they taught at my other traditonal clubs (mainly karate). This is why I noted that all fighting stlyes must as a nessicity remove all the glitter and flash crap when your brain has been knocked against the back side of your skull.
It is hard to look pretty in fornt of somebody who has trained in this style when I had been doing kihon (kata and line work) punching at air. Great stuff.
Yang Zongbao comments about stance is 100% correct, as I outlined to my instructor last weekend that I love the PuBu tip forward stances expressiveness but if 2 people were equally fast they would sweep, or side kick the locked knee when you offer a side angle (the perfect way to make a knee joint pop apart!).
It is great fun, and very meditiative graceful stuff.....but its not real. That is what is 'Wushu' today. Like it or not. I have trained with 2 Wushu schools before settling on this one, and even with the differnt forms the problem is the same.

Ih8eurocentrix, I thought I just explained that in the broad modern martial arts world, and to mainland Chinese 'Wushu' is only modern Wushu.
The old meaning of Wushu IS literally 'M.A', but you will find that it now essentially applies to the 'national sport of China' (literally)...i;e what you will see at the Olympics soon.
In whatever context you used it you would be wrong anyhow.
You are mistaken that Bruce Lee didnt train in pre-CCP arts as he learnt WIng CHun with Yip Man in HK as his first martail art. I dont believe Bruce Lee mastered all arts as I said, IT HIS HIS ETHOS which I agree with as I do learn 'formal' styles such as Wado Kai, Kobukan & 'modern' Wushu and have never thought of going to a JKD club.
Yes, a Muay Thai kich boxer with 1 months traing would likely take out a Wushu person with 1 years training becuase they (thai stlye) purely learn the business of fighting 1 on 1. This is more what Bruce Lee commented.
As I quoted Bruce Lee 'you must get into the water to learn how to swim'.

Wujiang
I have a traditional 'Wushu' (i.e non-communist, with combat and partner work & applications) text at home and in it Bruce LEe is photographed meeting with the SCHOOL Master & his family. They all seem happy..
Any idea he learnt Western martial arts just because he was shut out from Asian instructors is all hooey. He was admired by many Chinese and I can see no negative effect from him on any tradtional martial art which all persist in even greater scale than before he appeared.
Blame Mao if you need somebody, but if anything the martial arts world was re-invogorated by Bruce Lee populisation.
I suggest you read some of his writings or look into what he did and how hard he trained (not just watch his movies which can be bad) and then reconsider what points I made about him.
Yes, other people have said the same thing in different ways (including people I know)......but they didnt have Bruce Lees influence on the world. Why criticise a the man as some sort of poor mans master who use the Western stlyes?
He didnt master Wing Chun in terms of doing it till he was an old man (whoppee), or maybe any style to any 'grandmanster 'status but his point is that a stlye is a very personal thing so why spend 20 years on one thing...seek out elements of each. He was the real business, got challenged by other Chinese martial artist becuase of his fame....and he kicked their butts when champions were sent to fight for his right to teach Westerners.
He was said by his first Wing Chun master that they swapped lessons as Bruce knew dancing. The master said in a short time Bruce had learnt his techniques, and the master still couldnt dance well! There are other comments like this I have heard from other schools about his displine in learning their strikes and blocks...the way he trained was incredible if you look at his daily regime and training schedule. My God, and he blew away the Westerners with his physicality and speed. Isnt that s what it is all about? Or a dance?
I dont really see what you point is, apart from attempting to play down his talent.

Re-read what I said about both Jet Li & Bruce Lee and tell me what is wrong.

...to make it clear, the WIng CHun school I know is exactly that. Wing CHun.
They would never call themselves Wushu...as anyone who know what this means will see the leaping and the foil swords.
Like I said so-called KungFu schools of the original Wushu meaning are more likely to name a school instead, i.e Whin Chun, Long Fist or Nan Wa Pai or Lang Tao Jin's Hua Lin Pai as Yang Zongbao mentioned.

d****, I wish I knew a real 'Kung Fu' school here, as the mainlanders bring Wushu only, and even though I know a guy who learnt Wing CHun in Taiwan who teaches well, I felt the unusual linear from centreline punching stlye was just too incompatible to what I felt came naturally.....
The true 'traditional Long Fist' stlyes that I prefer dont seem to be common here, so Wushu for all its faults (as long as I am aware of them) came more naturally from a background of karate stlye kata reverse punches..

I am talking about his times in Hong Kong. Not America. That is another discussion

Chinese societies are not like western ones. They do everything they can do hide displeasures and disharmonies within the ingroup. You don't 'express' your displeasure for a member of the ingroup. You don't leave and live somewhere else if you don't like your family or have an argument with your sister on the streets. You leave it all inside the house where no one can sees you (true, things are changing nowadays, but was certainly the case back then). This is especially true in front of a camera. It is the gossips and behind-the-back insults that you form of picture of what things were like.



Agreed on the idea that he was admired. But that was AFTER he became famous. And it was after his fame that everyone tried to sell themselves as being in connection to him somehow. That is how hypocratical (sp) humans are like. When you were a nobody, everyone spits one you. When you are a somebody, everyone loves you. The admiration of people within the MA community (in Hong Kong) was for his fame and sucess. Not his martial arts.

And the CMA community did shut him out before and after his fame in terms of teaching him things. Even after he became the big superstar, Yip Man rejected his plea to teach him the Wooden Dummy.

Yep. I still blame Mao. But your statement that martial arts was re-invogorated by Bruce Lee populisation is an overstatement. In America, maybe. But in Hong Kong, the MA industry have been alive and kicking. I don't deny that Bruce did give it another boost. But it wasn't as if it was in the danger of dying out.



I didn't criticize his training. I admit he was a great fighter. But not as a chinese martial artist.

That is where my criticism comes in. This approach was a very very very western approach. His education in the US made it inevitable that he made this conclusion. Individualism in the Chinese sense is different. hard to explain here. Need to dig through my books on cross cultural psychology and sociology.

The idea of 'expression' of the body is a western appraoch. Chinese martial arts is about fighting. Not expression. Things either work for you or it doesn't.



I say before and I say it again. He was a good fighter. Not a good Chinese martial artist. You are trying to say that Bruce trained hard and fought well, therefore he was a great chinese martial artist. Which is not the case.

I don't quite follow you. What is a 'Chinese Martial artist' in your mind?

actually Wujiang I dont consider him to be a 'CHinese MArtial artist' in the sense perhaps you mean it. He was Chinese & he was a martial artist.
It wouldnt make any difference if he was Korean or an Englishman.


I agree with all your points basically on the society etique thing, except that for Bruce Lee to appear in this schools book is perhaps not just being polite....even as I know that Chinese don't insult their geusts or hosts if hey have good manners, to draw the link it obviously their pride Bruce knew their master.
I should point out masters of both Hakido and Taekwando appear in his last unfished movie and when he died there were many tributes from world martial artists, including Chinese 'Kung Fu'. I doubt that was all for show however.
If some CHinese grey haired martial artists dont like him thats too bad.......CHinese arent the final words on martial arts anyway, as nobody is.


Agreed too that he was a bit of a trouble maker and that led to his leaving HK....but some of the best fighters I know of arent all nice people, they are just good at what they do. I admire their ability but not the family life.
One student said to me, '''if you want to train well then heed his lessons, but if you want to know how to live your life, go to church.'''

Agreed also the meaning of Wushu is vague, and probably depends who you talk to.
I can hardly say what is right or wrong. A master of WIng CHun in the states I argue Chinese antiques with calls his assoc. with 'wushu' in the title, but his style isnt Wushu.
I suppose it is wrong to try and correct meaning then. I should say 'modern' Wushu to clarify....but most MA people will know what it means in modern times anyway.

Could someone assess the accuracy of the Wikipedia article linked by Q57?

While we're on that... have any of you considered doing CHF 'brand' wikipedia articles? To spread our knowledge to the layman!

That's possible - we do have enough experts here to pool our resources to write more accurate articles for Wiki, or correct the errors in the existing Wiki articles.

How about voting in this new poll? http://www.chinahistoryforum.com/index.php...3&mode=show&st=

It seems that the closer to it's roots a martial art is, the more brutal and efficient it has a tendency to be. But also more simple and direct, the oldest martials arts like Pankration is not tought in their original forms anymore since they are simply to brutal for the use in the ring nowadays. but they were quite popular in the ancient world, both for entertainment and as a gift to the gods/ancestors, which also craved some blood and guts to be realy happy!

Hi Yun, I read Q57. Back in the winter of 2003/04 I researched Shaolin's history using many different internet sites, cross-referencing search topics like Shaolin, Bodhidharma, Kung Fu, Northern Wei Dynasty, Buddhism, etc. I used only English language websites. Based on that research, I believe Q57 is an accurate summation of the monastery's history. The only part that I had not seen before was that Bodhidharma was initially refused entry into the monastary. I never read that anywhere before.

Hope this helps some.

I also think it's kinda funny that peaceful Buddhist countries or Buddhist communities are given credit for various fighting arts

Shaolin, muay thai

i read from a book written by a shalin monk that emperor and his generals luitenents visited the shaolion temple evey 4 or so years so the indian monks fighting style probaly kariput was influenced by the generals existing martial arts.

Diversity breeds strength buddy, that's what Shaolin was known for

The fighting powers of the monks themselves are either folklore or very exaggerated, in actual events, from what I know

The Indian monk story is also largely myth

http://www.sltd.de/start.php <- shaolin monastery temple in germany..

http://www.aboutshaolin.com/ <-very nice site (you need login!)

http://www.russbo.com/main.html <- another nice site..

http://www.shaolin.org.cn/ <- original site of original temple in henan..?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Shaolin Quart (Shaolin Boxing)

Shaolin Quan or Shaolin boxing originated in the Shaolin Temple on Mount Songshan at Dengfeng in Henan Province. It was named after the temple. The founder of the Shaolin Quan was said to be an Indian monk, Bodhi-dharma. The proposition, though very in-fluential, was proved to be false, for there was a monk named Bodhidharma but he knew nothing at all about Chinese boxing. In fact, Shaolin Quan was the manifestation of the wisdom of the monks of the temple, secular Wushu masters and army generals and soldiers According to historical records, the Shaolin Temple was built during the Northern Wei Dynasty in the 19th calendar year of the reign of Emperor Taihe (495) and Is one of China's most famous ancient temples. The Shaolin Temple once had many monks on its premises. Those monks of the lower level mostly came from the secular society and some of them knew some martial arts before entering the temple. Those who knew mar­tial arts taught and helped each other to improve their skills. They also absorbed the experience of their predeccssors and gradually developed their martial arts into the unique Shaolin school.

During the Northern Qi Dynasty (550-577), Shaolin monks could litt hundreds of kilograms in weight and were good at boxing and horse riding. By the end of the Sui Dynasty (581-618), Li Shimin, king of the Qin State, fought with the self-appointed emperor of the Zheng state,Wang Shichong. Shaolin monks Zhi Cao, Hui Yang,
and Tan Zong took the side of Li and helped him catch the latter's nephew Wang Renze to force the selfappointed emperor to surrender. After Li Shimin was enthroned as the first emperor of the Tang Dynasty, he awarded his followers according to their military merits and contributions. Monk Tan Zong had the title of chief general conferred on him, white the Shaolin Temple was given large grants of land and money to expand the temple complex. The Shaolin Temple was allowed to organize an army of monk soldiers, who acted as military people in warring times and as monks in peace time. The Shaolin school of boxing improved and developed through the trials of battles and wars.
The Shaolin monks in the Ming Dynasty (1368-1644) were all taught to practise Wushu. In the 32nd calendar year of the Jiajing reign (1553), the Shaolin military monks took part in the battles against Japanese invaders in southern China and accomplished many military exploits. Wang Shixing of the Ming Dy­nasty wrote in his Tour of Mount Song. "All of the 400 Shaolin Temple monks have good Wushu skills." "Fists and cudgels were wielded as if they were flying during practice." Cheng Chongdou also of the Ming Dynasty wrote in his book The Dossier of Shaolin Cudgel Fight: "Shaolin monks are best known for their cudgel fights." Ming general Yu Dayou, who was reputed for his anti­Japanese military Service, went to teach cudgel fighting skills in the Shaolin Temple. It was in the latter half of the Ming Dynasty that Shaolin monks switched from cudgel fighting to fist fighting, so that fist fights could ' be promoted to match cudgel fights.
In the Qing Dynasty (1644-1911) the people living around the Shaolin Temple were very active in practising Wushu, which boosted the development of the Shaolin school of martial arts. In the Shaolin Temple, the rear h^ll was used for Wushu exercises, where various kinds of weapons were displayed on the weapon Stands ready for use at any time. Some monks practised fist fighting to safeguard the temple. After years of exercises and practising, foot prints were stamped on the brick floor of the rear hall and these prints can be seen clearly even today. On the north and south walls of the White-Clothes Hall, there are Qing Dynasty murals vividly depicting the exercises practised by monks in the tem­ple.
In the fifth calendar year of the Yongzheng reign of the Qing Dynasty (1727), people were not allowed to practise Wushu. However, they could not be stopped either in the secular society or in the Shaolin Temple, where Wushu was practised Underground.
Apart from the Shaolin Temple on Mount Songshan, the Shaolin Temple was said to have set up more than a dozen Shaolin affiliates in other temples in the country. The Shaolin Temple on Mount Nine Lotus in Fujian Province during the Ming Dynasty was famous for developing the Shaolin Quan.
Around the 1911 Revolution against the Qing Dy­nasty, the Shaolin martial arts underwent further developments. Wushu clubs were established all over the country and most of them took the Shaolin Quan. Lots of patriots organized sabre and flying sword groups in order to overthrow the dynasty. They constantly prac­tised their skills and contributed greatly to the cause.
The Shaolin school is very populär in secular society with a myrad of followers. Over the years it was enriched theoretically and its techniques perfected to form
a colossal system of fist fight.
Compactness is a feature of the Shaolin school. The moves and tricks of this school are short, simple and succinct as well as versatile. While fighting, Shaolin boxers would advance and retreat straightforwardly. They need only a small space to execute their style of fist fight which is described as "fighting along a Single straight line." Shaolin Quan is powerful and speedy with rhythmic rising and falling of body movements. It stresses hardness of actions and blows but it also advo-cates softness in support of the hardness. The motto of the Shaolin fist fight says "hardness first and softness second." When jabbing or palming, the arm is required to be neither bent nor straight, in an attempt to blend external and internal forces. **


-
** Essentials of Chinese Wushu
ISBN: 7-119-01477-3

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detai...g=UTF8&v=glance

From here.

I'm particularly intrigued by this paragraph:

However, some of the info is doubtful, for example, an excerpt from the next paragraph, especially the last sentence:



I wonder if what he said is true at all and am particularly intrigued by some of the sources he cited, like if they actually exist. He must mean Zhuang Zi as in the acclaimed "Daoist" philosopher and skilled debater, right? Odd, Daoist philosopher listing fighting techniques? What about the "Yin Wen Tze (Records of Art and Literature)"? I can't find anything about it. Came someone verify all these sources please?

Also, it seems pretty hard to come across any reliable sources on the real history behind Chinese martial arts. Most of the stuff I've come across were written by masters who don't have much understanding of Chinese history at all, much less the military side of Chinese history. Seems there may need to be some cooperation between those martial arts masters and real professional historians in order to produce a good book.

Quite agreed w/ you on those points on most MA instructors. Most of them are not that intellectual.

Some are narrow-minded. Can't see past the big picture.

They live, drink and smoke whatever style they learn.

http://www.shaolin-society.co.uk/History_o...lin/shaolin.php

I have heard that this site is a fake, with many false informations..

be careful! Many site are maked by cheaters..

In Europe have be many missunderstoods about "Shaolin Do" Or "Shaolin Karate" they have masters with 20 Dan (hehe..)


-

anyone seen the episode in the History Channel's 'Warriors of the East' series on the shaolin monks? It claims that they rescued Li Shimin from the clutches of a warlord in Luoyang.

Anyone know where they got this from? I know that the monks helped Li Shimin against Wang Shichong, who was based in Luoyang, and that he patronised the shaolin monastery once on the throne, but it's a long way from there to rescuing him. If Li Shimin had ever been captured by his enemies, he would probably have been executed

I wouldn't give the show too much credit, it described the captive Li Shimin as 'son of the emperor'...

Well, Li Shimin was indeed just a "son of the emperor" at the time of the campaign against Wang Shichong - his father Li Yuan was ruler of the Tang and he was not even the Crown Prince. But yes, I have seen that episode before and the mythologizing was atrocious. To even suggest that Li Shimin was a helpless little kid who could be kidnapped by a warlord shows how little homework the producers did.

We have a thread about this legend here: http://www.chinahistoryforum.com/index.php?showtopic=2656

Movies about the Shaolin monks may have helped put Chinese martial arts on the world map, but they have become such a mythological institution in their own right (and profited so much from it) that it is high time someone put up a website debunking the myths.

That's why I get my history from books rather than cable tv (which I don't have anyway)

The fact that from all the martial institutions in 3000 years of Chinese history, they chose to profile the shaolin monks shows the series' guiding philosophy. History becomes soundbite entertainment...

They did what ???!!!!!! @#!@#$#!~^&*&*(@$@# Sometimes I'm thankful I don't have TV.

Wish they could be sued for $$$$, nothing hurts these type of producers more.
But wait ... could be some fly-by-night producers ... it should be History Channel that should be sued.

History channel is after all a tv show and as managers of that show they need to make as much moneys as possible ,.,too bad they make try and make exiting as possible and in every documentry they spice things up.

Jet Li's "Shaolin Temple" is "spicing things up".
Having Li Shimin as a child to be rescued is total fabrication.

I'm sorry to say this but the Shaolin temple(real and fake) are just sell-outs.