Post: Hengest:

Well, apart from the fact that there was probably never a Fukien Shaolin temple, and there certainly were never 12 Shaolin temples, and no Shaolin temple was burnt down during the Boxer Rebellion, it all seems perfectly reasonable.>

Post: Stazzy:

[quote=Hengest Well, apart from the fact that there was probably never a Fukien Shaolin temple, and there certainly were never 12 Shaolin temples, and no Shaolin temple was burnt down during the Boxer Rebellion, it all seems perfectly reasonable.[/quote 

http://www.shaolin.com/temples_shaolin.aspx>

Post: Hengest:

Thanks for that. I feel dumber just looking at it. :roll:

Do yourself a favour and do a little more research on the matter than just googling "Shaolin".>

Post: bamboo:

Hengest-

Why didn't I just trust what you wrote? Why did I have to look at it?

It just drew me in, the crapulence was spell binding.

-bamboo>

Post: nbotary:

"Crapulence"??? I've heard/used "craptacular", but never "crapulence". I need to remember that one... :lol:>

Post: Hengest:

Yeah, "crapulence" is a good word. I like "crapulence". :D>

Post: Stazzy:

[quote=Hengest Thanks for that. I feel dumber just looking at it. :roll:

Do yourself a favour and do a little more research on the matter than just googling "Shaolin".[/quote 

Yeah, I'll do that...as soon you start backing up your statements with proof and not information you made up.>

Post: Hengest:

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

From a post I made on the MA History Q&A thread:

Quote:

It must also be stressed that there was only ever one temple, the one in Henan. There is no historical evidence for a temple anywhere else. The story that there were two or more temples stems from two sources. One was a popular series of novels from the Ching dynasty called Sword-Man. This series posited that there were several Shaolin branches. The second source is the mythologies created by various secret societies in an effort to legitimise their schools of kung fu. These stories usually revolved around a second temple being situated in Fujian province and much of the styles of kung fu still practiced today claim their Shaolin "roots" from this temple, for which there is no actual evidence whatsoever. A few years ago Chinese archaeologists said they had found the remains of the mythical Southern Shaolin temple; however, the "evidence" presented to connect it with Shaolin was laughable and the site of the temple was quickly covered up when a "reconstruction" of the original Southern Shaolin temple was built slap bang on top of it. Governments will do anything for tourist cash it seems.

To get you started, read Adam Hsu's chapter on the subject in his excellent The Sword Polisher's Record, then turn to the articles Stanley Henning has written on the matter. He writes for the Journal of Asian Martial Arts and other more academic publications.

I've done my research sweetheart. Now it's your turn.>

Post: bamboo:

For the record- When important archaeological sites are discovered, they are NOT covered over with quick reconstructions.
People have been using China's closed door "new history" for years to promote bull and cock stories that in the past could never be disproven because of communist policy. As the doors of China are opening further all the time to outsiders, more and more myths will be dispelled as will fraudulent martial artists.

On a side note- I always find it funny how martial roleplayers studying japanese of chinese arts feel the need to link themselves to some silly romantic notion of times past.
Monks were not all good people (many were criminals using the robes to escape prosecution) , samurai "bushido" code was not even around in the times of war and lets face it, bodhidharma "invented" his style of martial exercise for just that- exercise to aid the monks in meditation.

-bamboo>

Post: samurai6string:

yeah, wasn't Bushido developed during the Tokugawa period that was soemthing like 200 years of peace? Poetry, painting, philosophy etc. were exercises taken up by the warrior caste because they weren't engaged in fighting? or something to that extent? Hengest can come and clean up what i just said. :lol:>

Post: bamboo:

Samurai- your right on the money, no need for any cleaning job.

Stazzy- Thats quite the accusation you threw at Hengest. Perhaps you would care to give a few references to credible sources from which you are you are claiming Hengest is simply "making things up"?

I've read the "Sword Polishers' Record", its levels above the vast majority of material towing the party line, just my humble opinion.

Although not I'm sure of Bok Nam Park's credibility, I've also really enjoyed his books.

-bamboo

-edited for spelling error>

Post: Hengest:

[quote=bamboo I've read the "Sword Polishers' Record", its levels above the vast majority of material towing the party line, just my humble opinion.[/quote 

It's a great book isn't it? It's a shame so few people seem to have read it, particularly among kung fu practitioners. It should be on every CMA students "must read" list.>

Post: nbotary:

Hengest & Stazzy -

I've actually been reading "The Shaolin Grandmaster's Text", I can't remember specifically what it said, but I know that it mentions two separate temples. The best source to ask is Bloodybirds since he actually studied in Hong Kong and is a student of Sigong Ricky Anderson - 53rd generation Shaolin monk. I believe that Bloodybirds will be able to set the record straight on this issue. In fact, I e-mailed him the response shortly after I got it and he began to rip apart all the statements this moron said one by one.>

Post: Hengest:

[quote=nbotary I've actually been reading "The Shaolin Grandmaster's Text", I can't remember specifically what it said, but I know that it mentions two separate temples. The best source to ask is Bloodybirds since he actually studied in Hong Kong and is a student of Sigong Ricky Anderson - 53rd generation Shaolin monk. I believe that Bloodybirds will be able to set the record straight on this issue. In fact, I e-mailed him the response shortly after I got it and he began to rip apart all the statements this moron said one by one.[/quote 

Isn't that the book written by a bunch of American guys who claim to be the "real" Shaolin? Sorry, I'm not going to place much trust in that one.

And, while I sincerely mean no offence to Bloodybirds, and I'm very happy to listen to his opinion on the matter, I doubt he'll be able to "set the record straight". I'm sure he's trained under some awesome kung fu teachers, but, to be honest, I don't think that's qualification enough to be an authority. It's awesome kung fu teachers who are usually the most irresponsible when it comes to spreading the rubbish touted as Shaolin history.

It's the same with any style. You don't hear crap about TKD being 2,000 years old from non-TKD guys. There are exceptions that prove the rule (eg Adam Hsu, Harry Cook, etc) but, generally, if you want a good picture of MA history, it's usually best to speak to a historian, not a MAist.>

Post: bamboo:

So, just to follow up: Hengest gave his sources to his accuser. Has an apology been made or is this how things are done? We just throw around accusations of people making things up and then just fall silent?

Pretty sad.>

Post: nbotary:

I'm not one to accuse Hengest of anything. I do agree with him that in order to get the correct information, it's better to go to a historian rather than your average Joe. As far as the authenticity of the book that I've been reading, I would only hope that the content is based on fact, not fiction. However, the only way to truly get accurate information would be to go to China and seek out the actual monks who are direct descendents of those who trained in the Shaolin temple. Just my two cents...>

Post: bamboo:

I don't mean you Nick, I mean the young gentleman that wrote:

Quote:

Yeah, I'll do that...as soon you start backing up your statements with proof and not information you made up.

Its oh so easy to accuse, now what?>

Post: Stazzy:

While I mean no offense to either bamboo or Hengest, I don't believe I owe him an apology either. Since I don't know either of you in real life, I'm going to place more trust in a link I found on google than what you type on these boards. That's just how it is. Maybe you're right and you really do know considerably more about Chinese history than I do, but until you show me proof that's more than just mentioning a book while putting down another, I'm not obligated to apologize. Likewise, you're not required to believe anything I typed on the matter as I did exactly what you said and googled the subject.

As for the fall silent part, it's a sort of defense mechanism used to study your opponent from a distance.>

Post: bamboo:

Have you looked into the books mentioned? The authors? Have you researched the sources to the sites you cited? Those authors? Maybe looked at Hengest's credentials? Thats how you get to the bottom of things.

I don't take any offense, I just don't understand why your here if you don't want to participate? If a kung fu guy like BB or NB gives me a source after a debate, your damned right I'll look into it, hell, I did (as did Hengest) when you posted your internet site. Now afterwards we can then have real discussion since we have all looked into the facts.

If all we do is write down conjecture from baseless opinion, well then we end up with nothing.

Your right, you don't owe anyone an apology, you owe it to YOURSELF to get to the bottom it. If you don't care, then don't post.

-bamboo>

Post: Hengest:

[quote=Stazzy While I mean no offense to either bamboo or Hengest, I don't believe I owe him an apology either.[/quote 

It's OK, I don't expect an apology for calling me on my arguement. That's just part of the discussion process. However, it would've been nice to receive an apology for your baseless accusation that I was making shit up. That's not part of the discussion process; that's just being a dick.

[quote=Stazzy Since I don't know either of you in real life, I'm going to place more trust in a link I found on google than what you type on these boards. That's just how it is. Maybe you're right and you really do know considerably more about Chinese history than I do, but until you show me proof that's more than just mentioning a book while putting down another, I'm not obligated to apologize. [/quote 

I gave an arguement then followed it up with sources (which I think is what you asked me to do). The link you posted gives no sources. Of course, you're entitled to believe any crap you want. I just prefer to be a little more stringent.

[quote=Stazzy Likewise, you're not required to believe anything I typed on the matter as I did exactly what you said and googled the subject.[/quote 

Well that works out nicely...

[quote=Stazzy As for the fall silent part, it's a sort of defense mechanism used to study your opponent from a distance[/quote 

Oh good, cos for a mintue there I thought you'd just shut the fuck up cos you realised you'd been FUCKING OWNED!!>

Post: Hengest:

[quote=nbotary However, the only way to truly get accurate information would be to go to China and seek out the actual monks who are direct descendents of those who trained in the Shaolin temple.[/quote 

And how would you go about that Nick?>

Post: Stazzy:

[quote=Hengest Oh good, cos for a mintue there I thought you'd just shut the fuck up cos you realised you'd been FUCKING OWNED!![/quote 

:roll:

Reading your posts is always fun because I get to roleplay as the spell check function in Microsoft Word.

If you want to believe that I got owned, that's completely up to you. Everyone's entitled to their own opinion on these boards from what I understand.

As for looking into the books mentioned, I just don't have that kind of time right now. :? It's tough just to find enough time to try and post on the boards with my current school schedule.>

Post: Hengest:

[quote=Stazzy Reading your posts is always fun because I get to roleplay as the spell check function in Microsoft Word.[/quote 

Ah, the old "I can't pick on anything else he's said so I'll make out his spelling is bad" one.

I apologise for the one typo I made. I can see how that would negate everything I posted previously. :roll: I believe the rest of the post is rendered perfectly. Being English I use British spelling conventions. Sorry if that confuses you.

And if you're referring to my use of the word "cos", look it up. It's in the OED as an informal contraction of "because"; since we're not writing doctoral theses here, it's perfectly good English.

The written language is my job, so you can give up trying to claim superiority on that point.

[quote=Stazzy If you want to believe that I got owned, that's completely up to you. Everyone's entitled to their own opinion on these boards from what I understand. [/quote 

That's awfully sporting of you.

[quote=Stazzy As for looking into the books mentioned, I just don't have that kind of time right now. :? It's tough just to find enough time to try and post on the boards with my current school schedule.[/quote 

I work a full-time job, study four languages, train MA, lift weights, read profusely, and keep 'er indoors happy, and I still have time to get to the pub and have a pint or several with the lads at least once a week; I know a little bit about time management.

So here's a tip: stop posting on threads you know nothing about (and wasting the time of everybody else who has to read your drivel and then respond) and then use that time to read a book here and there. Maybe then you can contribute something worthwhile to discussion.>

Post: Stazzy:

[quote=Hengest  I work a full-time job, study four languages, train MA, lift weights, read profusely, and keep 'er indoors happy, and I still have time to get to the pub and have a pint or several with the lads at least once a week; I know a little bit about time management. [/quote 

Would you like that cookie now or do you want to save it for after practice? I couldn't give any less of a shit what you do with your time, boyscout. Not everyone has the time to read a book every time they want to post something in a forum thread.

[quote=Hengest So here's a tip: stop posting on threads you know nothing about (and wasting the time of everybody else who has to read your drivel and then respond) and then use that time to read a book here and there. Maybe then you can contribute something worthwhile to discussion.[/quote 

I don't recall telling you or anyone else that they were required to respond to my "drivel", but since you feel that it's your duty to do so, I'm honored...no really, I am. :roll: I don't see how posting a link to a website with martial arts information relevant to the subject at hand creates counter-progression.

Your apology is in the mail (the envelope with the free sample of laundry detergent)...right next to your cookie. Enjoy.>

Post: Hengest:

So I take it there weren't any spelling mistakes in my last post?

[quote=Stazzy Would you like that cookie now or do you want to save it for after practice? I couldn't give any less of a shit what you do with your time, boyscout. Not everyone has the time to read a book every time they want to post something in a forum thread.[/quote 

Probably not no. But if somebody's got time to repeatedly post about how they don't have time to read a book, I'd say it's less a matter of time and more a matter of prioritization.

I don't list what I do with my time to impress, rather to show that, for most of us (with the possible exception of those who have their own family) if you want to do something, there's always time. In short, I call bullshit on your claim that you don't have time to read.

[quote=Stazzy I don't recall telling you or anyone else that they were required to respond to my "drivel", but since you feel that it's your duty to do so, I'm honored...no really, I am. :roll: I don't see how posting a link to a website with martial arts information relevant to the subject at hand creates counter-progression. [/quote 

You accused me of making shit up. That creates counter-progression. Plus it makes you look like a tard when I show that I didn't pull my arguement out of my arse.

You admit you've done no research, yet feel that you're qualified to accuse me of talking shit. Wouldn't you feel honour-bound to defend your position if somebody did the same to you?

[quote=Stazzy Your apology is in the mail (the envelope with the free sample of laundry detergent)...right next to your cookie. Enjoy.[/quote 

Now, call me cynical, but since you don't seem to be civil enough to apologise, I'm guessing your word's no good on that cookie either.>