Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Abbott FU YU vs Fu JU

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Abbott FU YU vs Fu JU

    Can someone well versed in Shaolin history tell me if there really was an Abbott Fu Ju?

    I know Abbott Fu Yu is well documented, but there are all these CMA legends about an Abbott Fu Ju.

    Shaolin documents talk about Abbott Fu Yu (during the early Sung dynasty) had his bringing together of some CMA masters and developing a book of boxing forms.

    But, various KF lineages talk about an Abott Fu Ju (from a different time period) doing the same thing.

    Can anyone clarify that there is no Abbott Fu Ju talked about in any Shaolin documents?
    Was there only Fu Yu?

    Sal

  • #2
    the peeps your talking about predate the likes of gee sim, bak mei, ng mui etc and they are legends at best. if you are looking for concrete evidence i suggest you search in a different avenue, try the history of the hamburger or something
    "did you ask me to consider dick with you??" blooming tianshi lotus

    Comment


    • #3
      ok, thanks for your non-answer. You're naming southern KF legend people that have nothing to do with what I am asking.

      All I am asking is that someone that has access to documents/ knowledgeable people from Shaolin, if they can find out if there is really was a person named Abbotth Fu Ju rather than Abbott Fu Yu, at a later time.

      Comment


      • #4
        ok sal, i was trying to be blatantly obvious, if you think the monks know more about shaolin history then mainland masters or laymen you are in for a serious surprise, they know nothing more then the same legends you read, they just pretend to know more because they not only read into them more then us(well maybe not you) but they pass it off as authentic inscruitable knowledge, which is ridiculous.

        the real fact of the matter is like i said, these individuals your seeking answers about are meaningless, have i personally read of a fu ju and fu yu? yes, but so what. did i read that fu ju did what fu yu did? yea, but so what? you actually think it matters what some unreligious wushu demo monk has to say go for it. you wanna think some of the "real"(laughable) monks like de yang, de cheng, and the rest know more then most laymen or mainland masters? entertain your own fantasys then
        "did you ask me to consider dick with you??" blooming tianshi lotus

        Comment


        • #5
          (sigh) okay I understand what you are saying.
          And I know that those civil servant wushu monks don't know much, I wasn't meaning them at all, in fact they were reading my articles that were in KF mags at Shaolin back in the 1990s to learn stuff.

          I meant what I said, someone knowledgable about the subject.
          In case somone here, or from wherever,had some historical information that I haven't seen yet myself.

          Why would I want to know what those modern monks have to say?
          I wasn't even thinking about them.

          (no offense, I've been doing writing articles for various magazines on CMA history for 15 years at least, maybe you don't know who I was? Not that I mean that in an egotistcal way, just asking a question)

          Comment


          • #6
            i remember you said in one thread i read that you trained in shaolin for quite some time, but that meant little to me since so many people train for very long time and they know nothing

            regardless the best bet you got is UWE, hes the real scholar, best ive come across via any forum so far. since hes so busy your best chance is to email him directly, and be patient

            sorry for the misunderstanding and the "rudeness" lol, i cant help it
            "did you ask me to consider dick with you??" blooming tianshi lotus

            Comment


            • #7
              Cool, thanks, I appreciate it.

              yes, Uwe would be a great source.
              Often Russ has been able to find some good answers to my questions as well.

              The argument right now is some people are saying Fu Yu is from 1294
              and other from 960 ad.

              They both can't be right and the only way to settle this to hear from people that have direct access to the historical documents that are in existence at Shaolin or elsewhere.

              Maybe its not an important thing to some people on the surface, but i'm in the middle of tracing some forms development during certain years and knowing exactly when Fu Yu existed and if this Fu Ju name is fales or not.

              ok, thanks

              (I have been diligently tracing how moves from forms travel from one style to another, such as how sequences of moves from the Sun Tai Tzu forms are found in the exact same sequence in Chen tai ji lao jia form, and sequences from Lohan 18 Hands forms found in ba Qua forms, etc, etc)

              Comment


              • #8
                Historical documents at Shaolin. There's a topic.

                De Yang told me that he had, in his control, some of the older texts, at Shaolin, or, at least, used to. God knows with the current political situation who has them now. De Qian also has some stuff. But, when it comes to researching history in China, and especially Shaolin, don't you think that it's a bit "impossible" to really find the truth? For an "ancient civilization", they weren't very good at keeping records.
                Experienced Community organizer. Yeah, let's choose him to run the free world. It will be historic. What could possibly go wrong...

                "You're just a jaded cynical mother****er...." Jeffpeg

                (more comments in my User Profile)
                russbo.com


                Comment


                • #9
                  Yeah, I understood that, but just out with my begging bowl in case I get some good scraps.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    It's not that the Chinese of ages past weren't good at recording things into writing, they just had a knack of burning them up

                    Sal, I would keep digging. I'm definately not a scholar, but Abbot Fu Yu seems to pop up a lot. Is this the Abbot that recorded the famous 18 styles along with their associated masters? I remember there being an article in JAMA maybe 4 years ago that referenced this document. There was some confusion on my part as it also mentioned Fu Yu being contemporary with Wang Lang, founder of the Northern Mantis styles. My assumption was that Wang Lang was placed in 18th century. Then again, like I said, I'm no scholar.
                    -Jesse Pasleytm
                    "How do I know? Because my sensei told me!"

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      In the books of deqian, he put Fu Yu around 961

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by dave l.
                        In the books of deqian, he put Fu Yu around 961
                        Yeah, I know, that's the thing, other people are insisting that he is from 1264.
                        Big difference in time.

                        Can there be two people? A Fu Yu and a Fu Ju?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          not for nothing, but it wouldn't shock me to learn that people had similar names and a lot of conflated identities.

                          I thought there was some pretty good historical record of Fu Yu- but I thought it was a Mongol dynasty wasn't it?
                          "Arhat, I am your father..."
                          -the Dark Lord Cod

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            yeah, I totally agree.

                            Fu Yu via other sources say that he is from 1242 (I made a typo in the previous post) and Shaolin say a Fu Yu is from 961.

                            Then there is this Fu Ju name that comes up as the Abbott that brought together the varous masters and made new Shaolin forms.

                            What's going on?


                            Do the Shaolin history books (the real ones, not modern crap) say that there are two different Fu's? One from 961 and a different guy from 1242?

                            One, I think Fu Yu, is just a religious Abbott then at Shaolin, I would bet his is from 1242.

                            the other Fu JU, I think is the martial art Abbott that brought together the various masters and made new Shaolin forms.

                            All I want to know from someone that has access to real documentation is which one was which? or what's the story?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Hey Sal,

                              There was a Fu Hu but he's placed around the same time as Fu YU. For the rest no other Fu JU. Just Fu Xing and a Fu Zhen...those last two are placed around 1300-1350..

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X