Firstly, the traditional aspect is relevant because by defining that from the buddhist perspective that ShiYongXin possibly plans to present it from , as opposed to what the mcdojos or non affliated ( as in never were ) schools, it opens a realm of whole new skills that only come from understanding certain concepts contained ( though not neccessarily exclusively) in shaolin buddhism. By this, I mainly refer to internal stuff and forms etc that rely on an understanding of those concepts . I'm sure you'll find beef in that statement , but I'm just going to be thankful that it's someone elses to present.
By highlighting and seperating the differences , it proves that we're dealing with 2 different products to begin with and the folks using the name to imply the same thing being offered , is just not the case. As a result of their use of the term, it confuses ppl with what the product is and takes the market from shaolin under terms of public duress.
I don't want to get to get too buddhist in my reply here , so I think I'll keep it brief.
As for the wushu / shaolin curriculum , someone already queried what was being taught in terms of gongfu at the temple as a factor in a case of allowing use of the shaolin name elsewhere. That would make it extremely relevant to the case. Alot of the true traditional stuff is not at the temple any more , however that said, their are schools and temples in the US sanctioned by ShiYongXin who are acting on the temples behalf. It's been a loong history battle for shaolin to keep itself alive and I believe that once their are certain measures in place to afford shaolin the protection to come back out of the closet at home with the skills the prc negotiated so sternly to repress as parameter for shaolin to operate at all, down to the inclusion of wushu , that shaolin gongfu will experience a revival of those more traditional forms not so apparent there at present.
What they teach Stylee is the product. I think it has a lot more to do with it than ppl might realise. And those iterations are still shaolin gongfu you think. Just the fact of those 2 terms together implies something a little more..........like affiliations for starters.
As for the Supreme precedences though ... .... ( and don't be affraid to take some lateral thought on it ) how about you tell me???
BL
By highlighting and seperating the differences , it proves that we're dealing with 2 different products to begin with and the folks using the name to imply the same thing being offered , is just not the case. As a result of their use of the term, it confuses ppl with what the product is and takes the market from shaolin under terms of public duress.
I don't want to get to get too buddhist in my reply here , so I think I'll keep it brief.
As for the wushu / shaolin curriculum , someone already queried what was being taught in terms of gongfu at the temple as a factor in a case of allowing use of the shaolin name elsewhere. That would make it extremely relevant to the case. Alot of the true traditional stuff is not at the temple any more , however that said, their are schools and temples in the US sanctioned by ShiYongXin who are acting on the temples behalf. It's been a loong history battle for shaolin to keep itself alive and I believe that once their are certain measures in place to afford shaolin the protection to come back out of the closet at home with the skills the prc negotiated so sternly to repress as parameter for shaolin to operate at all, down to the inclusion of wushu , that shaolin gongfu will experience a revival of those more traditional forms not so apparent there at present.
What they teach Stylee is the product. I think it has a lot more to do with it than ppl might realise. And those iterations are still shaolin gongfu you think. Just the fact of those 2 terms together implies something a little more..........like affiliations for starters.
As for the Supreme precedences though ... .... ( and don't be affraid to take some lateral thought on it ) how about you tell me???
BL
Comment