Dear all
I was in the middle of writing a post on the Taijiquan and Shaolinquan courses when I logged on to check the forum. I read with great interest the exchange between StierSifu and Kevin in the Shen Men Tao thread.
Again, those posts have provided me with a great opportunity to write a post that has been germinating in the back of my mind for ages now.
First off, let me say that I like both Stier Sifu and Kevin immensely. Let's forget for a minute that I am a Shaolin Wahnam student (and very privileged to be one ). I am afraid that Stier Sifu may find me most presumptuous and out of line if I say that our Taijiquan lineages have something in common, given my very rudimentary skills. Still, that Yang Shaohou is my lineage forefather is a fact, and for that reason, I respect StierSifu as an elder in my lineage. I am also grateful to Stier Sifu; you have been very kind in answering all my questions, irritating though they must have been.
As for Kevin, though we have never met, I feel a certain resonance with you, perhaps because we are both apologetics for the faith. I have also found your posts mature and moderate, well argued and intelligent. I would have loved to have you by my side when we were defending the Catholic faith against attacks from Protestants (I must say though, the Catholic-Protestant divide is something I now steer clear of, and something Jesus certainly would not approve of).
That long paragraph is not meant to portray myself as some sort of neutral UN peacekeeper. People who try to take no sides tend to piss all sides off, or to put it another way, the top of the fence is a dangerous place to be. I just wanted to take this opportunity to say how I feel about both of you.
And now for the issue at hand - Organisational politics and "brown-nosing". Let's begin with a basic premise - loyalty is a virtue, and a highly valued one. No Shaolin Wahnam disciple or any member of a martial arts sect/school would knowingly slime their own group. The corollary of that is that they would be supportive of each other, and help grow the group, and to perserve, pass on and glorify their art (in Chinese 将本门发扬光大) (Some of you may have noticed this is just a variation of the Buddhist precepts of "Do no evil, do good and cultivate your mind")
Those who have followed my posts on this forum would know I have had disagreements with other Shaolin Wahnam members on this forum, particularly when I felt I was being personally attacked. Just because one is part of a group does not mean that one conforms like a robot or behave as a cog and wheel (even if we are in fact One).
At the same time, as members of Shaolin Wahnam, we have a duty to stand together and be cohesive. I have gone through my posts and found that some of them, like those Stier Sifu refers to, may be interpreted as "patting other Shaolin Wahnam members on the back". Such posts are common in our forum, being what Christians would call "mutual edification" (Rom 14:19) even if they seem cheesy to others (this is where my English fails me, would those who can translate this word help: 肉麻)
The reason for such posts is that this forum is first and foremost meant for the development of Shaolin Wahnam members. It is only natural we tell each other "good job", "well done" etc even if it may not be true from a third party's perspective. For example, if one of us had written dim-witted account of a rather uninspiring qigong experience, that writer would still find encouragement, simply because a) he took the trouble to write and
b) he is one of us.
And yet, none of us lie when we say something positive. As Sifu likes to say, words are provisional, and are used in context and for the situation in question. "Good" for a novice is very different from "good" for a master.
I believe it was Darryl who said that this forum is a closed (close?) one with open doors. Other schools are allowed to air their views, which we truly appreciate as such views tell us where we may be wrong or help us do better. But this is still the Shaolin Wahnam forum, and the core function is the training of its members.
Visitors may sometimes have the impression that we gang up on those with views different from ours. The most vivid examples that come to mind are the CFQ and what i call the "Alberto" posts. While that is quite a valid impression to form, my personal opinion is that this is merely the result of a mathematical law. There are more forum members than guests, and most guests are just lurkers. The odds of a member posting are therefore far higher, and being members, they would believe in our school's teachings (or cease to be members). Naturally, when someone writes something insulting or offensive to Sifu, the instructors or just a divergent view, members may respond in support. The problem is that they often do so simultaneously, or even if they see replies already being posted, feel so strongly that they simply have to get their words onscreen. I seriously doubt there is ever a conscious attempt to overwhelm a single, often hapless detractor with sheer numbers.
Well, I guess I will leave it at this. I really want to continue with my other post on the courses, not to mention unfinished work at the office.
I was in the middle of writing a post on the Taijiquan and Shaolinquan courses when I logged on to check the forum. I read with great interest the exchange between StierSifu and Kevin in the Shen Men Tao thread.
Again, those posts have provided me with a great opportunity to write a post that has been germinating in the back of my mind for ages now.
First off, let me say that I like both Stier Sifu and Kevin immensely. Let's forget for a minute that I am a Shaolin Wahnam student (and very privileged to be one ). I am afraid that Stier Sifu may find me most presumptuous and out of line if I say that our Taijiquan lineages have something in common, given my very rudimentary skills. Still, that Yang Shaohou is my lineage forefather is a fact, and for that reason, I respect StierSifu as an elder in my lineage. I am also grateful to Stier Sifu; you have been very kind in answering all my questions, irritating though they must have been.
As for Kevin, though we have never met, I feel a certain resonance with you, perhaps because we are both apologetics for the faith. I have also found your posts mature and moderate, well argued and intelligent. I would have loved to have you by my side when we were defending the Catholic faith against attacks from Protestants (I must say though, the Catholic-Protestant divide is something I now steer clear of, and something Jesus certainly would not approve of).
That long paragraph is not meant to portray myself as some sort of neutral UN peacekeeper. People who try to take no sides tend to piss all sides off, or to put it another way, the top of the fence is a dangerous place to be. I just wanted to take this opportunity to say how I feel about both of you.
And now for the issue at hand - Organisational politics and "brown-nosing". Let's begin with a basic premise - loyalty is a virtue, and a highly valued one. No Shaolin Wahnam disciple or any member of a martial arts sect/school would knowingly slime their own group. The corollary of that is that they would be supportive of each other, and help grow the group, and to perserve, pass on and glorify their art (in Chinese 将本门发扬光大) (Some of you may have noticed this is just a variation of the Buddhist precepts of "Do no evil, do good and cultivate your mind")
Those who have followed my posts on this forum would know I have had disagreements with other Shaolin Wahnam members on this forum, particularly when I felt I was being personally attacked. Just because one is part of a group does not mean that one conforms like a robot or behave as a cog and wheel (even if we are in fact One).
At the same time, as members of Shaolin Wahnam, we have a duty to stand together and be cohesive. I have gone through my posts and found that some of them, like those Stier Sifu refers to, may be interpreted as "patting other Shaolin Wahnam members on the back". Such posts are common in our forum, being what Christians would call "mutual edification" (Rom 14:19) even if they seem cheesy to others (this is where my English fails me, would those who can translate this word help: 肉麻)
The reason for such posts is that this forum is first and foremost meant for the development of Shaolin Wahnam members. It is only natural we tell each other "good job", "well done" etc even if it may not be true from a third party's perspective. For example, if one of us had written dim-witted account of a rather uninspiring qigong experience, that writer would still find encouragement, simply because a) he took the trouble to write and
b) he is one of us.
And yet, none of us lie when we say something positive. As Sifu likes to say, words are provisional, and are used in context and for the situation in question. "Good" for a novice is very different from "good" for a master.
I believe it was Darryl who said that this forum is a closed (close?) one with open doors. Other schools are allowed to air their views, which we truly appreciate as such views tell us where we may be wrong or help us do better. But this is still the Shaolin Wahnam forum, and the core function is the training of its members.
Visitors may sometimes have the impression that we gang up on those with views different from ours. The most vivid examples that come to mind are the CFQ and what i call the "Alberto" posts. While that is quite a valid impression to form, my personal opinion is that this is merely the result of a mathematical law. There are more forum members than guests, and most guests are just lurkers. The odds of a member posting are therefore far higher, and being members, they would believe in our school's teachings (or cease to be members). Naturally, when someone writes something insulting or offensive to Sifu, the instructors or just a divergent view, members may respond in support. The problem is that they often do so simultaneously, or even if they see replies already being posted, feel so strongly that they simply have to get their words onscreen. I seriously doubt there is ever a conscious attempt to overwhelm a single, often hapless detractor with sheer numbers.
Well, I guess I will leave it at this. I really want to continue with my other post on the courses, not to mention unfinished work at the office.
.
Comment