Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #257784 in Books
• Published on: 2009-02-15
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 281 pages

Review
"A real gift to martial arts enthusiasts and historians alike. Combining scholarly caution and respectful appreciation, Shahar shows how much and how little can be learned about the origins of the monastery in the fifth century, its close relationship with the Tang emperors (618-907), its flowering as a religious and military institution in the Ming dynasty (1368-1644), and the suspicion with which it was regarded by the Qing state (1644-1911)....This refreshingly original study is indispensable for understanding both the history and the hype." -Choice "A long-awaited, in-depth look into the complex political, military, and hygienic factors surrounding the monastery's involvement in martial arts....This is clearly a pioneering book, and Shahar, a qualified scholar, has documented his material in a manner that will allow others to pursue the provocative questions he raises." -Journal of Asian Martial Arts"

About the Author
Meir Shahar is associate professor in the Department of East Asian Studies, Tel Aviv University.

Customer Reviews

Academically rigourous and thoroughly readable
I came to this work as both an academic and a practitioner of a Shaolin style of pushing hands. The evolution of the Shaolin arts from staff fighting to unarmed styles is explored in great detail from a variety of sources (many of which are primary and have been translated here for the first time).

This is one of the first books I've read that makes a scholarly attempt at explaining how the Buddhist monks of Shaolin successfully negotiated the cognitive dissonance caused by commitment to Buddhist principles of non-violence on one hand and mastery of martial arts on the other.

The book also succeeds in recognising and clarifying the role of Daoist thought and cultivation practices (namely the Dao Yin) in the development of Shaolin Gung Fu.

Some of the conclusions (especially in relation to the unarmed styles) lend some support to Nathan Johnson's (2000) thesis 'Barefoot Zen'. After long and careful study of the forms of Shaolin Gung Fu and Karate Kata, Johnson contended that these arts were never intended for fighting (whereas Shahar would likely contend that fighting was not their sole purpose, p.180 and p.200).