Dear Mr. Leung,
*Odkedy Vás pán Frost nazval Shi Xiong, verím, že ste tiež šaolnský mních. Hanbíte sa nám povedať, že ste tiež šalinský mních? Ďakujem Vám za vašu dlhú lekciu o indickom budhizme. Vedeli ste, že čínsky budhizmus sa úplne odlišuje od indického? Vedeli ste o tom, že čínsky budhizmus je kombináciou taoizmu a konfucionizmu. Obzvlášť šaolinský Zen-budhizmus.*
Mr. Frost calls me shixiong (elder brother) because he maybe thinks I am his senior in Buddhism, or in martial arts, or in both. Ask him, please, this is not my concern. But I am not a Shaolin monk. However, I am a Buddhist monk of Chan order (namely Caodong and Linji lineages) for the past 15 years, also a lay member of Taoist Quanzhen order, in-door disciple of Yin Fu line baguaquan, I graduated from the local university with martial arts major, student of Traditional Chinese Medicine and have many other activities in Taiwan where I reside for more than 15 years. I am not ashamed to say this, I just do not consider it important - that is just cheap talking, the important thing are facts and real, verified results.
I am sorry I did not give you my previous answer in English which is probably reason why you misunderstood it. I did not lecture about Indian Buddhism, I just used a couple of Sanskrit terms to show that the Chinese Buddhism is not completely different from Indian Buddhism (as you write) and that both Indian and Chinese Buddhism use very strict differentiation between lay disciples and monks. The proof that Buddhism in India and China has the same root is very simple: when you took refuge in Buddhism, you accepted five basic Buddhist vows - do you think these vows are different in Chinese and Indian Buddhism? No, they are not. Do you think the Chinese Buddhism does not have Four Noble Truths, that it does not have three basic characteristics of Buddhism (impermanence, no-soul doctrine, suffering)? Of course not - basic teaching of Buddhism is the same in both Chinese and Indian Buddhism.
*Podľa čínskej terminológie používame výraz (to je iba výslovnosť) Fu Jia Di Zhi, ktorý znamená budhistický nasledovník a výraz (to je iba výslovnosť) Zhui Jia Di Zhi, ktorý znamená laický nasledovník budhizmu. Obidva majú v sebe názov Di Zhi, čo doslovne znamená nasledovník a nie mních. Vedeli ste, že čínština nepozná slovo mních? Zvyčajne ľudia („nečíňania“) prekladajú Fu Jia Di Zhi, ako náboženský mních. Preto Zhui Jia Di Zhi znmená laický mních. Prečo potom ľudia(„nečíňania“) akceptujú preklad prvého názvu a
druhého názvu už nie? Už viac ako 1 500 rokov šaolinskej histórie bolo mnoho známych šaolinských laických mníchov („laymonks“). Všetko je iba o rozdieloch prekladu cudzieho jazyka a rozdielnych kultúr. Ja som iba jeden z mnohých predošlých Zhui Jia Di Zhi. Môžem vám pripomenúť, že India nemá žiadny Zen-budhizmus? Sú potom všetci šaolinský mnísi klamári a podvodníci?*
To avoid another misunderstandings, let me please to unify the transcription of Chinese characters. According to pinyin (standard transcription of characters in China) Fu Jia Di Zhi should be fojia dizi 佛家弟子 (Buddhist disciple), Zhui Jia Di Zhi should be correctly zaijia dizi 在家弟子 (lay disciple) - as well as your Buddhist name 德龍 should be correctly transcribed as Delong, not DeLon. Or if you want to choose English (Wade-Giles) transcription (it is still required transcription for US Congress Library therefore widely used in English-written works on Chinese Buddhism, wushu etc.) these terms are Fo chia ti tzu, tsai chia ti tzu, Te Lung.
You translate fojia dizi correctly as "budhistický nasledovník", as well as zaijia dizi as "laický nasledovník budhizmu" into Czech/Slovak languages. However, your following explanation that "Preto Zhui Jia Di Zhi znmená laický mních." [Therefore Zhui Jia Di Zhi means laymonk] is incorrect: Fojia dizi is not opposite term to zaijia dizi, both these expression are related to other terms. Fojia dizi is related to terms like Daojia dizi (Taoist follower/disciple) or wushu dizi (martial arts follower/disciple). And zaijia dizi is related to term chujia dizi 出家弟子 (disciple who left family/home/household - which means monk). Therefore your statement "Vedeli ste, že čínština nepozná slovo mních?" [Did you know that Chinese language does not know the word monk?] is also incorrect. This term (translated into English as monk) is chujiaren 出家人 and there are also other terms for monk: 和尚 heshang or 比丘 biqiu.
Therefore if you call yourself zaijia dizi (Zhui Jia Di Zhi) which means lay follower, you acknowledge that you are not chujia dizi (or heshang or biqiu). Therefore you also acknowledge that you are not a monk and therefore you should not use term monk or even laymonk.
*Dovoľte mi teraz povedať niečo o šaolinkom preukaze. Henanská provinčná budhistická asociácia je jediná autorita, ktorá je uznaná centrálnou vládou, aby mohla vydávať dôkazy o identifikácii všetkých Zhui Jia Di Zhi a Fu Jia Di Zhi. Tento preukaz má dokopy osem strán, ktoré som nezverejnil všetky, kvôli tomu, aby neboli kopírované a inak zneužité. Sú tam štyri oficiálne pečiatky a ochranné známky. Dve strany, ktoré som zverejnil, majú pečiatku Henanskej provinčnej budhistickej asociácie, ktorá je dobre viditeľná, takže každý ju môže vidieť. Je veľmi zaujímavé, že váš tlmočník si vybral preložiť iba pečiatku Henanskej provinčnej budhistickej asociácie. Kompletne odignoroval názov šaolinského kláštora, ktorý je umiestnený rovno nad pečiatkou Henanskej provinčnej budhistickej asociácie.*
I do not use translator, I am fluent in Chinese - and in my previous mail I also wrote that your "Shaolin passport" contains information about your ordination in Shaolin Temple in 2001 ("...hoci je tam vyslovne uvedene, ze dotycny podstupil buddhisticke sluby v klastore Shaolin v roku 2001."). Therefore the problem is not in your relation to Shaolin Temple, I acknowledged it. The problem is that your "Shaolin passport" says that you took refuge with Master Suxi in Shaolin Temple - and nothing else.
Your "Shaolin passport" should be correctly called "Passport of Buddhist Association of Henan Province" - because it was issued by this association, not by Shaolin Temple and it says only that you became a Buddhist follower in Shaolin Temple in 2001. It also says your Buddhist name is Delong (not Shi Delong). Therefore you are not monk (only real monks can use name Shi) and this is also obvious from your photo (you have hair on your head, you did not go through tonsure ceremony - shaving head ceremony, which is required for every monk). Your "passport" does not say anything about you being 31. generation of Shaolin monk (again, it says only that you took basic Buddhist vows in Shaolin Temple). This is very important detail because you use this "passport" as proof that you are real "Shaolin laymonk" and you want the same proof from Mr. Frost. Let me say it clearly: it is not any proof of you becoming 31. generation of Shaolin laymonk, it says only that you became lay Buddhist follower in Shaolin Temple. These two are completely different things: even some 90-years old grandmother can pass through the same ordination ceremony (as you did), but it does not mean she is automatically x-generation of "Shaolin warrior monk".
*Pod mojou fotkou je vodotlačová ochranná známka Shong Shan Shaolin Temple. Keďže je to vodotlač ľudia ju nemôžu vidieť jasne v kópii, ktorú som vám poslal. Na týchto dvoch stranách, ktoré som uverejnil je šaolinský kláštor zmienený už dvakrát. Na štvrtej a piatej strane, ktorú som nezverejnil opäť kvôli bezpečnostným dôvodom sú ďalšie dve červené pečiatky. Jedna je veľká pečiatka šaolinského kláštora a druhá môjho bývalého ShiFu Shi SuXie. Na piatej strane je opäť spomenutý názov šaolinského kláštora.*
That is completely ok.
*Áno, nie je tam spomenuté žiadne „Shi“ na tretej strane pred DeLon(g). Nižšie dole na tej istej strane však tak isto nie je zmienené žiadne „Shi“ pred menom môjho bývalého učiteľa Su Xie. Ďalej na 4 a 5 strane opäť nie je spomenuté žiadne „Shi“ pred menom môjho bývalého učiteľa SuXie. Znamená to teda, že bývalý opát SuXie tiež nebol „Shi“ ??? Takže, ked v šaolinskom preukaze nebolo spomenute slovo “Shi“ pred SuXie, takisto budete nadalej tvrdiť, že ani on nebol mních?*
With regards to use of name Shi, you do not have any right to use it. You are not monk and your Buddhist passport of Buddhist Association of Henan Province gives your Buddhist name clearly as Delong. Besides, there is another person with Buddhist name Shi Delong, he is real monk and his name is possible to see on photo of the stele posted here by Mr. Frost. Now let me say this: no father gives two sons of his the same name and equally, no Buddhist master gives two disciples of his the same name. If there is a person with name Shi Delong (and it is not you, his civil name is Xi Qinglong, according to Mr. Frost) why should your Buddhist master give the same name to you? It does not make sense and leads only to confusion. Why then did he give you name Delong? The reason is very clear and obvious: because you do not have right to use Shi. That other person is Shi Delong, a real monk, you are Delong, a layman.
And Master Suxi was of course monk, a higly respected monk. Your Buddhist passport writes his name "Shang Su Xia Xi". This title "shang xia" is much more than simple Shi. Shang xia is used usually (at least here in Taiwan) only for very old monks (at least sixty) or for monks with great personal achievement and public recognition. It means something like "Above (in the heaven) Su, below (on the earth) Xi" or "Unsurpassable, unmatched, superior etc. Suxi". And only the Buddhist monk can ordinate the Buddhist followers. Therefore it is obvious why his name is not written as Shi Suxi.
*V anglickom jazyku, seminár znamená (prednáška), na ktorej ľudia sedia, počúvajú a učia sa. Je to iba krivka učenia sa z počutia a nie krivka trénovania. Koľko ShiFu poznáte, ktorý by dávali ZDARMA semináre (v angličtine prednášky) všade kadiaľ chodia? Časy všetkých cvičení a cena za ne je jasne vyznačená v programe. Nie sú tam absolútne žiadne klamlivé informácie. Iba chlupák si to môže pomýlit, v tak jasne a detailne vyznačenom programe...*
According to my information, seminar does not mean "(prednáška), na ktorej ľudia sedia, počúvajú a učia sa". Prednáška is lecture, that is where the students sit, listen and learn. Seminar is learning where students actively participate in learning process, not just sit and listen. Please, try to understand difference: lecture is teacher's talking and students' listening, seminar is active participation of teacher and students.
Therefore I admit you give free lectures (prednáška) but I say that your seminars are not free - you are paid for seminars. For example, your following 3-days long seminar in Brno gives (according to your website) has only two free one hour-long lectures. All the other activities are paid. Therefore it is incorrect to proclaim that you give "free seminars".
And yes, I know martial arts teachers who gives free lectures, too - but they usually do not proclaim it publicly (and perhaps also because most of those free lectures are given in beer pubs

).
*ÁNO, musim spoplatňovať jednotlivé cvičenia, pretože musím aj platit za výdavky spojené s mojou cestou.Vy ľudia ste pozerali príliš veľa kung-fu filmov.
ÁNO, dúfam že zhromaždujem veľa peňazí, pretože niektorí inteligentní ľudia zo Slovenska s otvorenou mysľou ma podporujú, aby som vybudoval „Výskumný inštitút - Shi DeLon“ v najchudobnejšej časti Slovenska.
Takže bohatí ľudia ako Vy a pán Frost by sa k nám mohli pridať a urobit niečo konštruktívne, miesto toho byť iba patetický. Celý projekt nie pre starého človeka ako som ja, ale pre celú budúcu generáciu.*
The problem is not that you take money for seminars. The problem is that you claim that your seminars are for free!
You are right that I am rich person, unfortunately, I am not rich person with regards to money - so I am not able to support you, sorry.
*Čoho je veľa, toho je veľa! Som veľmi znechutený a unavený z tejto detskej hry so slovami. Som Číňan a poznám svoju kultúru veľmi dobre. Som plne kvalifikovaný Henanskou provinčnou budhistickou asociáciou aj ©aolinským kláštorom, že som šaolinský mních. Ja som si namiesto toho vybral názov „laický“ mních, pretože som ženatý. Čo je na tom zlé? Ja sa už nepotrebujem ďalej obhajovať niekomu, kto nie je Číňan a dokonca ani nemá šaolinský preukaz. Hovorte si čo chcete, pretože ľudia, ktorí mi veria aj naďalej u mňa trénujú a stále potrebujú moju pomoc, liečením pomocou šaolinského čchi-kungu. A tí, ktorí mi neveria môžu trénovať u vás, to mi absolútne nevadí. Vy ste tí, ktorí máte problém so mnou.
Som PhD fellow in research (odborný asistent vo výskume) v angličtine je to isté ako (študent) na ShanDong univerzite v Číne. Mal by som sám seba nazývať Dr. Leung YK, keď ukončím svoju doktorantskú prácu v roku 2010. Momentálne nepoužívam titul Dr., pretože ešte nie som kvalifikovaný, ale som iba študent alebo odborný asistent (fellow).*
Yes, similar discussions are tiring and cumbersome but please, try to discuss facts and accept the facts - try not to use emotional and illogical statements, try not to twist them because it is not the honest way.
Maybe you can consider this to be a childish game and word-play, but try to understand please, that every game has its own rules. If you want to play a game of serious martial arts teacher, then play its rules correctly and honestly. If you try to use incorrect facts, if you try to twist truth, if you do not care about commonly accepted rules, you will get only into the troubles. People in Slovakia still do not have enough experience with Chinese martial arts and MA teachers but that does not mean all Slovaks are naive to martial arts and MA teachers. Try to understand please that because you are Chinese person, it does not mean you must understand Chinese culture better than non-Chinese person.
*Prosím ospravedlňte ma, už nebudem viacej nikdy odpovedať na žiadne otázky v rámci tohto diskusného fóra, pretože mám pred sebou napísať ďalších 150 000 slov v rámci svojej dizertačnej práce. Čakajú ma napísať 3 ďalšie knihy pre vydavateľa a dva scenáre k dokumentárnym filmom.....
Mimochodom koncom tohto roka budem v ©aolinskom kláštore ohľadom natáčania dokumentárneho filmu, možno sa tam s vami obomi stretnem a počas môjho pobytu v ©aolinskom kláštore pôjdem vzdať úctu vášmu Shifu Shi DeYuan.
Nakoniec vám obom ešte raz veľmi pekne ďakujem za úžasnú publicitu, pretože už viac ako 12 000 ľudí počulo o skromnom šaolinskom mníchovi Shi DeLon.*
Well, humble Shaolin laymonk Shi Delon wants to create "Research Institute - Shi DeLon". Why not "Shaolin Research Institute", if you are disciple of Shaolin Temple as you proclaim? I can only hope that you are not afraid to pay them royalties for their Shaolin Temple trademark or that they even would not let you to teach martial arts under their name? But if you want to create this Institute under your own name, why then to designate yourself as Shaolin Temple laymonk of 31. generation? Why not just to say "I am Leung YanKwai, I am martial arts teacher and healer and I want to create my own Institute"? I think there must be some obvious reason - and I also think many other people can find this reason too.
What I argued above was matter of facts (not related to my personal opinions). In the end, let me express my personal statement:
I think that teaching and studying martial arts is a matter of relation between teacher and student. If student thinks he learns something useful, good for him - I am happy. If teacher can earn some money from teaching to support himself so he can devote all his time to teaching his students full time and to his own progress in martial arts, good for him - I am happy. If some teachers of martial arts come to teach martial arts to Slovakia, I am even more happy. If people in Slovakia will learn even very basic things (like Eight Pieces of Brocade, Baduanjin), that is okay. However, no-one is above law and everyone should play according to the laws of game. If some teacher twists something here, something there, if he has unreasonable claims, if his statements do not correspond with reality, if he has illogical argumentation that because he is Chinese, he must know better etc., and if all this repeats again and again, then one has to conclude that this is not behavior of decent and honest person. I firmly believe that people are able to find the truth for themselves. I also believe you are not such a person and that most of these arguments between us have their root in misunderstanding of the facts. Therefore I also believe you will correct these misunderstandings, thank you very much.
*Všetko dobré.
Shi DeLon
PhD, research fellow (odborný asistent) vo výskume na ShanDong univerzite v Číne
31. generácia šaolinskych laických mníchov (worrior monk=mních bojovník, pokiaľ to ľudia u vás preferujú viac)
12. generácia Chen JiaGou TaiJi Quan*
Regards
Miroslav Bakos
釋果平