Fake Shaolin Monks
kais...@yahoo.com
I'm Ervin Nieves, who wrote "Is YOur Shaolin MOnk a Fake?" -- the Dec
98 Inside Kung Fu cover story, as well as two Wushu Kung Fu cover stories,
the June/July 1996 story (A Shaolin Hero in America -- on Yan Ming) and
the Oct/Nov 1997 cover (Shaolin Success -- on Guo Lin). I do not use
"Shi" in front of their names, because only authentic monks use "Shi"
before their names, and it is my very well informed "opinion" that they're
"suspect." I retract any perceived support of these or any other alleged
Shaolin monks in the U.S. or China. Jens Kruse was correct in his letter
to Inside Kung Fu calling it a museum peopled by a guild of actors. The
whole thing is a joke. I left Shaolin Temple village disgusted. The only
reason I didn't yank my December 1998 cover story and made it sound like
there were still some "real Shaolin monks" left, was that the editor of
the magazine wouldn't probably have published my story otherwise. As it
turns out, one of the alleged Shaolin monks threatened Inside Kung Fu with
a lawsuit and as a result we're seeing articles written by people in
support of "the real Shaolin Temple." Readers of IKF should not easily
trust the "8 Truths About Shaolin Temple" article, since it's written by
Wing Lam's chief "Shaolin" instructor who insists on using "Shi" before
his name, even though he's unreal. Quoting older alleged Shaolin monks is
no proof. You can hire an old guy off the farm as easily as you can hire
a young Wushu star to shave his head. A lot of this info I acquired
behind close doors and is not readily available to the public, but it is.
I even have a picture of one alleged Shaolin monk who's attained
international notoriety with a woman and two kids. The alleged monk is
bearded and in plain clothes. The woman in the picture accompanies the
photo with a letter to a U.S. based martial arts grandmaster imploring him
to help her convince her "HUSBAND" to stop pretending to be a monk and
come back to China and help her support their two babies. The publishers
and/or editors of Wushu Kung Fu and Inside Kung Fu are aware of these
pictures and letter, but won't do anything. They're too leary of law
suits. In fact, one alleged monk is going to actually appear on the cover
this year (perhaps in September) as a result of a "deal" designed to avert
a lawsuit, even though there's ample proof and testimony to question this
person's authenticity.
Readers should be leary about believing information written by people
who claim they are sole "direct importers from the real Shaolin Temple."
Since when is the Shaolin Temple in the export-import business? Why does
Gene Ching, Wing Lam's employee, write that some martial monks can eat
meat and drink wine, when Wing Lam published an erratum in his company's
catalogue apologizing to alleged monk Guo Lin for stating real Shaolin
monks could eat meat and drink wine. The erratum, included a long letter
in which Guo Lin denied this. Incidentally, Guo Lin, in my opinion, is
not the closest thing to a "real Shaolin monk." There are also many more
than two alleged Shaolin monks in the U.S. There are at least six.
Readers should find it suspicious that there are more than one abbot of
Shaolin: Shi Suxi, Shi Yongxin, Shi Wanheng, etc. Almost every tour of
alleged Shaolin monks is accompanied by an alleged abbot.
Readers, I was duped to. Why do you think I wrote three articles
supporting Shaolin? Why did I give up my first cover story opportunity
with Inside Kung Fu to let Brian Gray write an August 1995 piece on my
former instructor? Hey, I've been to Shaolin. I've learned from alleged
monks. I know what I'm talking about as much as anyone. Don't be a
victim! Pass this message on to your friends everywhere and be careful.
As a legal caveat, let me say that all of the above
is my opinion based on years of experience, interviews of alleged Shaolin
monks both in China and the U.S. (including alleged abbot Shi Yongxin),
etc. There's always the possibility that I'm wrong, but I would consider
that possibility 0% if I were allowed to be entirely truthful without
concern for legal repercussions. Still, you don't have to believe me if
you still want to believe. By the way, Santa is dead too!
Find yourself a good teacher of Chinese Wushu and enjoy. Heck, the
moves in all those movies we enjoy watching are mostly Wushu
anyway...sometimes mixed with some Hong Gar.
-- Ervin Nieves
Martial Arts Author and bamboozled student of alleged Shaolin monks
P.S. In my story, A Shaolin Hero, I called Shi Yan Ming a "Shaolin Hero"
based on the appearance of his name in a Shaolin book published in China
(which I now know are all suspect as well). The picture didn't look like
Shi Yan MIng, but my Chinese wife told me it was. I called Shi Yan Ming
and asked him if that was his picture, since it didn't look like him. He
told me taht was his name, but not his picture, because the Chinese
governement was punishing him for defecting. Well, I found out about two
years later, and I can prove this by showing a videotape and other
pictures, tHAT there are in fact "two Shi Yan Mings." The other "Shi Yan
Ming" is the one taht was pictured in the book and not the one in NYC.
The other "Shi Yan Ming" teaches or has taught at the Shaolin Wushu Center
near the Shaolin Temple [Museum] and came to the U.S. on the Lalopooloza
tour. His kung fu is much better than the other Shi Yan Ming in NYC, as
you can probably tell from watching the sad TNT performance of someone who
had really solid kung fu at one time. Shows everyone that we all have to
pracitce to maintain our skill level.
In any case, be careful!
P.P.S. I did not intend to type Gene Ching is "unreal." The point I wanted
to make was that it's not proper to use "Shi" unless one is a bona fide
Chan Buddhist priest. Note: Real Chan Buddhist priests exist and there
may be a few at Shaolin, but I doubt it. I sat in the "Abbot's chamber"
as the "monks" performing the 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Shaolin Temple Buddhist
ceremonies walked in and out of this room. The "monks" rushed back to
their t.v. sets in the room. In China, Shaolin Temple monks are often
referred to jokingly/parodically as "9 to 5 monks" -- meaning they're just
employees of a Shaolin amusement park/outdoor museum. Shame!
Legal Disclaimer:-
The above expresses the opinion of the author. Everyone is encouraged to
perform their own investigation prior to believing anything negative or
positive about any alleged Shaolin monks in the U.S. or China. The author
wishes he were wrong. The aforementioned was published to help Americans
avoid victimization. A front page story in the Wall Street Journal Oct
11, 96 on fake Shaolin monks was the first expose of fake Shaolin monks
printed in the U.S. Jon Funk, who I previously blasted in my former
ignorance, has written well on the Shaolin charade by alleged monks.
Bruce Young does appear to know what he's talking about, except I would
caution Bruce to avoid recommending any alleged monk as possibly being
more genuine. I apologize if my past articles or advertisements (I wrote
the advertisement for Guo Lin's videos) or participation in assisting
alleged Shaolin monks (I introduced both Yan Ming and Guo Lin to both
magazines and to Wing Lam; in fact, I even helped yan ming start his
seminars at Wing Lam's school) misinformed people. Caveat Emptor! This
has been a public service first amendment announcement!
End of Disclaimer!
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Matia Matthews
with the outside world or do i watch to many kung fu movies?? will someone
enlighten me please?
Michael Anderson
asked, he is kind of elusive about anything regarding Shaolin.
I thought that the "Shi" was just his name. He is called Doctor Wu, and
I have never heard anybody refer to him in any other way.
Sky, what would Dr.Yuen say about this? I have read that he is a Shaolin
descendant. Would he care to comment on the "Travelling Monks" or Shi
Yan Ming? And what about the "Shi" thing?
O mi tofu to all!
Michael
www.geocities.com/HotSprings/Villa/2965
praj...@my-dejanews.com
Amituofo. First, you have to find out which "Shi" (which Chinese character)
is in your teacher's name. The character "Shi" that is the first syllable in
Sakyamuni (Chinese: *Shi* Jia Mou Ni) Buddha's name is used as a surname by
all ordained members of the Chinese Buddhist order. A layperson can not use
this character "Shi" as part of their name. However, there exists another
surname that is also pronounced "Shi" in Mandarin but with a different
intonation. This "Shi" is an entirely different Chinese character and is an
existing Chinese family name.
Harry
praj...@my-dejanews.com
Chig...@webtv.net (Michael Anderson) wrote:
> My Sifu is Shi Cun Wu. He has never claimed to be Shaolin, and when
> asked, he is kind of elusive about anything regarding Shaolin.
> I thought that the "Shi" was just his name. He is called Doctor Wu, and
> I have never heard anybody refer to him in any other way.
> Sky, what would Dr.Yuen say about this? I have read that he is a Shaolin
> descendant. Would he care to comment on the "Travelling Monks" or Shi
> Yan Ming? And what about the "Shi" thing?
>
> O mi tofu to all!
> Michael
>
> www.geocities.com/HotSprings/Villa/2965
>
Dear Michael,
Amituofo. You should first determine which "Shi" (what Chinese character) is
used in your teacher's name. The character "Shi" used as a surname by
ordained monks & nuns of the Chinese Buddhist order is the first syllable in
Sakyamuni Buddha's name (Chinese: *Shi* jia mou ni). Laypersons can not use
this "Shi" character in their names. There is another "Shi" that sounds
similiar but is pronounced with a different intonation in Chinese Mandarin.
This other "Shi" is an existing Chinese family name.
Harry
>
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
trinl...@my-dejanews.com
Chig...@webtv.net (Michael Anderson) wrote:
> My Sifu is Shi Cun Wu. He has never claimed to be Shaolin, and when
> asked, he is kind of elusive about anything regarding Shaolin.
> I thought that the "Shi" was just his name.
I don't know enough Chinese to determine if it is a title or a name. However,
in the case of Dharma-names, and names given to people at ordination there is
a tendency (it appears to be fairly regular throughout Buddhism, but Mileage
May Vary) for the names to follow particular patterns associated with the
particular order. In some cases one can make a fairly good guess what Order
a person is studying under by their Dharma-name, and sometimes even who their
teacher is... or their, job within the Sangha.
In the case of a local Zen center, all the Ordained persons have
Dharma-ordination names that start w/ "To" (Tozan, Tonen, Toshu...) Someone
who has more contact with the various Zen schools could probably determine
which sort of Zen and possibly which of the Temples in Japan is their parent.
A Dharma practitioner from a Vajrayana school w/ a Refuge name of "Karma"
is probably studying under Karma Kagyu... a "Tenzin" is probably Gelug... a
"Konchog" is probably Drikung Kagyu (and with a strong possiblility of being
a student of my Khenpo...<as is the occasional Trinlay functioning in a
secretarial-administrative situation in the Sangha>... (Konchog with 2 other
names attached is probably a Renunciate...)
I had been thinking that the "Shi" was one of those kinds of naming elements,
possibly particular to Shaolin.
In any case, traditionally it's recommended that one observe carefully over
an extended period of time (12 years) the teacher and the students before
making a commitment to a teacher.
There are several things (at least in the case of Dharma teachers or
supposed monks) that one can look for. Lineage: one should be able to get
clear and verifiable information about where the Teacher studied and under
whom. It should actually be EASY to contact the Teacher's Teacher or his/her
peers and verify their certification to be teaching.
Documentation: it is normal for Ordainees to have some kind of documentation,
(they're called "Inka" in Japanese) Which gives the lineage information and
has their teacher's or the head of the lineage's seal. (at this point in
time, it's highly likely that this document will NOT be in English.) I can
think of only one instance where a valid teacher did not have his papers, and
that's because he'd lost them in a house fire. He was still on the record at
the main temple, as having been ordained and certified. The papers were
replaced within a few months.
Discussion: It is normal for Ordainees to associate with each other and
discuss the Dharma. It's not unusual for different orders to be relatively
friendly terms with each other. Able to discuss the Dharma with any other
order and still, despite cultural or theological differences will essentially
be on the same page. (the core Dharma teachings are remarkably consistent...
Even though I'm by no means a Teacher or Renunciate, I can be in a discussion
group containing a Zen sensei, and a Therevadan, and a good selection of
other "flavors" and we can all not only keep up with each other but serve
each other as sources for cross referencing.) <A Buddhist Clergy person with
no contact with a regular Sangha, or contact with other Buddhist clergy on a
fairly regular basis (with the exception of solitary and isolated retreat
settings...and even then...) would seem really really unusual if not
suspicious.>
Teachings given by a valid Dharma Teacher will not only withstand, but be
verified via cross refernceing with other Dharma resources.
Trinlay Khadro
luth...@my-dejanews.com
kais...@yahoo.com wrote:
Jon Funk, who I previously blasted in my former
> ignorance, has written well on the Shaolin charade by alleged monks.
Funk is supposed to be a genuine practitioner of Praying Mantis Kung Fu.
I doubt whether he would be lying about anything.
Strange fact is, I actually knew back in the Eighties, a Caucasian guy
who would shave his head like a monk and run a studio called Omega.
He was a bounty hunter by trade and taught martial arts on the side. He
invited me to bring my sifu with me to meet him and so I did. When my sifu
watched this man (let's call him "Greg") go through some motions with his
staff, not until we left the studio did he tell me "what lousy movements.
He's a teacher." Yes, my sifu was polite to "Greg," but told me he was
definitely a phony.
It's easy to fool unaware people.
:-) Luther67
shaoli...@my-dejanews.com
> I'm Ervin Nieves, who wrote "Is YOur Shaolin MOnk a Fake?" -- the Dec
> 98 Inside Kung Fu cover story, as well as two Wushu Kung Fu cover stories,
> the June/July 1996 story (A Shaolin Hero in America -- on Yan Ming) and
> the Oct/Nov 1997 cover (Shaolin Success -- on Guo Lin). I do not use
> "Shi" in front of their names, because only authentic monks use "Shi"
> before their names, and it is my very well informed "opinion" that they're
> "suspect." I retract any perceived support of these or any other alleged
> Shaolin monks in the U.S. or China. Jens Kruse was correct in his letter
> to Inside Kung Fu calling it a museum peopled by a guild of actors.
>
Dear Dejaview Readers:
I was recently informed by the editor of Inside Kung Fu that the above
private e-mail I sent to two individuals was posted to Dejanews Internet
forum. I did not post these e-mails to the Internet. I do stand by the
general advice I gave to help protect American citizens from probable or
potentially fraudulent alleged Shaolin Temple monks. I thank the editor
Inside Kung Fu for having the guts to publish the original story, albeit in a
less forward fourth edited version. I do not hate Yanming and Guolin and the
other alleged Shaolin monks in the U.S. In fact, I am grateful to Yanming
for having taught me kung fu and for Guolin for his acts of friendship. That
is what made publishing my third article -- "Is Your Shaolin Monk a Fake?"
Inside Kung Fu cover story of Dec 98 -- difficult. The original version of
this article was in fact writtent to support "genuine" Shaolin monks in the
U.S. and forewarn students of suspect monks by quoting Ch'an Buddhist sutras.
But prior to publication, I received updated information from a long-term
student of one alleged Shaolin monk that proved to me that I was wrong again
about supporting any alleged Shaolin monk. At first, I thought about yanking
the whole article and even tried to get it published without the pictures
that appeared in the article of alleged Shaolin monks, but I was told that an
article couldn't be published without supporting artwork nor could I write
alleged Shaolin monk in the photo captions. My choice: run the article with
minor revisions (given the short time towards publication and work already
invested by Inside Kung Fu) or cancel it completely (and readers would not
have the knowledge how to scrutinize alleged Shaolin monks -- i.e the Ch'an
Buddhist Sutras followed by all genuine monks). I chose to let it go. Dave
Cater came up with a great title for the article and it was the magazine's
decision to choose the cover and cover title it chose. Again, great job!
Like I said in my private e-mail that got posted, be careful! Would a
genuine monk write referring to reincarnating wine bottles and how drinking
meat and eating wine is possible? If so, why did Guolin (who's also
suppossed to be a genuine Shaolin monk) send a strongly phrased letter to
Wing Lam stating that the meat and wine drinking is not the case. Wing Lam
published this as an erratum in their catalogue. Would a genuine Ch'an
Buddhist priest be concerned with "reputation" when one of the main hallmarks
and goals of Buddhism is to transcend the ego and all worldly possessions
(e.g. money, fame, etc.)? Do real Shaolin Ch'an Buddhists go around
threatening to sue martial arts magazines because they think they're being
alluded to and their business ties or "livelihood" will be hurt? What
happened to the notion of monks renouncing the world and embracing vows of
poverty? The Brahma Net sutra is a genuine guide to the behavior of all
sects of Ch'an Buddhist priests who follow the Boddhisatva path. Would a
genuine Shaolin monk and alleged genuine followers ignore such sutras,
pretending they didn't exist? Dejanews readers must realize that there are
literally hundreds of great kung fu performers who can shave their head and
seem like a Shaolin priest. Great kung fu artists pepper the provinces of
Henan, Hubei, and others. There are little teenagers who would simply
astound American audiences. The "will to believe" is very strong, and that's
what lead myself, Kenny Wong, Harry Leong, Jens Kruse, and the many others
who've responded to my Inside Kung Fu article or the Internet posting of
feilo (fat man) and kaissefet (chicken ass) -- whoever the heck they are --
to write of their victimizations. I was not the first to write about fake
Shaolin monks in America, but the first to support the claim with Buddhis
sutras. Refer to an October 11, 96 front page Wall Street Journal article on
fake Shaolin monks. Refer to Jon Funk's articles in Black Belt magazine.
Refer to the many letters posted on the subject by people who've been to the
alleged Shaolin Temple and saw it being constructed. Heck, in the same issue
as my Wushu Kung Fu cover story on Guolin, Wushu master Lu Xiaoling wrote how
she and a group of other Wushu masters trained the alleged Shaolin monks of
today's "Shaolin Temple" in martial arts. I was doubtful when I first read
this, but now I believe her. If Yanming and Guolin truly are pulling the
yellow cloth over people's eyes, then I hope they repent and live a genuine
life. I think they have a lot of good in them buried with other ambitions.
It is such a sad thing to live an inauthentic life prompted by a desire for
material possessions, especially if one has to pretend to be something one is
not. One should either truly embrace Buddhism or drop the fascade. Most
people in China are aware from T.V. documentaries that The Shaolin Temple of
today is suspect and was reconctructed in the late 70s for Jet Li's Shaolin
Temple movie and tourism. Overseerers of Buddhism in China are appointed by
the communist government of the People's Republic of China. These alleged
Shaolin monk tours make lots of bucks for local governments and businesses in
a time that backdoor capitalism and materialistic values (or lack thereof)
dominate the mainland Chinese psyche. Many of these alleged Shaolin monks
come from poor families and want a better life, so I understand the
temptations they must experience. Yet, it is unethical to say one is a monk
and life a materialistic life predicated on mundane goals rather than
spiritual aspirations. Many students get disappointed. I have some
documented personal testimony of a wife of one alleged monk who claims to
have been abandoned by her husband and needed help to help feed and clothe
their two children. I was informed by other alleged Shaolin monks of another
alleged monk's girlfriend, who was so distraught when her alleged Shaolin
monk/boyfriend decided to remain in America that she committed suicide. If
true, innocent Chinese have also suffered at the hands of generally good
people who've been seduced by the allure of material gains. In the name of
goodness and compassion, I ask these alleged Shaolin monks to please embrace
genuine Buddhism and atone for their past sins or renounce their alleged
Shaolin monk stance and live a normal life. Help support the loved ones back
home or their families with some of the money gained in the U.S. -- and kung
fu is big business in the U.S. Only you can know 100% if this is true. Be
honest and do the right thing. I also encourage the alleged monks in the
U.S. to practice their kung fu in addition to Buddhism. After coming to the
U.S., many of these monks lay off the practice and get out of shape. I was
saddened when I saw Yanming leaning forward doing 45 degree angle kicks, and
losing his breath after only a couple of minutes of peforming bad kicks,
partially performed Chen style Tai Chi (apparently to catch his breath), etc.
Yanming had beautiful kung fu. It was a joy to watch him perform. The
other Yanming in China, who's pictured as a Shaolin Hero in one of the books
published by local publishers in China (note: these books are suspect; and I
erroneously confused the two Yanming's when I wrote "A Shaolin Hero in
America" for Wushu Kung fu, based on a conflicting name/picture mismatch) )
is more acrobatic than the NYC Yanming; nevertheless, NYC Yanming had really
beautiful kung fu. Now he is a shadow of what he used to be. I'm sad for
this. Question: if Yanming and Guolin and the rest of these alleged Shaolin
monks are suppossed to be fighting monks, why don't they fight? Heck, didn't
Yanming allegedly win the Xi'an National Sparring Championship (as I wrote in
an advertisement I wrote for him while a student per his information)?
Fighting monks should fight, otherwise they're not fighting monks. In an
Arena article, Yanming states how he was offered $70,000 bucks to fight but
refused. Why would a fighting monk who's a sparring champion in China refuse
to fight? Because of Buddhism? But hasn't he allegedly been a monk since
age five? What are these contradictions? I have yet to see a single alleged
Shaolin Temple monk fight. I'm sure they can kick around their students, but
what about fighting the Gracies, Shamrock, Lennox Lewis, etc.? Isn't it
fight or flight that's at work here? I reiterate that these are my opinions
based on personal information that only a few people are aware of. If I've
gotten any facts wrong, I apologize. I restate that no one should form a
definitive opinion on alleged Shaolin monks -- either positively or
negatively -- or the businesses which profit immensely from selling alleged
Shaolin monk videos, uniforms, books, etc. -- without conducting their own
research. Dejanews provides an open Internet forum protected by the first
amendment. My intention is to help forewarn people of the probability of
suspect alleged Shaolin monks. In the end, it's up to the individuals to
decide what to believe. I encourage those who've been victimized by alleged
Shaolin monks to come forward and write their viewpoints and experiences on
Dejanews. American citizens need to protect ourselves from potential
victimization. That's an important role of the American media and the open
Internet forum. Yanming and Guolin, I feel sorry for the lives you are
living, even though you make a lot of money and are getting famous. Maybe
people in Hollywood don't care if you're just acting (if indeed you are),
since the world of illusion defines the world of entertainment. But people
believe in you. Many people who approach you desire something spiritual and
beautiful. They want a family environment in your schools sometimes, which
they can't get at home. They wish to learn real martial arts skills they can
use to defend themselves from potential violence on the street, not just
Chinese wushu. Please be good to students and to those who've given you love
and admiration. If you do know genuine Ch'an Buddhism, then embrace it fully
and be kind and compassionate to all. Renounce materialism and fame. Be the
nice persons I see underneath my perception of lost souls. I miss both of
you often and am sorry for having spilled the beans. It was a difficult
ethical decision. Thank you for your past friendship and teachings. I am
filled with sadness at having to reveal what I've revealed, but I didn't want
othes to suffer. I wish you well.
Best regards,
-- Ervin Nieves
P.S. There are those who support alleged Shaolin monks in the U.S. and
profit immensely financially by it -- e.g. certain martial arts magazines and
import-export businesses selling religious attire as kung fu uniforms,
videotapes,etc. Perhaps these businesses and individuals really believe
there are still genuine Shaolin monks or they hope to keep the faith alive
and wait until a more auspicious time to help a geuine Shaolin Temple
resurrect. I hope the supporters of such businesses (writers, employees,
etc.) serve as a conscience for the truth instead of guardians of
confliciting business interests. Only you know your motivation for alleging
that the genuine Shaolin Temple survives. Many of us who've been there and
have no vested interest in the matter -- e.g. no potential business profits,
no status as Shaolin instructors, etc. -- beg to differ. Heck, as an author
of three full cover stories on alleged Shaolin monks, I was set to write a
book with one alleged monk featuring two alleged Shaolin Temple monks. This
book would have made me lots of money every year. Yet, I thought it was
unethical and "spilled the beans." Whereas others make lots of money
claiming the real Shaolin Temple exists, I gave up my book and money, a
chance to learn kung fu from alleged monks, and have earned their animosity
to boot. Speaking the truth isn't easy, but I invite those with vested
financial interests to please meditate on the ill long-term results of saying
something is the case when it isn't. People are grateful enough to you for
supplying the opportunity to buy videotapes, weapons, etc. You don't have to
sugarcoat what's really happening in China to keept the sales going. Lineage
charts and profits are fine, but one's historical reputation and integrity is
more important. If you' ve been misinformed or misguided, may you find
genuine enlightenment. Buddha bless you as well!
> The above expresses the opinion of the author. Everyone is encouraged to
> perform their own investigation prior to believing anything negative or
> positive about any alleged Shaolin monks in the U.S. or China. The author
> wishes he were wrong. The aforementioned was published to help Americans
> avoid victimization. A front page story in the Wall Street Journal Oct
> 11, 96 on fake Shaolin monks was the first expose of fake Shaolin monks. I apologize if my past articles or advertisements (I wrote
> the advertisement for Guo Lin's videos) or participation in assisting
> alleged Shaolin monks (I introduced both Yan Ming and Guo Lin to both
> magazines and to Wing Lam; in fact, I even helped yan ming start his
> seminars at Wing Lam's school) misinformed people. Caveat Emptor! This
> has been a public service first amendment announcement!
>
>
>