Rene - HFY Champion! [Archive] - Kung Fu Magazine Forums

reneritchie

05-09-2003, 11:43 AM

Tom,

Thank you for being part of the solution!

As for your question about Cheung Ng and the Red Junk performers, first we must all realize that there is simply no way to speak with absolute certainty about those times. All we can do is pass on what was passed down to us.

In the original family tree I received, Cheung Ng was indeed listed right above the "Red Junk Period" of Hung Gam Biu, Wong Wah-Bo, Law Man-Gung, Dai Fa Min Kam, and others. I should point out this is identical to how the late Pan Nam sifu also listed his family tree, based on his work with reporter Law.

Now, since that time more information on both the Opera and the Red Turban Rebellion has come to light, and it does look like Cheung Ng was active in the 1730s and Hung Gam Biu, et. al. was active in the 1850s, making a direct connection very unlikely to say the least. How do we reconcile this? Again, no lineage can offer historically accurate information about this time period, and in the oral transmission of lineage, some problems can arise. It's therefore possible that 1 or more members of the family tree were ommitted for some reason (the information was lost, or was kept confidential, for example). Indeed, Benny Meng has said he spoke to a Sihing of Gee sifu who, while not possessing the technical information Gee sifu possessed, knew more history, and could fill in the missing generations (hence the update on the VTM site).

Another possible explination is that, like with other lineages and the Ng Mui/Yim Wingchun origin, due to the turbulant times and the lack of information, the system became connected with a well known figure, and like Pan Nam, linked back to a man known to have had great influence on the Red Junks.

In the end, however, please remember that history is just an interesting aside and the important thing is the art itself and how it enriches our lives today.

reneritchie

05-09-2003, 11:45 AM

Terence,

When you've gotten it out of your system, please do come back and feel free to ask your questions and perhaps we can build some bridges and create some harmony.

tparkerkfo

05-09-2003, 11:48 AM

Thank you Rene,

See, that wasn't painful. I don't know why we couldn't have stated it like that to begin with. I also liked the way you did not manage to attack me, my family, and my dog. I think this can be the begining of a new era of mutual respect and understanding between HFY supporters and HFY questioners!

Thank you for your reply
Tom

reneritchie

05-09-2003, 11:55 AM

My pleasure Tom. I believe we can all benefit if we discuss things in a respectful, open manner. Please don't hesitate to post any other questions, you or anyone.

HFY, like every branch, is a treasure, and all treasures shine brightest when properly held up to the light.

t_niehoff

05-09-2003, 11:59 AM

Ok, Rene, I'll play and play nicely with others.

RR wrote:

In the original family tree I received, Cheung Ng was indeed listed right above the "Red Junk Period" of Hung Gam Biu, Wong Wah-Bo, Law Man-Gung, Dai Fa Min Kam, and others. I should point out this is identical to how the late Pan Nam sifu also listed his family tree, based on his work with reporter Law. RR

Who provided this "original family tree"? I assume they knew it was going into "Complete Wing Chun"? And while many lineages record Wong Wah Bo and Dai Fa Min Kam as Red Boat members, tracing their lineage back to them, is their any evidence outside of HFY's oral tradition of the existence of Hung Gam Biu? TN

Indeed, Benny Meng has said he spoke to a Sihing of Gee sifu who, while not possessing the technical information Gee sifu possessed, knew more history, and could fill in the missing generations (hence the update on the VTM site). RR

Who was this si-hing? What I find mystifying is that HFY's "original family tree" (above) should coincide exactly with Pan Nam's. If Garrett simply didn't know the history as well as his sihing, why would his version match Pan's (and not have one or two more ancestors)? TN

Terence

reneritchie

05-09-2003, 12:29 PM

Hi Terence,

Thank you for being part of the solution!

We received the tree from Gee sifu, through John (one of the original students before the VTMs involvement and the HFY name began being used publically) and it was expressly for Complete Wing Chun.

As you know, records of the Red Junk are sketchy at times. For example, Kam is known by the nicknames "Painted Face" and "New", and not by a full proper name. Likewise, Biu is known in this family tree as "Red Turban", perhaps a nod to the Red Turbans who fought to overthrow the Yuan, perhaps to the Red Turbans who tragically died fighting the Qing in Guangdong, or perhaps to the Red Turban common-folk who came out to support the Red Junk performers in Foshan (perhaps this was even how he encountered them?)

Now, while no other lineage lists a Hung Gam Biu, there is another Biu listed as one of the hairpins (along with Wong, Leung, Kam, etc.) in the Cho family records. While Biu is not a unique name, if Dai Fa Min Kam and Sam Kam are the same, perhaps Hung Gam Biu and the Biu from the Cho records is the same?

In either case, again, the records of that time are sketchy, and we cannot speak of them with absolute certainty (but then, people on CNN argue every day about what *really* happened just last week, just down the street, 150 years ago, on the other side of the world, is even more challenging).

Unfortunately, I have no information as to who this sihing was. The tree, however, was not identical to Pan Nam's, as it listed far more members from the Red Junk period (Pan's listed only Wong, Leung, Kam, and Lay Fook-Shun, whom I believe Gee sifu listed as Siu Sang Hung Fook, since Lay was the Siu Sang in the Opera). Gee sifu's tree was much more complete as well, listing out the lineages for Yip Man, Yuen Kay-San, and others (though Fok Bo-Chuen was listed as a student of Law Man-Gung rather than Wong Wah-Bo, which is laterally different from Sum Nung's listing). I can't speculate as to why Pan Nam's was/is missing generations.

yuanfen

05-09-2003, 12:34 PM

Dear Rene- since you are answering questions

1.is space and time- relative, absolute. measured by the simulataneity of spatially separated events, using the speed of light as absolute or not?

2. can specific time space and direction be simultaneously assigned to a punch?

3. Is Chan enlightment gradual or sudden?

PS- lest my questions sound like part of a small group plot....

I have had serious debates with Rene, Terence and quite a few posters who are mistakenly regarded as a gang. There is great diversity among critics of mumbo jumbo.

TjD

05-09-2003, 12:43 PM

what are time/space distortions in the HFY meaning of the terms?

i just keep seeing people forming black holes with their chi sau and no one can seem to answer this question, mabye you can help me out here Rene :D

yuanfen

05-09-2003, 12:50 PM

Who are the others in the picture with Terence?

reneritchie

05-09-2003, 12:53 PM

Joy,

Thank you for being part of the solution!

First, please understand that many of the people currently involved with HFY are new to the art, with only a few years at most of exposure, and many learn from students or grand students. If we were back in HK in 1953, and Leung Sheung had grand students, it would be difficult to expect them to answer detailed, precise questions, even if they did have backgrounds in other arts. Now add in the fact that most people here are English, not Cantonese, and we have to deal with transliteration and translation as well. "Mumbo jumbo", or "jibba jabba" is perhaps forgiveable under those circumstances! We're dealing not only with Gee sifu and his unique culture, but the "middleman" culture in between, which perhaps is causing some of the confusion.

Unfortunately, I don't have access to most of the source material sans "middleman", but I will answer as best as I can.

1. Space and time are relative. These are tools used to determine and achieve optimal results. Proper position in space (measured and aligned, then tested and ingrained through training) reduces the amount of time necessary to act. Similarly, it reduces the amount of options (space) and time the opponent has left to respond with. This is similar to the commonly seen proverb of "maximum results through minimum effort", but as with most things in HFY, there is a very detailed, precise, step-by-step method used to both teach and employ the concept.

2. By training for optimal results, even under the stress of combat, it increases the odds of acceptable results. If you train at 100%, perhaps you can achieve 80% under extreme conditions. If you only train with 80% (precision, etc.) maybe you'll only achieve 50% which could prove unacceptable. Time and Space is just a concept that gives a student a process they can undertake to help fine tune the best reflexes possible, and verify them for themselves, so they don't have to take any one person's opinion as the sum total of all reality. Others probably have other ways of doing the same, but perhaps not in this manner, or described in this way.

3. Chan can be either sudden or gradual, and while some maintain there is a strong connection between Chan and HFY, since this is a WCK forum, it is perhaps better to constrain ourselves to the martial aspects of HFY.

And yes, Joy and I have had some classic arguments which make some of the recent ones here look like love-ins. Glad that's in the past, and that this thread can help build better understandings for all.

reneritchie

05-09-2003, 12:59 PM

TjD,

Thanks for being part of the solution!

Again, please remember that a lot of the English being used is the result of a new culture developing a vocabulary for the art, hence the vocabulary will be dependent upon that new culture: the way they think, understand, and express themselves, and it may or may not make it easier or harder for others.

While I can't say for sure how any other person tries to assign modern English to Chinese concepts, my guess would be that as part of teaching the developmental process (not just teaching material, but teaching how to learn, validate, and teach material), the material is put through tests. A "distortion" might then be a problem that arises during the testing due to improper positioning (space) or timing (time). A little off to the right or to the left, a little late or a little early can all result in sub-optimal responses. Using the time and space learning/teaching model, a student can fine tune their responses to develop as optimal a response as possible.

I hope this has been of some help and leaves you with a more positive disposition towards HFY!

TjD

05-09-2003, 12:59 PM

so time is just a different way of saying take the shortest path to the target? (closest weapon -> closest target)

while space is a different way of saying occupy the centerline?

so from this, i'm assuming time/space distortions are when you screw up in either case?

reneritchie

05-09-2003, 01:07 PM

TjD,

Drawing parallels is always useful to show we're not dealing with alien or obscure concepts, but its important to understand how far the parallel goes. HFY, like most branches, has its own distinct understanding and usage of words like "shortest path" and "centerline" (I believe they actually use a 5-line concept, involving center, mid-claviculars, and shoulders lines).

Another way to look at some of the confusion is depth of detail. For some, its enough to know a bird is a bird. For others, they'll want to distinguish robins from hawks from hummingbirds from condors, etc. And for still others, they'll want to distinquish each type of bird down to its most precise of sub-species, even if it involves using the Latin names.

Neither level of specificity is inherently better or worse, it just depends on what you need, and what you're interested in drilling down to. HFY, because of their methods, likes a high degree of precision in terminology, which does not always conincide with the likes or usages of other branches.

reneritchie

05-09-2003, 02:14 PM

Any more questions? As often as people have claimed no one will answer the tough HFY questions, certainly there must be more floating around?

hunt1

05-09-2003, 02:27 PM

Ok Rene here goes.

As I understand it HFY traces themselves back to Jee Shim and hence to the Shoalin Temple this gives them their Chan influence and their claim to be a paradigm shift in martial teaching that occured at the Shoalin Temple.

Since Jee Shim did not exist and is only the southern Kung-fu "Johnny Appleseed" how does HFY claim direct from Shoalin through him? How do they claim Chan teachings from a person that did not exist except in creation myths? How are they connected to any paradignm shift that may or may not have occured at the Shoalin temple if the person that brought them their art direct from Shoalin never existed? Did he come through a temperal distortion in Space\Time from the future to teach them in the past?

yuanfen

05-09-2003, 02:38 PM

Dear Rene- if we take out the Chan claims and the unbroken link to Southern Shaolin temple and the space time "equations"
and the secret lineage- what do we know about the art---not
about any persons involved-for now.

reneritchie

05-09-2003, 02:39 PM

Hi Hunter,

Thank you for being part of the solution!

I think there might be some confusion. Hung Fa Yiu traces themselves back to Yat Chum (Yi Chen), whom their oral transmissions relay was a 22nd generation Shaolin monk, and their connection to the Shaolin Temple of Songshan, Henan.

Jee Shim (Zhi Shan), on the other hand, is one of the famed 5 Elders of Southern Chinese martial lore, and named as the founder of systems such as Hung Ga Kuen and Weng Chun Kuen.

As to whether either existed or not, when dealing with those times, so long ago and far away, its impossible to say with 100% certainty about most all things. All we can do is honorably pass down the information, clearly identify it for what it is, and respect those who choose to respectfully form different opinions as to its relative historical vs. legendary merit.

As to Chan teachings, again, this being a martial arts forum, I believe its better if we constrain ourselves to the martial aspects at this point.

PaulH

05-09-2003, 02:48 PM

Okay Rene,

Let talk Martial. I notice in the picture that Terence so artistically rendered to us that HFY seem to have that classic WC pose. How would you answer from the HFY viewpoint this question of Joe Lewis:

Joe Lewis
Predicament: If two students are at close range practicing a drill and each has their lead hand making contact with the other's lead hand wrist, this means both are well within the other's punching range. Assume that while executing a prescribed drill, each student, at all times, keeps their rear hand positioned far below their chin, positioned somewhere in the center of their chest. Now evaluate the tenets of each student's positioning, especially assessing its defensive merits. The lead hand is way out in front, leaving the chin completely unprotected. At the same time, that arm has the elbow positioned way out in front of the unprotected body.

Assess each of the seven gaps in their positioning. You've got the gap between the chin and the breastplate, and the second gap between the chin and the lead shoulder. Usually the chin is out in front of the shoulder, making the shoulder useless as a defensive tool if you're going to attempt to deflect an incoming strike by using a shoulder roll. You've got two more gaps between each of the two fists and the chin, and another two gaps created by the daylight between both elbows, leaving the body unprotected. The seventh gap is created by the great distance horizontally between the two elbows. This is a complete breach of the first rule of combat, which is always attack from a position of strength to a position of weakness.

How could any rational person believe that they could stand that close to a good puncher with those seven openings, and believe that they're not going to get hit. Using this type of positioning, hands down, shoulders squared, and body unprotected, (often used in sticky-hand drills), would allow a good puncher to eat you alive.

Regards,

FIRE HAWK

05-09-2003, 03:29 PM

Maybe Yat Chum and Jee Shim are the same person with more than one name , and if i remember Pan Nam calls his Yat Chum Um jee a women nun maybe that is Ng Mui with another name ?

planetwc

05-09-2003, 03:35 PM

Questions:

1. If Wing Chun is from Shaolin where are the specific Shaolin movements?

2. Which portions of the Wing Chun forms have Shaolin influenced "martial DNA" (posture, movements)?

3. Is Hung Fa Yi, Wing Chun or Weng Chun?

4. Are Wing Chun and Weng Chun the same system or two distinct arts which are not related?

planetwc

05-09-2003, 03:38 PM

What is the unbroken lineage of Hung Fa Yi in the last 100-200 years?

At present we have Garrett Gee and his teacher.

Who was the si-gung of Gee?

How is Hung Fa Yi able to go back to their orginator of their Wing Chun, yet be unable to provide the last 5 generations of teachers and si-hings?

Is Gee Sifu's teacher known as a Wing Chun instructor or even as a martial art teacher in the province in China where he resides?

Who are the other students of Gee Sifu's teacher?

planetwc

05-09-2003, 03:41 PM

If all the other branches of Wing Chun have a similar set of core principles, movements and platforms, and Hung Fa Yi's is completely different than WHY should Hung Fa Yi be considered Wing Chun?

What concrete proof does Hung Fa Yi have to being a Wing Chun system?

What concrete proof does Hung Fa Yi have to being the oldest form of Wing Chun?

planetwc

05-09-2003, 03:47 PM

If Hung Fa Yi is the paradigm shift of Shaolin, such that it does not resemble Shaolin arts, how did that shift occur?

If all other variations of Wing Chun are descended from Hung Fa Yi, why are they not alike (in terms of similarities to Hung Fa Yi) or did another paradigm shift occur from Hung Fa Yi to ALL other Wing Chun systems? How did that happen?

Why would it be that there is commonality among all other Wing Chun systems BUT Hung Fa Yi? Would that not indicate that Hung Fa Yi is another system of Kung Fu unrelated to Wing Chun Kuen?

If ALL other Wing Chun systems had such a disconnect from what the Hung Fa Yi system is, and Hung Fa Yi is supposed to be the one true original source art, how did Hung Fa Yi stay the same unchanged over generations when there is no defined lineage of transmission over the last 200 years?

How do the current Hung Fa Yi generation know that what they are doing is EXACTLY the same as it was at the art's founding?

What proof is there of this lack of change and evolution?

If there was evolution, then which specific Hung Fa Yi teacher made such changes, and WHY?

planetwc

05-09-2003, 03:50 PM

Why is it that on the VTM Seminar tape, Benny Meng performs the Hung Fa Yi form which is almost exactly the same as the TWC form performed by Marty Goldberg?

Doesn't that seem to show a connection between the two systems?

tparkerkfo

05-09-2003, 05:14 PM

Hi PlanetWC,

hold it. Your actually asking questions. You can't. You will upset the whole space/time continumm and be banned. You can only read what they choose to put out and not question it, unless you want the mark of a HFY basher/hater branded upon you. There is no room for logical critical thinking. Just drink, and don't ask.

I learned from my mistake. As a HFY supporter again, I just accept! Not question.

Tom

reneritchie

05-09-2003, 05:31 PM

Dearest Joy,

Thank you for your interest. If we stick to the relevant areas of WCK discussion, there is still much that can be addressed, including areas of body structure, weighting, strategy, etc.

Warmest always,

reneritchie

05-09-2003, 05:40 PM

Paul H.,

Since I do not practice HFY (it is not a requirement for a supporter, and hopefully not for a champion) and I can only look at the pictures and make suppositions. However, I would first like to stress that any picture is only a snapshot in time, and the moment before and the moment after are unknown to us. I would second like to stress that no single part or aspect of a system will make sense when taken out of context - it needs to be viewed within the whole.

As four limbed vertibrates, two of which limbs are typically used to remain standing in non-ground-based arts, there will always be limits in the area that can be shielded pre-engagement. Thus, each method needs to make choices about how limbs are aligned, giving up some "holes" in order to create some "obstacles". Everything will have a risk/reward ratio. What methods then do, within their whole approach, is to maximize the rewards and minimize the risks through overall strategy and the support of other elements.

In HFY, using their process of testing alignment through various simulations, based on what they consider to be of paramount importance, they have come up with the posture Gee sifu displays. Perhaps if one hand was more bent, it would protect one area more, but leave another area less well protected. These are simply the ideals from their perspective, and to compensate for the holes that are opened in order to achieve it, there is footwork, hand changes, and other elements, and knowing the holes allows for some predictability in how a skilled opponent might try to exploit them, giving a foundation from which to train these supports.

I hope this reply has increased your appreciation for the HFY art.

reneritchie

05-09-2003, 05:43 PM

Firehawk,

While anything is possible when dealing with events so long ago and far away, it unfortunately means *anything* is possible and the slope of supposition is slippery indeed.

As to Pan Nam, yes he renders the name Yat Chum Um Jee, which depending on the details of the characters, can mean Yat Chum founder of Convent, or Yat Chum, Hermit. I do not know if one had to be female to found a convent in Hunan province in the 18th century, but others have assumed that.

reneritchie

05-09-2003, 06:17 PM

David,

Thank you for being part of the solution!

1 & 2. I do not know of any specific Shaolin movements. Since we are all mostly human with similar configurations, and all involved in a similar endeavor (fighting) I'm sure there may be some overlap whether there is a direct Shaolin connection or not. Until such time as a detailed analysis of HFY, side by side with an ancestral Shaolin Fist like Lohanquan, its impossible to say either way. However, just like Yip Man's story, tracing WCK back to Shaolin through Ng Mui, the oral transmission from Gee sifu claims Shaolin roots. Aside from that, all we have are personal opinions, and I can respect those, agree or politely disagree.

3. Gee sifu uses the character for Wing (chant, sing), not Weng (perpetual, everlasting).

4. They are just names and over the generations, sometimes more oral and less written transmissions have led to different people using different characters even within the same system (eg. sihingdai Yip Man and Chan Yiu-Min using Wing and Weng respectively). Secondly, Weng is used by a wide range of arts, some probably further removed from what most consider WCK than others. If you're referring to Weng Chun Kuen from Fung Siu-Ching, it could perhaps be a different branch evolved from on of the ancestral components of Wing Chun Kuen (the one that gave us the pole, dummy, and some San Sik). As it has been 150 years on the tree, each branch will of course have grown in some ways divergent.

5. The unbroken lineage of HFY as given to us for Complete Wing Chun was Yat Chum -> Cheung Ng -> Hung Gam Biu -> Cheung Gung -> Wong Ting -> Wong Ming. Benny Meng has indicated Gee sifu's sihing has supplied additional generations between Cheung Ng and Hung Gam Biu.

6. Gee sifu's sigung was Wong Ting, his sifu's father.

7. Gee sifu has provided the lineage, but I don't know of any sihing or side-branches provided. If this information is available, it may be kept private.

8. Gee sifu told me his sifu was friendly with Mai Gei Wong, who was well known in the area, but I have not been able to verify this with the Mai Gei Wong people, its possible that the younger generation didn't know him. I have not been able to find anyone in the restaurant or medical circles familiar with him as well, which might also be a generational thing. While it would be sensible to think people in the WCK circle all knew each other, the Cultural Revolution was a very hard time and many stayed very quiet. If you didn't have a reputation for fighting and didn't teach large numbers of students, you might remain relatively unknown.

9. I do not know of any other students of Wong Ming, though Gee sifu said there were 3 other disciples, and Benny Meng has said he is in contact with one other student.

10. HFY should be considered WCK because they use the WCK name. Southern Mantis is different in kind from Northern Mantis, yet they both use the name Mantis. Chen Taiji and other systems have Long Boxing without a direct connection to what is commonly considered Changquan. Likewise, there are several systems that encorporate Weng or Weng Chun into their name, or Hung into their name. Names are just names. While HFY may be different (or similar, depending on how you choose to phrase or read it) from Foshan and Panyu WCK, so is Pao Fa Lien which also uses WCK.

11. When dealing with murky matters like Chinese martial lineages, where most systems cannot be accurately traced back beyond the 20th century, its probably impossible to offer concrete proof of anything. All we have are the systems themselves. HFY seems to use terms like Tan, Fook, Bong, to have sets like Siu Nim Tao, Chum Kiu, Biu Jee, to have a Muk Yan Jong, pole, and double knives. Perhaps the interpretation is different, but every branch has more or less distinct features (Koo Lo with no sets, Pao Fa Lien with very different mechanics and sets, etc.)

12. Again, while several branches from the Red Junk have common features, not all systems calling themselves WCK share the closeness of those commonalities (again, PFL being a prime example). It's also possible that different branches of WCK evolved differently, or drew on different elements of its initial composition, resulting in different empasises that grew more different over time. Foshan and Panyu, Pao Fa Lien, HFY and TWC, and Weng Chun Kuen could all be variants of the same ancestral material, developed distinctly over time.

13. In Chinese culture, its never polite to claim there are changes. Most branches of most arts over time have claimed they are without changes, or true to their founder. This is respect and face. Whether they are or not is impossible to tell, since we lack "fossil" evidence. If we understand the culture, its not so much a matter of absolutes as it is of tradition.

14. Absent video from 200 years ago, of course its impossible to tell, but given the same tradition, trust is placed in Gee sifu, unless he states otherwise, to teach what was taught to him as best he can, and benefit of the doubt is given that previous generations did likewise. It might sound romantic, but it is part of the culture, like ancestor worship and traditional rituals.

15 & 16. Absent proof, which is impossible unless a book is unearthed in misty China, it becomes a matter of faith, like childen not assuming they're adopted, or going to bed assuming the sun will rise. Unless Gee sifu tells of a specific change, its assumed no concious changes were made, and if romanticized, again its part f the culture and tradition, same as believing Jee Shim taught the Tiger Crane Fist or Washington chopped down the cherry tree.

17. Having seen that live, and having seen 2 other similar back-to-back demonstrations, I would agree that there appears to be similarities between HFY and TWC which do not exist between either system and the Foshan/Panyu branches. However, until something concrete is discovered, what connection, if any, remains speculation ranging from the absurd (coincidence), to the possible (shared ancestry at some point), to the rediculous (secret colusion). These similarities, however, if anything, perhaps suggest deeper roots to either art than many others previously considered. Still, its important to remember that while similarities do exist, that doesn' mean the systems are identical, and even the Foshan/Panyu systems are as different in some ways as they are similar in others.

I hope this reply has helped share some of the unique character of the HFY system with you.

reneritchie

05-09-2003, 06:19 PM

Tom,

I appreciate that you are helping support HFY but I'm afraid others may mistake your tone as being something other than serious. Perhaps you could stick with the Q&A format to avoid any confusion?

Grendel

05-09-2003, 07:25 PM

Originally posted by reneritchie
Tom,

I appreciate that you are helping support HFY but I'm afraid others may mistake your tone as being something other than serious. Perhaps you could stick with the Q&A format to avoid any confusion?
I have another coupla' questions, what HFY franchises are available and what would I receive for my investment dollars?

Are Hung Fa Yi and HFY trademarked?

Why did Garrett Gee paint over the words "Wing Chun" from his school's window in S.F.? Is this a concession that it isn't Wing Chun?

Is this the right thread to ask these types of questions?

Are we merely feeding the HFY egos?

Does anyone really care?

Phenix

05-09-2003, 07:31 PM

Weng Chun. Wing Chun......

ok, Thus I have heard.

In the tale of martial art from Southern China......There is a Weng Chun Kuen which is different to White Crane Weng Chun of Fujian. That Weng Chun Kuen is told to be Hu Hui-Chien (madarin, a school brother of Hung Xi kuan and Fang Si Yuek) art.

Hu Hui -Chien trained in Weng Chun Hall of Shao Lin and his sifu is Jee Shim.

That is the tale.

So, which Weng Chun is Weng Chun? That is up to you all to figure up. I just tell you what I have heard.

As for how VTM link this Wing Chun to that Weng Chun.....
Well, If it is the art of Hu Hui-Chien of Weng Chun Hall.
How is all this link up to Yat Chan.....? I left that to VTM researchers and Chi Sim researchers.

yuanfen

05-09-2003, 10:57 PM

Rene- If The GM was young enough to attend High School in SF
and his father was a well known taichi and Chu family instructor-
and given his relatively young age
how could SF HFY if it is wing chun have roots in Canton?

yuanfen

05-09-2003, 11:03 PM

Rolling_Hand

05-09-2003, 11:36 PM

Originally posted by Yuanfen

Rene- If The GM was young enough to attend High School in SF
and his father was a well known taichi and Chu family instructor-
and given his relatively young age
how could SF HFY if it is wing chun have roots in Canton?
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Someone had explained that many times before.

The GM went to college in USA, not high school.

anerlich

05-10-2003, 12:22 AM

The sea appears calm so far, but I sense a tsunami of name-calling, accusation and counter accusation, and the rehashing of old arguments, building and ready to break in the near future ...

captain

05-10-2003, 01:45 AM

ya'll "discuss" too much.

reneritchie

05-10-2003, 04:42 AM

Grendel,

Thank you for being part of the solution!

1. I do not know if HFY franchises are available, nor what any investments in such an enterprise would bring. Before taking on such a large comittment, however, like any good businessman, you should do your due dillegence and perhaps try a sample class with Gee sifu first.

2. A quick search of www.uspto.gov revealed no trademarks registered in the USA for Hung Fa Yi or HFY

3. Unfortunately, being on the other side of the continent,I do not have any information on the signage outside the HFY school, however a quick look at hungfayi.com shows the words Wing Chun still unblemished.

4. This is the perfect thread!

5. Quite the contrary, we are attempting to divest of ego so as to achieve true and lasting results.

6. If you train SNT in the forest, and there's no one around to fight, are you still martial?

7. Gee sifu is Cantonese, and can teach his art in Cantonese (please don't allow the intervening pseudoculture to confuse you on that score). Beyond that, it is once again impossible to prove with absolute certainty, so lacking compelling evidence to the contrary, it becomes a matter of personal belief.

8. Gee sifu is 47 years old. According to Gee sifu, HFY was revealed to him as a child in the park in Guangzhou while he was training his family's system, Fujiquan from Fu Zhensong. He relates that he trained a few years around the age of 14, then more intensely for a few more years when he informed his sifu he would be moving to the US. If you have any firm dates on his alleged attendance at a US highschool, perhaps we can do the math and work out a more exact timeframe.

9. I have personally heard him say HFY the most, but this might just be more convenient than the longer HFYWCK. At this time, I lack better information on that subject.

10. Thank you for distinguishing between me, the HFY champion, who will make a real and sincere effort to share and build bridges, and the boosters who may or may not have similar motives. Personally, I believe the boosters, passionate and dedicate individuals though they are, lack diplomatic skills and allow their emotions to get the better of them. Perhaps this is understandable, and they can leave the thread for champions like myself who can calmly, clearly, and rationally, handle the public's thirst for information.

I hope this has given you a new hope for HFY understanding.

Respectfully,

reneritchie

05-10-2003, 04:45 AM

Hendrik,

Thank you for sharing your knowledge!

I am familiar with the accounts of Hu Hui-Chien, sidai of Hung Hey-Goon, who is reported to have brought Weng Chun Kuen to Guangdong province from Fujian.

However, as this is a HFY thread, if anyone wishes to discuss the unique and glorious art of WeCK, I encourage them to start their own thread, so this one may stay focused and on topic.

Respectfully with respect,

reneritchie

05-10-2003, 04:47 AM

Joy,

Thank you for your continued good graces!

Since I do not have dates for Gee sifu's alleged attendence of a San Francisco high school, I cannot give an authoritative answer to how, if at all, it constrained his timeframe for learning HFY. Gee sifu is currently 47 years old, and according to him, was learning HFY at around the age of 14 in China.

Respectfully,

reneritchie

05-10-2003, 04:49 AM

Rolling_Hand,

While I still have you on ignore and thus cannot read what, if any contribution you have made to my thread, due to past confusions your involvement had caused in relation to the HFY art, I respectfully request you leave this thread to me, the HFY champion, so that I might rebuild burned bridges and restore lost good faith.

Respectfully, etc.

reneritchie

05-10-2003, 04:57 AM

Andrew,

Due to my new capactity as the HFY champion, perhaps not surprisingly, I was blessed last night to spend a short time on the phone with Gee sifu. As per usual, he was polite, engaging, and showed humility and diplomatic skill unmatched.

Gee sifu made it very clear that he does not mind questions *at all*, and that he understands there will be questions and even criticism of his art and of himself personally since both are not widely known to the public, and skepticism is natural. Being somewhat traditional, Gee sifu prefers to get to know people before sharing with them, as he believes some of his information, especially concerning his martial family, is sensitive and involves their rights to privacy, and he understands that might also cause some frustration on all sides.

If any personal attacks are directed towards anyone asking questions of any kind about HFY, please understand it does not reflect Gee sifu's nature or wishes, and in fact, is directly counter to them. But more on all that later,

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate, and apologies to your team mate Luke for the stylistic pinching.

Respectfully,

reneritchie

05-10-2003, 05:04 AM

Train, William, Chango,

With greatest and utmost respect, please refrain from posting on this thread (and perhaps all threads here) and allow me, the HFY champion, to handle the pesky, often annoying little task of inter-communication.

While I pale to insignificance before your technical knowlege of HFY, I possess the diplomatic skills, as well as the quick wit and irresistable charm, to truly make a difference, if I'm allowed to.

There is much old baggage. Set it down for a while, grab a decaf, and let me build back the bridges, garner the good faith, and demonstrate a better, brighter strategy for y'all to adopt.

Respectfully, etc.

Your champion,

reneritchie

05-10-2003, 05:06 AM

Captain,

While your comments inject some perhaps well needed humor and irony, perhaps it would be best to keep this thread appropriately serious.

If you have any HFY questions, please don't hesitate.

Respectfully, cheerio, pip pip, etc.

captain

05-10-2003, 05:33 AM

rene:"away put your weapon,i mean you no harm"
-yoda-

i do have a question though.i saw gee doing a very high
bong sau,the sort that would stop a right hook.so a bong
can also be used for a jab AND a hook.?

Russ.

anerlich

05-10-2003, 06:03 AM

You know?? Sifu Chan's Student punching your sifu, knocking him back??

I heard about that too, as did everyone on the WCML about 7 years ago.

The general consensus was that it was a rather one-sided and probably embellished view of a discussion of punching mechanics, started rather rudely by the student mentioned.

Your efforts to take the moral high ground are rather undermined by your apparent desire to fight fire with fire.

canglong

05-10-2003, 09:22 AM

We have this...

Isn't this a HFY thread? What does Robert Chu have to do with HFY? I don't what his "relationship" is with his these people you refer to; nor do I care. But, thank you for your concern. TN Terence

"Thanks for the stories about Robert Chu. I sincerely hope that your skill and understanding in WCK has grown in the 20+ years since you all happened to attend a TWC seminar and that folks that knew you then and met you again today would be impressed with your progress. Perhaps looking at it that way might give you some perspective -- that none of us are the same as we were 20 years ago, including Robert Chu. We've all grown." Terence

then we have this...

Alright, I'm going to come clean too -- I'm really the head of HFY. See the attached photo. Terence

Terence, so your message is don't bad mouth my sifu, while I bad mouth yours? Very tasteless and clearly Mm Yan Chi Dai !

Savi

05-10-2003, 09:34 AM

Quite an interesting thread...

Is Rene representing the HFY family with true sincerity ? If so, he should also challenge those who give mockery to the family whom he is speaking for. If Rene's actions are indeed sincere, keep it up!

Da_Moose

05-10-2003, 09:42 AM

I am new to this forum, so I will be brief and just add my thoughts to what I have read thus far. I will also say that I am a student of HFY, so I may seem a little biased or emotional about what I write, but that is how it would sound anyway as many of the posts are designed to make any response to them sound inrrational or emotional, not logical or thoughtful.

Some of you claim to be champions/supporters of HFY, but how can this be so without any of you having studied it directly? I am just wondering. Some have honestly stated that they haven't studied the art, but they are supporters/champions of it. That just doesn't make any sense. I do believe you are champions/supporters of open mindedness and rationality, as well as logic and tolerance.

I do appreciate those of you who are trying to lead rational, mature discussions. Thank you, it keeps the reading fun and interesting. We do not need those who have yet to graduate from Kindergarten and can't yet lead/participate in a factual, rational discussion. Those of you making claims that border on insult to our lineage's ancestors and Sifu should cool it. These 'questions' or observations you have made regarding our heritage should be stopped if you yourself do not know the facts. Don't make the claim unless you can support it.

We HFY students do appreciate the attempts to keep this thread non-childlike and purely intellectual. Please keep up the good work! And please, if you haven't studied any HFY, don't try to answer the questions that pop up. We are perfectly capable of diplomacy. Simply ask one of us. We will answer to the best of our ability as we are still new to this system.

PaulH

05-10-2003, 10:04 AM

Okay Rene,

Since you are the undisputed champion of the HFY so far, I would like to ask these common discussion questions among the WC brothers. What drills or training devices do the HFY use to improve their fighting skills? How do they solve the problem of losing (i.e., position or structure, being overpowered by incoming force, being grabbed by someone stronger, getting choked in a head lock, getting kicked, being fingered jabbed, elbowed, head butted and tackled). In particular how do they train for these possibilities or do they cover these issues at all in their training curriculum? How do they fit in the HFY space and time context?

Regards,

yylee

05-10-2003, 10:17 AM

Hi Rene

Originally posted by reneritchie
.....revealed to him as a child in the park in Guangzhou while he was training his family's system, Fujiquan from Fu Zhensong....

Fu ZhenSong's BaGua was really famous in China. A WCK friend of mine happens to be training the Fu's KungFu these days, his BaGua Chuen Palm kind of reminds me of the high Tan Sau found in some WCK lineages.

The Fu's also has their own family Fu Gar TaiChi Kuen.

I have also heard the Fu's family members are still practicing/teaching in the park in Guangzhou today.

tparkerkfo

05-10-2003, 10:27 AM

Hi Da Moose,

You ask some very serious and thoughtful questions. I am glad all logical and critical thinking on this list hasn't been lost. I am also kind of excited to see two or three new HFY members to the list. It seems as if a good number are on the list now and are participating. Hopefully good will come of it. Rene has decided to help build the bridges and help with the PR and communication problems we have had in the past. I think he has done a fine and admirable job. No doubt there will be skeptics and it will be hard to convince some, Savi had questions, but I think his posts speak for themselves.

How indeed can people be supporters and champions of HFY if they never studied the art? That is touchy and hopefully Rene will lend his hand here. but I notice that HFY has always relied on champions that did not study the art. I was one once before the dark days and my fall from grace. Both Rolling Hand and Geezer have been supporters and neither studied the art, as far as we can tell. I am still trying to learn about more of our members so I am not sure if there are more on this list in particular.

Supporting and championing often do not require indepth knowledge, just a cursory overview. I think Rene has enough. We champion the words of Thomas Jefferson and the ideals of John Locke, but how many of us have studied either of them in any real detail? How many of you study the last president you voted for in any real detail. Support indeed can come from not having a direct involvement.

I am also glad to hear about Gee sifu's chat with Sigung Gee. It is nice to know that atleast he accepts the questions. Of course respect should be paid as it would be to any elder and shows good mo duk. He seemed very logical and showed critical thinking every time I met him. I hope that attitude spreads.

I am sure I am on the HFY dirty list because I asked some hard questions. My intent is percevied as bad, but it is not. I am trying to follow Rene's example, though it is difficult. But he has already answered several of my questions, and done so without attacking me, my lineage, or my financial situation. LOL. Heck, if this keeps up, I just may buy everyone a round of drinks!

Now for my question to Rene,

Can you explain a couple concepts to make sure I am on the right page and can understand further more difficult discussions regarding HFY.

1) Time and Space in a nutshell
2) Kiu Sau
3) Sam Moor Kiu
4) I forgot this one, but add anything that would fit.

Thank you Mr Masked Man!

JohnL

05-10-2003, 11:49 AM

Rene;

Thanks for the new approach to HFY.

I am a member of HFY and have found the training to be real, spontaneous, and complete. The bases for my feelings is that the use of the formula, when applied to my anatomical structure, provides me with the proper spacial configeration to reduce time in my movements. The reduction of space and time converts to a reduction of energy expended. I feel that these concepts are the cutting edge of technical martial arts and provide the best alignment for both attack and defense.

Again, thanks for the fresh start and I look forward to gaining better insights from reading your thread.

John Lambert

taltos

05-10-2003, 12:14 PM

Originally posted by tparkerkfo
Now for my question to Rene,

Can you explain a couple concepts to make sure I am on the right page and can understand further more difficult discussions regarding HFY.

1) Time and Space in a nutshell
2) Kiu Sau
3) Sam Moor Kiu
4) I forgot this one, but add anything that would fit.

I'm not sure if I'm invited to this party, but since I havn't had any conflicts with anyone and haven't been accused of being in "the mob," I'd like to take a stab at explaining facets of the system I currently train.

Some of this information (most of the Time/Space and Saam Mouh Kiuh) is paraphrased from the following article:

http://home.vtmuseum.org/articles/loewenhagen/jeung_ngh.php

[To give credit where credit is due.]

1. Time and Space in a Nutshell
The Time and Space Concept is used by HFYWCK to guarantee simultaneous offense and defense with pinpoint accuracy and optimum efficiency. It involves the training of martial self-awareness according to the HFY Wing Chun Formula: 1 CENTERLINE (the origin), 2 LINES of defense (depth), 3 REFERENCE POINTS (height), and the 5 LINE CONCEPT (width). Using these specific concepts and reference points (which are based on the practicioners own body), allows the practicioner to develop implicit awareness of the distances between each of their own body parts. In HFYWCK, you are taught that before any attempt can be made to precisely control an opponent's mass in motion while denying them the time and space required to react, one must first have control over his own structure throughout its movement in space and time. In HFYWCK one starts by aligning one's own body parts to provide an optimum mix of balance, strength and ease of use in relation to three-dimensional space. This is drilled extensively (until it is expressed consistently and automatically and calibration occurs instinctively). The practicioner then develops the awareness of an opponent's structures and flaws in relation to the practicioner's own space. Finally, Time is added to the equation and movement of one's parts within and through space is trained.

2. Kiuh Sau
Kiuh Sau is a training tool. It can also be used in application. When people who train Kiuh Sau speak of it, they can be speaking of it in terms of an exercise, or as a conceptual framework of combat, or as a learning tool for any number of purposes. Here is one way of looking at it.

Kiuh Sau can be a training tool that allows the practicioner to develop several abilities. One is the ability to set up one's structure when caught unaware without merely giving the opponent a second chance to hit by deflecting the attack without setting up properly (re: calibrating one's structure through use of the HFY Wing Chun Formula). This could be referred to as "getting a sense of reality," or "setting up your identity." Kiuh Sau can also give you precious time in combat by developing in the practicioner the ability to "sweep" entire gates of space when threatened without putting oneself in harm's way. This is done by developing the sensitivity needed to read the opponent at the bridge (in Kiuh Sau the forearm). This could be called "getting to know your opponent."

Chi Sau is not Kiuh Sau because when Kiuh Sau is done correctly, you are not in a position for the opponent to have a realistic time ans space to hit you. If your opponent is able to best your Kiuh Sau, you would then proceed to Chi Sau, which has it's own training tools and operational range/methods.

3. Sam Moor Kiu
Also called Saam Mouh Kiuh, this is a philosophical framework that describes three basic levels of awarenessn (from Floating/Wandering to Separate/Awareness to Eternal/Focus). These levels of awareness can apply to more than just hand-to-hand combat, but I will use the example of hand-to-hand combat as an illustrative tool, and put the SMK concept as it applies to mind and spirit aside for now.

HFYWCK practitioners are trained to recognize three different time frames/situations in relation to combat. The first is called Fauh Kiu (Floating Bridge). It represents the time during which one has no control of either time or space. According to HFYWCK, during this timeframe no part of the HFY Wing Chun formula is expressed in alignment or structure.

The second time frame is called Saan Kiuh (Separate Bridge). This timeframe addresses the conditions and results of having time, but not space, or having space, but not time. According to HFYWCK, any strikes landed during this timeframe are considered nothing more than "lucky strikes" because the practitioner could not guarantee the outcome.

The third time frame is called the Weng Kiuh (Everlasting Bridge) time frame. It represents complete control of time and space, allowing simultaneous offense and defense.

HFYWCK practicioners are trained to express Weng Kiuh, but are also trained to recognize when they are in one of the other timeframes in order to avoid illusions in combat and directly address the reality at hand.

I hope that helps, and was direct enough. It certainly does not cover the depth and breadth of the information, but hopefully is enough of a "quick and dirty" answer.

-Levi

Savi

05-10-2003, 12:29 PM

Levi, you are a true gem in our HFY family. :)

tparkerkfo

05-10-2003, 01:23 PM

Thank you very much Levi. Your responses have typically always been very rational and helpful. It will take me a while to digest what you wrote (pasted). I don't think anyone expects detailed information as it is difficult on the medium. Just the core of the concepts. These discriptions are maybe precise and accurate, however they are a bit convoluted and unclear. I think they can be simplified a lot so dummies like me can understand them. LOL.

Tom

Ultimatewingchun

05-10-2003, 01:28 PM

Okay...it really is time to clean about HFY.
No more secrecy...no more beating around the bush about it.
The real Grandmaster of HFY is.....

William Cheung!

See www.cheungswingchun.com for more details.

Savi

05-10-2003, 01:42 PM

Originally posted by Ultimatewingchun
Okay...it really is time to clean about HFY.
No more secrecy...no more beating around the bush about it.
The real Grandmaster of HFY is.....

William Cheung!

See www.cheungswingchun.com for more details.
I do not think that GM Cheung would attest to your statement.

Ultimatewingchun

05-10-2003, 02:45 PM

Remember the joke (back in the day) when people would say they never saw Superman and Clark Kent in the same place, and at the same time?

That's how it is with TWC and HFY...(Just change the names, dates, places and events of certain people and principles, drills, technigues, etc. - and you're in business)....but they still remain -

One and the same system - but the interesting thing is that one of the leaders of these Siamese twins can prove his claim to be teaching the system since 1972 and the other says he's teaching it since 1975 but can prove nothing of the sort.

One of them is a LEGEND back in Hong Kong (dating all the way back to the 1950's - do to his extraordinary fighting skills) while the other just sort of came out of nowhere in the late 1990's and has never done anything besides seminars and a few magazine articles.

One of them had no place in his association for a NEW and IMMEDIATE "leader"/curator type of guy and the other did.

And the rest is history!

All it really takes is a Masters degree in Marketing, fellas!
And the ability to keep a straight face while saying the most bizarre and amazing things!

Not a Master's degree in Wing Chun...just marketing!

anerlich

05-10-2003, 03:45 PM

apologies to your team mate Luke for the stylistic pinching

It's a lot harder to emulate Luke Beston since he became an in-law of the Gracie family. Maybe you could find a cutie amongst GG's relatives...

I personally consider it a serious crime in the martial community.

I agree it wasn't exactly respectful, but you do yourself no favours by using this sort of ridiculous hyperbole.

taltos

05-10-2003, 06:55 PM

Originally posted by tparkerkfo
Thank you very much Levi. Your responses have typically always been very rational and helpful.

Thanks. I do try to be available and helpful, and it's nice that people notice that.

Originally posted by tparkerkfo
These discriptions are maybe precise and accurate, however they are a bit convoluted and unclear. I think they can be simplified a lot so dummies like me can understand them.

I agree. When you have to explain something, you really get an idea of the nuances, and how well you yourself grasp the material. I was trying to answer all three questions and not go over a page (which I almost did), but I can see how the information could still be confusing.

I'd be more than happy to clarify any questions you have. As someone earlier pointed out, even the same words mean different things to different people, so it can be hard sometimes to give a quick answer without creating more confusion, since even "common" vocabulary can have different meanings to individuals.

-Levi

reneritchie

05-10-2003, 07:27 PM

Andrew,

Thank you for helping with the high rode. As to the original post, please remember this is strictly a HFY thread, and anyone wishing to discuss other sifu, Chan and Chung included, are welcome to start their own threads.

As to Luke Gracie, yes, he has set the bar perhaps impossibly high. I am an MA journalist (published), however, and I'm still single, so the other door remains open.

Thanks as always,

reneritchie

05-10-2003, 07:29 PM

Tony,

As HFY champion, I respectful request that you refrain from posting on this thread (perhaps all threads) so that my diplomatic skills may do some damage control. While I understand your passion, HFY being a new introduction has to take the high road, which I have already turned onto the onramp for.

Respectfully, etc.

reneritchie

05-10-2003, 07:31 PM

Savi,

Thank you for your question!

Please understand, however, I am *not* representing the HFY family. I am representing HFY. The difference is simple, yet profound. The HFY family is a group of individuals, HFY is an art. It is my intent, through this thread, to show a better strategy for engaging the WCK world, repair burned bridges, mend fences, and create a new, better perception for HFY, and I *sincerely* hope the old strategy and the the baggage that's been accumulated by it will be set down, grabbing of a decaf, and letting me get on with it.

Respectfully, etc.

reneritchie

05-10-2003, 07:39 PM

Da_Moose,

Since you are new to the forum, please let me introduce myself. I have over a decade of experience in WCK, almost two decades in MA in general, am a twice (not independantly) published MA book author, and multi-time MA magazine author (professional). I am one of the individuals who first publicized HFY (nee Hung Suen) to the English reading world through my co-authored book, Complete Wing Chun, and the reason many of the non-San Fran based people in the US heard of and developed an interest in the art. I am also humble and ravishingly good looking... But I digress. Since I helped introduce HFY to the English reading world, I feel somewhat responsible for its relationship with that world, but unfortunately I was negligent and allowed my attention to waver, and during my inattentiveness, bad feelings have arisen between HFY and some of the rest of the WCK world. I will now single-handedly show a better way to relate to others, and help set the HFY ship on a newer, better course to friendly relations.

That said, with the utmost respect, I now request that you allow me, HFY champion, to answer further questions on this thread, regardless of any exception you may take to their form or content. Our strategy is one of polite engagement, meeting frowns with smiles, and insults with courtesy. We will lead by example.

Gee sifu has personally told me he does not mind any questions, and understands due to the new introduction of his beloved art that there may be skepticism and criticism. If Gee sifu is okay with that, I am okay with that, and will use it to HFYs advantage.

Very nice to meet you,

Respectfully, etc.

reneritchie

05-10-2003, 07:43 PM

Paul H,

Please understand that, as I have said before, while I am the HFY champion, I do not study the art, and so cannot give detailed technical information on specific elements that may or may not be present. Perhaps it would help to consider this an introductory chapter, setting the stage, so to speak. When I have properly mended the fences, rebuilt the bridges, etc. and HFY students learn to model the example I set, hopefully we can proceed to further chapters that will address such specifics.

I am working on the crawl, walk, run model, and am still just pushing off the initial crawl.

I can say that the eventual answer you get will not be something alien or bizarre, but something involving the tools from the sets, actualized through the concepts and strategies of the art.

Thank you for your understanding,

reneritchie

05-10-2003, 07:45 PM

David,

Thank you for increasing the hit count!

Fu ZhenSong was very famous, and while he is Gee sifu's sijo, Gee sifu is currently concentrating on HFY, not Fujiaquan, and as this is a WCK forum, and a HFY thread, I respectully hope everyone can keep forcus and keep us on track.

Do you have any HFY questions for me to answer?

reneritchie

05-10-2003, 07:53 PM

Tom,

Thank you for participating! Your rehabilitation is going nicely! You're spot on! There is a long history of HFY supporters who (at least claim) no knowledge of or connection to HFY. Unfortunately, they didn't possess any diplomatic skills, which is a definate plus in a champion, so I have taken up the burden. Hopefully they will enjoy their retirement and feel free to pursue leisure activities while I mend the fences and rebuild the bridges.

Now for your questions!

1. I tried to help with this on an early post in this thread. Please see that post and if you have further questions, I will do my best to continue.

2. Kiu Sao are simply methods of bridging, but like many/most things in HFY, they follow a very systematic method of implementation and rigourous testing to help the student develop as optimal a response as possible.

3. Saam Mo Kiu are simply three stages of achievement, or understanding/accomplishment. There are many models for learning and application skill, both in western and easter culture, this one provides a nice way for students to measure an analyze their progress, from a state of not knowing, to struggling to understand, to effortlessly doing.

4. If you need to blend an oil and a vinegar, try adding some mustard to tie both together.

With respect,

reneritchie

05-10-2003, 07:55 PM

John,

Thank you for your unpurchased support! It is very refreshing and inspiring, and I hope I can live up to it!

As mentioned, we all learn and develop in different ways. Some people are visual learners, some kenetic learners, some must always go through a process to learn, and some just seem able to do things. For people who need and/or appreciate a very detailed proceedural approach to learning application skill, HFY certainly seems to fit the bill!

Respectfully,

reneritchie

05-10-2003, 08:01 PM

Levi,

As someone who has consistently risen above the din and strived to provide real information and develop real rapport, not only are you invited to the party, but there'll be no cover charge and your hand will be stamped (with an appropriately red flower emblem) so you may come in or out as you wish without the bouncers trying to double up on you!

And especially thank you for the very clear and informative replies to Tom's technical questions, which I am saddly uninformed about and thus not able to provide as complete an answer as possible.

If anyone has any confusion about the English terms used, I would be happy to try and filter some of it. Eg, if identity, as previously raised, causes confusion, think about it as optimal self structure, Sunzi's knowledge of self -- just getting your own body under control and in the best possible posture.

reneritchie

05-10-2003, 08:04 PM

Victor,

Thank you for upping the hit count!

I understand, based on past experiences, there is a lot of baggage, but this thread is an effort to start clean. If William Cheung sifu wishes to explore the connection, if any, between his art and HFY, perhaps it can be done in a detailed, step by step manner. Otherwise, I respectfully request that you stay with the question and answer format of this thread, and let us take the time to properly re-introduce HFY before we move on to more complex and potentially politcal discussions.

Crawl, walk, run.

Respectfully,

Da_Moose

05-10-2003, 09:46 PM

Mr. Ritchie,

Thank you for your welcome and brief history about yourself. I understand what you said about introducing HFY to the world via your book, but does that make you qualified to become its champion? As you told my sihing Savi :

"I am *not* representing the HFY family. I am representing HFY. The difference is simple, yet profound. The HFY family is a group of individuals, HFY is an art. It is my intent, through this thread, to show a better strategy for engaging the WCK world, repair burned bridges, mend fences, and create a new, better perception for HFY, and I *sincerely* hope the old strategy and the the baggage that's been accumulated by it."

I understand about the Family part, but I am somewhat confused about the Art aspect you mention? In your years of xp, have you ever studied HFY? If so, then by all means, represent the art, but if you have not, how can you truly represent it? No disrespect intended, but that's like me saying I can be an ambassador to the USA for Ireland simply because I have read about Ireland in the news, yet I have never visited the nation nor do I hold a citizenship there.

I understand what you are trying to do as far as 'healing' the bridges between HFY and the other styles, so to speak, but maybe you shouldn't use the word 'champion' to describe yourself, ie, HFY Champion. This leaves to many possible interpretations and potential problems just due to semantics. I know Sigung Gee welcomes any questions about HFY, but maybe he needs to be the one to be its 'champion' as he can more accurately answer the questions that arise. Perhaps you should become a HFY Liason instead of champion? ; )

I also understand your dimplomatic policy to be respectful to all here and maintain an intellectual forum free from insults and petty remarks. However, you'll find that many of the HFY members are very receptive to questions and such. We also posess many dimplomatic skills, but it may not appear so since some of the questions/observations posted here on the thread are tricky to answer without seeming vindictive or emotional at times. They make it so that almost any answer seems like we are being bullies or jerks, when we are simply answering the question.

Respectfully,

Da_Moose

CHS

05-10-2003, 11:08 PM

Okay...it really is time to clean about HFY. No more secrecy...no more beating around the bush about it. The real Grandmaster of HFY is..... William Cheung!

Victor P,
Please stop posting any unnecessary trolls on this thread as you don't add value to it. You don't really act like a sifu, at least on internet.

reneritchie

05-11-2003, 05:00 AM

Da_Moose,

Please call me Rene. Peer to peer conversation is tricky enough, layers of distance and relativism only more so.

I have not studied HFY at all, but I have met Gee sifu, and seen small demonstrations a few times. However, I believe the fact that I do not study HFY and am not a member of the HFY family is a *huge* asset on this thread as it allows me to engage in bridge building and fence mending without the emotional baggage that might otherwise (and historically has always) led to hightened tensions.

I am sure there are those in the HFY family with diplomatic skills, Gee sifu paramount amoung them, however his presence on the internet does not extend to this forum, and so he has thusfar left it to others to engage the WCK community, and those who have chosen to do so, while they may have many other excellent qualities, diplomacy has eluded all but 1 or 2 of them, and that has sabotaged even those 1 or 2 who would otherwise have done well (as its even threatened to do this thread!)

To be blunt, the strategy employed in the past has been with a few exceptions an abject failure. So I've turned the page, dawned a new day, hit next on the CD tracklist.

As to the term 'champion', if any confusion arises, I will politely and respectfully clarify, and being asked will only give me another opportunity to make a difference.

Believe me, this is a demand on my time and an expenditure of my effort, I would have been more than happy for someone else to have competantly and effectively handled this before, but nature abhors a vacume, (as most of us do anything that both sucks and blows in the behavioral sense), and so, this thread!

Respectfully, etc.

canglong

05-11-2003, 05:52 AM

"As HFY champion, I respectful request that you refrain from posting on this thread (perhaps all threads) so that my diplomatic skills may do some damage control. While I understand your passion, HFY being a new introduction has to take the high road, which I have already turned onto the onramp for." Rene

Fortunately or unfortunately however you would like to perceive it the hung fa yi members posting here have been riding the high road from day one, welcome aboard by the way. From Gee, Sifu on down to the newest student you will find nothing but amicable people posting with the utmost integrity and sincerity others would do well to understand that as well. The only noticable difference on your part is how you perceive and receive those comments. As for your advice or request on posting, we are all free thinking adults here so your advice and your request is niether desired nor warranted. A thorough understanding of that will be very instrumental in your transformation becoming complete.

reneritchie

05-11-2003, 07:03 AM

canglong
05-11-2003 12:52 AM This person is on your Ignore List.

While passionate and good-intentioned, passion often leads to heartbreak and good-intentions pave the road to he!!. It takes much effort to create, and unfortunately little to destroy, and words issue easily, but once issued cannot be taken back, and thus need to be considered and measured with the utmost care. However difficult to accept, it is not our desire which translates, only our results that matter. Therefore, for the good of HFY and public perceptions thereof, I respectfully suggest others follow my lead and place on ignore those who unintentionally do great harm to the image and reputation of HFY, which I am currently championing.

Yours in building a brighter future,

Respectfully, etc.

captain

05-11-2003, 07:22 AM

.this also proves that our weekends are simply not FULL enough..
..rene you seem to have gone "all official".....yes,you get the
lash often [even when you are simply helping out someone] ,but
you must not lose your humour....."when all about you.........."

russ.

Ultimatewingchun

05-11-2003, 11:08 AM

Things that TWC and HFY have in common with each other...but are not shared by other wing chun systems:

A second SLT form...with footwork... not found in other wing chun systems.

Chum kiu...look exactly alike, but very different than other wing chun systems.

Bil Jee...have yet to see the HFY version....(stay tuned).

Wooden Dummy...have seen just a few sections of HFY...looks exactly like the same corresponding sections in TWC - and different than other wing chun dummy sets.

Entry Technique: look exactly alike...again, not found in other wing chun systems.

Emphasis on the "golden rules" for parallel and cross leg foot placement vis-a-vis your opponent... exactly alike, but no such emphasis in other wing chun systems.

Emphasis on Blind side strategy (using primarily parallel foot placement)... look exactly alike - not emphasized in other wc systems.

Butterfly Sword applications...have seen several HFY applications...look exactly like TWC...but different than other wc systems.

Central line strategy (facing the point of contact with your centerline while blocking strikes and kicks)...look exactly alike, not found in other wc systems.

The corresponding sidestepping and T-stance footwork to support the above-mentioned central line blocking strategies and techniques...look exactly alike, but not found in other wc systems.

The NAMES used to describe some of the above-mentioned principles, strategies, and techniques may be different between the two systems (ie.- what TWC calls the central line may not be the same name used in HFY)...but the PHENOMENA is still the same.

Another example is the EMPHASIS on time, distance, and space elements and strategies referred to in HFY....a different "verbal" approach to the same principles and strategies EMPHASIZED in TWC...but not emphasized in other wc systems.

THE RESEMBLENCE BETWEEN THE TWO SYSTEMS IS ABSOLUTELY AMAZING...

Somebody has some explaining to do...Wouldn't you say?

It can be verified that TWC has been taught publicly since 1972 - but it cannot be verified (as of yet) that HFY has ever been taught to anyone prior to the late 1990's.

So I ask the rest of the wing chun community...With which Grandmaster/System does the burden of proof lie?

tparkerkfo

05-11-2003, 11:24 AM

HI Victor,

I see your points and I do also wonder about them, which is why I am perceived to be a HFY basher. I am trying to turn over a new leaf, but am finding it difficult to stay focused. Old habbits die hard. Your post is highly politcal and has enough explosives to rip this thread, and maybe forum apart. But it is still a good question. Maybe Rene can help defuss the situation before the space/time continum explodes, (Sorry couldn't help-gotta have some fun)

My assesment is Gee did NOT get that good from watching videos. I just don't buy it, and never had. But maybe we can clearify this up once and for all. Victor, Did GM Cheung put all this infomation onto video? I have heard that GM Cheung puts things in his forms so he can tell who learned what when, or something to that affect. Is there any of these items that you mentioned above NOT explained in detailed in a video? If he has info that has not been released there, but is similar to what TWC does, then we can rule out the video thing. If it is all on video then we are back to square one.

Tom

***********
Author's note- this is not an attack on HFY or Gee sifu. Please do not intreprete it this way. My intention is to rid the video question. Gee sifu has too much skill to be a closet video learner.
***********

Ultimatewingchun

05-11-2003, 12:48 PM

Tom:

Just about everything in the TWC system has been put on video at some point it time...although to be perfectly honest about it, many such videos are hard to come by because they were never released and sold to the general public as such...you have to know somebody to get a copy of them.

Contray to the impression I may have given out to some people -
I would prefer the outcome of these questions that have been raised to be one of actual proof offered and verified...

to the affect that HFY/Gee is legitimate.

Otherwise we will have a very ugly scandal on our hands that will adversely affect the whole wing chun community.

But nonetheless the questions raised and the search for answers must go forward...How can the two supposedly different systems look so exactly alike?

FIRE HAWK

05-11-2003, 02:07 PM

Geezer

05-11-2003, 04:04 PM

Firehawk Wrote>

Lets remember even if William Cheung learned some Hung Fa Yi his art also has Yip Man Wing Chun in it so it would be a mixture of Yip Man Wing Chun and Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun and Sifu Gee s would be straight Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun without any influence from other Wing Chun .

From what I understand GM Cheung claims his heritage from Yip Man and that he was taught a secret style that was only passed on to him!!!!???

Now Sifu Victor Parlati wants to make a connection between GM Gee and GM Cheung so bad it must hurt him inside, it's plain as day that GM Gee has been taught HFY as an underground member but Sifu Victor Parlati says this cannot be so because Triads never existed!!!???

Where did GM Cheung learn his TWC and why do we not see this in any of the other Yip Man students.....I'm sure GM Cheung wasn't his only favourite?????!!!!

FYI.....you are able to view ignored posts by clicking on the person and it will bring up his post....just incase you didn't know.

Sheldon

planetwc

05-11-2003, 04:29 PM

Where have you seen video of the HFY dummy and weapons?

reneritchie

05-11-2003, 05:31 PM

Victor,

Thank you for your questions. As I have watched a lot of Seinfeld, and my sister lived in NYC for two years, I'm familiar with New Yorkers, and while others may take your tone as aggressive, when passed through my state-of-the-art Cisco NYer filter, I'm able to understand and appreciate the love you have for your art, and the questions you have regarding HFY.

I have heard from others with TWC backgrounds that certain specific elements of HFY seem similar to their realm of previous experiences, including what you mention. As touched on before, there could be a variety of explinations:

1) Coincidence in evolution. Like with Lotus and Excel, two things intended for a similar purpose using similar parameters will turn out similar. This might seem unlikely, but not impossible, so I list it here.

2) Shared ancestry. Perhaps, one or more generations ago, there exists a shared teacher. This would require more detailed analysis to verify, as we would have to map out developments in the system(s) over time, determine which occur in both systems, which in only one, then figure out the most likely period for a shared ancestor, and examine who the potentials could be.

3) A recent connection. While Gee sifu and Cheung sifu both deny this, which makes it very unlikely, we must still realize and respect that they are entitled to their privacy and even if there was some connection, remote or close, they may not consider it any of our business. Again, unlikely, but not impossible, so it is listed.

As to learning from books or videos, I think even the TWC people who have met Gee sifu directly have related that he exhibited a level of skill beyond what they considered possible to learn by anything than direct, hands on means. Like plether, while it might look okay, its easy to distinguish it from something that really came from a cow.

Again, we are merely in the early stages of re-introducing HFY to the WCK community, and are in the crawl phase of crawl-walk-run. We need to proceed step by step, and carefully, to make sure we stay on solid ground.

Thank you for upping the hit count!

reneritchie

05-11-2003, 05:35 PM

Just a general thank you to those who have contributed to this becoming without a doubt the most successful HFY thread in history! Scafolds are up, teamsters are delivering supplies, sub-contractors are arriving lunchpails in hands (except for the requiste sicks and no-shows that are part of "doing business"), and work on the bridges and fences is commencing.

To those with questions, please continue to post them, and increase your beneficial feelings towards HFY.

Those with other agendas, be they within or without, thank you for controlling yourselves and keeping this thread as prestine as possible. Sabotage is just uncool.

Respect,

InfiniteApogee

05-11-2003, 06:31 PM

I'll re-ask a question here that was in a thread about don chi sau that mysteriously disappeared. It was the hfy group talking about their don chi sau and how it differs from everyone else. My question is this: what does hfy mean by directional and dimensional training and how are they different? All fighting ocurs in the 4 dimensions, so I would like to know how the hfy stuff is different. When they say they train "the truth" in 3 dimensional reality, and that the rest of us don't, what do they mean? Let's use their don chi sau as the platform so as to narrow the discussion. How do they use don chi sau, to control/realize/warp the space time continuim in ways different than other YM/YKS based wing chun.

Thanks
Clark

Da_Moose

05-11-2003, 07:55 PM

Clark,

What is the fourth dimension? Unless you are counting something metaphysical, I only know of three: Height, Width and Depth.
Please clarify the fourth.

InfiniteApogee

05-11-2003, 09:07 PM

Originally posted by Da_Moose
Clark,

What is the fourth dimension? Unless you are counting something metaphysical, I only know of three: Height, Width and Depth.
Please clarify the fourth.

Time is the fourth. You guys are talking about space and time, I thought that was understood.

Clark

reneritchie

05-12-2003, 06:44 AM

Clark,

Thank your for being part of the solution!

Of course we all exist in 4D timespace and since we do, and are bound by certain laws of such timespace, there are constraints upon what we can and can't do in Dan Chi Sao or anything else (or rather, a finite range of likely possibilities from which we can excluse the very unlikely ones like teleportation, flight, etc.) Further being that we are all (mostly) anthropomorphic, with two arms, two legs, a head on the top, etc. it further contrains the possibilities (where Subulba might stand on his hands and use one foot, we're standing on our feet and using one hand). Once we stand in front of each other and touch bridges (arms), we are even further constrained in likely possibilities.

The last level of constraint is goal oriented. While in the WCK we are all familiar with, sayings like Maximun results through minimum effort help further narrow the possibilities (for example, spinning around is considered inefficient), HFY enjoys very specific, very detailed, and very procedural concepts and excercises for determining what HFY considers to be the very narrow band of optimal possibilities.

Given the way they stand and the way they place their limbs, they test possibilities (challenges to their "identity" in trendy terms). It sounds like there is a whole mini-system of these to develop what they like to develop, and they consider it time and effort well spent.

Hopefully this has increased HFY's luminousity in your regions!

burnsypoo

05-12-2003, 06:53 AM

short power?

InfiniteApogee

05-12-2003, 07:20 AM

Rene
Thanks for trying to enlighten me. I still have trouble with what is meant by "directional" and "dimensional" strategies. Would there be a small example in don chi sau that you could think of to demonstrate the difference? Thanks for taking the time to try! I don't envy you ;)

Clark

reneritchie

05-12-2003, 07:34 AM

Clark,

Unfortunately, as a supporter, I have no technical knowledge of HFY, however, as a champion, my skills in diplomacy and logical reason are currently far more important.

Please don't let trendy terms used by some individuals confuse your appreciation for HFY. As I said, we're all in the same 4 dimensions, and need to move within a finite range of optimal directions, so its just HFY's specific, detailed, method of teaching a student how to discern and verify they are withing optimal movement ranges for themselves.

Imagine not being familiar with "the shortest path between two positions is a straight line" (valid in the scale at which we're opperating). Some might try to use terms like dimensional and directional and draw you graphs or holograms or sims or what not to try to explain it to you, give you a course booklet with excercises (no answers in the back!), set up little booths where you could try different scenarios, then have you give a resume to show that you understand. Others might just say "your fist, his face, 'nuff said". We all learn differently and all enjoy different methods and degrees of learning.

This time, hopefully more than the last time, the rosey glow is a rising....

reneritchie

05-12-2003, 07:36 AM

Eric,

I am unfamiliar with the rapper "Short Power". Was it an alias, perhaps, of Bushwick Bill?

pvwingchun

05-12-2003, 07:49 AM

Rene

Great job on mending fences and putting the scientific lingo into layman's terms. Since you have become the Champion of HFY things have gotten much more civil. I have wanted to wade into this debate before but in the past the the viciousness with which most were attacked for asking legitimate questions kept me from doing so. My Si Pak has recently become involved with HFY and I have been trying to learn as much about it as possible. Based on that I have a few questions for the HFY Champion.

1. Based on the article by Benny Meng about Style vs System, which states as I understand it that "modern day" WC needs to be reexamined and may not be a system after all, but more of a style (I think I got that right I briefly reread the article this morning), what is your take on the issue?

2. You have done a great job at breaking down what they say and using terms and explanations that most can understand, outside of the scientific terminology (which because of my background I understand) and breaking everything down to the nth degree do you believe that HFY is as different from other WC as it claims or is it simply a lineage difference and a natural evolution with the differences that occur as a result of an art that changed as it has been passed down through different ancestors?

3. I realize you are busy as most of us are but do you have any plans on researching the historical lineage of HFY based on the fact that you have already done research in this area and have a leg up on most others?

John

reneritchie

05-12-2003, 08:22 AM

John,

Thank you for being part of the solution!

I understand there might be hard feelings on many sides of past discussions, and hope we can move past them into a brighter, nobler, more cavity-free future!

Thank you for your unfunded praise, but I'm merely lending a helping hand, and it is the two shores of communication my bridge is building on which deserve the credit.

To your questions!

1. As this is a HFY thread and not a VTM thread, I would very much appreciate it if we could just focus on HFY and leave the writings and opinions of individuals, associated or not, out of it. Individuals will always act as they will act, and others will react as they will react, and we can't let either action or reaction mar the base impression of HFY or keep the larger audience from enjoying it.

2. I believe the "pseudo-scientific" terms are the attempt of one group primarily of a different culture and background than the originating art to come to better understandings of that art. In keeping with Quantum theory, of course, we cannot observe without altering, nor can one culture transmit another without leaving their own stamp on it. Were there a group of ranch hands in the Canadian mid-west, or a cadre of Apalachian hermits, or a coven of New England poets involved, doubtless other "languages" would be used for them to understand the art, which might be as much or even more confusing to the world at large. This thread, however, is taking pains to be stamp free, to stick to the basics, and while still tinged by English and by a Western focus, hopefully we can try and try again until a rounded, robust communication method is in place that will be accessible to the community at large.

To get to the second part of your question, this is a very deep issue and there may be difference of opinion. Some will contend there is one reality and everyone has their own unique perception of it, while others will contend there is no reality and only the intricate web of perceptions.

In the end, a wiser man then me (staff writer of Inside Karate back in the 80s, I think) said that since we're all similar beings (mostly human) engaging in similar endeavors (mostly MA for this discussion), existing in the same universe (we'll call it Prime for convenience and to stinguish from the evil universe of goatees and march music), there will by necessity be similarities in what we do. What will differ will be the individual. Arithmetic is a simple, pure science, yet there exist many methods for teaching grade school children their math (as any frustrated teacher dealing with yet another board mandated curriculum shift will tell you).

HFY, thus, has its own model for transmitting knowlege, and combined with its own beliefs on the optimal way of standing, holding its limbs, moving, etc. becomes a distinct entity all its own.

How distinct is a matter of personal opinion. Similarity and difference, like beauty, are in the eyes (and emotions) of the beholder. You can look and see difference if you choose to, and there are many for you to focus on, or you can look and see those elements in common, if that is your preference.

I used to own both Lightwave 3D and Imagine. They were for the same thing (3D animation) but I didn't like Lightwave and liked Imagine. I still like Corel and dislike Photoshop. Obviously, there must be some differences between similar things for similar purposes.

3. Unfortunately, I believe at this time not enough information exists for anything beyond personal, faith based belief or pure speculation, both of which can be empowering and fun, but do little for pure historical work. Hopefully, in the future, as more information on the culture of the time and place is available, and HFY has been established to the degree that Gee sifu can comfortably share more information, it would be a more productive endeavor.

Hopefully this has been a halogen bulb in the basement, etc.

Ultimatewingchun

05-12-2003, 08:26 AM

After rereading this entire thread I was impressed in ways not felt the first time around with some of Levi's technical remarks and with Rene's apparent sincerity - and I am also prepared to take Rene at his word about Garrett Gee's apparent openness to questions and scepticism - at least as a working hypothesis.

(Trolls like Geezer should not take that to mean any capitulation on my part to their "HFY is the one and only wing chun worth considering" routine, or that William Cheung, who is still a legend in Hong Kong and other parts of the world for his extraordinary fighting skills - has any explaining to do about TWC).

So I will shelve William Cheung's theory about HFY simply being repackaged TWC for the time being - and hopefully, forever.

Now returning back to my "What About This" post on the "THREE
POINTS ABOUT TWC THREAD" and updating it - I am now entertaining the following ideas:

1) TWC and HFY are the same exact system, albeit with different names to describe the same exact principles, strategis, drills, and techniques - and they are very different in many ways to all other wing chun systems.

2) Neither Garrett Gee nor William Cheung are guilty of fraud, misrepresentation, or collusion.

3) It was TWC/HFY that was the tightly-held and hidden system that EMERGED out of the "modified" wing chun lineage/system during the course of evolution...ie.- Leung Jan didn't suddenly invent "modified" but simply dropped the TWC/HFY elements when confronted with the idea of "having" to teach Chan Wah Shun.

4) I still maintain that Leung Bik/TWC... and/or... Leung Jan/TWC are somehow connected to those folks who eventually passed the HFY art down to Garrett Gee.

5) The secrecy aspects of TWC/HFY is an important clue, as I recall (and went back to check) the original interviews and magazine articles with William Cheung in the early 1980's wherein he publicly emphasized the "revolutionary" and secretive aspects of the TWC art as a clandestine attempt to raise an army and overthrow the Manchu government...Neither Moy Yat nor anyone else to my recollection before 1982 (William Cheung) ever emphasized this aspect of wing chun history, and now...

6) Beginning in the late 1990's Garrett Gee is publicly emphasizing the same historical origins of TWC/HFY and with greater detail about names, places, dates, events, etc. Without passing any judgment on the accuracy of Gee's accounts - I nonetheless find the "emphasis" very suggestive as regards the similarities to Cheing's accounts that actually started not in 1982, but rather in 1972 when he first started to unveil TWC to his students in Australia.

7) For Gee to "copy" William Cheung's TWC system (ie.- from videos, articles, etc.) and then add such an incredibly elaborate array of historical "mumbo-jumbo" would be the mark of a very sick mind filled with delusions of grandeur. How could any sane person expect to get away with such a thing?...Added to the fact that...

8) Gee appears by all accounts to be someone who does not exhibit any such behavior. (I will take this opportunity to suggest to his followers very strongly that they should follow his lead).

9) The extremely close technical similarites between the two systems should not be forgotten (see my post on this thread entitled "ABSOLUTELY AMAZING")...and now I will add even more to the list - which Levi's post helped to generate.

The Sam Moor Kiu framework within HFY, with its three stages of floating bridge, separate bridge, and everlasting bridge are an EXACT PARALLEL to the first three of TWC's 5 stages of combat theory as taught by William Cheung....the non-contact stage, the contact stage, (what HFY describes as being near the forarms); and when a little closer to the opponent - the exchange stage, wherein simultaneous sttack and defense is possible. (The other two are pursuit and retreat).

In addition...the issues raised about the HFY dan chi sao (height, width, depth, and time) ARE ALSO COVERED in TWC's advanced version of dan chi sao.

In conclusion, Rene's approach is a good one...looking carefully at HFY as a fighting art (and to a certain extent, looking at its historical/lineage claims)...is more productive than looking at its supporters behavior (I am not referring to Gee in this instance).

To reiterate: I think that the two systems are one and the same
thing...with some sort of a shared history somewhere along the line.

As to the museum and the shabby treatment given to all other wing chun lineages, Yip Man, William Cheung, Moy Yat, etc....
that's another matter entirely that Garrett Gee himself should address and rectify...not Benny Meng...but Garrett Gee!

pvwingchun

05-12-2003, 08:37 AM

Rene

Sorry about my faux pas on question number one I was relating it the statement that HFY is a complete system whereas WC is a style....and felt it an appropriate question. But I will defer to you wisdom and integrity and accept your answer as is.

John

Geezer

05-12-2003, 08:37 AM

Sifu Victor Wrote>

Trolls like Geezer should not take that to mean any capitulation on my part to their "HFY is the one and only wing chun worth considering" routine, or that William Cheung, who is still a legend in Hong Kong and other parts of the world for his extraordinary fighting skills - has any explaining to do about TWC

I like the way you accuse me of being a "TROLL" when you've done nothing but be Insulting and Rude towards the VTM and HFY organisation.

Sheldon

reneritchie

05-12-2003, 08:54 AM

John,

You are a gentleman and a scholar of the highest order!

Please understand, its not that I'm anti-semantic, just wish to separate the wheaty HFY from the chaffy linguistics.

With respectitude,

reneritchie

05-12-2003, 09:11 AM

Victor,

Thank you for your re-reading!

Please keep in mind, our movie feature has only just started, and its impossible to determine the conclusion before we've even finished the first act (for no dime-store scripters be we). What good would a Jessica Fletcher story be, after all, if everyone tried to figure out who done it, before anyone even knew what was done?

Crawl, walk, run. Until step by step has been achieved, and the larger picture drawn, no detail work or coloring can be started.

In hopes of clarifying, I do not believe Saam Mo Kiu are specifically for combat engagement. For this, HFY has "Five Battle Formation Facing Chasing Postures" which include Bai Jong, Intercepting Bridge, Sinking Bridge, Chasing Shape, and Recovering horse. Perhaps Saam Mo Kiu is involved in stages of understanding and achieving these Five Battle'Postures.

BTW- I do not believe Gee sifu has any controlling association with the VTM, other than them forming some of his student body. The actions of the VTM, good or ill, reflect the VTM, not Gee sifu, only Gee sifu's actions reflect his actions (naturally).

A torch in the tunnel, etc.

Ultimatewingchun

05-12-2003, 09:39 AM

Rene:

While it is true that Gee may not have"any controlling association"
with the VTM...the fact still remains that there are people who address him as "Grandmaster"...or "Sifu"... because he is their
instructor and LEADER..who do have "control" over the VTM.

If he wanted Meng to change the way certain things in the museum are presented to the world as fact (because he thought it would be the fair and honorable thing to do)...all he would have to do is say the word....would he not?

After all...the "facts" in question ARE ABOUT HIM AND HIS SYSTEM!

reneritchie

05-12-2003, 09:49 AM

Victor,

Thank you for continuing to up the hit count!

Grandmaster Gee told me that there are too many people in his family now for him to control how each and every one of them behaves. And again, since this is a HFY thread, I hope we can all leave the VTM out of it, and just concentrate on HFY, letting no other individuals or entities affect our warm fuzzy feelings...

Respectifully,

Ultimatewingchun

05-12-2003, 10:26 AM

Rene:
I don't quite understand your remark about "uping the hit count".
Please explain.

reneritchie

05-12-2003, 10:32 AM

Victor,

When you view a web page, in this case a thread, its called a 'hit' and a count of those hits is kept. For example, while this historic and groundbreaking thread only has 107 replies, it has 2318 views, or 'hits'.

I was thanking you for increasing those numbers of views, and since you were gracious enough to reply, probably by quite a bit.

Not a HFY question, I know, but I was formerly an Internet New Users champion, so I channeled my past self to briefly respond.

Respectfully, yadda, etc.

Ultimatewingchun

05-12-2003, 01:25 PM

Levi:

Rene seems to think that the parallel I drew between TWC's five stages of combat theory and HFY's Sam Moor Kiu framework (particularly the first 3 stages)...is not accurate.

I'm not so sure about that!...and I'd like to hear your thoughts on the matter.

reneritchie

05-12-2003, 01:28 PM

Victor,

To clarify, I stated that the Saam Mo Kiu might be a grandeur philosophy, and that HFY already had their own specific 5 stages of combat. Did you read up on them? If so, we could continue the conversation.

Yours in HFY illumination,

Respectanthood,

Ultimatewingchun

05-12-2003, 01:54 PM

Levi:

In reference to Sam Moor Kiu, you wrote:

"HFY practioners are trained to recognize three different time frames/situations in relation to combat. The first is called Fauh Kiu(floating bridge). It represents the time during which one has no control over time or space. According to HFY, during this timeframe no part of the HFY Wing Chun formula is expressed in alignment or structure."......

Now, Levi, compare that to the following theory put forward in TWC:

In the non-contact stage, since there is no contact with the opponents' body (or the space he occupies)...and since the distance is such that it would take more than one simple movement of one of your limbs to contact some part of his body and space,.ie- at least one "step" would be required to touch him (the contact stage)....to control the timing and to bridge the empty space safely requires lauching an attack first (ie.- the entry technique)...before he gets a chance to "steal the march" (and therefore he sets the timing of the encounter) and he begins to invade your space...(he gets the initiative - like the chess player with the white pieces who therefore gets to move first).

If you get my drift on this, Levi, and I highly suspect that you will, please respond...at which point I will give the parallels (in detail) as regards TWC's second and third stages of combat - in relation to HFY's Saan Kiu and Weng Kiuh.

taltos

05-12-2003, 02:40 PM

Hello Parlati Sifu,

The SMK philosophy of HFYWCK is more than just the first few stages of combat. As Rene pointed out, in HFY there are also 5 stages of combat, each dealing with pre, inter, and post contact in their own way, according to the strategies inherent in each stage.

As I said earlier in the thread, the SMK "levels of awareness can apply to more than just hand-to-hand combat, but I will use the example of hand-to-hand combat as an illustrative tool." I was only giving a SMK answer in physical terms because that was the basis of the first question.

So to answer your question in terms of the TWC information you provided, from what I understand of HFYWCK you can express the HFY Wing Chun Formula in your body in relation to the shared line of attack between you and your opponent without necessarily having contact. You could also fail to express the HFYWC Formula while in contact, while entering into contact, while regrouping, while attemting to follow, etc. Therefore, the three levels of awareness do not directly parallel the first three stages of combat, since you could conceivably be in any of the stages of combat and have no control, some control, or total control within each stage.

The SMK experience, to me, has more to do with your own honesty with yourself and your structure, technical knowledge, etc. Rene had mentioned earlier that the SMK progression could provide "a nice way for students to measure an analyze their progress, from a state of not knowing, to struggling to understand, to effortlessly doing." This very close to the core of the idea. In anything, be it philosophy, strategy, tactics, energetics, application, etc, you can wander blindly, have a notion of what you should be doing, and be able to consistently recognize and do the correct thing. The SMK philosophy gives me the ability to measure my progress.

-Levi

Mckind13

05-12-2003, 05:28 PM

Levi,

Would can you list all five please?

It looked like you said

face
change
break
chase
regain

Thanks

taltos

05-12-2003, 05:49 PM

Originally posted by Mckind13
Levi,

Would can you list all five please?

If you are referring to the 5 phases of combat, sure.

From http://home.vtmuseum.org/genealogy/hung_fa_yi/curriculum.php they are...

Baai Jong - (Place Post) - Facing and Set Up

Jiht Kiuh - (Intercept Post) - Intercepting the bridge

Chahm Kiuh - (Sink Bridge) - Sinking the bridge

Jeui Yihng - (Chase Posture) - Chasing/dominating the superior
position

Wuih Mah - (Recover Horse) - repositioning the horse for further attack

Together, they are called Ngh Jahn Chiuh Mihn Jeui Yihng (Five Battle Formation Facing Chasing Posture)

-Levi

Mckind13

05-12-2003, 08:23 PM

Thanks Taltos

Rene I want to be part of the solution... I at least want to get you to 5000 Hits :P

Maybe I could say something controversial.

Thanks

David

Chango

05-12-2003, 11:54 PM

I understand what you are attempting here Rene. It is apprecieated however to really enjoy or understand the precise measures HFY standards are set by one must have some in depth experience out side of the written format. I understand that your efforts are to help conversation along. However I also see where some assumptions are being made and alot is being lost. I think those who have such experiences will agree. I think Levi has made a great effort in bridging the gap however I still see where there is miscomunication Maybe you should consult with a HFY member before speaking for HFY. Just for the sake of accuracy. This will be great step in the right direct for better comunication.

Chango (saat geng sau) :cool:

desertwingchun2

05-13-2003, 01:26 AM

Sibak Chango, I most wholeheartedly agree! Seeing as how Rene has decided to put me on his ignore list I felt it counter productive to offer a similar suggestion.

Thank you from those of us who Rene has chosen to ignore under the guise of speaking for us. :confused:

-David

canglong

05-13-2003, 01:42 AM

David,

It would seem that our Champion has put rule number 4 on ignore, along with common sense as well. I left the last part of that phrase in since he has me on ingore too hahahahahaha:D

"4) Value those who disagree with you more than those who agree. As any writer should know, only the harshest criticism has value. The mutual admiration societies and philosophical rationalizers will hone your ego, not your craft." RR

Geezer

05-13-2003, 05:31 AM

David Wrote>

Thank you from those of us who Rene has chosen to ignore under the guise of speaking for us.

Funny really......he ignores those he fights for!!!!!???? ;)

Sheldon

Ultimatewingchun

05-13-2003, 06:39 AM

Levi:

You seem like a nice guy and I have an I.Q. of 130...which should be a good enough combination to dispell my bewilderment - because for the life of me, I just don't understand. What on earth are you talkin' about?
As regards the HFY fauh kiu (floating bridge), you want to run that by me again?
Please don't be esoteric...just straight talk!

In terms of combat: I am here, the opponent is there. Now what is the "floating bridge" and how does it relate to the two of us as we face off against each other?

reneritchie

05-13-2003, 06:45 AM

Victor,

I believe your confusion is as simple as apples and oranges. You're trying to force a comparison of two divergent things, the 5 stages of combat, and the 3 bridges, if you shift focus and start your comparison between the 5 stages of combat and the list of the HFY 5 stages Levi provided, it would be apples and apples, and probably very productive for everyone.

A zippo in the dark, etc.

reneritchie

05-13-2003, 06:53 AM

Chango,

Thank you for upping the hit count!

As long time (but currently ignored) HFY supporters Sheldon and Roger have shown, no technical knowledge is required to be universally loved and adored in this capacity. I am no HFY technician, granted, so think of me as a diplomacy and community relations consultant (and as we all can see, a highly effective one, able to accomplish more in one thread than whole continents in decades).

But this thread is not about me, your opinions of me, or anything other than HFY. On that topic, I believe we can never be too detailed or specific, and so we shouldn't be. This is an introduction, remember? We are rebuilding bridges, retarring roofs, repenning the herd. We need to work in manageable, bite-sized chunks. We need to *crawl* before we walk or run, and at this juncture, your HFY champion has determined that giving just a little idea, coarse though it may be, is far more beneficial than levels of detail beyond what is currently digestible.

Perhaps when this thread has done its job and relations have been repaired and people are willing to listen again, and the bed is properly tilled, more progress will be possible.

Now I respectfully request that you stick to the Q & A format of this thread, and either leave it for your HFY champion to manage, or become part of the the solution like Savi.

Respecticularity, etc.

tparkerkfo

05-13-2003, 06:55 AM

Hi Chango,

mmmm, I think you might have a point. Rene is not very technically savy with HFY as he has not studied it. So he is bound to make errors and not be precise. So, we can have a choice I suppose, let Rene continue the bridge building and have semi accurate information which is supported by Levi, and that leds to good communication and tames the list a bit. OR, we can shun Rene and go back to the highly accurate, technical world of HFY where every post becomes HFY centered and disputes run amok. For a change, I kind of like the current model. It atleast gets every one to listen. We can iron out the issues latter. Lets just chat and have tea for a bit. :)

mmmmm...Desert Wing Chun on an ignore list? Maybe I outta try that one. Then I can "mind my ways".

Tom

reneritchie

05-13-2003, 06:55 AM

David,

Thank you for wanting to be part of the solution! That is 21/45th of the battle!

On this thread, something controversial would be a good solid HFY question for me to sink my teeth into! Please have at it!

Candle in the wind, etc.

Geezer

05-13-2003, 07:57 AM

Rene Wrote>

As long time (but currently ignored) HFY supporters Sheldon and Roger have shown, no technical knowledge is required to be universally loved and adored in this capacity.

It's nice that you have crossed over to the side of supporters and it's a shame that you had not done this 3yrs ago......maybe I wouldn't be considered a Troll now but a lurking fan who is interested in what the VTM and HFY have to say.??
It seems you are very sincere in your efforts to mend bridges...I applaud you Rene Ritchie:D

Maybe now I can sit back and read your interesting posts as you champion the HFY practioners.....bravo Rene;)

Sheldon

Bright....Bright.....Light at the End of the Tunnel!!!!!

Geezer

05-13-2003, 08:00 AM

Rene Wrote>

but currently ignored

Rene......you're too curious by nature to simply ignore....me thinks......... that's what you would like us to think????

Again Rene......Bravo;)

Sheldon

Ultimatewingchun

05-13-2003, 08:02 AM

I'm not trying to force anything, Rene...I'm just trying to get Levi to answer my latest question.

But thank you for your concern.

Geezer

05-13-2003, 08:05 AM

Sifu Victor Parlati Wrote>

I'm not trying to force anything, Rene...I'm just trying to get Levi to answer my latest question.

You know what...you might want to try a different approach....I found I asked questions in a similar way to you about GM Cho On and it didn't get me anywhere.

May I suggest you follow Rene's lead.

Sheldon

reneritchie

05-13-2003, 08:25 AM

Victor,

I apologize for my inability to better communicate with you. What I was trying to say, perhaps badly, is that while you focus on comparing the 5 stages of TWC with the 3 Mo Kiu of HFY, you miss the easier step of comparing the 5 stages of TWC with the 5 stages of HFY. It is, perhaps, a more specific, first-step sort of conversation where you can get on the same page together.

To make a simple analogy using my critically raved vehicular model, you're focusing on comparing a car to a boat, when another car is sitting right there.

Laser pointer at a concert, etc.

reneritchie

05-13-2003, 08:29 AM

Tom,

Thank you for your continued support and encouragement!

I highly recommend the ignore list feature for a more enjoyable, productive, and litter free forum. If more people take advantage of it, I believe we can meet Kyoto accord energy conservation standards and then some!

This thread can even help set filter parameters. Examine it carefully, and anyone who has not stuck to the format, or has commented on the discussion rather than the issues, can simply be ignored, resulting in a clean, eco-friendly thread, where no dolphins have been harmed, and no preservatives added.

In then as always,

Ultimatewingchun

05-13-2003, 09:15 AM

Levi and Rene:

Perhaps it is I who has failed to communicate...I am no longer trying to compare the five stages of TWC to HFY's "floating bridge"
...I'm simply looking for an EXPLANATION of the floating bridge as it relates to combat.

reneritchie

05-13-2003, 09:26 AM

Victor,

It is my understanding the term floating bridge, while it probably can be applied to combat, is a grandeur term that provides and overall philosophy. A stage of learning/knowing/understanding, rather than a stage of physical exchange between two beings, if you will.

Perhaps if we try to overlay them onto combat, we could get floating being the stage of pre-skill, where you're left floating without knowledge, not yet with any strategy or experience. Like a kite when you've yet to grip the string.

San Kiu would then be a string still unsteady in the hand, sometimes catching the wind, sometimes jumping about, sometimes losing it. Weng Kiu would be the steadiest of hands on the string, making the kite one with the wind, until will and action were indistinguishable.

Philosophically, perhaps there's a Mo Kiu as well, when bridges are transcended, the kite is stringless, and everything simply is as it should be.

One handed man with a lamp, etc.

yuanfen

05-13-2003, 09:34 AM

FWIW- IMo there is a lot of dogmatism or bad theory about
actual combat.

I find an old saying helpful--
your adversary may have something to say about your plans.!

Ultimatewingchun

05-13-2003, 09:52 AM

Rene: The confusion arose for me when Levi originally tied it to combat..but in fact...the whole meaning of it was first intoduced to me back in 1975 when I first discovered Bruce Lee's teachings and sayings....I'll paraphrase:

"In the beginning, a punch was just a punch, and a kick was just a kick. After learning more.... a punch was more than just a punch, and a kick was more than just a kick. And after I learned the technique...I found that a punch was just a punch, and a kick was just a kick."

reneritchie

05-13-2003, 09:54 AM

Joy,

Thank you for your continued grace and hit count upigeness!

Yes, of course, the opponent, unless properly hypnotized or working a sanctioned WWE event, will certainly disregard any plans, carefully laid by mice or man. Its really just a percentages game. Train for 100%, perhaps get 50-75%, train for only 50%, maybe only get 20-25%.

And ounce of prevention, and all that jazz.

In respectination,

reneritchie

05-13-2003, 09:56 AM

Victor,

Thank you!

Yes, I remember the saying fondly, and even Martial Exemplar Bruce Lee was borrowing from the older "tree is just a tree, mountain is just a mountain". No wonder the oldies are the goodies!

Glad we could work our way through the confusion!

Red dawns, etc.

John Weiland

05-13-2003, 10:44 AM

Originally posted by reneritchie
Thank you for wanting to be part of the solution! That is 21/45th of the battle!

Admirable precision. :D

Cheers.

reneritchie

05-13-2003, 10:52 AM

John,

We are nothing if not sub-molecularly precise!

Particle-arily yours, 3rd star from the left, etc.

Ultimatewingchun

05-13-2003, 11:16 AM

Rene, you have too much time on your hands!

reneritchie

05-13-2003, 11:27 AM

Victor,

The scary thing is, I don't! I just have excellent time management skills, and the ability not only to multi-program, but multi-thread.

That and complete lack of sleep combined with the latest nutrition tactics from Dzu, and the miracles fall one, two, three!

A burning roach skittering across the floor, etc.

Marcos Hsiang

05-13-2003, 12:57 PM

After all, is there any objective, material evidence on how Grand Master Cheung's TWC is so different from the other Ip Man heirs, and why it's so close to HFY?
And has Cheung Sifu always been teaching this same WCK? If positive, are we to assume that Bruce Lee learnt some HFY from Cheung Sifu?
Hasn't anyone here enough access to Cheung Sifu or Gee Sifu so that this question could be directly addressed and clearly responded?
Thanx,

Hsiang

taltos

05-13-2003, 01:16 PM

Originally posted by Ultimatewingchun
I'm simply looking for an EXPLANATION of the floating bridge as it relates to combat.

Fauh Kiuh, as is relates SOLELY to combat, is when you have control of neither time nor space and you are not expressing any part of the Wing Chun Formula (Centerline, 2 Lines of Defense, 3 Reference points, etc.).

I had atated earlier, and you quoted, "The first is called Fauh Kiu(floating bridge). It represents the time during which one has no control over time or space. According to HFY, during this timeframe no part of the HFY Wing Chun formula is expressed in alignment or structure."

That's about as plain as I can make it. I'm sorry if that seems esoteric. If you do not have HFYWC Structure in combat (as defined by the HFYWC Formula), you would be said to be Fauh Kiuh.

-Levi

pvwingchun

05-13-2003, 01:24 PM

Please explain what you mean by controlling time and space.

John

taltos

05-13-2003, 01:24 PM

Originally posted by Ultimatewingchun
The confusion arose for me when Levi originally tied it to combat

Forgive me. I thought that my qualifying statement of that the "levels of awareness can apply to more than just hand-to-hand combat, but I will use the example of hand-to-hand combat as an illustrative tool" would be enough to express that this is just one way to view the SMK philosophy.

I realized later that there was some confusion, which was why I quoted myself when I explained that "As I said earlier in the thread, the SMK levels of awareness can apply to more than just hand-to-hand combat, but I will use the example of hand-to-hand combat as an illustrative tool. I was only giving a SMK answer in physical terms because that was the basis of the first question." I was sure THAT would clear things up.

I'll try again. SMK can apply to any facet of the HFYWC experience, from theory to training to application to skill/challenge to teaching to learning. It is simply the recognition of three types of knowledge: None, Some, All. Or Blind Faith, Testing, Proof. Or No Idea of What's Going On, Some Idea of What's Going On, Total Control of the Situation. Et Al.

I hope this cleared up any confusion.

-Levi

Ultimatewingchun

05-13-2003, 01:40 PM

Marcos Hsiang:

You need to check the very first post on the thread entitled UNDERSTANDING TWC...especially the part about "fork kiu".

John Weiland

05-13-2003, 01:54 PM

Originally posted by reneritchie
John,

We are nothing if not sub-molecularly precise!

Particle-arily yours, 3rd star from the left, etc.
Speakering wiuth such precisioneering impresses the Hades oiut oif meu iun aill fiuve diumensioniues and maikes evierything sio muich cleareir. :D (This is how I envision English in Zhuge Liang's oldest and bestest Wing Chun style.)

Following through on these fine points, Wing Chun has an important internal element. Does Hung Fa Yi have any internal component? Or, does it more closely resemble some other MA?

reneritchie

05-13-2003, 01:56 PM

Is it too early to humbly demand this thread be placed into sole consideration for KFO "thread of the year"?

Please make sure I am not unanimously awarded "poster of the year", however, for even though I have single handedly brought about peace in our space and time; have filled critics who used to bash the great art of HFY with warm fuzzy answers and all thing good; brought the glory of "ignore" to stalwarts of the "old guard" who like arms brokers made a leechy feeding off conflict; I am only a vassal (or vessal, whichever you prefer), and it is the art that matters.

And on that note, I would appreciate it if everyone, inspite of whatever celebratory carrousing they are engaging in, stays focused, keeps to our proven success formula of Q&A, and lets the quality keep on keeping on.

Respectamundo,

John Weiland

05-13-2003, 02:02 PM

Originally posted by reneritchie

And on that note, I would appreciate it if everyone, inspite of whatever celebratory carrousing they are engaging in, stays focused, keeps to our proven success formula of Q&A, and lets the quality keep on keeping on.

Respectamundo,
What's your question? Shouldn't you set a better example? Can I be a HFY Champion too?

Cheersamundo,

desertwingchun2

05-13-2003, 03:05 PM

Originally posted by reneritchie
David,

Thank you for wanting to be part of the solution! That is 21/45th of the battle!

On this thread, something controversial would be a good solid HFY question for me to sink my teeth into! Please have at it!

Candle in the wind, etc.

Rene - your sarcasm is duely noted. Your insults continue to shine bright, acting as a beakon to those with identity issues.

"quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by reneritchie

Thank you for wanting to be part of the solution! That is 21/45th of the battle!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Admirable precision. :D

Cheers." - John Wieland

-David

byond1

05-13-2003, 03:39 PM

...hey ren......hhmmmmm...please stay away from those burning roaches they will kill you...............;)

side note...have you ever met the nan anh guys around the block from ye?? ya know thee yuen chai wan school?? what is there slt like? (and to tie this into hfy champ) and how would you compare it to hfy slt? how about yks slt?
and where on earth is the "temple of the diamond" that supposidly ycw learned wck from fok bo???

passing_through

05-13-2003, 04:28 PM

Before you start learning, a punch is a punch. As you learn, a punch is not a punch. When you have learned, a punch is just a punch.

A punch is a punch - This is an example of Fau Kiu (floating bridge). Punching (and by extension, fighting in general) is something you just know how to do. It's an instinct. You're born with some idea of how to deliver a strike. Is it effective? *shrug* At this level of awareness, you don't really know and can’t evaluate (and don’t care). You're fighting based on instinct and emotion. People at this stage tend to have no awareness of time/space so they only think of how to maximize power - such as by drawing the fist back before throwing the punch.

A punch is not a punch - This is an example of Saan Kiu. You no longer think about emotion or instinct when punching. Punching becomes a certain time, space and energy. It's attributes - relaxation, power, focus, mobility, being dynamic. It's connecting the body - punch with the feet, ankle, knee, hip, waist, shoulder, elbow, wrist, finger. It's different strategic situations, different distances for different types of punches. It's very much more than just throwing a punch. This is why "a punch is not a punch" - it's all the various learning experiences and angles to understand "punch". You see through all the shades and learn.

A punch is a punch - This is an example of Weng Kiu, following after the previous two statements. From the outside, it seems that you're back where you started - you've come full circle back to a natural state. However, you're changed for having the Saan Kiu experience. A Weng Kiu punch and a Fau Kiu punch might look similar but they are worlds apart. Think of coming full circle but - instead of being on the same place (a flat circle) you've traveled up to a new place (a three-dimensional spiral). When seen from overhead, it still looks like a circle - but when seen from the side, it had a height.

The above only describes one example of Saam Mo Kiu progression – one of many within the system. There are layers within layers - Saam Mo Kiu experiences for learning individual components but also a Saam Mo Kiu experience going through the whole system.

passing_through

05-13-2003, 04:35 PM

In martial arts – as in all reality - people play many different roles. Trying to keep everyone happy is the unique role of the diplomat. Knowing what turns of phrase are required to get people to your way of thinking is a unique skill. For the soldier or the scientist, at some point a stand has to be taken. In the past there might have been more energetic exchanges of energy due to a focus on expressing truth. This will cause conflict. So, I commend the diplomats for paving the way to communication, however accurate it may or may not be. So long as there is a bridge, communication can be clarified later.

Kung fu in any medium other than personal experience, no matter how precise the terms used by the person explaining, will always lose something in the explanation.

Sincerely,
Jeremy R.

Marcos Hsiang

05-13-2003, 04:50 PM

Thank you, Victor Sifu, for your attention.
However I still carry these doubts regarding HFY and TWC:
1 - What's Cheung Sifu's allegations on why he's the only Ip Man's heir to teach such a different version of WCK, mostly considering it's similar to HFY?
2 - Why is such a version to be called the "Traditional" one? Would it have to do with Hung Suen/Hung Fa Yi being really the most traditional of the WCK systems?
3 - Could Gee Sifu have learnt his WCK from one of Ip Man's collegues under Leung Bik (considering Victor Sifu's statement on the other thread)?
4 - Why on earth none of Gee Sifu's sihings are openly known?
5 - Can you, Victor, ask Cheung about it?
6 - Can you, Rene or Chango, ask Gee Sifu about it?
7 - Can anyone answer anything for sure on this theme?

Hsiang

yuanfen

05-13-2003, 05:37 PM

samm mo kiu- sounds like experienced teaching common sense plus
unnnecessary jargon.

Chango

05-13-2003, 05:50 PM

Hsiang,

When you ask me to ask my Sigung GM Gee such questions. You really should know that he has said that he does not know GM William Cheung. The HFY lineage has been laid out for you. there is no connection to the Ip man lineage. Please keep this in mind when asking such questions. When more is brought to the front about HFY you will find that it is very different. I hope in the future you can have a first hand experience with a HFY member so you can see things for yourself. I still stand by the fact that no matter how much we type or write we can never have the accuracy that HFY information demands.

Rene,
I understand your point. I would not be so quick to pat myself on the back. I have to admit that your thread does stand well in the areana of polotics. (I mean this in the most respectful since) But we still have to ask ourselves are you building bridges or helping more people to make assumptions and assertions that will lead to more confusion? yes we have to take baby steps if you will
but make sure those steps are tward better understanding and not confusion. Once again maybe you can use you time managment skills to manage the time to consult with a qualified HFY member to help you not make such general statements or allow confusion to accure. I mean if you insist on being some sort of champion using the HFY name the least you could do is make sure that your information is accurate. This isn't about my opinion on you or yours on the HFY family. It's about being accurate. I hope you see my point here. :cool:

Saat geng sau

William E

05-13-2003, 07:27 PM

Hsaing

If you are new to this forum, then you are asking the same questions that have been asked/answered many different times in the recent past by Rene, Chango and myself.

Are there similarities between the different styles of Wing Chun? Of course there are… It is my belief that Wing Chun evolved from the same ancestors, thus there are similarities that are common to each style.

But if you are looking for a comparison of Wing Chun families, then I believe it is Chi Sim WC and Hung Fa Yi WC that have a strong connection.

Several of my kung fu brothers and sisters, with extensive experience in many different styles of Wing Chun kung fu, attended a seminar recently given in Ohio by GM Hoffman of the Chi Sim WC lineage. Chi Sim WC shared the same underlying concepts, philosophies (Chan Buddhism, Saam Moi Kui), history (both from wing chun tong), training methods (kiu sau) with the HFY Wing Chun lineage.

The hundreds of members that have come across the country to visit our kwoon can act as eyewitnesses regarding the information of our family tree and the many photos that are up on the wall of the kwoon. We have no obligation to show this information to the outsiders. That is a part of our family tradition.

If you are using this as an excuse to attack my family honor then your MO DUK is questionable. It may appear that I am sensitive about this issue but I'm very tiresome of the same people continuing to spread rumors / false accusations and who have nothing better to do than stick their nose other people's business.

William E.

Phenix

05-13-2003, 09:36 PM

Originally posted by William E

Several of my kung fu brothers and sisters, with extensive experience in many different styles of Wing Chun kung fu, attended a seminar recently given in Ohio by GM Hoffman of the Chi Sim WC lineage. Chi Sim WC shared the same underlying concepts, philosophies (Chan Buddhism, Saam Moi Kui), history (both from wing chun tong), training methods (kiu sau) with the HFY Wing Chun lineage....

If you are using this as an excuse to attack my family honor then your MO DUK is questionable. It may appear that I am sensitive about this issue but I'm very tiresome of the same people continuing to spread rumors / false accusations and who have nothing better to do than stick their nose other people's business.

William E.

Bill,

I agree with you about stick their nose on other people's business. Can you please explain how is HFY the oldest or Original WCK which was claim by VTM? Any FActual evidents?
Does Garret Gee support this claim?

IMHO, if HYF support VTM's oldest claim but cannot come up with factual evidents and legacy which can cross check with other chinese martial arts, will it not a continuing to spread rumors?

As for Chan and Saam Mo Kiu link, can anyone provide any factual evidetns.

Hendrik

John Weiland

05-13-2003, 11:37 PM

Rene, HFY Champion,

While doing research on HFY history, I found an apparent typo on the VTM website and sent them the following e-mail to bring it to the webmaster's attention:

Just FYI. On the VTM website, the following anomalies exist. Apparently, at least one is a typo. (One says 6th generation and the other says 8th.)

The Truth about Wing Chun's Past
http://home.vtmuseum.org/articles/meng/myths.php
Particular thanks must be given to Sifu Garret Gee (6th Generation) who represents Cheung Ng's legacy.

Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun's Two Track Approach to Combat Training
http://home.vtmuseum.org/articles/meng/hfy_two_track.php
A Note About the Authors: Grand Master Garret Gee is the 8th Generation inheritor of Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun Kung Fu.

Nice website, but I find it hard to navigate.

As I said, it is a nice website, but where is the research on which the articles and stories are based? Did I miss it?

Regards,

Chango

05-14-2003, 12:09 AM

Hello,
If I could share my experiences with the forum. I have just complete the instructor's course for Chi sim. I'm a member of the HFY family. So I have first hand extensive experiences with both systems. I cannot agree with you more William! These systems share deep connections!

I find that both system begin with the understanding of core Chan concepts. I'm very much aware of Phenix's protest as to what he conciders to be Chan. However I checked and cross checked these concepts with knowlegable Chan athorities. None the less I do not wish to debate the origin of these concepts. Both systems share these concepts and both systems point to Chan regardless of anyone's opinions on them.

I find that both have a "first hand expeince approach" both citing that one cannot ignore the realities of combat. be it ground fighting or long range kicking to striking and trapping. Both however also demand that one understands fully one's true identity. Both site the fact that one must manage his or her space looking beyond one's personal wants or needs or style at that point!

I found also that both systems shared reference points and used them in a very simular way! It is clear to me having first hand experiences with numorous families that these systems are very close and connected deeply! From not only a historical and phylosophic stand point but very much in training method!

Once agian I realize that we are all related as WCK brothers. How we are connected then becomes secondary.

Chango (saat geng sau)

Train

05-14-2003, 01:00 AM

I thought this thread is about mending bridges???

IMHO, if HYF support VTM's oldest claim but cannot come up with factual evidents and legacy which can cross check with other chinese martial arts, will it not a continuing to spread rumors?Hendrik

Here we go again :) I thought the people at the VTM had already explained it to you time after time. Why do you always bring up the same old question? Look Hendrik! Every lineage has their own history. No matter what kind of MA your studying, everone has different history. You don't have to believe it ok. It's like your theory on ermei 12 palms and crane style. Ok I read it, it could be true but what kind of real proof do you have to relate it to the WC history??? Who cares!! I guess people have to take your word for it because it's your family's history, right?? Why don't you call the VTM and ask for heaven's sake. write an email to the HFY head quarters or something and get your own facts. Trying to find out the truth from a forum is not exactly professional...... hmmmmm...... maybe you just want to stir something up.......

I don't posts that much here becuase some people do not like other people's opinions. but today I just have to say something.

For the people that doesn't like what the VTM is doing, I have one thing to say, I Don't See Anybody else Doing Something Like That For The WC community!!! Sifu Benny Meng spends a lot of his own time and money on the VTM and i think he has done a fantastic job. It takes years of commitment to do something like that. Unlike the people who does research on the internet and books on WC, Sifu Benny Meng has met the most top WC representitives around the world first hand. Who can say they have done something like that??

Get Over It People

committment

05-14-2003, 01:20 AM

Bill,

I agree with you about stick their nose on other people's business. Can you please explain how is HFY the oldest or Original WCK which was claim by VTM? Any FActual evidents?
Does Garret Gee support this claim?

IMHO, if HYF support VTM's oldest claim but cannot come up with factual evidents and legacy which can cross check with other chinese martial arts, will it not a continuing to spread rumors?

As for Chan and Saam Mo Kiu link, can anyone provide any factual evidetns.

Hendrik

Hendrik,

In my opinion, I believe that HFYWC is one of the oldest branch in the wing chun family. I also believe that the Chi Sim wing chun lineage goes back even further than the HFY lineage. We never claimed to be the oldest/original. Through the years of learning the HFYWC from GM Gee, never did I ever hear GM Gee claim the HFY lineage to be the oldest/original. GM Gee always tell us to respect all lineages in the wing chun family. We have our own history, and Hendrik, you have yours. FWIW, I also believe that your wing chun lineage is also one of the oldest branch in the wing chun family.

VTM is an independent organization that researches all branches in the wing chun family. It is an ongoing research Sifu Meng conducts year-in year-out for the last 10 years. Sifu Meng had traveled thousands of miles in making many trips to mainland China to get the information first-hand. And Because of that, I respect his findings.

Josh

Marcos Hsiang

05-14-2003, 05:13 AM

William,

I did not mean to attack your family, my questions are sincere.
Pehaps they are more related to TWC than HFY, because the one thing that I do not understand is why Cheung Sifu WCK is so different. This curiosity got bigger after that event with Boztepe, that took place some years ago.
I would like to check HFY but have no money to travel to the US right now.
Thank you anyway.

Hsiang

reneritchie

05-14-2003, 06:29 AM

Marcos Hsiang,

St'okay?

Since this is a HFY only thread, and not a general TWC discussion thread, please understand if I respectfully request you transfer the TWC elements of your question over to Victor's outstanding and groundbreaking TWC thread.

As to what possible connection, if any, exists between HFY and TWC, please see my spectacular response earlier in the thread, and if you have any follow ups, please don't hesitate.

A lighthouse on the foggy shore, etc.

reneritchie

05-14-2003, 06:32 AM

John,

Controlling time and space is simply a way of referring to control of relative position ensuring you have the easiest and quickest access to your opponent's vulnerable areas while they have the most difficult and time consuming access to your own.

I hope this response has increased your satisfaction with HFY's online presence,

Respectfully,

reneritchie

05-14-2003, 06:38 AM

John W.,

As this is a HFY thread, and not a ZLWCK thread, please forgive me if I don't consume valuable net realestate delving into a whole different subject at the moment.

As to you HFY question, while definitions for "internal" vary (neigong vs. neijia vs. groundpath vs. micromuscular vs. sanneihe vs the telekenetic/telepathic hybrid I dub telepathetic vs. etc.) it is my understanding HFY contains profound elements of what they dub "internal". I am not sure if this is separate from the martial training (ie. a separate exercise like Yijinjing), but I do believe the SNT I saw contained movements of a Qigong nature.

A pinhole camera through which to behold the eclipse, etc.

reneritchie

05-14-2003, 06:40 AM

John W.

My question was (and thank you for giving me the opportunity to repeat it), "Is it too early to humbly demand this thread be placed into sole consideration for KFO "thread of the year"?"

While it is something of a digression, it does have some fleeting flirtation with the relevant topic and format of this thread, but you're correct, I must truly and consistently strive to lead by better and more stupendous example. I will meditate on this....

Incense in the crockpot, etc...

reneritchie

05-14-2003, 06:45 AM

Brian,

Thank you for your consideration and concern!

Lest any misunderstand, I meant roaches as in the insects for which they were always spraying when I was in NYC (we get more earwigs than roaches where I live... shudder). Napalm seemed like a solution, hence the skittering...

But I digress again. Please don't encourage me off-topic, I need everyone's support to keep this thread pure!

As to Nam Ahn, while I have met some of his students, and know quite a bit about the background of Vietnamese WCK, since this is a HFY thread, please understand if I respectfully request we start a new topic to discuss that subject, and stick to HFY here.

As to the comparison you request, there is a great deal of variation among Vietnamese WCK, with those descending from the the ethnic Cantonese students looking much closer (as could be expected) to YKS than HFY, and those of the ethnic Vietnamese students looking unique in their own right, the result of integration with other material, etc., and unlike more or less HFY or anything else (except, of course, for the broad generalities we all share).

A bik that's been flicked, etc.

reneritchie

05-14-2003, 06:47 AM

Jeremy,

Thank you for being part of the solution! Please find your passport on this thread stamped with a provisional visa, and enjoy a complimentary cup o'joe for an excellent, bridge-building and highway extending reply!

WRT your caveat, the diplomat part is quite correct, the soldier and scientist not. Soldiers and for the most part scientists (unless they're self-funded and governed) do not take stands, they do as they are told to do, and follow the policy set by their (often not soliderly or scientific) superiors. They're tools (which is why they sometimes do have to take stands, at trials, for following the wrong policies). Perhaps captains of industry and government/community leaders would be more to the point, but of course they have situations all their own, and this is, after all, a HFY thread. 8)

Respectaculosity, etc.

reneritchie

05-14-2003, 06:57 AM

Marcos Hsiang,

1 - TWC material, please see TWC thread.
2 - (takes scoop of "Traditional Tsocolate Ice Cream" and scoffs it down). Shrug. Dunno, please see TWC thread and previous replies on this thread.
3 - I do not know if Gee sifu personally met his sigung, but he has never said he has reason to doubt his sifu, Wong Ming's claim that he learned from his own father, Wong Ting, rather than Leung Bik. And since its uncertain what Leung Bik's WCK, if any, looked like, its difficult to present a compelling case for that theory. So, while anything is usually possible, there's nothing at this point to suggest it.
4 - There were apparently only 3 sihings. We don't even know the names of all of Yip Man's sihings. We don't know the names of all Yip Man's students, and its the most popular branch on earth. Perhaps they don't fight a lot, and don't teach publically, or have careers that would not benefit from their being publically known or known as martial artists, or any of a number of other reasons, all speculative to be sure, but sadly that's all we have at the moment.
5 - TWC question respectfully for TWC thread.
6 - I will try to compile a list of pertinent, respectful questions.
7 - No, but that's for sure! 8)

A willow'whisp in the swamp, etc.

tparkerkfo

05-14-2003, 06:57 AM

Hi Chango,

This is not a personal attack at all, just a question. Please don't take offense to it. I am sure others will just by my asking.

How long have you studied Gee Shim wing chun? If I am not mistaken, You guys only have had a couple seminars. How can you be ready for an instructors course? I don't mean this in a confrontational way, just currious as it usually takes a long time to learn skills.

One reason this intrests me is because Eddie Chong too took short courses in Pan Nam's style. The major difference was that he spent several years on the Pan Nam system, and he trained for extended periods in China, not a couple weekends. After several years, finnaly started to teach the system.

Has Andreas packaged the art in such a way that makes use of your previous training and condensed the core of Gee Shim?

I find it facinating since I have distance problems to my school.

Tom

reneritchie

05-14-2003, 07:00 AM

Joy,

Thank you for upping the hit count,

We all have different means of communicating, of expressing ourselves and of achieving understanding. What might be quick for one person to pick up might be belabored for another, and what might be easy for one person to express, might be a thesis for another.

It would make sense that this is common sense, for if it were not, it would be senseless, and that would be senseless. Sensible things should be sensible.

As to jargon, we are all victims of jargo in one way or another. One person's simplicity is another's incomplete and one person's elaboration is another's needless complication. Find the level that suits you, pull on the speedo's, and jump in for a dip!

Halogen at the bottom of the pool, etc.

reneritchie

05-14-2003, 07:10 AM

Chango,

Thank you for striving to be part of the solution! And thank you for seeing my point. As to your point, I think that since long time (but currently mass-ignored) HFY supporters Sheldon and Roger always received unconditional support, admiration, and lusty thanks, and were never encouraged to seek but one honeyed drop of actual HFY information, I will be just fine.

No one understands anything with complete and utter precision, so really you're just asking to trade one level of lack of understanding for another, and while that might be prudent in the future, at this point, as you rightly point out so pointedly, we're still on baby steps (baby crawls, even more pointedly).

Please be patient, its a long road to hoe, but we are making steady progress.

Also, as champion, I hereby respectfully request once again that you remember we're not discussing me, we're discussing the great art of HFY, and your time, precious as it is, would better be spent earning your provisional visa like Jeremy.

Highway blinker 57, US1, etc.

reneritchie

05-14-2003, 07:14 AM

William,

As a direct student of Gee sifu, you are perhaps the most valuable resource on this forum. Since you find the repeated questions (which will probably always be echoed by new comers, much as TWC vs. WT, 50/50 vs. 100/0, etc.) please allow me to handle them with grace and dignity, while you share your vast technical knowledge of HFY along the rebuilt, structurally reinforced bridges being built before you.

Respectocity,

reneritchie

05-14-2003, 07:22 AM

Hendrik,

Thank you for upping the hit count!

If any direct HFY claims (as opposed to VTM claims, as this is a HFY and not VTM thread) are made about being the most original, it would only be a drop in the great waterfall of original WCK claims. With only the fewest of exceptions, I'm hard pressed to find *any* branch that hasn't at some point, under some practitioner, who hasn't claimed to be "the original" (not to mention all the other arts like wumei, fut ga, mui fa, etc. that have claimed to be the original, more complete versions of WCK). So, like PFL's "Northern Internal" orginal claim, or some of the others, all without any evidence but with the faith of their practitioners, we can simply view this as part of the culture, and not at all unique.

As for Chan and SMK, as this is a martial arts and not a religious forum, I respecfully request we stick to the martial aspects of the discussion, and anything else be redirected to the appropriate religous forums.

Bight eyes on bushy tails, etc.

Phenix

05-14-2003, 07:28 AM

Originally posted by Chango

I find that both system begin with the understanding of core Chan concepts. I'm very much aware of Phenix's protest as to what he conciders to be Chan. However I checked and cross checked these concepts with knowlegable Chan athorities. None the less I do not wish to debate the origin of these concepts. Both systems share these concepts and both systems point to Chan regardless of anyone's opinions on them.

......Once agian I realize that we are all related as WCK brothers. How we are connected then becomes secondary.

Chango (saat geng sau)

IMHO,
It is the responsibilities of the claimer to show the legacy and the teaching of Chan with fit the sutras. Until then it is claim and not a fact yet.

reneritchie

05-14-2003, 07:29 AM

John W.

As this is a HFY thread, and not a VTM thread, while I'm sure they appreciate pointing out the error, I would prefer to stay focused on Gee sifu and HFY the art, and eliminate even the potential for any other individual or group to effect perceptions of him, or them, be it negatively or positively.

As to what, if any research supports the material of the VTM or any other group, that is likewise outside the scope of this thread. It's my understanding Gee sifu teaches the HFY, but his students are too numerous now for him to control, and can communicate or further elaborate as they wish, so unless something comes directly from Gee sifu, we should always be careful not to let it effect our perceptions of him or of HFY.

Respectaffle,

reneritchie

05-14-2003, 07:30 AM

Chango,

Thank you for sharing! Please find your provisional visa for this thread stamped and approved. As HFY champion, I am warm and fuzzy over the excellencing in communication being instigated herein!

reneritchie

05-14-2003, 07:33 AM

Train,

Thank you for upping the hit count!

Respectfully, however, if you cannot handle questions, even ones that annoy you, with grace, humility, humor, tact, and a skillful mastery of the single entendre, please either supress your desire to post on this thread so as not to pot hole our beautriful new highway or sway our still under construction bridge. Our ignore lists, after all, are growing far too long (even if they lend the threads a spiffy polished look!)

Firecrackers beneath the lions feet,

Geezer

05-14-2003, 07:34 AM

Rene Wrote>

As to your point, I think that since long time (but currently mass-ignored) HFY supporters Sheldon and Roger always received unconditional support, admiration, and lusty thanks, and were never encouraged to seek but one honeyed drop of actual HFY information

How do you know????

If you're trying to ignore me???.......then why keep bringing my name up:confused:

Anyway please reference my earlier post,

Sheldon Wrote>

It's nice that you have crossed over to the side of supporters and it's a shame that you had not done this 3yrs ago......maybe I wouldn't be considered a Troll now but a lurking fan who is interested in what the VTM and HFY have to say.??

Bravo Rene......Bravo

Sheldon

The Original.......not a Biter!!!!!!

reneritchie

05-14-2003, 07:35 AM

Josh,

Thank you! You along with Levi, IMHO, are the future of HFY's online presence. You serve as beautiful examples of what is possible when questions are engaged with sincerity and a firm commitment (pun only midly intended) towards making things better!

Cheers!

(And in my experience as well, Gee sifu talks extensively about respecting all lineages).

reneritchie

05-14-2003, 07:37 AM

Tom,

Thank you for upping the thread count!

Respectfully, however, since your question is about the long distance learning of Andreas Hoffmann sifu's Weng Chun system, perhaps you could start a thread about that? Even if you wish to explore long distance learning of HFY, it would probably be better in a separate thread.

Highbeams around the curve, etc.

Phenix

05-14-2003, 07:54 AM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Train

"Here we go again :) I thought the people at the VTM had already explained it to you time after time. Why do you always bring up the same old question? Look Hendrik! Every lineage has their own history. No matter what kind of MA your studying, everone has different history. You don't have to believe it ok." ---train?

I am asking for facts to support the claim is that ok? Explain is great but explain is not factual evidents. Certainly Every lineage can have thier own history. However, when one lineage claim thier history is the oldest. It is ok others to ask them to show the factual evidents? HS

" It's like your theory on ermei 12 palms and crane style. Ok I read it, it could be true but what kind of real proof do you have to relate it to the WC history??? Who cares!! I guess people have to take your word for it because it's your family's history, right?? " ---Train

Sorry, it is not my theory. It is the legacy and inheritance from 1800's.

As, I said it before I do NOT make claim for other lineage.
However, for Yik Kam's WCK. ALL THE FACTUAL EVIDENTS ARE THERE. THE KUEN KUIT FROM 1850, THE CROSS KUEN KUITS OF OTHER SYSTEM. THE TOPOLOGY.....

Since this post is about HFY, I guess I can ask the question about why HFY is the oldest and expect to have evidence. If VTM or HYF is expecting me to accept thier "oldest" claim. Then, it is also the responsibilities of VTM and HFY to show as much factual evidents as what I have. Not explaination but factual evidents which can be traced. That is fair isn't it? HS

"Why don't you call the VTM and ask for heaven's sake. write an email to the HFY head quarters or something and get your own facts. Trying to find out the truth from a forum is not exactly professional...... hmmmmm...... maybe you just want to stir something up......" ---Train

This is a Post for HFY right? so why get defensive? We talk about technical nothing but technical. So what is professional? A few post ago, I go as far to post Surangama Sutra. You attact me and my Chan sifu's temple..... So who is professional and who is not?
who stir things up who shows factual evidents? HS

.

"I don't posts that much here becuase some people do not like other people's opinions. but today I just have to say something."--train

That is your choice. However, still it is a technical discussion. and opinion has to be back up with evidents right? HS

"For the people that doesn't like what the VTM is doing, I have one thing to say, I Don't See Anybody else Doing Something Like That For The WC community!!!" ---Train

I don't see people dont like what the VTM doing. What I see is people like to see the factual evidents which back up the VTM's the olderst claim. -HS

"Sifu Benny Meng spends a lot of his own time and money on the VTM and i think he has done a fantastic job. It takes years of commitment to do something like that. Unlike the people who does research on the internet and books on WC, Sifu Benny Meng has met the most top WC representitives around the world first hand. Who can say they have done something like that?? " --Train

Certainly, everyone will agree Benny Meng is admirable.

WCK community is a large community.
So, it doesn't mean there is only one person in the whole WCK community who is doing research. in addition, there are alots who did researh and don't make a cents out of the research.

Not to mention, there are people with lineage legacy, factual evidents, and more then decades not years of seaching and verifying.

reneritchie

05-14-2003, 08:09 AM

Hendrik,

Thank you for upping the hit count.

Did you perhaps miss my previous message? If so, please read it then closely adhere to the slightly less than fanatical guidelines I have set for this thread, and start one of your own if you wish to trod down other paths.

Once again, this is not a VTM thread, not a Benny Meng thread, not a Hendrik thread, not Train thread, not a Yik Kam thread, not a spool of thread, not a silver thread for astral travel, but a HFY-only thread.

The shining light of totalitarianism, etc.

Phenix

05-14-2003, 08:11 AM

Josh,

"In my opinion, I believe that HFYWC is one of the oldest branch in the wing chun family. I also believe that the Chi Sim wing chun lineage goes back even further than the HFY lineage. We never claimed to be the oldest/original.

Through the years of learning the HFYWC from GM Gee, never did I ever hear GM Gee claim the HFY lineage to be the oldest/original. GM Gee always tell us to respect all lineages in the wing chun family. We have our own history, and Hendrik, you have yours. FWIW, I also believe that your wing chun lineage is also one of the oldest branch in the wing chun family." -- Josh

Certainly you can belive and have the right of belive that HFYWC is one of the oldest branch.

As for claimed, to be the oldest/original. If you read Benny and Richard's VTM article in KungFu Magazine. There you can see black and white. May be Garret didn't aware about this.
If so, May be Garret wants to clearify that is just VTM's view not Garret's. HS

"VTM is an independent organization that researches all branches in the wing chun family. It is an ongoing research Sifu Meng conducts year-in year-out for the last 10 years. Sifu Meng had traveled thousands of miles in making many trips to mainland China to get the information first-hand. And Because of that, I respect his findings."

Certainly, Benny is admirable.

However, if VTM makes a claim. Then VTM has to show factual evidents. It is about responsibility and integrity right?

Hendrik

Geezer

05-14-2003, 08:25 AM

Hendrik Wrote>

As for claimed, to be the oldest/original. If you read Benny and Richard's VTM article in KungFu Magazine. There you can see black and white.

Is that in the latest copy???

Sheldon

reneritchie

05-14-2003, 08:30 AM

Hendrik,

While I enjoy your posts tremendously, your continued flouting of my most polite and respectful request for you to stay on topic and follow the Q&A format of the this thread, keeping with HFY and not delving into the VTM or Chan or any other off-topic subject, will force me, very reluctantly, to place you on ignore so as not to soil the magnificence that otherwise dominates this thread.

Dwindling tail lights on the horizon, etc.

Phenix

05-14-2003, 08:32 AM

Rene,

Certainly you are right.

my question is if ------ HFY CLAIM it is the OLDest WCK?

and Josh gave me a great reply.

Seems like HFY didn't make the claim it but VTM did.

Hendrik

reneritchie

05-14-2003, 08:38 AM

Hendrik,

Thank you for seeing the light!

Again, we must be careful to distingush what is said directly by Gee sifu, and what is communicated by others from the own cultural identities.

So, since you have Josh's reply, and you *know* this is not a *VTM* thread, but a *HFY* thread, I'm positive you're positive you will positively be positive from now on, correct?

HFY only please, Q&A only please.

Fog lights coming around the curve, etc.

pvwingchun

05-14-2003, 09:09 AM

Rene

Your answer is much appreciated and it is as I thought, but with the use of the terms "controlling space and time" I thought it might have some deeper meaning but it is simply using different terminology for what we do…..

Now while you are doing an admirable job of answering questions and shining a light in a dark tunnel I am somewhat disheartened by the fact that some f the HFY posters on here did not step up and answer the question as you did. It would have gone a long way in opening up the floodgates through which a free flow of info could pass. But with time I am sure that this to will come to pass. That said you are doing a fantastic job a keeping the lines of communication open and putting old animosity to rest.

You sir are a national treasure and as such should receive worthy praise.

John

reneritchie

05-14-2003, 09:23 AM

John,

While this thread is not about me (I am but an instrument), I appreciate your astute observations about treasuriness and all things praise worthy.

Since we are not in the realms of the before mentioned telepathicness, nor do I believe anyone is claiming any freaky mind powers or worm hole utilizations, we're left with the real world we all exist in, and hence, there will be overlappage in our methods for doing similar things. However, I must metronome like point out that while things can be similar, there can also be differences in the details (both God and the devil live in the details, I've heard, and one assumes not in the same neighborhood therein, rent control, gated communities, etc.). HFY has very specific, very procedural, very detailed methods for determining, according to their preferences, how they do things, and other people's mileage varies.

As to the HFY family, I do not represent them, I represent the art of HFY beyond them. Like you, I hope all of them take up the sterling example set in this thread and become part of the solution, and some already have, offering excellent peeks into the HFY techniques and methodology, but I impose my will on no one (only my "ignore" settings) and so to each there own, as long as they fully understand how others might misperceive their lack of good faith involvement.

In fireworks over the boardwalk, etc.

John Weiland

05-14-2003, 12:33 PM

Hi Rene,

Originally posted by reneritchie
John W.

As this is a HFY thread, and not a VTM thread, while I'm sure they appreciate pointing out the error, I would prefer to stay focused on Gee sifu and HFY the art, and eliminate even the potential for any other individual or group to effect perceptions of him, or them, be it negatively or positively.

I did acknowledge that the thread is HFY, not VTM. :) I ascribed the inconsistency to typographical error, but I don't know enough about HFY to be sure. Has the generation number stayed consistent over time? I was only trying to follow your good example by reading up on GG and HFY.

As to what, if any research supports the material of the VTM or any other group, that is likewise outside the scope of this thread.

Not off the hook that easily, Champ. :D I was seeking info, not on the VTM, but on HFY.

It's my understanding Gee sifu teaches the HFY, but his students are too numerous now for him to control, and can communicate or further elaborate as they wish, so unless something comes directly from Gee sifu, we should always be careful not to let it effect our perceptions of him or of HFY.

I think I'm beginning to see. Is this another function of time and space? Perhaps a secret teaching?

Respectaffle,
Likewise, with all dube respect. :p

John Weiland

05-14-2003, 12:44 PM

Hi Rene,

Upping the hit count, if nothing else, couldn't you just put a question mark at the end of Hendrik's statements and provide the answers? He is axing relevant questions isn't he?

Wouldn't your job as HFY champion be easier if the VTM or GG's own website contained some of the answers to the many historical, technical, and other questions?

Reading the VTM website is interesting, but don't you get hungry for more information an hour later?

Can I get a visa now? :p

Regardsarama,

reneritchie

05-14-2003, 12:49 PM

John,

Thank you for following up!

There are 2 possibilities that do not require me to delve too deeply into things VTM

1) Typo
2) Because the VTM has inserted more generations in between Cheung Ng and Hung Gam Biu, they have moved Gee sifu down the generational ladder accordingly.

As to supporting research, I have not yet seen any presented by any individual or group to support any third party articles by any individual or group relating more or less to HFY. That does not mean said research does or does not exist, or will or will not exist in the future, or will or will not be presented if it does/will exist when and how.

As to secret teaching, anything we did not previously know was a secret from us, and anything we learn from someone or something else is a secret. Not all secrets are good, not all learning welcome. If someone insists on practicing commando style beneath their funky kung-fu PJs, for example, that's a secret I wish never to be taught or even hinted at in comic reparte. To each their (properly contained) own, however.

Now that this post has functioned to take time to fill up some space, a diode on the fritz, etc.

t_niehoff

05-14-2003, 12:52 PM

Rene,

You truly are the HFY champion! Can you explain a few things to me? Some have alleged that HFY has been passed down -- for hundreds of years -- unchanged. Is this claim true? And if so, how is this possible? And is there any evidence to support this claim?

And can you explain how HFY has some of the same terminology that has by all accounts, except those of HFY, been considered unique to Yip Man WCK -- Baat Jam Doh, Siu Nim Tao, etc.?

Thanks,

Terence

reneritchie

05-14-2003, 01:00 PM

John,

Thank you for your repeated and continual uppaginess,

WRT Hendrik's ?s, as HFY champion you may remember me from such previous posts as "it is difficult to speak of facts when dealing with people and events so long ago and far away", and "most lineages at one time or another have made claims of being the original", and the re-run-almost-as-much-as-f'n-Sound-of-Music, "this is not a VTM thread."

My job as HFY champion would be *much* easier, nay clearly effortless (paper cuts aside) were there a HFY encyclopedia direct from Gee sifu. Absent that, it would still be a relative cake walk were people to clearly differentiate between fact (what they can prove beyond reasonable doubt unto a moral certainty) and belief (what they hold true absent definitive proof), and if, in general, everyone would focus on turning those frowns :( upside down :) .

The VTM website reflects the unique culture of the VTM, their beliefs, their ideas. While I do surf that and other sites on occasion, I always get sufficient protein and simple carbs from wingchunkuen.com to stave off after surfy munchies!

Respect II - The Humble Appreciation Continues!

reneritchie

05-14-2003, 01:14 PM

Terence,

Thank you for continuing the solution!

As Obi-Wan (Ben) Kenobi so brilliantly said, you will find many things are true given your point of view. From reading some of the HFY posts, its my understanding that HFY is more an idea or guideline than an act (though acts spring from the idea/guideline) and it is this idea which some of them (not sure if its actually HFY or just the VTM again) claim is unchanged.

This is possible if the parameters are kept relatively simple. Of course every individual (we are not machines of perfect replication - thankfully given the events in T2 or Matrix!) will naturally be a little different than the fellow or lass down the line, but if we pare away as much as possible, certain constants will remain. While cars have changed a great deal, if we look at them as platforms with 4 wheels, not so much since the days of carts and wagons. While porn continues to get more and more fringe, the Kama Sutra covered the basics of the heterolsexual dynamic ages ago. In other words, manifestations change far more rapidly than core essances.

Evidence to support this, unfortunately, is non-existant as there are no other known HFY schools stemming from branches other than Gee sifu, so cross-checking remains impossible. Likewise, we can't prove its different for the same reason. Thus, we are left only with our own beliefs. Of course, the matter of whether its changed or not is really minor and only of interest to ethnic relic collectors.

As to HFY's terminology, Gee sifu explained at the second Friendship Seminar (in which you were in attendence at for), that in an effort to make his art more accessible to others, he'd adapted some Yip Man terminology. Presumably his direct students, those with no prior WCK experience from other lineages, would not need this transitory assistance.

Hopefully this has buffed your appreciation of HFY to a new level of shininess!

planetwc

05-14-2003, 02:22 PM

Josh,

Most of the "uproar" around HFY came from the very articles written in Kung Fu Magazine, where it was claimed that HFY was the oldest, original Wing Chun system. These articles were written by instructors under Benny Meng and profiled him and his research into the system etc.

Therefore, while those claims may not have been made by Gee Sifu, they certainly were made by Meng Sifu and Lowenhagen Sifu.

On this forum others from the HFY student community in Ohio and Arizona have opined that Yip Man's art was not a system such as HFY but merely a personal expression etc. etc.

Then there was all sorts of wonder from the HFY community about what the fuss was about--when the Yip Man system was "dissed" in the eyes of many of that lineage.

However, when questions regarding the other students of Gee's own Sifu were asked it was considered insulting. This in itself was rather odd, as the very claim by HFY is that it has such a well documented and vibrant unbroken connection to the past. Presuming that is so, why would it be an insult to ask about the breadth and depth of the student population, Gee Sifu's peers and his si-hings?

Yip Man's connection up to Leung Jan is clearly established as are his si-hings and fellow students. As in turn are the relationships between students of Yip Man and so on.

The HFY community came on strong in magazine articles, in web pages on the VTM site and here on this forum with their beliefs and opinions--but presented as unchallengable FACT. It appeared as though they expected others outside their system to simply accept without proof any and all of their claims.

This thread itself was an attempt to bridge between the marketing of the KF/Qigong article, previous posts here etc.

As many claims were made about how HFY was the older original true Wing Chun, without providing enough factual details on these claims.

Most of the attempts to ask this information of people who have studied both Moy Yat and Garret Gee's systems for comparision did not lead anywhere. Instead what was presented was the cantonese terminology internal to the HFY system.

So I would say most of the controversy started from the HFY/VTM attempts to publicize their system.

You might want to track down the original articles and read them, as well as some of the posts here on this forum.

If I decided to say that I was the lineage holder for the oldest truest and original Wing Chun and that furthermore my art was a true system, which was more precise in it's scope and expression as opposed to what Garrett Gee or Benny Meng taught, you might find that insulting. If at every turn when you asked about core concepts I came back with my own buzzwords and how they were deeper and superior to what you did with your mere sam mo kiu, and that I had 8 battle theories which trumped your 5...

I think things might degenerate rapidly.
If when I was pressed to divulge my teacher and his teacher, and said instead that it was secret and to ask further about my Sifu and his background was insulting, well I think we wouldn't get very far.

Hopefully, you get a flavor from the other side of the equation of where things ended up in the ditch so to speak.

Originally posted by committment
Bill,

I agree with you about stick their nose on other people's business. Can you please explain how is HFY the oldest or Original WCK which was claim by VTM? Any FActual evidents?
Does Garret Gee support this claim?

IMHO, if HYF support VTM's oldest claim but cannot come up with factual evidents and legacy which can cross check with other chinese martial arts, will it not a continuing to spread rumors?

As for Chan and Saam Mo Kiu link, can anyone provide any factual evidetns.

Hendrik

Hendrik,

In my opinion, I believe that HFYWC is one of the oldest branch in the wing chun family. I also believe that the Chi Sim wing chun lineage goes back even further than the HFY lineage. We never claimed to be the oldest/original. Through the years of learning the HFYWC from GM Gee, never did I ever hear GM Gee claim the HFY lineage to be the oldest/original. GM Gee always tell us to respect all lineages in the wing chun family. We have our own history, and Hendrik, you have yours. FWIW, I also believe that your wing chun lineage is also one of the oldest branch in the wing chun family.

VTM is an independent organization that researches all branches in the wing chun family. It is an ongoing research Sifu Meng conducts year-in year-out for the last 10 years. Sifu Meng had traveled thousands of miles in making many trips to mainland China to get the information first-hand. And Because of that, I respect his findings.

Josh

planetwc

05-14-2003, 02:32 PM

Oh Champion,

So Gee Sifu learned from Wong Ming Sifu.
Wong Ming learned from his father Wong Ting Sifu.
And Wong Ting learned from who?

taltos

05-14-2003, 02:39 PM

Originally posted by planetwc
So Gee Sifu learned from Wong Ming Sifu.
Wong Ming learned from his father Wong Ting Sifu.
And Wong Ting learned from who?

This has been posted several times before, but here it is again...

http://home.vtmuseum.org/genealogy/hung_fa_yi/family_tree.php

This is the "family tree" of HFYWCK as presented by the VTM.

Southern Shaolin Temple
Wing Chun Tong
Yat Chum Dai Si
Cheung Ng
Chan Jing Lin
Chan Sai Yuan
Chan Boh Jung
Huhng Gun Biu
Cheung Gung
Wang Ting
Dr. Wang Ming
Garrett Gee

I hope this is what your were looking for.

-Levi

Mckind13

05-14-2003, 03:08 PM

Rene,

Historicly how is Huhng Gun Biu recorded in the Red Boat Records.
Who was he, What was his expertise, his seniority and where did he come from geographically

Is there a significance to the name in in Secret Society, Red Boat legend or history?

What does the name mean?

I am curious because HFY seems to attach HGB to the same period as Lueng Yi Tai, Wong Wa Bo etc...

Champion of the 5000 hit thread

David

John Weiland

05-14-2003, 03:41 PM

Originally posted by taltos

This has been posted several times before, but here it is again...

http://home.vtmuseum.org/genealogy/hung_fa_yi/family_tree.php

This is the "family tree" of HFYWCK as presented by the VTM.

Southern Shaolin Temple
Wing Chun Tong
Yat Chum Dai Si
Cheung Ng
Chan Jing Lin
Chan Sai Yuan
Chan Boh Jung
Huhng Gun Biu
Cheung Gung
Wang Ting
Dr. Wang Ming
Garrett Gee

I hope this is what your were looking for.

-Levi
More in the interest of higher continued uppaginess than anything else, how does the above represent Garrett Gee as the Sixth or Eighth generation "grandmaster" of HFY? In other words, where does the counting of "grandmasters" begin?

Also, seriously (or serially) are there dates that correspond with these names?

How did Garrett Gee recieve ordination as the grandmaster of HFY? Does anyone know if this is acknowledged by his siheng/sidai?

I study from a fourth generation student of Yip Man (although technically he could call himself a first gen student as a classmate of Bruce Almighty, but declines to recognize that distinction). Yip Man taught in HK for what? About 25 years give or take. In that time, there were already students who were teaching in his lineage, most of whom never declared that they were grandmaster or master of allmightiness or anything other than "sifu." Generations in Wing Chun seem to be shorter by half than the twenty year norm that demographers use.

So, in addition of questioning the title of grandmaster, shouldn't there be a whole lot more generations represented in the lineage of HFY?

Continuuingly seeking a solution to the deepening....mystery.

Regards,

planetwc

05-14-2003, 03:43 PM

Yes it was. Thanks!

Originally posted by taltos

This has been posted several times before, but here it is again...

http://home.vtmuseum.org/genealogy/hung_fa_yi/family_tree.php

This is the "family tree" of HFYWCK as presented by the VTM.

Southern Shaolin Temple
Wing Chun Tong
Yat Chum Dai Si
Cheung Ng
Chan Jing Lin
Chan Sai Yuan
Chan Boh Jung
Huhng Gun Biu
Cheung Gung
Wang Ting
Dr. Wang Ming
Garrett Gee

I hope this is what your were looking for.

-Levi

t_niehoff

05-14-2003, 05:39 PM

Rene,

Thanks for your informed answer. Truly, HFY is lucky to have such a champion as you! Are you being paid for such a service?

In any event, could you answer yet another question. In one of the HFY articles by the VTM staff (**** Loewenhagen, I believe), it was stated that HFY was the combat method for Hung Mun. Is this accurate? If so, why isn't HFY more widespread than just California, Ohio, and Arizona?

In a related question, does HFY claim to be a "superior fighting method"? If so, are there any known fighters that have used HFY successfully (as Leung Jan, YKS, etc. have in other lineages), and if so could you provide details?

Thanks,

Terence

Mckind13

05-14-2003, 09:09 PM

Hit Count 4120

Common everyone help get Rene to 5K

Thanks

David

yuanfen

05-14-2003, 09:17 PM

Sure

Phenix

05-14-2003, 10:03 PM

Originally posted by taltos

Southern Shaolin Temple
Wing Chun Tong
Yat Chum Dai Si
Cheung Ng.....

-Levi

I have a question on this above...

IMHO,

In the legend or myth of Southern Shaolin temple.

It is said that Hu Hui-Chien who is the student of Jee Shim practice his martial art in WEng Chun Tong (Hall). ANd Hu Hui-Chien's set is Fa Kuen....... thus his kungfu was named as Weng Chun Kuen which is based on Weng Chun Tong.

How is this link to Wing Chun Kuen which uses Siu Lien Tau as the based or core? That is a different type of core.
FaKuen is not SLT.

IMHO, the more I look into the story of Weng Chun Kuen. The more I think HFY has a great possibility a sister art of Jeeshim Weng Chun Kuen which Hu Hui-Chien is their ancestor. and the founder is Jee Shim and since Jee Shim is also sifu of Hung Xi Kuan. Thus, Jee Shim Weng Chun also is a sister art of Hung Kuen.

Jee Shim--- Hu Hui Chien (Weng Chun Tong, Weng Chun Kuen), Hung Xi Kuan (HUng Kuen) -----> Jee Shim Weng Chun Kuen, HFY

but, this is a different type of art DNA compare with Wing Chun Kuen which is from Ng Mui.

So,
Jee Shim ----> WEng Chun (Tong) Kuen (Fa Kuen .. Chong Kuen..as core)
Ng Mui ------> Wing Chun Kuen (Siu Lien Tau as core)

What do you all the history researcher think? IMHO,
high Probably, finally, we all find out WingChunkuen is not Weng Chun Kuen and all are just mis communication from the past. Since Hu Hui chien's weng chun kuen exist so not too difficult to compare and verified? Similar to White crane wing chun will verify Wing Chun Kuen. ?Thus, what Cheung Ng learn is Weng Chun Kuen. and in red boat exist both type of art which have different dna. VTM needs to look into this IMHO.

reneritchie

05-14-2003, 10:16 PM

Just returned from the unfortunate experience of seeing Matrix Reloaded (avoid it at all costs) and it will take me a while to repurge and reload my standards for acceptable movie fare. Replies cometh with the morrow!

Green text in vertical scrawl to oblivion, etc...

azwingchun

05-14-2003, 10:18 PM

Rene this is a HFY thread can we please keep on topic?!?!? ;)

John Weiland

05-14-2003, 11:42 PM

Originally posted by Phenix
I have a question on this above...

IMHO,

In the legend or myth of Southern Shaolin temple.

It is said that Hu Hui-Chien who is the student of Jee Shim practice his martial art in WEng Chun Tong (Hall). ANd Hu Hui-Chien's set is Fa Kuen....... thus his kungfu was named as Weng Chun Kuen which is based on Weng Chun Tong.

How is this link to Wing Chun Kuen which uses Siu Lien Tau as the based or core? That is a different type of core.
FaKuen is not SLT.

IMHO, the more I look into the story of Weng Chun Kuen. The more I think HFY has a great possibility a sister art of Jeeshim Weng Chun Kuen which Hu Hui-Chien is their ancestor. and the founder is Jee Shim and since Jee Shim is also sifu of Hung Xi Kuan. Thus, Jee Shim Weng Chun also is a sister art of Hung Kuen.

Jee Shim--- Hu Hui Chien (Weng Chun Tong, Weng Chun Kuen), Hung Xi Kuan (HUng Kuen) -----> Jee Shim Weng Chun Kuen, HFY

but, this is a different type of art DNA compare with Wing Chun Kuen which is from Ng Mui.

So,
Jee Shim ----> WEng Chun (Tong) Kuen (Fa Kuen .. Chong Kuen..as core)
Ng Mui ------> Wing Chun Kuen (Siu Lien Tau as core)

What do you all the history researcher think? IMHO,
high Probably, finally, we all find out WingChunkuen is not Weng Chun Kuen and all are just mis communication from the past. Since Hu Hui chien's weng chun kuen exist so not too difficult to compare and verified? Similar to White crane wing chun will verify Wing Chun Kuen. ?Thus, what Cheung Ng learn is Weng Chun Kuen. and in red boat exist both type of art which have different dna. VTM needs to look into this IMHO.
The jig is up! Hendrik is on to us. Hide until the coast is clear. We can restart the church later somewhere else. :p Be sure to protect the sacred scrolls. :p

Hendrik: Aren't you tired of always being right? :D

Rene: Which of the southern Shaolin temples is the right one? Or are historical claims not to be considered?

Uppingly yourin,'

mun hung

05-15-2003, 12:26 AM

Wow! Been gone for a little while, and now Rene's the HFY champion? Everyone must give Rene credit for trying to calm the WC waters.

I do have a few questions of my own:

If the art was traditionally kept a secret for such a long time - why did Garret Gee decide to break this tradition?

If HFY was "battleground tested" why is there so little on it? Would'nt it be more widespread? Which battles?

What purpose does the HFY "bai jong" (tan and gum) position of the hands serve? Particularly the gum sau? (I was told that it was gum and not wu) Where is the "pressing" energy being directed and why? Sideways in "bai jong"? Why not forward energy with something else?

These are genuine questions.

reneritchie

05-15-2003, 06:54 AM

David W.,

Thank you for your continued good will!

Wong Ting learned from Cheung Gung. I don't remember exactly, but they may have had a famial (uncle?) relationship as well.

A projector in a darkened theater, etc.

reneritchie

05-15-2003, 06:56 AM

Levi,

Thank you for your continual positive contribution. Grace under fire is a rare, but incredibly valuable gift, and it more than keeps on giving.

Respectatrix,

reneritchie

05-15-2003, 07:20 AM

David W.,

I understand your frustration and the frustration of other wrt how HFY has been portrayed both online and in the media, but I also understand the frustration of HFY as to how its been perceived as well.

With prolonged disagreement comes a sense of dehumanisation with regards to those we consider "on the other side." Since everything seems to clear and reasonable to us, we make ourselves believe those "on the other side" by definition can't be clear and rational. This can take many forms, with accusations of brain washing, cultlike behavior, conspiracy theories, or imagined "boys" bands. Step back, and all of them are equally absurd, but within the unique, almost mob-like mentality of the argument, they seem to make sense.

The solution? Keeping that step back, keeping that objectivity. I'm sure many in the WCK community felt offended by how HFY was portrayed online and in the media, just as I'm sure many in HFY were offended by the reaction to what they felt they were sharing.

Understand, we all love our respective arts and all think very highly of them (otherwise we'd probably be doing something else) and its only naturally, especially in the early days, when the love is so new, to get a little carried away, and also to respond defensively when others get carried away.

I have no doubt some members, perhaps most or even all, of the HFY family believe their art to be the greatest thing since the invention of linked sets, to be original, best for combat, most scientific, etc. And I have little doubt most people who aren't HFY members think just as highly of their own arts, which is why they become so defensive.

Sure, everyone makes claims. There have been some wild Yip Man articles in the past, first that Yip Man was the one true best lineage, and then arguing among themselves who was the one true best teacher/master/fighter in that lineage. And there have been articles promoting Pao Fa Lien (Northern Internal WCK), Vietnamese WCK, Fut Sao, and almost every branch in the same way.

What's the difference with HFY, then? Pattern.

We've all fallen into one and can only see the cause on the other side. One side feels the other continually makes unsubstatiated claims of superiority and the other feels the one continually engages in biased attacks against them. Neither accepts responsibility, and therefore neither can change.

Quite frankly, much of the bickering is silly. Historical cultural martial practices are analogus Apalachian Folk Pottery or Aboriginal Flute Making. Those involved take them deadly seriously and those that aren't don't even know about them, much less care. They aren't past due heating bills, the kid's college fund, the late mortgage payment, the lapsing health insurance for a sick parent, etc. They're histroical cultural martial practices and while there's some investment involved (usually ego, sometimes money) they pale to insignificance in the light of real, life, death, and wellbeing, issues.

Thus the need for this thread, and to be blunt, the need for me, Champion with Pattern Remover!

The HFY family are not a bunch of crazy cultists out to convert everyone by the sword, they are people, just like you and me, who love what they do with deep and abiding passion, and they do their best, and they make mistakes, and they don't always understand disagreement, but they remain people, sons and daughters and brothers and sisters and mothers and fathers, and regardless of flavor, fellow martial artists.

Those who question HFY are not a bunch of crazed conspirators out to defame HFY by any means necessary, they are people, just like you and me, who love what they do with a deep and abiding passion, and they do their best, and they make mistakes, and they don't always understand disagreement, but they remain people, sons and daughters and brothers and sisters and mothers and fathers, and regardless of flavor, fellow martial artists.

It will be very difficult to break old patterns. Patterns are something we feel comfortable with and cling to. It takes will to break patterns, and not everyone will be able to. But if we don't, we'll remain stuck, relations will worsen, and real problems will arise.

How to break the old patterns? Understand each other, try to put ourselves in the other guy or gals place, walk a mile in their shoes, acknowledge their feelings and try to come to terms with them, then see how you would like it resolved, and try to do the same for them.

It will be difficult, but we can do it, especially with me as Champ!

reneritchie

05-15-2003, 07:26 AM

David M.,

I do not have firm information about "Hung Gam Biu", but among the records of the Cho family, there was among the opera hairpins a man named Biu. I have the details at home, and my memory is not what it used to be but I believe he may have been a Fa Min (Hendrik might remember offhand) and of middle seniority on the Red Junks. I do not have any background information on him.

Earlier in the thread I covered the historic significance (including the Yuan dynasty rebel group, the Qing dynasty rebels, and the supporters of the Red Junk-led rebellion in Foshan). If you can't find it, or want to follow up, please don't hesitate.

The name means "Red Turban", a red cloth bound up and over the head, worn by some rebel groups to identify themselves, also worn by the citizens of Foshan to show their support for the rebellion.

And yes, Biu would be the same generation as Wong, Leung, Kam, etc.

Pine fresh scent on the breeze, etc.

5000, G!

reneritchie

05-15-2003, 07:36 AM

John W.

Your dedication to uppaginess which result in grand exultation and hopefully tax breaks previously enjoyed only by the top 1%.

I'm not sure if the references to Gee sifu's generations predate the extra generations Benny Meng, on consultation with Gee sifu's sihing, added in between Cheung Ng and Hung Gam Biu. If they do, it is simple counting, if not, we can still count back and see where it would start.

Although I do not have dates from Gee sifu handy, according to other sources and related history, we know Cheung Ng arrived in Foshan in roughly 1730. I believe author Law (of Pan Nam article fame) worked out Yat Chum's dates based on that but don't have them handy. Biu would have been active the same time frame as Wong Wah-Bo et. all, which is around the 1850s up until the time Yip Ming-Chan destroyed the opera (please see my article on Kung Fu Online for detailed opera history). I'm not sure if that's serial, parallel, or firewire, but its burst rate it pretty rocking.

I have not heard Gee sifu refer to himself as *the* grandmaster, as he mentioned previously, I believe, having 3 sihing, so its possible he was either appointed successor by his sifu, or some members of the HFY, due to their great love of him, refer to him in that manner.

It might seem that there should be more generations in HFY, but keep in mind according to Gee sifu the art was kept extremely closed and private, with but a handful of students, and most if not all others of them with little to no interest in teaching others, and even Gee sifu not teaching HFY to the public until very recently. Since the public opening of HFY, however, the generations are certainly speeding up, with several now (todai, tosuen, tosap, etc.) under Gee sifu, and schools run by several layers of generations as well.

Picard, in one of his chats with Data, once tried to explain how compelling human's find mysteries. Hopefully people will come for the mystery and stay for the warm fuzzy Q&A goodness.

Respectaggedon,

reneritchie

05-15-2003, 07:45 AM

Terence,

Thanks for your unsolicited (punny, ha ha!) and highly perceptive praise, but please let me humbly remind you this thread isn't about me, or about Simon from American Idol, its about HFY.

To wit: Once again, whatever the VTM may or may not have said, this thread isn;'t about them or the perceptions people have about HFY through the VTM. It's about HFY. The VTM can probably write anything they want at this point, from a hard hitting journalistic report on a Foshan Cha Lao, to a children's book on yellow elephants. None of that should affect anyone's perception of HFY. HFY is beyond anyone but Gee sifu's words.

That said, I do not have any information linking HFY with the Hung Mun, nor do I know of any Chinese settled cities with HFY lion dance troops or benevolent societies (though there may be some not well known yet). I have heard one of Gee sifu's sihing taught in HK and the NT for a while, so perhaps there is HFY in other places still to come forward.

I've not heard Gee sifu ever speak in relative judgemental terms like "superior". I'm sure some of his students, grandstudents, great grandstudents, etc. believe it is (otherwise they'd likely be doing something else), but that's true of most lineages.

And as to fighting records, potential and filling that potential, and puplicizing the filling of that potential, aren't always the same thing. Despite most everyone's belief here that WCK is a superior MA, we've yet to have a WCK person wear UFC or PrideFC gold.

Feelings of cottony softness, etc.

reneritchie

05-15-2003, 07:45 AM

David M.,

Thank you for helping keep track of the hit count of this most momentous of threads!

I salute you in respect!

reneritchie

05-15-2003, 07:46 AM

Joy,

Thing

(I saw this once on Whose Line is it Anyway, seemed like good natured fun!)

The softer side of, etc...

reneritchie

05-15-2003, 07:50 AM

Hendrik,

Since it seems polite, reasonable requests for you to keep this thread pure (it is about HFY, not Weng Chun or anything else) have failed, I must unfortunately now place you on ignore, alongside unmissed and soon-to-be-forgotten trolls like Roger, Sheldon, David, and Tony.

Please email me if you need to discuss this, I won't be able to see further postings here.

A moon over parador, etc.

reneritchie

05-15-2003, 07:52 AM

John Widener,

Apologies, I was merely trying to explain my temporay absence and the fleeting loss of my championy powers due the dreadful Matrix 2 kryptonite effect.

Luckily, my essences are all restored, my focus renewed, and my championship aura blindingly powerful.

Bring dem questions on!

Respectaissance,

05-15-2003, 07:56 AM

Originally posted by reneritchie
<snip snip insightful stuff>
It will be very difficult to break old patterns. Patterns are something we feel comfortable with and cling to. It takes will to break patterns, and not everyone will be able to. But if we don't, we'll remain stuck, relations will worsen, and real problems will arise.

How to break the old patterns? Understand each other, try to put ourselves in the other guy or gals place, walk a mile in their shoes, acknowledge their feelings and try to come to terms with them, then see how you would like it resolved, and try to do the same for them.

Amen to that. It's an understatement to say that pattern, behavior, and culture change are extremely challenging.

It will be difficult, but we can do it, especially with me as Champ!

You've invested an uncanny amount of time and energy thus far. I'm tired out just watching, LOL. In contrast to how repulsed I've been by so many forum threads in past weeks and months, I'm quite impressed by both your discipline and tenacity in this "pattern breaking" initiative thus far. Being a broken record helps. And I already see indicators of some positive results; I hope they are both lasting and transferable by virtue of your investment.

Intentionally or not, I note that you've played out the Four Agreements quite nicely in this thread. Good job on setting the example.

My apology for the digression from the topic at hand.

Regards,
- Kathy Jo

reneritchie

05-15-2003, 07:57 AM

John W.,

Please forgive me if I stray ontopic.

The Southern Shaolin Temple is a complex, debateable issue, even for professional researchers. In terms of HFY oral history, as with the oral histories of many WCK branches, it was a temple in Fujian province destroyed by the Qing, no more, no less.

Whether one day we find acceptable proof of an actual "Southern Shaolin Temple" proper, of a temple with another name that for various reasons came to be referred to as "Southern Shaolin", or if things remain elusive, the oral traditions, IMHO, are still part of the richness of our shared culture and can be enjoyed beyond strict historical analysis.

Thanks for pageuppinating mine,

Super sized respect value meal, etc.

captain

05-15-2003, 08:01 AM

guys,why only look to r and r,who says he is the great sage??
the information is out there for anyone to seek out,with some
effort.and besides,i think rene secretly "loves" the tiny hassles
that are heaped on his shoulders by trolls"seek for ya self!!!
tickets to china cheap right now;sounds like a summer project!

russell.

Geezer

05-15-2003, 08:32 AM

Rene Wrote>

I must unfortunately now place you on ignore, alongside unmissed and soon-to-be-forgotten trolls like Roger, Sheldon, David, and Tony.

Please email me if you need to discuss this, I won't be able to see further postings here.

Not true....but....Oh Well......hey Rene, I actually put you on my Buddy List.....I'm showing you the love baby!!!!!.

Rene Wrote>

I have heard one of Gee sifu's sihing taught in HK and the NT for a while, so perhaps there is HFY in other places still to come forward.

Any thoughts on time periods here???

Sheldon

The Original.....not the Biter!!!!

t_niehoff

05-15-2003, 12:16 PM

RR wrote:

Once again, whatever the VTM may or may not have said, this thread isn;'t about them or the perceptions people have about HFY through the VTM. It's about HFY. RR

Fair enough, but doesn't Garrett Gee co-author many of these articles with members of the VTM? For example, to reference the discussions about the "Southern Shaolin Temple", Garrett writes in the June, 2003 IKF that "hung fa yi wing chun kung fu was created in the Southern Shaolin Temple 330 years ago". Is this just HFY oral tradition?

And what about the "paradigm shift" of HFY that Gee writes was the "culmination of shaolin philosohpical and physiological knowledge"? Could you explain this "paradigm shift" in greater detail?

While you're at it, can you explain what Garrett means when he writes "Creation of the maximum efficiency required for human combat", i.e., HYF, "mandated strict adherence to the laws of physics and the realities of human structures, geometry, and physiological motion"? As the chinese of "330 years ago" had not developed physics (and as "the laws of physics" are described by mathematics, also which the chinese hadn't developed to any significant degree) how could any system "adhere to those laws" other than unintentionally (as we all adhere to the laws of gravity!!)?

Thanks,

Terence

reneritchie

05-15-2003, 12:25 PM

Terence,

Thank you for continuing with great graces!

Gee sifu said that he cannot control what others do, and indicated that his martial accounted for only a fraction of what had thusfar, and what will be published. I am sure he is given respectful credit for a lot of work, but unless he says or publishes something directly, it is probably best to attribute it to the actual author(s).

I am fairly sure Southern Shaolin is part of Gee sifu's oral tradition, much as it is many arts.

I do not know if Gee sifu wrote that, it doesn't sound like his turn of phrase. It's possible the meaning goes back to the core of HFY, what they consider important being different than what other approaches consider important. This would certainly be a shift.

The same, about it not sounding like Gee sifu's turn of phrase applies to the rest. I'm sure whomever wrote it feels that way, and many people have written similar about many arts in the past. It probably refers closer to a lay sense of physics (we know a ball will drop straight down, for example, even if we don't have Western physics to describe terminal velocity, wind effects, friction resistance, etc.). People built solid structures like homes and temples without Western geometric vocabulary, and all over the world, through trial and error, observation and experience, determined a set of working rules that proved reliable. MA is probably no different.

A ripple in the pond, etc.

Ultimatewingchun

05-15-2003, 02:59 PM

Rene:

If you don't stop looking in the mirror every eleven minutes and proclaiming yourself both the HFY champion and the KFO champion (by making half the one zillion posts on this thread yourself)...I'm going to be tempted to hop a plane up to Quebec and force a sleeping pill right down your throat...

NOW GET SOME SLEEP, ALREADY....!

The are many of us who are beginning to worry about your health, Rene...om...om...aum...

Marcos Hsiang:

You're creating quite a stir over there with your TWC/William Cheung/HFY/Garrett Gee questions... aren't you?

...Good questions - but even though they will up Rene's hit count, he would prefer you ask them on the Understanding TWC thread.

This thread is a goodwill tour for Rene (who's obviously campaigning for mayor of something...) and for Garrett Gee, Benny Meng and the rest of the HFY guys... by not having to answer tough questions.

So if you ask these questions on the other thread...I will explain to you in detail why I think that TWC and HFY are really one and the same system...and I will also explain why it is that Garrett Gee and company are the ones who need to do a lot more explaining about the AMAZING similarities between the two systems than William Cheung does.....

Jim Roselando

05-15-2003, 04:34 PM

Hey Rene,

I just read over this and you are doing one heck of a job!

Ok! I have a question? In one of the old discussions that was originally about my beliefs regarding WC being Shaolin or not (called To Be or Not To Be), and Hendrik's theory, the discussion turned into a HFY debate. A few of the HFY guys that were contributing to the discussion commented that HFY was a combo of Military and Monk. Most WC state that WC was from the Snake/Crane and Hendrik made comments about it being Snake Body/Crane Fist but do you or any of the HFY guys know which arts were involved in the development of HFYWC?

Regards,

FIRE HAWK

05-15-2003, 06:34 PM

Does Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun have Qi Na or Chi Na in the Hung Fa Yi system ?

yuanfen

05-15-2003, 09:05 PM

Of Course Firehawk!

mun hung

05-15-2003, 10:53 PM

So much for getting any answers to my questions. :(

Oh well.

t_niehoff

05-16-2003, 04:48 AM

Rene,

Thanks for your answer -- though it doesn't leave me feeling sated. How about this: we know the "hanging dummy" (with cross beams instead of the older free-standing model) was developed by the weng chun folks in Hong Kong and adopted by Yip Man. So this dummy is a recent technical development (circa 1950) -- and apparently it has been adopted by HFY (some older lineages like YKS still haven't for reasons that I'll discuss below). And if we look at dummy forms/drills from lineages that we know predate YMWCK (so that they use the free-standing dummy) we see that they all make use of the lack of cross-beams to flank the dummy at 90 degrees or more (as in YKS dummy, Pan Nam dummy, etc.). The adoption of the hanging dummy would require that these lineages "modify" their dummy form to account for the technical change as the crossbeams limit flanking to within 90 degree. So it is reasonable that YM's dummy form developed in HK - his Foshan students have a different dummy form - would have included these modifications. In HFY we see that they use the hanging dummy and obviously can't flank 90 degree as we see in the older forms of WCK - so does this mean that it's dummy form has been 'modified' like Yip's?

Thanks,

Terence

reneritchie

05-16-2003, 06:30 AM

Victor,

While I'm not Italian, I enjoy the culture, and feel toasty paisan-hood emenating from your recent posts!

I unfortunately do not possess much more than the symbolic baatgwa and fungsui mirrors, and I'm afraid to look into them for fear of being warded against. That might explain at times my unkempt hair and misbuttoned pajama tops. I appreciate your concern in regards to my sleep habits (I'm actually a bit of a sonambulistic insomniac, I keep falling awake!) but again, this thread is not about me, it is about HFY.

And if you have any more questions about HFY, please don't hesitate.

A blade of grass on the tranquil sea, etc.

reneritchie

05-16-2003, 06:35 AM

Jim,

Thank you for post the uppaginess and being part of the solution!

Again, it is very difficult to talk in specifics about what occured so long ago and so far away, so perhaps its not suprising that I haven't seen nor heard any specific elaboration about which exact individuals and arts (like the Tanglang 18 of Wanglang, perhaps) forged HFY upon the militant Shaolin anvil.

As you know, however, Pan Nam did share the list from his perspective (of arts, not individuals) and they included Buddhist Palm, Chin Na (sic), Taiji (Chen?), Eagle Claw, etc. But since those are not all Shaolin arts, and this is not a Pan Nam thread, it may be of little or large use to us.

Respectoslando,

reneritchie

05-16-2003, 06:36 AM

Firehawk,

Thank you for being part of the solution!

I believe that Hung Fa Yi, like most Chinese martial arts, includes applications of a Kum Na (Qin Na) nature.

A bird in the bush, etc.

reneritchie

05-16-2003, 06:37 AM

Joy,

Thank you for your participation and your efforts to help improve the image of HFY in the WCK community!

Restpectacular!

reneritchie

05-16-2003, 06:46 AM

Mun Hung,

My most sincere apologies! I missed your post first time around! Please do not let my simian like incompetence mar your impression of the dazzling art of HFY!

I cannot guess as to Gee sifu's motives in breaking the chains of silence and secrecy and gifting the world with public knowledge of HFY, however if I were to guess it could perhaps be that he felt times had changed and the reasons to keep HFY a secret were no longer what they once were. In a world of vehicular, deadly weapon, chemicals and what not, martial arts are no longer what they once were either.

As to battle-ground tested, this may be another case of VTM writing. If so, I cannot address it on a HFY specific thread. There are many kinds of battle grounds, however, from skirmishes aboard boats and back alleys, to the streets of Foshan or the parks of Guangzhou, and if one or two secret HFY members were involved in the fighting of the Taiping era and survived to teach others, as Red Junk members Wong, Leung, Kam, etc., that would be a specific kind of tested.

As to the technical part of your questions, as a supporter and even champion, like long time (but currently ignored) supporters Roger and Sheldon, I am not in possession of such information, but can imagine that through the procedural model, given their preferences, they have determined that those positions offer the best opportunity during pre-contact set up, perhaps creating angles and covering.

A dongle on the parallel port, etc.

reneritchie

05-16-2003, 06:52 AM

Terence,

I apologize if, like certain MSG laden foods, my answers leave you still questioning only a few hours later. I will attempt to carb load you in order to, if nothing else, put you to sleep.

Due to the popularity of the Yip Man system, excepting do-it-yerselfers, most commercially/easily available dummies will of course be in the Yip Man adapted 'hanging' format and anyone using one from another approach, if and when necessary, will have to adapt, even if its on-the-fly.

Since WCK is a conceptual art, rather than technical, most should find this simple, perhaps even mindless. HFY, being something focused on very specific core ideas, even if a minor alteration to fit a piece of wood was necessary, would probably not have to even lay finger on the specific core ideas. Like attacking a tall, thin woman instead of a short stumpy man, the core ideas being the same allow for the specific response, if any, to fit the situation.

A brief in the casefile, etc.

tparkerkfo

05-16-2003, 06:54 AM

Hi Terence,

I am not Rene, our HFY champion, nor do I play one on the internet. But I had a couple things bouncing around. I am not sure if the dummy is a good thing to look at. Many arts not at all connected to wing chun, all of which retain their traditional forms and such, incorrporate the hangging dummy. Several Bak Mei schools have it. I have seen Hung Gar schools that also have it. The thing is such an elegant training device that I can see everyone incorrporating it. LOL.

This isn't the correct post to ask this, I don't want to run the risk of being put in ignore jail by our champion, so I'll just ask outloud. I don't recall any part of the Pan Nam dummy really affected by the cross slats. There is one part where you reach around and do a neck pull to a vital spot, differnt than the Yip Man dummy. Some dummies have slots in different places that can make this move a little difficult, but that is just the specifica dummy. We must be able to flow as our opponents wont be 100% alike. The only real issue is that the Yip Man dummy is too short. Pan Nam had one that was in the ground I beleive, or atleast it touched the ground. There is a section were you step on the base of the dummy, which you cannot do with the Yip Man dummy. But your point being that the techniques would fit the type of dummy used would make sense.

My question, to get this back on track, is related to Shaolin. When we look at shaolin arts, arts like Hung Kuen that claim and are recognized as shaolin, why don't we see the typical patterns? I can look at Choy Li Fut, Bak Siu Lam, and Chan Chuan and still see the similarities. All are very different, but have the same core. Art attacks that utilize larger circles, being powered with the shoulder. Large stances such as the front bow being fundamental to power generation. Power generation by torquing the hips and waist. Solid reverse punches. Etc. Why don't we find much in common between Hung Gar and wing chun? I have only seen a small amount of HFY, and I myself do not see the similarity really. Why wouldn't the same theories, or atleast similar ones be found in Hung Gar? Hung Hay Gun was supposed to be very close with Gee Shim and trained with him for a long time. Luk Ah Choy also trained with him. But we don't find the Chan principles nor do we find any of these theories that are spoken about. We also don't see Hung Gar theories talked about in HFY. I do understand that the arts changed and maybe Gee Shim would have taught one group something that he left out of another. But would he have taught both such a distinctly different art?

May be that leads to the question if Gee Shim taught both. Maybe Hung Gar is NOT connected to Gee Shim in reality. In that case, we probably can not say that wing chun and Hung Gar are connected to those that think it is. As we "solve" one puzze, we get another. But it don't make sense. The answers kind of sounds like the pre copernican solution for Venus's orbit, or was it Mars?

Tom

Ultimatewingchun

05-16-2003, 08:36 AM

Rene:

You're performance of the "iron fist in the velvet glove" routine (ala...Tony Robbins...let's sweep all the tough questions under the rug...I'm great...you're great...and life is truly wonderful)...is starting to wear thin...

AND doesn't address some very pertinent issues concerning HFY; specifically, The TWC/HFY connection in terms of the near exactness of their martial teachings, (and the attempt at co-option by HFY of Chan philosophy doesn't count as any "major" difference between the two martial arts)....

the issue of William Cheung's proven expertise over the last 45 years - and Garrett Gee'e unproven expertise - in terms of who it is that has the most explaining to do about that "martial exactness"...

the issue of Yip Man's true place in wing chun history and Shaolin heritage...

the issue of the VTM and Benny Meng's highly questionable behavior - in terms of rewriting history without proof.

It is downright unethical and misleading for Garrett Gee to say - when asked about Meng and the VTM - that he now has too many students to be able to control all of their individual actions.
Only ONE of those students is in control of a museum dedicated to wing chun kung fu. Gee knows that, I know that, William Cheung knows that, Moy Yat knew that...and so does everybody else...

And when that museum prints articles (as does Gee) that make huge claims for which there is only tiny scraps of evidence (most, if not all of it, through oral tradition)...then questions HAVE to be raised, and answers HAVE to be given - NOT EVADED.

reneritchie

05-16-2003, 08:58 AM

Victor,

First, thank you for the whiplash inducing posts! As I myself have seen co-workers pre-and-post morning double latte's, I understand the phenomena and will try to help bring it down.

As the more astute among us might have already guessed (or more accurately "read"), this thread is not so much about answering questions as it is about re-establishing the framework that will make asking and answering questions, indeed relationships in general, successful. Frankly, someone needed to remind the questioners just how to ask questions with a chance of getting an answer (for a question intended not to get an answer is something else entirely), and to show how questions being asked could far, *far*, (far!) better be handled.

All were lost, so I provided a road map. From here, whether you choose to look at it and plot a course towards a mutual destination, or if you choose to floor it off road and off a cliff, I have no control, but you have a choice, at least. This breather, this interupt, this reset has given everyone a moment to pause, to be intertained, and most importantly, to be acknowledged.

The pattern has been broken, where you or anyone else goes from here, is your and their choice. And who among us is truly omniscient to know all, to see the end of every path, to know the result of every choice. None. So we must, regardless of fiery passion, and o'eer whelming pride, consider ourselves carefully, and proceed cautiously.

If that's the velvet gloved iron fist of "hello!" smacking one and all upside the muchy pink pineapple, so be it.

Now, as a TWC person, please remember how you feel when people "attack" William Cheung sifu and TWC (remember, many of the same people share just as many questions about TWC as HFY). Now, regardless of whether you feel its analogus or not, understand this is how HFY people feel when people "attack" Gee sifu and HFY. Take your post, flip it around, and see how you would respond to it. That's the element of choice we all face, regardless of self-righteous delusion, or perhaps because of it.

I do agree with you, but instead of "have to be raised" I think "will be raised", but a conversation between two peple lacking eyes and ears, possessing only mouths, is seldom productive (and can iritate small birds and animals nearby).

Break your questions down, we'll go through them step by step, one by one, like the many splended dishes on thanksgiving. But remember to start with the antepasto!

A glimmer on a crystal stemware, etc.