Leung Bik

[planetwc]

Thought I would start a separate thread on Leung Bik to allow Victor to continue his TWC training/technique thread on it's core content.

To that end...

In my opinion there are several questions at hand.

1) Did Leung Bik exist and did he end up living in Hong Kong?

2) Did Leung Jan modify his Wing Chun to teach Chan Wah Shun only a limited or modified version of the system? Did he in turn teach a different Wing Chun to his son(s)?

3) Did Leung Bik meet Yip Man and decide to teach the "unmodified" or "true" or core Wing Chun to Yip Man, who was not a family member, AND was a student of the man who his father wanted to withhold the real Wing Chun principles and techniques from?

If so, why teach this complete version to a student of his purported rival?

4) Did Leung Bik teach a secret or separate form of Wing Chun to Yip Man, under constraints to keep this training secret from any future students?

[planetwc]

In some articles onYip Man and Leung Bik (http://www.wckfc.com/masters/ipman.htm)
it is said (by Yip Ching) that at the purported meeting and defeat of Yip Man by Leung Bik, Yip Man had completed the Wing Chun system to the level of Chum Kiu and had not learned Bil Jee.

"At this point the old man asked Ip Man to demonstrate the Biu Gee form. Not wanting the old man to know he didn’t know the Biu Gee form, Ip Man said, "I really don't feel like showing you the form.""


If we presume then that Leung Bik actually did exist and did meet Yip Man in Hong Kong, then it would seem that Yip Man would have completed his training in Wing Chun with Leung Bik by learning Bil Jee, the dummy and the weapons from Leung Bik.

Those would be a fairly significant portion of training, and quite advanced as in most schools those are the advanced portions of the training.

"Leung Bik lived with Ip Man for five years and learned the entire system of Wing Chun. Through out his life, Ip Man referred to Leung Bik as Si Pak. Even though both of his kung fu teachers had the same kung fu, they both had different teaching styles. Chan Wa Shun was a relatively uneducated man whose metaphors and understanding were more grounded in the earth, in the common man's language. On the other hand, Leung Bik was very educated and his metaphors and understanding were shaped by philosophy. His understanding of the principles of Wing Chun was deeper and more refined than his kung fu younger brother Chan Wa Shun. When Leung Bik died, Ip Man returned to Fatshan to help his kung fu brothers with the knowledge he had gained in Hong Kong."

This description mentions nothing of teaching held back from Chan Wah Shun, but rather the opportunity to learn from a better educated si-pak who could communicate concepts in a more sophisticated fashion AND who completed his training in the rest of the system.

[planetwc]

Let us continue our presumption that Leung Jan did have a younger son named Leung Bik, who moved to Hong Kong, and encountered, then taught for 4 years a young Yip Man.

According to TWC history, Leung Bik taught Yip Man the traditional Wing Chun system, as opposed to the modified version which his father taught Chan Wah Shun.

Chan Wah Shun was somehow taught differently from the time he joined Leung Jan's class, and during the entire time he would interact with his fellow classmates and teacher he NEVER observed them using the signature techniques of traditional wing chun in their chi sao or even in gor sao or challenge matches of Leung Jan.

This also meant that when Chan Wah Shun would chi sao with his teachers sons, or with his teacher, they never had to resort to the key principles of blind side attacks for a larger opponent as Chan Wah Shun was known for being a large strong man.

The rationale here then, is that during the entire period of time that Chan Wah Shun was training, sparring and fighting at Leung Jan's school he would never have triggered a response from either his teacher or Leung Bik which would have brought out the "traditional" Wing Chun movements and principles?

That if he trained there hard and often, as a next door neighbor, Leung Jan and Leung Bik would have had to have found either addtional time or a different place to train traditional Wing Chun so that Chan Wah Shun would not see it or learn it.

When would this training have occurred?

Why would this have happened?

a) Because Wing Chun was a secret family art not to be passed in total to non-family members?

b) Because Chan Wah Shun was a better student than Leung Bik?

If there were no OTHER students in Leung Jan's school, that also implies then that there were only 4 people doing Wing Chun in the world.

1. Leung Jan
2. Leung Bik
3. Leung Jan's other son
4. Chan Wah Shun

If it was Leung Jan's intention to not teach outside his family, why then did he teach Wing Chun when he retired to Koo Lo?

If the Leung family tradition is to only teach family member the complete system, then that would imply that if Leung Jan's great grandson does his family's Wing Chun, then he too would have the secret traditional version.

[planetwc]

If there is only one traditional Wing Chun system and all others are modified, then what about the other lineages of Wing Chun?

We NOW know that there are other systems of Wing Chun which do not spring from Leung Jan.

Sum Nung Wing Chun, from Yuen Kay Shan
Chi Sim, currently under Andreas Hoffman
Pan Nam
Chu Chong Man

Spring to mind.

Additionally, Leung Jan himself upon retiring to Koo Lo village, his ancestral home, taught Wing Chun there until his death. This tradition has been carried on by his own family and the Fung family of Koo Lo.

Why is it then that many of these systems have the same or similar stances, training platforms and sets?

Are they all modified systems of Wing Chun?

How is this possible when they do not spring from the teachings of Leung Jan?

[planetwc]

Leung Jan's other disciples (aside from any of his sons):

Chan Wah Shun aka Jiao Chin Wah
Lo Kwai aka Chu Yuk Kwai
Leung Kei aka Lau Man Kei

[reneritchie]

Let's try to go through this methodically,

1) According to most accounts there was a Leung Bik. In a one account, there was not, and in another, he didn't end up in HK, but in the common Yip Man lineage account, there was and he did. This then becomes a "we don't know"

2) The answer to the first part of this question, based on everything available to date, is "probably no". Given that there are other lineages from the Red Junk, and from Wong Wah-Bo, and these broadly match what Chan Wah-Shun taught, it is "very unlikely" anyone other than the common originating source (Red Junks) could have formed it. As to whether or not Leung Jan's sons learned different WCK, or any WCK, this again varies into a "we don't know" but based on the same common available information, it seems "more likely" they learned the same WCK as everyone else.

3) Since accounts on this vary within the Yip Man family (many saying yes, a few saying no) it is another "we don't know". Evidence seems split fairly evenly down the middle, making it impossible to determine likelihood, IMHO, and lacking any third party coroboration (ie. lineages from Leung Bik not through Yip Man) that's all we're left with.

4) As above "very unlikely" although we can't rule out the possibility Leung Bik might have either learned or created another version of WCK after leaving Foshan, and taught that to Yip Man (the culture of face causing him to attribute it to his father regardless of its real source).

On the Yip Ching derived story, if its true Yip Man only learned up to Chum Kiu from Chan Wah-Shun and Ng Jung-So (possible, as Ng seemed notoriously stingy with teaching material), and learned the Biu Jee and the rest from Leung Bik, it makes it "very unlikely" Leung Bik taught him anything other than typical Foshan WCK since the Biu Jee Yip Man taught his HK students, including Leung Sheung, Lok Yiu, etc. is very, very close to the Biu Jee from the Fok Bo-Chuen/Yuen Kay-San lineage. Had Leung Bik taught anything else, the only Biu Jee Yip Man could have passed on would have been closer to William Cheung's.

As to the different education/comprehension levels of CWS vs. LB, this part has never made much sense, unless CWS was completely illiterate or daft. WCK theory is not particle mechanics, most have us have read the Kuen Kuit and been taught the theory, most of us have kung fu uncles that range from tradesmen to college educated, do we see this reflected today? I have sibaksuk who were butchers and ironworkers, and sibaksuk who were engineers or university grads, and they all have the same basic knowledge.

Besides, in the story, Yip Man was still young, and only beginning his education, would the education level of his sifu vs. sibak make that big a difference at that point in his life?

WRT the TWC story,not only did CHan Wah-Shun never notice the Leung family doing anything different, he somehow failed to notice that what he was learning was very different from what he had been "peeking" at through the fence.

WRT the other lineages, Chu Chong-Man is part of the Weng Chun handed down by Wai Yan to Andreas Hoffmann, and Pan Nam is in large part Leung Jan derived (via Chan Yiu-Min/Jiu Chao and Lai Hip-Chi). In parallel, we have Fok Bo-Chuen/Yuen Kay-San, and the Cho family, none of which have any connection to Leung Jan, but are very similar in core, and Koo Lo, which decends from Leung Jan's later teachings.

Since, as mentioned, these are remarkably similar in core to Yip Man WCK, it seems "unlikely in the extreme" that Leung Jan could have "modified" anything into them. He may have learned something additional that was different (another system/branch), or created something, but it looks fairly certain what is now practiced as Sum Nung, Yip Man, Koo Lo, Cho, etc. are what WCK was from the Red Junks.

So, while its possible Leung Jan, Leung Bik, Yip Man, or William Cheung either learned a divergent branch or different system, or came up with a different system, the standard story of Yip Man's WCK being "modified" from something else is unsupportable.

[yuanfen]

While waiting on Victor's answer to David-if any:

1) Did Leung Bik exist and did he end up living in Hong Kong?

((Dont know. Does not matter. Ip Man has mentioned learning from him. Given the excellence of Ip man's wing chun- good enough for me that he has mentioned his sources. I would be surprised if "Did leung Bik exist" becomes a peer reviewed article in a decent history journal.))

2) Did Leung Jan modify his Wing Chun to teach Chan Wah Shun only a limited or modified version of the system? Did he in turn teach a different Wing Chun to his son(s)?

((As NTC pointed out-"modification" in varying degrees is part of teaching and learning except for robots."))

3) Did Leung Bik meet Yip Man and decide to teach the "unmodified" or "true" or core Wing Chun to Yip Man, who was not a family member, AND was a student of the man who his father wanted to withhold the real Wing Chun principles and techniques from?

If so, why teach this complete version to a student of his purported rival?

((IMO - the TWC version of the Leung Bik saga is part of TWC marketing. It is possible quite separtely from TWC to maintain that Ip man synthesized his wing chun based on what he learned from differnt people and his own experience and evolution.What's the big deal?))

4) Did Leung Bik teach a secret or separate form of Wing Chun to Yip Man, under constraints to keep this training secret from any future students?

((Separate from the TWC story-see NTC's post on so called "secrets". Teachers teach in specific contexts to specific students- no sudden enlightment on the whole enchilada. Different students take with them different aspects of a teachers teaching-in many fields and specially in wing chun- which is not for
uniform training of privates on how to march, drill and hold a rifle))
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rene sez:
it makes it "very unlikely" Leung Bik taught him anything other than typical Foshan WCK since the Biu Jee Yip Man taught his HK students, including Leung Sheung, Lok Yiu, etc. is very, very close to the Biu Jee from the Fok Bo-Chuen/Yuen Kay-San lineage.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Rene- "likely" etc seems to be a couldbeen approah to history.
Induction is tricky business like causality...
couldabeen- gasp- that other biu jee was an imitation of
Ip man or his students biu jee?
Things can look similar but not be the same....including biu jee
dynamics.

BTW form the TWC thread- the Cheung conception of the central
is not really the same as what some call the center line- the tyranny of words.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally- I am not sure what we are getting out of the same old same old Leung Bik "issues" specially the TWC version.
Victor has given the TWC version- one can accept, reject or modify and move on.......

[reneritchie]

Rene- "likely" etc seems to be a couldbeen approah to history.
Induction is tricky business like causality...
couldabeen- gasp- that other biu jee was an imitation of
Ip man or his students biu jee?
Things can look similar but not be the same....including biu jee
dynamics..

No joy, it really can't in this context. In the context of TWC, if Yip Man only learned SNT and CK from CWS, and learned BJ from LB, the only BJ he would have would be LB's, which would be the one William Cheung does, so if anyone else copied it from Yip Man, it would also be the one William Cheung does. It isn't. (Now it is possible that all of Yip Man's other students went and copied the "modified ;)" version from another lineage, and Yip Man didn't mind... but that doesn't seem very likely, does it?)


Ip Man has mentioned learning from him.

We don't know that. The only evidence we have of this is the Mok Poi-On interview, which at first I thought was conclusive Yip Man did mention it, but now have heard that it was actually a Leung Ting interview in Yip Man's name, and as Leung Ting himself has said, he was very fond of Lee Man (who Wang Kiu maintains came up with the Leung Bik story) and listened to his stories all the time.


It is possible quite separtely from TWC to maintain that Ip man synthesized his wing chun based on what he learned from differnt people and his own experience and evolution.What's the big deal?))

In that context, none, especially if he learned from his sifu, sihing, and sibak, and all their WCK was very similar, it makes no difference at all. However, in the TWC story context, it would eliminate one of the most devisive elements in the Yip Man family (the idea of "modified" and "traditional" and all surrounding hoopla would be moot).

[reneritchie]

Note: It could theoretically be possible that Yip Man learned both a "modified ;)" and "traditional ;)" version of BJ from LB, but it doesn't seem likely he'd waste his time on the "modified" given the context of the story, and this possibility would still run into the problem of other lineages not matching the "traditional ;)" but rather the "modified ;)" paradigm.

[yuanfen]

Rene sez:

No joy, it really can't in this context. In the context of TWC,

((TWC doesnt have exclusive rights on Ip Man wing chun and trying to change TWC views is intless and futile IMO))

We don't know that. The only evidence we have of this is the Mok Poi-On interview, which at first I thought was conclusive Yip Man did mention it, but now have heard that it was actually a Leung Ting interview in Yip Man's name, and as Leung Ting himself has said, he was very fond of Lee Man (who Wang Kiu maintains came up with the Leung Bik story) and listened to his stories all the time.

((A chain without fixed links. Several of Ip man's students just
accepted Ip man's own picture of his background. Some have nothing to do with Mok Poi or Leung Ting or Cheung as authorities on their wing chun. Most wing chun folks I know spend little time with the Leung Bik story- we keep blowing it out of proportion on the net))

[KPM]

Joy wrote:
((A chain without fixed links. Several of Ip man's students just
accepted Ip man's own picture of his background. Some have nothing to do with Mok Poi or Leung Ting or Cheung as authorities on their wing chun. Most wing chun folks I know spend little time with the Leung Bik story- we keep blowing it out of proportion on the net))

---That is only because it is used as the central theme for the claims laid out by the TWC family. Claims that label all the rest of us as "modified" and "inferior." If TWC were to drop those claims and its labels for the rest of us, the Leung Bik story would recede to the background and become what it should become....an historical footnote or curiosity.

Keith

[KPM]

Hi David!

it is said (by Yip Ching) that at the purported meeting and defeat of Yip Man by Leung Bik, Yip Man had completed the Wing Chun system to the level of Chum Kiu and had not learned Bil Jee.

---Very interesting! I had not heard this particular slant on the story before. But I would take this with a "grain of salt." The article also states that Yip Man went to Hong Kong to attend St. Francis College....not St. Stephen's College as everyone else states. The article also has Yip Man being 17 at the time, which if I am recalling properly is older than what most others state. From what I understand, even though they were called "colleges", these institutions in Hong Kong at the time were really middle schools. This article also says that Leung Jan had only 3 students...Chan Wah Shun and his own two sons....which we know from other sources is untrue. So I am not sure I would believe this claim of Yip Man only knowing WCK through the Chum Kiu form.

This description mentions nothing of teaching held back from Chan Wah Shun, but rather the opportunity to learn from a better educated si-pak who could communicate concepts in a more sophisticated fashion AND who completed his training in the rest of the system.

---Assuming that the Yip Man really did learn from Leung Bik, I think this is likely the closest to the truth. Yip Chun's version of the Leung Bik story says nothing about Yip Man not knowing the entire system and learning the dummy, Biu Jee and weapons from Leung Bik. But it does back up the idea of Yip Man learning the theories and concepts in more depth and detail. So it seems most likely to me that Yip Man developed a better understanding and grasp of the WCK principles from Leung Bik. This understanding may very well have influenced such things as structure, footwork and strategy. Yip Man may very well have selectively taught aspects of this understanding to various students. Victor has admitted that elements of what have become known as "trademark" aspects of TWC have shown up in the teachings of other Yip Man students. So it is possible that Yip Man taught William Cheung elements of WCK theory that come from the more in-depth or advanced teachings of Leung Bik. It is possible that William Cheung took some of these concepts and "ran with them" and innovated a bit on his own to come up with TWC. It is also possible that a young boy being taught something that seemed different from what his classmates were learning got a little carried away with the whole idea of it and the story behind it became a bit exagerated over time. Regardless, I still have seen no evidence that makes me believe TWC existed in its present form prior to when William Cheung began teaching it to the public.

So if we accept that Leung Bik did exist, did teach Yip Man, and did teach him something above and beyond what he had learned from Chan Wah Shun, I don't see any reason to believe that what he taught was a totally separate, distinct, and "secret" version of WCK. But then I'm sure you probably agree with me. :-)

Keith

[azwingchun]

it is said (by Yip Ching) that at the purported meeting and defeat of Yip Man by Leung Bik, Yip Man had completed the Wing Chun system to the level of Chum Kiu and had not learned Bil Jee.

This is the same story as it is told by Ip Ching on a Wing Chun history tape that I have. ;)

[Phil Redmond]

Keith,
This article also says that Leung Jan had only 3 students...Chan Wah Shun and his own two sons....which we know from other sources is untrue.KPM

Can you tell us these sources?

It is also possible that a young boy being taught something that seemed different from what his classmates were learning got a little carried away with the whole idea of it and the story behind it became a bit exagerated over time.KPM

You beat me to the punch. I have thought something similar after I learned that there were different WC families. Sifu Cheung really loved Yip Man like a father. He went with YM every where. Even places a young boy should not have frequented. I can see him believing what his Sifu told him. When I talk to him about it I can see that he really believes what Yip Man told him as a young boy.

Yuanfen,
Your post; "Is there any relevance to this "debate"?" Good post.
I agree with *almost* everything you said there. Does it really matter?
Phil

[Phil Redmond]

I posted this on another thread:
I have a question for you. I have a copy of 1975 8mm movie that was converted to VCD and VHS that shows William Cheung performing the 3 empty hand forms and the dummy in HK. The footage was taken at the VTAA. He went there to show his seniors and peers what Yip Man had taught him. Why would he show the other WC people something that he made up? The forms are almost the same as they are now except the dummy form has more kicks etc.
Phil

[KPM]

Hi Phil!

Can you tell us these sources?

--Well first off you have the people LJ taught when he retired to Koo Lo village. I am away from home right now, and don't have all the names, but primary one was Wong Wah Sam. Another of these was LJ's own nephew. This info is preserved in the Pin Sun lineage. There are also several names listed other than Chan Wah Shun and his sons for when he was teaching in Foshan. These are noted on Rene's website, and he can probably provide the sources. From what I have seen, none of the Foshan WCK people limit LJ's teaching to just 3 people. That seems to be something that came out of the whole "CWS peeking through the fence" story repeated in the YMWCK family.


You beat me to the punch. I have thought something similar after I learned that there were different WC families. Sifu Cheung really loved Yip Man like a father. He went with YM every where. Even places a young boy should not have frequented. I can see him believing what his Sifu told him. When I talk to him about it I can see that he really believes what Yip Man told him as a young boy.

---I think it is entirely possible that to some extent Yip Man may have been "feeding him a line." Not done with malicious intent, but just to encourage a young boy's enthusiasm. We also have other stories that indicate that Yip Man was prone to being agreeable with people rather than challenge their beliefs. So it is possible that an enthusiastic young boy asked things like "sifu, am I really the only one you are teaching this too?"....or, "so sifu, this was a secret system for overthrowing the Manchus?" and Yip Man just said "sure" so as not to dampen a young boy's dreams and enthusiasm. Its just too bad we don't have much to back up these things that William Cheung remembers from when he was a young teen.

Keith

[Phil Redmond]

planetwc wrote:
"In some articles on Yip Man and Leung Bik
it is said (by Yip Ching) that at the purported meeting and defeat of Yip Man by Leung Bik, Yip Man had completed the Wing Chun system to the level of Chum Kiu and had not learned Bil Jee."

I'm not refuting you, but someone on another thread said that using internet sources for WC is sloppy research ;). Also, I read the source you used and I don't see where Yip Ching said what you wrote. From what I see the article was written by Ron Heimberger. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Phil

[planetwc]

Phil,

Based on the footage on your site, the TWC forms do not look like the Wing Chun forms Yip Man taught or demonstrates on the 8mm film of him prior to his death.

Also isn't there a 4th form namely TWC's Advanced SLT?
And what of Cheung Sifu's Knife form, isn't that his own creation?

By the time the mid 70's roll around Cheung Sifu has had what at close to 20 years to refine his own theories and approach to Wing Chun. I see no reason why a man of his skill could not derive his own system of combat refined to his own personal experience and decades of training should he chose to do so.

People like Bruce Lee (Jun Fan/JKD), Ueshiba (Aikido), Carlos and Helio Gracie (Gracie Jujutsu) , Mas Oyama (Kyokushinkai) , Al Dacascos (Won Hop Kuen Do), Jigoro Kano (Judo) all created their own systems. None of them were out of "whole cloth" rather they were derived from their own synthesis and evolution based on their learning from master teachers and personal combat experience. Why not accord Cheung Sifu the same level of martial skill, creativity and intellectual capacity as these others?


Originally posted by Phil Redmond
I posted this on another thread:
I have a question for you. I have a copy of 1975 8mm movie that was converted to VCD and VHS that shows William Cheung performing the 3 empty hand forms and the dummy in HK. The footage was taken at the VTAA. He went there to show his seniors and peers what Yip Man had taught him. Why would he show the other WC people something that he made up? The forms are almost the same as they are now except the dummy form has more kicks etc.
Phil

[Phil Redmond]

Originally posted by planetwc
Phil,

Based on the footage on your site, the TWC forms do not look like the Wing Chun forms Yip Man taught or demonstrates on the 8mm film of him prior to his death.

(You are right. The forms are different).

Also isn't there a 4th form namely TWC's Advanced SLT?
And what of Cheung Sifu's Knife form, isn't that his own creation?

(Yes there is. And He explains why it's there).

By the time the mid 70's roll around Cheung Sifu has had what at close to 20 years to refine his own theories and approach to Wing Chun. I see no reason why a man of his skill could not derive his own system of combat refined to his own personal experience and decades of training should he chose to do so.
People like Bruce Lee (Jun Fan/JKD), Ueshiba (Aikido), Carlos and Helio Gracie (Gracie Jujutsu) , Mas Oyama (Kyokushinkai) , Al Dacascos (Won Hop Kuen Do), Jigoro Kano (Judo) all created their own systems. None of them were out of "whole cloth" rather they were derived from their own synthesis and evolution based on their learning from master teachers and personal combat experience. Why not accord Cheung Sifu the same level of martial skill, creativity and intellectual capacity as these others?



I've been saying this for years. If he DID invent TWC then the man is a genius. My point regarding the lost footage is why would he go to his seniors to show them something he made up? He told them that he learned this way from Yip Man. In the end it doesn't matter to me where it came from. It works and I train for the combat aspects.
Phil

[flaco]

william cheung only learned from yip for about 3-4 years if im right, so i doubt all his stuff comes from yip, also i highly doubt that yip taught william the real forms, and wong sheung leung and yips sons a different form.

i see alot of similarities in williams forms compared to other obscure styles of wc, i think that cheung went and learned more, from other wing chun teachers in china, and always gave yip the credit.
i get confused on why leung shum is the only yip style that has the 100 nothing stance?all other yip disciples use the 50/50.
all in all, we will never know the answers to these questions.

[WCis4me]

:confused:
I thought this thread was about leung bik? Almost the entire second page is devoted to William Cheung.

[WCis4me]

"Leung Bik lived with Ip Man for five years and learned the entire system of Wing Chun. Through out his life, Ip Man referred to Leung Bik as Si Pak. .........
....Let us continue our presumption that Leung Jan did have a younger son named Leung Bik, who moved to Hong Kong, and encountered, then taught for 4 years a young Yip Man."
I am a bit confused here. Are you saying it was 5 years or 4 years?

According to TWC history, Leung Bik taught Yip Man the traditional Wing Chun system, as opposed to the modified version which his father taught Chan Wah Shun.
Actually that isn't exactly correct IMO. It isn't the contention that that he taught one opposed to the other. It is the contention that one was taught in ADDITION to the other. If you look at TWC there is many things the same as other lineages, however there is also significant extras.

If there were no OTHER students in Leung Jan's school, that also implies then that there were only 4 people doing Wing Chun in the world.
again I have to disagree as there were other lineages. From Leung Jan to yip man it was limited. Don't forget WC was relatively unknown (outside of asia) until Yip Man and his decendents came along, there wasn't schools with thousands of students as there is now. Did leung jan even have a 'school'?

If it was Leung Jan's intention to not teach outside his family, why then did he teach Wing Chun when he retired to Koo Lo?
Well we know he did teach outside of his family as there was Chan Wah Shun, however that was because it was inevitable as Chan Wah Shun 'caught' them training (if we believe that story).
If he 'retired' wouldn't that imply that he wasn't teaching anymore?

If the Leung family tradition is to only teach family member the complete system, then that would imply that if Leung Jan's great grandson does his family's Wing Chun, then he too would have the secret traditional version.
Could be. He would have also had to have learned from his father, who would have learned from either Leung Bik or his brother.

If there is only one traditional Wing Chun system and all others are modified, then what about the other lineages of Wing Chun?
Well first of all because of evolution ALL wc is modified even TWC. before everyone gets upset about this statement I say that as it is evolution. I mean look at boxers from the 60's to now. The sport, the techniques etc have changed dramatically in the last 40 years.......it is evolution.
Secondly, I have heard that there is a system emerging from the woodwork called HFY which is considerably similar to TWC. As I said I have only heard about it and am not really familiar with it. Is there any HFY people here that could talk about the lineage to see if it goes back pre- Leung Jan. As if it does it would show that there is other lineages that have both styles of WC in their history.

Chan Wah Shun aka Jiao Chin Wah
Lo Kwai aka Chu Yuk Kwai
Leung Kei aka Lau Man Kei
Where did you get this info from? Is it confirmed that they were students? Where are their decendants now? Just asking to get a full perspective of what you are saying.

[John Weiland]

Originally posted by WCis4me
Leung Bik lived with Ip Man for five years and learned the entire system of Wing Chun. Through out his life, Ip Man referred to Leung Bik as Si Pak. .........
....Let us continue our presumption that Leung Jan did have a younger son named Leung Bik, who moved to Hong Kong, and encountered, then taught for 4 years a young Yip Man."

I am a bit confused here. Are you saying it was 5 years or 4 years?

Planet Wing Chun is not saying it. The quote was from the Ron Heimberger article Yip Man and Leung Bik (http://www.wckfc.com/masters/ipman.htm) The article has a couple of problems. From the above it sounds as if Leung Bik moved in with Yip Man, not the other way around. Possible, I guess, but then the article confuses St. Francis (whatever that is) with Yip Man's purported high school, St. Stephen's College, so the article is sloppy to the point of being dubious in its content and accuracy.

[planetwc]

From a descendant of Chan Wah Shun in Shunde.

Rene Ritchie can probably provide other sources for this information as well.

http://www.wengchunsanjoang.com/hist.html


Originally posted by WCis4me


Chan Wah Shun aka Jiao Chin Wah
Lo Kwai aka Chu Yuk Kwai
Leung Kei aka Lau Man Kei


Where did you get this info from? Is it confirmed that they were students? Where are their decendants now? Just asking to get a full perspective of what you are saying.

[planetwc]

Wing Chun was not Dr Leung Jan's primary profession.
He was a herbal doctor. His pharmacy, Jan San Tong, was located on "chopsticks street" in Foshan. He retired and closed his shop in Foshan and moved to Koo Lo village.

There were other students of Chan Wah Shun such as Ng Chun So (Yip Man's si-hing, and probable primary teacher given Chan Wah Shun's extreme age at the time.).

The existence of other lineages of Wing Chun Kuen other than Yip Man was fairly unknown outside of mainland China until the mid nineties or so.



Originally posted by WCis4me

From Leung Jan to yip man it was limited. Don't forget WC was relatively unknown (outside of asia) until Yip Man and his decendents came along, there wasn't schools with thousands of students as there is now. Did leung jan even have a 'school'?

Well we know he did teach outside of his family as there was Chan Wah Shun, however that was because it was inevitable as Chan Wah Shun 'caught' them training (if we believe that story).
If he 'retired' wouldn't that imply that he wasn't teaching anymore?

[WCis4me]

Hi Planetwc,
Thanks for the link. Interesting site. Do you know why is it called 'weng' chun?
It talks about the existence of Leung Bik as well, despite not being a descendent line from Yip Man. That infers that perhaps the story started at least as far back as Chan Wah Shun as two different student lines (yip man and chan wah shun's son) talk about Leung Bik.

Regards,
Vicky

[planetwc]

Indeed Phil. The more important thing here is, combat effectiveness not marketing. Cheung Sifu has left a long legacy in terms of students and schools to be proud of, without ANY need for the Leung Bik<->Yip Man secrets story.

My sense was that William Cheung had pretty much "retired" the whole traditional vs modified marketing, as his large worldwide following and success as a teacher should speak for itself.

In the light of the new millenium, when we are now more aware of more details of Wing Chun, it's depth and breath that some things in terms of the history and marketing can be questioned.

Each lineage practices what it believes to be an effective combat system. Each has it's own interpretation of principles and tactics.

When we can strip away the marketing fluff, that is meant to draw in the unwashed newbies, we can get down to the real business of Wing Chun Kuen. What works, what doesn't. What you have to train and sweat for, taste bitter to achieve.

I just don't like the marketing stuff, which doesn't seem logical or still valid in the light of today's knowledge. Many have this kind of spin, and in some respects it may be necessary to promote the scale of student population being sought after.

One can kick a$$ because you train hard with a great teacher and have the skill to implement theory and execute in the chaos of combat, not because some guy taught someone else by the light of the moon 150 years ago.


Originally posted by Phil Redmond


I've been saying this for years. If he DID invent TWC then the man is a genius. My point regarding the lost footage is why would he go to his seniors to show them something he made up? He told them that he learned this way from Yip Man. In the end it doesn't matter to me where it came from. It works and I train for the combat aspects.
Phil

[reneritchie]

According to the story, Chan Wah-Shun's son (Yip Man's sihing), Chan Yiu-Min used the character Weng for his art, and argued with his sihingdai that this was, in fact, the correct character to use. Descendants of Chan Yiu-Min, such as Pang Nam via Jiu Chow (Jiu Wan's uncle) also use this character.

David is correct in that Leung Jan taught out of Apothecary shop. There were 2 major kinds of MA at the time, private (taught to more gentlemanly, upper class individuals, usually quite expensive, out of a house or family estate or the like) and public (taught to anyone who joins, usually workers or farmers, etc. sometimes out of a public gym, not that expensive). WCK was of the former. It's said when Leung Jan retired, Chan Wah-Shun took over his classes, teaching where he could (eventually ending up in the Yip family temple).

Leung Bik is mentioned in most stories, even in China, though his knowledge of WCK, if any, varies greatly from being a regular student to not learning anything of relevance.

[WCis4me]

Originally posted by reneritchie
According to the story, Chan Wah-Shun's son (Yip Man's sihing), Chan Yiu-Min used the character Weng for his art, and argued with his sihingdai that this was, in fact, the correct character to use. Descendants of Chan Yiu-Min, such as Pang Nam via Jiu Chow (Jiu Wan's uncle) also use this character.

David is correct in that Leung Jan taught out of Apothecary shop. There were 2 major kinds of MA at the time, private (taught to more gentlemanly, upper class individuals, usually quite expensive, out of a house or family estate or the like) and public (taught to anyone who joins, usually workers or farmers, etc. sometimes out of a public gym, not that expensive). WCK was of the former. It's said when Leung Jan retired, Chan Wah-Shun took over his classes, teaching where he could (eventually ending up in the Yip family temple).

Leung Bik is mentioned in most stories, even in China, though his knowledge of WCK, if any, varies greatly from being a regular student to not learning anything of relevance.

Thanks Rene.
Is there a significant difference in what the characters mean? Do you know why he argued why it was the right way? I am curious as to why two sets of people would feel so strongly about which character was proper and why they felt that way.

Ok, if leung Jan retired and Chan Wah-Shun took over, I am a bit confused as to where it comes in (what planetwc was describing) that Leung Jan taught after this time in Koo lo village?

[reneritchie]

Hi Vicki,

Weng means perpetual, et: water flowing beneath the earth. Wing means chant, sing, et: words issuing from the mouth like water flowing beneath the earth.

Back then, literacy was very low in China, and the two characters sound almost identical (Phil can pronounce them for you and if you can easily tell them apart, Randy Jackson from American Idol will love your pitch!). In legend, Weng Chun signified what Jee Shim taught the Red Junk performers, while Wing Chun signified what Leung Bok-Chow (Yim Wing-Chun's husband) taught them. Nowadays, it's usually used to distinguish Dai Fa Min Kam's teachings from Wong Wah-Bo's (though Yik Kam uses Wing as well).

Here's the chronology:

Leung Jan retired and sold his apothecary shop in Foshan (Faatshan, where he'd been teaching). Chan Wah-Shun took over the class and Leung Jan moved back to his native village of Gulao (Koo Lo). In Gulao, he taught 4 more students, his 2 nephews (including Leung Bak-Cheung) as well as Wong Wah-Sum and Yik Ying.

[Tom Kagan]

A slight addition:

Ving v.

1) to sing
2) to express in verses, to versify
3) to versify historical events
4) to exalt, to praise, to glorify: "ving moy" to exalt the plum tree
5) to twitter, to chirp
6) (archaic) to whisper romantic overtures

7) n: a style of poetic composition
8) a: (archaic) beauty.

Tsun n.

1) the first of the four seasons in the lunar calendar, springtime
2) year, age, era
3) (archaic) chronological age
4) the east, oriental
5) (archaic) wine
6) pornography
7) life, vitality (archaic: semen)
8) loving feeling between man and woman


In addition to it being a semantic modifier to "Yin", the "Weng" is also a phonetic indicator. According to the Metropolitan Museum of Art, in archaic form, there was no difference between the pronunciation of "Wing" vs. "Weng" other than from regional dialects. Also, to refer to underground aquifer in archaic form, a different ideogram was used. It is the same ideogram as the modern ideogram for "fountain" and is also pronounced "Wing/Weng."

The true meaning of "Ving" requires a context. (Amusing if you consider there is a perfectly correct, not uncommon, and non-martial context in Cantonese to use the ideograms for "Ving Tsun" with the #6 definition for "Ving" and the #6 definition for "Tsun" :) )

To hear the songs of springtime is to recognize its beauty. Hence: Ving Tsun = "beautiful springtime." However, if it is to refer to a young woman to whom we give credit for the art, then it's just her familiar name and any other attempts to interpret it differently are just a way to have a conversation with her. ;)


"I don't know much English. This word, I happen to know." -- Moy Yat.

[reneritchie]

Thanks Tom,

There are also regional/periodic slang meanings, like Chun meaning "wine" during the Tang dynasty, or "play" in Shanghai during th Qing. A rich language to be sure.

[Phil Redmond]

Since I speak Cantonese I'd like to clarify for those who aren't aware, Ving Tsun, Wing Tsun are both pronounced, "Wing Chun" in Cantonese.
Phil

[planetwc]

Leung Jan closed his apothecary shop in Foshan and retired to Koo Lo village (he retired from his primary business), where he continued to teach Wing Chun, but using a different approach (San Sik).

Chan Wah Shun took over teaching Wing Chun of the Leung Jan lineage in Foshan. Leung Jan taught in Koo Lo village until his death there.

Yip Man started with Chan Wah Shun as a teacher in Foshan, however, Chan was VERY old and died about 2 years I think into accepting Yip Man as a student (Chan Wah Shun had others as pupils including his own son). Therefore one of Chan Wah Shun's senior disciples Ng Chun So took on responsiblity for teaching Yip Man in Foshan.


Originally posted by WCis4me


Ok, if leung Jan retired and Chan Wah-Shun took over, I am a bit confused as to where it comes in (what planetwc was describing) that Leung Jan taught after this time in Koo lo village?

[WCis4me]

Thanks, Rene, Tom and David for the informative responses.

Rene,
I did ask Phil to pronounce it and I see what you mean now. Thanks again,

Vicky

[reneritchie]

Chan Wah-Shun sifu also had a stroke a year or so before his death which left him with greatly reduced capacity. He retired back to his home village in Shunde (Sam Dak) shortly thereafter, where he passed away (and where his great grandchildren still teach WCK and their family village boxing). Chan Yiu-Min took over his public classes, Ng Jung-So, and Lui Yiu-Chai (before he moved to Vietnam) his private ones. It was a turbulant time in China, however, and most of Yip Man's sihing, lacking the personal wealth Yip Man had prior to the Japanese occupation, left WCK to work for survival or moved to other places, like South East Asia, to seek their fortunes.

On another note: One of the core ingredients that IMHO many of these stories fail to take into account is the hard work and insight Yip Man had into WCK. Sifu, sihing aside, before he began teaching he had decades of personal time to reach a rather profound understanding of the art, and the simple, brutally effective art he taught in HK, IMHO, depended not so much on one storied connection or another, but on his own kung-fu.

[russellsherry]

hi guys i arggree with david williams, for once if chan wah soon knew the guy was spying on him you one close the window from whence he was looking into , two the easy way to stuff his training would, be not show him chi sau the thing that make us driffrent from anybodu else, by the way phil a former senor of mine, has sifu william cheung, doing the hk forms on super 8 at a footsgrey market demo sifu cheung ppole form wasnot the one you guys do, just a question? no disrespect meant why did sifu cheung not teach in australia unti l master yip man died peace russellsherry

[WCis4me]

Hi Rene,

depended not so much on one storied connection or another, but on his own kung-fu.
Very good point IMO.
However, there is lots of chatter about him being a fairly good fighter early on, being a master of WC early on. Some of it says that directly after he studied under Leung Bik he was able to defeat his seniors under Chan Wah Shun. That would mean he was very well versed in understanding the finer points of what Leung Bik taught him even before those decades of refining.
It is curious that there is not much talk in what I have seen from various sources so far, about those decades in between. It is all very general 'he learnt from Leung Bik where he mastered Wing Chun, then returned to Fatshan where he defeated his seniors (on some accounts), then after doing some police work and raising a family, fled to HK.
Is there more detail on what happened during that 30+ years that you know of?

Vicky

[hunt1]

To play devils advocate.

It is said that all WC coming from Wong Wah Bo is the same. However didnt Leung Jan have 2 teachers. He could have learned a different version of WC from Leung Yee Tai.

Yip Mans early HK students WC looks like that of Foshan his later HK WC looks a little different. Perhaps as he was more established he felt comfortable incorporating WC from a source other than Chan Wah .

If you look at Yip Mans weapons forms ,the body structure, engagement ideas, and footwork you see many things that appear in TWC.

It is known that Yip Man knew many different WC people, perhaps as he got older he combined all his knowledge or taught different students different aspects depending upon their needs.

Yip Chun has been quoted as saying his father said that according to Leung Bik one of Leung Jans goals was to find a simpler way to convey WC and that Leung jan spent his life trying to do so. Isnt Koo Lo WC living proof of this?

Just some thoughts.

[WCis4me]

for once if chan wah soon knew the guy was spying on him you one close the window from whence he was looking into ,
The story is that Chan Wah Shun was spying on Leung Jan teaching and not that people were spying on Chan Wah Shun. Also I think they were out in the grounds, not in the house. It also talks about that Leung Jan wasn't sure how much Chan Wah Shun had seen or grasped the concept of or even how long he had been watching for. Could have been a minute could have been a year, who knows. But the story that I read seems to infer that when Leung Jan agreed to teach Chan Wah Shun, as he knew he saw something, he soon realized that Chan Wah Shun did not grasp some concepts and therefore Leung Jan didn't go further into them with Chan Wah Shun.
Again, who knows, that is just how the story goes that I read and quoted.

[WCis4me]

Originally posted by hunt1
To play devils advocate.

It is said that all WC coming from Wong Wah Bo is the same. However didnt Leung Jan have 2 teachers. He could have learned a different version of WC from Leung Yee Tai.

Yip Mans early HK students WC looks like that of Foshan his later HK WC looks a little different. Perhaps as he was more established he felt comfortable incorporating WC from a source other than Chan Wah .

If you look at Yip Mans weapons forms ,the body structure, engagement ideas, and footwork you see many things that appear in TWC.

It is known that Yip Man knew many different WC people, perhaps as he got older he combined all his knowledge or taught different students different aspects depending upon their needs.

Yip Chun has been quoted as saying his father said that according to Leung Bik one of Leung Jans goals was to find a simpler way to convey WC and that Leung jan spent his life trying to do so. Isnt Koo Lo WC living proof of this?

Just some thoughts.
Very interesting. Actually I noticed that too and have showed my sifu a couple of sites (galleries and videos on the sites) of some later students (this past weekend) and he too has noticed similarities between them and TWC, especially in the footwork.

Thanks for the additional insight about Leung Jan having more than one teacher. Only really went as far back as who Yip Man learned from so far, and didn't realize Leung Jan also had two teachers.

Regards,
Vicky

[yuanfen]

Couldabeen theory- another devil- another advocate...
none of the theories thus far can be "proven' completely..
take whatever story strikes your fancy...including the following..
(you cant apply only documentary history methods to oral history)

1. Like genes- we inherit different bits and pieces of wing chun-
but it's all wing chun.

2. Leung Jon prolly blended Wong Wah Bo's harder wing chun with Leung Ye Tai's softer wing chun.

3. Different students pick up different aspects of a teacher's teaching. Chan Wa Shun probably depended more on strength
(not necessary to buy the secret watching story). Leung Bik asa a son of Leung Jon(not necessary to buy the Chan wah Sun-leung Bik conflict story) prolly via his father picked up more of the principles and didnt have to depend as much on strength.

4. Understanding principles gives you a softer wing chun and results in greater footwork/leg work which is the case with Ip man's wing chun. Ip Man had time to develop his own synthesis
but the stimulation for footwork/leg work and principles prolly came from somewhere other than Chan Wah Sun whose leagcy does not seem as well developed on those items.. Coulddabeen Leung Bik's influence.

5. Ip Man's sons were not really into wing chun and came to HK when IM was just about closing his hands. But as kids they are bound to have heard what their father said about his origins....
a natural process.Cheung is not the only person referring to Leung Bik .The IM sons heard about Leung Bik and many of Ip man's students did too. They didnt have to depend on Mok Poi pr leung Ting to shape their ideas about IM. Lots of Ip man's students actually spent very little quality time with Ip man himself. All got different bits and pieces of what Ip man knew- since he carefully doled out information. He was quite consistent on that point.So there are differences in IM's students wing chun. Folks paid differently- WC became IM's living in HK and folks got what they paid for per IM's inclinations to a considerable degree.

6 William Cheung's actual mature learning time with IM was comparatively limited. He got part of Im's teachings. His weapons work is quite different from several folks who completed the knives with IM.(including WSL and a few others).

7. Leung Jon's teachinga few folks at the end- does not supplant but supplements his life long contributions.

8. Soooo--- its best to see each others wing chun ... and a few just might make their synthesis of the best elements as Yim Wing Chun did, Leung Jan did and Ip Man did...and developa good version of the art rather than robotic imitations. With teaching-
one's articulation of principles improve.. IM like most teachers evolved since his Foshan teaching days- reached a pak in Hong Kong and then declined with age and illness and retirement. End of short culddabeen story. Only the Shadow knows and the keeper of the Time machine, With Omar Khayyan- this is truth and the rest is lies-the flower that once has bloomed forever dies. Heres to more NG MUI plum blossoms- its always spring. Cheers.

PS Sorry for key board erorrs.

[reneritchie]

Hunter,

I think you've mentioned this theory before? It remains very interesting. However, I think you'd have to look at dummy and weapons froms from other lineages (not from Leung Yee Tai) to see if they don't also contain the same seeds you're referring to. If they do, it might be common to all WCK, not just from Leung Yee-Tai.

Vicky,

From what I read of Ngau Shu's account, Leung Jan taught inside, thus Ngau was able to watch and learn while doing his clean up. Perhaps it varied with the seasons. Chinese homes back then were small walled compounds.

Joy,

Wong Wah-Bo as hard and Leung Yee-Tai as soft are (opera role) gender stereotyping 8P

[yuanfen]

Wong Wah-Bo as hard and Leung Yee-Tai as soft are (opera role) gender stereotyping 8P
-------------------------------------------------------
Rene- you are politically correct-but gender was not on my mind-
it was their martial backgrounds as I gathered.

[reneritchie]

Joy,

C'mon, Leung was supposedly tight with Jee Shim and all that Shaolin power and poleness!

[yuanfen]

Rene-I didnt get into Gee Shim stories. He lived a "long" life.

[hunt1]

Rene- absolutly right. problem is i dont get around much and so many guard their weapons forms like they hold the meaning of life! You have seen far more than I so may be in a better postion to judge. I havent even seen Lun Gais weapons so cant even get a feel for all of Yip mans teaching.
I wouldnt be surprised if many things cut across family lines. Short weapon vs long for example not many options.

[reneritchie]

Joy,

But did he prosper (fumbles to make geeky vulcan hand gesture).

Hunt1,

The problem also is some didn't learn the weapons back then (eg., 1940s Foshan) but either got them from other branches or came up with them or got them later, so it can skew the results. FWIW, the YKS/SN pole is broadly similar to the Yip Man pole (the short, simple version), but has a few things I've only seen thusfar in Andreas' Weng Chun clip. The YKS knives are just like the hands, but we have some Cheung Bo knife as well in the SN system which is more like Weng Chun (no flipping, but the horse and t-step stuff). Maybe Jim can fill us in on Gulao, but I think they are very similar to the boxing stuff all around, even with the pole. Cho weapons I've only seen once, and can't remember well off hand (Hendrik tends to go through stuff at a million miles an hour ;)

[FIRE HAWK]

http://www.oxfordwingchun.com/Content/wingchunandchine.html
Another style, commonly known as Snake Style Wing Chun, was founded by Leung Yee Tye. It was founded in Yum Chou where he lived in his retirement. During this time he also trained Law Maan Kung in this style. Later successors included Lau Chee Kwong and Ho Huan Biao who practised and promoted this style in Fat Shan. This style is very common in Fat Shan. A characteristic of this style is that the traditional wooden dummy has been replaced by a wall-mounded box fitted with flexible plastic sticks .

[yuanfen]

Firehawk- wing chun history is pretty tricky business.
But the fusion of snake and crane symbolism shows up in wing chun a lot.

You may recall Hendrik's interesting and informative posts on
the merging of snake and crane principles out of Fujian and Emei roots.

Simple chronological history often misses the meaning (semiotics)
of signs and metaphors- which are concentrated capsules of
many oral and traditional transfers of knowledge and experience.

[Jim Roselando]

Hello Rene/Hunt1,


Perhaps as he was more established he felt comfortable incorporating WC from a source other than Chan Wah

Yet! This seems highly unlikely since all known branches of WCK are so similar. It would probally have more to do with personal development or refinement or? JR

one of Leung Jans goals was to find a simpler way to convey WC and that Leung jan spent his life trying to do so. Isnt Koo Lo WC living proof of this?

Yes, but it is still just WCK. The body is the same and the horse is the same and the movement is the same. There was only a few slight modifications so while he developed a shorter platform, the art was not so different. JR

Maybe Jim can fill us in on Gulao, but I think they are very similar to the boxing stuff all around, even with the pole

The pole form was also modified to make use of the WC horse rather than the sei ping ma etc.. The grip is also slightly different but if you look at the strokes you will see the tip of the pole moves in the same directions as Futshan pole. There are only so many ways to move a pole. 5 core movements! Very simple, very effective. JR


Regards,